DoD's $6.7M contract for aircraft software fixes awarded to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $6,742,316 ($6.7M)

Contractor: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-12-23

End Date: 2027-05-22

Contract Duration: 515 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.1K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: SOFTWARE CORRECTION OF DEFICIENCIES BUILD

Place of Performance

Location: STRATFORD, FAIRFIELD County, CONNECTICUT, 06614

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $6.7 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION for work described as: SOFTWARE CORRECTION OF DEFICIENCIES BUILD Key points: 1. Value for money is difficult to assess without a competitive benchmark. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about price discovery. 3. Risk indicators include the sole-source nature and potential for cost overruns. 4. Performance context is limited to aircraft software correction, a niche but critical area. 5. This contract fits within the broader Defense sector's aircraft manufacturing and maintenance spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract's value is difficult to benchmark due to its sole-source nature and the lack of publicly available cost data for similar specialized software correction services. Without competitive bids, it's challenging to determine if the fixed fee is reasonable or if taxpayers are receiving optimal value. The cost-plus-fixed-fee structure introduces some risk of cost escalation, though the fixed fee component aims to cap the contractor's profit.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not openly competed. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the necessary specialized capabilities or when urgency dictates. The lack of competition limits the government's ability to solicit multiple bids and potentially negotiate a lower price.

Taxpayer Impact: Sole-source awards can lead to higher costs for taxpayers as there is no competitive pressure to drive down prices. This limits the government's leverage in price negotiations.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Navy, which will receive corrected aircraft software. Services delivered include the identification and correction of software deficiencies in aircraft systems. The geographic impact is primarily within Connecticut, where Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation is based. Workforce implications include specialized software engineers and technicians at Sikorsky.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potentially increases cost to taxpayers.
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type can incentivize cost overruns if not closely monitored.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
Limited public data on the specific software deficiencies and their impact.

Positive Signals

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation is a known entity with experience in aircraft manufacturing.
The contract addresses a specific need for software correction, implying a focus on safety and performance.
The fixed fee component provides some cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on aircraft manufacturing and maintenance. The market for specialized aircraft software development and correction is highly concentrated, often dominated by original equipment manufacturers like Sikorsky due to proprietary knowledge and system integration requirements. Spending in this area is critical for maintaining the operational readiness and safety of military aviation assets.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve a small business set-aside. Given the sole-source nature and the specialized requirements, it is unlikely that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses will be significant unless explicitly mandated by the prime contractor. The focus is on a large, established defense contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight will likely be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures would be tied to the contract's performance clauses and delivery schedules. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature and the proprietary aspects of aircraft software. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Manufacturing
Defense Software Development
Military Aviation Maintenance
Naval Aviation Programs

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Cost-plus-fixed-fee contract type
Potential for cost overruns
Limited competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $6.7 million to SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION. SOFTWARE CORRECTION OF DEFICIENCIES BUILD

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $6.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-12-23. End: 2027-05-22.

What is Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation's track record with the Department of Defense, particularly on sole-source contracts?

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin, has a long and extensive history of contracting with the Department of Defense, particularly for rotary-wing aircraft. They are a primary manufacturer for many Navy and Army helicopter platforms. While they have a strong track record of delivery, sole-source awards to large, established contractors like Sikorsky are common for specialized systems where they are the original equipment manufacturer or possess unique expertise. Analyzing their past sole-source awards would require deep dives into specific contract histories, but generally, their performance is considered reliable, albeit often at a premium due to the lack of competition. The DoD often justifies sole-source awards based on technical data rights, unique capabilities, or urgent needs, which would need to be thoroughly documented for this specific contract.

How does the cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types for software development in the defense sector?

The Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) contract type is often used for research and development or complex services where the scope of work is not precisely defined at the outset, or when the contractor's costs are difficult to estimate accurately. In this case, for 'SOFTWARE CORRECTION OF DEFICIENCIES BUILD,' the exact nature and extent of the deficiencies might not be fully known, making CPFF a plausible choice. Compared to Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), CPFF offers more flexibility for the government if requirements change or unforeseen issues arise, as the contractor is reimbursed for allowable costs. However, it shifts more cost risk to the government than FFP. Other types like Cost-Plus-Incentive-Fee (CPIF) or Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) introduce performance incentives, which might be more appropriate if specific quality or efficiency targets were set. For well-defined software projects, FFP is generally preferred for better cost control.

What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source award for critical aircraft software?

A sole-source award for critical aircraft software carries several potential risks. Firstly, the most significant risk is the lack of price competition, which can lead to the government paying a higher price than if the contract were competed. Without competing bids, there's less incentive for the contractor to offer the most cost-effective solution. Secondly, there's a risk of reduced innovation or responsiveness, as the contractor may face less pressure to improve processes or offer cutting-edge solutions when they are the only option. Thirdly, dependency on a single supplier can create vulnerabilities; if the contractor experiences financial difficulties, operational issues, or decides to exit the market, the government could face significant disruption in maintaining its aircraft. Finally, sole-source awards can sometimes be perceived as less transparent, potentially leading to scrutiny regarding the justification and fairness of the procurement process.

What is the typical duration and cost for aircraft software correction contracts within the Department of the Navy?

Determining a 'typical' duration and cost for aircraft software correction contracts is challenging due to the highly specialized nature of each requirement and the specific aircraft platforms involved. Contracts can range from short-term, focused efforts for a single deficiency on a specific system to longer-term, multi-year engagements for comprehensive software overhauls or upgrades across a fleet. The cost is heavily influenced by the complexity of the software, the criticality of the aircraft, the number of systems affected, and the level of testing and validation required. For instance, a minor bug fix might cost tens of thousands of dollars, while a significant software redesign for a major platform could run into millions. The $6.7 million awarded to Sikorsky for a 515-day period suggests a moderately complex effort, likely involving multiple software modules or a significant update, but without more context on the specific aircraft and deficiencies, direct comparison to other contracts is difficult.

How does the 'Aircraft Manufacturing' (NAICS 336411) category spending by the Department of the Navy compare to this specific software correction contract?

The NAICS code 336411, 'Aircraft Manufacturing,' encompasses a broad range of activities, including the production of complete aircraft, aircraft engines, and aircraft parts. Spending within this category by the Department of the Navy is substantial, often running into billions of dollars annually, covering new aircraft procurement, major assembly, engine production, and extensive maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) services. This specific contract for 'SOFTWARE CORRECTION OF DEFICIENCIES BUILD' at $6.7 million represents a very small fraction of the total spending under NAICS 336411. It is a specialized service contract focused on a specific aspect (software) rather than the manufacturing of hardware. While related to the overall aircraft lifecycle, its value and scope are significantly narrower than the broader manufacturing and assembly activities typically associated with this NAICS code.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Aircraft Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT AND STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Lockheed Martin Corp

Address: 6900 MAIN ST, STRATFORD, CT, 06614

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: $6,742,316

Exercised Options: $6,742,316

Current Obligation: $6,742,316

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0001923D0015

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline