February 4, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Ben Kassel and Bruce Kaplan
While many Pentagon initiatives face a change of course under new Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, its digital engineering strategy deserves a push forward.
The strategy, issued in 2018 by then-Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Michael Griffin, aimed to help military services harness modern sustainment methods like additive manufacturing, digital twin and augmented reality. For the Department of Defense, enterprisewide implementation of these techniques would lower costs, increase weapon systems' mission-capable rates and afford flexibility in fleet modernization.
But digital engineering requires digital, 3D data — and the DoD doesn't have enough.
Modern sustainment practices hinge on the availability of what's known as the model-based definition, 3D models and digitized descriptive information for a system or component. Using computer-aided design programs, engineers can manipulate the data to enable practices like condition-based maintenance, eliminating weapon systems' unnecessary downtime. Digital data can facilitate seamless transit from original equipment manufacturers, or OEM, to procurers and sustainers in the field and at maintenance depots worldwide.
However, the technical data for most weapons systems remains elusive to the services and their program management offices, or PMO, or the datasets are available only in 2D documentation, such as blueprints.
Meanwhile, readiness suffers. Of 46 weapons systems reviewed by the Government Accountability Office, only three achieved annual mission-capable targets at least five times between 2011 and 2019. More than half (24) failed to meet their goal even once, according to GAO's November 2020 report.
The KC-13OJ Super Hercules air refueler and the MV-22B Osprey tiltrotor were among the programs to miss their target all nine years. GAO cited inaccessible technical data as a contributing factor for both programs. Of the Super Hercules, the report says: “The Navy and Marine Corps were unable to obtain the technical data of the aircraft ... the lack of the technical data compromises [their] ability to analyze and resolve sustainment issues.” Similar concerns were raised about the P-8A Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft, saying “technical data needed for maintenance has not been readily available to the Navy.” Dozens of systems, including the F-35 fighter jet, face similar obstacles.
Notably, the GAO report referred not to 3D, model-based data but rather legacy incarnations: blueprints and documents that may have been converted “digitally” into PDFs. This is a far cry from the machine-readable formats required to use digital engineering technologies across the enterprise.
The GAO cited the production of 170 “structural repair manuals” as a means of narrowing the Osprey's technical data gaps. The labor-intensive replication of physical documents — the PMO projected five years to deliver all of them — is a piecemeal solution, at best. Troublingly, modern sustainment methods seem beyond the reasonable expectation of not just PMOs but even forward-looking organizations like the GAO.
To foster its DoD-wide implementation, the digital engineering strategy needs reinforcement, which could take the following forms:
Operationalizing the DoD strategy requires work in other areas as well, particularly in removing intra- and inter-organizational stovepipes, and securing the data's transmission and storage. But the first step toward a model-based sustainment enterprise is ensuring the availability of modern technical data. This need will only grow more crucial.
Today's sustainment practices too closely resemble those of 30 years ago, not what they should be 30 years from now. We're already playing catch up. It's time to view sustainment with 3D glasses.
Ben Kassel is a senior consultant at LMI. He previously worked with the U.S. government on defining and exchanging technical data used for naval architecture, marine and mechanical engineering, and manufacturing. Bruce Kaplan is a fellow at LMI. He previously served as technical director of logistics for research and development at the Defense Logistics Agency.
May 5, 2021 | International, Aerospace
“That will require additional investment. It will require me diverting investment from equipment and platforms into infrastructure and into how we operate,” says Air Chief Marshal Mike Wigston.
May 13, 2020 | International, Aerospace
By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The COVID-19 pandemic could make it more difficult for the U.S. Air Force's newest F-35 squadron to organize its personnel and jets on schedule. On April 21, the 356th Fighter Squadron at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, became the service's northernmost fighter squadron after receiving its first two F-35s. Pilots began flying those jets for training three days later, and another four F-35s on loan from Hill Air Force Base in Utah flew to Alaska on April 27. But a couple key challenges could hamper the assemblage of the new squadron, said Col. Benjamin Bishop, commander of the base's 354th Fighter Wing. “We're actually on timeline,” he told Defense News in an exclusive interview on April 28. “We have the pilots and maintainers already here to support operations throughout the summer. However, as you know, the Department of Defense has put a stop-movement order through [June 30], and that is something we're working through on a case-by-case basis.” Under the current order, pilots and maintainers who are moving through the training pipeline have been granted a blanket exception to transfer to Eielson. But more experienced pilots, maintainers and support personnel coming from an operational base like Hill Air Force Base will need to receive an exception. Getting additional F-35s to Eielson could also be an obstacle, as Lockheed Martin assesses whether it must slow down deliveries of the F-35 due to disruptions to its supply chain. In a statement to Defense News, Lockheed spokesman Brett Ashworth could not say whether the company was on track to deliver F-35s to Eielson on schedule. “Lockheed Martin continues to work with our suppliers daily to determine the impacts of COVID-19 on F-35 production,” he said. “We are analyzing impacts at this time and should have more detail in the coming weeks.” If the coronavirus pandemic delays the pace of F-35 deliveries to Eielson, the squadron will have to mitigate the shortfall in jets, Bishop said. “Currently, we're at a good pace on the road to readiness for our F-35 program here, and we'll continue to adapt and adjust to bring this mission capability to its full potential in the Indo-Pacific theater,” he noted. Despite COVID-19 and the potential logistical challenges involved in sending people and F-35s to Eielson, day-to-day training operations have continued as normal, said Col. James Christensen, 356th Fighter Squadron commander. Having six F-35s on base allows maintainers to use the jets for training while also maximizing flight hours for the eight pilots currently in the 356th. “We still do the mission the way we always have. We have the masks and the wipe procedures and social distancing,” Christensen said. “So [we're] being creative but still being able to get the mission done.” There are strategic benefits to being the U.S. Air Force's northernmost fighter squadron, starting with access. With support from an aerial refueling tanker, the F-35s at Eielson can reach and target any location in Europe or the Asia-Pacific, Bishop said. And even the harsh climate of Eielson has its perks. It's a short flight away from the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex, the Defense Department's largest instrumented training range, with 77,000 square miles of airspace, according to the 354th Fighter Wing. “The F-35 is going to be able to fly in that airspace, but they're not going to be alone,” Bishop said. F-35s training in that area will regularly be joined by F-22s based at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, as well as the F-16s in Eielson's 18th Aggressor Squadron that simulate enemy combat jets. “You're going to see amazing fifth-generation tactics and integration tactics emerge,” he said. Russia is investing in its Arctic infrastructure, and the U.S. military must make its own improvements to how it operates from and trains in the region, said Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy, who leads U.S. Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command. “It's great to see some of the additional forces that are going in, whether it's the F-35s going to Eielson, whether it's the work of the Coast Guard to develop icebreakers,” he said during a May 4 event. “These are all relevant things for us to be able to operate in the Arctic. And that is absolutely, to me, key to our ability to defend ourselves.” As the 356th stands up and becomes combat-ready, it will participate in the next Red Flag-Alaska, a multinational air-to-air combat training exercise slated to be held this August. The squadron is also looking for opportunities to deploy around the Asia-Pacific so that pilots can acclimate themselves to the long geographical distances that characterize the region, Christensen said. “Everyone is excited just to have F-35s here because of the awesome training we can do, but we're also thinking about at some point we have to project this air power out into the Indo-Pacific theater as a combat force. And transitioning everyone, including the wing and including [Pacific Air Forces] — they all have to adjust the mission of Eielson,” he said. Unlike other fighter bases, which usually swap out existing aircraft of existing squadrons with new jets, the two F-35 squadrons coming to Eielson aren't replacing anything, and infrastructure needs to be built to accommodate the anticipated growth in both people and aircraft. When the first members of the 356th Fighter Squadron arrived on base in July 2019, Eielson was home to about 1,750 active-duty personnel, Bishop said. By December 2021, that number is expected to double, with the addition of about 1,500 airmen. In that time, 54 F-35s will be delivered to the base for a total of two squadrons — a notable increase from the 30 F-16s and KC-135s previously at Eielson. An estimated $500 million will be spent on military construction to support the buildup at Eielson, including new operations buildings, a simulator building, heated hangars and other maintenance facilities, and a new