Nouvelles

The "Agility Prime" event next week will kick off with speeches by Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett, Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, and Air Force acquisition head Will Roper. By THERESA HITCHENSon April 21, 2020 at 5:47 PM WASHINGTON: The Air Force is pulling out all the stops next week to demonstrate the potential utility of ‘flying cars' to military users across the services, as well as civil agencies within the US government including the Department of Transportation. The Agility Prime program's virtual event, being held April 27-May 1 will open with speeches by Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett, Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, and Air Force acquisition head Will Roper, who has been championing the idea since last summer. Some 50 vendors of electric vertical take off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft will be given a chance to strut their stuff to potential buyers across the military services and the US government, Col. Nate Diller, Agility Prime team lead, told reporters today. The high-powered line-up is a testimony to the Air Force's dedication to becoming an earlier adopter of flying car technology for moving people and cargo, as commercial actors such as Uber move out on developing designs for the commercial market. Diller said the Air Force also has been working closely with NASA — which itself has been working with Uber on an eVTOL craft — and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to create operational standards and licensing issues for future vehicles. The FAA regulates US airspace and NASA obviously has expertise in providing safety certification for aircraft and spacecraft carrying people. Bob Pearce, NASA's associate administrator for aeronautics research, and Michael Romanowski, the FAA's policy chief for aircraft certification, will speak at the event as well, Diller said. Agility Prime is first focused on mid-sized eVTOL craft that can carry three to eight people. Diller explained that the service sees potential utility in two other classes of vehicles: very small craft that can carry only one or two people (which he said some vendors are already test flying using FAA licenses applying to ultra-light aircraft); and larger aircraft that could ferry cargo and a large number of people. The first round of Agility Prime prototype contracting, Diller said, in some cases bounce off the Air Force Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase I and Phase II contracts already held by some vendors. However, he stressed, the door is wide open to new entries — with next week's event offering “virtual booths” for newcomers to show off their wares. He would not, however, provide an estimate of planned Air Force spending on the program. The Air Force also is wooing private sector investors to the event in hopes they will kick in funds to the companies showing the most promise, both technologically and in plans for getting their wares on the street. As Breaking D readers know, Roper has launched a concerted effort to revamp the service's approach to SBIR funds, led by the new AFVentures unit, designed to match Air Force funds to investments from venture capital funds and ‘angel' investors (read, interested rich people.) Roper has said that he intends for AFVentures to invest about $1 billion a year in some 30 to 40 “game-changing” startups in hopes of helping them vault over the infamous ‘valley of death' between demonstrating a capability and becoming a DoD program of record. One of the hallmarks of Roper's approach to Air Force acquisition chief has been a focus on leveraging commercial research and development to help DoD ensure that it can stay ahead of China in the pursuit of new technology — arguing that ‘innovation is the new battlefield.' https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/50-vendors-vie-for-air-force-flying-car/

Tucson, Ariz., April 20, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- The U.S. Air Force announced plans to continue with Raytheon Missiles & Defense, a business of Raytheon Technologies (NYSE: RTX), on the development of the Long-Range Standoff (LRSO) cruise missile, a strategic weapon that will replace the service's legacy Air-Launched Cruise Missile. Raytheon Missiles & Defense, a business of the newly formed Raytheon Technologies, was formed on a foundation of advanced innovation and excellence in engineering. "LRSO will be a critical contributor to the air-launched portion of America's nuclear triad," said Wes Kremer, president of Raytheon Missiles & Defense. "Providing a modernized capability to the U.S. Air Force will strengthen our nation's deterrence posture." In 2017, the U.S. Air Force awarded Raytheon and Lockheed Martin contracts for the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase of the program. The Raytheon Missiles & Defense LRSO team recently passed its preliminary design review and is on track to complete the TMRR phase of the defense acquisition process by January 2022. Contract negotiations for the engineering and manufacturing development phase, with a strong focus on schedule realism, affordability, and cost-capability trades, will start in fiscal year 2021. The contract award is anticipated in fiscal year 2022. To view the U.S. Air Force's announcement, click here. About Raytheon Technologies Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company that provides advanced systems and services for commercial, military and government customers worldwide. With 195,000 employees and four industry-leading businesses ― Collins Aerospace Systems, Pratt & Whitney, Raytheon Intelligence & Space and Raytheon Missiles & Defense ― the company delivers solutions that push the boundaries in avionics, cybersecurity, directed energy, electric propulsion, hypersonics, and quantum physics. The company, formed in 2020 through the combination of Raytheon Company and the United Technologies Corporation aerospace businesses, is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. Media Contact Tara Wood C: 520.247.5630 Tara_woods@rtx.com View source version on Raytheon Company: http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2020-04-20-US-Air-Force-selects-Raytheon-Missiles-Defense-to-develop-Long-Range-Standoff-weapon

Guy Norris As the airframers go, so goes the aircraft engine industry. After spending most of the past decade accelerating production to keep pace with unprecedented airliner delivery rates the engine makers have spent the past month in reverse thrust. But as production lines slow, and in some cases come to a full stop, the grim guessing game about the industry's post-COVID-19 pandemic future can begin. For every engine company, anchored midway between their own supply chains and Airbus, Boeing and Embraer in particular, all scenarios paint a bleak picture and the potential impact of the virus-triggered crisis is alarming on at least three key levels. Near term, all must weather the storm and rapidly shrink capacity by 40% or even more to match the new realities of the slower airframe production rates now expected for the next couple of years. Second, having long since focused the core of their business models on the aftermarket, they must adjust to significantly lower revenues from a near term reduction in demand for maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) services. Third, with nearly all their resources dedicated to survival, reduced revenues and spending trimmed, development of new engines and propulsion technology is expected to slow significantly—at least in the near term. However, all the manufacturers know that in the mid-to-longer term the environmental pressures on performance will return and so will the relentless demand for lower emissions and greater innovation. Already committed programs will therefore continue, albeit potentially stretched over longer test and development schedules. From a volume perspective, GE Aviation and Safran's CFM joint venture is expected to see the greatest change. Having delivered 1,736 LEAP-1s and 391 CFM56-5/7s in 2019, output from the combined French and U.S. operations will decline significantly in 2020 in lockstep with urgent reductions in production at Airbus and Boeing. CFM, which was previously on track towards a planned annual production rate of more than 2,000 LEAP-1s by the end of 2020, cannot comment on numbers while its parent companies remain in a dark period prior to earnings calls at the end of April, but is expected to slash this target by around half. GE Aviation, which was already expecting a leaner 2020 before the COVID-19 pandemic because of delays to the GE9X-powered Boeing 777-9 and slow-downs to the GE90-115/GEnx-1 powered 777-200LR/300ER and 787 programs, is eyeing the even more troubling impact of the crisis on its aftermarket business. Although around a quarter of GE Aviation's revenues come from its military and other businesses, just 30% comes from commercial engine sales. A much larger portion of its revenue—approximately 45%—comes from MRO services. While some programs, like the CFM56 for the P-8 maritime patrol aircraft as well as military fighter engine efforts, will continue much as before, the company has already taken drastic action to stem losses by furloughing half of its engine manufacturing workers for four weeks. This move, taken in early April, followed an announcement in late March that it was reducing its workforce by 10% (around 2,500 employees), in direct response to the collapse of its MRO workload which the company estimates will be down by around 50% through mid-year at least. However, given the exodus of around two-thirds of the world's airline fleets into storage (almost 17,000 aircraft), the short to medium outlook for engine MRO would be described as dire at best. Compounding the issue for many of the OEMs is that the higher value aftermarket engines powering the widebody fleet, particularly the older generation Airbus and Boeing models, now look increasingly unlikely to ever return to service—at least in their existing guise. For Rolls-Royce, this problem is particularly acute as the UK engine maker focused increasingly on the widebody market over the past decade, widening its exposure to reliance on the support revenue from aftermarket work on older fleets of 747 and 777s as well as older A330s. With full-time premature retirement a possibility, including the previously unthinkable sunsetting of relatively young Trent 900-powered A380s as well as the rapid decline of the RB211-535 powered 757 and Trent 500-powered A340-600 fleets, the company can no longer bank on the expected rebound in deferred maintenance coming out of the crisis. Rolls has also rushed to mitigate losses by enacting measures aimed at saving at least £750 million ($937 million) in cash this year. These include a 10% salary cut for the global workforce and canceling dividend payments. Further moves are expected as the company adjusts to rate reductions announced by Airbus involving the Trent-powered A330no and A350-900/1000, as well as yet-to-be announced rate cuts for the Trent 1000-powered 787 which will shortly be revealed in detail by Boeing. Pratt & Whitney, now part of Raytheon Technologies, is similarly impacted across the board with production of the PW1000G geared turbofan reduced for the A220/A320neo families and commercial revenues hit by falling aftermarket revenues for the PW2000/PW4000 and V2500. Measures such as 10% pay cuts through year-end, as well as furloughs, are being introduced while research and development spending is being frozen. Deliveries of military engines, in particular the F135 for the F-35 fighter and PW4000 for the KC-45A tanker remain unaffected. The early retirements of the PW4000, as well as some CF6-powered fleets, is also significantly impacting revenues for German engine maker MTU. https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/daily-memo-powering-down

Sean Broderick What will it take to get parked aircraft back into service? Air Transport and Safety Editor Sean Broderick responds: Airlines are consulting with aircraft and engine original equipment manufacturers (OEM) for specific guidance, because most maintenance manuals do not cover how to idle aircraft/engines for a short period of time (30-90 days). Typical maintenance manuals' procedures for parking aircraft are focused on long-term storage, which most airlines aren't doing, because they plan to reactivate their fleets as soon as possible, with the exception of aircraft they might retire. Once these procedures are in hand, it's about having technical manpower that is able to follow a task card and operate aircraft systems. Some supplier opportunities exist—engine covers are hard to find, for instance, so operators are turning to foam inserts and other options—but that is more about keeping aircraft out of service longer versus bringing them back out. Another note: Some operators are keeping aircraft on “active maintenance” programs until they understand what their fleet needs will be post-pandemic. Basically, this treats an airframe as if it's flying even though it is not. Regular maintenance intervals such as daily and weekly checks are performed, but there may be some manpower issues, especially with operators that do not have sufficient tech ops talent in-house. https://aviationweek.com/mro/what-will-it-take-get-parked-aircraft-back-service

OTTAWA — COVID-19 is presenting another challenge to Canada's long-running and tumultuous effort to buy new fighter jets. The federal government last summer launched a long-awaited competition to replace the Royal Canadian Air Force's aging CF-18s with 88 new fighter jets at an estimated cost of $19 billion. The move followed a decade of controversy and mismanagement by various governments. The three companies still in the running are supposed to submit their bids at the end of June and, despite the pandemic, the federal procurement department insisted in an email to The Canadian Press that it still expects them to meet that deadline. The three companies vying for the lucrative contract are Lockheed Martin and Boeing from the U.S. and Sweden's Saab. Lockheed Martin builds the F-35 while Boeing is pitching its Super Hornet and Saab is offering its Gripen jet. Yet while representatives for the three companies say they are likewise plugging away at their respective proposals, a senior Boeing executive left the door open to asking the government for an extension as COVID-19 forces the company to adjust how it does business. "It's challenging, there's no question about it," Jim Barnes, the Boeing executive responsible for trying to sell the company's Super Hornet jet to Canada, said in an interview on Tuesday. "We want to make sure we put the most competitive offer on the table for the government of Canada to evaluate and we feel like we can put a very compelling offer. If we feel like we don't have time to finalize that competitive offer ... we would certainly ask for an extension." The government has already approved one extension to the competition since it was launched last July. Companies were supposed to submit their final bids at the end of March, but were given three more months after Saab asked for more time. Boeing continues to work closely with the U.S. government and navy on its bid and hopes to meet the current deadline, but Barnes said the pandemic has slowed things down as many staff work from home on a complex project with significant security considerations. "Then you have to take into consideration the health of your subject-matter experts in those areas where there are just a few people that can really work up those responses," he said. "Those kinds of things we're dealing with. I'm not sure if the other teams are dealing with that, but we are monitoring that and if we feel like we can't meet the deadline, we'll certainly consider an extension request as an option." Representatives for Lockheed Martin and Saab were more confident in being able to meet the current deadline. "Lockheed Martin remains prepared to provide a comprehensive proposal for Canada's future fighter capability project competition," Lockheed Martin Canada chief executive Lorraine Ben said in a statement. "We have not requested an extension of delivery for the FFCP preliminary proposal and we are excited to share more about the F-35's ability to strengthen and modernize defence, enhance ally partnerships and contribute to economic growth in Canada." Saab Canada president Simon Carroll expressed similar sentiments, saying in an interview that while there some challenges in