14 avril 2020 | International, Terrestre
By: Jen Judson
WASHINGTON — The COVID-19 pandemic is not slowing down the Army's plans to field an enduring indirect fires protection capability, according to Lt. Col. Juan Santiago, the service's program development manager for the effort.
The Army has had to take a few steps back over recent years to reconsider its ways forward to develop an enduring capability to defend against rockets, artillery and mortars as well as cruise missiles and unmanned aircraft systems.
As the service re-examined its path, Congress mandated that it buy an interim capability aimed directly at protecting the force from a growing cruise missile threat, but the Army has stressed that the system it will use — Rafael's Iron Dome — won't cover all the bases needed for a lasting capability.
Earlier this year, the Army sent a report to Congress outlining its plans to get after the enduring capability, partly by hosting a shoot-off with vendors that bring launcher and interceptor capabilities next year.
The Army issued a request for information to industry at the beginning of March with plans to conduct an industry day.
But with the COVID-19 pandemic raging in the United States and limiting travel and social contact, the IFPC program office had to get creative in order to keep the program moving forward.
The office was able to host one-on-one meetings with interested vendors as part of an industry day this month and is planning to answer industry questions, which have been submitted virtually, Santiago told Defense News in an April 9 interview.
To stay on track with the program, the office couldn't afford to delay industry engagements in order to keep the ball moving, Santiago explained.
The next big step for industry is to submit white papers to the Army toward the end of April, Santiago said.
The Army will review the papers over the course of a month and will notify industry by the end of May whether or not they will be invited to proceed into an agreement with the service to move forward, he said.
Those selected will move into a modeling and simulation phase that will also include some hardware-in-the-loop activities where capabilities are demonstrated in a simulated environment to determine if they are ready to go out on the range for the live shoot-off next year in the 3rd quarter of fiscal 2021 at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. Santiago said he could not disclose the number of agreements that might be awarded.
The Army will invite vendors to submit final proposals following the shoot-off, Santiago said, but even if a vendor isn't ready for that phase, it can still submit a final proposal that draws upon performance in a simulated environment and includes a plan to get to a live-fire capability within the desired timeline.
The government will evaluate final proposals and choose one vendor to provide the launcher and interceptor solution in the fourth quarter of FY21, Santiago said.
Initial capabilities are expected to be fielded by FY23.
15 juin 2021 | International, Terrestre
The vehicles will not go to a specific brigade, but rather divided among units to facilitate transportation and training, a military source with knowledge of the acquisition told Defense News.
21 mai 2020 | International, Terrestre
“I've heard some people talk about [going] back to a BCA [Budget Control Act] level of funding,” Gen. Murray says, referring to the steep cuts also known as sequestration. “And I've heard some people say that it's even going to be worse than BCA.” By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on May 20, 2020 at 1:11 PM WASHINGTON: Over the last two years, the Army has cut or cancelled more than 240 programs to free billions for its 34 top priorities, from hypersonic missiles to new rifles. Some of those 34 may have to die as the economy and budget reel from the COVID-19 pandemic, . “I start off with what Secretary Esper and Secretary McCarthy have said consistently, across DoD: three to five real growth is what we need,” said Gen. Mike Murray, chief of Army Futures Command. “Given what's going on in this country over the last two or three months.... my personal expectation is we're not going to see three to five percent growth. We'll be lucky to see a flat line.” LRPF: Long-Range Precision Fires. NGCV: Next-Generation Combat Vehicle. FVL: Future Vertical Lift. AMD: Air & Missile Defense. SL: Soldier Lethality. SOURCE: US Army. (Click to expand) While the Army is still working on its long-term spending plan for 2022-2026, the future topline is very much in doubt. “I've heard some people talk about [going] back to a BCA [Budget Control Act] level of funding,” Murray told an online AOC conference yesterday, referring to the steep cuts also known as sequestration. “And I've heard some people say that it's even going to be worse than BCA.” “I do think budgets are going to get tighter,” Murray said. “I do think that decisions are going to get harder.” Across its actual and projected budgets for 2020 through 2025, despite a slight drop in its topline, the Army has moved $40 billion from lower-priority programs to the 34 “signature programs.” Murray's Futures Command runs 31 of the 34, grouped in six portfolios: long-range rocket and cannon artillery is No. 1, followed by new armored vehicles, Future Vertical Lift aircraft, an upgraded battlefield network, air & missile defense, and soldier gear. Meanwhile, three most technologically demanding programs – including hypersonics and high-energy lasers – are handled by the independent Rapid Capabilities & Critical Technology Office. “We're prioritizing what I call the 31 plus 3,” Murray said. “We have fully funded those priorities in the program at the expense of a lot of other things.” The XM1299 Extended Range Cannon Artillery (ERCA) howitzer in an earlier test shot last year. But Army leaders have already warned that the Big Six will need more funding as they move from concept to prototype to mass production. Even a flat budget topline will be tight — and COVID makes flat the best-scare scenario. When and if the budget shrinks, Murray warned, “I do think we're going to have to make some tough decisions.” Hypothetically, he said, the