BAE Systems has announced that it will continue providing lifecycle sustainment, integration, and engineering services to support U.S. aircraft carriers after being selected for a five-year, $68.5 million contract.

According to BAE, under the Air Traffic Control and Landing Systems (ATC&LS) Engineering Products & Technical Services (EPTS) contract awarded earlier this year, BAE Systems will leverage decades of program history to develop, produce, equip, test, evaluate, sustain, and update the AN/SPN-46(V) Automatic Carrier Landing System.

		 BAE Systems to sustain critical carrier landing systems with $68.5 million contract from the U.S. Navy“With this win, BAE Systems retains a key air traffic control contract that we have held since 1973 to provide industry-leading systems integration capabilities and solutions that ensure the safety of critical carrier-based landing systems,” said Lisa Hand, vice president and general manager of BAE Systems’ Integrated Defense Solutions business.

The AN/SPN-46(V)1 is a Precision Approach and Landing System, manufactured in the United States, by Textron Systems, which is used on aircraft carriers of the United States Navy. The radar uses two dual-band radar antennas, which also function as transmitters, to guide planes or helicopters to the ship.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
20 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago

Bond’s across the Atlantic seem too be strengthening

Lazerbenabba
Lazerbenabba
6 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

BAE has performed this function for the US navy for almost 48 years as per the article
It would appear that this British world spanning success is constantly in the defence news almost every day particularly within the US sphere.

Tommo
Tommo
6 days ago
Reply to  Lazerbenabba

But it’s good too see that the continuing use of British equipment is seem as a better alternative to home grown so too speak

Wayne John Faulkner
Wayne John Faulkner
5 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

Yup the British designed landing system was developed for Harrier and F-35B, and later modified for CATOBAR

AV
AV
6 days ago

Agree with all the other posts on this one….side note: that’s some serious air power in the photo..rivals a lot of actual air forces.

Eufster
Eufster
6 days ago

At least the US is giving them contracts. They should change their name to USAE Systems.

Bob
Bob
6 days ago
Reply to  Eufster

Why should they change their name?

Eufster
Eufster
5 days ago
Reply to  Bob

Tongue in cheek, Bob. I wasn’t serious.

Just hinting at the fact the US has a higher recognition of the importance of defence capability than the UK. I’d like to see the UK at the very least match the US defence budget of 3% of GDP. But wishful thinking I know.

Andrew D
Andrew D
5 days ago
Reply to  Eufster

Your right 3% it should be if not more the way the world is.

Wayne John Faulkner
Wayne John Faulkner
5 days ago
Reply to  Eufster

Well its risen to 2.2%, so going in the right direction.

Johan
Johan
6 days ago
Reply to  Eufster

Something to do with they havnt Butt bummed the USA Taxpayer yet, give them time BAEs is far from a British company and is more Chinese, and i used to work for them.

Rob_F
Rob_F
5 days ago
Reply to  Johan

I’m sorry Johan, can you substantiate that claim with some evidence?

Johan
Johan
5 days ago
Reply to  Rob_F

you want proof BAEs screwed the taxpayer, i start with MRA4 that’s a good one, next removing all Harrier Airframes extended flight hours, and then Invincible class removed service parts on the turbine gearbox. YOU NEED MORE and don’t mention SUPA GLUEING BOLTS on. Their only interest is selling off old factory airfields so they can purchase contracts… your proof is in the National Audit Office reports on BAEs.

James
James
5 days ago
Reply to  Johan

Sorry that is a load of twaddle. Clearly didn’t work for BAE. BAE is a UK company and saying it is more US and Chinese is ridiculous.

Johan
Johan
5 days ago
Reply to  James

more Chinese parts in BAEs than any country, how many LCD screens in any BAEs products, worked at Dunsfold building Hawks and Harriers. so dumbfuck guess i know a little more than you….

Jonathan
Jonathan
6 days ago

It’s important to note these companies no longer hold a national identity in the sense that British airspace or British petroleum were British companies and so were linked intrinsically to the betterment of the British nation state. These creations of neoliberal globalisation are very much sovereign entities in their own right, having partnerships of convenience with nation states but having no specific belonging to any single nation.

Last edited 6 days ago by Jonathan
DaveyB
DaveyB
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Perhaps that needs to change?

Jonathan
Jonathan
5 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Indeed.

Eufster
Eufster
5 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

The plot of the video game Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare should serve as a reminder of the dangers of giving private defence companies too much power. In this plot a fictional private defence company named Atlas Corporation becomes so powerful by selling arms to the nations of the world that the company itself becomes a sovereign entity that rivals the superpowers. Eventually they declare war on the world in an attempt of world domination of course.

Tommo
Tommo
5 days ago
Reply to  Eufster

Not on my SPCTRUM ZX they haven’t hee hee hee