The Air Force Just Awarded the NGAGE Aerospace Ground Equipment Contract to 24 Winners
Missing one of NGAGE’s 24 seats doesn’t shut you out. Winning a seat doesn’t mean money yet, either. What happens before the first task order posts will shape who gets the early work.
The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) is the DoD organization behind NGAGE. It runs the vehicle from its Support Equipment & Vehicles division at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. On August 17, it awarded 24 companies places on the NGAGE aerospace ground equipment contract. That vehicle is a multiple-award IDIQ, so the government issues task orders over time instead of running a new competition per purchase. Its $920 million ceiling covers a 2-year base period and four 2-year options, for a potential 10-year period of performance through approximately 2036.
The Air Force awarded NGAGE positions to 24 companies from 66 offerors, creating a competitive pool for future aerospace ground equipment task orders. The contract includes a reported $920 million ceiling and an initial obligation of $15,000, meaning significant spending will depend on future task-order releases rather than the initial award itself.
| Field | Answer |
|---|---|
| Signal | AFLCMC awarded 24 companies places on NGAGE, a 10-year, $920M-ceiling Multiple Award IDIQ for AGE modernization and sustainment, August 17, 2026 |
| BD implication | New-business capture for non-awardees willing to team; positioning urgency for the 24 awardees, who face fair-opportunity task-order competition (FAR 16.505(b)(1)) once orders post |
| Customer | Fighter, bomber, tanker, airlift, and unmanned-aircraft fleets that use AGE for launch, recovery, operations, and maintenance |
| Buyer | Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Support Equipment & Vehicles division, Robins AFB |
| Funding | $15,000 initial obligation using FY2026 RDT&E funds |
| Acquisition vehicle / path | NGAGE, solicitation FA853226RB001, multiple-award IDIQ, draft RFP released August 2025 |
| Incumbents / ecosystem | No predecessor AGE-support vehicle identified; treat NGAGE as new unless a prior contract surfaces |
| Access strategy | Task-order competition among the 24 awardees; subcontracting/teaming with an awardee for everyone else |
| Timing | First task order has not yet been announced; no sub-tier team has been publicly identified |
| Confidence | Moderate |
| Pursuit posture | TEAM (non-awardees) / PURSUE (the 24 awardees, who hold a seat on an awarded vehicle) |
| Upgrade triggers | A public teaming solicitation from an awardee; the first task-order announcement naming a subcontractor |
| Downgrade triggers | Confirmation NGAGE task orders are being kept fully organic, with no subcontracting plan |
- NGAGE covers launch, recovery, operations, maintenance, and new-technology design/development/testing for fighters, bombers, tankers, airlift aircraft, and unmanned systems.
- The awardee roster spans large primes such as Lockheed Martin, Booz Allen Hamilton, and Oshkosh, along with small and mid-market AGE-specialized firms such as Aero Specialties, ATAP, ATEC, HDT, and Torch Technologies.
- The solicitation uses NAICS 336413 — Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing — aligning the vehicle with aerospace ground equipment manufacturing and support capabilities.
Why this isn’t just another award notice
Most of NGAGE’s $920 million ceiling will be competed through future task orders. As a multiple-award IDIQ, the vehicle creates a competitive environment where awardees generally receive fair opportunity to compete for task orders under applicable federal contracting rules. The first task-order releases will determine which companies convert their NGAGE position into actual revenue. Task-order competition is also where a non-awardee gets back in. A task order the 24 awardees cannot fully staff could create a subcontracting opportunity rather than a closed market.
What Aerospace Ground Equipment Is, and What Routes Through NGAGE
AGE is the ground-support layer, not the aircraft itself and not IT infrastructure, across fighters, bombers, tankers, airlift, and unmanned systems:
- Tow tractors and power carts.
- Hydraulic and maintenance test stands.
- Launch and recovery equipment specific to each airframe.
AFLCMC’s Support Equipment & Vehicles (SE&V) division runs NGAGE as one multiple-award IDIQ under NAICS 336413. Its stated scope covers AGE for the fleets named above. NGAGE establishes a new acquisition pathway for aerospace ground equipment requirements. Future AGE work selected for this vehicle will compete among the 24 awarded companies. NAICS 336413 sets the applicable SBA size standard for small business status. The set-aside status of the vehicle is not established.
| Contract element | Detail |
|---|---|
| Ceiling | $920 million maximum potential value across all options; actual spending depends on future task orders |
| Initial obligation | $15,000 initial obligation using FY2026 RDT&E funds |
| Base period | 2 years |
| Option periods | Four 2-year options |
| Total potential period of performance | 10 years, running through approximately 2036 |
| Contract type | Multiple-award IDIQ (MAC) |
| Contracting activity | AFLCMC, Support Equipment & Vehicles division, Robins AFB, Georgia |
| NAICS code | 336413, Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing |
The $920 Million Ceiling Isn’t Spending Yet
$920 million is the ceiling: the maximum the government could spend if it exercises every option and funds every task order. It is not a budget line, an appropriation, or a promise.
The reported $15,000 initial obligation is the only dollar figure tied to a funding action at award. It’s RDT&E money, not a production or sustainment obligation. That says nothing about AGE work volume. The initial obligation appears consistent with a standard minimum-guarantee payment rather than a measure of future AGE work volume.
The NGAGE timeline:
- August 2025: Air Force releases the draft RFP for NGAGE, opening industry comment.
- Between August 2025 and August 2026: AFLCMC finalizes FA853226RB001 and receives 66 offers; The exact posting date remains unclear.
- August 17, 2026: The Air Force awards 24 positions on NGAGE.
- Not yet reported: first NGAGE task order.
