Embrace the Air-Power Revolution

U.S. Can't Approach 5th-Gen Aircraft the 'Old Way'

By ROBBIN LAIRD
Published: 21 February 2011

U.S. air power has reached a turning point. As budget cuts increase and the U.S. Air Force's percentage of the defense budget falls, the crucial requirement is to invest in the future. President Barack Obama is calling for a Sputnik moment in the investment in future technologies, and there is little reason to exclude the Defense Department from such an effort.
Yet this is exactly what is happening. After canceling the F-22 without ever understanding what the Raptor brings to the joint war fighter, the administration is slowing its investment in the F-35, instead putting money into legacy aircraft.
The new aircraft represent a sea change with significant savings in terms of fleet costs and overall capability. But this will not happen unless policymakers understand that the transition is not simply from fourth-generation to fifth-generation aircraft, but a transition from yesterday's approach to war fighting to distributed operations.
The shift is from linear to sequential operations; it is a shift away from fighter pilots who need to reach back for support from large aircraft command-and-control and ISR platforms, to 360-degree dominance by deployed decision-makers operating not in a network but a honeycomb.
The F-35 is a flying combat system able to operate across the spectrum of warfare. It is the first plane that has the combat system to manage 360-degree space. Deployed as a force, it enables distributed air operations, an approach crucial to the survival of our pilots in the period ahead.
The fifth-generation aircraft are a benchmark for a new approach to airpower. The traditional aircraft adds systems that provide capabilities, and the pilot has to manage each new system. The F-35 has five major combat systems that interact with each other to provide capabilities.
Functional capabilities emerge from the interaction of the systems done by the machine and are not simply correlated with a single system. For example, jamming can be done by several systems aboard the aircraft; the machine determines which one through interaction among the systems. The entire system rests on a common architecture with broadband capabilities.
But if airpower leaders simply mimic the operations of older aircraft with fifth-generation planes, the promise of new air operations will not be realized. The result would be a repeat of the failures of the French facing the Germans in World War II, where the French had superior tanks but outmoded tactics and command structures, and achieved predictable results.
The new aircraft simply do not function as do the old. Considerable cultural change will be required in moving to distributed air operations and decision-makers.
And the shift will require developers of weapons and remotely piloted aircraft to think differently about how to leverage the new stealth-enabled distributed air operational capabilities.
F-22 pilots have already called for the change. They don't want to be tethered to the Airborne Warning and Control System; they don't want to be directed by the classic operations of a centralized combat air operations center.
Another key part of the airpower cultural revolution is the approach to maintainability. To hear some Air Force officials, they sound like the union members in the 1970s objecting to changes in the work force associated with digital production of the newspaper. To recall the days of the controversy, union members wanted to keep their typesetting functions in spite of the elimination of the jobs necessary to produce a newspaper digitally. They lost and Rupert Murdoch won.
The same is true of the shift from mechanical to digital maintenance regimes. Many jobs will be eliminated - the U.S. Marine Corps estimates one-third - and the tooth-to-tail ratio much improved.
The administration's ideological opposition to performance-based logistics (PBL) systems is part of the problem of "union style" resistance to change. The last administration signed a PBL with the partners; the current administration should honor it. The benefits are clear; less cost for sustainment for a more capable aircraft.
In short, the U.S. and its partners are on the cusp of an air-power revolution if our leaders have the courage to embrace cultural change. And there is a clear need to direct investments toward the future, not the past. After all, this is change you can believe in.
Robbin Laird is editor of a book on the evolution of air operations, "Re-Norming Air Operations," and co-founder of the defense analytical website Second Line of Defense.

IDEX: NATO, Thales Extend Comms System Agreement

ABU DHABI - NATO has extended with Thales for two years a contract to act as operator of the secure communications system used by coalition forces in Afghanistan, the French systems company said in a Feb. 20 statement at IDEX 2011.

Thales won a contract in 2007 years ago to provide an information and communications service for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The service allows more than 7,000 users in the various militaries to talk to each other on the Afghan Mission Network, the company said.