preparing a bid during a pandemic, "we're certainly working towards that and are planning at this point in time to submit in accordance with that deadline." Yet there are also questions about the government's ability to move ahead on the project even if the companies do get their bids in on time, given the majority of federal employees are working at home. "Those submissions are going to have a combination of sensitive and classified information, and handling all that with a workforce, the majority of which is working from home, is going to be more difficult," said defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. "I think as a basic bottom line, it is completely illogical to think that the impacts of COVID-19 won't be running through the entire suite of defence procurements because you can't work as efficiently with a huge chunk of your workforce at home." This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 21, 2020. https://www.richmond-news.com/covid-19-latest-hurdle-in-canada-s-long-road-to-buying-new-fighter-jets-1.24121637

By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — You can count on Germany to stir the pot of nuclear weapons sharing amid a global pandemic. Such was the case in the past few days in a country that, armed with a superb health care system and a relatively low COVID-19 mortality rate, is seen as a model for managing the coronavirus crisis. But as of Sunday afternoon, the national security community was abuzz about a news report saying Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer effectively promised her U.S. counterpart that the ministry will buy 45 F-18 jets from Boeing. The Der Spiegel report comes after news broke a few weeks ago that Berlin planned to acquire a mix of Airbus Eurofighter jets and Boeing F-18s for a smattering of air warfare jobs too demanding for the country's aging Tornado fleet. Those jobs include flying conventional fighter-bomber missions, jamming enemy air defenses and carrying U.S. nuclear-tipped gravity bombs to hypothetical World War III targets somewhere eastward, per NATO's so-called nuclear sharing deal. According to Der Spiegel, Kramp-Karrenbauer sent U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper an email last week detailing her ministry's wish to buy F-18s not only for the atomic mission — which comes as little surprise — but also for the electronic warfare role. That reported promise stung Eurofighter advocates — even those who might begrudgingly accept an American product for the nuclear mission — because Airbus has plans for a souped-up jamming plane that it wants to see in Germany's inventory. In short, the Eurofighter crowd wants nothing more than Berlin to pick a pure Eurofighter fleet, arguing that the F-18′s shelf life is expiring in U.S. budget planning anyway, and that the Boeing jet is no closer to nuclear weapons certification than any other aircraft. The German Defence Ministry has always signaled it will take into account industrial policy considerations in the Tornado-replacement question. So strongly did senior leaders believe in the idea of a keeping the European industrial base humming toward an eventual Franco-German aerial über-weapon that they nixed Lockheed Martin's F-35 from the competition. But keeping American aircraft entirely out of the loop has always seemed a nonstarter. A ministry spokesman on Monday said Kramp-Karrenbauer's missive to Esper was only meant to test the waters regarding America's ability to start delivering those planes when the actual acquisition program gets underway in a few years. A formal decision on replacing the Tornados had initially been expected by the end of March. But as the coronavirus crisis unfolded, that decision was pushed to after Easter. Kramp-Karrenbauer is expected to announce her plans before the parliamentary Defence Committee on Wednesday, where she is likely to face opposition from lawmakers of the SPD coalition partner. Until then, Germans have yet another puzzle to discuss, as an increasingly divisive debate unfolds here over reopening the country. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/04/20/germanys-defence-ministry-is-under-the-gun-to-name-a-tornado-replacement/

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — In a surprise move, the Air Force on Friday announced plans to continue its Long Range Standoff Weapon program with Raytheon as the prime contractor. The LRSO program, which aims to field a new air-launched cruise missile capable of both nuclear and conventional strikes, is currently in its technology maturation and risk reduction phase, with both Raytheon and Lockheed Martin developing their own versions of the weapon. Typically, the Air Force would downselect to a single company in fiscal year 2022, when it awarded the engineering and manufacturing development contract that precedes low-rate production. However, the Air Force decided to press ahead with Raytheon's design after an “extensive evaluation” of the company's technology as presented during the preliminary design review, said Maj. Gen. Shaun Morris, who leads the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center. “Our competitive TMRR phase, which included both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon as the prime contractors, enabled us to select a high-confidence design at this point in the acquisition process,” he said, according to an Air Force release. “And this early off-ramp of a contractor is completely in line with the existing LRSO acquisition strategy, which included periodic