27 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial

Space Acquisition: Speed May Not Fix Problems, Critics Say

"The answer isn't 'we've just gotta go fast'," said one critic.

By THERESA HITCHENSon May 26, 2020 at 4:10 PM

WASHINGTON: The latest version of the Air Force's long-overdue report to Congress on space acquisition reform fails to address a number of foundational questions, critics say, including: go fast to do what; who gets to decide the what; and who is accountable if things go pear shaped?

DoD is asking Congress to cut legislative strings and approve special powers to streamline space acquisition programs worth billions — pushing the need for speed to ensure the US military's technical edge over China and Russia, as first reported by colleague Sandra Erwin. The proposed changes are focused mainly on ways to get the Space Force out from under current acquisition rules, both those imposed by Congress and internally by DoD regulations.

They also are “mostly a rehashed list of things that every service has asked for since time immemorial,” one national security space veteran told Breaking D, with a virtual eye roll.

Or in the words of the recently-released teaser for the upcoming Netflix comedy “Space Force”: “Your attitude seems to be: ‘Give us money and don't look'.”

“The problem is, I think, it's asking for a lot of trust from Congress that in space in particular hasn't been necessarily warranted to date,” said Joshua Huminski, director of the National Security Space Program at the Center for the Study of the Presidency & Congress.

A space acquisition report, due to Congress on March 31, was delivered on May 20. Air Force acquisition head Will Roper called a press briefing last Friday to discuss it, only to abruptly cancel a couple hours later with no explanation.

A congressional aide told Breaking D on Friday afternoon that they could not release the version of the report transmitted to Congress because it was not a final version; and an Air Force spokesperson later confirmed that — well after business hours on Friday evening and before the long Memorial Day weekend).

So, it's not really the final version. The spokesperson said: “The Department of the Air Force continues to work with DoD and interagency partners to finalize the Space Force Alternative Acquisition System report. An initial version of the report was delivered to the Hill, but we anticipate delivering the final report to Congress soon.”

As one space analyst notes wryly: “Not exactly a clean rollout.”

The nine proposed reforms are required because “current space threats demand a shift to a system that more broadly delivers agile solutions to meet an ever-evolving technical baseline and integrate into an open architecture,” according to the current report language. Three of the recommendations will require legislative changes; one will require agreement from the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

Specifically, the nine recommendations address the following acquisition authorities for the Department of the Air Force and the Space Force:

Unique Acquisition Category (ACAT) Thresholds, Major Defense Acquisition
Program (MDAP) Definition, and Milestone Decision Authority Delegation for Space Systems.
“Efficient Space Procurement (ESP)” Codification for the DAF/USSF.
USSF-Unique “New Start” Notification Procedures.
Budget Line Item Restructure.
Modified JCIDS [Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System that sets program requirements] Approach for Space Systems.
New Policy Regarding Key Decision Point and Reporting Requirements for Development, Fielding, and Sustainment of Space Systems.
“Useable End Item” Determination Authority.
Separate USSF Topline Budget.
USSF-Unique Head of Contracting Activity (HCA).

As an example of bending the current DoD rules for the Space Force, the “Budget Line Restructure” asks Congress for authority to move money around by combining individual programs within in a large “portfolio” of similar efforts — an effort unlikely to win congressional approval, if past attempts are a guide.

Numerous critics noted it goes directly against the intent of Congress when it mandated in 2016 that DoD develop a Major Force Program to allow better tracking of both the macro military space budget and individual projects from year-to-year via a specific, standardized “program element number” in budget documentation.

Further, as Breaking D readers know, the report punts on one of the key mandates included in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA): to create a Space Acquisition Executive separate from the Air Force acquisition authority, a position now held by Roper.

The NDAA requires that the Air Force appoint a Senate-confirmed assistant secretary for space acquisition and integration. That person, the act said, “will “synchronize with the Air Force Service Acquisition Executive on all space system efforts, and take on Service Acquisition Executive responsibilities for space systems and programs effective on October 1, 2022.” The SAE is to oversee the Space and Missile Systems Center, the Space Rapid Capabilities Office (SpRCO), and the Space Development Agency (SDA) — all of which currently have separate acquisition authorities and lines of oversight.

Roper has fought tooth and nail against a fully separate SAE since it was proposed by Congress, according to numerous DoD sources even threatening to resign if it is created outside his purview. Sources close to the debate say that Gen. Jay Raymond, who currently is double hatted as head of the Space Force and Space Command, also does not want to see a change in the status quo that would put another layer of acquisition oversight in the mix.

Thus, the current version of the draft report simply states that Roper will hold SAE authority for now. This, several sources said, in reality is a place holder signaling that DoD intends to recommend in future that Congress essentially ditch the idea.

“We want to ignore your direction on the separate SAE [Space Acquisition Executive] – thanks, but we know better,” the former national security space official summed up. “And it ain't a signal – it's a shot across the bow.”

“On face value, I think it does seem to suggest they are trying to avoid the separate Space Acquisition Executive, which when combined with the bucketing of money is unlikely to be well received by Congress,” Huminski said.

“Congress is going to want some balance here, at least I think,” he added. “If the Space Force wants the authority to move money around within the portfolios, they are going to need to provide some measure of confidence to Congress that it is being done in an efficient and transparent manner, which could be the SAE—at least someone accountable for those money moves.”

Failure to restructure the space acquisition organization, critics point out, leaves open the critical question of how DoD plans to fix the problem of lack of coordination with the Army and Navy on user equipment, for which they have acquisition authority. (We're looking at you, GPS III.) While the Space Force in the near term will comprise only Air Force personnel either seconded or transferred, the expectation is that eventually it will include Army and Navy personnel as well.

A number of critics further charge that the requested changes do not sufficiently address the fact that previous space program cost overruns and schedule delays can be attributed to lack of coherent, coordinated and disciplined management at the program level within Space and Missile Systems Center itself, not due to outside factors.

“All of the changes they've asked for are external to the Space Force,” said one former DoD official, rather than taking a hard look at past program management. “Instead it's: ‘Congress has to change; Ellen Lord [DoD acquisition czar] has to change; the JROC [Joint Requirements Oversight Council] has to change.”

“The answer isn't ‘we've just gotta go fast',” the official added.

“One of the biggest challenges is the proverbial acquisitions rubber meeting the road—unless the Space Force changes what they are buying, changing how they buy it may not matter,” Huminski explained. “If the same architectures and same vehicles and same capabilities are bought, just faster, what was the point of changing anything at all?”

DoD sources defend the proposal, saying that Congress asked for, and expected to receive, ‘bold recommendations' on how to change the current space acquisition system.

Noting that there are many conflicting pressures, one DoD source said that concerns about transparency and who does what exactly have been overtaken by concerns that the Space Force “be empowered to go fast, innovate, and achieve the space dominance wanted by POTUS.”

Another government official keeping tabs on the issue said sympathetically that in some ways, “they are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.” While some in Congress likely will be annoyed by the recommendations push to get out from under current regulations, the source said, others would have complained loudly if DoD failed to move from the status quo.

Spokespeople for a number of key House and Senate members involved in defense oversight did not respond to requests for comment.

However, DoD sources and several analysts with close Hill ties said Congress is most likely to be concerned by the recommendations that infringe upon Congress's own powers. For example, members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are almost certain to protest the recommendation that assumes approval if Congress doesn't respond to “New Start” notifications within 30 days.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/space-acquisition-speed-may-not-fix-problems-critics-say

