It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Air Force issues E-8 replacement RFP

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   
There are days that I wonder if there is anyone left in the Air Force leadership that has more than two brain cells left to rub together to get a coherent thought going. It sure doesn't seem that way. The Air Force officially dropped the E-8C recapitalization RFP. Despite Congress passing language that the contract must be fixed price, in the 2017 NDAA, the Air Foce has gotten a waiver to allow the EMD portion to be cost plus, because "it would be too hard" to do an entirely fixed price contract.

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James, in an interview early in December said, "If we were to full stop that [hybrid strategy] and come back to firm-fixed price, I’m sure that would cause a delay because we would in essence be largely starting over. So a delay in the RFP would produce a delay in the IOC". The EMD portion of the contract is expected to run $6.9B, with Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Lockheed being the primary bidders. The aircraft will come with either a Raytheon, or Northrop Grumman radar system.


WASHINGTON — The US Air Force on Wednesday released a request for proposals (RFP) for the JSTARS recap program after the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer waived statutory language that would have compelled the service to pursue a fixed-price contract.

The waiver, granted by Defense Department acquisition chief Frank Kendall on Dec. 23, allows the Air Force to proceed with a hybrid contracting strategy that includes both fixed-price and cost-plus elements. In the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress stipulated that the engineering, manufacturing and development (EMD) phase of the JSTARS recap must be executed under a fixed-price deal — a change that Air Force leaders had said could add months to the program.

www.defensenews.com...
edit on 12/28/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I am confused. Did I read that right, the platform is based upon the Boeing 707?

Really? Great plane, maybe one of the very best ever made, but...........its a four engine gas hog! Granted, it will fly on two engines, but............maybe they put new engines on it?



posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Lulz... and there's people in the contracting community who think air force has the best procurement people...

Not denying the amazing the hints I've h3ard about RCO, but it seems to me at least the high ranking penta-morons don't understand the first thing about adjusting a evaluation factors to ensure you can roll things at firm fixed price...

Pretty shocking...



posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I don't understand her argument, the RFP has dropped for both a firm fixed and a hybrid? Yet putting it out as firm fixed only would cause a delay?

Firm fixed only works if the Air Force sign the deal and walk away until type acceptance, what will happen is they will get into the project office, realise their specification includes parts or performance that can be improved and start signing modifications.

The first modification opens the door for the prime to start recouping over runs, profit and risk that would have driven them to deliver an aircraft on time and on budget. They spend more time convincing the AF to make further modification to try and pay to design out obsolescence, something which can be easily managed and other things the prime has already been paid to do.

Crazy.

Of course if you want it to be the best, then you have to pay for it, in money and time and the EMD phase is the best place for this.


edit on 28 12 2016 by Forensick because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

No, the current jets are on the 707 platform. The new ones will probably be based on a business type jet.



posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Forensick

The RFP was dropped, but it's a hybrid RFP, not a fixed price, which was called for by Congress. The EMD phase is cost plus, with procurement being fixed.



posted on Dec, 28 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

The current fleet of E-8Cs are based on converted commercial 707-320s. They took the lowest time airframes they could get out of storage, and put them through an intense rebuild and modification program which added the under fuselage radar system. They were upgraded in 2005, with improved JT8D engines.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

The E-8 is fine, great even.

i think that you start getting diminishing returns when trying to save money.

sometimes things cost money and you get what you pay for. It will be interesting with a good businessman running the executive branch, maybe he will be able to wrangle these people



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

No, no it isn't. They are running out of TF33s in the pipeline, maintenance costs are steadily climbing, and they're reaching the point where readiness rates are starting to come down because of parts availability.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

at 1/4 billion per JSTAR i think tooling a new shop to make some replacement parts would be a heck of allot cheaper then going threw whole new project.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

And at what point do you stop spending money on aircraft that are 40+ years old? Do you just keep building parts forever? It's not that easy. Even if you did tool up a new shop, you have to spend money for the tools, spend money for the engineering work, spend money for the building to put the tooling into, etc.

The airframes are going to wear out. The choice is to replace them now, while you can keep flying the existing aircraft to perform the mission until the new ones take over, or keep flying these until they wear out, and have a capability gap, while you wait to get the new aircraft up and running.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

So building brand new 707 from scratch, which would be required at this point, would be cheaper than using off the shelf airframes that are faster, have longer legs and more fuel efficient than the 707 could ever dream of being?
The 1/4 billion isn't just for the airframe either. Most of that cost is in the advanced electronics on board that would put current E-8's to shame. It's time for this upgrade.



posted on Dec, 29 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

The 707 was originally selected because of the size of the radar that was needed at the time. The fairing over the physical antenna is something like 14 feet long, and it's heavy. The new radar systems get better performance, with a fixed antenna, which makes them much lighter and smaller. They no longer need a large platform to do the mission.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join