DoD awards $11.8M for aircraft landing gear, citing sole-source justification

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,825,000 ($11.8M)

Contractor: Honeywell International Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-08-21

End Date: 2028-01-18

Contract Duration: 880 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: WHEEL,LANDING GEAR

Place of Performance

Location: SOUTH BEND, ST JOSEPH County, INDIANA, 46628

State: Indiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.8 million to HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. for work described as: WHEEL,LANDING GEAR Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a sole-source basis, raising questions about price competition. 2. Long performance period (2025-2028) suggests a need for sustained supply. 3. Focus on landing gear indicates a critical component for aircraft operations. 4. Contract value is moderate, but the lack of competition warrants scrutiny. 5. Contractor has a significant presence in aircraft parts manufacturing. 6. Performance is tied to specific aircraft maintenance requirements.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $11.8 million for landing gear components appears moderate for a sole-source award. Without competitive bids, it's difficult to benchmark the value for money definitively. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract shifts some risk to the contractor. Further analysis would require comparing this price to historical sole-source awards for similar components or to publicly available pricing for commercial equivalents, if applicable.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded using a sole-source justification, meaning only one vendor, Honeywell International Inc., was solicited. This approach is typically used when only one responsible source is available or when a compelling justification exists for not seeking competition. The lack of multiple bidders means there was no opportunity for price discovery through a competitive bidding process, potentially leading to a higher price than if multiple vendors had competed.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive pressure. The justification for sole-source procurement needs to be robust to ensure the government is not overpaying for essential components.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from the continued availability of critical landing gear components for its aircraft fleet. This contract ensures the operational readiness and safety of specific naval aircraft. The primary service delivered is the supply of landing gear parts, likely for maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) activities. The geographic impact is primarily within the United States, supporting naval aviation readiness. Workforce implications are likely within Honeywell's manufacturing and supply chain operations.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price competition and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Long contract duration could lead to price escalation if not managed carefully.
Dependence on a single supplier for critical components poses a supply chain risk.

Positive Signals

Award to an established manufacturer like Honeywell suggests a focus on reliability and quality.
Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Contract supports the operational readiness of essential defense assets.

Sector Analysis

The aerospace manufacturing sector is characterized by high barriers to entry, complex supply chains, and significant R&D investment. Landing gear systems are highly specialized and critical components requiring stringent safety and performance standards. Honeywell International Inc. is a major player in this sector, providing a wide range of aerospace components. This contract fits within the broader category of defense aerospace MRO and component supply, a significant segment of the overall aerospace market.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve a small business set-aside, as indicated by 'ss': false and 'sb': false. The prime contractor, Honeywell, is a large corporation. There is no explicit information regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses within this award. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific contract is likely minimal, though Honeywell's overall subcontracting practices could involve small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified goods. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature, but contract awards are generally publicly reported. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Aircraft Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO)
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Procurement
Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Contracts
Aerospace Component Manufacturing

Risk Flags

Sole-source justification requires careful review.
Potential for price inflation due to lack of competition.
Long contract duration increases exposure to supply chain risks.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.8 million to HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.. WHEEL,LANDING GEAR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-08-21. End: 2028-01-18.

What is Honeywell's track record with sole-source defense contracts for aircraft components?

Honeywell International Inc. has a long history of supplying components to the Department of Defense, including sole-source awards. These awards are often justified by proprietary technology, unique manufacturing capabilities, or the critical nature of the component where only one supplier can meet the stringent requirements. Analyzing past sole-source contracts awarded to Honeywell for similar components would provide insight into pricing trends and the typical justifications provided. While sole-source awards are necessary in certain situations, they necessitate rigorous justification and oversight to ensure fair pricing and prevent potential overspending. Publicly available contract databases can be queried to identify patterns in Honeywell's sole-source awards, their values, and the stated justifications, offering a basis for comparison with this current award.

How does the $11.8 million value compare to similar landing gear procurements, especially sole-source ones?

Benchmarking the $11.8 million value requires comparing it to similar sole-source awards for landing gear systems or major components. Without access to proprietary pricing data or detailed specifications of the components being procured, a direct comparison is challenging. However, general market intelligence suggests that complex aircraft systems, including landing gear, can range from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars per set, depending on the aircraft type and technological sophistication. Sole-source awards inherently lack the price discovery mechanism of competition, potentially inflating costs. If this award represents a single set of landing gear for a large military aircraft, it might be within a reasonable range, but if it covers multiple sets or less complex components, it could indicate a higher-than-market price. Further analysis would involve examining the contract's duration (880 days) and the quantity of items to derive a more meaningful per-unit or annual cost.

What are the primary risks associated with this sole-source contract for landing gear?

The primary risk associated with this sole-source contract is the potential for inflated pricing due to the lack of competitive bidding. Taxpayers may bear a higher cost than necessary. Another significant risk is supply chain vulnerability; dependence on a single supplier for critical components like landing gear can create risks if the supplier faces production issues, financial instability, or geopolitical disruptions. Furthermore, without competition, there may be less incentive for the contractor to innovate or offer cost-saving improvements over the contract's duration. The long performance period (nearly 2.5 years) also increases the exposure to these risks over time. Ensuring robust contract management and oversight is crucial to mitigate these potential downsides.

How effective is a firm fixed-price contract in managing costs for sole-source procurements like this?

A firm fixed-price (FFP) contract is generally considered effective in managing costs, especially for sole-source procurements, because it shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. The government agrees to pay a set price, regardless of the contractor's actual costs. This provides cost certainty for the buyer. For sole-source awards, FFP is often preferred to incentivize the contractor to control their expenses and deliver the product at the agreed-upon price. However, the effectiveness hinges on the initial price negotiation; if the baseline price is set too high due to the lack of competition, the FFP structure will simply lock in that higher cost. Therefore, while FFP provides cost certainty, the initial price determination remains a critical factor for ensuring value for money in sole-source situations.

What is the historical spending pattern for landing gear components by the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending patterns for landing gear components by the Department of the Navy are likely substantial, given the size and operational tempo of its aircraft fleet. This spending typically falls under categories related to aircraft parts, maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO). Analyzing past contract awards for landing gear systems, whether sole-source or competitively procured, would reveal trends in contract values, durations, and the number of bidders. Such analysis could highlight whether this $11.8 million award is consistent with historical spending for similar requirements or if it represents an outlier. Factors like inflation, technological advancements, and changes in aircraft fleet composition would influence these historical patterns. Understanding this context is vital for assessing the reasonableness of the current award.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: N0038324R003D

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Resideo Technologies, Inc.

Address: 3520 WESTMOOR ST, SOUTH BEND, IN, 46628

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: $11,825,000

Exercised Options: $11,825,000

Current Obligation: $11,825,000

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 1

Total Subaward Amount: $50,590

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0038325DNM01

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline