News

by Chris Thatcher As Members of Parliament return to the House of Commons this week, aerospace eyes will be on the cabinet ministers and MPs most likely to support a new vision for the industry. With the return of Marc Garneau to Transport Canada, Navdeep Bains to Innovation, Science and Industry, Harjit Sajjan to National Defence and Mary Ng to Small Business and Export Promotion, and the introduction of Anita Anand to Public Services and Procurement and Carla Qualtrough to Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion, the government's front benches include ministers well acquainted with key issues that need to be addressed if Canada is to retain its position as a leading global aerospace nation. Last fall, the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada (AIAC) asked Jean Charest, a former premier of Quebec and deputy prime minister of Canada, to lead a cross-country discussion on the sector's future and a possible course forward. His ensuing report, “Vision 2025,” delivered at the Paris Air Show in June, offered recommendations centred on six core themes: expanding the skilled workforce; growing small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); promoting innovation; investing in Transport Canada's aircraft certification and regulation capacity; sustaining Canadian leadership in space; and better leveraging defence procurement to drive industry growth. The recommendations were drawn from five months of meetings with industry executives, provincial premiers and their economic development ministers, federal ministers, opposition parties, academia and the general public. “Our goal was to re-start the discussion between the industry and its partners in government, education, research and the business community,” Patrick Mann, president of Patlon Aircraft & Industries and the former chair of AIAC, reminded the sector during the recent Canadian Aerospace Summit in Ottawa. “It has been a truly pan-Canadian event that has reached all through the industry . . . [and] into every level of government.” If Charest's report provides a guide for how to address some of the challenges generated by a multitude of countries and technology companies now seeking to gain a larger footprint in aerospace, the task of implementing it rests in part with Keith Donaldson. Donaldson assumed the chair of AIAC during the summit and acknowledged the report will drive much of the association's activities over the next 12 months. “I'm all in on Vision 2025,” he told Skies. “This is the time to re-engage as an industry, to recognize that [aerospace] is a jewel we have in Canada. It's R-and-D intensive, it's pan-Canadian, it has the highest input for STEM (science, technology, math and engineering)-type jobs, men and women – let's grow this. We need the support and partnership of the federal government. That is how we combat [other entrants].” A chartered accountant by training who previously worked with KPMG, Donaldson is vice-president of APEX Industries, a machining, components, subassembly and structures manufacturer in Moncton, N.B. Over his 15 years with the company, he served as president of the New Brunswick Aerospace and Defense Association and co-founded the Atlantic Canada Aerospace and Defence Association. He's also been a fixture on AIAC's technical committees, from audit and finance, to small business, defence procurement and supply chain access. That experience could be crucial, as much of the heavy lifting to make the report's recommendations reality will come from the technical committees. Under Mann's leadership, AIAC spent part of the past year restructuring the committees to align with the direction of Vision 2025. “We spent a lot of time . . . making sure their mandates were going to match the recommendations,” said Donaldson. “We wanted to make sure the chairs were well aligned. [They] are some of the heavy hitters in the industry, from Bombardier, UTC, Cascade, Collins Aerospace . . . [They have] industry interest, company interest and personal interest for the success of these recommendations.” Winning the skills battle Because of ministerial familiarity with the report's recommendations, AIAC will be hoping it can move quickly to implement some of them. The appointment of Qualtrough, who has spoken at previous AIAC conferences, to a portfolio that will focus on the sector's top priority of skills development is seen as “an early win,” Donaldson noted. “When AIAC did the industry engagement, it was very evident that to maintain and grow, we have to win the skills battle,” he said. “A lot of the other recommendations are going to move forward, but we have to solve the skills one. Failure is not an option here.” Other sectors are going to be competing for the same STEM talent, but the Vision 2025 blueprint might give aerospace a leg up with government, he suggested. That means offering ideas not only to retain and retrain the current workforce where necessary, but also to recruit and support more women in the sector, attract First Nations, and collaborate with immigration initiatives. “It is not going to be a one size fits all. We are going to have to work on each one of those areas,” said Donaldson. For APEX, a medium-sized business of about 250 people, 70 of whom work specifically in aerospace, finding and retaining talent is the issue that keeps most senior managers awake at night, he added. The association will also be looking for quick progress on some of the recommendations aimed at strengthening the capacity of Transport Canada. “They are already a world class organization. We are not starting from zero on that