December 21, 2020 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

The military is scrambling to understand the aviation crash risk from a new 5G sale

By: Valerie Insinna and Aaron Mehta

WASHINGTON — As part of a broader move to boost the 5G industry in the United States, the Federal Communications Commission on Dec. 8 began auctioning a portion of C-band electromagnetic spectrum, a move the committee's chairman, Ajit Pai, celebrated as “a big day for American consumers and U.S. leadership in 5G.”

But, in the weeks leading up to the auction, more than a dozen commercial aviation groups warned the sale could, as one study put it, lead to “catastrophic failures” with the potential for “multiple fatalities.”

At the core of the concerns are radar altimeters, a critical piece of aviation technology used by military, commercial and civil aircraft of all types — including helicopters and unmanned aerial systems — to measure the distance between an aircraft and the ground.

The aviation groups worry that 5G operations on the spectrum sold by the FCC could cause interference that would provide inaccurate readings on altimeters or cause their failure outright, in essence leaving pilots unaware of how far they are from the ground and potentially leading to crashes over the United States.

According to a memo obtained by Defense News, those concerns are shared by the head of the Federal Aviation Administration and the number two at the Department of Transportation, who are calling on the FCC to pause the sale so the safety issue can be studied more closely. The FCC, in turn, has said its own technical studies show little to no risk involved and it intends to continue moving forward.

Now, with the auction underway, the Defense Department is scrambling to catch up. The Pentagon has yet to determine the effect on military aircraft and has not established a formal position on the sale, with officials rushing behind the scenes to set up meetings and understand the potential long-term impacts.

A Pentagon official, in response to questions from Defense News, would only say the department's policy board on federal aviation and aviation cyber initiative task force — an interagency organization led by the FAA — are reviewing reports by industry groups about the risk of 5G interference.

Senior leaders from the Defense Department, Department of Homeland Security, and the aviation cyber initiative plan to meet Dec. 21 “to discuss findings and to establish an interagency way ahead to validate and respond to these reports,” the official stated.

Among those expected to attend are Brig. Gen. Robert Barrie Jr., the official who manages Army aviation assets; Brig. Gen. Eric DeLange, director of the Air Force cyberspace operations and warfighter communications office; and several cyber experts from the FAA and DHS.

Perhaps most notably, Honeywell Industries, a key producer of radar altimeters, has also been invited to discuss possible alternatives to current systems — a sign that the defense industry is taking the issue seriously. Honeywell declined to comment.

If the spectrum sale continues, some experts are warning a best case scenario may be that the department has to spend millions of dollars and thousands of man hours to design, procure and install new radar altimeters across the military's fleet of airborne systems.

The worst case?

As one senior government official with experience in aviation said, “There will be accidents, property's going to be destroyed and people are going to die.”

The ongoing dispute

Under the Trump administration, the FCC has focused on the sale of spectrum in order to goose the nascent 5G industry, which administration officials see as a driver for American economic growth. Branded as the 5G FAST Plan, the commission has moved quickly to sell C-band spectrum.

This particular auction involves spectrum in the 3.7–3.98 GHz frequency, with the hope of selling more than 5,000 new flexible-use overlay licenses. Satellite operators using the C-Band have agreed to repack their operations out of the band's lower 300 megahertz (3.7-4.0 GHz) into the upper 200 megahertz (4.0-4.2 GHz), in two stages. They expect to complete the move in December 2023. As of Dec. 17, more than 50 bidders had reportedly put forth over $15 billion in offers for the spectrum rights.

Currently, the 3.7–3.98 GHz frequency portion of the C-Band is relatively quiet, occupied predominantly by low-powered satellites. For decades, this made the neighboring 4.2-4.4 GHz frequency a perfect place for the operation of radar altimeters, which are also called radio altimeters.

But that frequency may not stay quiet for long. Once 5G telecommunications are introduced in the 3.7-3.98 portion of the band, there is a “major risk” that those systems will create “harmful interference” to radar altimeters, according to an October study from the RTCA, a trade organization that works with the FAA to develop safety standards.

“The results of the study performed clearly indicate that this risk is widespread and has the potential for broad impacts to aviation operations in the United States, including the possibility of catastrophic failures leading to multiple fatalities, in the absence of appropriate mitigations,” the RTCA stated in its report. Research for the report was conducted by the Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute, a cooperative research organization based out of Texas A&M University.

Radio altimeters are critical during landings, once an aircraft moves below 2,500 feet from the ground. At that point, no other instruments provide an accurate measurement of a plane's distance from the ground.

“It's so important to have an accurate reading, because if it's a bad reading it could lead to the airplane doing something you don't want it to do.” explained Terry McVenes, the RTCA president and chief executive. McVenes is a former Boeing safety executive with 30 years' experience in the commercial aviation industry.

“If your airplane thought it was 1,000 feet above the ground but was only 50 feet above the ground, well... you could have a problem,” he said.

The trade group filed the report with the FCC in early October, and shortly afterward met with an FCC engineering team. But since then, “We've heard nothing back from the FCC, had no other direct interactions with them” outside the official filling process, he said.

The release of the study triggered a last-minute request by 12 trade groups, including the Aerospace Industries Association, which represents military aviation companies, to consider mitigation efforts based on the report. The groups called the findings “the most comprehensive analysis and assessment to date on this subject, based on the best assumptions, parameters, and data... It has been peer reviewed for accuracy and validity and should not be dismissed by the Commission.”

The report has also gained the attention of Steven Bradbury, the acting deputy secretary for transportation, and Steve Dickson, the FAA administrator, who in a Dec. 1 letter obtained by Defense News warned that the spectrum sale could specifically damage both the Terrain Awareness Warning System, a major safety function for aircraft, and Autoland features relied on for pilots when landing a plane.

“Given the scope of the safety risk, and based upon our current knowledge, it is unclear what measures will be necessary to ensure safe operations in the [National Aerospace System], or how long it will take to implement such measures,” the two leaders wrote. “Depending upon the results of further analysis, it may be appropriate to place restrictions on certain types of operations, which would reduce access to core airports in the U.S. and, thus, reduce the capacity and efficiency” of commercial aviation.

That letter, sent to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, or NTIA, was requested to be added to the FCC's public docket. However, the letter has not been posted to the FCC's public docket as of press time.

The FCC and supporters of expanding 5G argue that the concerns are overblown.

“In the C-Band Order, the Commission concluded that our rules would protect radio altimeters used by aircraft, and we continue to have no reason to believe that 5G operations in the C-Band will cause harmful interference to radio altimeters,” Will Wiquist, a spokesman for the FCC, said in a statement. “Among other things, these altimeters operate with more than 200 megahertz of separation from the C-band spectrum to be auctioned, more protection than is afforded in some other countries.

“Moreover, the RTCA report was prepared outside of the joint aviation/wireless industry group that was set up at the Commission's request and is not a consensus position of that group. Indeed, at least one other member of that multi-stakeholder group has expressed significant concerns with the study and several of its assumptions, and the Commission's experts have concerns with this study as well.”

The member group that expressed concerns about the study is the wireless trade association CTIA, which in December filled with the FCC a document that called the findings “lacking and unreliable” and “unsound and unsupported.” Among the specific concerns raised by CTIA were that altimeter requirements used in the report were overly stringent, that it did not break down results by altimeter brand and model, and that the report relied on “unrealistic” scenarios during testing.

McVenes said RTCA is open to conducting the research again if presented with new data to work with, but has yet to see that information from CTIA or the FCC.

Risks to military aviation

Although the RTCA study looked exclusively at civil and commercial aircraft, almost all military aircraft are equipped with radar altimeters that are very similar to their commercial counterparts, said the senior government official. Defense News granted anonymity for this official to speak candidly about the risks to pilot safety.

While radar altimeters made for military aircraft are sometimes built to slightly more stringent requirements — having the ability to function in extremely cold or hot environments, for instance, or to withstand higher gravitational forces — they still reside on the same portion of the spectrum as commercial ones and are vulnerable to the same interference, the senior government official said.

