News

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — If the Pentagon faces tighter budgets in the coming years, departmental planners should look to cut legacy programs first in order to preserve funding for modernization requirements, Defense Secretary Mark Esper told reporters Tuesday. “Frankly, my inclination is not to risk any in the modernization programs; it's to go back and pull out more of the legacy programs,” Esper said in response to a question about what modernization priorities, such as shipbuilding, might be on the table. “We need to move away from legacy [programs] and we need to invest those dollars into the future. We have a lot of legacy programs out there right now. I could pick dozens out from all branches of the services. So that is where I would start,” he continued. “What that would mean is probably accepting some near-term risk, but I think that is something [that has to happen], given the trajectory that we see China is on, and we know where Russia may be going in the coming years. So that is one place where I would begin, but we're going to be working through this course of action.” The secretary also emphasized that he's not going to “risk the strategic deterrent,” reiterating that modernizing America's nuclear capabilities remains the department's top priority. Budgets were already expected to be flat or decline slightly in the coming years before the coronavirus pandemic, which has required the U.S. government to pump trillions of dollars into the economy. Esper said that “tremendous load” is something the department must consider as it plots a budget strategy for fiscal 2022 and beyond. His comments match what the secretary said Monday during an appearance at the Brookings Institution, where he said the spending spree in response to the spread of COVID-19 means the department's ongoing efforts to find internal efficiencies must continue to bear fruit. The department claimed savings of $6.5 billion in FY19 through process reforms and the sale of obsolete equipment, with another $5.7 billion in spending reallocated from legacy programs to modernization priorities. During the Brookings event, Esper noted that the department will “likely need” extra money from Congress if a fourth coronavirus supplemental fund is worked out, in order to help cover costs for medical supplies procured by the Pentagon. At the start of his press event, the secretary used prepared remarks to note that top defense leaders will be appearing at the Senate Armed Services Committee tomorrow to discuss the Federal Communications Commission's decision to allow Ligado to operate in the L-band spectrum, a move long opposed by the department because of concerns it will negatively impact GPS. Esper said the decision “disregards the many objections of industry and the inner agency, grounded in years of hard data and science. Ultimately this will cause harmful interference to the GPS network, jeopardizing our nation's security, prosperity and way of life.” The secretary declined to comment on why the FCC moved ahead with the decision. C4ISRNET, a sister publication of Defense News, has reported the decision came amid political pressure from top Trump administration officials. https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/05/05/esper-flat-budget-could-speed-cutting-legacy-programs/

Seth J. Frantzman JERUSALEM — Israel's Ministry of Defense has procured the FireFly, a lightweight loitering munition designed for infantry and special forces. Jointly developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and the MoD, FireFly's canister-deployed design with multiple rotors enables it to hover around buildings and attack concealed enemies that may be beyond line of sight or hiding in urban environments. FireFly is designed to fulfill a need that platoons and smaller units have on the modern battlefield for an unmanned system that is rugged and lightweight. Mini-UAVs are increasingly in demand for infantry use, and the ability to combine them with loitering munitions that can conduct surveillance and attack has become the next step for ground forces. FireFly was designed over the last 15 years based on sketches produced as far back as the Six-Day War, when Israeli soldiers had to fight in the early morning amid trenches in Jerusalem during the Battle of Ammunition Hill. Also taken into account during the design period were Israel's experiences fighting militants in close combat in urban areas, such as the Gaza Strip, as well as knowledge of the difficulties armies have faced in fighting in places like Mosul, Iraq, against the Islamic State group. Gal Papier, director of business development at Rafael's Tactical Precision Weapons Directorate, said the current FireFly model has a seeker, warhead and data link with electro-optical features that are similar to Rafael's larger Spike missile family. The Spike group of munitions includes precision-guided tactical missiles. The main difference is the addition of dual rotors so the FireFly can hover and remain stable in windy environments. “It's a different way of looking at missile guidance,” Papier said. “This is innovative and new — it's a missile that folds into a small canister.” First unveiled in 2018, Papier foresees the FireFly as “infantry's best friend,” enabling forces to both scout and attack. The warhead is small, coming in at only 400 grams, but Rafael says it is lethal enough for infantry and special forces missions. “Normally the targets are insurgents or suppressing machine guns or a sniper,” Papier explain, comparing the FireFly to UAVs that carry 20-kilogram payloads and must be launched by catapult. FireFly gives an operator up to 1.5 kilometers of line-of-sight use and 500 meters of non-line-of-sight use. It can return to the user with the click of a button, and its technology provides situational awareness to avoid collisions with obstacles. It can also operate during the day or night with a low acoustic signature. Its battery and warhead can both be replaced; the warhead can be swapped for another battery to provide double the 15-minute flying time for surveillance missions. The press of a button on the operator's tablet causes the warhead to slam into an enemy at up to 70 kph. It is also designed with safeguards, such as an abort capability. Rafael also foresees the FireFly launched from vehicles, with several units contained in a pod or “beehive” that would operate from inside the vehicle. This is in line with the increased use of smaller tactical UAVs with armored vehicles, and future battlefield concepts that foresee vehicles and infantry units operating in sync with numerous drones. “We are in [the] design stage of these pods, tailored for different vehicles. We see it as a building block,” Papier said. Israel's procurement of the FireFly and its deployment with infantry units are part of the country's multiyear plan to restructure its armed forces, known as “Momentum.” The plan also calls for increased digitization of land forces and for units to have access to more UAVs and technology. This is meant to bring intelligence assets as far forward as possible to battalion- and company-level units sharing information gathered by UAVs on a network. Papier noted that the increased deployment of loitering munitions like this will change infantry units as they decide how to make soldiers into dedicated drone operators. https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/05/05/israel-acquires-firefly-loitering-munition-for-close-combat/

Andrew Eversden Two U.S. senators called on the Office of Management and Budget to ensure that federal regulation banning the government's use of Chinese telecommunications technology include “explicit processes” to help small businesses with compliance. In a May 4 letter sent to acting OMB Director Russ Vought, Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., asked Vought to carefully consider to the needs of small businesses while the agency reviews a proposed rule. The senators' concern is in response to a proposed rule under review by OMB implementing Section 889(a)(1)(B) of the fiscal 2019 defense policy law — a provision that bans federal agencies from procuring or doing business with companies using “covered telecommunications equipment or services" in an effort to block Chinese tech companies like Huawei and ZTE from entering the U.S. government's supply chain. Rubio and Cardin are the top two senators on the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. According to the letter, OMB is currently reviewing the draft proposed rule, statutorily required to be implemented Aug. 13. Because smaller companies don't have access to the same resources as larger suppliers, they may need “more assistance and time,” the senators wrote. The pair called the guidance for small businesses “vita,l” given that small businesses make up about one-quarter of federal procurement, worth $120 billion. “By providing these small firms with a clear path toward compliance and a reasonable time frame, we believe that the goal of securing the United States supply chain will be better achieved,” Rubio and Cardin wrote. Outside interest groups representing federal contractors have also pushed Congress to delay the implementation of Part B of Section 889. In a joint letter in late March, the National Defense Industrial Association and the Professional Services Council asked Congress to delay the Aug. 13 date to February 2021. They also cited the ongoing coronavirus pandemic as reason for a delay. “Part B will impose significant financial and operational costs on medium and small-sized firms at a moment of substantial uncertainty and hardship. While we agree that Part B addresses a significant problem in defense supply chains, and that additional measures are needed to protect [Department of Defense] information assets from covered equipment, COVID-19 has made the current implementation timeline infeasible,” the groups wrote. The United States government alleges that Huawei's 5G technology allows for Chinese government espionage and poses a threat to national security. Senior U.S. officials have traveled the globe, urging allies not to include Huawei's technology in their 5G networks. But the effort has been largely unsuccessful, particularly after the United Kingdom announced in January it would allow Huawei to build noncritical pieces of its 5G network. That decision was met with scorn by lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Still, Rubio and Cardin warned that OMB needs to produce the regulation cautiously and carefully. “We are concerned that if the regulatory implementation language fails to adequately consider small businesses, this process could not only result in an ineffective implementation of the prohibition, but also be both harmful and costly to thousands of small federal contractors,” they wrote. https://www.fifthdomain.com/congress/capitol-hill/2020/05/05/proposed-rule-banning-chinese-tech-needs-to-consider-small-contractors-senators-warn/

Nathan Strout The Space Development Agency is seeking proposals for its first batch of satellites, which will make up its initial transport layer — an on-orbit mesh network that will connect space-based sensors with terrestrial shooters. According to the May 1 solicitation, SDA is looking to award two contracts to build a total of 20 small satellites, which will comprise Tranche 0 of the National Security Space Architecture, a proliferated, low-Earth orbit constellation that will fulfill a multitude of military needs, including tracking hypersonic weapons; providing alternative position, navigation and timing data; delivering beyond-line-of-sight targeting; and more. Ultimately, the agency envisions a constellation made up of hundreds of interconnected satellites. Ten of those Tranche 0 satellites will form the agency's initial transport layer. The spiral development approach The agency is taking a spiral development approach to its National Security Space Architecture. Tranche 0 will be a testing and training segment that will demonstrate the integration of the architecture with other war-fighting efforts and inform future SDA developments. Tranche 0 is anticipated to be on orbit in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2022, with the SDA adding new tranches of satellites every two years, increasing the constellation's size and capabilities. Launch services will be acquired through the Orbital Services Program 4 contract or follow-on contracts. The philosophy behind the spiral approach is that the two-year cycles allow the agency to rapidly put new capabilities on orbit in response to evolving threats. Instead of waiting years for the perfect satellite system, the agency wants to push technologies that are currently ready into orbit as soon as possible, giving war fighters increased capabilities in the near term. With Tranche 0, the SDA wants to achieve periodic, regional, low-latency data connectivity. With Tranche 1, which will add 150 satellites to the constellation, the agency plans to provide persistent regional connectivity. Building a mesh network The National Security Space Architecture will be made up of several layers serving different functions. Tranche 0 will establish the transport layer, a space-based mesh network that will be able to pass data from one satellite to the next. The mesh network will operate as part of the Integrated Broadcast System, the Defense Department's standard network for transmitting tactical and strategic intelligence and targeting data. The key technology that will enable the transport layer are optical inter-satellite cross links, providing approximately 1 Gbps connections between the satellites. Each Transport Layer satellite will have four such cross links — forward, behind, right and left — which will allow them to pass data on to the nearest or next-nearest transport layer satellite operating in the same orbital plane. The satellites will also be capable of cross-plane cross links, meaning they will be able to connect to non-transport layer satellites operating above or below them. Assuming that they also have optical inter-satellite cross links, these non-transport layer satellites would then be able to pass data through the transport layer's mesh network to another satellite or even to a terrestrial shooter. For example, it could work like this: A space-based sensor collects imagery that it wants to pass to a