Air Force budget backs Raytheon hypersonic, no Lockheed missile funds

Sur le même sujet

• 

  22 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Space Force invokes Defense Production Act to prop up small launch market

  Nathan Strout The Space and Missile Systems Center will award ride-share contracts to six small launch providers under the Defense Production Act, providing support to a market the Pentagon has repeatedly said is vulnerable to coronavirus-related financial restraints. The six companies approved by the Industrial Base Council are Aevum, Astra, X-BOW, Rocket Lab USA, Space Vector and VOX Space. Each company will be awarded sole-source contracts for two ride-share missions to be conducted over the next 24 months. The value of the contracts was not included in the announcement originally posted on SAM.gov on June 16. Funding for the 12 ride-share missions will come from the Defense Production Act Title III funding effort, which is backed by the recently passed coronavirus relief act. The Pentagon has singled out the small launch market as being particularly hard hit by the COVID-19 pandemic over the last few months. On April 20, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord warned that the small launch market was one of three sectors she was most worried about. In a later statement to C4ISRNET, the Space and Missile Systems Center elaborated on her remarks. “There is concern that the current financial and market constraints resulting from the COVID-19 have reduced funding sources necessary to continue development and operations for the nascent small launch industry,” said Col. Rob Bongiovi, director of SMC's launch enterprise directorate. “Much of the industry have limited flight capability or are in the critical transition from development to flight and this funding restriction may prevent or delay these systems. The Space and Missile Systems Center is evaluating the impacts to the small launch industrial base to consider actions to enable a robust U.S. launch industrial base.” In response, the Space Force Acquisition Council held an emergency meeting with representatives from the U.S. Space Force, the National Reconnaissance Office, the Space Development Agency and others. A survey was sent out to members of the Space Enterprise Consortium to see how the Defense Department could help. SMC Commander Lt. Gen. John “JT” Thompson hinted earlier in the week that Defense Production Act awards would be forthcoming for the small launch market. “In the small launch environment, Secretary Lord and [U.S. Space Force Service Acquisition Executive Will] Roper have both commented about how important small launch is to our enterprise, and I can't give you the details right now but I would anticipate here very shortly some very critical Defense Production Act awards to our small launch providers to keep that industry going,” Thompson said. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/06/19/space-force-invokes-defense-production-act-to-prop-up-small-launch-market/

• 

  21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

  Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Since Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein took over as the service's top general in 2016, the Air Force has made figuring out how to connect its weapons with those of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps its biggest priority. The Air Force is set to have spent $300 million on the Advanced Battle Management System through fiscal year 2021. However, the service is still struggling to define what ABMS needs to do and how much it will cost, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released April 16. "The Air Force has not established a plan or business case for ABMS that identifies its requirements, a plan to attain mature technologies when needed, a cost estimate, and an affordability analysis. ... To date, the Air Force has not identified a development schedule for ABMS, and it has not formally documented requirements,” it read. That could have significant consequences for the program down the road, GAO continued: “GAO's previous work has shown that weapon systems without a sound business case are at greater risk for schedule delays, cost growth, and integration issues.” The GAO made four recommendations: create a cost estimate and a plan laying out how to afford the program, formalize the decision-making authorities of those involved in ABMS, and develop a list of technologies that are expected to fit into the initial system. In a response to the report, Kevin Fahey, the assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, concurred with all four recommendations — a sign that, going forward, the Air Force may be required to solidify more of its ABMS plans. The Air Force has maintained that the program's unconventional structure and methodology is a feature, not a bug. It wants to use a series of experiments to help discover and mature new technologies that can be weaved in alongside legacy platforms. For instance, the first ABMS experiment connected SpaceX's Starlink constellation with an AC-130 gunship, and the next demo will employ a Kratos Valkyrie drone carrying communications gear that enables the F-22 and F-35 to securely share data while allowing them to maintain stealth. Air Force officials have said technologies that are proven to be successful and mature during the experiments could become programs of record inside the ABMS family of systems. However, the Air Force does not seem to have a firm plan for what technologies it needs and when to bring them online, the GAO said. The service has identified 28 development areas that includes a new cloud network, a new common radio, and apps that provide different ways of presenting and fusing data. However, none of those areas are linked to specific technical requirements, and the Air Force hasn't explained what organizations are responsible for the development of those products. In one damning section, GAO compared ABMS with several cancelled programs with similar aims, such as the Army's Future Combat Systems program that sought to field a family of manned and unmanned technologies and the Joint Tactical Radio System, which was intended to create a government-owned software defined radio. These programs publicly flamed out after millions of dollars were spent in development, in part because certain technologies were not mature enough and caused the schedule to unravel. The scope of ABMS will be far larger than those previous programs, the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation told the GAO. But because the Air Force has not provided a detailed acquisition strategy, CAPE does not have confidence that the Air Force will be able succeed where those programs have failed. “Given the criticality of the battle management command and control mission and the planned retirement of legacy programs, the lack of an ABMS business case introduces uncertainty regarding whether the needed capabilities will be developed within required time frames,” the GAO said. Figuring out who has responsibility and decision-making authority for ABMS is also a messy proposition, the GAO said. The ABMS effort is led by a chief architect, Preston Dunlap, who is responsible for managing tradeoffs among the portfolio of technologies and guide experimentation efforts. However, existing programs that will be part of the ABMS family will retain their separate program office with their own independent management, and the Air Force has yet to clarify whether Dunlap will be able to redirect those program's funding to fall in line with ABMS objectives. For example, the Air Force's program office for space is currently working on a data integration project that could correspond with ABMS efforts to field a cloud network. But “although some ABMS funds have been obligated for this project, there is no documentation to support that the Chief Architect will be able to direct the PEO to change the project objectives or timeline to align with ABMS requirements once they are defined,” the GAO said. The role of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability or AFWIC, which was established in 2017 to help define how the service will fight wars in the future, is also unclear. An AFWIC senior official told the GAO that the organization began leading the service's multidomain command and control initiatives in 2019, but it is uncertain whether AFWIC also has the power to change the direction of the ABMS program. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2020/04/20/is-the-air-forces-advanced-battle-management-system-program-gearing-up-to-be-the-next-major-acquisition-failure/

• 

  4 février 2020 | International, Naval

  Navy awards $300M for C5ISR and radio systems

  By: Mark Pomerleau BAE Systems was awarded a pair of contracts worth $300 million that will support the Navy in digital endeavors. The first is a $212 million contract from the Navy's Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division to integrate and sustain critical communications systems. As part of the contract, BAE will design, acquire, integrate and test radio systems for new guided missile destroyers specifically, as well as other unspecified Navy and Coast Guard ships. The second contract is a $104.7 award from the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division for engineering and technical services for command, control, communications, computers, combat systems, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C5ISR) systems both afloat and ashore. “Maintaining reliable lines of communication and situational awareness for those at the forefront of national security is a mission-critical priority for BAE Systems and our customers,” said Mark Keeler, vice president and general manager of BAE Systems' Integrated Defense Solutions business. “We're proud to continue supporting the integration of combat systems and solutions for the U.S. Navy as they defend against advanced air, surface, and subsurface threats.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2020/02/03/navy-awards-300m-for-c5isr-and-radio-systems