≈$4.54B Defense-wide DEFINITIVE CONTRACT FA880708C0010

GPS III A satellites at ~$4.5B — the satellites and their ground control sit on separate contracts with different companies, both running to 2027 (Lockheed Martin)

Defense Contract Management Agency 2008-05-15 〜 2027-08-30

The Department of Defense has awarded Lockheed Martin about $4.55 billion for the third-generation GPS III A satellites. In our collected data, the ground control system that operates them (OCX) is a separate award to Raytheon at about $4.50 billion — comparable in size, with both periods of performance running into 2027.

Contract key facts

  • RecipientLockheed Martin
  • Contract value$4,535,621,596 (≈$4.54B)
  • BranchDefense-wide
  • Awarding agencyDepartment of Defense
  • Awarding sub-agencyDefense Contract Management Agency
  • Award typeDEFINITIVE CONTRACT
  • Period of performance2008-05-15 〜 2027-08-30
  • Contract ID (PIID)FA880708C0010

Contract scope (original)

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) IIIA

Key points

  • The scope reads "GPS IIIA"; recipient Lockheed Martin, value about $4.55 billion ($4,545,479,949 cumulative).
  • Period May 15, 2008 to August 30, 2027; award type DEFINITIVE CONTRACT.
  • Within our collection, the ground control segment (OCX) is a separate award to Raytheon at about $4.50 billion ($4,495,410,624).
  • The OCX period runs February 25, 2010 to March 31, 2027 — into the same window as the satellite side.
  • Recorded outlays are about $49.19 million on the satellite side and $90.16 million on the ground side; public outlay fields can be incomplete and cannot be read as an execution rate.
  • The satellites at about $4.55 billion and the OCX ground system at about $4.50 billion are near equals — the ground side carries half the system.

1A satellite is not something you launch and then use

Satellite positioning works by a receiver picking up signals from several satellites and deriving a position from differences in arrival time. What holds that accuracy is the clock aboard each satellite together with the ground apparatus that continuously corrects for drift in those clocks and error in the orbits and sends the corrections back up.

A positioning system therefore exists only as two halves, one in space and one on the ground. Launching satellites achieves nothing new if the control segment cannot work with them.

2Separate contracts progress separately

In our collected data the satellites (Lockheed Martin, about $4.55 billion) and the ground control segment, OCX (Raytheon, about $4.50 billion) were awarded by different components to different companies at almost the same value. That the amounts are so close reads as the ground half being not an accessory but half the system.

And the periods of performance now run to August 2027 for the satellite side and March 2027 for the ground side — both longer than originally envisaged. Being separate contracts also means one can slip while the other proceeds, and a gap between them produces exactly the state of having satellites in orbit whose capability cannot be used.

3What the record shows

Both are DEFINITIVE CONTRACT, with recorded outlays of about $49.19 million on the satellite side and about $90.16 million on the ground side. Public outlay fields can be incompletely recorded depending on the age of the contract and the reporting route, so that ratio cannot be read as an execution rate. Satellite counts and the reasons for any delay are not in the recorded scope.

4The part in space and the part on the ground

A positioning system works by a receiver taking signals from several satellites and deriving position from differences in arrival time. That accuracy rests on the clocks carried aboard and on the ground-side arrangement that continually corrects their drift and orbital error and sends the corrections back. Both halves have to be there.

The part in spaceThe part on the ground
The satellites (Lockheed Martin)The OCX ground control system (Raytheon)
About $4.55 billionAbout $4.50 billion
Performance runs to August 2027Performance runs to March 2027
Recorded outlays about $49.19 millionRecorded outlays about $90.16 million

That the amounts sit so close reads as the ground side carrying half the system rather than being an accessory. Two separate contracts also means one can slip while the other proceeds, and a gap in progress produces exactly the state of being in orbit with the capability unusable. The outlay column can be incompletely recorded depending on era and reporting path, so the ratio cannot be read as an execution rate.

Why it matters

Where primary equipment and its supporting infrastructure are awarded separately, progress per contract does not equal availability of the whole. Following public data by equipment name misjudges when a system becomes usable. On the acquisition side, matching the periods of paired contracts is what allows an estimate of true completion; on the industry side, knowing which delay propagates into one's own orders is the basis of planning.

FAQ

What data is this?
A single Department of Defense (DoD) federal procurement contract recorded in "USAspending," the U.S. open government-spending dataset. The recipient, awarding component, value, and scope are public. This site is not an official U.S. government website.
Is the amount final?
It is a cumulative figure as of collection. Large defense contracts accumulate modifications over many years, so amounts change. The latest figure is available at the source, USAspending.
Why is ground control as expensive as the satellites?
Because a positioning system exists as two halves. The apparatus that corrects clock drift and orbital error and sends corrections back up is what holds accuracy, so the ground side is half the system rather than an accessory.
Can new capability be used once satellites are launched?
Not unless the control segment can work with them. Because the two are separate contracts, one can slip while the other proceeds, producing satellites in orbit whose capability cannot be used.

Sources (primary)

This article is an independent organization based on the U.S. official spending data below. Verify the exact, latest details with the official source.

#Defense#DoD#Space#GPS#Positioning#System acquisition#Federal contracts
Disclaimer: This site independently summarizes and classifies information based on official data sources. Always verify the latest and accurate information with the official sources. Content on finance, health, legal, and security is information, not advice. This site is not an official website of the U.S. government.