cafeteria. A total of 41 facilities will be either built or refurbished with that funding, with 29 of those projects finished and others still under construction to support a second F-35 squadron, Bishop said. And everything — from constructing new facilities to maintaining runways — is tougher in the subzero temperatures of the Arctic. “Early on in this job, I learned that there are two seasons in Alaska,” Bishop said. “There's winter and construction season, with the former a lot longer than the latter. From a beddown perspective, how you put your construction plan together, you have to maneuver around that season.” “In order to maintain efficiency of fighter operations up here, one of the things we did is we built walled weather shelters for our aircraft, so all of our aircraft are actually housed in weather shelters," he added. "That's not necessarily for the aircraft. That's more for the maintainers because having that insulated and heating facility, now you can do maintenance around the clock.” Corrected at 5/12/20 at 2:53 p.m. with the correct size of the JPARC, which was recently expanded to 77,000 square miles of airspace. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/frozen-pathways/2020/05/11/how-the-us-air-force-is-assembling-its-northernmost-f-35-squadron-amid-a-pandemic/
July 28, 2020 | International, C4ISR
Mark Pomerleau America's adversaries have targeted the military's weaknesses via information warfare in recent years and as a result the Department of Defense has made a series of moves to reorganize and better defend against such threats. While each service is undertaking a slightly different approach toward information warfare, Defense officials have said there is a broad buy-in to a larger vision of how to fuse capabilities and better prepare to fight. Collectively, they show the breadth of the movement. Here are several ongoing efforts within the services and the Pentagon underway. Navy Upon assuming the service's top officer in December, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday issued a fragmentary order outlining a variety of tasks for the Navy. Included in this order was a direction that the Navy will pilot a dedicated information warfare cell within a maritime operations center at Large Scale Exercise 2020 to more effectively execute space, electronic warfare, information operations and special operations forces into all-domain operations. Large Scale Exercise has been put on hold until next year due to the ongoing pandemic. Gilday explained that the results from the exercise will refined the requirements and timeline for these IW cells in all fleet maritime operations centers as part of the budget for 2022. Gilday also required the Navy to develop a plan to field small tactical cyber teams for fleet cyber commanders, however, that also is still forthcoming. Army The Army's primary arm for cyber operations has been working to reorganize and change its name. Lt. Gen. Stephen Fogarty in August announced Army Cyber Command intended to change its name to Army Information Warfare Command. Similar comments came from Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville. It is still unclear when the official name change will take place. The tactical manifestation of this name change will exist with the 915th Cyber Warfare Battalion, a relatively new unit consisting of 12 teams that support brigade combat teams or other tactical formations. These “fly away” teams, as some officials call them, would help plan tactical cyber operations for commanders in theater and unilaterally conduct missions in coordination with forces in the field. The Army has already activated its first two companies under the 915th in the last year and plans to create another within the next year. On the capability side, the Army is continuing to field its first organic brigade information warfare capabilities. These include the Multi-Function Electronic Warfare Air Large, the first organic bridge aerial electronic attack asset, which is also capable of cyberattacks pod mounted on a MQ-1C Gray Eagle drone, as well as the Terrestrial Layer System Large, the first ground based integrated signals intelligence, electronic warfare and cyber platform. The Army recently awarded a development contract to Lockheed Martin for MFEW and plans to equip units in 2022. The TLS is currently in the prototyping phase with two companies competing for the contract. The Army aims to equip units in 2022 as well. Air Force In October, the Air Force created its first information warfare command in 16th Air Force, which combined 24th Air Force and 25th Air Force. It now fuses cyber, electronic warfare, intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance, information operations and weather together under one commander. While the new entity reached fully operational capability this month, there is still more work to be done in getting the right personnel in place and continuing to integrate the disparate entities that existed separately before. Specifically, 16th Air Force's commander Lt. Gen. Timothy Haugh said an information warfare cell that will be tied closely with the air components at European and Indo-Pacific Command has been assigned but that leaders still need to hire personnel. Additionally, he noted during a July 15 event hosted by the Mitchell Institute that the 16th will be partnering with their parent entity Air Combat Command to create a spectrum warfare wing. Marine Corps The Marines decided to reorganize their Marine Expeditionary Force headquarters nearly four years ago and create the MEF Information Groups (MIGs). These entities centralize cyber, electronic warfare, intelligence and information operations into tactical maneuver formations. These forces are still participating in exercises to better refine structures and concepts. Pentagon Congress in last year's defense policy bill directed the Department of Defense to designate a principal information operations adviser. https://www.c4isrnet.com/smr/information-warfare/2020/07/26/how-the-defense-department-is-reorganizing-for-information-warfare/