ground-based system, but it is not within range of any ground station. No problem. The sensor would pass on that imagery to a transport layer satellite via an cross-plane optical cross link. The data would then bounce from transport layer satellite to transport layer satellite until it arrives above its destination, where it would then be downlinked to an optical ground terminal or distributed to the appropriate weapons system via the Link 16 tactical data network. In theory, this would allow shooters to receive space-based sensor data in near-real time. Since the SDA plans to continue building on the transport layer in subsequent tranches across multiple vendors, the optical inter-satellite cross links will need to be designed with interoperability in mind. The SDA also wants radio frequency cross links as a backup to the optical cross links. Tranche 0 will include 10 transport layer satellites — three of which will include Link 16 payloads. During an April industry day, SDA Director Derek Tournear said this initial, space-based mesh network will form the space network component to the Defense Department's Joint All-Domain Command and Control enterprise, or JADC2. “The transport layer, which is what the draft [request for proposals] and the industry day was talking about today, is going to be the unifying effort across the department. That is going to be what we use for low-latency [communications] to be able to pull these networks together, and that, in essence, is going to be the main unifying truss for the JADC2 and that effort moving forward. That is going to be the space network that is utilized for that,” Tournear explained. The agency has six goals for its Tranche 0 transport layer: Demonstrate low-latency data transport to the war fighter over the optical cross link mesh network. Demonstrate the ability to deliver data from an external, space-based sensor to the war fighter via the transport layer. Demonstrate a limited battle management C3 functionality. Transfer Integrated Broadcast System data across the mesh network to the war fighter. Store, relay and transmit Link 16 data over the network in near real time. Operate a common timing reference independent of GPS. According to the request for proposals, the SDA plans to award a contract Aug 10, with delivery expected by July 31, 2022. Responses to the solicitation are due June 1. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/05/05/heres-what-the-space-development-agency-wants-from-its-first-10-satellites/

By: Rebeccah L. Heinrichs Rogue states are taking advantage of the American preoccupation with the COVID-19 pandemic. North Korea may test another long-range missile according to the head of U.S. Northern Command, Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy. He warned Congress in March that the North Korean regime is still a serious threat and is improving its missile program. And last week, Iran's Revolutionary Guard successfully launched a satellite into space. This was the first for the terrorist paramilitary group, though not the first for the regime. The pandemic is likely to prompt Congress to reassess, cut and redirect spending, but safeguarding the American people from missile attack is an essential service the government cannot afford to scale back. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Rob Soofer said at a recent Hudson Institute event: “[T]oday we are in an advantageous position vis-a-vis North Korea. Forty-four ground-based interceptors. Gen. O'Shaughnessy has complete confidence that the system will work and we can address the threat. Then the question is: Can we wait until 2028?” The Trump administration intends to deploy in 2028 the Next Generation Interceptor, or NGI, meant to handle far more complicated missile threats than what the Ground-based Midcourse Defense, or GMD, system was initially designed to do. Still, as Dr. Soofer explained, threats develop at an unpredictable pace, and so the Pentagon is pushing for initiatives to bolster defense in the meantime. Those initiatives will require serious bipartisan cooperation while concurrently developing the NGI and pursuing other advanced capabilities meant to dramatically increase the ability of the missile defense architecture. It's a tall order, but critical, nonetheless. First, and to be clear, the Pentagon has not yet embraced this step due to its determination to focus on NGI. But Congress should invest in more than just sustaining the current GMD system; it should improve it by adding 20 GBIs to the already fielded 44. The silos will be prepared for the additional numbers since, in 2017, President Donald Trump called for adding more deployed GBIs considering the heightened North Korea missile threat. The Pentagon began work on preparing for their delivery but never emplaced GBIs into those silos because Pentagon officials canceled the Redesigned Kill Vehicle. The Pentagon had anticipated the Redesigned Kill Vehicle for the nation's new GBIs. After evaluating the resources and time it would take to restart the production line of the Capability Enhancement II interceptors or to rapidly develop an improved kill vehicle that leverages new technology, the Pentagon should choose the most cost-effective solution. Recall, the Capability Enhancement II was the kill vehicle that performed well in the last complex flight test, which was the first salvo engagement of a threat-representative intercontinental ballistic missile target by GBIs. Regardless of the option the Pentagon would choose, the result would be a near-term enhanced capability by either increased capacity at a minimum, or an increased capacity with improved kill vehicles on 20 of the 64 at best. Either would be a much better scenario than keeping the backbone of homeland defenses stagnant while we anticipate the NGI in 2028. But that is not all the country should do. It should also move forward with steps the Pentagon has embraced. Those steps include improving the discrimination radar capability in the next few years so GMD can better detect and characterize the evolving threat, and deploying other existing systems to bolster GMD. Utilizing current systems with impressive testing records against missiles shorter than ICBM range as part of a layered homeland defense is called the “underlay.” As a key component of the underlay, Congress has directed the Pentagon to test the Aegis SM-3 IIA interceptor against an ICBM target. Unfortunately, because of the pandemic, the Missile Defense Agency's planned flight tests will be delayed, including for the SM-3 IIA. The threats facing the country will not wait for the end of the pandemic, and the Pentagon should reconsider that delay. As soon as the country can test the system, and if it is a success, it would be wise to prepare to deploy Aegis SM-3 IIA as the threat requires. If there is an ICBM attack against the U.S. homeland, a GBI would have the first shot at the incoming missile while it's in its midcourse phase of flight; and if an enemy missile gets through, and the Aegis SM-3 IIA is positioned correctly, it could have another shot at the missile as it begins its descent. There has been some concern about whether Russia or China have legitimate claims that bolstering homeland defense in this way is destabilizing. But no evidence supports these claims, and, as Dr. Jim Miller, an Obama-era undersecretary of defense for policy, said at a recent Hudson event: “We cannot and must not give Russia or China a veto over the United States' ability to defend ourselves from North Korea and Iran. That is an absolute no-go for any administration.” Another system that is a natural candidate for the underlay is the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense air defense system. Embracing that concept as well, Dr. Miller said: “It makes sense for certain contexts. And if you're looking at a shorter-range missile and a relatively small footprint of coverage, THAAD has a real chance to contribute in that. To me, that's certainly the case for Guam and Hawaii.” But what about cost? That's the $10 billion question — a question that happens to be valued at more than the current president's budget requires for the Missile Defense Agency. The budget request that Congress is currently considering for the MDA is roughly $9.2 billion, noticeably less than previous years, even as the role of missile defense is supposed to be expanding in the country's National Security Strategy. There is no margin for cutting the budget. Congress should rally around this mission and budget, and it should increase funding to sufficiently make these necessary improvements in the near term without paying for them by sacrificing investments like NGI for the not-so-distant future. It can do that without tipping the scale much more than $10 billion this year. That is eminently reasonable given the pressure every government department will feel after the sudden spending splurge due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Rebeccah L. Heinrichs is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute where she specializes in nuclear deterrence and missile defense. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/05/expand-missile-defenses-during-the-pandemic-dont-cut-them/

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Boeing is set to roll out the first “Loyal Wingman” drone for the Royal Australian Air Force during a Tuesday morning ceremony, putting the RAAF high on the list of countries experimenting with autonomous aircraft. “This a truly historic moment for our country and for Australian defense innovation,” said Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison. “The Loyal Wingman will be pivotal to exploring the critical capabilities our Air Force needs to protect our nation and its allies into the future.” The RAAF plans to buy three drones, which Boeing calls the Airpower Teaming System, as part of the Loyal Wingman Advanced Development Program. Over a series of flight tests and demonstrations, the RAAF hopes to figure out how to best integrate drones with fighter jets and other combat aircraft, allowing the air force to keep pilots safe by putting lower cost unmanned assets at risk during a fight. “Autonomy is a big element of this, as well as the incorporation of artificial intelligence. Those two elements combined enable us to support existing forces,” said Jerad Hayes, Boeing's senior director for autonomous aviation and technology. The ATS is semi-autonomous, meaning that fighter pilots will not have to remotely control the maneuvers of the drone, said Shane Arnott, Boeing's ATS program director. “When you are teaming, say with a Super Hornet, they don't have the luxury during combat maneuvers or operations to be remotely piloting another aircraft while doing their own,” he said. But one of the biggest technical questions still remains: How much data should be transferred from the ATS to the cockpit of the manned aircraft controlling it, and when does that turn into information overload? That question is one Boeing wants to answer more definitively once ATS makes its first flight later this year and moves into its experimentation phase, Arnott said. “There's a lot for us to figure out [on] what's that right level of information feed and direction. One of the great benefits of working with the Royal Australian Air Force is having the real operators [give feedback],” he said. “We don't have all the answers yet. We have a lot of understanding through our surrogate simulator and surrogate testing that we're doing, but we will prove that out.” Boeing first introduced the Airpower Teaming System at the Australian International Airshow at Avalon in February 2019, when the company unveiled a full-scale model. Since then, the company has moved quickly to fabricate the first of three aircraft, completing the fuselage structure this February. In April, the aircraft stood on its own wheels for the first time and powered on. The ATS air vehicle is 38 feet long, with a removable nose that can be packed with mission-specific sensors and other payloads. Throughout the design process, Boeing simulated a “digital twin” of the aircraft that allowed it to virtualize the operation of the aircraft, as well as how it would be produced and maintained. It also saved money by incorporating resin-infused composite structures, including one that is the largest piece Boeing has ever manufactured using that technique, Hayes said. That large structure snaps into another to form the plane's wings, cutting down on the manpower needed to fabricate the aircraft. While the drone's sleek, twin-tailed design is simple, with only four moving surfaces, it was carefully composed to optimize the aircraft's survivability, maneuverability and cost, Arnott said. While Arnott wouldn't talk about the stealth features of the aircraft, he noted that “there was a lot of thought put into getting that right balance of ‘good enough' across the board, and [radar] signature is obviously an aspect, and affordability is a big one.” Boeing officials have also declined to comment on the price of the aircraft, but Arnott and Hayes made it clear that Boeing intends to keep it cost-competitive with its main competitor, Kratos Defense and Security's XQ-58 Valkyrie. The U.S. Air Force has expressed interest in procuring Valkyrie for the loyal wingman role and to host communications relay payloads that would allow the F-35 and F-22 to share data stealthily. Boeing is also engaged with the U.S. military about potential uses of the ATS, Hayes asid. “We see the Airpower Teaming System platform as capable of going against many different mission sets, and as such, we're engaging across the Department of Defense to understand their specific mission need, what their requirements are for those, and understanding exactly how the Airpower Teaming System fits those,” he said. The nose — which is 8.5 feet long with more than 90k cubic inches volume — is key to the company's strategy to sell the system outside of Australia, Arnott said. Boeing envisions working with international customers to create customized modular payloads that could be built with the help of indigenous suppliers, thus increasing its appeal. “The industrial aspect of this is of a lot of interest for a number of countries,” said Arnott. “Being able to do meaningful work on the systems to the extent of creating whole new payloads or role capability is of great interest.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/05/04/boeing-rolls-out-australias-first-loyal-wingman-combat-drone/

