Tech maturing too fast for multiyear drone buys, Army’s Bush says

Sur le même sujet

• 

  19 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Citing TransDigm, DoD seeks new acquisition powers, and trade groups oppose

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Four defense industry trade associations “strongly oppose" a handful of Pentagon-backed procurement reform proposals that they say would harm the defense industrial base, and they're asking Congress to reject them. Two of the proposals aim at controversial pricing practices used by TransDigm by requiring contractors to submit cost information for commercial items and by requiring contracting officers to conduct a commercial item determination for every procurement. Others would set a preference for performance-based contract payments and authorize the Defense Department to release or disclose detailed manufacturing or process data. The May 6 protest letter came from the Acquisition Reform Working Group — made up of the National Defense Industrial Association, American Council of Engineering Companies, the Computing Technology Industry Association and the Information Technology Industry Council — to the the House and Senate armed services committees. It comes as the panels were readying their drafts of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. The Pentagon has worked to monitor its network of suppliers from the economic shocks associated with the coronavirus pandemic and to protect suppliers by using emergency funding from Congress to speed payments and improve cash flow along the supply chain. The trade groups noted they represent “thousands of small, mid-sized, and large companies in addition to hundreds of thousands of employees that provide goods, services, and personnel to the Department of Defense,” and said the four proposals a “could have significant consequences for the defense industrial base.” Congress focused ire at TransDigm last year after the Defense Department's Inspector General found for $26.2 million in parts the military bought from TransDigm, it earned $16.1 million in excess profit. Transdigm was the only manufacturer of the majority of the parts, which let it set the market prices even for competitively awarded parts. Though DoD has argued its contractors need new latitude to make commercial item determinations and obtain cost or pricing information to prevent the excessive pricing TransDigm was accused of, the trade groups argue the TransDigm's actions weren't facilitated by an inappropriate reliance on improper commercial item determinations, or insufficient access to pricing data. “As illustrated by the TransDigm Group, Inc's pricing practices, generally once a conversion to a commercial product or commercial service is made, it is common for prices to increase and subsequent contracting officers find it difficult to obtain data necessary to determine price reasonableness and negotiate fair and reasonable prices on behalf of the taxpayer,” the department said in its proposal. Another proposal would require a contractor to submit uncertified cost information for commercial item proposals or contracts less than $2 million. The idea behind the reform is DoD wants to be able to get more insight into the costs of sole-source items and put itself in a more favorable position to negotiate with sole-source companies. Congressional hearings on TransDigm's excessive pricing showed Defense leaders need the authority to obtain the data “to the extent necessary to determine price reasonableness is paramount in ensuring that such excessive pricing practices are curtailed.” But the trade groups argue that levying the new regulations would “add a significant barrier to commercial item acquisition, reduce information sharing, further burden the system, and impede—rather than enable—the delivery of capabilities to the warfighter at the ‘speed of relevance'—all with little to no added protection for the government or the taxpayer." The trade associations also opposed DoD's legislation to set a preference for performance-based contract payments. The groups said a DoD proposal to “recouple” total performance-based payments to total cost incurred would reverse Congress's previous work to emphasize performance over cost and contradict a spate of defense acquisitions rules. DoD's argument is that it shouldn't be reimbursing a contractor more than its actual costs, or it “would result in negative levels of contractor investment,” and create a disincentive for contractors to deliver. Another disputed proposal would let DoD release detailed manufacturing or process data, or DPMD, pertaining to privately funded commercial or noncommercial items outside of the government to third parties seeking to compete against the original equipment manufacturer. It's the latest episode in a running game of tug-of-war between industry and DoD over intellectual property. While Congress has in recent years prodded DoD to set intellectual property strategies early in acquisition programs and negotiate for IP rights on a case-by-case basis, the trade groups argue the proposal would give DoD “an automatic default authority” and “eliminate the possibility of a negotiated solution.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/05/15/citing-transdigm-dod-seeks-new-acquisition-powers-and-trade-groups-oppose/

