22 juin 2018 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR
By: Karen Jowers
A retired Army major general and former retail executive will lead a Pentagon task force that is examining the case for a possible merger of the military exchange and commissary systems, Defense officials announced Thursday.
Keith Thurgood, who was also the chief executive officer of the Army and Air Force Exchange Service from 2007 to 2010, will start work Monday.
If the task force business case analysis confirms that consolidation is the right approach, and if Defense Department officials back that finding, Thurgood will serve as the consolidated organization's executive director until the permanent position is advertised and filled, according to a May 29 memo directing the task force's formation.
The retired Reserve major general has more than 28 years of military service and has held executive positions at PepsiCo & Frito-Lay Inc., Sam's Club, Overseas Military Sales Corporation, and MedAssets, Inc. He will take a sabbatical from his current position as clinical professor at the University of Texas at Dallas.
He could serve up to two years on the task force.
The task force will examine “back office” operations of the exchanges and commissaries, such as information technology, human resources and accounting. It will first determine whether the exchange systems ― AAFES, Navy Exchange Service Command, and Marine Corps Exchange ― could be combined with one corporate “backbone.” Then members will determine whether the Defense Commissary Agency could be merged into that system.
Consolidation of the stores wouldn't necessarily mean that commissaries and exchanges would be combined into one store. Officials are also looking at keeping the individual branding of the exchange stores on military bases, as they combine behind-the-scenes operations.
“With General Thurgood's leadership, understanding of the customer experience, and private sector experience in the retail space, the task force will evaluate our potential to generate efficiencies and scrutinize the above-the-store business aspects of the exchange system, with a goal of validating and defining our execution plan for the way forward,” said John H. Gibson, II, DoD's chief management officer, in the DoD announcement.
16 août 2022 | International, Terrestre
Once delivered, the PRTVs will undergo a period of testing prior to a full-rate production decision.
26 juillet 2018 | International, Aérospatial
BY MARCUS WEISGERBER The single-seat jet is being built to shoot down enemy aircraft, pound targets on the air, and even hit ships at sea. The new F-15 combat aircraft that Boeing is pitching to the U.S.Air Force would have a single-seat cockpit and a host of new weapons, including anti-ship missiles, Defense One has learned. If the Air Force bites, the so-called F-15X would be the Pentagon's first new Eagles since a 2002 purchase of the air-to-ground variant known as the F-15E Strike Eagle. But various allies have purchased newer variants of the Cold War air-superiority fighter, as recently as last year. The X version would largely resemble the ones Qatar ordered in 2017, tuned up with the latest technology for the new era of great-power competition envisioned in the Pentagon's National Defense Strategy, according to people with knowledge of the plane's development. Boeing officials declined to comment. The Air Force and Boeing have been talking about how new F-15Xs would be cheaper to operate than the current fleet of F-15s, which date as far back as the early 1980s. The talks have been going on for over a year, according to sources with knowledge of the discussions. The X variant would benefit from upgrades funded by allies who have bought F-15s: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Singapore and South Korea, which have collectively spent about $5 billion to develop new technology for their jets, the sources said. Compared to the Air Force's existing F-15s, the new ones would have better flight controls, displays, and radars, and more powerful engines that allow the planes to carry a larger payload. Like the air-to-air F-15C, and unlike the Strike Eagles, the new F-15X would have just one seat. Large digital display screens would replace the analog dials inside older F-15s. The planes could carry all of the existing equipment, like targeting pods, used across the existing Eagle fleet. The F-15X will also be able to carry anti-ship weapons that allies have paid to test and install. In all, the plane could carry 29,000 pounds of weapons. The F-15's range, speed and payload separates it from other fighter jets in the U.S. military. “There's really nothing like it,” said Richard Aboulafia, vice president for analysis at the Teal Group, a Virginia-based consulting firm. The additional weapons would allow the plans to fly new missions. It is expected to cost about $27,000 per hour to fly the F-15X. That's about $5,000 less than an F-15E. Currently, F-15Cs used by the Air National Guard to defend the continental United States. Other C squadrons based in England and Japan. F-15Es are primarily based in North Carolina, Idaho and England. The Air Force is amid a sweeping review that is examining the mix of planes in its fleet, which senior officials are quick to point out is the smallest and oldest in the service's history. The F-15X is being pitched to complement existing F-22 Raptors and F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, to handle various missions where there is little risk of being shot down by surface-to-air missiles. The view of only flying stealthy, fifth-generation fighters solo into battle without a complement of other other jets “appears to be going away,”Aboulafia said. Still, he said, “unlikely but not inconceivable.” Congress has been supportive of the F-15 program. The just-out-of-conference 2019 National Defense Authorization Act includes about $1 billion for a host of upgrades to existing F-15s, including electronic warfare. People with knowledge of the program say the new equipment being purchased for the oldest F-15Cs could be installed on the new X variant. Looking to the future, the sources said, the F-15X is ideally suited to carry hypersonic weapons. https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2018/07/heres-look-new-f-15x-boeing-pitching-us-air-force/150039/