choice may come down to something like, “Is it 31 plus three, or is it 24 plus two?” Considering the agonies the Army went through in its multiple rounds of “night court” cuts to find money for the 34 priority programs in the first place, cancelling any of them will be painful – but not impossible. Yes, the Army needs capabilities from each of its six modernization portfolios to work together in what's called Multi-Domain Operations against a future foe like Russia or China. Long-range precision firepower blasts holes in enemy defenses for aircraft, armor and infantry to advance; then they hunt out enemies too well-entrenched or mobile for artillery to destroy. Meanwhile air and missile defense protects the entire force, and the network passes intelligence and targeting data. But each of the Big Six includes multiple programs, and the Army has never expected all 34 to succeed. That's a crucial difference from the service's last major modernization drive, the Future Combat Systems cancelled in 2009, which depended on each of its 20 component technologies working as planned. Army slide showing the elements of the (later canceled) Future Combat System “Is there room for failures? Yes,” Murray told reporters at an Association of the US Army conference last year. “This concept does not count on any specific piece of capability.” That doesn't make cuts painless or easy, however. “Our priorities are our priorities for a reason,” Murray said yesterday. The Army's current weapons, from missiles to tanks to helicopters, largely entered service in the Reagan era. They've been much upgraded since, but there's only so much add-on armor, souped-up horsepower, and advanced electronics a 40-year chassis can take. The Army says it needs new weapons to take it into the next 40 years. “The kids running around on armored vehicles today are riding... fundamentally the same vehicles I rode around in as a company commander, way back when,” Murray said. “My now five-year-old granddaughter [lives] up the road at Fort Hood, Texas... I've got eight grandchildren, and out of all of them, I have absolutely no doubt that she is my infantry company commander wearing an Airborne Ranger tab at some point in the future. So that makes it personal for me.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/army-braces-for-post-covid-cuts-gen-murray
14 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial
By THERESA HITCHENSon July 13, 2020 at 2:45 PM WASHINGTON: House appropriators are worried that the Air Force's latest try to replace the MQ-Reaper isn't fully baked and might lead to a capability gap between the service's planned divestiture of the venerable hunter/killer drone and any follow-on. “The Air Force's fiscal year 2021 budget request proposes to terminate production of MQ–9 aircraft, citing an excess of aircraft compared to projected operational requirements. The Committee does not accept this proposal and recommends additional funding for 16 MQ–9 aircraft. The Committee is concerned that the Air Force has reached this decision without adequate planning for a follow-on system,” the House Appropriations defense subcommittee (HAC-D) wrote in their report accompanying the draft 2021 DoD spending bill. The full committee will mark up the draft bill tomorrow, which adds $343.6 million for procurement of 16 MQ-9s — 16 more than the Air Force asked for, after it announced in February plans to terminate production at prime contractor General Atomics. The HAC-D's insistence on continuing the program echoes strong support from the House and Senate Armed Services Committees for continuing the Reaper program. The SASC version of the NDAA added $50 million to the program; the HASC added $108 million. The HAC-D noted that, while the Air Force has initiated a replacement program called the “Next Generation UAS ISR/Strike Platform,” initial operating capability isn't planned until 2031. (And everyone knows the likelihood of maintaining the originally planned IOC on a brand new program is slim.) Indeed, Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) already has extended the response time for interested vendors to offer concepts in response June 3 request for information (RFI) from July 15 to July 24, according to a July 7 announcement on beta.SAM. The RFI notes the effort is “still in the very early requirements definition phase and is conducting market research to inform our acquisition strategy.” Air Force acquisition czar Will Roper told the HASC in March that the service is currently studying a family of systems, ranging from high-end and expensive drones that would be highly survivable in peer conflicts to low-end, “attritable” aircraft that might be commercially acquired. “The purpose of this RFI is to research potential solutions for the Next Generation UAS ISR/Strike platform, the Next Generation Medium Altitude UAS and potential follow-on program to the MQ-9 weapon system. The Air Force is also interested in researching alternative ways to support future lower-end, lower-cost ISR missions which may include initiatives to modernize, augment, and/or replace existing systems. This RFI inquires about unique and innovative practices that can deliver relevant capability efficiently, timely and at a reduced life-cycle cost,” the RFI states. The HAC-D, however, wants the Air Force to pick up the pace and is demanding that Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett submit a report to Congress with the 2022 budget request “on an MQ–9 follow-on program to be designated as MQ–Next.” “The goal of the MQ–Next program should be to accelerate the development and fielding of a next-generation medium altitude unmanned aerial system,” the committee adds. “The report shall detail the desired features of such a system, the cost and timeline required to achieve development and fielding, proposed measures to ensure full and open competition, and an explanation of how such a system would fulfill the goals of the National Defense Strategy. Ironically, MQ-X was the name of the service's first effort to replace the Reaper, which was cancelled in 2012. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/air-force-lacks-adequate-plan-for-next-gen-reaper-hac-d/