October 15, 2020 | International, Land, Security

The Army’s SAW and M4 replacement is headed to troops by 2022

The gun that will replace both the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon and the M16/M4 rifle/carbine weapons — and add a new, widely distributed caliber to the U.S. military inventory for the first time in decades — is less than two years away.

The Next Generation Squad Weapon finished its first prototype test event in September. The three previously selected offerings came from Sig Sauer, Textron Systems and General Dynamics Ordnance.

Brig. Gen. David Hodne, Infantry School commandant and Soldier Lethality Cross Functional Team director, along with Brig. Gen. Anthony Potts, head of Program Executive Office Soldier, gave updates to Army Times ahead of the Association of the U.S. Army Annual Meeting and Exposition.

Concurrently, the Army in April has also selected two companies, L3 Technologies and Vortex Optics, to compete for the fire control for the weapons system.

Sig Sauer's design looks much like a conventional assault rifle while GD is using a bullpup design, which shortens the length by building the magazine feed into the weapon stock. Textron has built its weapon around the cartridge, which is unique to them, a cased telescope item that has the projectile inside of the casing to reduce weight.

Back in April, each of the companies provided 15 rifles, 15 automatic rifles and 180,000 cartridges using the government-developed 6.8mm projectile.

The 6.8mm projectile was chosen after decades of testing and evaluation showed that 5.56mm lethality at mid-ranges on the battlefield was inadequate and existing 7.62mm could be outperformed by the 6.8mm round and save weight for the soldier.

The new caliber also gives the soldier both a rifle and automatic rifle firing the same round, both effective past the 600m mark of existing light calibers.

Following the September testing, the companies will have six months until their next prototype test, scheduled to begin in February.

During the annual Maneuver Warfighter Conference at Fort Benning in Georgia, Maj. Wyatt Ottmar, project officer over NGSW for the Soldier Lethality CFT, laid out some of the recent developments and next steps for the weapons system.

Ottmar noted that Sig Sauer provided a combined steel lower and brass upper ammunition cartridge to reduce weight. A contract is expected to be awarded to one of the three companies this coming fiscal year with fielding to start in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2022, or sometime between August and October 2022, to Infantry, Stryker and Armor Brigade Combat Teams.

Ultimately, the weapon will be fielded to all close combat forces, including special operations forces, infantry, combat engineers and scouts.

The fire control is expected to field six months ahead of the weapon, Potts said. That will allow the NGSW producer to better integrate the optic with the weapon.

https://www.defensenews.com/news/your-army/2020/10/14/the-armys-saw-and-m4-replacement-is-headed-to-troops-by-2022/

On the same subject

August 18, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

Number of Foreign Companies Within Defense Supply Chain Grew Over Past Decade, Report Says
Reliance on foreign suppliers in the defense industrial base rose—notably in packaged software and IT services—even as calls for reshoring increase, according to a new report. Reshoring the defense supply chain may reduce national security risks, but a new report detailing a heavy dependency on goods and services from foreign countries like China shows reshoring may be easier said than done. Researchers at Govini, a decision science company supporting the defense industry, analyzed data from over 1,000 Defense Department vendors across 100 industries to show how supply chain reliance on products from foreign countries has increased over the past decade. According to the survey, the number of Chinese suppliers in DOD's base increased by a total of 420% since 2010. For cyber and information technology, two statistics stick out. The share of companies based in foreign nations in the supply chain grew the most in the packaged software and IT services between 2010 and 2019. Companies based in foreign countries made up 3% of the packaged software supplier base in 2010. That number rose to 7% in 2019. The numbers are similar for IT services: Companies based in foreign countries made up 3% of the IT services supplier base in 2010 and 7% in 2019. Tara Murphy Dougherty, CEO of Govini, told Nextgov increasing adoption of IT infrastructure is critical for the Defense Department, particularly as COVID-19 forced the agency's workforce into mass telework. But that means it is imperative DOD addresses supply chain concerns for information and communications technology. Murphy Dougherty said these two investment areas are only going to continue to grow, which means the department needs to act to clearly define its stance on IT supply chain security. “What are you doing, other than responding to some of the legislation that we've seen come out of the Hill mandating investigation of this?” she said. “It would be great to see more options.” A key mandate from Congress related to supply chain was supposed to take effect on an interim basis Thursday. Section 889 (a)(1)(b) of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act bans agencies from contracting with companies that do business with five Chinese firms, including Huawei and ZTE. But according to a Defense News report, the Pentagon received a temporary waiver from the Director of National Intelligence pushing back the compliance date until September 30. Defense Undersecretary for Acquisitions and Sustainment Ellen Lord said at a Professional Services Council webinar Thursday she needs feedback from industry on what's working and what's not when it comes to implementing the rule. “I know we're all aligned in that we do not want adversaries in our supply chain. We don't want further theft of intellectual property. We don't want these nefarious actions going on,” Lord said. “But how do we get the language into the contracts, how do we practice the behaviors of ensuring we understand what we have in our supply chains for telecommunications equipment? What we need to do is continue to hear from you.” It's not yet clear how the brief deadline extension will affect the implementation process. Regardless, visibility down the supply chain remains a key concern. Murphy Dougherty said there needs to be more transparency in supply chains if the industry is going to address security risks. The Govini report focuses on firms in the mid-tier of the supply chain, with less visibility than a large company like Boeing. For companies further down the supply chain, U.S.-based companies make up less than half of the supplier base, according to the report. Chinese companies make up anywhere from 5% to 9% of the supplier base in the middle to lower ranges of the supply chain. Murphy Dougherty said it's going to take time to see changes in the data. How to address the industrial base at a structural level remains an unanswered question, she said, and collaboration between DOD and industry will be critical in coming up with a new system to ensure supply chain security. “It begs the question of do we have the right models in place today and the right framework for the department to get all of the goodness and partnership it possibly can out of the American commercial economy,” Murphy Dougherty said. https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/08/number-foreign-companies-within-defense-supply-chain-grew-over-past-decade-report-says/167767/
July 19, 2019 | International, Other Defence

