Back to news

October 5, 2020 | International, Aerospace

Pentagon's Lord blames KC-46A's fixed-price contract structure for further programme issues

Pat Host

The Pentagon's top acquisition executive blames the Boeing KC-46A Pegasus aerial refuelling tanker's fixed-price contract structure for the programme's ongoing issues.

Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire said during a 1 October hearing that Boeing cancelled a 2 October KC-46A delivery to the 157th Air Refueling Wing (ARW) in New Hampshire due to electrical problems with the aircraft. Ellen Lord, under secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment (A&S), said in response that the root cause of the KC-46A's problems is the contract type that was awarded to Boeing.

Lord said that one issue is the technical solution that was the aircraft's original design, which is now being redesigned. The programme, she said, also has a myriad of manufacturing issues including ongoing foreign object debris (FOD) problems. The programme, Lord said, has an engineering design and execution issue as well as a manufacturing problem.

Boeing's fixed-price contract structure, previously lauded as an example of improved government contracting, means the company pays the Pentagon for cost overruns. The contract structure was considered an improvement over cost-plus contracting, where the government reimburses the contractor for cost overruns.

One expert said that Boeing paying for cost overruns on the KC-46A disincentivises the company from improving its performance. Doug Birkey, Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies executive director, told Janes

https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/pentagons-lord-blames-kc-46as-fixed-price-contract-structure-for-further-programme-issues

On the same subject

  • Maintaining UK and US military relationship could cost Britain more than $10 billion a year

    June 27, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

    Maintaining UK and US military relationship could cost Britain more than $10 billion a year

    LONDON — Britain needs to raise defense spending by over £8 billion a year, or U.S. $10.59 billion, to not undermine the military relationship with the U.S. says a report by the parliamentary defence committee. The report, which looks at the U.K.'s defense relations with the U.S. and NATO, recommends Britain increases the percentage of gross domestic product being allocated to the military first to 2.5 percent and eventually 3 percent if the country is to maintain the military relationship with the U.S. and keep its leading role in NATO. “The U.K. armed forces and the Treasury benefit from our close relationship with the U.S. However, that will continue to be true only while the U.K. military retains both the capacity and capability to maintain interoperability with the U.S. military and to relieve U.S. burdens. For this to be the case the U.K. armed forces must be funded appropriately,” said the report released June 26. The lawmakers urged a significant rise in a defense budget which currently just manages to squeeze above the 2 percent of gross domestic product demanded by NATO for defense spending. “We calculate that raising defence spending to 2.5% of GDP would result in a forecast spend of £50 billion per annum and raising it to 3% of GDP would take this to £60 billion per annum,” said the lawmakers. The defense budget this year is set at £37 billion with small real term increases expected annually up to 2022. A rise to 3 percent would see defence spending return to a level — in GDP percentage terms —that has not been seen since 1995. The release of the document comes at a bad time for anyone advocating increases in defense spending here. Last week Chancellor Philip Hammond, an ex-defense secretary, revealed plans to spend an additional £20 billion a year on health care and made it clear that there was little or nothing left to bolster the finances of other departments, including defense. Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson has been battling for months to secure additional funding to fill a black hole that the National Audit Office, the government's financial watchdog, has previously estimated could be anything between £4.8 billion and £20 billion in equipment spending alone over the next decade. The exact amount depends to some degree on how much the military can save in efficiency improvements and reprioritizing and cutting capabilities and programs. The headline outcomes of a Minstry of Defence review into the future size and shape of British forces, officially called the Modernising Defence Programme, could come at the NATO summit scheduled for Brussels starting July 11. Media reports Sunday on the defense funding battle highlighted the seemingly growing rift between Williamson and senior government figures over the issue. The reports followed strong denials from Prime Minister Theresa May last week that the government here was considering a watering down of Britain's ‘tier-one' status as a military power after the Financial Times reported that May asked Williamson to justify continuance of that position. The U.S, Britain, China, Russia and France are the only nations with a tier one status — which basically means they are able to fight nuclear, conventional and other conflicts around the world. The committee said military-to-military engagement between the U.K. and the U.S. was one of the linchpins of the bilateral relationship between the two nations. The report said the U.K. benefits greatly from the width and depth of the U.K.-U.S. defense and security relationship, but such a relationship requires a degree of interoperability that can be sustained only through investment in U.K. armed forces. The importance of the military relationship between the U.S. and Europe's leading military power also extends into NATO. Lawmakers said the relationship is vital to the functioning of NATO while the U.K.'s leading contribution to the alliance helps to sustain the relationship between London and Washington. Julian Lewis, the Defence Committee chairman, said in a statement: “Defence spending is an area where a strong message needs to be sent to our allies and adversaries alike. The Government has consistently talked about increasing the U.K.'s commitment to NATO after our departure from the European Union. An increased commitment, in the face of new and intensified threats, means that further investment is essential,” said Lewis. The warning in the report over the risks to the military relationship between London and Washington follows a similar warning in February by U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis that Britain had to retain a credible military if the relationship between the two nations was to endure and strengthen. Williamson said that in financial terms alone the U.K. benefits to the tune of £3 billion a year from the U.K.-U.S. defense relationship. John Spellar MP, the Defence Committee's senior Labour Party member and former armed forces minister said the inquiry has “underlined the importance of the U.K.-U.S. relationship in the area of defense and security and emphasizes the benefit which the U.K. receives as a result.” “We have heard that there are perceptions in the U.S. that the U.K.'s defense capabilities have slipped and that concerns have been raised about the U.K.'s ability to operate independently. We need to challenge this perception and the Modernising Defence Programme is an excellent opportunity to do so,” said Spellar. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-priorities/2018/06/26/maintaining-uk-and-us-military-relationship-could-cost-britain-more-than-10-billion-a-year/