The cargo planes and aerial refueling tankers operated by the Air Force's Air Mobility Command would be most hindered by the interference produced by 5G due to their similarities to commercial aircraft, said Mike Holmes, a retired Air Force four-star general and former head of Air Combat Command. Holmes reviewed the RTCA report at Defense News' request.

Many of the Air Force's mobility assets are either based on commercial passenger jets, such as the Boeing 767-derived KC-46 tanker, or are equipped with commercial off-the-shelf avionics. As such, certain mobility aircraft are approved to conduct landings in bad weather conditions when the pilot has to rely on the aircraft's instruments — such as the radar altimeter — instead of visual cues.

“You wouldn't be able to fly that approach if your radar altimeter was being interfered with and you couldn't get a good signal,” Holmes said. “For the military...you'd probably divert someplace else.”

For tactical aircraft, the bigger concern would be low-level flights over terrain such as mountains. Fighter pilots use their radar altimeters when flying close to the ground to evade enemy radar or surface-to-air threats. However, Holmes noted that not all fighter jets — such as the 1970s era F-15C — have radar altimeters, and that pilots would still be able to rely on visual cues.

Still, he said, if a radar altimeter is offering faulty information due to interference, that could lull pilots into a false sense of security about how far they are from the ground.

“Part of [the problem] is going to be trying to know whether you're getting interference or not,” he said.

The senior government official noted that the special operations community could be particularly hurt by 5G interference. Certain aircrews of platforms, such as the C-130 or C-17, receive specific training to fly special operations low level missions, which involve flying close to the ground and inserting or extracting special operators, and those training missions may become more difficult to execute if 5G interference is a problem.

This training “is often executed under the cover of darkness. Depth and obstacle perception can be hindered in darkness due to the human eye's cell structure,” the official said. “Night vision goggles provide compensation but still limit the pilot's situational awareness.”

If the sales go through, the military will likely have to modify or replace its altimeters to meet whatever new safety standards the FAA eventually approves to mitigate the risks of 5G interference, Holmes said.

“If you go ahead and give up this part of the spectrum, the interference will drive changes that have to be made either to modify the equipment that is being used for 5G, to modify the equipment that are on airplanes, or to modify the procedures that determine how you use that equipment,” Holmes said.

Replacing or modifying altimeters will take time and funding — two commodities defense experts predict will be in short supply over the coming years — as defense budgets flatten.

In the near term, Holmes projects the services will change their training practices to eliminate any added risk to pilots caused by altimeter interference, such as restricting pilots of certain aircraft from landing in bad weather or ensuring that pilots of fighter aircraft take off with enough fuel so that they can divert to another airport if their radar altimeter no longer works.

In short, the military will have to give up money, time and effectiveness to fix the problem.

“The outcome would be lack of efficiency. You wouldn't fly [certain] approaches in bad weather. So there would be times you couldn't go do what you were [planning on] doing, whether that's moving passengers or cargo in the civilian world or whether that was passengers or cargo in the military,” Holmes said.

“But ultimately, I would think the impact is going to be greater on the commercial airline world than it was on the military world.”

A billion dollar problem

While the satellite operators who currently operate within 3.7-3.98 GHz will receive some proceeds of the sale, allowing them to move to another portion of the spectrum, no funding is set to be given to the civil, commercial and government entities that rely on radar altimeters for safe aerospace operations.

As a result, it is likely that the U.S. military will have to replace “many or most” of the radar altimeters currently onboard its airplanes, helicopters and drones, the senior government official said. And because radar altimeters have all been developed to operate on the same portion of the spectrum, there is no off-the-shelf replacement already on the market for which interference wouldn't be a concern.

On the commercial side, McVenes said if industry has to replace altimeters across its fleet, a price tag of “several billion dollars is probably on the low estimate.” That price tag could well jump for the military side, given the complexity of work on military systems - it is easier to swap out a part on a commercial plane than a stealth-coated fighter - and the infamous prices of defense procurement.

Meanwhile, the Defense Department could need to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the engineering work necessary to develop new altimeters, procuring those systems, testing and recertifying each platform for normal operations, and finally, installing the new hardware on potentially hundreds or thousands of aircraft across the military's inventory.

“It will take many years, if not decades,” the senior government official said.

In the two months since the report was released, industry has jockeyed to get more time to study the issue and to put measures in place to mitigate the risks.

In a Nov. 17 letter to the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the Aerospace Industries Association and 13 other aerospace trade groups implored members of Congress to take action to protect the frequency bands used by radar altimeters.

“We are concerned that without this congressional intervention to understand potential implications and ramifications, decisions will be made with a frightening lack of understanding of aviation requirements,” the groups stated.

Help from Congress seemingly came Dec. 7, when Rep. Peter DeFazio, the Oregon Democrat who leads the House committee, sent a letter to FCC Chairman Pai calling for the commission to postpone the sale.

“These RTCA findings are alarming; they not only align with earlier research identifying harmful effects of 5G networks to radio altimeters, but they reflect a clear need for the FCC to return to the drawing board with this premature plan,” he wrote. “There is no question that additional study is needed to understand the full extent and severity of 5G interference with radio altimeters and whether any mitigations are feasible — or even possible — to ensure flight safety.

“We must never take a chance with aviation safety — and at no point should commercial interests be placed above it.”

A day later, the FCC pressed forward with the auction.

https://www.defensenews.com/2020/12/21/the-military-is-scrambling-to-understand-the-aviation-crash-risk-from-a-new-5g-sale

On the same subject

May 12, 2020 | International, Land, C4ISR

COVID Disrupts Network Tests – But Army Presses On
The Army pushed hard to field-test new tech with real soldiers. Then came the coronavirus. Now the service will have to rely much more on lab testing. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on May 11, 2020 at 5:11 PM WASHINGTON: The Army is taking a calculated risk to field much-needed network upgrades known as Capability Set 21 on time next year. To do that, the service needs to start buying radios, computers, satellite terminals, and much more in bulk this year so it can start fielding them to four combat infantry brigades in early 2021. Many Army weapons programs are staying on schedule because they're still doing digital design work and long-term R&D, much of which can be done online. But Capability Set 21 is so far along that much of its technology was already in field tests with real soldiers — testing that has been badly disrupted by precautions against the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, said Maj. Gen. David Bassett, Program Executive Officer for Command, Control, & Communications – Tactical (PEO-C3T), the Army may have to rely on more testing data from the lab to make up for limited testing in the field. “As soon as we possibly can, we're going to get this back in the hands of soldiers,” Basset told the C4ISRNet online conference last week. “In the meantime, we know an awful lot from the lab-based risk reduction that we've done.” “The risk,” he said, “is pretty manageable.” Risk & Return The field tests done before the pandemic, combined with extensive lab tests, should be enough to prove the technology will work, Bassett said. In fact, the Army already largely decided what technologies to buy for the upgrade package known as Capability Set 21, he said. What it still wanted soldiers to figure out in field tests, he said, was how they would use it in the field. That feedback from those “soldier touchpoints” would help both fine-tune the tech itself and figure out exactly how much to buy of each item – say, single-channel radios versus multi-channel ones — for each unit. Going ahead without all the planned field-testing means the Army will have to make more fixes after the equipment is already fielded, a more laborious, time-consuming, and costly process than fixing it in prototype before going into mass production. It may also mean the Army initially buys more of some kit than its units actually need and less than needed of other items. But CS 21 is a rolling roll-out of new tech to four brigades a year, not a once-and-done big bang, Bassett explained. So if they buy too much X and too little Y for the first brigade or two, he said, they can adjust the amounts in the next buy and redistribute gear among the units as needed. It's important to make clear that the Army's new technologies have already gone through much more hands-on field testing from actual soldiers than any traditional program, and have improved as a result. In the most dramatic example — not from CS 21 itself but a closely related system — blunt feedback from soldiers and quick fixes by engineers led to major improvements in prototype IVAS augmented reality goggles, a militarized Microsoft HoloLens that can now show soldiers everything from live drone feeds to a cross-hairs for targeting their rifle. Doing such “soldier touchpoints” early and often throughout the development process is central to the 20-year-month Army Futures Command's attempt to fix the service's notoriously disfunctional acquisition system. But to stem the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus, the Army – like businesses, schools, and churches around the world – has dramatically cut down on routine activities. “Units are either not training, or they're training with significant control measures put in place – social distancing, protective equipment, and things like that,” said Maj. Gen. Peter Gallagher, head of the Network Cross Functional Team at Army Futures Command. That's disrupted the “access to soldiers and the feedback loop that's been so critical to our efforts.” Nevertheless, the Army feels it has enough data to move ahead. It may also assess that the risk of moving ahead – even it requires some inefficient fixes later – is lower than the risk of leaving combat units with their existing network tech, which is less capable, less secure against hacking and less resilient against physical or electronic attack. 2021 And Beyond Capability Set 21 focuses on the Army's light infantry brigades, which don't have many vehicles to carry heavy-duty equipment, as well as rapidly deployable communications units called Expeditionary Signal Battalions. It includes a significant increase in the number of ground terminals for satellite communications, the generals said, though not quite as many as they'd hoped to be able to afford. It'll be followed by Capability Set 23, focused on medium and heavy mechanized units riding in 20-plus ton 8×8 Strykers and 40-plus-ton tracked vehicles. While units with lots of vehicles can carry much more gear, they also cover much larger distances in a day. That means CS 23 will include much more long-range communications through satellites in Low and Medium Earth Orbit, “which give us significantly more bandwidth at lower latency,” Gallagher said. “In some cases, it's almost having fiber optic cable through a space-based satellite link.” Even with CS 21 still in final testing, the Army's already gotten started on CS 23. It's reviewed over 140 white paper proposals submitted by interested companies in January, held “shark tank” pitch sessions with the most promising prospects in March, and is now negotiating with vendors. An Army slide summing up the systems being issued as part of the Integrated Tactical Network. Note the mix of Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) and military-unique Program Of Record (POR) technologies. There has been some impact from COVID,” Gallagher said, “[but] we will have all the contracts probably let no later than July.” The chosen technologies will go into prototype testing next year, with a Preliminary Design Review of the whole Capability Set in April and a Critical Design Review in April 2022. Further Capability Set upgrades are planned for every two years indefinitely, each focusing on different key technologies and different parts of the Army. Meanwhile, Bassett's PEO shop is urgently pushing out more of its existing network tech to regular, Reserve, and National Guard troops deployed nationwide to help combat COVID-19, Bassett said. That includes everything from satellite communications links to military software on an Android phone, known as the Android Tactical Assault Kit (ATAK). Originally developed to help troops navigate and coordinate on battlefields, ATAK is now being upgraded to provide public health data like rapid updates on coronavirus cases. “Any soldier that was responding to this COVID crisis that needed network equipment, we wanted them to have a one-stop shop,” Bassett told the conference. “They would come to us and we'd go get it for them.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/covid-disrupts-network-tests-but-army-presses-on
May 27, 2020 | International, Aerospace

Space Acquisition: Speed May Not Fix Problems, Critics Say
"The answer isn't 'we've just gotta go fast'," said one critic. By THERESA HITCHENSon May 26, 2020 at 4:10 PM WASHINGTON: The latest version of the Air Force's long-overdue report to Congress on space acquisition reform fails to address a number of foundational questions, critics say, including: go fast to do what; who gets to decide the what; and who is accountable if things go pear shaped? DoD is asking Congress to cut legislative strings and approve special powers to streamline space acquisition programs worth billions — pushing the need for speed to ensure the US military's technical edge over China and Russia, as first reported by colleague Sandra Erwin. The proposed changes are focused mainly on ways to get the Space Force out from under current acquisition rules, both those imposed by Congress and internally by DoD regulations. They also are “mostly a rehashed list of things that every service has asked for since time immemorial,” one national security space veteran told Breaking D, with a virtual eye roll. Or in the words of the recently-released teaser for the upcoming Netflix comedy “Space Force”: “Your attitude seems to be: ‘Give us money and don't look'.” “The problem is, I think, it's asking for a lot of trust from Congress that in space in particular hasn't been necessarily warranted to date,” said Joshua Huminski, director of the National Security Space Program at the Center for the Study of the Presidency & Congress. A space acquisition report, due to Congress on March 31, was delivered on May 20. Air Force acquisition head Will Roper called a press briefing last Friday to discuss it, only to abruptly cancel a couple hours later with no explanation. A congressional aide told Breaking D on Friday afternoon that they could not release the version of the report transmitted to Congress because it was not a final version; and an Air Force spokesperson later confirmed that — well after business hours on Friday evening and before the long Memorial Day weekend). So, it's not really the final version. The spokesperson said: “The Department of the Air Force continues to work with DoD and interagency partners to finalize the Space Force Alternative Acquisition System report. An initial version of the report was delivered to the Hill, but we anticipate delivering the final report to Congress soon.” As one space analyst notes wryly: “Not exactly a clean rollout.” The nine proposed reforms are required because “current space threats demand a shift to a system that more broadly delivers agile solutions to meet an ever-evolving technical baseline and integrate into an open architecture,” according to the current report language. Three of the recommendations will require legislative changes; one will require agreement from the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. Specifically, the nine recommendations address the following acquisition authorities for the Department of the Air Force and the Space Force: Unique Acquisition Category (ACAT) Thresholds, Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) Definition, and Milestone Decision Authority Delegation for Space Systems. “Efficient Space Procurement (ESP)” Codification for the DAF/USSF. USSF-Unique “New Start” Notification Procedures. Budget Line Item Restructure. Modified JCIDS [Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System that sets program requirements] Approach for Space Systems. New Policy Regarding Key Decision Point and Reporting Requirements for Development, Fielding, and Sustainment of Space Systems. “Useable End Item” Determination Authority. Separate USSF Topline Budget. USSF-Unique Head of Contracting Activity (HCA). As an example of bending the current DoD rules for the Space Force, the “Budget Line Restructure” asks Congress for authority to move money around by combining individual programs within in a large “portfolio” of similar efforts — an effort unlikely to win congressional approval, if past attempts are a guide. Numerous critics noted it goes directly against the intent of Congress when it mandated in 2016 that DoD develop a Major Force Program to allow better tracking of both the macro military space budget and individual projects from year-to-year via a specific, standardized “program element number” in budget documentation. Further, as Breaking D readers know, the report punts on one of the key mandates included in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA): to create a Space Acquisition Executive separate from the Air Force acquisition authority, a position now held by Roper. The NDAA requires that the Air Force appoint a Senate-confirmed assistant secretary for space acquisition and integration. That person, the act said, “will “synchronize with the Air Force Service Acquisition Executive on all space system efforts, and take on Service Acquisition Executive responsibilities for space systems and programs effective on October 1, 2022.” The SAE is to oversee the Space and Missile Systems Center, the Space Rapid Capabilities Office (SpRCO), and the Space Development Agency (SDA) — all of which currently have separate acquisition authorities and lines of oversight. Roper has fought tooth and nail against a fully separate SAE since it was proposed by Congress, according to numerous DoD sources even threatening to resign if it is created outside his purview. Sources close to the debate say that Gen. Jay Raymond, who currently is double hatted as head of the Space Force and Space Command, also does not want to see a change in the status quo that would put another layer of acquisition oversight in the mix. Thus, the current version of the draft report simply states that Roper will hold SAE authority for now. This, several sources said, in reality is a place holder signaling that DoD intends to recommend in future that Congress essentially ditch the idea. “We want to ignore your direction on the separate SAE [Space Acquisition Executive] – thanks, but we know better,” the former national security space official summed up. “And it ain't a signal – it's a shot across the bow.” “On face value, I think it does seem to suggest they are trying to avoid the separate Space Acquisition Executive, which when combined with the bucketing of money is unlikely to be well received by Congress,” Huminski said. “Congress is going to want some balance here, at least I think,” he added. “If the Space Force wants the authority to move money around within the portfolios, they are going to need to provide some measure of confidence to Congress that it is being done in an efficient and transparent manner, which could be the SAE—at least someone accountable for those money moves.” Failure to restructure the space acquisition organization, critics point out, leaves open the critical question of how DoD plans to fix the problem of lack of coordination with the Army and Navy on user equipment, for which they have acquisition authority. (We're looking at you, GPS III.) While the Space Force in the near term will comprise only Air Force personnel either seconded or transferred, the expectation is that eventually it will include Army and Navy personnel as well. A number of critics further charge that the requested changes do not sufficiently address the fact that previous space program cost overruns and schedule delays can be attributed to lack of coherent, coordinated and disciplined management at the program level within Space and Missile Systems Center itself, not due to outside factors. “All of the changes they've asked for are external to the Space Force,” said one former DoD official, rather than taking a hard look at past program management. “Instead it's: ‘Congress has to change; Ellen Lord [DoD acquisition czar] has to change; the JROC [Joint Requirements Oversight Council] has to change.” “The answer isn't ‘we've just gotta go fast',” the official added. “One of the biggest challenges is the proverbial acquisitions rubber meeting the road—unless the Space Force changes what they are buying, changing how they buy it may not matter,” Huminski explained. “If the same architectures and same vehicles and same capabilities are bought, just faster, what was the point of changing anything at all?” DoD sources defend the proposal, saying that Congress asked for, and expected to receive, ‘bold recommendations' on how to change the current space acquisition system. Noting that there are many conflicting pressures, one DoD source said that concerns about transparency and who does what exactly have been overtaken by concerns that the Space Force “be empowered to go fast, innovate, and achieve the space dominance wanted by POTUS.” Another government official keeping tabs on the issue said sympathetically that in some ways, “they are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.” While some in Congress likely will be annoyed by the recommendations push to get out from under current regulations, the source said, others would have complained loudly if DoD failed to move from the status quo. Spokespeople for a number of key House and Senate members involved in defense oversight did not respond to requests for comment. However, DoD sources and several analysts with close Hill ties said Congress is most likely to be concerned by the recommendations that infringe upon Congress's own powers. For example, members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are almost certain to protest the recommendation that assumes approval if Congress doesn't respond to “New Start” notifications within 30 days. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/space-acquisition-speed-may-not-fix-problems-critics-say
November 12, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - November 12, 2020
DEFENSE MICROELECTRONICS ACTIVITY Globalfoundries U.S. 2 LLC, Hopewell Junction, New York, has been awarded a ceiling increase of $400,000,000 under modification P00068 to previously awarded contract HQ0727-16-C-0001 for access to leading edge, current and legacy microelectronics and trusted processes for the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. Increase in interest for leading edge technology and lifetime orders for end of life technology initiated the need for this ceiling increase. The modification brings the total cumulative face value of the contract to $1,114,632,911 from $714,632,911. Work will be performed at Burlington, Vermont; East Fishkill, New York; and Malta, New York, with an expected completion date of March 31, 2021. The contract is being incrementally funded and no funds are being obligated at time of award. The Defense Microelectronics Activity, McClellan, California, is the contracting activity. NAVY AgustaWestland Philadelphia Corp., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is awarded a $171,047,763 modification (P00006) to previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract N61340-20-C-0007. This modification exercises options for the production and delivery of 36 TH-73A aircraft in support of the Advanced Helicopter Training System program. Work will be performed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (87%); Mineral Wells, Texas (5%); and various locations outside the continental U.S. (8%), and is expected to be completed in December 2022. Fiscal 2021 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $171,047,763 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. J. Walter Thompson U.S.A. LLC, doing business as Wunderman Thompson, Atlanta, Georgia, is awarded an $80,056,529 modification to previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract M95494-19-C-0020. This modification exercises Option Period One to furnish supplies and