How the US Navy is creating the ‘nirvana of one combat system’

Sur le même sujet

• 

  23 juillet 2018 | International, C4ISR

  With cyber forces underequipped, DoD turns to rapid prototyping contracting

  By: Mark Pomerleau U.S. Cyber Command's main warrior cadre has been deemed ready for war and now the organization is shifting its focus to readiness and operations. Sources have told Fifth Domain that DoD's cyber warriors lack certain skills, capabilities and even equipment. One source went so far as to say that the list of what these forces can do is short. As a result, the military wants to quickly get these new cyber warriors the tools they need. To do this, they are turning to contracting vehicles such as other transaction authorities and the so-called IT Box construct as a way to skirt the traditional acquisition system, which is often derided as lethargic, bureaucratic and not optimized for the high tempo of the software-centric world. These approaches allow for the government to partner with non-traditional companies for less mature technologies and prototypes meaning solutions, albeit some that are not always 100 percent mature, get to warfighters faster. This approach allows DoD to be more agile and flexible in procuring and equipping, multiple industry sources told Fifth Domain. However, one potential downside to this approach is a lack of competition for this work. What do cyber warriors need? As the command is growing, maturing and standing on its own, it needs training modules, infrastructure to conduct operations on and tools. Leaders say one of the most critical needs of cyber warriors is a training platform. And industry officials add that often the first time cyber warriors face certain techniques is during a mission. This is because of a lack of a holistic and robust training environment, similar to the Army's combat training centers or the Air Force's Red Flag. To change that the Army, on behalf of Cyber Command, is in charge of an effort called the Persistent Cyber Training Environment. The Army, using an OTA approach, is running a series of innovation challenges as a way to prototype capability. This approach would provide an interim solution to cyber warriors while at the same time reduce risk and help the larger program of record. Another capability cyber warriors will need is an operational platform from which to house tools, launch operations and perform command and control. Currently, the Air Force is working this program on behalf of Cyber Command. The Unified Platform, as it's called, is considered one of CYBERCOM's largest and most critical acquisition programs to date. Industry officials have said it is necessary to conduct cyber operations and is critical to national security. The Air Force's acquisition strategy is not totally clear, with some industry sources noting that they are not taking an OTA approach to this critical capability. The service is currently using the General Services Administration's premier enterprise Alliant Government wide Acquisition Contract vehicle in which multiple contractors will be awarded and will compete against each other for individual task orders on the final program. Federal agencies traditionally use Alliant to implement new and innovative technologies. (Potential) Drawbacks Despite being an attractive option to rapidly equip forces, these vehicles come with some risk. Industry officials acknowledge that OTAs were meant for prototyping, research and development and risk reduction for larger programs of record, not as a replacement for procuring large programs and platforms. While Congress has extended the use of OTAs for actual development of production, William LaPlante, senior vice president and general manager for MITRE National Security Sector, calls this “a dodgy area.” LaPlante, who served as assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition,, told Fifth Domain that the OTAs can limit competition. Since these rapid prototyping vehicles enable DoD to work with non-traditional companies that don't have to bring forth fully developed solutions, they tend to favor smaller tech companies as opposed to larger defense contractors. LaPlante said if one subscribes to the philosophy that the best product comes from a full competition, the competition part of these contracting mechanisms is not very clear. Second, he said, going faster means the upfront homework in the way of budgeting, market research and strategy may be neglected. While this work might take a bit of time, if it's not done, he said, the risk of making mistakes increases. Going forward, LaPlante noted that it will be important how blowback and failure is handled because “there's no question mistakes will be made." There is also the issue of integration. With a series of disparate systems, it is unclear who will be the integrator: government or industry? “It's a perpetual discussion of the last 20-30 years: is the government itself strong enough to assume the role of integrator? Probably not. You need some industry partner,” he said. https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2018/07/20/with-cyber-forces-underequipped-dod-turns-to-rapid-prototyping-contracting/

