13 juillet 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
Contracts for July 12, 2021
Today
14 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial
By PAUL MCLEARY and THERESA HITCHENSon May 13, 2020 at 4:32 PM
WASHINGTON: Like the rest of the Defense Department, Special Operations Command is preparing for flat to declining budgets in the coming years as the national debt spirals to $25 trillion and the economy flattens due to COVID-19 related shutdowns.
At the moment, the command that trains, equips and sustains the nation's elite covert operators boasts a $13 billion budget, $7 billion of which goes directly into buying and repairing new gear, with another $800 million pumped into research and development. And that's the unclassified part of the budget.
The command wants to protect those investments, Jim Smith, SOCOM's top acquisition executive, told reporters this morning. But fiscal realities being what they are, “right now, our planning assumptions are based on a flat budget out through the next seven years or so,” he said. “And then, if you take into account inflation, you might even have a slightly downward pressure on our overall budget.”
Just recently, Defense Secretary Mark Esper suggested that the budget pressure might force his hand in cutting older, legacy systems earlier than planned to pull savings toward priority modernization programs like the $500 billion the DoD plans to spend on the refurbishment of the nuclear triad over the next decade.
Earlier this month Esper declared, “we need to move away from the legacy, and we need to invest those dollars in the future. And we have a lot of legacy programs out there right now — I could pick dozens out from all branches of the services” that could be cut or curtailed.
Asked by Breaking Defense if pressure on SOCOM budgets could lead to the command walking away from bigger and older systems, Smith said “SOF is a little different. There is a propensity for us to accept a near-[commercial] solution and get it into the fight very quickly. And for that reason, we tend not to sustain equipment or the 20-year, 30-year life cycles that you see in the services.”
That's not to say “we don't have the same pressures,” as the services in finding savings, he added. “We're trying to divest in a force that you know likes to hold on to things. And so we have very rich dialogue at the command level, I can assure you, about trying to divest over some of our larger programs going on.”
One area commanders want to grow is close air support and ISR in areas without large, improved landing strips via the Armed Overwatch program. Lt. Gen. Jim Slife, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, said in February at the Air Force Association's annual meeting that the aircraft would replace AFSOC's U-28s — and focus more on plane's close air support, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions.
Smith today explained that effort is standing on the shoulders of the Air Force's defunct Light Attack Aircraft effort.
“We are on the backs of the Air Force's effort. We're using the same program managers and engineers,” Smith said. “Everything that was learned by the Air Force in their light attack experiment is being leveraged into ours.”
The Air Force's long-running light attack aircraft saga — that at one point was expected to involve procurement of up to 300 airplanes — began way back in 2011, when the Air Force initiated a program to procure what it then called “light air-support” aircraft for use in insurgencies.
In 2017, the program morphed into what the service called the Light Attack Experiment, aimed at developing a concept of operations that involved US allies as well as fleshing out an overall acquisition strategy. In 2018, then-Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said the service had set aside $2.4 billion in the fiscal year 2019 budget's five-year cycle to acquire agile, armed reconnaissance aircraft — once it had tested out its chosen competitors: Textron's AT-6 and the Sierra Nevada-Embraer team's A-29.
In October 2019, facing a threat from Congress to strip the program from its control, the Air Force issued a request for proposal to Textron and Sierra Nevada to buy “two or three of both” companies' turboprops. Finally, in February this year, the Air Force threw up its collective hands and gave up the quest to buy light attack aircraft in quantity — purchasing only two each of the AT-6 Wolverine and A-29 Tucanos for continued experimentation.
Several of the companies who originally fought it out way back in the day under the Air Force effort, as well as Textron and Sierra Nevada, are now throwing their hats in the SOCOM ring. Spokespeople for Air Tractor (which had formally protested the Air Force's contract award in the light attack competition), Sierra Nevada and Textron confirmed to Breaking Defense today that they are all in for the live-fly demonstration expected in November.
The plan is for SOCOM to buy up to 75 of the aircraft over seven years, beginning with a $106 million request in the 2021 budget to kick things off.
The Special Operations community is as interested in what it can put on one of these planes as it is in the aircraft itself.
“At the end of the day, I'm going to deliver a weapon system,” Smith said. “And so what's really important to me is what the vendor brings to the table, in terms of their ability to integrate weapons onto a non-developmental platform. I think the Air Force, you know, there was a lot of focus on the actual platforms. I don't think you'll see that from SOCOM. We are far more interested in the integration capability of our eventual industry partners on the platform.”