Intelligent Waves Awarded $43 Million VETS2 Task Order
RESTON, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Intelligent Waves LLC, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) providing end-to-end information technology solutions, announced it was awarded a $43 million task order to provide cybersecurity support to the Joint Force Headquarters – Department of Defense Information Network (JFHQ-DODIN). Under this task order, Intelligent Waves and teammates, Booz Allen Hamilton and Cinteot, will provide technical support to enhance readiness and security under the DODIN Readiness Security Inspections (DRSI) program. Tasks include inspections, evaluations, validations, and audit regimens that will ensure DCO and DCO-IDM effectiveness. The task order has a one-year base period of performance with four additional option years. “We have proudly supported the DoD with innovative IT and cybersecurity solutions since inception,” said Matt Stern, chief information security officer for Intelligent Waves. “This win is an affirmation that we understand the cyber threat landscape and the importance of protecting the DODIN.” About Intelligent Waves Founded in 2006, Intelligent Waves LLC is a service-disabled veteran-owned small business providing innovative end-to-end information technology solutions to public and private sector clients worldwide. Solving challenges in systems engineering, cloud computing, cyber and mobility, we deploy secure technologies and digital strategies to drive innovation and impact for our customers. For more information, visit www.intelligentwaves.com. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190718005623/en
June 10, 2019 | International, Aerospace

How did the two offerings competing to be the US Army’s future engine measure up?
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — Cost appears to have played a major role in the Army's decision to pick GE Aviation's T901 engine for its future helicopter engine, based on a look at documents laying out the service's post-award analysis, obtained by Defense News. Yet, other factors not shown could have also contributed to the Army's choice, which the Government Accountability Office upheld following a protest from losing team Advanced Turbine Engine Company (ATEC) — a partnership between Honeywell and Pratt & Whitney. The GAO is expected to release a redacted version of its decision next week, which could shed more light on how the Army decided to move forward with GE. While the cost of GE'S engine seems to have been a deciding factor, the document outlining the service's criteria to determine a winning engine design to move into the engineering and manufacturing development phase states that “all non-cost/price factors when combined are significantly more important than cost/price factor.” According to that chart, the Army said it would primarily measure the engine submissions against its engine design and development, followed by cost/price, followed by life-cycle costs and then small business participation in order of importance. The Army assessed ATEC's and GE's technical risk as good and gave ATEC a risk rating of low while it gave GE a risk rating of moderate when considering engineering design and development for each offering. Both GE and ATEC had moderate risk ratings when it came to engine design and performance. And while GE received a technical risk rating of moderate for component design and systems test and evaluation, ATEC received low risk ratings for both. Almost all other technology risk assessments and risk ratings were the same for both engine offerings. GE scored “outstanding” in platform integration capabilities. Based off the chart, it appears ATEC won, so its likely the documents are not an exhaustive representation of how the Army decided to move forward with GE. While both ATEC and GE offered prices within the Army's requirements, GE came in 30 percent lower in cost. And according to Brig. Gen. Thomas Todd, the program executive officer for aviation, in an interview with Defense News in April, GE was also working on trying to shrink the timeline within the EMD phase by roughly a year. But, in ATEC's view, the charts show it had offered the best value product to the Army. ATEC's president, Craig Madden, told Defense News that the company took the Army's selection criteria laid out in the request for proposals seriously across the board from engineering design and development factors to cost to even small business participation, where it scored higher than GE in the analysis chart. “We did come in higher in cost but this was considered a best value evaluation and not lowest price, technically acceptable,” Madden said. “I think low price is good for a plastic canteen or a bayonet, it's not good for a highly technical turbine engine.” And despite coming in at a higher cost, Jerry Wheeler, ATEC's vice president said, the up front cost in the EMD phase will be higher but the delta would shrink when considering life-cycle costs of both engine offerings. Both ATEC and GE received good technical ratings and were given risk ratings of low. When just going by the chart, GE's four moderate risk ratings in key categories means “they could have disruption in schedule, increased cost and degradation of performance,” Madden said. He added ATEC was also focused on lowering risk, so that, although the Army offered incentives to finish the EMD phase earlier than 66 months, ATEC presented a plan to complete at 66 months with a plan to look at acceleration wherever possible. ATEC is now pushing to be a part of the EMD phase, essentially extending the competition, so that more data on engines can be garnered. The Army had periodically weighed keeping the EMD phase competitive with two vendors, but ultimately chose to downselect to one. For GE, the Army made the right decision and had enough data to do so. “The U.S. Army competitively selected GE's T901 engine over ATEC T900 engine after more than 12 years of development,” David Wilson told Defense News in a statement. “Those 12 years included the Advanced Affordable Turbine Engine (AATE) program, during which both companies ran tow full engine tests,” he said. Additionally, both companies executed a 24-month technology maturation and risk reduction contract where GE self-funded and successfully completed and tested a third engine, a full-sized T901 prototype engine, with successful tests on all components, Wilson said. “We've done three full-engine tests and provided an unprecedented amount of test data to the Army for them to determine which engine was the best to move forward with in EMD,” he added. Funding a second engine through EMD would cost more than twice as much and delay critical Army modernization by at least two years, Wilson argued. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/06/07/how-did-the-two-offerings-competing-to-be-the-us-armys-future-engine-measure-up/

All news