May 31, 2023 | International, Naval
Deliveries will coincide with the arrival of new frigates, extending the range of Harpoon missiles now installed on Spanish warships.
April 19, 2023 | International, Land
The German government is exercising two options contained in the contract for retrofitting original Puma infantry fighting vehicles to the new S1 design status.
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: Champion the availability of model-based technical data in policy. Modern sustainment requires a shift from decadesold practices. Paper data that supports secondhand manuals and haphazard 2D-to-3D conversion should no longer be the norm. Services cannot lead this transition on their own, however. Federal guidance on the acquisition, creation, use and management of authentic, model-based technical data would jump-start the movement toward digital sustainment. Educate PMOs to acquire technical data rights strategically. Policy must be partnered by the right mindset. One reason PMOs don't have technical data is that sometimes they never asked for it. An afterthought at the time of procurement, technical data is often overlooked until maintenance is needed. Then it's too late — or too expensive — to acquire the needed rights. Leadership can encourage PMOs to identify potential sustainment solutions — and the technical data rights needed to execute them — at the time of acquisition. Assert the government's rights to model-based technical data. A sea change in sustainment depends on building unprecedented trust between OEMs and PMOs. OEMs understandably need to protect intellectual property, but their grip on model-based technical data must loosen for digital sustainment to flourish at scale. This can be accomplished without OEMs surrendering their competitive advantage. In many cases, OEMs need not transfer custody of the data itself for sustainment activities. Limited-rights agreements and trusted third-party arrangements can be tailored to enable data availability only when needed or to execute specific solutions. Giving OEMs confidence in these approaches will entail extensive dialogue and commitment by DoD leaders. Given the GAO's assessment, seeking a breakthrough is worth the attempt. 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. https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2021/02/03/as-mission-capable-rates-languish-pentagon-should-embrace-digital-engineering/
September 22, 2020 | International, Land, C4ISR
Jen Judson WASHINGTON — Army Futures Command has given the green light to the Maneuver Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate to move forward on developing a plan to equip tactical and combat vehicles with electric power, according to a Sept. 21 statement. The directorate will begin drafting a requirements document for Tactical and Combat Vehicle Electrification (TaCVE) and will host an industry day Oct. 20 to share its electrification initiatives with industry. CALSTART, an organization that focuses on clean technology transportation, and the Ground Vehicles Systems Center will cohost the event. The electrification effort aims to decrease the Army's reliance on fossil fuels. “The requirement also aims to increase operational reach across all maneuver formations through electric propulsion, which offers a variety of operational and tactical benefits,” a statement from the directorate read. “These include the potential to double operational duration, implement silent mobility, increase silent watch, and potentially reduce the Army's logistical burden by nearly half when fully implemented,” it stated. The Army launched an earnest effort into electrifying the brigade earlier this spring. Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley, then-director of the Futures and Concepts Center within AFC, told Defense News at the time that the effort is easier said than done and doesn't just just focus on simply powering a vehicle electrically. Instead, it would attempt to work out how an entire enterprise that would support those electric vehicle fleets and other capabilities could work. “Let's be clear. We're behind. We're late to meet on this thing,” Wesley said. “If you look at all of the analysis, all of the various nations that we work with, they're all going to electric power with their automotive fleet, and right now, although we do [science and technology] and we've got some research and development going on and we can build prototypes, in terms of a transition plan, we are not there.” Army officials know there will likely be a time where vehicles that use fossil fuel and ones that are all-electric share the battlefield. “What is the distribution plan that enables that?” Wesley wondered. “That is much more complex when you look at the implications for an entire enterprise.” Wesley was preparing a proposal for the head of Futures Command on how the service might accomplish such an endeavor that could change the paradigm of the logistics and sustainment tails as well as enhance force mobility. The proposal was intended to make a business case for the Army electrifying the formation, discuss the technical feasibility and describe a transition process. The MCDID requirements development process gives the overall effort traction to move out quickly. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/09/21/army-gives-green-light-to-shape-vehicle-electrification-requirements/