  • US Army discontinues Rapid Equipping Force

    October 5, 2020 | International, Land, C4ISR, Security

    US Army discontinues Rapid Equipping Force

    Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army has discontinued its Rapid Equipping Force stood up during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to get urgently needed capabilities into the field in 180 days or less. As the Army shifts from a focus on counterinsurgency operations to going up against near-peer adversaries like Russia and China across air, land, sea, cyberspace and space domains in large-scale operations, the REF's utility and mission has been in question. The service is also disbanding its Asymmetric Warfare Group. “As our focus changes to great power competition and large-scale combat operations, Army analysis indicated that the personnel and resources could best be utilized in building the operational fighting force,” an Oct. 2 Army statement read. “To ensure the value of organization's work over the past 14 years is not lost, all lessons learned will be maintained by the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center, via the Center for Army Lessons Learned, Centers of Excellence and other [Training and Doctrine Command] enterprise stakeholders.” The discontinuation won't happen overnight. Both organizations will be fully deactivated by the end of fiscal 2021 “and will transition the mission of providing immediate support to other organizations,” the statement noted. Over the past several years, the REF hung on to certain missions and continued to advocate for its relevancy. A year ago, Defense News sat down with the REF's director in a new, smaller office space at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, in a conference room surrounded by small counter-unmanned aircraft systems that it was rapidly fielded to units and considered one of its success stories. In 2017, the REF was focused on counter-drone technologies; dismounted electronic warfare equipment; tethered intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities; and urban operations equipment including up-armored commercial vehicles. But many of those technologies have found other homes within the Army. As the service stood up its new security force assistance brigades, the REF expected a surge in work to support the needs of those units in the field as they deployed. The REF played a small role at the time, providing the first SFAB with a few items it needed ahead of deployment such as communications gear and an item that assisted the unit with indirect fires. Last year, the REF was highlighting its nearly 10-year-old Expeditionary Lab, a 3D-printing trailer that can be deployed downrange to solve problems for units operating in austere environments. Col. Joe Bookard, who is still the REF's director, told Defense News at the time that the REF would continue to fill the niche of urgently supplying soldiers with capabilities to meet immediate needs while they are deployed. He said that, in a way, the REF has been doing what Army Futures Command is doing now, but on a smaller scale: providing capabilities that are rapidly procured to a small number of soldiers for evaluation, and then refining those capabilities as needed. In 2019, the REF addressed 400 requirements sent from combatant commanders to address operational capability gaps, Bookard said. Among some of the recent success stories is the tiny Black Hornet, an unmanned aircraft system that is now a program of record and was fielded as the Soldier Borne Sensor. The REF was also working to transition two hand-held counter-UAS capabilities — the DroneBuster and the Drone Defender — to the larger force as official programs. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/10/02/army-discontinues-rapid-equipping-force/

  • 10 winners chosen in International Space Pitch Day

    November 18, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    10 winners chosen in International Space Pitch Day

    Nathan Strout WASHINGTON — Ten winners have emerged from the first International Space Pitch Day, a joint venture between the U.S. and the U.K. designed to encourage and reward innovation that could benefit the two nations' military endeavors in space. The event was modeled on the U.S. Air Force pitch days — “Shark Tank”-inspired competitions where nontraditional companies can directly present their technology solutions to acquisition officials and walk away with same-day contracts. The Air Force has held dozens of topical pitch days over the last two years as officials try to identify “defense unicorns.” The first space-specific pitch day was hosted by the Air Force in November 2019, though the since-established U.S. Space Force has taken over those pitch days. “Pitch Days open the government's aperture to work with commercially-focused companies,” according to Will Roper, the assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics. “Competing for technology outside of our fence lines has been a major U.S. Air Force and Space Force theme. Partnering with our allies to compete globally is the natural evolution.” Open to companies and entrepreneurs from all over the world, the inaugural International Space Pitch Day was jointly funded by the U.S. Air Force and the U.K.'s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory and the British Royal Air Force. Representatives from those organizations, U.S. Space Force, U.K. Strategic Command and NATO worked through the various proposals, with 15 companies invited to present their solutions during the Defence Space Conference in London. Ultimately, 10 companies were awarded same-day contracts each worth up to $66,000, according to an announcement from the U.K. government. That funding will help the vendors fast-track their solutions. “It is the first time two nations anywhere in the world have come together to award defense contracts based around a pitch-style event, similar to Dragon's Den/Shark Tank,” said Vice-Marshal Harvey Smyth, the U.K.'s director for military space and air. “It is also the first time two nations have awarded joint defence innovation contracts to an overseas-based enterprise in this way.” While most of the winners are from the U.S. or the U.K., one company from India and another from Australia won contracts. The ten winners were: 114 AI Innovation Limited (India) Clearbox Systems (Australia) Clutch Space Systems (U.K.) Cognitive Space (U.S.) precursor SPC (U.S.) Riskaware Limited and Telespazio Vega UK (U.K.) Rocket Communications (U.S.) Slingshot Aerospace (U.S.) Spire Global UK (U.K.) Swim.ai (U.S.) https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/11/17/10-winners-chosen-in-international-space-pitch-day/

All news