Author Topic: Air Force Plans $10 Billion GPS III Contest Amid Lockheed Delays  (Read 2490 times)

Online Targeteer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3630
  • near hangar 18
  • Liked: 804
  • Likes Given: 391
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-02/lockheed-s-latest-delays-on-satellites-may-open-door-to-boeing

The Air Force will hold a $10 billion contest for as many as 22 new Global Positioning System satellites that’s likely to pit Lockheed Martin Corp. -- which is years behind schedule on the ones it’s already building -- against Boeing Co. and possibly Northrop Grumman Corp.

A request for proposals on the GPS III satellites will be issued “in the very near future,” pending its review by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, Lieutenant General John Thompson, head of the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center, told reporters Thursday.

“We wouldn’t be doing a competition if we didn’t think there were viable alternatives to the current Lockheed Martin system,” said Thompson, who added that “there are many vendors that are interested.”

Best quote heard during an inspection, "I was unaware that I was the only one who was aware."

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
  • Canada
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 454
Can SSL (Space Systems Loral) be able to enter the contest?

Online russianhalo117

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3866
  • AR USA / Berlin, DE / Moscow, RF
  • Liked: 755
  • Likes Given: 466
Can SSL (Space Systems Loral) be able to enter the contest?
Maybe, but they do not formally offer defense products. All launches to date have been commercial. However their SC platforms are built to be mil-spec and ITAR compliant. They do offer Satellite-Based Augmentation System (SBAS) with a graphic of a navigation type payload.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2017 03:17 PM by russianhalo117 »

Online psionedge

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 8
I think this is intended to be a payload only competition, not an entire satellite competition.

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 62
 :o $10.000mln for 22 GPSIII satellites, or $450mln for each satellite.  That's outrageouly expansive.
ESA/EU bought eight Galileo block3 satellites for €324mln, and a additional option for four for €157.75mln, or ~€40mln for each satellite.
I know it's a apples to oranges comparison. :-X

Online eeergo

  • Phystronaut
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4791
  • Milan, Italy; Spain; Virginia
  • Liked: 459
  • Likes Given: 358
Also because, IIRC, US budgeting includes salaries and workmanship, while the European system usually doesn't.
-DaviD-

Offline Rik ISS-fan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 750
  • the Netherlands
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 62
Also because, IIRC, US budgeting includes salaries and workmanship, while the European system usually doesn't.
I don't get this statement, please explain.
The DoD wants to buy 22 aditional GPSIIIF satellites, and they estimate that will cost $10billion.
ESA buys the galileo satellites for ~40mln, the contractor team has to pay the saleries of their employees.
Operation of the Galileo system isn't included in the contract, but I expect the same with GPSIIIF.

I know GPSIII satellites weight >3000kg and Galileo satellites only 750kg. GPSIII has 15year service life, Galileo 12years.
GPSIII needs a individual launch for each satellite, Galileo can do duo or quad launches.
I think when everything is calculated the GPSIII system is 5-10x more expansive than the Gallileo system.

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2127
  • US
  • Liked: 1481
  • Likes Given: 1052
I think this is intended to be a payload only competition, not an entire satellite competition.

Lockheed doesn't build the current payloads.  It's for both.

Online eeergo

  • Phystronaut
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4791
  • Milan, Italy; Spain; Virginia
  • Liked: 459
  • Likes Given: 358
Also because, IIRC, US budgeting includes salaries and workmanship, while the European system usually doesn't.
I don't get this statement, please explain.
The DoD wants to buy 22 aditional GPSIIIF satellites, and they estimate that will cost $10billion.
ESA buys the galileo satellites for ~40mln, the contractor team has to pay the saleries of their employees.
Operation of the Galileo system isn't included in the contract, but I expect the same with GPSIIIF.

I know GPSIII satellites weight >3000kg and Galileo satellites only 750kg. GPSIII has 15year service life, Galileo 12years.
GPSIII needs a individual launch for each satellite, Galileo can do duo or quad launches.
I think when everything is calculated the GPSIII system is 5-10x more expansive than the Gallileo system.

I'm not positive about it in this case, I was merely pointing out a difference that is usually quoted when comparing US project costs to the ones in other countries, especially in Europe. While US projects factor in salaries/workmanship as integral part of the budget, many European organizations (and I believe contractors) does it separately, because their accounting considers that to be part of the sunk costs for the company's actives - i.e. if they weren't working for that project, they'd be working for something else, not fired (or scrapped, in the case of machinery).

I don't know for certain if this is precisely the case here, and I'm certainly no accountant, but maybe it can explain part of the mismatch, together with the hardware differences you mention.
-DaviD-

Online psionedge

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 8
I think this is intended to be a payload only competition, not an entire satellite competition.

Lockheed doesn't build the current payloads.  It's for both.
LM was responsible for procuring the current payloads. It wasn't a GFE payload.

Offline Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 250
  • Likes Given: 567
Is this for the GPS Block IIIA to be launched in '18-earlier 20's or the GPS Block IIIF constellation to be launched in the late 20's-earlier '30's?

I had issues with the provided link.
Paul

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2127
  • US
  • Liked: 1481
  • Likes Given: 1052
This would start with the 11th GPS III satellite.

Offline Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 250
  • Likes Given: 567
This would start with the 11th GPS III satellite.
Thanks for clarifying.

This set of up to 22 vehicles is now known as GPS-3 as per the Deputy Director of the US Air Force's GPS Directorate.

The RPF should be out soon or was rumoured to be released in early Dec 2017.
Paul

Tags: