US Marines to test drone-killing laser weapon

On the same subject

• 

  February 3, 2021 | International, Naval

  The report card is in for the US defense industry’s health

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The health of America's defense industrial base ranks a middling “C” due to growing cyber vulnerabilities, a poor ability to surge production in a crisis, and political obstacles for defense budgeting, according to a lead defense trade group's new study. According to the National Defense Industrial Association's second annual “Vital Signs” report, the defense industrial base entered the COVID-19 pandemic in a weakened state despite healthier marks for competition, profitability and demand. The report, released Tuesday, graded eight performance areas from 0 to 100 for an average score of 74 for the year 2020. Government data firm Govini co-produced the data-driven report, which used the Pentagon's 2018 assessment of the defense industrial base as a jumping off point. “The defense industrial base is facing multiple headwinds: industrial security threats, flat future defense budgets, a shortage of skilled, cleared workers and decreased investments in the sciences that fuel U.S. innovation,” NDIA's chief executive, Hawk Carlisle, said in a statement. “Add to these the increased regulatory burdens and barriers for new entrants, which continue to shrink both the number of companies that participate in the DIB and the number of new companies entering the defense marketplace.” He added that the report, which makes no recommendations, ought to drive discussions as the Pentagon ramps up for competition with China and Russia. Though the study predates both COVID-19 and the revelation that elite cyber spies have spent months secretly exploiting SolarWinds' software to peer into computer networks, it raised alarms over industrial security. As data breaches and cybersecurity vulnerabilities both surged, industrial security overall showed “clear and continued deterioration,” ranking the lowest of all with a 56. The industrial base's ability to meet surge demand during a crisis received a failing grade of 66. Companies NDIA surveyed said that in the first 30 days, the industrial base could ramp up quickly but the rate of progress would slow soon thereafter; more than a 100 percent increase would take 180 days. More than half of firms said the availability of skilled labor would be a factor in increasing defense production, and 16.5 percent said a gap in U.S.-based human capital was the most vulnerable part of their supply chain ― in part fueled by a security clearance backlog. The size of the defense industry workforce fell to about 1.1 million people from its mid-1980s peak of 3.2 million, the report said. An analysis of public opinion, congressional action and regulatory action downgraded the “political and regulatory” outlook by 10 points since 2018 ― even prior to the pandemic and a related emphasis on domestic spending. A key factor was a new Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification framework and its “additional regulatory burdens for all defense contractors,” the report said. Also, public opinion in favor of defense spending saw its largest decline since the Reagan-era defense buildup of the 1980s: A Gallup poll found that 17 percent of respondents felt the United States is spending too little on national defense and military purposes, down from 25 percent in 2019 and 33 percent in 2018. Industry can be pleased the “Demand” category jumped 16 points, corresponding with an increase in contract obligations issued by the Department of Defense. DoD contract obligations grew from $329 billion in fiscal 2017 to $394 billion in fiscal 2020, marking about a 20 percent increase. Foreign military sales also grew by nearly 20 percent over the same time period. Among all categories, major defense platforms ― aircraft, naval vessels and land vehicles ― were awarded the largest share of total contract obligation value, but contract obligation value for electronics and communication services grew 89 percent, leading all service categories. https://www.defensenews.com/2021/02/02/c-grade-for-us-defense-industrys-health-warns-trade-group-report

• 

  May 9, 2023 | International, Other Defence

  Pentagon strategy urges faster tech transition, more collaboration

  The 11-page strategy, which the department released May 9, also emphasizes the need for more investment in lab and test infrastructure.

• 

  September 18, 2019 | International, Aerospace

  Boeing wants government to force Northrop to partner on ICBM replacement

  By: Aaron Mehta NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — Months after announcing it would not bid on the Air Force's ICBM replacement program, Boeing is officially lobbying both Congress and the service to force a shotgun marriage with Northrop Grumman, against the latter company's will. Frank McCall, Boeing's director of strategic deterrence systems, told reporters Tuesday that the company was actively seeking “government intervention” on the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) program, one which would require Northrop to add Boeing as at least a major sub-contractor, if not a co-equal partner. “We think clearly it's time for the Air Force or other governmental entities to engage and direct the right solution. Northrop has elected not to do that,” McCall said during the Air Force Association's annual conference. “So we're looking for government intervention to drive us to the best solution.” Technically, GBSD is still an open competition. However, Northrop stands as the only competitor still making a bid. Lockheed Martin was knocked out in late 2017, and Boeing dropped out of the competition in July. Boeing claimed Northrop's acquisition of solid-fueled rocket motor manufacturer Orbital ATK, now known as Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems, gave the competitor an unfair advantage. Boeing has since made overtures toward Northrop, arguing that a partnership involving the two companies would benefit the development of GBSD. But Boeing on Friday announced that Northrop had rejected any teaming attempts. Now, it seems, the company has decided to stop playing nice and start getting real. McCall reiterated that Boeing would not be bidding as a prime on the GBSD request for proposal as is. He also would not rule out the possibility of launching a protest with the Government Accountability Office, should the Air Force not force Northrop to accept Boeing as part of its team. “I'm not spending any time thinking, ‘what if it doesn't work.' We're going to make it work,” he said. Both Boeing and Northrop are currently under contract for a tech maturation phase, which runs into next year. Asked whether the company was worried whether its TMRR contract could be cancelled early given its stance that it will not bid, McCall said: “Certainly that's a concern." However, “the service is maintaining our work," he added. They continue to accept our deliverables, continue to fund our contract. So, I think we're in good shape with the service.” Because both teams are under that development contract, McCall argued that the Air Force should take the two teams and let them begin sharing information, with the service making the final decision on what pieces of each bid would work best when combined. “What I am suggesting is the Air Force pull us in a room together and say ‘you've got 30 days to go figure out what is the right integrated baseline for the country to move forward with,'” he said. “While we have offered to Northrop a menu of things to choose from, we think the Air Force is really in a better position to go through that menu, go through the Northrop menu, and select the best option for the future.” Should the Air Force not choose that route, McCall was open that Boeing has begun engaging members of Congress to circumvent the Pentagon and force its hand. He pointed to Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama as someone who has already raised shown support for Boeing's position. McCall declined to name others, but should this turn into a legislative fight, it could come down to Boeing's supporters – with strongholds in Alabama, Washington and Missouri – versus those of Northrop Grumman. A wild card may come in the form of Lockheed Martin, who was announced as part of a ten-company national team for Northrop's bid earlier this week; as the world's largest defense firm, Lockheed could bring to bear significant firepower in Congress, and would likely be happy to knock Boeing out of the ICBM game. The Boeing executive declined to say what specific parts of the GBSD program Boeing was targeting should it end up with Northrop, but indicated that nuclear command and control — part of Lockheed's workshare under Northrop's planned team — would be one aree where Boeing's experience could come into play. Asked what percentage of workshare on the program Boeing would be satisfied with should the team-up happen, McCall declined to give a number, saying: “We told Northrop, we don't care if you're the prime or we're the prime. We're not dictating a workshare percentage.” https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-force-association/2019/09/17/boeing-calls-for-government-intervention-on-icbm-replacement-fight