COTS, COTS, COTS, COTS

Posted by John McHale

Nearly everyone I speak to at avionics or defense trade shows or for interviews over the phone brings up the COTS (commercial-off-the-shelf) procurement term in some way. They make COTS products, use COTS practices, or think COTS is the worst thing in the world.

Nearly everyone I speak to at avionics and defense trade shows or for interviews over the phone brings up the COTS (commercial-off-the-shelf) procurement term in some way. They make COTS products, use COTS practices, or think COTS is the worst thing in the world.

Everyone seems to have different definitions or different acronyms for COTS. I've heard GOTS -- government-off-the-shelf; ROTS -- rugged-off-the-shelf; MOTS -- military-off-the-shelf; NOTS -- NATO-off-the-shelf; or my personal favorite: KOTS -- kinda-off-the-shelf. A few industry friends tell me they see a lot of SHOTS or "sh "-off-the-shelf. I'll let you fill in the rest ... we are a family web site ya know.

Seriously though, COTS is a procurement term that is supposed to embrace technology standards, but lacks any standard definition itself.

We like to think of COTS as being anything that is available out of a company catalog, even if it is tweaked or adjusted for a specific program. On the other hand custom would be anything that the government or end-user pays a supplier to develop from the ground up.

We've been talking about COTS for 15 years now. We've had shows about it and dedicated sections of our magazine to it, but many of our readers still differ on its meaning.

Some think the original intent of the Perry memo was to embrace commercial practices rather than a decree to run out and buy gadgets right off the shelf at Radio Shack or Fry's. In other words, to create standard product lines of MIL-STD components that can be bought off the shelf.

Many companies do offer such solutions, but just as many will buy a totally commercial component that does not meet military specifications and put it in a rugged enclosure.

Using COTS also cuts down on development time, which is very important to DOD program managers who want to get technology into the hands of the warfighter in Iraq or Afghanistan as fast as possible. DOD funding has been diverted from long-term programs to solutions that can be deployed near term to the warfighter.

Regardless, of how COTS is deployed or used, its dark side -- obsolecscne remains. No matter how you define it, designers still have to manage how they will support programs with components that will be obsolete in a few months or years.

Desginers of the avionics for the Orion spacecraft -- the proposed replacement for the space shuttle -- at Honeywell told me in January that managing obsolescene is one of their biggest challenges, but they cannot reach many of their performance golas without making use of COTS electronics and standards.

A decade and half after the Perry memo COTS has become a household word to those in the defense industry, it remains a kind of procurement wonder drug with wonderful benefits and occasionally some nasty side effects.

What does COTS mean to you? I would love to hear your COTS definition, your COTS success, or even a COTS horror story.

Follow me on Twitter

David Jensen joins Avionics Intelligence

Posted by John McHale

I am quite thrilled to announce that veteran aviation journalist David Jensen has joined our staff as a contributing editor. He will be writing one feature and news article a month for the Avionics Intelligence website and e-newsletter.
I am quite thrilled to announce that veteran aviation journalist David Jensen has joined our staff as a contributing editor. He will be writing one feature and news article a month for the Avionics Intelligence website and e-newsletter.

David is also serving on the advisory boards for our Avionics Europe and Avionics USA conferences and exhibitions. He was a co-founder of the Avionics Europe event held each March in Amsterdam, Netherlands.

David, the former editor-in-chief of Avionics Magazine and Aviation Maintenance Magazine, has more than 25 years experience in aviation journalism. He was also managing editor and then editor of Rotor & Wing, covering the helicopter industry. Briefly, he also served as editorial director for the Magazine Group at Phillips Publishing, now Access Intelligence.

David's first article for us will be on DO-254 certification issues for avionics hardware and will appear next month on our website and e-newsletter.

I'm looking forward to working with David, his in-depth experience and knowledge of aviation and journalism will be a huge asset to Avionics Intelligence.

Very cool helicopter avionics technology showcased at AUSA

Posted by John McHale

New helicopter technology was definitely creating a buzz at the Association of the U.S. Army (AUSA) annual Meeting in Washington this week, as Boeing released its new AH-6i helicopter and Sikorsky parked a version of its Light Tactical Helicopter between the convention center and the Renaissance Hotel.
New helicopter technology was definitely creating a buzz at the Association of the U.S. Army (AUSA) annual Meeting in Washington this week, as Boeing released its new AH-6i helicopter and Sikorsky parked a version of its Light Tactical Helicopter between the convention center and the Renaissance Hotel.

I took a seat in the LTH and learned that the primary objective of the aircraft is speed. Sikorsky is looking to eventually approach 250 knots while at the same time being a fully functional helicopter. They did not have a full avionics system in the model at AUSA, because they are still developing the cockpit systems, which could end up as a traditional cockpit display or have all the functionality placed in a head-up avionics display.

Boeing's AH-6i uses much of the avionics software and avionics hardware from the company's Apache Block III upgrade, which is still being developed with another test flight scheduled later this fall.

Boeing hopes that the AH-6i will be what the Army is looking for as it resets its Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter requirements. The first ARH program -- that was under development with Bell Helicopter -- was canceled a year ago.

In the cockpit demonstrator that Boeing had at their booth they were showcasing avionics technology still in development such as voice control. Essentially Boeing engineers are designing an avionics system that allows pilots to control communications, targeting, etc., all with their voice.

It lets pilots focus more on what's outside the cockpit, rather than having to push various buttons on the display, company officials told me.

Electronic flight bag -- a taboo phrase?

Posted by John McHale

During conversations I've had recently with several experts on avionics systems on our Avionics Europe Conference Advisory Board and with electronic flight bag (EFB) designers, I've learned that EFB is more and more becoming a bad word with airline procurement managers.
During conversations I've had recently with several experts on avionics systems on our Avionics Europe Conference Advisory Board and with electronic flight bags (EFBs) designers, I've learned that EFB is more and more becoming a bad word with airline procurement managers.

Apparently avionics engineers at airlines are having a hard time justifying purchase of EFB Class 1 and Class 2 products just to enable a paperless cockpit.

Bill Ruhl, marketing manager for Astronautics in Milwaukee, Wis., told me that this hurts the retrofit market. The FAA is allowing new functionality such as airport moving maps on Class 2 EFBs has helped in this area, but it is becoming more of a competitive and cultural problem than one of capability, he said. The larger airlines do not want their pilots to be able to take the EFBs -- loaded with sensitive company data -- off the airplane, Ruhl said.

This is also why EFB designers have been adding more capability top the products, Ruhl said. They have evolved beyond the original EFB concept. He noted that Astronautics likes to call their systems single processor or dual processor solutions as opposed to EFB, because they go beyond the original concept in terms of capability.

During our Advisory Board meeting last week the members echoed these comments and for next year we decided not to have a stand alone session just on EFBs, but rather one called "Cost Efficient Avionics -- EFBs and Beyond."

Yes, we left EFBS in there because quite frankly it was one of our best attended sessions last year in Amsterdam -- despite the fact that we placed it the end of the conference, when attendance can lag.

UAVs sharing civilian airspace

Posted by John McHale

One of the topics of discussion this week at the Unmanned Systems North America show in Washington was what needs to be done technologically and culturally to manage the growing use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in civilian airspace.

One of the topics of discussion this week at the Unmanned Systems North America show in Washington was what needs to be done technologically and culturally to manage the growing use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in civilian airspace.

The key is to take a proactive air traffic management approach instead of reacting to problems such as collision avoidance, David Vos, senior director of Unmanned Airborne Systems and Control Technologies for Rockwell Collins in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, told me today.

The biggest challenge will not be technological or bureaucratic, but rather cultural, Vos said. Many in the commercial aircraft industry do not understand unmanned systems and they need to realize they are not just toys or model airplanes, he added.

In a presentation he made at the show this week Vos said that "as the need for civil UAVs increases and airspace continues to crowd, the NextGen (Next generation Air Traffic Management System), SESAR (Single European Sky ATM Research), and increased automation are essential."

Vos also says those concerned must understand the rules as determined by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Eurocontrol.

