June 20, 2019 | International, Other Defence

House passes $983 billion spending package 226-203, bucking White House

WASHINGTON ― The Democratic-controlled House passed a $985 billion appropriations package for fiscal 2020 that aims to fund national security at $17 billion less than the White House requested, end the post-2001 war authorizations after eight months, pull military support in Yemen and defund the W76-2 nuclear warhead.

The vote was 225-203, with seven Democrats voting with the Republican minority. Zero Republicans voted for the bill.

It's a salvo from Democrats in FY20 budget negotiations with the GOP-controlled Senate and White House, and the White House has threatened that President Donald Trump would veto the massive bill. Beyond the above provisions and others, the administration strongly objected to language meant to block Pentagon funds being applied to a wall on the southern border.

The threat foreshadows pushback from the Senate and the White House, in part because both advocated for a $750 billion national defense budget, while the House-passed bill is consistent with a $733 billion national defense budget. (The House bill would fund the Pentagon alone at $8 billion less than the White House request.)

The four-bill “minibus” contained the two largest of the 12 annual appropriations bills; the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies bill and the Defense bill. For the defense, it totaled $645.1 billion in base-defense funding, and $68.1 billion in the budget-cap-exempt wartime funding account.

House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., emphasized the package's investments outside the Pentagon, including a 4 percent increase in State Department funding.

“This bill rejects the administration's unacceptable budget request and irresponsible policies and, rather, strives to uphold many bipartisan congressional priorities,” Lowey said when the bill was introduced. “America's foreign policy is strongest when diplomacy, development and defense are well-funded and equally prioritized, as many of today's global challenges cannot be addressed by military intervention alone.”

Republicans have opposed the minibus as an empty exercise because Congress lacks a bipartisan deal to ease spending caps and avoid across-the-board sequestration cuts. Nor does the bill contain border wall funding sought by conservative Republicans.

“Moving these bills as-is is a wasted opportunity because the bills are far from what the president has requested and will support,” said the House Appropriations Committee's ranking member, Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas.

“Defense spending does not meet the request while nondefense spending greatly exceeds the request in current levels. This could lead to a veto and another government shutdown, something both [parties] agree would be devastating ― in addition to these funding concerns.”

The White House issued a veto threat last week that spelled out its objections to provisions in the bill that would end the post-2001 war authorizations after eight months and pull military support in Yemen―and because the House parked less defense spending in the budget-cap skirting war fund.

The language surrounding the authorization for the use of military force, Granger said, could jeopardize the Pentagon's ability to conduct military operations worldwide. “It's a bad policy that will force the DoD to unwind counterterrorism operations overseas if the Congress and the president cannot agree on a new authorization,” she said.

To avoid another government shutdown, 12 appropriations bills must pass Congress and get the president's signature by Oct. 1. Negotiations between the White House and lead lawmakers on a deal to ease budget caps has been ongoing, according to a statement last week by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.. (The Senate Appropriations Committee hasn't yet moved any of its bills.)

Another likely sticking point in budget talks with the GOP-controlled Senate and the White House is the minibus' bill's prohibition on the Defense Department spending funds to implement its policy on open transgender service. The vote to approve an amendment that contained the prohibition broke mostly along party lines, 234-183.

The amendment targets a March 12 memo that would largely bar transgender troops and military recruits from transitioning to another gender, and require most individuals to serve in their birth sex.

The House defeated Republican amendments that would have added back $19.6 million for the W76-2 low-yield submarine-launched nuclear warhead and would have added back $96 million for “conventional missile systems” in the range of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. However, it also defeated a Democratic amendment that would have barred funding for research on the Long Range Standoff weapon.

The bill was passed out of committee with language to restrict the Pentagon's authority to transfer money between accounts to $1.5 billion ― a response from Democrats to the administration's use of defense funds for Trump's proposed border wall.

Next week, the House is expected to take up a separate minibus that contains the Department of Homeland Security spending bill, which was at the heart of last year's 35-day government shutdown.

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2019/06/19/house-passes-983-billion-spending-package-226-203-bucking-white-house/

On the same subject

June 11, 2018 | International, Aerospace

Yokota airmen improve gas mask with 3D printer, potentially saving Air Force $8 million or more
By SETH ROBSON YOKOTA AIR BASE, Japan — Tokyo-based airmen used a 3D printer and American ingenuity to modify a standard-issue gas mask into an aircraft oxygen system, potentially saving millions of dollars and improving aircrew safety. The idea of hooking up the M-50 joint-service, general-purpose mask to an aircraft was hatched during brainstorming sessions by airmen from Yokota's 374th Maintenance Squadron and 374th Operations Support Squadron. “We took the mask and added some off-the-shelf parts and some 3D-printed parts and converted it into a piece of equipment that can work in an aircraft,” said Senior Master Sgt. David Siemiet, an aircrew flight equipment superintendent. Gear used now — the Aircrew Eye/Respiratory Protection System, or AERPS — is expensive, heavy and fault prone with long waits for replacement parts, said C-130 Hercules pilot Capt. Matthew Kohl. When the ubiquitous, light and cheap M-50 is connected to an oxygen system, air flows through its chemical filters to the user, whose eyes are protected by goggles, Siemiet said. To build their prototype, the airmen looked at an Army system that hooks soldiers' masks to air blowers to overcome the stifling environment inside a battle tank. The airmen came up with a cap that blocks airflow into one side of the mask and an adaptor that allows it to attach to a hose that can be plugged into an oxygen system. The modification, which the airman call “AERPS Ultra,” uses a few standard parts and two components made on a 3D printer that aircraft materials technology craftsman Sen. Airman David Petrich bought for a few hundred dollars of his own money. It costs only about 75 cents to modify one mask, and the project has the potential to save the Air Force at least $8 million and countless man hours, according to Tech. Sgt. Eric Lundeen, another aircraft materials technology craftsman involved in the project. The M-50 weighs less than a pound, a lot less than the 40 pounds of chemical-protection gear now used by aircrew. Unlike the current system, the lighter masks don't need a power supply that must be hooked to on-board electricity and uses expensive batteries, Petrich said. “You can wear the mask onto the plane and latch in and you are good to go,” he said. The mask modifications can be done on base without the need to pay a contractor, Siemiet added. https://www.stripes.com/news/yokota-airmen-improve-gas-mask-with-3d-printer-potentially-saving-air-force-8-million-or-more-1.531504
June 19, 2018 | International, Land, C4ISR

Pentagon Grounds Marines’ ‘Eyes in the Sky’ Drones Over Cyber Security Concerns
Gidget Fuentes The Marine Corps has shelved several new, small drones – at least temporarily – amid a Pentagon ban and assessment on the cybersecurity of commercial, off-the-shelf, unmanned aerial systems, a service spokesman told USNI News on Monday. The Department of Defense issued a ban last month on the purchase and use of all commercial off-the-shelf drones until the Pentagon develops a plan to mitigate security risks. The online site sUAS News obtained a copy of the May 23 memo written by Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick M. Shanahan ordering the temporary ban due to “unmanned aerial vehicle systems cybersecurity vulnerabilities.” Military.com reported on the memo's effect on the Marines last week. The Marine Corps officials are asking defense officials to exempt eight systems so Marines can continue to use and train with the drones, Capt. Joshua Pena, a Marine Corps Combat Development Command spokesman, told USNI News Monday. Pena said exemption requests were being drafted and reviewed by senior leaders and for submission to the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for these systems: Black Hornet 2 and Black Hornet 3, manufactured by FLIR Systems, Inc.; SkyRanger (Aeryon Labs); InstantEye Mk-2 Gen-3 and InstantEye Mk2 Gen-5 (Physical Sciences Inc.); Indago (Lockheed Martin); and DJI Phantom 3 Pro and DJI Phantom 4 Pro (DJI). InstantEye is a centerpiece of the “Quads for Squads” initiative driven by the commandant, Gen. Robert Neller, to equip infantry units with innovative, high-tech capabilities to make Marines more lethal and effective in a cyber battle space, including micro and small drones. The small quadcopter, manufactured by InstantEye Robotics, a division of Andover, Mass.,-based Physical Sciences, Inc., is getting fielded to squads across the Marine Corps' three infantry divisions. Neller, speaking June 12 at the 69th Current Strategy Forum held at the Naval War College, touted the service's push to bolster its cyber capabilities to include using the small quadcopter, according to the Fifth Domain newsletter. But the Pentagon's decision has forced Marines to stop using InstantEye until it can get the green light from the Pentagon. It's considered a COTS product, Pena said, and “the system has been grounded.” The ban “also applies to all UAS ground command and control elements including smartphones or tablets with associated software and hardware,” he added. So far, the first battalions have received 600 of the Marine Corps' initial buy of 800 Mk-2 Gen-3 drones for the “Quads for Squads,” and the remaining 200 are pending shipment, he said. “The policy has not affected that schedule,” he added. In suspending all COTS unmanned aerial systems, Shanahan cited a May 14 DoD inspector general finding that “the DoD has not implemented an adequate process to assess cybersecurity risks associated with using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS).” “Effective immediately, you must suspend purchases of COTS UAS for operational use until the DoD develops a strategy to adequately assess and mitigate the risks associated with their use. In addition, you must suspend the use of COTS UASs until the DoD identifies and fields a solution to mitigate known cybersecurity risks,” he wrote in the memo. Shanahan noted his authority to approve any “requests for exemptions, on a case by case basis, to support urgent needs.” He directed military officials and agencies to report to him within 30 days “to identify and account for all COTS UAS.” The memo doesn't indicate what prompted the suspension of the military's use of drones, which include some popular commercially-available drones sold to consumers and manufactured by U.S. or foreign companies. However, last month, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., wrote to Defense Secretary James Mattis about “a potential national security threat” in products manufactured by DJI, or Da-Jiang Innovations, a technology company based in China. In his letter, dated May 7, Murphy cited an Army decision last year to halt the use of DJI commercial UAS and an “intelligence bulletin” issued by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement “asserting that DJI was using its products to provide critical infrastructure and law enforcement data to the Chinese government.” “These vulnerabilities pose a tremendous national security risk, as the information obtained by the Chinese government could be used to conduct physical or cyber-attacks against U.S. civilian and military targets,” wrote Murphy, whose Senate committee assignments include appropriations and foreign relations. DJI, or SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd., as noted on the company's website, is based in Shenzhen, China, and manufactures drones, including several popular with consumers and drones hobbyists and used by military and federal agencies, and interest remains in recent UAS solicitations including by the Army. Murphy didn't cite any specific example of a security breach or hacking by DJI but raised concerns about vulnerabilities particularly with foreign-made systems. “I encourage you to, at a minimum, consider a DoD-wide directive banning the use of UAS owned or manufactured in a foreign nation until further threat-assessments can be completed,” he wrote. He noted the “deluge of foreign-made military equipment” the military has bought and opined that “if the hundreds of DJI drones purchased by the U.S. government in the last several years had been American-made, we would not have subjected ourselves to this massive potential intrusion and exploitation of sensitive U.S. sites.” Two years ago, security concerns about DJI products prompted the company to issue a statement that “DJI does not routinely share customer information or drone video with Chinese authorities' and cited its privacy policy. https://news.usni.org/2018/06/18/pentagon-grounds-marines-eyes-sky-drones-cyber-security-concerns
September 1, 2020 | International, Aerospace

New and old aircraft programs could get axed as top US Air Force general seeks ‘ruthless prioritization’ of capabilities
By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — With stagnant budgets on the horizon, the U.S. Air Force is hurtling toward “the most difficult force structure decisions in generations” and must cancel programs and sacrifice some of its existing aircraft inventory to prepare for a potential fight against Russia or China, the service's top general said Monday. A future war with either country could entail combat losses on par with those of a major conflict like World War II, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown wrote in a paper titled “Accelerate Change or Lose,” which outlines his vision as the service's new top uniformed leader. Brown became chief of staff of the Air Force on Aug. 6. Although the Defense Department has focused on war with an advanced, near-peer nation since 2016, Brown raised concerns that the Air Force's sense of urgency is not strong enough and warned of potential mission failure unless the service accelerates the pace of change. A “ruthless prioritization” of the service's requirements is in order, he said. “We must reframe platform-centric debates to focus instead on capabilities to execute the mission relative to our adversaries,” he wrote. “Programs that once held promise, but are no longer affordable or will not deliver needed capabilities on competition-relevant timelines, must be divested or terminated. Cost, schedule, and performance metrics alone are no longer sufficient metrics of acquisition success.” The Air Force must be responsive to the actions of its adversaries, pivoting when necessary to stay ahead and creating technologies that can be cost-effectively operated and maintained, Brown added. “Capabilities must be conceived, developed, and fielded inside competitors' fielding timelines — knowing we will need to adapt and adjust over time. Innovative ideas from our Airmen need viable sustainment pathways. If we are to beat our competitors in conflict, we must also beat them in development and fielding of capability,” he said. It's unclear what existing capabilities could be on the chopping block, but more details on the Air Force's path forward are expected. During a Aug. 31 roundtable, Brown told reporters that the service is working on action orders associated with his strategic vision that will be unveiled at the Air Force Association's conference during the week of Sept. 14. Brown's call for rapid change could pave the way for another bloody budget rollout when the Air Force's plan for fiscal 2022 is revealed next year. During its FY21 budget deliberations, service leaders alluded to “controversial changes” such as fleetwide divestments, but ultimately the Air Force proposed retiring handfuls of older platforms rather than entire aircraft types. Congress has attempted to curtail some of those changes, putting strict limits on the amount of tankers and bombers permitted to be retired each year. Brown acknowledged that if he's to make radical changes to force structure, he will need to have tough conversations with other Air Force and Pentagon leaders, Congress, and industry to determine where risk can be taken. “When we work in various silos, we're all trying to make our particular program or platform as capable as we can be. But we can't afford all of those,” he said. The difficulty is getting “the right set of full programs” and not “a number of broken programs” that “balance the checkbook at the expense of our capability.” Brown's priorities for the Air Force extend beyond changes to existing force structure and modernization plans. Like his predecessor, Gen. Dave Goldfein, Brown stressed the importance of the military's Joint All-Domain Command and Control concept, as well as increased interoperability and data sharing with allies. Brown also hinted that a restructure of the Air Force could be forthcoming, and that the creation of the Space Force provides an opportunity to review the roles and missions of his service. “Sometimes the model we use in the deployed environment is different than the model we use at home,” he said. “You want to train like you're going to fight. From that aspect, we've got to take a look at ourselves.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/08/31/new-and-old-aircraft-programs-could-get-the-ax-as-top-us-air-force-general-calls-for-a-ruthless-prioritization-of-its-capabilities/

All news