General Electric awarded $246M for aircraft engine development, testing, and integration by the Air Force
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $246,419,005 ($246.4M)
Contractor: General Electric Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2025-03-01
End Date: 2026-10-31
Contract Duration: 609 days
Daily Burn Rate: $404.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: DO3 - ENGINE BUILD, TEST, MATURATION AND INTEGRATION
Place of Performance
Location: CINCINNATI, HAMILTON County, OHIO, 45215
State: Ohio Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $246.4 million to GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY for work described as: DO3 - ENGINE BUILD, TEST, MATURATION AND INTEGRATION Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in advanced propulsion systems. 2. Competition dynamics suggest a robust market for specialized aerospace manufacturing. 3. Performance risk is mitigated through a Cost Plus Award Fee structure. 4. This contract supports critical Air Force readiness and modernization efforts. 5. The award positions General Electric as a key supplier in the defense aerospace sector.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $246.4 million for engine build, test, maturation, and integration appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the work. Benchmarking against similar complex aerospace development contracts is challenging without more granular data on specific deliverables. However, the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure allows for performance-based incentives, suggesting an effort to achieve value for money by rewarding efficient and effective execution.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This competitive process is expected to drive price discovery and ensure the government receives competitive offers. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but the 'full and open' designation suggests a healthy level of market interest and engagement.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a more competitive environment, which can lead to lower prices and better terms for government contracts.
Public Impact
The U.S. Air Force benefits from advanced and reliable aircraft propulsion systems. Services include engine build, testing, maturation, and integration, crucial for aircraft operational readiness. The primary geographic impact is likely within Ohio, where General Electric's operations are based. This contract supports a highly skilled workforce in aerospace engineering and manufacturing.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns inherent in Cost Plus Award Fee contracts if not managed tightly.
- Dependence on a single contractor for critical engine components could pose supply chain risks.
- Long-term sustainment costs for these advanced engines are not detailed in this award.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing and broad market access.
- Cost Plus Award Fee structure incentivizes contractor performance and efficiency.
- Contract duration of 609 days indicates a focused effort on specific development milestones.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the aerospace and defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on aircraft engines. The market for advanced military aircraft propulsion systems is highly specialized, dominated by a few key players like General Electric. Spending in this area is driven by defense modernization priorities and the need for cutting-edge technology to maintain air superiority. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other major engine development programs for military aircraft.
Small Business Impact
The provided data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and does not explicitly mention subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears limited for this specific award, though General Electric may engage small businesses as part of its broader supply chain.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Air Force contracting and program management offices. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure necessitates close monitoring of performance metrics and cost expenditures to ensure award fees are justified. Transparency is typically maintained through contract reporting mechanisms, and the Inspector General's office would have jurisdiction over any allegations of fraud or mismanagement.
Related Government Programs
- Aircraft Engine Manufacturing
- Aerospace Propulsion Systems
- Defense Procurement
- Air Force Materiel Command Contracts
Risk Flags
- Cost Overrun Potential
- Supply Chain Dependency
- Performance Measurement Complexity
Tags
defense, department-of-the-air-force, general-electric, aircraft-engine-manufacturing, cost-plus-award-fee, full-and-open-competition, ohio, engine-development, aerospace, military-readiness
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $246.4 million to GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY. DO3 - ENGINE BUILD, TEST, MATURATION AND INTEGRATION
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $246.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2025-03-01. End: 2026-10-31.
What is General Electric's track record with similar Air Force engine development contracts?
General Electric has a long and extensive history of developing and supplying engines for U.S. military aircraft, including numerous contracts with the Air Force. They are a primary contractor for engines on platforms like the B-21 bomber, F-35 fighter jet (via a joint venture), and various transport and trainer aircraft. Their track record generally includes successful delivery of complex propulsion systems, though like any large defense contractor, they have faced scrutiny over cost and schedule on specific programs. This specific contract for 'engine build, test, maturation and integration' aligns with their core capabilities and past performance in advanced engine programs.
How does the $246.4 million award compare to typical engine development contracts?
The $246.4 million figure for engine build, test, maturation, and integration is substantial but falls within the expected range for advanced military engine development programs. Such programs are inherently complex and require significant investment in research, design, prototyping, rigorous testing, and integration into airframes. For context, major engine development programs for new fighter jets or bombers can run into billions of dollars over their lifecycle. This $246.4 million award likely represents a specific phase or component of a larger engine program, making it a significant but not unprecedented investment for the Air Force.