NAVY Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems, McKinney, Texas, is awarded $325,000,000 for a firm-fixed-price contract for the repair of the Advanced Targeting Forward Looking Infrared System used in support of the F/A-18 aircraft. Work will be performed in McKinney, Texas (59%); and Jacksonville, Florida (41%). Work is expected to be complete by May 2025. This is a five-year base period with no option periods. Annual working capital (Navy) funds in the amount of $54,507,477 will be obligated at time of award, and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. One company was solicited for this sole-sourced requirement under authority 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), and one offer was received. The Naval Supply Systems Command, Weapon Systems Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity (N00383-20-D-WC01). Flightline Electronics Inc., Victor, New York, is awarded an $18,588,079 firm-fixed-price indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the manufacture and delivery of 543 TTU-597/E engineering change proposal kits to address parts obsolescence and availability issues on the fuel control test set for Navy and Foreign Military Sales customers. Additionally, this contract provides logistics support documents to include technical manual updates, provisioning data and the interim support items list. Work will be performed in Victor, New York (60%); and Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom (40%), and is expected to be complete by May 2024. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1). The Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (N68335-20-D-0008). Bell Boeing Joint Project Office, Amarillo, Texas, is awarded a $10,178,059 modification (P00029) to a previously awarded, fixed-price-incentive-firm-target, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00019-17-C-0015). This modification provides for additional repairs in support of the V-22 Common Configuration Readiness and Modernization program. Additionally, this modification provides non-recurring engineering for a drive tube engineering change proposal in support of V-22 (Osprey multirole combat aircraft) production. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (30%); Ridley Park, Pennsylvania (15%); Amarillo, Texas (13%); Red Oak, Texas (3%); East Aurora, New York (3%); Park City, Utah (2%); McKinney, Texas (1%); Endicott, New York (1%); various locations within the continental U.S. (28%); and various locations outside the continental U.S. (4%). Work is expected to be complete by September 2022. Fiscal 2018 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $4,804,019; fiscal 2019 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $5,119,758; fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Navy) funds in the amount of $240,500; and fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $5,108 will be obligated at time of award, $5,044,519 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. AIR FORCE StandardAero Inc., San Antonio, Texas, has been awarded a $237,395,588 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract action for the J85 engine repair. The contractor will provide maintenance, repair and overhaul repairs of the J85 engine. Work will be performed in San Antonio, Texas, and is expected to be completed by May 2028. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition in which one bid was received. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $10,135,844 is being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity (FA8124-20-D-0005). L-3 Communications Integrated Systems, Greenville, Texas, has been awarded a not-to-exceed $76,000,028 cost-plus-fixed-fee, undefinitized contract modification (P00008) to contract FA8620-19-F-4872 for procurement of Group B materials, ground systems integration lab and subcontracts. Work will be performed in Greenville, Texas, and is expected to be completed by March 31, 2024. This contract involves 100% Foreign Military Sales and is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $37,240,021 are being obligated at the time of award. The 645th Aeronautical Systems Group, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity. DMS Contracting Inc., Mascoutah, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0001); C. Rallo Contracting Co. Inc., St. Louis, Missouri (FA4407-20-D-0002); Davinroy Mechanical Contractor Inc., Belleville, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0003); Hank's Excavating & Landscaping Inc., Belleville, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0004); J&B Builders Inc., St. Charles, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0005); Mantle-Plocher JV, Worden, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0006); Surmeier & Surmeier, Mascoutah, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0007); and Pugsley Byrne JV LLC, Brighton, Illinois (FA4407-20-D-0008), have been awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts with a maximum estimated aggregate value of $45,000,000 under a multiple award task order contract. The awards are in support of the multiple award paving contract program to support the Scott Air Force Base construction program, including paving and civil categories. Work will be performed on Scott AFB, Illinois, and is expected to be completed May 4, 2021. These awards are the result of a competitive acquisition and nine offers were received. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $500 are being obligated to each contractor at the time of award. The 375th Contracting Squadron, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY SupplyCore Inc.,* Rockford, Illinois, has been awarded a maximum $60,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for facilities maintenance, repair and operations items. 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 an 18-month bridge contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are Illinois and Alaska, with a Nov. 5, 2021, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2022 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE8E3-20-D-0011). Raytheon Co., Andover, Massachusetts, has been awarded a maximum $36,688,190 firm-fixed-price delivery order (SPRRA2-20-F-0077) against a seven-year basic ordering agreement (SPRRA2-19-R-0046) for radio frequency exciters. 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 three-year, 11-month contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Massachusetts, with a March 31, 2024, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2024 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. Leading Technology Composites Inc., doing business as LTC Inc., Wichita, Kansas, has been awarded a maximum $26,752,704 modification (P00010) exercising the second one-year option period of a one-year base contract (SPE1C1-18-D-1073) with three one-year option periods for enhanced side ballistic inserts. This is a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract. Location of performance is Kansas, with a May 4, 2021, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2021 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. American Water Enterprises LLC, Camden, New Jersey, has been awarded a $21,810,972 modification (P00251) to a 50‐year contract (SP0600‐03‐C‐8268), with no option periods for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the water and wastewater utility systems at Fort Rucker, Alabama. This is a fixed-price with prospective-price-redetermination contract. Locations of performance are New Jersey and Alabama with an April 15, 2054, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2054 Army operations and maintenance funds. The contracting activity is Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Raytheon Co., Andover, Massachusetts, has been awarded a maximum $8,362,088 firm-fixed-price delivery order (SPRRA2-20-F-0079) against a seven-year basic ordering agreement (SPRRA2-19-R-0046) for radio frequency exciters. 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, nine-month contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Massachusetts, with a Jan. 31, 2023, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama. ARMY ASM Research LLC, Fairfax, Virginia, was awarded a $40,284,199 firm-fixed-price contract to provide comprehensive credentialing and privileging program support for the Army National Guard or Air National Guard. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of May 4, 2025. The National Guard Bureau Operational Contracting Division, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (W9133L-20-D-1000). Miller Electric Co. Inc., Reno, Nevada, was awarded a $12,000,000 modification (P00004) to contract W911SA-17-D-2006 for sustainment, modernization and improvement projects for the 88th Army Reserve Centers throughout the states of Kansas and Nebraska. Bids were solicited via the internet with six received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of May 31, 2021. The 419th Contract Support Brigade, Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, is the contracting activity. CAE USA Inc., Tampa, Florida, was awarded an $11,157,134 firm-fixed-price contract for advanced helicopter flight training support services. Bids were solicited via the internet with seven received. Work will be performed at Fort Rucker, Alabama, with an estimated completion date of May 15, 2027. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance, Army funds in the amount of $11,157,134 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command, Fort Eustis, Virginia, is the contracting activity (W9124G-20-C-0008). Manhattan Construction Co., Tulsa, Oklahoma, was awarded an $8,300,000 modification (PZ0001) to contract W912BV-20-C-0008 for alternate care facilities in Oklahoma. Work will be performed in Tulsa and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, with an estimated completion date of May 10, 2020. Fiscal 2020 civil construction funds in the amount of $8,300,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY Perspecta Labs Inc., Basking Ridge, New Jersey, was awarded a $29,917,092 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for a research project under the Fast Network Interface Cards (FastNICs) program. The FastNICs program will speed up applications such as the distributed training of machine learning classifiers by 100x through the development, implementation, integration and validation of novel, clean-slate network subsystems. Work will be performed in Basking Ridge, New Jersey, with an expected completion date of May 2024. Fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) funding in the amount of $1,110,000; and fiscal 2020 RDT&E funding in the amount of $2,925,000 are being obligated at time of award. This contract was a competitive acquisition under an open broad agency announcement and eight offers were received. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (HR0011-20-C-0090). *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2177362/source/GovDelivery/

With defense budgets expected to be coming in flat under even best-case scenarios, the time for tough decisions might be coming. By PAUL MCLEARY WASHINGTON: The Pentagon may slash older weapons programs to buy new ones in coming years if the federal government's COVID-19 response takes a big bite out of budgets, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said today. Before the global pandemic slammed American society and ground the economy to a halt, Pentagon leaders were already looking at flat defense budgets and were casting about for fat to trim. But the trillions Congress and the Trump administration has pumped into the economy, which falls on top of an already exploding budget deficit, could make predictions of flat budgets look optimistic. Esper told reporters at the Pentagon he would target older programs: “We need to move away from the legacy, and we need to invest those dollars in the future. And we have a lot of legacy programs out there right now — I could pick dozens out from all branches of the services” that could be cut or curtailed. As Army Secretary in 2018, Esper's “Night Courts” saved the service some $33 billion through scrapping oler programs with an eye to pumping cash into new weapons programs. The Navy is undergoing a review that aims to shave $40 billion in the coming years, and the Marine Corps is aggressively getting rid of troops, tanks, helicopters, and — possibly — trimming the F-35 to make room for modernization investments. In particular, the massive modernization of the nuclear delivery systems will not be touched. Esper said “we're not going to risk the strategic deterrent we need to modernize,” if budgets trend downward, but acknowledged that cutting old weapons systems before their replacements were ready “would mean probably accepting some near term risk, but I think [modernizing is] important given the trajectory that China is on, and we know where Russia may be going in the coming year.” Earlier this week, Esper said he was concerned that exploding budget deficits would put an end to the dream of 3% to 5% yearly defense budget growth, which he had targeted for Pentagon modernization. “There is a concern there that that may lead to smaller defense budgets in the future at the critical time we need to continue making this adjustment, where we look at China, then Russia, as our long-term strategic competitors,” he said at the Brookings Institute. Some lawmakers are bracing for the coming cuts. “I am extremely concerned about that,” House Armed Services Committee member Rep. Mike Gallagher told me recently. “I think it is going to require defense hawks, like myself, to make not only more energetic arguments, but new and creative geopolitical arguments,” to advocate for spending on modernization programs. “If you assume downward pressure on the defense budget, it means that DoD will need to get the most out of every dollar spent.” Those arguments will be critically important for the services as they pitch their latest modernization efforts. “I think the budget comes down sooner rather than later,” Mackenzie Eaglen, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said during a recent webinar Adding fuel to that view was Todd Harrison, DoD budget expert at the Center for Strategic and International Security, who added, “what has historically happened is, when Congress's fiscal conservatives come out and get serious about reducing the debt, reducing spending on defense is almost always part of what they come up with for a solution,” he said. “So, we could be looking at a deficit-driven defense drawdown coming.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/old-weapons-under-fire-as-covid-debt-rises/

