October 20, 2024 | International, Land
HENSOLDT secures contract to deliver radar systems for Space Centre Australia
The total order volume of the initial phase is worth around 20 million euros (around $30 million AUD).
October 9, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR
US Army capabilities integration chief talks multidomain ops
By: Jen Judson
WASHINGTON — Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley is the new Army Capabilities Integration Center director and the first director to guide the center's efforts under the purview of the brand-new Army Futures Command, as opposed to Training and Doctrine Command, where the center lived since its inception.
ARCIC will be responsible for the development of future operational and war-fighting concepts that align and inform the service's major modernization priorities that Futures Command is tasked to develop in a new and rapid way. In an unprecedented method, concept and capability development will be formed in parallel.
In a wide-ranging interview with Defense News, Wesley discussed how the Army is evolving its major operational concept — Multidomain Operations 1.5 — and how ARCIC will continue to align modernization strategy with the concept as the Army heads toward a fully modernized force by 2028 — one that can provide overmatch against peer adversaries.
When are you coming out with the new version of the Army's Multidomain Operations concept (MDO 1.5)? Will it be at the Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference?
We're teasing it out. What we're going to do is deliver all of the principles and tenets of this new concept, and then you'll see the signed version within 30 days of that.
Why is getting the MDO concept right so critical?
I'll say upfront this is the most fundamental rewrite of an operational concept since AirLand Battle that was published in 1982.
Concepts are critical, particularly at a point in time when you see the world's dynamics fundamentally shift in a way that you've got to, in many ways, reconfigure or redesign and modernize your army.
What has changed in the world that requires multidomain operations?
I'd say there are a number of things. But if there's a word that you want to remember in terms of identifying the challenges we face within the pacing threats, it is the word “standoff.”
And what [our adversaries] have invested in are things that mitigate against the United States and our partners and allies' strengths. We're very good at close combat, and they've watched us over the last 30 years or so. And when you give the United States and our coalition partners and allies time to build up against it, usually the outcome is preordained based on ability to get into position and conduct operations the way we like to conduct them. So recognizing that, they've invested in what we oftentimes refer to as anti-access, area denial capabilities, which serendipitously came parallel with our withdrawal from the continent of Europe and the Korean Peninsula over the last 30 years.
On the same subject
-
-
April 2, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Pentagon turns to new buying tools 10 times more often
By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The amount of funding for defense research awarded through other transaction authorities have increased nearly tenfold in five years, according to a new analysis seen exclusively by Defense News. The report, by data and analytics firm Govini, shows the use of OTAs and small business innovation research contracts has expanded to the point that, in 2019, the two methods accounted for $9.6 billion, or 10 percent of the Defense Department's research, development, test and evaluation spending. OTAs are small contracts awarded to companies of any size, in theory targeted at nontraditional defense contractors, with the purpose of conducting research or prototype efforts on a specific project; they are not subject to Federal Acquisition Regulation rules. SBIR contracts are targeted at small businesses in order to act as seed money for them to conduct research and development efforts; they are subject to the FAR rules. Overall, $34.5 billion have been handed out in the last five years through the two contracting methods, to 6,503 unique vendors. However, more than half the OTA dollars are going to only three consortia. The two contracting methods may be about to jump in importance for the department, in light of the new coronavirus outbreak. Navy acquisition head Hondo Geurts, in a March 24 memo, ordered his workforce to do what they can to keep small companies assigned to naval research programs on track, including specifically calling out the need to protect SBIR efforts. Govini tracked the use of OTA and SBIR contracts over a five-year period, from fiscal 2015 through fiscal 2019. “The Defense Department's surging use of OTAs reflects its strong desire to break free from the stringent acquisition process, better access innovative technologies, and lure new companies to the defense ecosystem who otherwise may not see the federal government as a viable or lucrative potential market,” said Tara Murphy Dougherty, Govini CEO. “Fundamentally, the Department is driven by the imperative to outpace China's military modernization in order to retain a military advantage, and they understand that leveraging emerging technologies and the very best technology available in American industry — not just the Defense Industrial Base — are critical to achieving that goal,” she added. OTA dominance The numbers tell a particularly stark story of how the department is increasing its use of OTA contracts. From 2015-2017, the government awarded $12.5 billion in SBIR contracts, versus $4.9 billion in OTA contracts. But from 2018-2019, the government awarded $5.7 billion in SBIR contracts, while it handed out $11.4 billion in OTA deals — an increase large enough to nearly draw even over the five-year period. That increase in OTA funding also ties into the mission laid out by the National Defense Strategy, which encourages a focus on great power competition with China and Russia. According to Govini, the two biggest OTA investments of RDT&E dollars during this time period were $5 billion for munitions and long-range fires, and $3 billion for space systems. While the dollar totals are becoming closer, overall SBIR recipients continue to dwarf OTAs — 6,213 to 290 during the five-year period. In the number of OTA awards per service, the Army leads the way. (Govini) The Army leads the way with use of the two contract methods ($14.1 billion) during this period, followed by the Air Force ($10.4 billion), defensewide agencies ($6 billion) and the Navy ($4 billion). The two contract types also split their dollars in divergent ways. The top SBIR vendor, Colsa Corporation, received 4 percent of total SBIR awards, and the top ten (which includes Colsa) received less than 20 percent of the overall total. In comparison, the top three OTA vendors are consortia managers that make up more than half of total OTA contracts. Those three are Analytic Services Inc. ($5.429 billion), Advanced Technology International ($1.616 billion) and Consortium Management Group Inc. ($1.238 billion). Traditional defense corporations are taking advantage of OTAs as well. The fourth highest recipient of OTA money is United Launch Alliance, co-owned by Lockheed Martin and Boeing; the sixth highest recipient is Lockheed; the eight highest is Northrop Grumman; and the 10th highest is Boeing. Given that OTAs were designed to reach out to nontraditional defense firms, “it's surprising how many traditional defense contractors benefit from OTA arrangements,” Murphy Dougherty said. “Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing were all top OTA vendors over the past five years. This is a good example of how accessing the data can help the Department measure its success in terms of achieving intended outcomes through actions like increased OTA use.” Earlier this month, Ellen Lord, the Defense Department's top acquisition official, was asked at a McAleese & Associates conference about data that shows prime contractors taking advantage of OTA contracts. Lord indicated her office needed to gather more data on the issue before taking a look. “The whole premise of OTAs was to get the nontraditional [vendors] and the smalls there,” Lord responded. “I find it hard to imagine a situation where large primes would predominately use OTAs, but I don't know what I don't know. That wasn't the objective. “Oversight is one of our responsibilities in A&S [the office of acquisition and sustainment] that I take very seriously, so we need to make sure that we don't have unintended results from some of the polices that we implement. We're always trying to improve that.” https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/04/01/pentagon-turns-to-new-buying-tools-10-times-more-often/
-
July 3, 2024 | International, Land
German budget committee clears over 6 bln euros of defence purchases, say sources