reviews to assess contractor designs,” Morris said. “Lockheed Martin has been an excellent contractor and partner throughout the TMRR effort and this pivot to Raytheon does not represent a lack of effort or commitment on their part. Lockheed Martin has supported the nuclear enterprise for decades and we continue to value their expertise in sensors and nuclear certification and surety.” Elizabeth Thorn, the service's program manager, characterized the decision as “not a downselect, per se,” adding that the Air Force will continue to work with Lockheed on specific technologies that could drive down risk to the LRSO design or otherwise be beneficial to the program. The Air Force noted that the company had begun the “closeout process” to stop work on risk reduction phase of the program, leaving Lockheed's precise role in the LRSO program unclear. “We've supported our nation's nuclear triad for more than 60 years and look forward to working with the USAF to support the LRSO mission, specifically leveraging our sensor technology and nuclear certification and surety expertise,” Lockheed said in a statement. LRSO is set to replace the AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missile or ALCM, but the program has come under intermittent fire from lawmakers who believe that arming aircraft with a weapon that could be either nuclear or conventional could unnecessarily raise the risk of miscalculation, triggering a nuclear war. The Air Force has argued that it needs a nuclear missile that can be fired from standoff distances to enable the non-stealthy B-52 to remain a credible deterrent to adversaries with advanced air defense systems. Due to the decision to select Raytheon early, the Air Force wants to shift funding that will allow the company to begin certain work early, such as flight tests, the service said. A contract award for the next phase of the program is still scheduled for fiscal year 2022. Morris added that the service was also confident in its ability to keep the program affordable in a sole-source environment, despite the lack of competition that usually helps the government negotiate a lower-cost product. Roman Schweizer, a defense analyst with Cowen Washington Research Group, said the Air Force's announcement prompts additional questions about Lockheed's future role and the information both companies presented during the preliminary design view. “It's possible the USAF made an industrial base/cost decision based on other long-range weapons,” he wrote in an email to investors. “Singling up on LRSO could have been an industrial base decision or a way to reduce cost and speed up development.” In a statement, Raytheon noted that the company is on track to complete risk reduction efforts by January 2022. “LRSO will be a critical contributor to the air-launched portion of America's nuclear triad,” said Wes Kremer, president of Raytheon Missiles and Defense. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2020/04/20/the-air-force-made-a-surprise-decision-to-sole-source-the-long-range-standoff-weapon-heres-who-will-move-forward/

Nathan Strout The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has issued nine new contracts to companies developing drone swarm technologies, the agency announced April 13. Through the agency's Offensive Swarm-Enabled Tactics program, or OFFSET, it hopes to foster technology developments that will enable 250 small unmanned air or ground robots to work together in support of the war fighter. The program works in five main areas: swarm tactics, swarm autonomy, human-swarm teaming, virtual environment and physical test bed. The agency has hosted multiple swarm sprints to encourage rapid innovation in one or more of those areas. The nine awards mark the fifth such swarm sprint, with this one focused on swarm tactics and physical test beds in an urban environment. “The urban environment presents compelling challenges such as tall buildings, tight spaces, and limited sight lines,” Timothy Chung, the OFFSET program manager in DARPA's Tactical Technology Office, said in an agency news release. “Enhancing the Swarm Physical Testbeds that tackle those unique challenges is a desired goal of the OFFSET program.” Four of the participants will be tackling the swarm tactics portion of the sprint, where they will be asked to solve problems such as “disrupting the opposition's decision making, obfuscating swarm intent, updating maps of a dynamic environment, and maintaining the swarm's communications indoors.” The remaining five performers will work on the physical test bed thrust area, which includes reducing deployment times, utilizing new navigation sensors, incorporating fixed-wing aircraft into the swarm and enhancing mobility for robotic, wheeled vehicles in urban settings. Participants will incorporate their technologies into the OFFSET swarm systems architecture to demonstrate their respective solutions, with field tests taking place in December 2020. The recipients are as follows: Thrust area: Physical test bed Michigan Technological University/Michigan Tech Research Institute Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory HDT Expeditionary Systems, Inc. Sentien Robotics Texas A&M University Thrust area: Swarm tactics Michigan Technological University/Michigan Tech Research Institute Charles River Analytics, Inc. Soar Technology, Inc. Northwestern University https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/04/20/darpa-to-foster-urban-drone-swarm-tech-with-nine-new-contracts/

Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Since Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein took over as the service's top general in 2016, the Air Force has made figuring out how to connect its weapons with those of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps its biggest priority. The Air Force is set to have spent $300 million on the Advanced Battle Management System through fiscal year 2021. However, the service is still struggling to define what ABMS needs to do and how much it will cost, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released April 16. "The Air Force has not established a plan or business case for ABMS that identifies its requirements, a plan to attain mature technologies when needed, a cost estimate, and an affordability analysis. ... To date, the Air Force has not identified a development schedule for ABMS, and it has not formally documented requirements,” it read. That could have significant consequences for the program down the road, GAO continued: “GAO's previous work has shown that weapon systems without a sound business case are at greater risk for schedule delays, cost growth, and integration issues.” The GAO made four recommendations: create a cost estimate and a plan laying out how to afford the program, formalize the decision-making authorities of those involved in ABMS, and develop a list of technologies that are expected to fit into the initial system. In a response to the report, Kevin Fahey, the assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, concurred with all four recommendations — a sign that, going forward, the Air Force may be required to solidify more of its ABMS plans. The Air Force has maintained that the program's unconventional structure and methodology is a feature, not a bug. It wants to use a series of experiments to help discover and mature new technologies that can be weaved in alongside legacy platforms. For instance, the first ABMS experiment connected SpaceX's Starlink constellation with an AC-130 gunship, and the next demo will employ a Kratos Valkyrie drone carrying communications gear that enables the F-22 and F-35 to securely share data while allowing them to maintain stealth. Air Force officials have said technologies that are proven to be successful and mature during the experiments could become programs of record inside the ABMS family of systems. However, the Air Force does not seem to have a firm plan for what technologies it needs and when to bring them online, the GAO said. The service has identified 28 development areas that includes a new cloud network, a new common radio, and apps that provide different ways of presenting and fusing data. However, none of those areas are linked to specific technical requirements, and the Air Force hasn't explained what organizations are responsible for the development of those products. In one damning section, GAO compared ABMS with several cancelled programs with similar aims, such as the Army's Future Combat Systems program that sought to field a family of manned and unmanned technologies and the Joint Tactical Radio System, which was intended to create a government-owned software defined radio. These programs publicly flamed out after millions of dollars were spent in development, in part because certain technologies were not mature enough and caused the schedule to unravel. The scope of ABMS will be far larger than those previous programs, the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation told the GAO. But because the Air Force has not provided a detailed acquisition strategy, CAPE does not have confidence that the Air Force will be able succeed where those programs have failed. “Given the criticality of the battle management command and control mission and the planned retirement of legacy programs, the lack of an ABMS business case introduces uncertainty regarding whether the needed capabilities will be developed within required time frames,” the GAO said. Figuring out who has responsibility and decision-making authority for ABMS is also a messy proposition, the GAO said. The ABMS effort is led by a chief architect, Preston Dunlap, who is responsible for managing tradeoffs among the portfolio of technologies and guide experimentation efforts. However, existing programs that will be part of the ABMS family will retain their separate program office with their own independent management, and the Air Force has yet to clarify whether Dunlap will be able to redirect those program's funding to fall in line with ABMS objectives. For example, the Air Force's program office for space is currently working on a data integration project that could correspond with ABMS efforts to field a cloud network. But “although some ABMS funds have been obligated for this project, there is no documentation to support that the Chief Architect will be able to direct the PEO to change the project objectives or timeline to align with ABMS requirements once they are defined,” the GAO said. The role of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability or AFWIC, which was established in 2017 to help define how the service will fight wars in the future, is also unclear. An AFWIC senior official told the GAO that the organization began leading the service's multidomain command and control initiatives in 2019, but it is uncertain whether AFWIC also has the power to change the direction of the ABMS program. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2020/04/20/is-the-air-forces-advanced-battle-management-system-program-gearing-up-to-be-the-next-major-acquisition-failure/