Sur le même sujet

4 décembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

This company wants to launch satellites into space via drone
Nathan Strout WASHINGTON — Could drones hold the answer to putting satellites on orbit faster? Space logistics company Aevum is betting on it with its new Ravn X drone, which it built in the hopes of launching rockets into orbit every three hours. “Aevum is completely reimagining access to space,” said Jay Skylus, Aevum's founder and chief executive, said in a statement unveiling the new launch solution Dec. 3. “U.S. leadership has identified the critical need for extremely fast access to low Earth orbit. We're faster than anybody. “Through our autonomous technologies, Aevum will shorten the lead time of launches from years to months, and when our customers demand it, minutes,” he added. Founded in 2016, the company has been developing its product in stealth mode for years. On Dec. 3, they officially unveiled the new Ravn X autonomous launch solution ― an 80-foot long drone designed to launch small payloads into low Earth orbit. The company has yet to conduct its first test flight but is working toward airworthiness certification. Leaders hope to launch a payload for the military before the end of 2021. “We have a small launch vehicle that's more or less designed from scratch to be reusable and for responsive space access,” Skylus told C4ISRNET in an interview. “We do this by operating this sort of three stage launch vehicle stack. The first stage is an unmanned aircraft that is completely autonomous. The second and third stages are rocket systems.” Following take off, the drone rises to between 30,000 and 60,000 feet, where the rocket separates and ignites, launching the payload into orbit. Ravn X can take off and land horizontally on any airstrip at least one mile long. “The entire system is designed for a turnaround time and response time of about 180 minutes,” Skylus explained. The idea of launching satellites into space from the air isn't a new concept. For example, Northrop Grumman's Pegasus rocket ― designed to be launched into orbit from a carrier aircraft ― has been used for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Air Force and NASA missions since the 1990s, with the most recent mission taking place in October 2019. A more recent entrant into the air-launch-to-orbit arena is Virgin Orbit's LauncherOne rocket. The company's first test flight, which failed to reach orbit, was conducted in May 2020. Aevum thinks of itself as taking the concept one step further by adding autonomy to the launch process. “This entire process is more or less fully autonomous, and this allows us to basically reduce the cost of labor that's required by about 90 percent,” said Skylus. Aevum's approach also gets at one of the most frustrating issues with launch: weather. In 2018, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency announced the DARPA Launch Challenge, where small launch companies were asked to show that they could put a payload into space within just 30 days. While about 50 companies applied, by 2019 their were only three companies remaining in the competition. By 2020, there was just one: Astra Space. The company came close to achieving its goal, ultimately failing after inclement weather forced them to scrub multiple launch attempts. Ravn X is largely impervious to those issues. “Because of the architecture, we're really not dependent on weather and those types of things. We expect to be available more than 96 percent of the year,” said Skylus. The company is already drawing attention from the Department of Defense. Ravn X's first mission will be the ASLON-45 mission for the U.S. Space Force, a $5 million contract. With that mission, the focus is on showing how the company can get a payload into orbit in 24 hours or less, said Skylus. That launch is expected to be complete before the end of 2021. In addition, the company has received a Phase II Small Business Innovation Research award, a classified contract, and is one of eight company's to receive a $986 million indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract for Orbital Services Program-4. “I'm excited to see the bold innovation and responsiveness in development today by our small launch industry partners to support emerging war fighter needs” said Lt. Col. Ryan Rose, Chief of the Space and Missile Systems Center's Small Launch and Targets Division, in a statement coordinated with Aevum's announcement. “The U.S. Space Force is proactively partnering with industry to support U.S. space superiority objectives. Having a robust U.S. industry providing responsive launch capability is key to ensuring the U.S. Space Force can respond to future threats.” The Pentagon has been pushing industry for responsive launch solutions, ensuring that they can place payloads into orbit with little notice. Aevum's focus on software and automation gives them an edge in meeting those elusive responsive launch requirements, Skylus said. “The responsive space launch type of problem has been a problem for several decades now, and the government has been seeking a solution to this. While others, our peers, are trying to tackle this from a technology/engineering perspective, Aevum is really tackling the problem from a system level perspective,” said Skylus. That's meant taking proven hardware solutions and applying autonomous software solutions to the ground processes and mission assurance elements. “If you look at our financials and things like that, we really do look more like a software company as opposed to a launch company,” said Skylus. “Which is great, because that means we're profitable right out of the gate.” For Aevum, the focus is on being that dependable, responsive launch service, and that may come at a premium for prospective customers, including the Pentagon. “We're not looking to be the lowest cost provider. That was never something that we claimed to be,” said Skylus. “Our focus has been: How do we make sure that we can go when our customers need to go? “Our niche market is going to be composed of customers like the Department of Defense who can't afford to wait a week to gather intel ... Or a customer like a commercial constellation customer who if they're down for over a week, they're going to lose more in revenue than they would be willing to pay for a launch,” he continued. “Those are the customers that we're really targeting.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/12/03/this-company-wants-to-launch-satellites-into-space-via-drone/
2 décembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Head of European Defence Agency: EU strategic autonomy is an opportunity, not a threat
By: Jorge Domecq The European Union's strategic autonomy in defense is on everybody's lips since it was put forward as a long-term goal in the EU's 2016 Global Strategy. Yet, it remains unclear what it means in practice and how it would impact NATO and our trans-Atlantic relationship. This has led to a mostly academic debate about the concept's end goal, fueled by doubts and fears stoked from both sides of the pond. However, the risk of too much abstract talk is that we get distracted from the concrete action needed to bring us closer to, what in my view, is a laudable objective. It is time we approach strategic autonomy more positively and look at it as a constructive project — not something directed against NATO, the United States or anybody else. It's about putting EU member states in a position where they can autonomously develop, operate, modify and maintain the full spectrum of defense capabilities they need. It's about giving the EU the option and tools — political, operational, technological, industrial — to take military action whenever needed, either together with partners (notably NATO) wherever possible, or separately if necessary. Instead of undermining trans-Atlantic trust and security, as some fear, a more robust and autonomous European defense will ultimately lead to a stronger NATO. It is in the interest of our trans-Atlantic partners to have a more capable and efficient EU in defense. The U.S. wants Europe to take on its fair share of burden in defense? A stronger and more credible European pillar in NATO will contribute to that. The EU's ambition, as stated in the 2016 Global Strategy, is to reach “an appropriate level of strategic autonomy” in order to “ensure Europe's ability to safeguard security within and beyond its borders.” However, it takes more than ambition and political will to get there. Strategic autonomy presupposes at least two things. First, that our member states' armed forces have at their disposal the full spectrum of military assets that, taken together, could enable the EU to take military action, and on its own if necessary. Second, that the functionality and usability of these assets is not restricted by any technological or political caveats controlled by non-European actors. Today, admittedly, this is not the case yet. Hence the need to invest more, and better, in defense. The good news is that we are moving in the right direction, both in terms of “more” and “better.” But more spending does not automatically guarantee more efficiency or interoperability. To achieve that, we must invest better through cooperation: from joint priority setting to the development, procurement and deployment of cutting-edge defense capabilities. Prioritization is the foundation stone on which all subsequent steps must build. It is already in place: the Capability Development Plan, developed through the European Defence Agency and revised in 2018, lists member states' joint priorities for the years to come. One of them targets cross-domain capabilities that can contribute to strategic autonomy. Using the priorities as a compass will ensure efforts and funding are spent on assets that are really needed and contribute to making the EU more efficient in military terms. The Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, another new tool to boost joint capability planning and development, will help keep the focus on agreed priorities. To achieve strategic autonomy, the EU must also be able to master cutting-edge technologies and their integration into defense products. That's why it is so crucial that it acquires, maintains and develops the technological knowledge and industrial manufacturing skills required to produce the defense equipment it needs. Those key strategic activities have to be preserved and strengthened if we want to turn the goal of strategic autonomy into reality. EDA, which is the EU hub for defense innovation and collaborative capability development, has for years been involved in this critical work. The agency identifies critical, overarching strategic research areas and other key strategic activities underpinning the EU's strategic autonomy. The aim is to identify, and then support, must-have technologies and industrial capacities, without which strategic autonomy isn't possible. Artificial intelligence, micro- and nanotechnologies, or unmanned and autonomous systems are only a few examples of such critical disruptive technologies that are reshaping defense. It's through concrete action — not political and academic rhetoric — that we can make progress toward strategic autonomy. At the same time, we must ensure coherence and avoid any unnecessary duplication with NATO, which will continue to be the cornerstone of collective defense for its members. EU strategic autonomy isn't necessarily just around the corner, but it is attainable. The closer we get to it and the more additional defense cooperation it triggers, the better. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/head-of-european-defence-agency-eu-strategic-autonomy-is-an-opportunity-not-a-threat
25 août 2020 | International, Aérospatial

