The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) awarded 6 small business qualifiers firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity multiple award contracts with a combined maximum value of $151.1 million to suppport and maintain US Navy barges.

The companies will provide management, administrative and production services, materials, tools, equipment, facilities and required support for depot level troubleshooting, repair, renewal, refurbishment, modernization, maintenance and testing of Navy living barges and their auxiliary systems (hull, mechanical and electrical), including the potential of periodic docking. Living barges have crew living quarters and galleys.

Four firms will service barges in the Norfolk, VA area, and 2 will service barges in Jacksonville, FL…

Continue Reading… »

LPD-17 cutaway
(click to view full)

LPD-17 San Antonio class amphibious assault support vessels are a new class of ship which is just entering service with the US Navy. Much like their predecessors, their mission is to embark, transport, land, and support elements of a US Marine Corps Landing Force. What changes are the capabilities and technologies incorporated to perform that mission. This new ship class includes significant internal technology and design upgrades, and is designed to operate accompanying platforms like the V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle amphibious armored personnel carrier.

Between 10-11 scheduled ships of this class are slated to assume the functional duties of up to 41 previous ships, including the USA’s older LSD-36 USS Anchorage class dock landing ships (all decommissioned as of 2004, LSD-36 and LSD-38 transferred to Taiwan) and its LPD-4 USS Austin Class ships (12 built and serving, LPD 14 Trenton now India’s INS Jalashva). The San Antonio class ships may also replace 2 classes of ships currently mothballed and held in reserve status under the Amphibious Lift Enhancement Program (ALEP): the LST-1179 Newport class tank landing ships, and LKA-113 Charleston class amphibious cargo ships.

Welcome to Norfolk…
(click to view full)

Replacing that many existing ships is already a very tall order. While its design incorporates notable advances, the San Antonio Class has also had its share of teething problems. So, too, has the New Orleans shipyard to which most of this contract has been assigned. The number of serious issues encountered in this ship class have been much higher than usual, and more extensive. The initial ships have been criticized for sub-standard workmanship, and it took 2 1/2 years after the initial ship of class was delivered and accepted before any ship of class was sent on an operational cruise. Whereupon the USS San Antonio promptly found itself laid up Bahrain due to oil leaks. Meanwhile, costs are almost twice the originally promised amounts at over $1.7 billion per ship – 2 to 3 times as much as many foreign LPD classes, and more than 10 times as much as Singapore’s 6,600 ton Endeavour Class LPD.

DID’s FOCUS articles offer in-depth, updated looks at significant military programs of record. This is DID’s FOCUS Article for the San Antonio Class, detailing the ships’ unique features and capabilities, its program innovations and issues, ship timelines, and related contracts throughout the program’s history. As has become DID custom, the most recent additions are highlighted in green type. The latest developments include a contract to Raytheon that could be worth over $175 million, and the imminent commissioning of the LPD 21 New York, which contains steel from the destroyed World Trade Center…

• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Capabilities and Features
• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Process & Issues
• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Program, Budgets & Timelines [updated]
• LPD-17 San Antonio Class: Contracts and Events (1996-Present) [updated]
• Appendix A: Additional Readings & Sources – LPD-17 Ship Class
• Appendix B: Additional Readings & Sources – News and Views
  
  Continue Reading… »

SM-2 Launch w. AEGIS
(click to view full)

Variants of the SM-2 Standard missile are the USA’s primary fleet defense anti-air weapon, and serve with 13 navies worldwide. The most common variant is the RIM-66K-L/ SM-2 Standard Block IIIB, which entered service in 1998. The Standard family extends far beyond the SM-2 missile, however; several nations still use the SM-1, the SM-3 is rising to international prominence as a missile defense weapon, and the SM-6 program is on track to supplement the SM-2. These missiles are designed to be paired with the AEGIS radar and combat system, but can be employed independently by ships with older or newer radar systems.

DID’s FOCUS articles offer in-depth, updated looks at significant military programs of record. This article covers each variant in the Standard missile family, several years worth of American and Foreign Military Sales requests and contracts, key events, and the budgetary and technical background that can help put all that in context. New material is indicated in green type.

The latest addition includes a $47.8 million order for engineering and technical services to support the Standard Missile program…

• The Standard Missile Naval Defense Family: Missiles and Plans (SM-1 to SM-6)
• The Standard Missile Naval Defense Family: Budgets [updated]
• The Standard Missile Naval Defense Family: US Contracts & Events
  • FY 2010 [updated]
  • FY 2009
  • FY 2008
  • FY 2007
  • FY 2006
• The Standard Missile Naval Defense Family: Exports & Related Key Events
  • CY 2009 [updated]
  • CY 2008
  • CY 2007
  • CY 2006
  • CY 2005
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

Computer Science Corp. in Falls Church, VA received a $11.3 million order under a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (M67854-02-A-9004) for C4ISR support to the Marine Corps Systems Command’s Marine Corps Tactical Systems Support Activity (MCTSSA). The order has pre-priced options of $1.2 million, which if exercised, would bring the total order value to $12.6 million.