What are the primary risks associated with this Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract?
The primary risks with a CPAF contract, like this one, revolve around cost control and performance measurement. While CPAF incentivizes performance, there's a risk that the government may pay higher total costs if the contractor achieves high performance targets, even if those targets were achievable with less effort or cost. Effective oversight is crucial to ensure that award fees are genuinely earned based on objective performance criteria and that costs are reasonable and allocable. Without stringent monitoring, there's a potential for cost growth beyond initial projections, although the award fee mechanism aims to mitigate this by linking profit to performance.
How effective is the 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for taxpayers on this contract?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for taxpayers in government contracting. It allows any responsible source to submit an offer, thereby maximizing the number of potential bidders and fostering a competitive environment. This competition drives down prices, encourages innovation, and ensures that the government selects the best overall value, considering both technical merit and cost. For a complex contract like engine development, this process helps ensure that the Air Force receives state-of-the-art technology at a fair market price, reducing the likelihood of paying a premium due to limited supplier options.
What is the historical spending trend for aircraft engine manufacturing by the Department of Defense?
Historical spending by the Department of Defense (DoD) on aircraft engine manufacturing has been consistently high, reflecting the critical role of air power and the advanced technology required for modern military aircraft. Major engine programs, whether for fighters, bombers, transports, or helicopters, represent significant portions of the DoD's procurement and research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) budgets. Spending fluctuates based on the lifecycle of major aircraft programs – high during development and initial production, and then shifting towards sustainment and upgrades. General Electric, along with competitors like Pratt & Whitney, are perennial major recipients of these funds, indicating a stable but substantial market.
What are the implications of the contract duration (609 days) for program execution?
A contract duration of 609 days (approximately 20 months) for engine build, test, maturation, and integration suggests a focused, phased approach to achieving specific developmental milestones within a defined timeframe. This duration is typical for significant development and testing phases of complex systems, allowing sufficient time for engineering, manufacturing, rigorous testing under various conditions, and subsequent integration efforts. It implies that the contract is likely not for the full lifecycle of the engine but rather for a critical stage of its development or enhancement. This timeframe allows for iterative improvements and validation before moving to subsequent production or operational phases.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing
Product/Service Code: ENGINES AND TURBINES AND COMPONENT
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1 NEUMANN WAY, CINCINNATI, OH, 45215
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $850,342,339
Exercised Options: $546,993,472
Current Obligation: $246,419,005
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: FA862622D0010
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2025-03-01
Current End Date: 2026-10-31
Potential End Date: 2030-01-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2026-01-05
More Contracts from General Electric Company
- 200607!387702!1700!n00019!naval AIR Systems Command !N0001906C0088 !A!N! !N! ! !20060424!20090131!001408509!001408509!001367960!n!general Electric Company !1000 Western AVE !lynn !ma!01905!37490!009!25!lynn !essex !mass !+000018238000!n!n!000000000000!2840!gas Turbines and JET Engines, Acft & Comps !a1b!aircraft Engines and Spares !000 !NOT Discernable !336412!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!u!j!1!001!n!1a!z!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!b!y! ! ! !Y!1719!N00019!0001! ! — $2.4B (Department of Defense)
- Adaptive Engine Transition Program (aetp) — $2.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200608!001069!2100!w58rgz!usa Aviation and Missile Command!w58rgz06c0038 !A!N! !Y! ! !20051215!20101231!137488664!137488664!001367960!n!general Electric Company !1 Neumann WAY !cincinnati !oh!45215!15000!061!39!cincinnati !hamilton !ohio !+000177879422!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !a1b!aircraft Engines and Spares !000 !NOT Discernable !541330!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!n!j!1!001!n!1g!z!n!z! ! !Y!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!d!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $1.6B (Department of Defense)
- 200210!004379!1700!AA427 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001901C0147 !A!N! !N!P00001 !20020508!20031130!001408509!001408509!001367960!n!general Electric Company Inc !1000 Western AVE !lynn !ma!01910!37490!009!25!lynn !essex !mass !+000060619860!n!n!000000000000!2840!gas Turbines and JET Engines, Acft & Comps !a1b!aircraft Engines and Spares !2bjn!f414-Ge-400 !336412!E! !1! ! !C! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !d!n!j!1!001!n!1a!a!w!f! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!b!y! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $1.5B (Department of Defense)
- F414-GE-400 Engines — $1.2B (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)