services to enhance the Marine Corps' recruiting efforts. These services include a full range of services from the development of a tactical advertising strategy to the production of a wide-range of advertising formats (e.g., television, radio, print media, internet and direct marketing). Work will be performed in Atlanta, Georgia, with an expected completion date of December 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Marine Corps) funds in the amount of $80,056,529 are obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Marine Corps Installations Command Contracting Office, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity. Honeywell International Inc., Tempe, Arizona, is awarded a $72,944,708 for a long-term, firm-fixed-priced requirements contract for the repair of six weapon repairable assemblies in support of the V-22 aircraft. This contract includes a five-year base period with no options. Work will be performed in Torrance, California (44%); Tucson, Arizona (35%); San Diego, California (15%); and Tempe, Arizona (6%). Work is expected to be completed by November 2025. Annual working capital funds (Navy) will be obligated as individual task orders are issued and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. One firm was solicited for this non-competitive requirement under authority 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), with one offer received. The Naval Supply Systems Command, Weapon Systems Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity (N00383-21-D-XP01). Raytheon Co., El Segundo, California, is awarded a $53,440,000 modification (P00004) to previously awarded fixed-price-incentive-fee contract N00019-20-C-0001. This modification exercises an option to procure 16 AN/APG-79(V)4 radar systems. Additionally, this modification includes software, obsolescence management, engineering support and associated technical, financial and administrative data necessary for retrofit integration into the F/A-18C/D aircraft for the Marine Corps. Work will be performed in Forest, Mississippi (41.1%); El Segundo, California (32.6%); Andover, Massachusetts (18.3%); and Dallas, Texas (8%), and is expected to be completed in June 2022. Fiscal 2021 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $53,440,000 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Vigor Marine LLC, Portland, Oregon, is awarded a $24,049,402 modification to previously awarded contract N00024-19-C-4447 to support USS Chosin (CG 65) extended dry-docking selected restricted availability. Work will be performed in Seattle, Washington, and is expected to be complete by October 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Navy) funding in the amount of $24,049,402 will be obligated at the time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility, Everett, Washington, is the contracting activity. AIR FORCE General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., Poway, California, has been awarded an $81,866,402 cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price modification (P00014) to contract FA8620-18-C-2009 for the U.K. MQ-9B Protector program. This modification provides for the design, development, integration and component-level testing of additional capabilities being added to the baseline program. Work will be performed in Poway, California, and is expected to be completed Aug. 31, 2021. Total cumulative face value of the contract is not-to-exceed $174,889,865. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $71,563,692 are being obligated at the time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity. L-3 Communications Integrated Systems, Greenville, Texas, has been awarded a not-to-exceed $24,500,078 cost-plus-fixed-fee undefinitized contract action for procurement of Group B material and the Ground System Integration Lab. Work will be performed in Greenville, Texas, and is expected to be completed March 2024. This contract involves 100% Foreign Military Sales (FMS). This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. FMS funds in the amount of $14,006,934 are being obligated at the time of award. The 645th Aeronautical Systems Group, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8620-19-F-4872 P00005). DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Baxter Healthcare Corp., Deerfield, Illinois, has been awarded a maximum $40,000,000 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for infusion pumps and accessories. This was a competitive acquisition with 105 offers received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Illinois, with a Nov. 11, 2025, ordering period end date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2026 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE2D1-21-D-0001). Cummins Inc., Commercial and Government Entity, Memphis, Tennessee, has been awarded an estimated $24,869,181 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment for multiple weapon systems program support. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a two-year base contract with four two-year option periods. Location of performance is Tennessee, with a Nov. 11, 2022, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Columbus, Ohio (SPE7LX-21-D-0007). ARMY Tutor Perini Corp., Sylmar, California, was awarded a $25,998,795 firm-fixed-price contract for renovation of the Cadet Field House at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Bids were solicited via the internet with five received. Work will be performed in Colorado Springs, Colorado, with an estimated completion date of Nov. 24, 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Air Force) funds in the amount of $25,998,795 were obligated at the time of the award. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity (W9128F-21-C-0004). *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2413459/

All news