Watch that last step. None of the $920 million reaches an awardee, let alone a subcontractor, until a task order posts.
The NGAGE Roster: Who’s In, Who’s Out, and Who Isn’t Named at All
The NGAGE award pool includes large defense contractors and specialized aerospace ground equipment providers. These companies will compete for future task orders under the vehicle. Large primes and smaller AGE specialists compete for the same orders.
- Large, diversified primes: Lockheed Martin, Booz Allen Hamilton, and Oshkosh, whose business spans well beyond AGE. They still compete for the same task orders as everyone else.
- AGE-specialized firms: Aero Specialties, ATAP, ATEC, Aviation Ground Equipment, Chase Defense, Coherent Technical, CVI, Defense Engineering Services, DEVAL, ES3, GS Engineering, HDT, Intuitive, Knight Aerospace, MCT Industries, Newton Corp., P2 Mission Solutions, PCI Aviation, Suntest Systems, TLD, and Torch Technologies. Size status should be evaluated against NAICS 336413 requirements where relevant. This is where the founders, BD leads, and capture leads reading this most likely sit.
- The 42 non-awarded offerors: The 42 non-awarded offerors are not publicly identified. Companies that bid but did not receive a position therefore cannot be identified from the available award information.
No predecessor AGE-support IDIQ has been established. NGAGE should therefore be treated as a new acquisition vehicle rather than a confirmed replacement for an earlier vehicle. Treat NGAGE as a new vehicle, not a rename of an existing one, unless a prior contract surfaces later.
If You Didn’t Win a Seat: How Task-Order Subcontracting Works Under a MAC IDIQ
Companies that did not receive an NGAGE position cannot compete directly for task orders. Their practical entry path is teaming with an awardee that needs additional aerospace ground equipment capabilities, manufacturing capacity, engineering support, or specialized past performance. This creates a potential subcontracting opportunity for firms with specialized AGE capabilities, manufacturing capacity, engineering support, or relevant past performance. Direct outreach to awardees is the most practical way to pursue that opportunity.
- Cross-reference your AGE capability against the roster above, and shortlist awardees whose public capability statements overlap with yours. Cross-reference your AGE capability against the awardee roster and shortlist companies whose capabilities and customer needs overlap with yours.
- Reach out directly to your shortlisted awardees’ business-development contacts, rather than waiting for a posted teaming notice.
- Watch for the first task-order announcement or a teaming solicitation from an awardee. Either would move this from positioning to an active teaming pursuit.
Firms outside the 24 awardees, DIB subs included, can’t bid a task order directly. That competition is limited to the vehicle’s pool, unless FA853226RB001 allows later on-ramps. Whether the vehicle permits later on-ramps remains unclear. A nontraditional entrant has no separate way in either. Ordering under NGAGE is limited to the 24, whatever a firm’s status. Teaming with an awardee already holding a seat is the practical near-term path onto this vehicle’s work.
The 24 Awardees Now Compete Against Each Other, Not Against Outsiders
Winning a NGAGE seat is not the same as winning work. Task orders generally face fair-opportunity competition. Beyond the $15,000 initial obligation, future task-order volume remains dependent on upcoming requirements. Next step: document your past-performance case and identify which of the other 23 awardees compete most directly in your AGE niche.
FAQ
Who won a place on the Air Force’s $920 million NGAGE aerospace ground equipment contract, and how many companies competed for it?
The Air Force awarded NGAGE positions to 24 companies selected from 66 offerors. The award pool includes large defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Booz Allen Hamilton, and Oshkosh, along with specialized aerospace ground equipment providers.
Does the NGAGE solicitation let a non-awardee join later through an on-ramp?
This isn’t established either way. Whether the vehicle permits later on-ramps remains unclear. If an on-ramp exists, it could provide a path from teaming to direct competition. Without one, teaming with an awardee remains the practical route onto NGAGE task-order work.
If my company didn’t win a place on NGAGE, can I still get task-order work under it?
Subcontracting is the available path, since prime access is closed for now. FA853226RB001 may allow later on-ramps, but that provision remains unclear. Awardees can potentially use outside capabilities through subcontracting or teaming as task-order requirements emerge. Direct outreach to an awardee’s BD team before the first task order posts is the practical path.
Which office issues NGAGE task orders, and where would one post?
AFLCMC’s SE&V division at Robins AFB serves as the contracting activity for NGAGE. The first task-order announcement or teaming solicitation will provide the clearest indication of how work begins flowing through the vehicle.
What would show that NGAGE task orders are being kept fully organic, with no subcontracting?
No evidence either way yet, since no task order has posted. Watch the first several orders. If they go to awardees performing entirely in-house, with no subcontractor named and no teaming solicitation from any of the 24, that would indicate the vehicle isn’t generating subcontracting work. That would weaken the current TEAM assessment for non-awardee firms.
Does NGAGE replace an earlier aerospace ground equipment contract?
No predecessor AGE-support IDIQ has been established. NGAGE should therefore be treated as a new acquisition vehicle rather than a confirmed recompete. Treat NGAGE as new, not a recompete, unless a predecessor surfaces later.
BD classification: TEAM (non-awardee segment) / PURSUE (the 24 awardees). NGAGE creates immediate positioning opportunities for both awardees and companies seeking teaming relationships. Awardees should prepare for task-order competition, while non-awardees should identify potential teaming partners before requirements begin moving through the vehicle. A public teaming solicitation or a task-order announcement naming a subcontractor would move non-awardees into an active teaming pursuit. The 24 awardees are already in PURSUE because they hold positions on the awarded vehicle and can compete for future task orders. This posture would weaken if task orders consistently remain fully organic with no subcontracting activity.