No current cloud, commercial or military, lets frontline troops access both classified and unclassified data from all over the world, Dana Deasy told Breaking Defense. That makes JEDI unique – and too complex to split up among multiple contractors. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: A lot of people – even experts – don't get what the JEDI cloud computing program is really about, Dana Deasy told me. And that, the Defense Department's Chief Information Officer admitted, is partly the Pentagon's own fault he told me during a half-hour interview. So, this morning, after Breaking Defense published the latest of several stories on JEDI's legal and political troubles and the mounting criticism of the program, Deasy agreed to an interview to explain just why he thinks the worldwide military cloud is still essential – and too complexly integrated to split chunks off to different contractors. There are three fundamental misunderstandings about JEDI that the Pentagon needs to dispel, Deasy told me: First, people think JEDI is meant to be the one cloud to rule them all. It's not. While JEDI will be the default option for “general purpose” cloud computing across the entire Department of Defense, it will not replace hundreds of existing cloud contracts across the DoD not prevent the creation of new “fit for purpose” clouds tailored to specific missions. “We definitely had created the wrong perception. People believed that we were going to take all of our clouds, get rid of them, and migrate everything over to JEDI,” Deasy told me. “That was clearly never the intent.” Second, people think JEDI is a 10-year, $10 billion contract. It's not – not necessarily. While that's the maximum value and duration of the contract, the Pentagon has the option to terminate it after two years. There's another end-it-or-extend-it decision three years later, and a third three years after that. The minimum the winning contractor is guaranteed to get? Just $1 million over two years. The Defense Department's strategy to transition to cloud computing. “When I came on board, one thing I did was restructure the terms,” Deasy told me. “I've been working with clouds since clouds were first brought to the commercial industry marketplace, and about every two to three years, you see really big changes. I'm talking about significant enough changes where you just want to step back and look at the marketplace. That's why we changed the terms of the contract.” Third, people think JEDI is just another cloud. It's not. While existing military and even civilian clouds can do some of what JEDI is meant to do, none of them can do all of it. None of them can pull unclassified, secret, and top secret data, from the Pentagon, bases around the world, and forward outposts, and put it all together in a way that even troops in combat can access. “Go out to the tactical edge, sit down with the warfighter, and look at how we push information out to someone who's literally outside of the village on the side of a mountain,” Deasy told me. “I spent some time in Afghanistan last year, and you look at what it takes for them to prepare for a mission, to execute a mission. They are pulling data from a variety of sources, some unclassified, some classified.” But doing that today is damnably hard. It takes a lot of awkward workarounds to bridge the gaps between different and frequently incompatible networks, and you can't bring the kludged-together solution with you into combat. That's why one of JEDI's first priorities is building backpack-sized mini-servers. “To actually combine that data and physically get the information out to the warfighter in a form factor that they could use when they're out in the field, it just doesn't exist today. And no — you cannot pull that off the shelf,” Deasy said. “That is a unique capability that we have to build.” “We have to find a partner to help us do that, and that is what we've been looking to do with JEDI,” he told me. He really means a partner, one contractor, not many, because the task of building this highly complex, tightly integrated system is not something you can split up, the way you would an order for bulk commodities like potatoes, jet fuel, or even online storage. Why not? Let's let Deasy explain it in his own words (edited for clarity and brevity). Q: There's been a lot of excitement over JEDI since the program began in 2018, and a lot of frustration over the delays. How would you respond to the critics who say it's time to give up, or even that it was the wrong approach all along? A: At the time I joined [the Defense Department], which was actually two years ago this week, the first thing that Deputy Shanahan turned over to me was JEDI. The first thing he asked me to do was to go back and take a hard look at was, was this the right thing we were doing for the Department of Defense, were we going about it the right way. Was it the right thing? Yes. Were we going about the right way? Well, I'd say, mixed results. [Now] there's this whole conversation: “Should the DoD give up? Should the DoD start over? Should the DoD go and do something else?” I've spent a lot of time contemplating a bunch of different scenarios, and no matter what scenario I look at, you still have to solve the problem for the warfighter. We need to take data all the way out to the tactical edge, across multiple classification levels. And even if I wanted to stop JEDI today, there is no solution that is available already inside the Department of Defense to do that. I'd have to turn right around, go back out to the market, start an RFP once again to solve for that particular problem. This is why we stay the course. We're not staying the course because we're just being defiant or stubborn. We're staying the course because it's the shortest way to get from point A to point B, because if we don't stay this course, we will still have to go back and solve this particular warfighting need. And that is why I believe staying with JEDI and moving forward is the right solution. It's very easy for critics to say, “hey, there's a bunch of clouds already inside of the Department of Defense, why don't you just go use one of those?” Or “why don't you just split this up and give this to a bunch of different suppliers?” Yes, of course, JEDI can do commodity cloud capabilities, and so do a lot of our other clouds across the Department of Defense. The whole world of commodity cloud has gotten better and better. But it doesn't solve for our classification levels. It doesn't solve for the tactical edge today. If you look at the heart of that RFP [the 2018 Request For Proposals] and you really sort through all the requirements, what makes JEDI still unique today, that cannot be satisfied by other cloud environments, is the fact that it