29 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial
By: Kirk Pysher In a few months, the U.S. Air Force will choose two of the four competing space companies to provide five years of launches in the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) program. One of the core objectives for this program is to increase affordability by leveraging the technologies and business models of the commercial launch industry. Is that a realistic expectation given the current commercial space market and historical precedents? Historically, the commercial launch market has seen significant variability. Launches of commercial communication satellite constellations began in the early 1970s with NASA serving as the launch provider. New launch providers began to emerge from the commercial world after the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 allowed the private sector to provide launch services. We then witnessed a remarkable growth in commercial space launches in the 1990s that peaked just before the turn of the century. Then, until about 2014, the commercial launch market stabilized at 20-25 commercial geostationary orbit satellites per year that were split essentially between three global launch suppliers. Since then, new entrants into the commercial launch market and pricing pressure from terrestrial-based communication systems have significantly impacted the viability of the commercial launch market, reducing profit margins and returns on investment across the board. The expected 20-25 commercial GEO missions is now in the range of 10-15 launches per year and is expected to remain at that level beyond the NSSL five-year period of performance. With new entrants into the commercial launch market, that 40-50 percent reduction in annual launch opportunities will now be competed among seven to eight global launch providers, putting further pressure on the viability of those launchers. Additionally, commercial launch revenue is also expected to decrease over that period by as much as 30 percent as satellite operators look to reduce their launch cost through shared launch, smaller spacecraft and reduced launch pricing. Given the projected commercial launch market and additional competition from new entrants, launch service providers will have difficultly building and maintaining viable commercial launch business plans, let alone having commercial launch-driven capital to invest in new technology. History has proven that no commercial launch service provider can succeed without having an anchor government customer. The commercial launch market simply has not been able to provide the stable, long-term demand needed to maintain affordable pricing, innovation and factory throughput for the Air Force to benefit from. History has also demonstrated that it is the Air Force with NSSL since 2003 that has provided the launch service providers with a stable number of launches. The defense and commercial launch markets have a fundamental difference. The former focuses strictly on satisfying national security mission requirements in space — needs that are driven by risk, strategy and geopolitical events regardless of vulnerabilities in commercial markets. The defense market began in the late 1950s with industry designing, developing and building launch vehicles for the U.S. government to place critical national security satellites into orbit. Early on, we saw a large number of launches in the beginning — peaking at more than 40 in 1966 — before activity levels decreased to level out by 1980. After more than 400 launches of defense-related satellites, the defense launch market finally settled into an average eight launches annually, whereas the commercial launch market is strictly tied to the ability of global satellite operators to close business plans and obtain institutional and/or private funding on new and replacement satellites. The global COVID-19 pandemic is a stark reminder of the vulnerability of all commercial markets. Airlines, aircraft manufacturers and commercial space companies are needing to seek tens of billions of dollars in government assistance; and private commercial space investors are also reassessing their risk postures, as is demonstrated by the recent OneWeb bankruptcy filing. Given the projected decline in commercial launch along with the historical precedents, there would be significant risk for the Air Force to expect to leverage benefit from commercial launch. In fact, I believe history has demonstrated that it is commercial launch that is able to leverage the benefits derived from the steady cadence of defense and civil government launches. The Air Force, in its role as anchor customer, needs to clearly understand commercial market dependencies and business cases of its key providers. With that understanding, the Air Force will mitigate any risk of critical national security missions being dependent on a finicky and fluctuating commercial market. Kirk Pysher is an aerospace executive with more than 20 years in the commercial launch market, serving most recently as the president of International Launch Services until October 2019. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/28/will-commercial-and-military-launch-programs-ever-be-truly-complementary/