one,” noted Donaldson. However, much of the early effort will go to growing SMEs, which account for over 95 per cent of the aerospace sector. It's terrain Donaldson knows well and believes can be improved through initiatives to build on government programs that are already in place. “We are going to be taking what's already working and say, we want to expand some of these programs. That is going to give us some early wins,” he said. One possible tool could be the expansion of Quebec's MACH program, which has provided mentorship from OEMs and Tier 1s to SMEs to help improve business processes and make the transition to digital systems. “From an SME perspective, that program is one of the ways to go because it involves a larger company, the SME, the province, and support nationally,” observed Donaldson. Support and mentoring from larger businesses for digitization and best cyber practices are a critical need for smaller companies, he added, noting that many capture “thousands of pieces of data every day” and don't make as much use of the information as they should. “The new protocol for Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification in the U.S. is going to be applied to every single company in aerospace and defence, no matter where you are,” he said. “[These are areas] where a MACH-type program could hugely benefit SMEs across the country.” He cautioned, though, that while the emphasis must be on growing SMEs, those small companies often rely on strong OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) and Tier 1 suppliers for their export opportunities. In APEX's case, that's about 50 per cent of the business. “We need to keep the OEMs and large Tier 1s healthy in Canada,” he said. “The MACH [programs] of the world are only going to work well if Pratt & Whitney, Bombardier, Bell, IMP, Magellan, if they grow and invest in Canada. That goes back to a part of the overall Vision 2025.” During separate addresses to the aerospace summit, both Donaldson and Mann appealed to fellow executives to get involved in the process. Committees are the “place where our company can impact and shape the issues that are important to our business,” observed Mann. “There is a lot to making Vision 2025 a reality . . . and we need everyone's help to do that, to make sure aerospace is a key part of our new government's new strategy.” AIAC will continue to lobby the federal and provincial governments on the Vision 2025 recommendations, especially the 48 MPs whose ridings including substantial aerospace activity, and will serve as secretariat to a newly re-created all-party aerospace caucus in Ottawa. Speed is of the essence said Donaldson, noting the pace with which other jurisdictions are growing their aerospace capabilities. “We do not have the luxury [of time],” he said. “It's not like we have Vision 2025 and then there's a whole other plan. Vision 2025 is going to drive the industry. Period.” https://www.skiesmag.com/news/incoming-aiac-chair-discusses-aerospace-vision

By Marc Montgomery Most alliances historically don't last more than a couple of decades, but the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance is 70 this year, and has grown over that time to its now 29 members. Originally formed as a protection against the Soviets, new and much different types of threats lurk, and there are divisions in the organisation. Colin Robertson, a former Canadian diplomat and a Vice President of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. discusses the issues. U.S. President Donald Trump has been forcefully scolding many members of the Alliance for not living up to defence spending. In 2018, the Alliance widened the rules as to what counts as defence spending. Canada is among several members, including France and Germany, not living up to the commitment to spend at least two per cent of GDP on defence. This now includes for example, pensions paid to former soldiers. The Liberal government has been meticulously searching for any expense that might be counted as defence spending including RCMP expenses for members involved in peacekeeping, costs for Canada's spy agency-the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) and even death benefits for veteran's survivors. Canada now spends about 1.27 per cent of its Gross Domestic Product on defence. Robertson notes that the Alliance is burdened with disagreements, but that this is not unusual in NATO's history. It now faces new and much different threats from the more simpler Cold War period, such as new state actor threats, social but somewhat fluid and unorganised threats like piracy and mass migration, and non-state actors like Al Queda and DAESH, and a move by Russia and China to militarise space. While it has its hurdles to overcome, Robertson feels the Alliance will remain strong coming out of this week's meetings. https://www.rcinet.ca/en/2019/12/03/nato-at-70-leaders-meet-in-london-today/

By Matthew Cox Defense contractor Raytheon has just unveiled a new virtual training simulator designed to immerse full platoons of soldiers at a time into realistic battlefield settings, where they can shoot enemy targets with individual weapons and even call in close-air support. Raytheon began showing off its new Synthetic Training Environment Soldier Virtual Trainer at the Interservice/ Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) in Orlando, Florida this week. The prototype system is Raytheon's attempt to satisfy the U.S. Army's need to create a synthetic training environment that dramatically increases the level of realism in training. "They need a way to get soldiers into the same virtual environments that they have had for tanks and helicopters for decades," Harry Buhl, lead investigator for synthetic training at Raytheon, told Military.com. "When you do that in an immersive, synthetic environment, you can go beyond the [live-fire] range -- you can put people soldiers into urban scenarios or into combat-type scenarios ... so you can stress them at a higher level and gain higher levels of proficiency." The Army recently told industry officials that it will begin seeking prototype solutions early next year designed to develop similar types of simulator training technologies. "We intend to compete for that opportunity," Buhl said. Currently, Raytheon is demonstrating its new soldier virtual trainer to simulate an observation post for two soldiers. But it can be configured for much larger units, Buhl said. "We can support up to a platoon ... that is something that the Army hasn't asked for. But the technology path that we have chosen allows us to actually do this for a platoon-sized unit over a large area. So we have the capability to do squad training or situational training exercises which we believe will be the next step as the Army goes down this path," Buhl said. The new trainer uses very high-quality graphics, similar to high-end games and relies on virtual-reality headsets and instrumented weapons, he said. "You can pick up a weapon, and the weapon is in that virtual environment," Buhl said. "When you put your cheek to the stock of that weapon, you have that same sight [picture] as you would in real life, but you are in a virtual environment." The trainer relies on commercially available tracking sensors, roughly two-inch cubes, that are spread out across any area, Buhl said. "The software package that we put behind them will link them together and make them smart enough to understand where you are in the environment so that you can be realistically replicated in the synthetic environment," Buhl said. "As you ... take a knee, go to the prone, you are doing the same things in that synthetic environment. "If you were training on a basketball court, you could put these things up in the rafters of the basketball court and just leave them there." Eventually, the sensor technology will be built into the headsets, so there will be no need for tracking sensors, Buhl added. One of the features the Army is looking for is the ability for soldiers to train for calling in artillery or close-air support, Buhl said, describing how Raytheon's simulator shows realistic training distances. "You are ... on a hilltop looking down the valley, you've got some threat vehicles few miles away," he said. "You have [Air Force] A-10s circling overhead; they come down and you control them and call in their attack, so that you can apply close-air support directly on those targets." The simulator also allows soldiers to engage enemy targets with individual weapons at realistic ranges, another feature on the Army's wish list, Buhl said. If soldiers are using a rifle with an effective range out to 500 meters "you can engage targets out to 500 meters," he said. The trainer will also allow units to train for scenarios involving checkpoints that could call for the need to escalate from using non-lethal devices to lethal force, Buhl said. The Army is now developing the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS), a Microsoft-based headset that uses augmented reality to equip soldiers with a heads-up display allowing them to sight their weapon and view key tactical data. Scheduled to be ready for fielding in fiscal 2021, IVAS will also allow soldiers to train in synthetic training scenarios such as mission rehearsals before going on a live operation. Buhl said Raytheon used virtual-reality headsets because it "provides an immediate capability" the Army could take advantage of, but the system will be adaptable to work with augmented-reality headsets used with IVAS. "All of this is ... able to be packed up in a Pelican case and taken anywhere in the world," Buhl said. "It's also cloud-enabled, so if you did want to link into a networked training exercise with soldiers in another location, with tanks or helicopters that are in synthetic simulators, you could do all of that." https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/12/03/raytheon-unveils-platoon-sized-infantry-combat-simulator.html

ARMY Oakland Consulting Group Inc., Lanham, Maryland, was awarded a $16,617,465 modification (BA02 31) to contract W91QUZ-11-D-0018 to develop and deliver critical auditability and compliance requirements for the Logistics Modernization Program. Work will be performed at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 31, 2020. Fiscal 2020 other procurement, Army funds in the amount of $7,898,333 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity. The Dutra Group, San Rafael, California, was awarded a $10,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for maintenance dredging in Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 2, 2021. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile, Alabama, is the contracting activity (W91278-20-D-0001). NAVY Huntington Ingalls Inc., Newport News, Virginia, is awarded an $11,544,415 cost-plus-fixed-fee level of effort delivery order to previously awarded contract N00024-19-D-4306 to accomplish 12 months of execution planning for the repair and alteration requirements for USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78 – aircraft carrier/nuclear propulsion) planned incremental availability. The contracted requirements include the advance planning, design, documentation, engineering, procurement, ship checks, fabrication and preliminary shipyard or support facility work. Work will be performed in Newport News, Virginia, and is expected to be completed by September 2020. Fiscal 2020 operation and maintenance (Navy) funding for $1,000,000 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion and Repair, U.S. Navy, Newport News, Virginia, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Kampi Components, Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania (SPE7MX-20-D-0011, $10,911,917); and Optex Systems, Richardson, Texas (SPE7MX-20-D-0012, $11,024,488), have each been awarded a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract under solicitation SPE7MX-19-R-0102 for armored V periscopes. This was a competitive acquisition with two responses received. They are three-year base contracts with two one-year option periods. Locations of performance are Pennsylvania and Texas, with a Dec. 3, 2022, performance completion date. Using military services are Army and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Columbus, Ohio. Labatt Food Service, San Antonio, Texas, has been awarded a maximum $9,028,137 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-quantity contract for full line, food distribution for customers in Texas and New Mexico. This contract was a sole-source acquisition in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a 172-day contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are Texas and New Mexico, with a May 16, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 defense working capital funds. The contracting agency is Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE300-20-D-3253). (Awarded Nov. 27, 2019) Heart and Core LLC, Minnetonka, Minnesota, has been awarded a maximum $7,920,000 modification (P00014) exercising the third one-year option period of a one-year base contract (SPE1C1-17-D-1018) with four one-year option periods for moisture wicking t-shirts. This is an indefinite-delivery contract. Locations of performance are California and Minnesota, with a Dec. 15, 2020, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2021 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY Chenega Infinity LLC,* Chantilly, Virginia, has been awarded an $8,620,544 modification (P00005) to previously awarded contract HR0011-18-C-0151 for physical security support services. The modification brings the total cumulative face value of the contract to $16,869,621 from $8,249,076. Work will be performed in Arlington, Virginia, with an expected completion date of December 2020. Fiscal 2019 research and development funds in the amount of $6,735,856 are being obligated at time of award. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity. *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2030883/source/GovDelivery/

By: Jeffrey A. Stacey After the successful 2011 Libya operation, it appeared the U.S. and European allies were on the cusp of a new era of working together on international crises, only to stall out thanks to economic austerity and populist elections. Now that the refugee crisis in Europe is subsiding and allied troops and equipment have deployed to Poland and the Baltics, the window of opportunity has once again opened for deepening relations between the European Union and NATO. By setting up an EU-NATO informal track, regularizing operational transitions and embarking on expanded coordination in out-of-area operations — all of which are more crucial, given a potential Brexit and the 2020 U.S. election — these two crucial, overlapping alliances can step into a new era. There are two logical diplomatic tracks to be pursued: a formal track centered on implementation of EU and NATO ministerials/summits, as well as an informal track centered on working through difficult issues and preparing them for decision-makers. Senior officials from both organizations have commented recently that the informal track would be particularly useful for the kind of deep-dive, “peer around the corner” strategizing that busy officials are rarely afforded an opportunity to engage in. The EU is a global leader in what it calls “crisis management,” and what NATO refers to as “stabilization and reconstruction.” Joint planning ahead of such operations, aligning civil/military planning in advance, will allow for improved outcomes in theater. In general, NATO would gain a new capability to act in the immediate aftermath of its military operations when a crisis occurs, and the EU would gain the opportunity to spearhead joint Western crisis management as a matter of course. Taking a cue from the so-called changing of berets in the 2004 NATO mission in Bosnia — when European soldiers involved in the terminating NATO mission simply changed their uniforms out for EU uniforms and remained in place to take part in the EU follow-on mission — there is a strong likelihood that a similar arrangement can be made for deployed civilians. The EU and NATO have ample reasons to agree to regularize operational leadership transitions in moving from the military phase of a conflict to the post-conflict stabilization phase. Here's how it could work: The EU would be designated to spearhead the stabilization phase, having jointly planned this phase of the operation with NATO civilian planners at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe. NATO would commit to always selecting a European as the head of the NATO temporary civilian operation, and would call up a modest number of civilian experts from the nations, who would deploy to theater and engage in a delimited number of core stabilization tasks with the plan for a larger EU-led civilian deployment to absorb the NATO operation. NATO civilian operators would focus on a discrete set of core stabilization tasks awaiting the follow-on EU mission to become more comprehensive. Once a decision to deploy a civilian mission occurs in Brussels, the NATO stabilization mission would devolve to the EU. Most of the civilian experts will already be from EU countries, with the mission head also European. The rest of the NATO civilians can be seconded to the civilian operation mission via framework agreements such as the extant one between the U.S. and the EU that already has seconded Americans to EU missions in Africa. This operational compromise would prevent either alliance from playing second fiddle, ushering in a new era of co-planning and cooperating for both. Why can't both sides “just do it,” i.e., simply enact a leadership transition in theater whenever the need arises? Pragmatism can work in the moment, but it doesn't set precedents, as proven by the fact this is not already happening; past “impromptu” experiences of working together on the ground have not led to any pattern or even expectation of repeat or improved cooperating since. This proposal is firmly in the EU's interests, as it will put it fully in the driver's seat of crisis management and bring the EU the recognition it deserves for its existing capabilities and substantial operational experience. This proposal is also firmly in NATO's interests, for the alliance that almost split over its ongoing Afghanistan operation has no interest in further prolonged field deployments. There is also an additional strategic opportunity for both, as closer EU-NATO cooperation would be an important means for keeping the U.K. connected with its EU partners in the security and defense field following Brexit. But with crises around the world proliferating, in more pressing terms these two critical overlapping alliances among Western allies need to jointly become more operationally ready. Despite the political challenges in numerous Western countries, an agreement to overcome the EU-NATO operational impasse is on the cards. Prior to the negative impact of U.S. President Donald Trump's arrival, NATO-EU relations had been at their pinnacle. With an EU-NATO informal track and a means for overcoming the operational hurdle in hand, substantial progress can still be made prior to the next U.S. administration. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/12/03/how-to-take-eu-nato-relations-from-words-to-action/

By: Sen. Jim Inhofe Since World War II, the American people have believed our military has had the best of everything, but the technological superiority that kept us 20 years ahead of our competitors has rapidly diminished. In some cases, we're already behind. By 2030, unless we pursue “urgent change at significant scale,” as former Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis put it, it's likely the U.S. will face an enemy with superior weapons, superior equipment and superior capabilities. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in our strategic competition with China. China used to just steal our technology. Now, through heavy investment, they are improving it. The result? China is outpacing the U.S. in key areas like hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence and biotechnologies — not to mention conventional capabilities. China isn't the only one. Technological development is accelerating across the globe, expanding to more actors and changing the very nature of war. We can't afford to let our advantage erode further. It is up to the Department of Defense and Congress to make sure that the defense-industrial base becomes, as the National Defense Strategy demands, an “unmatched 21st century National Security Innovation Base.” If we want to “sustain security and solvency,” we need to consider wholesale change to industry culture and its interface with the Department of Defense, shed outdated management processes, and reimagine a resilient supply chain that mitigates 21st century risks. This begins with software, which is foundational to military capability. The DoD and its traditional hardware-dominant industry partners have been behind on software in almost every way — talent, tools, development and delivery processes. Software innovation has failed in countless DoD programs, including the Ford-class carrier, the F-35′s Autonomic Logistics Information System and the GPS next-generation operational control system. Instead of taking the Pentagon for granted as an endless source of cash flow, partners must refocus their attention on delivering secure capability that actually works. Next, the Department of Defense needs to continue to expand capacity — prioritizing speed of delivery and adapting its systems to maximize value and output. For too long we have been slow to expand our stockpiles of fifth-generation weapons required to fight peer adversaries. The second production line for JASSM-ER cruise missiles is a good start toward building the capacity needed to retain advantages that will make any enemy think twice before attacking. We must do the same for other fifth-generation weapons, including air-to-air missiles. Shipbuilding, including aircraft carriers, surface ships, submarines and our logistics fleet, is another area where our capacity is severely limited. The Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy, which recently surpassed ours in size, is on track to reach 400 ships in 2025 and is nearly self-sufficient for all components. Size of the fleet isn't a sole consideration. We've focused on ensuring the capability of our fleet remains unmatched and bolstering suppliers of critical components, but we must also improve the construction performance of lead ships in new classes to maintain and build upon our capability advantage. The last thing we want is a fair fight. Innovation is best done at the subsystem level through a rigorous engineering-based process centered on building knowledge through full-scale prototypes, which can then inform ship design. We are eager to work with the Navy to identify and fund more of these prototypes, which will serve as the building blocks of the future fleet. We also must accelerate innovation. Recent defense authorization legislation encourages the DoD to streamline acquisition, take a business-minded approach to contracting, and tap into nontraditional suppliers and public-private partnerships. This must continue. Dilapidated testing infrastructure is holding us back from catching up to our enemies. Just look at hypersonic weapons: Beijing is parading around dozens of its newest weapons, and we have yet to build one. The DoD has looked to Silicon Valley, but we are competing with Chinese influence there as well, and the Pentagon has often proven an impossible customer due to its antiquated bureaucracy. Any technological improvements will be meaningless if vulnerable to being infiltrated or stolen. Recent legislation continues support for the DoD as it assesses and mitigates risks to its supply chains posed by adversaries. Both the government and contractors need to cooperate on and use modern verification tools to identify trusted suppliers and manufacturers, as well as fix vulnerabilities. To make these tools useful, the DoD must first establish a working digital model of its suppliers. Lastly, while we must continue to invest in the domestic, organic industrial base, it's important to remember that we can't take on China and Russia alone — which is why the National Defense Strategy emphasizes our network of allies and partners. We must remove unnecessary barriers to industrial cooperation that degrade our collective competitive edge. We do not have to make a false choice between investing domestically and in our allies — we can do both. Under our National Technology and Industrial Base partnership with Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom, we can develop a more diverse, resilient industrial base, secure our supply chains, and become a “five eyes for defense procurement.” It's in our best interest to ensure our allies can leverage our technological advantages and we can leverage theirs. Without a strong national security innovation base, the Pentagon cannot implement the National Defense Strategy. Congress' job is to put the appropriate, tailored policy in place and provide sufficient, predictable resources to help the industrial base meet these challenges. Together, we can harness the power of American innovation to ensure that we are able to win the wars of the future. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/sasc-chairman-we-must-build-the-national-security-innovation-base-our-defense-strategy-requires/

NAVY General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. (GDEB), Groton, Connecticut, is awarded a $22,209,893,409 fixed-price-incentive, multi-year modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-17-C-2100 for construction of nine Virginia-class submarines, eight with Virginia Payload Module (VPM), from fiscal 2019 to fiscal 2023. The contract modification includes spare material and an option for one additional submarine with VPM. If the option is exercised, the cumulative value of this contract will increase to $24,097,439,556. The awarded amounts include previously-announced material awards (including long-lead-time material and economic ordering quantity material) totaling $3,197,633,908. This contract modification is for the construction of the fifth block of Virginia-class submarines by GDEB and major subcontractor Huntington Ingalls Industries' Newport News Shipbuilding division, inclusive of design support and all efforts necessary to test and deliver each submarine. GDEB will continue to subcontract with Huntington Ingalls Industries' Newport News Shipbuilding division. Work will be performed in Newport News, Virginia (25%); Quonset Point, Rhode Island (21%); Groton, Connecticut (20%); Sunnyvale, California (8%); Norfolk, Virginia (1%); Bethlehem, Pennsylvania (1%); and Annapolis, Maryland (1%), with other efforts performed at various places throughout the U.S. below one percent (22%), and other places outside of U.S. below one percent (1%). Work is expected to be completed by August 2029. If the option is exercised, work is expected to be completed by February 2030. Fiscal 2017 and 2019 shipbuilding and conversion, Navy (SCN) funding in the amount of $3,155,793,018 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year - funding: fiscal 2019 SCN (95%); fiscal 2017 SCN (5%). The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. Kellogg Brown and Root Services Inc., Houston, Texas, is awarded a $14,070,093 for modification of the second option under an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for base operations support services at Naval Support Activity (NSA) Kingdom of Bahrain. After award of this option, the total cumulative contract value will be $44,363,284. The work to be performed provides for, but is not limited to, all management, supervision, tools, materials, supplies, labor and transportation services necessary to perform security operations, galley services, unaccompanied housing, facility management, emergency service requests, urgent service, routing service, facilities investment, custodial, pest control service, integrated solid waste, grounds maintenance, utility management, wastewater, operate reverse osmosis water treatment system, chiller and transportation at NSA Kingdom of Bahrain. Work will be performed in NSA Kingdom of Bahrain. This option period is from December 2019 to November 2020. No funds will be obligated at time of award. Fiscal 2020 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds for $4,159,063 for non-recurring work will be obligated on individual task orders issued during the option period. Naval Facilities Engineering Command Europe Africa Central, Naples, Italy, is the contracting activity (N62470-17-D-4007). L-3 Technologies Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, is awarded a $9,999,144 firm-fixed-price modification (P00012) to a previously-awarded firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N00019-18-C-1030) to procure eight Common Data Link Hawklink AN/SRQ-4 systems for the MH-60R aircraft. Work will be performed in Salt Lake City, Utah, and is expected to be completed in December 2022. Fiscal 2020 other procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $9,999,144 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. AIR FORCE Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control, Orlando, Florida, has been awarded a $988,832,126 definitization modification (PZ0010) to previously-awarded contract FA8681-18-C-0021 for Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon critical design review, test and production readiness support. The contract modification will definitize the contract terms, specifications and price. Work will be performed at Orlando, Florida, and is expected to be completed Dec. 31, 2022. The total cumulative face value of the contract is $988,832,126. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds are being obligated in the amount of $23,000,000 at the time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity. GTA Containers Inc., South Bend, Indiana, has been awarded a $9,404,953 delivery order (FA8534-20-F-0003) against previously-awarded contract FA8533-16-D-0001 for collapsible fuel tank production. Work will be performed at South Bend, Indiana, and is expected to be completed by Jan. 31, 2022. The total cumulative face value of the contract is $24,507,563. Fiscal 2019 other procurement funds in the amount of $9,404,953 are being obligated at the time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, is the contracting activity. ARMY Fisher Sand and Gravel Co., Dickinson, North Dakota, was awarded a $399,962,000 firm-fixed-price contract to design-build border infrastructure along the southern perimeter of the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge in Yuma County, Arizona. Five bids were solicited with three bids received. Work will be performed in Yuma, Arizona, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 30, 2020. Fiscal 2018 military construction, defense-wide funds in the amount of $268,072,900 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District, Portland, Oregon, is the contracting activity (W912PL-20-C-0004). InSap Services Inc.,* Marlton, New Jersey, was awarded a $41,636,459 modification (BA02 44) to contract W91QUZ-11-D-0017 to provide personnel with technical experience to sustain the Army's Logistics Modernization Program. Work will be performed at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 31, 2020. Fiscal 2020 other procurement, Army funds in the amount of $7,961,225 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island, Illinois, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY Unisys Corp., Reston, Virginia, was awarded a single award indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity firm-fixed-price contract for Unisys Operating System 2200 capacity services. The place of performance will be at current Defense Information Systems Agency data centers. The contract ceiling is $80,457,160. The solicitation was issued as an other-than-full-and-open-competition action pursuant to the authority of 10 U.S. Code §2304(c)(1) and Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1, with only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. Proposals were solicited via the Federal Business Opportunities website (www.fbo.gov), now known as beta.SAM.gov website (www.beta.sam.gov). Only one proposal was received. The period of performance (PoP) consists of a one-year base period and two one-year options. The PoP for the base year is Dec. 1, 2019, through Nov. 30, 2020, and the option years follow consecutively through Nov. 30, 2022. The Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, is the contracting activity (HC1084-20-D-0002). (Awarded Dec. 1, 2019) DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY AvKare Inc., Pulaski, Tennessee, has been awarded a maximum $11,727,127 firm-fixed-price requirements contract for potassium chloride tablets. This was a competitive acquisition with one response received. This is a one-year base contract with four one-year option periods. Locations of performance are Tennessee and Minnesota with a Dec. 1, 2020, performance completion date. Using customers are Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, Indian Health Services and Federal Bureau of Prisons. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2021 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE2D2-20-D-0081). UPDATE: ADS Inc.,* Virginia Beach, Virginia (SPE8EH-20-D-0001), has been added as an awardee to the multiple award contract for fire and emergency services equipment, issued against solicitation SPE8EH-16-R-0001, and announced March 21, 2019. *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2030017/source/GovDelivery/

Murray Brewster · Reports of human rights violations are pushing trading countries like Canada into a corner In both war and diplomacy, language matters. And if one thing was evident from the flood of words coming out of the Halifax International Security Forum last weekend, it's that Western democracies, despite their vows to uphold human rights, have no common language to define their view of — and relationship with — China. The world is rapidly approaching a crossroads with Beijing, a point where nations will have to decide whether to treat the burgeoning superpower as a trading partner, a rival — or an active threat. Secret Chinese documents were released to media outlets recently which show how the Muslim minority Uighur population is being locked up in mass detention camps and subjected to "systematic brainwashing." Beijing's violent response to pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong revived grim memories of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. So is China a competitor or an adversary? 'Naive' about China's motives The answer to that question seems to depend on which country's leaders are answering it — how heavily Beijing has invested in their nations' markets, how badly their businesses want access to that vast Chinese market. "For many years, folks were naive about Chinese motivations," U.S. National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien told journalists during an on-the-record briefing in Halifax over the weekend. "In the past, the relationship with China was driven solely by trade, driven solely by economics." O'Brien describes China, rather antiseptically, as a "near-peer competitor," not as an adversary. Still, there were points during the briefing when O'Brien's language became decidedly adversarial — even dystopian — as he described the high-tech incarceration and forced re-education of as many as one million Uighurs. In the context of the dispute over allowing Chinese telecom giant Huawei into Western 5G wireless systems, O'Brien asked whether Western Europe would have allowed the Soviet Union into their countries to build railroads at the height of the Cold War. A new Cold War? On the record, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan also was not prepared to describe China as an adversary — but he was decidedly mushy when asked how we should describe it. The confusion on display in Halifax over the question of whether the West has arrived at the threshold of a new Cold War was widespread. U.S. Admiral Phillip Davidson, the commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, would not describe the current moment as "a new Cold War" but warned that the West needs to be prepared to continually "call out" China when it crosses internationally accepted lines. Many say some of those lines have been crossed already — through the arbitrary detention of the Uighurs (which China attempts to justify with the claim that it's fighting Islamic extremism) and through its program of constructing artificial islands in the South China Sea, which has been condemned by an international tribunal at the Hague. So, again ... rival or adversary? 'Feeding ... a monster' Lady Pauline Neville-Jones, a former top British diplomat and adviser to ex-U.K. prime minister David Cameron, said China has signalled it intends to become an "unequalled" high-tech nation. Beijing has said it's prepared to pour real money into achieving that goal — with Western nations supplying the world-class post secondary institutions that are training the next generation of Chinese engineers. "We are feeding something that could be a monster," she told the Halifax forum. "So what do we do about it? As long as we pursue our relations with China, largely separately on the basis of short-term national interest, I think we are giving away the game." It took Western allies several years to come with up a comprehensive Cold War strategy following the Second World War, she pointed out. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-u-s-sajjan-uighur-halifax-international-security-forum-1.5372856

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (Alexandria, VA) established the DOD Biotechnologies for Health and Human Performance Council (BHPC) study group to continually assess research and development in biotechnology. The BHPC group assesses scientific advances for improved health and performance with potential military application; identifies corresponding risks and opportunities and ethical, legal, and social implications; and provides senior leadership with recommendations for mitigating adversarial threats and maximizing opportunities for future U.S. forces. At the direction of the BHPC Executive Committee, the BHPC study group conducted a year-long assessment entitled “Cyborg Soldier 2050: Human/Machine Fusion and the Impact for the Future of the DOD”. The primary objective of this effort was to forecast and evaluate the military implications of machines that are physically integrated with the human body to augment and enhance human performance over the next 30 years. This report summarizes this assessment and findings; identifies four potential military-use cases for new technologies in this area; and assesses their impact upon the DOD organizational structure, warfighter doctrine and tactics, and interoperability with U.S. allies and civil society. https://community.apan.org/wg/tradoc-g2/mad-scientist/m/articles-of-interest/300458