Boeing awarded $66.7M for undergraduate military flight officer training system, a 7-year contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $66,668,908 ($66.7M)

Contractor: THE Boeing Company (0674)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-08-09

End Date: 2014-10-31

Contract Duration: 2,640 days

Daily Burn Rate: $25.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: UNDERGRADUATE MILITARY FLIGHT OFFICER GROUND BASED TRAINING SYSTEM

Place of Performance

Location: SAINT LOUIS, ST. LOUIS County, MISSOURI, 63134

State: Missouri Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $66.7 million to THE BOEING COMPANY (0674) for work described as: UNDERGRADUATE MILITARY FLIGHT OFFICER GROUND BASED TRAINING SYSTEM Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 2640 days (7 years) indicates a long-term need for the training system. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 4. The award to The Boeing Company suggests a reliance on established defense contractors for complex systems. 5. The specific product service code (PSC) is not detailed, making direct comparisons challenging. 6. The contract was awarded in Missouri, potentially impacting the local economy and workforce.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $66.7 million over seven years for a military flight officer training system appears to be a significant investment. Without specific details on the system's capabilities or comparable systems, it's difficult to definitively benchmark its value. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to manage cost overruns. Further analysis would require understanding the system's technical specifications and comparing its cost to similar training solutions, both within the DoD and potentially in the commercial aviation training sector.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a 'full and open competition' solicitation, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The fact that there were 5 bids received suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specialized training system. A competitive process like this generally helps ensure that the government receives a fair price and a solution that meets its requirements effectively.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process helps ensure taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down prices and encouraging innovative solutions from multiple vendors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are undergraduate military flight officers who will receive advanced ground-based training. The system delivered will enhance pilot training capabilities for the Department of the Navy. The contract's performance location in Missouri may have implications for regional employment in the aerospace and defense sector. The successful implementation of this training system is crucial for maintaining the readiness and effectiveness of future military aviators.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract doesn't adequately account for unforeseen development challenges.
Risk of technological obsolescence if the training system is not designed with future upgrades in mind.
Dependence on a single contractor (Boeing) for a critical training system could pose supply chain risks.
Ensuring the training system effectively translates to real-world flight proficiency requires rigorous validation.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Awarding to a major defense contractor like Boeing suggests access to established expertise and resources.
The competitive bidding process likely resulted in a well-defined and cost-effective solution.
The long contract duration allows for sustained development and support of the training system.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on specialized training systems. The market for defense training solutions is substantial, driven by the continuous need for highly skilled military personnel. Companies like Boeing are key players, leveraging their expertise in aircraft and simulation technology to provide advanced training platforms. Benchmarking this contract's value would involve comparing it to other large-scale simulation and training system procurements within the defense industry.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication from the provided data that this contract included specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. The award to a large prime contractor like The Boeing Company suggests that the primary focus was on the prime's capabilities. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified system within the agreed-upon price. Transparency would be enhanced through regular reporting requirements and potential site visits by government personnel. The Inspector General's office within the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Military Flight Training Systems
Aerospace Simulation and Training
Defense Contractor Services
Naval Aviation Programs
Undergraduate Pilot Training

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of technological obsolescence.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can shift risk to the contractor, potentially impacting quality if not managed well.
Lack of specific product service code makes direct cost benchmarking difficult.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $66.7 million to THE BOEING COMPANY (0674). UNDERGRADUATE MILITARY FLIGHT OFFICER GROUND BASED TRAINING SYSTEM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE BOEING COMPANY (0674).

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $66.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-08-09. End: 2014-10-31.

What is the specific nature and technological sophistication of the "UNDERGRADUATE MILITARY FLIGHT OFFICER GROUND BASED TRAINING SYSTEM" awarded to Boeing?

The provided data does not detail the specific technological features or capabilities of the training system. However, given the context of military flight officer training, it likely involves advanced simulation technology, virtual reality, or sophisticated computer-based modules designed to teach theoretical knowledge, procedural skills, and decision-making processes relevant to flight operations. The system aims to supplement or precede actual flight training, providing a cost-effective and safe environment for cadets to learn fundamental aviation principles and military protocols before taking to the air. Its sophistication would be measured by its fidelity to real-world scenarios, its ability to adapt to different training needs, and its integration with broader military training curricula.

How does the $66.7 million cost compare to similar military training system contracts awarded in the past decade?

Benchmarking the $66.7 million cost requires comparing it to similar large-scale military training system contracts. While specific comparable data isn't provided, contracts for advanced flight simulators, virtual training environments, or integrated training platforms for military aviation often range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on complexity, duration, and scope. For instance, contracts for full-mission simulators for fighter jets or transport aircraft can exceed this amount significantly. The seven-year duration of this contract suggests a substantial system, making the total cost appear reasonable if it delivers advanced capabilities. A more precise comparison would necessitate identifying contracts for similar undergraduate-level, ground-based training systems with comparable technological requirements and service periods.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to assess the success of this training system contract?

Key performance indicators for this contract would likely focus on the effectiveness and efficiency of the training system. These could include metrics such as the pass rates of officers completing the ground-based training, the reduction in time or cost required for subsequent flight training, the improvement in pilot proficiency scores (measured through standardized tests or simulator evaluations), and the system's uptime and reliability. User feedback from instructors and trainees would also be crucial. Furthermore, the government would monitor adherence to the contract's technical specifications, delivery schedules, and budget constraints. The ultimate success would be measured by the system's contribution to producing well-prepared and capable military flight officers.

What is The Boeing Company's track record with similar large-scale government training system contracts?

The Boeing Company has an extensive and well-established track record in developing and delivering complex systems for government and military clients, including training and simulation solutions. They are a major provider of aircraft, defense systems, and related support services. Boeing has historically been involved in numerous large-scale contracts for flight simulators, virtual training environments, and integrated learning systems for various branches of the U.S. military and international partners. Their experience spans decades and covers a wide range of platforms, from fighter jets to large transport aircraft. While specific details of past training system contracts are not provided here, Boeing's overall profile suggests significant capability and experience in fulfilling such requirements.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a complex training system, and how are they mitigated?

A primary risk with firm-fixed-price (FFP) contracts for complex systems like training platforms is that the contractor may underestimate development costs or encounter unforeseen technical challenges, potentially leading to reduced profit margins or, in extreme cases, financial distress for the contractor. This could indirectly impact the government through delays or quality compromises. Mitigation strategies employed by the government include thorough pre-award cost analysis, clearly defined technical requirements and scope of work, and robust oversight during contract performance. Contractors mitigate risks by conducting detailed planning, incorporating contingency into their pricing, and employing efficient project management. For the government, the benefit of FFP is cost certainty, while the risk is borne more heavily by the contractor.

How has spending on military flight training systems evolved over the past 5-10 years, and where does this contract fit in?

Spending on military flight training systems has generally seen a trend towards increased reliance on simulation and virtual reality technologies to enhance training effectiveness, reduce costs, and improve safety compared to traditional live flight hours. There's a growing emphasis on integrated training solutions that combine various modalities. This $66.7 million contract for a ground-based training system fits within this trend, representing a significant investment in modernizing training infrastructure. While specific historical spending figures for this exact category are not provided, the overall defense budget allocation for training and simulation has remained substantial, reflecting its critical importance. This contract appears to be a mid-to-large-sized procurement within the broader landscape of defense training investments.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing › Other Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: TRAINING AIDS AND DEVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: THE Boeing Company (UEI: 009256819)

Address: J S MCDONNELL BLVD, SAINT LOUIS, MO, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $69,037,170

Exercised Options: $66,668,908

Current Obligation: $66,668,908

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6133903D5014

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline