9 janvier 2019 | International, Aérospatial
Angel Krasimirov, Tsvetelia Tsolova
SOFIA (Reuters) - The Bulgarian government has approved a plan to start talks with the United States on buying eight new F-16 fighter jets to replace its ageing Soviet-made MiG-29s and improve compliance with NATO standards, the defense minister said on Wednesday.
A deal for Lockheed Martin's F-16V Block 70 would be worth around 1.8 billion levs ($1.1 billion), Bulgaria's biggest military procurement since the fall of Communist rule some 30 years ago.
The decision still requires parliament's approval.
Other bidders had included Sweden, with Saab's Gripen jets, and Italy, with second-hand Eurofighters.
Senior defense ministry and army officials say the F-16 is a multi-role fighter plane that had been tested in battle and had a long lifespan.
The defense ministry has previously said that the United States does not need additional licenses and agreements to supply the war plans with the necessary weaponry and licenses, unlike the offers from Sweden and Italy.
“The government is proposing to the parliament to allow it to start talks with the United States to acquire new war planes,” Defense Minister Krasimir Karakachanov told reporters.
The center-right coalition government has a thin majority in parliament, which is expected to vote on the move next week.
The plan has spurred heated political debates in the Black Sea country with supporters hailing it as a strategic choice for Bulgaria, whose NATO neighbors are also flying F-16s, while critics accused the government of breaching the tender rules.
On Tuesday, the White House said the United States was ready to work with the government to tailor a deal that will fit Bulgaria's budgetary and operational requirements. Its bid at present exceeds the tender's estimated limit, officials said.
“We believe that the F-16 Block 70 offers Bulgaria the best possible combination of price, capability and interoperability with other NATO air forces,” U.S. President Donald Trump's administration said in a statement.
Bulgarian President Rumen Radev, a former air force commander and frequent critic of Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, is believed to favor the Swedish bid and has criticized the process as flawed and “a triumph of lobbying”.
Critics have questioned whether the United States can deliver the first two F-16 jets within two years as required and pointed to a U.S. proposal for a one-off payment upon contracting rather than offering a long-term payment scheme as preferred in the tender.
Sweden has expressed its disappointment over the decision and said its offer was well below the estimated budget, provided for deferred payment and was ready to deliver on time.
The question of which warplanes to buy has been vexing successive governments in Bulgaria for more than a decade.
Borissov's government re-launched the tender in July, after a parliament commission ruled that a previous process which favored the Gripen jets, should be reviewed.
($1 = 1.7057 leva)
Editing by Kevin Liffey and Susan Fenton
26 mai 2021 | International, Aérospatial
South Korea's Agency for Defense Development (ADD) announced on 25 May that it has developed a laser-power enhancing technology for use in future weapon systems, with the most immediate application being a laser-based air-defence system. The...
2 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
By: Eric Lofgren In 2015, Congress passed middle tier acquisition, or MTA, authorities for rapid prototyping and rapid fielding. Lawmakers expected detailed guidance to follow shortly after. By June 2019, the Government Accountability Office found little clarity on documentation and authority. Congress reacted by threatening to withhold 75 percent of MTA funding in 2020 until the Pentagon released guidance. Dangle the purse strings and compliance follows. The undersecretary for acquisition and sustainment, or USD(A&S), released Department of Defense Instruction 5000.80 on Dec. 30, 2019. The MTA guidance, however, is more likely to pump the brakes on rapid acquisition than propel it forward. Programs designated “middle tier” do not have to follow regulatory processes for requirements and milestone reviews. That can shave years off a program schedule. In return, the prototype must be completed — or system fully fielded — within five years. As of March 2019, there were 35 middle tier programs. The term “middle tier” is perhaps misleading considering nearly half of them exceed the cost thresholds for major weapon systems — roughly $200 million for prototyping or $1 billion for fielding. Many questions remained unanswered until the new policy. How big was a middle tier? What documentation does it require? What is the role of oversight and USD(A&S)? Authority For several years, acquisition authority had been delegated down to the services. While the services only managed 48 percent of major programs in 2014, the figure grew to 90 percent in 2019. DoDI 5000.80 reverses the trend. While the services can approve MTA for non-major programs, only USD(A&S) may approve major programs. Moreover, major programs have far more entrance documentation than non-majors, including approved requirements, an acquisition strategy and a cost estimate. The services may avoid some documentation by disaggregating major systems into multiple MTA programs. For example, two of the Navy's non-major programs are components to Standard Missile-6 Block 1B. The same is true of the Air Force's Airborne Warning and Control System. USD(A&S), however, can still disapprove any MTA program, whether major or non-major. With advisers from all around the Office of the Secretary of Defense, there will be will numerous potential veto points. Each official may extract concessions from MTA programs managed by the services. Even though 31 out of 35 MTA programs are rapid prototyping efforts, the undersecretary for research and engineering, or USD(R&E), has been relegated to a secondary position. All MTA authority rests with USD(A&S). Almost as an affront to USD(R&E), he was given control over a rapid prototyping fund that Congress stopped funding. The outcome reflects a broader weakening of USD(R&E). Congress has reacted negatively to the undersecretary's effort to move fast and reallocate funds to higher value uses. USD(R&E) may lose control of the Missile Defense Agency to USD(A&S). Documentation While MTA exempts programs from traditional requirements and milestone processes, documentation abounds. Each service must create its own requirements process with approval in six months. Joint service requirements are discouraged from using MTA pathways. MTA requirements, however, must still meet the needs determined by four-star generals in the Joint Chiefs of Staff and combatant commands. This may in effect bring the same approvals from the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System process back into MTA. Many of the DoDI 5000.02 processes also apply. Still required are system analyses, sustainment plans, test strategies, cybersecurity, risk assessments, cost estimates and more. Contractors performing on MTA programs must still report cost data. No exemption was made for earned value management systems. Sidestepping many contract regulations — for example, with other transactions authorities — remains a separate process. Most importantly, Congress requires detailed justification in the budget for every MTA program. That means the services must start justifying MTAs at least two years in advance of funding receipt. Many of today's MTA programs spun off existing, budgeted line items. New programs may find a hard time finding funds. The present situation is reminiscent of the time David Packard attempted rapid acquisition between 1969 and 1971. A couple years later, new layers of bureaucracy descended. Similarly, MTA has built within it the seeds of another slow-paced bureaucratic order. Adm. Hyman Rickover's skepticism to the reforms nearly 50 years ago rings true today. As Rickover wrote to Packard in a memo: “My experience has been that when a directive such as the one you propose is issued, most of the effort goes into the creation of additional management systems and reports and the preparation of large numbers of documents within the Service to ‘prove' that the requirements of the directive are being met in order to justify funds for the Service. “So long as the bureaucracy consists of a large number of people who consider that they are properly performing their function of approval and evaluation by requiring detailed information to be submitted through the bureaucracy, program managers will never be found who can in fact effectively manage their jobs.” https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/01/02/too-many-cooks-in-the-dod-new-policy-may-suppress-rapid-acquisition/
9 février 2023 | International, Aérospatial
Air-launched effects are considered a critical piece of the U.S. Army's overhaul of the helicopter fleet.