• 

  14 janvier 2019 | International, Terrestre

  Here are the four prizes Textron Systems is watching in 2019

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Textron Systems is focusing on the U.S. Army this year, with its chief executive naming four unmanned and small arms programs with the service as the company's “need to win” items in 2019. Speaking to reporters Jan. 10, Textron President and CEO Lisa Atherton laid out the company's top priorities: 1. Squad Mobility Equipment Transport With its recent acquisition of Howe & Howe Technologies, Textron finds itself a player in the Army's Squad Mobility Equipment Transport competition. The Army wants to buy a robotic equipment carrier that troops can load with their gear, and Howe & Howe's tracked RS2-H1 robot is competing alongside three other companies for the contract. “We believe that program will progress this year, and we look forward to moving that to low-rate production,” Atherton said. The other competitors undergoing tests with the Army and Marine Corps are the Polaris MRZR X, a four-wheeled vehicle based on the Polaris MRZR currently in service with the Marines; the General Dynamics four-wheel drive Multi-Utility Tactical Transport; and the six-wheeled HDT Global Hunter WOLF, or Wheeled Offload Logistics Follower, Army Times reported last year. Each company delivered prototypes to two Army infantry brigade combat teams and a Marine Corps unit for tests last year. “They asked us to deliver eight vehicles and then just give them to the soldiers and let the soldiers do what they will with them and basically try to break them,” Atherton said. The vehicles have now come back to Textron in good working condition, which Atherton said is a “testament to the robustness of that capability.” After a year of tests, the Army will make a decision on the way forward with the program, which could involve a downselect to a single SMET provider, Army Times has reported. 2. Robotic combat vehicle As the Army looks to replace the Bradley Fighting Vehicle with what the service is calling the Next Generation Combat Vehicle, it is also hoping to develop an unmanned tank that can accompany it into battle as a robotic “wingman.” Again, Textron's acquisition of Howe & Howe gives the company an entry point into the competition, Atherton said. “We believe that the Ripsaw is tailor-made for that,” she said, referring to the light unmanned tank developed by Howe & Howe. “So this year we will be focused on responding to the [requests for proposals] that come out for the prototypes.” Ripsaw's appearance on the show “Jay Leno's Garage” attracted Atherton's attention to Howe & Howe and laid the foundation for the company's eventual acquisition. The robotic tank has been featured in numerous TV and movie spots, including the film “Mad Max: Fury Road.” The Army previously tested it at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. Atherton said Textron will make investments to improve the survivability of Ripsaw, as well as add “other innovations.” Brig. Gen. David Lesperance, who is leading the NGCV Cross-Functional Team, said in March that both NGCV and robot combat vehicle prototypes will be ready for soldier evaluations by 2020, with follow-on prototypes ready by 2022 and 2024. 3. Future tactical unmanned aerial system As the Army looks to replace its RQ-7 Shadow drones, it's testing a number of small, nondevelopmental unmanned aerial systems with the hopes of buying something off the shelf. As part of that effort, Textron was chosen to demonstrate Aerosonde HQ at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, last month, Atherton said. Aerosonde HQ is a version of Textron's small Aerosonde UAS and includes a kit that allows it to take off and land vertically. “Our team widely exceeded the threshold requirements,” she said. “So we're very proud of what we were able to do: very rapidly integrate those techniques and procedures and technologies into the Aerosonde to be able to provide that to the Army for the future tactical UAS.” 4. Next Generation Squad Weapons Textron also believes it has strong offerings for the Army's Next Generation Squad Weapons effort, an umbrella program to replace soldiers' small arms, Atherton said. Reducing the weight of small arms is a major goal of the program, and Textron previously developed case-telescoped weapons it claims are lighter in weight and more lethal than current weaponry. “We believe we are the leaders in the case-telescoped prototypes for the Army's next-generation squad weapon with our lightweight small arms technologies,” Atherton said. The company showcased a 5.56mm light machine gun variant and a 6.5mm caseless service rifle variant at the Association of the U.S. Army's annual meeting in 2017, Army Times reported. The service has awarded contracts to Textron; FN America, LLC; General Dynamics; PCP Tactical; and Sig Sauer to build prototypes of a Next Generation Squad Automatic Rifle, or NGSAR. The prototypes are due to be delivered this year. That weapon would replace the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, which fires 5.56mm rounds. The program also seeks to find a replacement for the M4, which it calls the Next Generation Squad Weapon Rifle, or NGSW-Rifle. Both NGSW-Rifle and NGSAR will fire 6.8mm rounds. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/01/11/here-are-the-four-prizes-textron-systems-is-watching-in-2019