https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/special-ops-budget-crunch-looms-but-new-aircraft-demo-coming
13 juillet 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
Today
14 mai 2020 | International, Terrestre
While the pandemic continues, Pentagon metrics show production on Army programs is returning to normal, the Army's acquisition chief told Breaking Defense. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on May 14, 2020 at 4:01 AM WASHINGTON: The number of defense contractors reopening after COVID-19 quarantines now exceeds the number of new shutdowns, the Army's senior acquisition official said in an interview. That is happening, Bruce Jette told me, because industry is learning and adapting. New health precautions, from disinfecting tools between shifts to social distancing on the factory floor, should contain further outbreaks of COVID-19 and keep Army programs on track, he said – even if there's a new upsurge in infections nationwide. According to daily updates from Defense Contract Management Agency, Jette said, “the openings are outweighing the number of closings, and total number of closings is down significantly, so things are improving quite a bit.” Of 10,509 facilities large and small that DCMA is tracking, 248 had closed at some point — but only 40 are still closed. The number of reopenings has exceeded the number of new closings since April 20. But, I asked, what if there's another spike, whether from states relaxing shutdown orders or a change in weather come the fall? Because of the new precautions now in place, Jette told me, “I would say that in the long run, if we had some degree of a resurgence, I don't think it would be as marked as the first one.” Learning To Cope There was an initial wave of shutdowns in the first days of the pandemic, Jette said, because a single case of COVID-19 might require putting the entire workforce at a facility into quarantine, particularly at smaller companies. That wasn't a panicked reaction, but a reasonable precaution. Workers had been mingling freely in close quarters, most coronavirus carriers were asymptomatic, and virtually no reliable tests were available. A company facing a single case had no way of knowing who else might already be infected. But that's no longer true, Jette went on. Private companies and government agencies alike have now broken up large groups of workers into smaller ones, creating “bubbles” in which any contagion can be contained. “For example, in the past, one shift came in and started using the tools from the other shift,” Jette said, as one example. “Now, between shifts, a cleaning team comes in and disinfects all the tools.” Wiping down shared equipment, surfaces, and spaces is just one part of a multi-layered defense against contagion. Workers on the same shift who once all came in and out together, chatting in close quarters and shaking hands, may now arrive and leave on staggered schedules so they can stay six feet apart at all times. Workflows have been changed and workstations physically moved, where possible, to permit social distancing on the factory floor. Employees who must work side-by-side wear masks and gloves. Those precautions reduce the chance of someone catching the coronavirus in the first place – and just as important, they make it harder for one infected employee to spread the disease, especially to colleagues outside their “bubble.” So when somebody does get sick, you only need to quarantine their particular team, not shut down the whole factory. “If somebody in the bubble comes down [with COVID],” he said, “ only that bubble ends up isolated.” Even Pentagon offices like Jette's own are getting cleaned more frequently and more thoroughly, he told me, even when no one working in them has actually gotten sick. “[Even when] nobody has become infected in a particular office,” he told me, “we are having a cleaning team go through and do one office here, one office there, and just do a thorough wipe-down to make sure that there's nothing that got into that office undetected.” These precautions aren't excessively onerous, disruptive, or costly, Jette said. They're just things nobody had thought about doing before – but now they might be useful even after the pandemic is under control. “I don't see it being a significant burden on the system; it was just something we didn't see was an issue before,” he said, “[but] I may well help us have fewer flus and colds if we just continue the same practice.” Dealing With Disruption Industry may be adapting well, but a global pandemic is still extraordinarily disruptive. Like the rest of the Defense Department, the Army is closely tracking not only its prime contractors but the smaller subcontractors and sub-sub-contractors, which are much more fragile. To date, the Army has pumped $167.5 million into small businesses to help them ride out COVID disruptions. “There have been some cost implications to the government,” Jette said, “but mostly with respect to the CARES Act,” which ensures workers at facilities closed by COVID are paid instead of let go. The main way the Army has helped out companies is by making payments they already had coming, just ahead of schedule. For example, Jette said, the service has started writing checks to contractors every 15 days instead of the normal 30. It's also increasing progress payments, normally limited to 80 percent of total contract value (85 percent for small business) to 90 percent (95 for small business). “Cash flow was one of those things we concerned ourselves with,” Jette said. “Congress gave us flexibilities there. There were things passed down from OMB in the White House that gave us some flexibility as well.” To help figure out which subcontractors might be in trouble, the Army's prime contractors have opened their books and shared information with the service, far beyond anything they were contractually obligated to do, Jette said. Since the early days of the pandemic, even before shutdowns began, he's been getting a daily report on the health of subcontractors, which now routinely runs over 60 pages. “The primes ... were all very cooperative in trying to give us visibility down to the lowest level supplier,” Jette said. “It's really been helpful for us, because it helps us get a better gauge on what we have to do if something goes awry. In some cases when a subcontractor shuts down, the primes can find an alternative supplier. But despite the huge size of the defense industrial base, Jette said, there are single points of failure where only one company that's been formally qualified to build a certain part or perform a certain industrial process. It takes time to get a back-up supplier up to speed – sometimes longer than the 16.8 days that, on average, it takes a quarantined facility to reopen. That has resulted in delays, Jette acknowledges, but, so far, Army programs are finding ways to make up the time elsewhere in their schedules and still deliver new weapons to the troops on time – what's called First Unit Equipped, or FUE. “Delivery schedules on some products have slipped a little bit right...but at this