MCTSSA is the Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) Systems Engineering Interoperability, Architecture, and Technology (SIAT) center for the US Marine Corps…

Continue Reading… »

Old as the hills…
(click to view full)

DID’s FOCUS articles cover major weapons acquisition programs – and no program is more important to the USAF than its current bid to replace its aerial tanker fleet. In January 2007, the big question was whether there would be a competition for the USA’s KC-X proposal, which will cover 175 production aircraft and 4 test platforms. The cost for this first phase alone is likely to reach $35+ billion spread over about 20 years, but America’s 40-50 year old aerial tanker fleet demands new planes. Otherwise, unpredictable age or fatigue issues, like the ones its F-15A-D fleet experienced in 2008, could ground its aerial tankers – and with them, a substantial slice of the USA’s total airpower. KC-Y and KC-Z contracts may follow in subsequent decades, in order to replace all 530 KC-135s/ Boeing 707s (195 active; ANG 251; Reserve 84) that were delivered until 1965, as well as the USAF’s 59 larger KC-10 tankers delivered from 1979-1987.

In the end, it was Team Boeing’s KC-767 Advanced (767-200 derivative) vs. the Team Northrop Grumman KC-30B (Airbus A330-200 derivative), both within the Pentagon and in the halls of Congress. Most observers correctly pointed out that all this lobbying was important, since the financial stakes guaranteed a huge political fight no matter which side won. A fight that ended up sinking, and restarting, the entire program.

Recent additions revolve around the KC-X v2.0 draft RFP’s release, as the canceled competition is on again, with a decision expected by mid-2010. As expected, complaints regarding the structure and process have already begun. The latest additions include an important milestone for EADS, amid doubts that the team can win under the new competition…

• KC-X: The Story So Far
• KC-X RFP v2.0: The New Structure [NEW]
• The Contenders and The Cargo Factor: KC-30B, KC-767… KC-777?
• KC-X: Teams & Locations [updated]
• KC-X RFP: Key Developments [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

The US Marine Corps is moving ahead with plans to build 24 new barracks for single Marines at Camp Pendleton in Southern California. The service plans to add 22,000 Marines from FY 2010-2013, and intends to build modern barracks to accommodate the expected 4,000 Marine increase at Camp Pendleton. The new housing is expected to bring single Marine quarters up to the same standard as married quarters. It’s part of a $2 billion makeover that also includes new training facilities, a fitness center, electrical and sewer improvements, and other facilities.

The latest contracts were awarded to Solpac for repairs to existing single Marines barracks…

Continue Reading… »

F-16B & X-35
(click to view full)

In an exclusive June 2006 interview, Israeli Air Force (IAF) chief procurement officer Brigadier-General Ze’ev Snir told Israel’s Globes publication that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was a key part of their IAF recapitalization plans, and that Israel intends to buy over 100 of the fighters to replace their F-16s over time. A 100-plane deal would have cost at least $5 billion under Israel’s original estimates, and would involve the F-35A conventional take-off Air Force version. Snir added that:

“The IAF would be happy to equip itself with 24 F-22s but the problem at this time is the US refusal to sell the plane, and its $200 million price tag.”

Unfortunately, Israel’s September 2008 request for its first 75 F-35s would end up costing them an estimated $15 billion – or about $200 million per plane. All in return for a fighter with poorer air-to-air performance than the F-22, and less stealth. The necessary contract must deal with that sticker shock, and with issues like the incorporation of Israeli technologies, before it can be signed. The latest news is that Israel may forego its own weapons and technologies, in order to curtail a $130 million price tag – and may decide to delay its F-35 purchase by 2 years…

• F-35 for Israel: Key Issues
• Contracts and Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

Bridge to the future?
(click to view full)

In its 2009 White Paper, Australia’s Department of Defence and Labor Party government looked at the progress being made in anti-shipping surveillance-strike complexes, and the need to defend large sea lanes, and dropped something of a surprise. They proposed increasing Australia’s submarine fleet to 12 boats by 2030-2040, all of which would be successors to Australia’s a current fleet of advanced Collins class submarines.

The Collins class was designed with the strong cooperation of ThyssenKrupp’s Swedish Kockums subsidiary, and built in Australia by state-owned ASC. The class has encountered a number of issues, including significant difficulties with its combat systems, issues with acoustic signature, major cost growth to A$ 5+ billion, and schedule slippage. Worse still, reports indicated that the RAN can only staff 2 of its 6 submarines put a huge crimp in the fleet’s usefulness. High-level attention led to 29 recommendations aimed at improving conditions and staffing on Australia’s submarines, and those are now being implemented. Their long term effect remains to be seen.

So, too, does the nature of Australia’s future submarine project – and its eventual cost…

Continue Reading… »

[by John MacNeill]
Goo goo g’joob!

In April 2005, “USN, DARPA See Blimps & HULAs Rising”, looked at a range of projects on the drawing board, including the Walrus heavy-transport blimp (that’s “heavy” as in “1-2 million pounds”) which offered the potential for a faster and more versatile sealift substitute.

In this article DID explains the Walrus concept, details the contractors and contracts involved in this initial award (including a few updates), and lays out the program’s structure… or at least, what used to be its structure. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) funded phase 1 contracts, but things seemed to end in 2006. Yet the imperatives driving the need for Walrus, or even for a much smaller version of it, remain. Is the Walrus dead? What about Paul? And could it, or a HULA like like it, rise again?

Continue Reading… »

Ask Sherwin-Williams…or PPG
(click to view larger)

PPG Industries in Pittsburgh, PA (N00189-10-D-0007) and Sherwin-Williams in Cleveland, OH (N00189-10-D-0006) each received an indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity with fixed unit price contract to provide marine coatings approved for US Navy shipyards.

Each contract contains a 1-year base period with 3 one-year option periods. The combined value of the contracts, if all options are exercised, would total $35.1 million…

Continue Reading… »