If there comes a time when the Department of Homeland Security needs to use UAVs over New York City, they must have an open dialogue with commercial airspace authorities.

UAVs are not going to decrease in numbers, they are here to stay and in the long run will be more economical than manned aircraft, Vos said.

He predicted that there will come a day when commercial passenger flights are pilotless much the same way some trains are today.

Once people become more comfortable with the concept, the UAV business will explode.

Unmanned systems show is buzzing

Posted by John McHale

What a difference a year makes. Last year's Unmanned Systems North America show in San Diego was informative and well attended but seemed to be reflecting some of that Southern California June gloom. This year it's just the opposite with packed stands and busy aisles.

What a difference a year makes. Last year's Unmanned Systems North America show in San Diego was informative and well attended but seemed to be reflecting some of that Southern California June gloom. This year it's just the opposite with packed stands and busy aisles.

Maybe it's the fact that it is in Washington where unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), undmanned ground vehicles, and unmanned undersea vehicles attract more government and definitely more local press.

Highlights at the event include General Atomics discussing the new Predator C Avenger, iRobot officials announcing more orders for the Packbot unmanned ground system, and Insitu’s ScanEagle surpassing 200,000 operational flight hours.

"In a year when people are wondering where the funding will come from funding for unmanned systems is one are that is definitely going up,"” one defense electronics supplier told me.

Every exhibitor I've talked to says traffic is strong and people are looking to spend money for autonomous programs.

Lots of non-traditional defense companies are also angling for a piece of the action. Sony, the maker of popular camcorders and televisions and monitors had a nice sized booth at the show.

No they weren't pushing flat screens, but rather they were showcasing their machine vision line of high-performance cameras for use on UAVs.

It's a market "we're exploring that has a potential for growth," says Drew Buttress, product manager for visual imaging products at Sony. He says Sony understands the military market and its long life cycles and that Sony supports its machine vision products for the long-term, still selling cameras that are nearly 10 years old.

It's heartening to go to a crowded trade show in a tough economic time. Maybe it's sign things are turning around.

Planes aren't selling

Posted by John McHale

The commercial and general aviation markets and in turn the avionics industry have been hit hard by the recession, with no upswing expected in the short term. Major airlines are laying off thousands and holding off on airplane purchases.
The commercial and general aviation markets and in turn the avionics industry have been hit hard by the recession, with no upswing expected in the short term. Major airlines are laying off thousands and holding off on airplane purchases.

Business and general aviation customers are also keeping their checkbooks closed, especially those who typically by luxury jets -- large companies taking bailout money from the U.S. government. As a result aircraft manufacturers are not buying new avionics displays and avionics computers for new aircraft cockpits.

As one supplier said to me this summer if it wasn't for his military business he would have to shut his doors. Yet, even the military is cutting back on aviation evidenced by the impending cancellation of the F-22 Raptor Jet Fighter.

According to market analysts at the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) in Washington, worldwide shipments of general aviation aircraft were cut nearly in half over the first half of 2009, compared with the same period last year.

Officials at Bombardier say business aviation faces challenges such as "high pre-owned inventories, negative public perceptions, and a difficult economic climate." However, in the long term they predict strong growth with revenues of approximately $256 billion U.S. over the next ten years for the industry, according to their "Bombardier Business Aircraft Market Forecast."

While looking at the websites for Boeing and Airbus, I found that many of their purchase announcements typically numbered less than 50 airplane orders at a time, where in good times they have been in the hundreds.

Will it get worse before gets better?

Perhaps not. At the Paris Air Show earlier this month Airbus officials told me that they think the market has hit bottom, but that it is unknown when it will come back if it will come back slowly or dramatically.

Boeing officials in their latest quarterly earnings announcement stated that Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA) second-quarter revenues decreased 2 percent to $8.4 billion on slightly lower airplane deliveries and lower volume in services while "operating earnings increased 5 percent and margins rose to 9.7 percent due to lower research and development expense partially offset by the lower services volume."

This is a good sign for Boeing and also a result of the company making major workforce cuts earlier in the year to offset the poor economy. Company officials also see India as a strong growth market -- the country's economy has averaged 7 percent annual growth over the past 10 years.