point, none of them has assuredly slipped the FUE,” Jette told me. “As of right now, the vast majority of challenges that we've had with COVID, we've been able to accommodate within the current contracts with minor changes.” But the factories aren't the only part of the system that has to function. “The most significant thing isn't production,” Jette said. “It's trying to get all the testing done to make sure that all the systems work.” While some testing takes place in labs, what's most complex is operational testing, which puts a new technology in the hands of soldiers in the field to see how it works in for a real unit, interacting with all the rest of that unit's gear, conducting a realistic mission in realistic conditions. That requires bringing together not only the soldiers but technical specialists from the manufacturers, Army program offices, and Army testing organizations across the country. “Those are not simple to just change or move around, [and] that's part of what we've struggled with,” Jette said. “In some cases, we have suppliers who provide a capability and it's ready to be tested and we just don't have the facilities or the units available yet for full testing.” Officials need adequate test data before they can approve a program to start production – what's known as a Milestone C decision. But, Jette said, if you have to delay that formal approval, you can compensate by getting ready to jump-start manufacturing as soon as you have the go-ahead. The contractor can even start production ahead of Milestone C at its own risk, if it's confident that testing will not find any significant problems. At some point, it comes down to what kind of risk you're willing to take. If you rev up your manufacturing base before testing is complete, but then testing discovers a problem you have to fix, you may have to make expensive, time-consuming changes to your design, to your production process, or even to items already built. But if you wait for all the testing to get done, no matter how long it takes, you may not get the kit to troops on schedule. Unprecedented Stresses It's a difficult and stressful time; Jette can't recall anything like it in his 30 years in the defense sector. “At least based on my experience which goes back to the early '90s,” he told me, “you may have had strains on a particular vendor, [but] this is fundamentally a nationwide challenge that covers all of our programs.” “I can't think of any time where we had such a longstanding challenge to keeping programs fully operational,” he said. “Probably the closest thing,” he said, is when Congress can't pass defense funding bills on time and passes a stopgap Continuing Resolution. A CR essentially puts spending on autopilot at last year's levels with no ability to start new programs, ramp up existing ones, or cancel failing ones. Like the pandemic, a CR can impact every function of the Defense Department, or even the entire federal government, for weeks or months on end. But funding problems don't threaten the health and safety of every worker the way the pandemic does. “In this case, we have to consider the financial underpinnings, but we also have to consider the impact to the people themselves.” “Our most valuable resources are people,” Jette said. “If I don't have good people, I'm not getting good work done. I want to make sure those people want to work here, and a big piece of that is giving them a safe and healthy environment.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/contractors-recovering-from-covid-shutdowns-bruce-jette/
6 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
Andrew Eversden Two U.S. senators called on the Office of Management and Budget to ensure that federal regulation banning the government's use of Chinese telecommunications technology include “explicit processes” to help small businesses with compliance. In a May 4 letter sent to acting OMB Director Russ Vought, Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., asked Vought to carefully consider to the needs of small businesses while the agency reviews a proposed rule. The senators' concern is in response to a proposed rule under review by OMB implementing Section 889(a)(1)(B) of the fiscal 2019 defense policy law — a provision that bans federal agencies from procuring or doing business with companies using “covered telecommunications equipment or services" in an effort to block Chinese tech companies like Huawei and ZTE from entering the U.S. government's supply chain. Rubio and Cardin are the top two senators on the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. According to the letter, OMB is currently reviewing the draft proposed rule, statutorily required to be implemented Aug. 13. Because smaller companies don't have access to the same resources as larger suppliers, they may need “more assistance and time,” the senators wrote. The pair called the guidance for small businesses “vita,l” given that small businesses make up about one-quarter of federal procurement, worth $120 billion. “By providing these small firms with a clear path toward compliance and a reasonable time frame, we believe that the goal of securing the United States supply chain will be better achieved,” Rubio and Cardin wrote. Outside interest groups representing federal contractors have also pushed Congress to delay the implementation of Part B of Section 889. In a joint letter in late March, the National Defense Industrial Association and the Professional Services Council asked Congress to delay the Aug. 13 date to February 2021. They also cited the ongoing coronavirus pandemic as reason for a delay. “Part B will impose significant financial and operational costs on medium and small-sized firms at a moment of substantial uncertainty and hardship. While we agree that Part B addresses a significant problem in defense supply chains, and that additional measures are needed to protect [Department of Defense] information assets from covered equipment, COVID-19 has made the current implementation timeline infeasible,” the groups wrote. The United States government alleges that Huawei's 5G technology allows for Chinese government espionage and poses a threat to national security. Senior U.S. officials have traveled the globe, urging allies not to include Huawei's technology in their 5G networks. But the effort has been largely unsuccessful, particularly after the United Kingdom announced in January it would allow Huawei to build noncritical pieces of its 5G network. That decision was met with scorn by lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Still, Rubio and Cardin warned that OMB needs to produce the regulation cautiously and carefully. “We are concerned that if the regulatory implementation language fails to adequately consider small businesses, this process could not only result in an ineffective implementation of the prohibition, but also be both harmful and costly to thousands of small federal contractors,” they wrote. https://www.fifthdomain.com/congress/capitol-hill/2020/05/05/proposed-rule-banning-chinese-tech-needs-to-consider-small-contractors-senators-warn/