General Atomics to use Boeing Software on MQ-25A bid

Boeing has joined a team of suppliers supporting General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ bid to win the US Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray programme even as it continues to promote a clean-sheet alternative design.

Boeing’s Autonomous Systems division will support GA-ASI’s bid for the carrier-based, unmanned tanker “with our aviation and autonomous experience”, says Chris Raymond, vice-president and general manager for the division.

The announcement comes less than two months after Boeing’s Phantom Works unit revealed with great fanfare a fully assembled MQ-25 ground test vehicle in St. Louis. Boeing’s presence on GA-ASI’s list of suppliers for a rival design doesn’t change the company’s plans to offer its own aircraft for the Navy contract.

“Pursuing the programme as a prime bidder and a member of the General Atomics team is good for our customer and reflects our focus on doing what’s necessary to compete, win and grow,” Boeing says.

GA-ASI’s announcement also clarifies other details of the company’s bid as Naval Air Systems Command evaluates proposals for the MQ-25, which also include a separate offer from Lockheed Martin.

If selected, the GA-ASI Stingray would be powered by the nearly 16,000lb-thrust Pratt & Whitney Canada PW815 turbofan engine. GA-ASI is so far the only bidder in the MQ-25 competition to have revealed an engine choice. It shows that the MQ-25 will be considerably larger than GA-ASI’s jet-powered Predator C Avenger unmanned air system, which is powered by the nearly 4,000lb-thrust PW545B turbofan.

www.flightglobal.com...

2nd link:

www.janes.com...

3rd link:

defense-update.com...

I wonder if the reason General Atomics has been moving along so sedately compared to Boeing is because they have always thought the rush wasn't worth it. Whether it was from the idea that the program was going nowhere or that they needed to do a clean sheet on their own, idk. However, using the Boeing software is not a bad move. It is what the X-47B used (in a derived state).

It should be noted about IP and the government: if the gov pays for you to develop a thing, then it is owned by the gov and can be given to even your competitors. That's what happened with the Boeing software being handed over to Northrop. If you need gov money, develop whatever tech on your dime and then have them pay for the testing. The test data is gov owned then, not the technology.

BTW, Boeing might have found a way to make money even if the MQ-25A never gets to a procurement: GA is now paying them for the software. Win!

a reply to: anzha

It's really a win for both companies. It's a lot for the industry in a way though. Let's innovation, less outside thought, less engineering experience. Oh well, let's just get the ball rolling. Paint dries quicker than projects get rolling these days. Boeing has at least shown the ability to hustle.

Sooo in reality Boeing are supplying a fuel gauge?

More info:

As for the company's MQ-25 prototype itself, which we have only seen in artists renderings as of yet, it is slated to be unveiled in just two months.

There's the juicy bit for ATS...

www.thedrive.com...

You know....I used to think the Air Force was superb at totally screwing projects into the ground.

They're freaking novices at it compared to the Navy. They're going to be lucky if anyone bids at this point. I can't think of a more screwed up project ever in the history of screwed up projects than this has been.

Meanwhile back on the ranch........


Here's Why General Atomics Teamed Up With Boeing For The MQ-25 Tanker Drone Tender
www.thedrive.com...

GA says they will team up with Boeing if Boeing wins the proposal all the while perusing their own entry........

That being said I still think at some point Boeing will by GA. Maybe not in the near future but down the road

a reply to: Zaphod58

Army has them both beat.

Foxtrot Charlie Sierrra.

The Rumsfledian disaster.

a reply to: anzha

Yes, but who actually pays attention to the Army? Other than to pat them on the head occasionally and tell them they're valuable or something. Give them some Tide Pods and they'll stay busy and out of the way for awhile.

a reply to: Zaphod58

fah. When the Blue Beanies actually have to take on a peer instead of strutting their stuff in front of third raters, then the army will matter. Until then, the army will find ways to fsck itself over with new and innovative creativity.

a reply to: anzha

They only matter because planes can't hold territory. The rest of the time they're there to laugh at.

At least they don't try to eat the crayons when you give them a coloring book, like another service does.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Until some Blue Beanie figures out how to actually build a veritech.

Then some joker hits it with an ATGM.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
You know....I used to think the Air Force was superb at totally screwing projects into the ground.

They're freaking novices at it compared to the Navy. They're going to be lucky if anyone bids at this point. I can't think of a more screwed up project ever in the history of screwed up projects than this has been.

Aquila down at Fort Huachuca. Don't ask questions, just believe it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

This is a service branch where the front line air defence surface assets are as old as I am and are literally falling apart at the seams, that wasted billions to build three expensive toys with useless gun systems that can't even mount Standards and don't even have a proper air defence radar, and yet despite being supposedly insanely modular/expandable there has not once been a suggestion to fast-track a rebuild of one of them with better radar and a bunch of classic, Standard-compatible VLS cells replacing the gun system to replace said creaking, falling apart air defence assets.

And this is after 5 years of Chinese Saber-rattling in the Pacific culminating with their launching carriers at an alarming clip and procuring a large stealth fighter that could very well be a carrier killer.

Maybe they're worried that the stealthy hull form will just make it that much easier for them to get hit by wayward container ships.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
You know....I used to think the Air Force was superb at totally screwing projects into the ground.

They're freaking novices at it compared to the Navy. They're going to be lucky if anyone bids at this point. I can't think of a more screwed up project ever in the history of screwed up projects than this has been.

The A-12 Nuff said.

a reply to: JIMC5499

The A-12 was nowhere near as bad as this. It at least was the same thing it started as when they killed it. The Stingray has been three different platforms over the course of the program.

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems successfully tested Pratt & Whitney’s PW815 turbofan engine on an inlet and exhaust mock-up for its proposed MQ-25 unmanned aerial aircraft on 5 April.

The test met all objectives and the joint team is now further evaluating data collected from that test, according to GA-ASI.

GA-ASI announced in February that it selected Pratt & Whitney’s PW815 turbofan engine to power its proposed unmanned aerial refueling aircraft for the US Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray programme.

The PW815 is rated at 16,000lb-thrust, which is substantially more than the proposed engine for Lockheed Martin’s MQ-25 bid, the 10,000lb-thrust General Electric F404, and the proposed engine for Boeing’s MQ-25 bid a 9,000lb-thrust version of the Rolls-Royce AE3007.

www.flightglobal.com...

The extra thrust really that necessary?

a reply to: anzha

Necessary? No. Useful? Hell yes. This was probably in development for way back in the day (back when we had to walk uphill both ways in snow to get to school) when it was called UCLASS.

The Navy is requesting almost $700M for the MQ-25A for FY19.

www.dtic.mil...

They have stated they expect to select a contractor this year. We'll see on that.

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) concluded performance testing of the arresting hook Hold Down Damper (HDD) for its proposed MQ-25 unmanned aerial refueling aircraft for the U.S. Navy. GA-ASI worked in collaboration with a team from GKN Aerospace’s Fokker business unit in Helmond, Netherlands. Fokker is slated to supply the arresting hook for the GA-ASI bid.

The test simulated dynamic conditions providing performance characteristics of the HDD, such as damping, spring rate and pressure control functionality. The test results validate modeling tools that provide quick reaction capability for completing the design and manufacturing during the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) contract.

www.ga.com...