• 

  8 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Reforging Of USAF Pilot Training Hits New Complications

  Steve Trimble In June 2019, U.S. Air Force Gen. James Holmes strapped into an Israeli Air Force M-346 Lavi advanced jet trainer and flew off to attack a ship in the Mediterranean Sea. “We fought our way through air threats and ground threats; we did a simulated attack on a target; we came off and fought through air threats and then [returned to base],” recalls Holmes, who retired last month as head of Air Combat Command (ACC). Of course, the attack was simulated: The threats and target appeared as constructed elements on the sensor displays inside the cockpit. The purpose of the exercise was not to defend the Israeli coastline but instead to show Holmes a new way of training pilots as the Boeing T-7A enters service within three years. The U.S. Air Force pilot training curriculum is almost as dated as the 60-year-old Northrop T-38Cs the T-7As will replace. New fighter and bomber pilots spend two years mastering basic skills at bases focused solely on training new pilots; then they move on to fighter training units (FTU) at operational bases. When Holmes entered the Air Force in 1982, FTU pilots still flew about 250 hr. each year. With flight-hour costs for F-15Es, F-22s and F-35As now over $25,000 per hour, FTU pilots today on average log about 150 hr. annually, contributing to a four-digit backlog of pilots certified for combat. But Holmes' experience with the Israeli Air Force has inspired a new approach to changing U.S. Air Force training. Unlike the T-38C's limited computing power, the M-346's embedded simulation system allows pilots at FTUs to fly realistic combat scenarios. As the T-7A enters service with similar technology, the Air Force is considering a broad shake-up of its pilot training system. The end result would be streamlining the curriculum by teaching fundamental skills and shifting earlier to combat training with T-7As instead of F-35s, F-22s or F-15Es. “One option might be to take those T-7s and put a mix of them at [training] bases to teach people how to fly them and do advanced bomber training and then put some portion of them out at the fighter wings,” Holmes says. “One option might be to do that training at training bases.” To determine the best approach, Holmes' ACC launched Project Reforge. The original idea outlined in May 2019 called for leasing eight Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI)/Lockheed Martin T-50 jets from Hillwood Aviation for five years. ACC hoped to use the jets to understand how embedded training systems in the T-50 cockpits could allow the Air Force to streamline the pilot training system. The ACC is still pursuing Project Reforge, but the acquisition process has been trickier than expected. Mission Systems Solutions (MSS), which has partnered with Leonardo to offer the M-346, objected to a plan from ACC to sole-source the lease deal to Hillwood's T-50s. Ultimately, the Air Force agreed to open the lease deal to competition and released an “invitation to propose” to industry in June. As the bidding deadline passed on Aug. 17, however, ACC changed course again. The invitation to propose for the lease deal was canceled for unknown reasons. Instead, ACC is continuing to accept proposals under a less formal process called a Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO). The CSO allows ACC to accept proposals for providing advanced jet trainers through means other than a leasing arrangement. Meanwhile, a new company called Quesada Aviation Holdings has emerged to submit a proposal with the KAI/Lockheed T-50, replacing Hillwood. “Quesada is fully prepared to support the [Air Force] and Air Combat Command,” says Seth Downing, the CEO. “We are pleased to see the CSO open and look forward to working alongside the [Air Force] and ACC in structuring a mutually beneficial and commercially viable alternative.” MSS also remains active in the Reforge project as the Air Force shifts to the CSO process. “We began conversations with the Air Force about the Reforge training concept more than a year ago,” says David Nichols, CEO of MSS. “We are continuing discussions with them to better understand their requirements and provide innovative solutions.” The final decision on the acquisition path for Project Reforge will be made by Gen. Mark Kelly, now the head of ACC, and will determine how to move forward with pilot training reform. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/reforging-usaf-pilot-training-hits-new-complications

• 

  2 août 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  British Air Force aims to be world’s first service with certified zero-carbon aircraft

  If the program goes as planned, Britain could have their first zero-carbon platform flying by around 2027.