Acquisition headlines (7/25 – 7/31/2022)

Kessel Run shows how to bridge the gap between development and operations. (War on the Rocks) Dan Patt and Brian Beachkofski: “But software is different. There is no blueprint that mediates between design and manufacture. The only specification is the source code, which can change hundreds of times a day. Using continuous delivery pipelines, updated software can be distributed to the field in minutes at near-zero cost… The divide between acquisition and operations exists at the highest echelon of the military. In the Air Force, one Major Command runs development (Air Force Materiel Command), while separate Major Commands run operations (Air Combat Command and operational commands like the Pacific Air Forces). The distinction was useful for hardware systems like the B-29, but the services now need combined development and operational support units for software capabilities. Otherwise, the benefits of DevSecOps will never be realized because the first commander responsible for both the Dev and Ops teams is a four-star general in the Pentagon.”

Marine Corps Force Design 2030: Examining the Capabilities and Critiques. (CSIS) “As of 2022, FD has transformed the capabilities of the Marine Corps by divesting in $16 billion worth of systems and equipment to reinvest in new or complementary systems and equipment that can provide a decisive advantage along the competition continuum. The Marine Corps has already fully divested tanks and bridging, and further divestments will include towed artillery. FD will instead increase rocket artillery systems and incorporate new systems, including the Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) and a family of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UASs)… Critics contend that such a force would leave the Marine Corps ill-equipped to fight insurgencies or regional wars—contingencies they believe are more likely to occur compared to the threat of direct peer conflict. .. Another critique is that the “divest to invest” strategy the Marine Corps is following has reduced its combined arms capabilities and capacities, making the service less relevant to the Joint Force.”

Boom Supersonic and Northrop Grumman team up to build superfast US military aircraft. (Space.com) ” The partnership between the two firms will help ensure potential military or government customers can acquire Overture aircraft made for their specific needs… Boom has pushed back plans to fly its test XB-1 jet after promising a date sometime in 2021. In May 2022, the company said in a media report from Simple Flying(opens in new tab) that it has completed 80% of its pre-flight testing… Four wing-mounted engines propel Overture to speeds of over Mach 1.7 when flying over water and just under Mach 1 over land. “

George Mason experts urge DoD to improve how it uses data from tech consortia. (Fed Scoop) “In a study by George Mason University’s Center for Government Contracting on Wednesday, experts argue that consortia are playing a pivotal role in high-profile and other Defense Department acquisition efforts, and particularly those associated with other transaction authorities (OTAs)… In their study, the officials identified 42 consortia supporting agreements, as of May 2022. Of those groups, 38 support the DOD, and four are working with other federal agencies — and 12 of the overall 42 contributed data that informed the experts’ review… Ultimately, Halcrow and Schwartz found that consortia bolster engagements between government and non-federal players, expand the defense industrial base — and, in some circumstances, they can significantly speed up acquisition timeliness and promote innovation.”

A review of CNO NAVPLAN 2022. (The Conservative Wahoo) “… a force of some 500 ships, 350 of which would be manned (or “crewed” as is becoming fashionable in some quarters) and 150 unmanned. Highlights include a goal of 12 ballistic missile submarines (SSBN), 12 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers (CVN), 66 fast-attack submarines (SSN), 96 large surface combatants (LSC), 56 small surface combatants (SSC), and 82 combat logistics and auxiliary vessels. The plan calls for 31 amphibious assault ships and 18 Light Amphibious Warships, which I believe is too few… The document released today is a solid statement of purpose and priority, and it lays bare the terrible choices being forced upon the CNO by under-investment.”

Rocket science: How Space Force acquisition works, with many players and dual hats. (Breaking Defense) “[Space Force acquisition executive] Calvelli, who has his own staff separate from SSC, has the authority to approve spending plans for individual Space Force programs. He delegates that authority to five “Program Executive Officers (PEOs)” who each manage a basket of programs, pay contractors and keep the accounting books. While [SSC commander] Guetlein has no acquisition authority under this chain either, his job is to ensure that all the PEOs are working together seamlessly… In practice, this means Guetlein is herding the five PEOs reporting to Calvelli that do have spending power. The really confusing part is that those five offices mirror the five mission areas of responsibility under the military command chain, and the PEOs themselves are the same people — with the difference being that when they are wearing their PEO hats, they can pay the bills. For example, Col. Brian Denaro, head of space sensing, is subordinate to Guetlein in the military chain. In the civilian chain, as PEO for space sensing, he technically is lateral in the organizational chart to Guetlein and subordinate to Calvelli.”

Mid-Tier programs running out of time; overruns coming, Kendall says. (Air Force Magazine) “Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall thinks Congress will give the Air Force a bigger topline budget amount than it requested in fiscal 2023—and not a moment too soon, because a number of “mid-tier acquisition” programs are running out the clock and need a fresh funding stream, he said. He also warned that the need to speed up the program acquisition pipeline will inevitably cause “cost and schedule pickups” that are “unfortunately … the price we pay” to stay ahead of China… It was assumed that those programs would be funded for subsequent production, he said, but “most of them aren’t structured that way … A lot of them are only funded for that five-year initial [phase], so there’s no funding in the out years of our FYDP for those programs,” he said. A “high percentage … are not fully funded.”“

Initial Operating Capability declared for unmanned influence sweep system (UISS). (NAVSEA News) “UISS provides acoustic and magnetic minesweeping coupled with the semi-autonomous, diesel-powered, aluminum-hulled Mine Countermeasures Unmanned Surface Vehicle (MCM USV). The MCM USV is an integral part of the MCM mission package and serves as the tow platform for both minesweeping and mine hunting missions. Notably, this is also the first IOC of an unmanned surface platform by the U.S. Navy, marking an important milestone in the evolution toward a hybrid fleet of manned and unmanned systems.”