GA-ASI signs FMS to deliver MQ-9B SkyGuardian RPAS to Belgium
General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (GA-ASI) is set to deliver the MQ-9B SkyGuardian Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) to Belgium. The company has signed a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contract with the US Air Force (USAF) to deliver the RPAS system. The contract includes the design, development, integration and production of the RPAS with its EO/IR video and SAR/GMTI surveillance payloads. Furthermore, GA-ASI will be responsible for the delivery of Portable Pre-Flight/Post-Flight Equipment (P3E), ground support equipment, Certifiable Ground Control Stations (CGCS) and spare parts. GA-ASI CEO Linden Blue said: “We look forward to providing our RPAS to meet Belgium's mission requirements, while also supporting the Nato Alliance. “Through our Belgian R&D seed-funding initiative, we are connected with many Belgian companies interested in further improving the capabilities of the SkyGuardian system.” The first delivery is scheduled for 2023. The MQ-9B model is the most advanced RPAS developed by GA-ASI. The company started the development of the aircraft system in 2014 to deliver an RPAS that will meet Nato's STANAG 4671 standard. The model is also available in another variant called SeaGuardian for maritime surveillance. According to the company, SkyGuardian has generated significant interest from customers across the world with the UK and Australia selecting the RPAS for their MQ-9B Protector programme and Project Air 7003 respectively. Last month, GA‑ASI renamed the industry team, including Australian partner businesses, to Team SkyGuardian Australia (TSGA). The team will develop and deliver MQ-9B SkyGuardian RPAS to the Australian Defence Force (ADF). https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/ga-asi-fms-mq-9b-skyguardian-rpas-belgium/

Toutes les nouvelles