• 

  14 avril 2020 | International, Naval

  US Navy should turn to unmanned systems to track and destroy submarines

  By: Bryan Clark Anti-submarine warfare, or ASW, is one of a navy's most difficult missions. Sonars detect submarines with only a fraction of the range and precision possible using radars or visual sensors against ships above the water. Submarines can carry missiles able to hit targets hundreds of miles away, requiring searches to cover potentially vast areas. And the torpedoes that aircraft and surface ships use to sink submarines need to be dropped right on the submarine to have any chance of sinking it. These challenges led the Cold War-era U.S. Navy to rely on a sequential approach for tracking enemy submarines. Electronic or visual intelligence sources would report when an opposing sub was leaving port, and it would hopefully get picked up by sound surveillance, or SOSUS — sonar arrays on the sea floor — as it entered chokepoints, like that between Iceland and the United Kingdom. Patrol aircraft would then attempt to track the submarine using sonar-equipped buoys, or sonobuoys, and eventually turn it over to a U.S. nuclear attack submarine, or SSN, for long-term trail. The U.S. ASW model broke down, however, in the decades following the Cold War as U.S. submarine and patrol aircraft fleets shrank, the Chinese submarine fleet grew, and Russian submarines became quieter. Today, the U.S. Navy devotes enormous effort to tracking each modern Russian submarine in the western Atlantic. During the 2000s, the strategy of full-spectrum ASW started an essential shift in goals, from being able to sink submarines when needed to being able to defeat submarines by preventing them from accomplishing their mission. Full-spectrum ASW and other current concepts, however, still rely on aircraft, ships and submarines for sensing, tracking and attacking enemy submarines to bottle them up near their own coasts or sink them in the open ocean. Although SOSUS has improved since the Cold War and is joined by a family of new deployable seabed arrays, the next link in the U.S. ASW chain is still a P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft, an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer, or a U.S. SSN. These platforms are in short supply around the world, cost hundreds of millions to billions of dollars to buy and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a day to operate. With defense budgets flattening and likely to decrease in a post-COVID-19 environment, the U.S. Navy cannot afford to continue playing “little kid soccer” in ASW, with multiple aircraft or ships converging to track and destroy submarines before they can get within missile range of targets like aircraft carriers or bases ashore. The Navy should instead increase the use of unmanned systems in ASW across the board, which cost a fraction to buy and operate compared to their manned counterparts. Unmanned aircraft could deploy sonobuoys or stationary sonar arrays, and unmanned undersea or surface vehicles could tow passive sonar arrays. Unmanned surface vehicles could also deploy low-frequency active sonars like those carried by U.S. undersea surveillance ships that can detect or drive off submarines from dozens of miles away. Although autonomous platforms will not have the onboard operators of a destroyer or patrol aircraft, improved processing is enabling small autonomous sensors to rapidly identify contacts of interest. Line-of-sight or satellite communications can connect unmanned vehicles and sensors with operators ashore or on manned ASW platforms. A significant shortfall of today's ASW concepts is “closing the kill chain” by attacking enemy submarines. Air- or surface-launched weapons have short ranges and small warheads that reduce their ability to sink a submarine, but their cost and size prevents them from being purchased and fielded in large numbers. Unmanned systems could address this shortfall in concert with a new approach to ASW that suppresses enemy submarines rather than destroying them. During World War II and the Cold War, allied navies largely kept submarines at bay through aggressive tracking and harassing attacks, or by forcing opposing SSNs to protect ballistic missile submarines. The modern version of submarine suppression would include overt sensing operations combined with frequent torpedo or depth-bomb attacks. Although unmanned vehicles frequently launch lethal weapons today under human supervision, the small weapons that would be most useful for submarine suppression could be carried in operationally relevant numbers by medium-altitude, long-endurance UAVs or medium unmanned surface vessels. Moreover, the large number and long endurance of unmanned vehicles would enable the tracking and suppressing of many submarines over a wide area at lower risk than using patrol aircraft or destroyers. Today the U.S. Navy uses unmanned systems in ASW primarily to detect submarines. To affordably conduct peacetime surveillance and effectively defeat submarines in wartime, the Navy should increase the role of unmanned systems. Using manned platforms to conduct command and control, and unmanned vehicles to track, deter and engage submarines, could significantly reduce the costs of ASW operations and enable the Navy to scale its ASW efforts to match the growing threat posed by submarine fleets. Bryan Clark is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. He is an expert in naval operations, electronic warfare, autonomous systems, military competitions and war gaming. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/13/us-navy-should-turn-to-unmanned-systems-to-track-and-destroy-submarines/