was solving for both OCONUS [Outside the Continental United States] and CONUS; it's moving data across multiple classification levels; and it was looking to create a commercial solution that would give us far better terms, conditions, and pricing than we'd ever seen inside the Department of Defense. When we looked across the landscape of all the cloud environments we had, there was not a single cloud environment that we had that could do all those things, nor was there one being contemplated inside the Department of Defense. We've got the Army that is now looking to consolidate their clouds, we have the Air Force has their cloudOne platform, Navy has stood up a special purpose cloud with their SAP HANA to consolidate their various SAP environments. All of those things fit exactly what we were trying to achieve in the cloud strategy document at the end of 2018. However, if you look at all those cloud environments and other ones that are stood up across Department of Defense, none of those, still, can do CONUS and OCONUS, none of them is solving for the tactical edge, and none of them is solving for multiple classification levels. [Before the stop-work order], we had dozens of projects across combatant commands and the services wanting to be the first to standup in the new JEDI cloud, because of two fundamental things: It offered capabilities that their clouds didn't offer and it offered it at a way better price. At the end of the day, the most competitive way of looking at market forces is, where are the services going to? And they were clearly going towards JEDI because of what it offered in terms of technology and what it offered in terms of price. One of the criteria that we really wanted out of JEDI was to get to the best commercial terms and conditions. And I can tell you after we were done with that award, we clearly in that award had better terms, better pricing than we had in any cloud across the Department. Q: But you took a long time assessing which competitors could meet your technical requirements, finally choosing Microsoft. Given the delays, and given how fast IT changes, is that assessment now obsolete? A: We did not take this final decision on the selection of our vendor until towards the back half of last year. Yes, we started this in 2018, but the offerings that we were looking at were being updated and refreshed throughout the entire RFP process until the point that they submitted their final submissions. Our [implementation] schedule is actually going to be in phases. First, we're going to roll out unclassified, then we're going to roll out the secret, and then we're going to roll out the top secret. And those solutions were going to be designed and built as we went through this process. One of the reasons we did that was because we did recognize that technology would change. We set it up in a way that we absolutely can stay fresh with technology as it changes, because we have these option periods [at two years, five years, and eight years] to go back and look at whoever our provider is and to decide whether or not they're staying current. If we saw that a vendor was starting to lose its competitiveness either on pricing, on speed of delivery, or on technology, you make it clear that if they were to continue down the path they're going, there's not going to be a renewal. The best evidence you get is just how are they delivering every day? Is it working, is it up and running? Do they really give you a tactical edge? Do they really give you multiple classifications? Are the warfighters benefiting from it? Q: But why is having a single contractor you can opt out of at set times better than having multiple vendors competing all the time for work orders under an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quanity contract? A: It's a fair question. And if what we were providing the Department of Defense was pure commodity cloud, a platform for storing and compute and building applications in a standard way that we see industry doing it today, IDIQ would be a perfect way to go. But that's not what we're doing here. That's what gets lost in this whole conversation. This is not your typical, basic, commodity cloud offering where you can put it out to three or four vendors and let the service pick every day who they want. Let's go back to what the requirements are. We are trying to build a cloud that can handle CONUS, OCONUS, unclassified, secret, top secret, traverse the data between those environments, and create hardware solutions at forward bases and to the tactical edge. Imagine for a second that I now wanted to have three or four vendors to do that. Think of the complexity it would take to build cross domain solutions for unclassified, top secret and secret, OCONUS, CONUS, forward bases, tactical edge devices, all the way out to the guys on the side of the mountain. Especially when you think about trying to move forward with this Joint All-Domain Command & Control, where the fight of the future is going to be multiple services and combatant commands having to work together and share data. That becomes almost untenable if you set it up as an IDIQ with multiple vendors. I mean, how would you ever build that to work all the way to the tactical edge? To move data from unclassified to secret to top secret, it's extremely complicated. It's not like you go buy this off the shelf. This is a very bespoke, tailored solution that has to be built. There is an actual hardware element of this, of creating the hardened devices that need to be put into the hands of a warfighter out there on a mission and that's what we don't have today. You have to find a vendor that can help you build those hardened devices out on the tactical edge. If we're doing IDIQs and every time we have a new warfighter need, we now are going to go out for three or four vendors, we're going to put that out, they're going to come back and bid, they're going to give a solution and then we have to go back and now re-integrate that solution. That gets be very hard and very complicated and very time consuming. You have to FEDRAMP all of them, you have to test all of them, you got to run them through certification. We have to put NSA red teams onto them, we have to put US Cyber Command to oversee each of those environments. Is that in the taxpayer's best interest? Does that sound like to you the lowest cost, most efficient solution for the DoD and the warfighter? There's going to be a lot of business across the Department of Defense where IDIQs are going to be perfect and we'll have lots of cloud providers that will flourish. But JEDI is a unique environment where having a partner to help us build this out is the smartest way to go. Throughout this entire process one thing has stayed constant: You have to find a way of putting a warfighter cloud capability into the hands of our men and women out on the tactical edge every day. And I've always looked at my responsibilities as CIO is to not to satisfy the cloud industry, but to satisfy what the warfighter needs. We have a unique war-fighting need that you just can't go get off of the shelf today. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/exclusive-dods-cio-makes-case-for-sticking-with-jedi