Jump to content

AMP Program


FEC130
 Share

Recommended Posts

This was posted on 18 January on Fed Bizopps

Modification to the C-130 AVIONICS MODERNIZATION PROGRAM (AMP) LOW RATE INITIAL PRODUCTION (LRIP) PRE-SOLICITATION ANNOUNCEMENT.

Contracting Office: Department of the Air Force, Air Force Materiel Command, Aeronautical Systems Center, 866th Aeronautical Systems Group, Wright Patterson AFB, OH, 45433, anticipates issuing, on or about January 2008, a sole source Request for Proposal to The Boeing Company, 2401 East Wardlow Road, Long Beach, CA 90807-5309 for the manufacture and installation of approximately twenty-six (26) C-130 AMP LRIP kits.

This acquisition is a follow-on to the competitively awarded C-130 AMP System Development and Design contract currently being performed by Boeing (F33657-01-C-0047)

Here is the link:

http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USAF/AFMC/ASC/656AESS%5FPK%5FC130LRIP/Modification%2002.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now , only the H2/3\'s are to be modified, Really doesn\'t make a bit of sense.

For quite a long time you are creating yet another variation that has to be taught. The reserve forces that \"own\" (sic) these acft have flown together in every conflict since Desert Shield. Kinda dumb, and a waste of money don\'t you think?

RZ Hill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RZ - What is driving AMP upgrades (KC-10, C-5, KC-135PC upgrades, Navy C-130, etc) is the need for the aircraft to be compliant in European airspace, often referred to as Global Air Navigation & Safety/Global Air Traffic Management (GANS/GATM - it has other acronyms). That upgrade, which was one of the original requirements driving AMP, obviously ballooned because of cost/schedule/risk/etc (same old sh_ _). The services, to include SOCOM/AFSOC and NAVAIR are looking for alternatives to the Boeing AMP (which exist; a number of companies have already developed, flown and certified a “glass cockpit†which generally meet GANS/GATM requirements). The fact is that the AF/DoD can’t afford everything on its plate and has to find money to fix structural problems on a lot of aircraft (C-130, P-3, F-15, KC-135, etc) in addition to meeting unfunded requirements (GANS/GATM), fuel costs and aircraft high utilization rates.

Strictly my thoughts folks……

Hush

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hush wrote:

RZ - What is driving AMP upgrades (KC-10, C-5, KC-135PC upgrades, Navy C-130, etc) is the need for the aircraft to be compliant in European airspace, often referred to as Global Air Navigation & Safety/Global Air Traffic Management (GANS/GATM - it has other acronyms). That upgrade, which was one of the original requirements driving AMP, obviously ballooned because of cost/schedule/risk/etc (same old sh_ _). The services, to include SOCOM/AFSOC and NAVAIR are looking for alternatives to the Boeing AMP (which exist; a number of companies have already developed, flown and certified a “glass cockpit†which generally meet GANS/GATM requirements). The fact is that the AF/DoD can’t afford everything on its plate and has to find money to fix structural problems on a lot of aircraft (C-130, P-3, F-15, KC-135, etc) in addition to meeting unfunded requirements (GANS/GATM), fuel costs and aircraft high utilization rates.

Not all of the balloning costs can be attributed to cost/schedule/risk/etc.

Products are developed to the point of design freeze on equipment designed as a drop in replacment only to have the program manager start adding \"nice to have features\" that force a redesign. Once that happens it starts snowballing from there. I am afraid that some responsibiliy lies with program managers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fault lies with PMs and senior leadership above them changing their requirements...there\'s enough blame to spread to a lot of folks. It ultimately affects the line guys/gals; who knows what the final mix will be. I personally found it irresponsible to take the H1s out of the AMP line...they\'re getting new CWBs, and very similar to H2s, so development wouldn\'t be too much $ (hell, most of it was already done) and we\'d finally have only 2 types of Herks in the MAF...C-130 AMPs and C-130Js. Well, except for Nashville...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of airplanes that will get the Boeing AMP mod is still a TBD.

After the Boeing AMP program passed the Nunn-McCurdy evaluation, the remaining funding that had originally been appropriated for about 600 airplanes (WAG) would only cover about 244 airplanes on an updated schedule.

Part of the increased cost resulted from delays in the program, moving the spending profile to the right; into out years that had not been anticipated in the original estimate. Some of this delay was to free up DOD funds to fight the war(s) in the mid-east and some of the increase was due to growth in scope.

Part of the Nunn-McCurdy evaluation was to determine whether or not AMP was really a worthwhile program; and the answer from the comittee was affirmative. Decisions at higher levels in DOD were made for selection of the 244 airplanes. More airplanes may be added back into the AMP program at a later date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well...I can tell you that the current program of record is 222 aircraft. That can always change down the road, but the official number is 222 C-130 AMPs...all slick H2s, H2.5s, & H3s. Any other number is incorrect (and it hasn\'t changed since the Nunn-McCurdy restructure and the DoD made the 222 decision.) At least until someone takes the money away...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So does that 222 include the AFSOC birds? According to the latest Air Force Times (Air Force Whine dated 28 Jan 08), AFSOC has pulled completely out of getting any of its birds AMP\'ed. I don\'t know how old that info in the story really is. Seems like AFSOC is going to be depending completely on the J model to replace the MC fleet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...