EU to accelerate naval projects under huge defense investment budget. (Naval News) “The EU Commission announced on 20 July that it will support 61 joint defence research and development projects with a total of almost €1.2 billion selected under the first call for proposals for the European Defence Fund (EDF). The most important project in the naval field is the European Patrol Corvette (EPC)… The EPC project is expected to enter the industrialization phase from 2025. The vessels are being considered in Italy to replace the Comandanti-class patrol vessels from 2027 and in France to replace the Floreal-class frigates in the late 2020ies / early 2030ies.”

Military services not aligned on JADC2 efforts, Air Force official warns. (Fed Scoop) ““Every service has their own interpretation of JADC2. The Department of Air Force is ABMS, the Army is Project Convergence and I think the Navy and Marine Corps … [Project] Overmatch. All different. I’ve looked at all of the documentation associated with all three. We are not aligned with what we need to be to be interoperable to be able to fight together,” Wanda Jones-Heath, the principal cyber adviser for the Air Force and Space Force… “A lot of the capabilities between them are not matching up. We’re beginning to find that out,” Joe Sublousky, vice president for All Domain Command and Control at SAIC.”

War in Ukraine could change the types of weapons the Pentagon wants, Raytheon CEO says. (Defense One) “What we’re learning from the war in Ukraine is big, slow things are big, slow targets, whether it’s warships or tanks,” Raytheon Technologies CEO Greg Hayes said in an interview Tuesday. “An asymmetric weapon can take out a multibillion dollar system.”… “I don’t think you’re gonna see that this year,” Hayes said.”

SCOUT wins defense contract to demonstrate utility of commercial data from sensors in space. (Space News) “Startup SCOUT Space won a Phase 2 Small Business Innovation Research contract from the U.S. Space Force to augment military systems with commercial data from space-based sensors… The Alexandria, Virginia-based company, founded in 2019, developed a sensing payload called SCOUT Vision that would give spacecraft “eyes to enable better navigation and avoid threats,” said co-founder and chief technology officer Sergio Gallucci. The payload uses computer vision and guidance software. The first one launched in June 2021 on an Orbit Fab’s on-orbit refueling spacecraft and is currently in operation.”

Air Force’s RQ-4 Global Hawk drones headed for retirement in FY27. (Breaking Defense) “Breaking Defense has obtained a June 27 letter from an Air Force Life Cycle Management Center contracting officer, which informed prime contractor Northrop Grumman of the sunset date for the Global Hawk Block 40 — the most modern version of the RQ-4 used by the service to collect surveillance and track ground targets… “Our ability to win future high-end conflicts requires accelerating investment in connected, survivable platforms and accepting short-term risks by divesting legacy ISR assets that offer limited capability against peer and near peer threats,” Stefanek said in a statement… “I think, in many ways, the Air Force is right: This is not a survivable platform if you were in war with a country that has advanced air defenses,” Pettyjohn said. “But really, none of our ISR platforms are. “

Kendall says F-35 engine decision needed soon; won’t limp along on R&D. (Air Force Magazine) “The Air Force will likely make a decision this summer on whether to insert Advanced Engine Transition Program (AETP) powerplants into the F-35 fleet, Secretary Frank Kendall said, because he doesn’t want to waste money on further delay if the program isn’t going forward… However, there are “two obstacles” to getting the AETP into the F-35, he said. “One is the high cost. It’s going to take several billion dollars [perhaps $6B] and a five-year program to move through [engineering and manufacturing development] to get that program ready to be fielded.” The other, he said, is that the AETP “will not fit all three variants of the F-35.”.. Kendall said he, personally, “very much desire[s]” to have “the AETP solution” in the F-35 because “you get significant range extension out of that” as well as “more capability that we need” for the F-35. “

Czech Republic declares intent to buy 24 F-35s, passing on Gripen. (Breaking Defense) “The Czech Republic will enter negotiations with the US government about a potential sale of up to 24 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, Czech government officials announced today. “Our decision to select this option is based on the analysis by the Czech Armed Forces, which clearly articulates that only the most advanced fifth generation fighters will be able to meet mission requirements in future battlefields,” Czech Defence Minister Jana Černochová said according to a news release... Prague’s decision to buy the F-35 is the latest in a series of major wins for jet, including recent announcements by Canada, Finland, Switzerland and Germany.

The hypersonic race: a case for guarded optimism. (Defense News) “Launching multiple lines of effort provided leaders with a set of options. Successful programs could be scaled up and underperforming programs terminated. The military deserves credit for allowing teams the opportunity to learn through failure.”