No financial details were available.
"We are very proud of the renewed trust shown in us by NATO for such a sensitive issue as the outsourcing of its communications capabilities, with all the security aspects that this involves," said Pascale Sourisse, Thales senior vice president in charge of C4I (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence), Defense and Security activities.
The system uses satellite, point-to-point radio links, fiber optics, secure voice over internet protocol (VoIP) and video on demand, the company said.

IDEX: QinetiQ Reaches Research Deal With Saudis

ABU DHABI - British defense technology company QinetiQ has inked a memorandum of understanding to undertake joint development work with a leading Saudi Arabia research center.

QinetiQ said in a statement released Feb. 20 at IDEX 2011 that it had agreed a deal with King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST) to collaborate on a range of research and technology development programs.

The sectors being eyed for collaboration include autonomy, robotics, sensors, communications and remote sensing, QinetiQ said.
Based in Riyadh, KACST is the Saudi national science agency and manages Saudi Arabia's national laboratories.

Pentagon Contract Auditors Overwhelmed

The agency that makes sure the U.S. Defense Department and other agencies are not overcharged by contractors is overwhelmed.
The volume of contractor work that has been paid for by federal departments but that still awaits auditing by the Defense Contract Audit Agency has nearly quadrupled - from $110 billion in 2006 to $405 billion in 2010. But in the same period, the Defense Contract Audit Agency's staffing grew by only 20 percent.

The $405 billion represents approximately 20,000 contracts, most of which were awarded by the Defense Department in support of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Kenneth Saccoccia, DCAA's assistant director of policy and plans. Of that, about a third - 6,500 contracts valued at an estimated $220 billion - have been awaiting auditing for more than a year.
"And intentionally, we have deferred it because of the resources," Saccoccia said in an interview. "We've dedicated those resources to higher-priority work, like forward-pricing work," which reviews contracts before they are finalized to help contracting officers negotiate a price.
The result of the backlog is that an estimated billions of dollars worth of savings are not being identified and returned to the Defense Department, experts say.
Also, such delays make it more difficult for auditors to prove overcharging that occurred years ago, because people involved with those transactions have moved on to other jobs or they remember less about the circumstances surrounding particular transactions.
Michael Thibault, who has been investigating DCAA's work as co-chair of the Commission on Wartime Contracting, said the agency needs a bigger audit staff, but that solution will take time.
Thibault blames the agency's inadequate staffing levels on poor planning by the Defense Department. Over the last several years, DoD contracting increased to support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet DCAA staffing levels remained about the same, he said.
"They should have been increasing the oversight needed for contracts … and they just didn't," Thibault said. "They missed it."
DCAA has added about 500 auditors to its work force over the last couple of years. Director Patrick Fitzgerald said in an interview last year that he plans to add 1,000 more by 2015. But Saccoccia said the current budget standstill makes staffing plans difficult to predict.
In the meantime, Thibault, who worked at DCAA for more than 30 years, including a 10-year stint as its deputy director, said he supports other solutions Fitzgerald has outlined, including changing the risk thresholds that require forward-pricing audits and simplifying the business systems that auditors use.
Still, as auditors work through the buildup from 2006 through 2008, 2009 and 2010 audits are piling up, Thibault said.
Since some problems that auditors find occur more than once, that means issues that could have been identified in 2006 and prevented in the following years may have happened repeatedly, he said.
Thibault and others, like Nick Schwellenbach with the Project on Government Oversight, are especially concerned about the amount of money being left on the table as these contracts go unaudited.
Historically, DCAA identifies between 1 percent and 2 percent in savings from incurred cost audits, Thibault said.
That means $4 billion could be recovered right now if DCAA were to complete backlogged audits. And the longer it takes to audit a contract, the greater the chances that records get lost and employees change jobs, Thibault said.
Saccoccia said timeliness is always a concern at DCAA. But he said they hope contracting rules allow DCAA to obtain sufficient evidence from the contractor to perform quality audits and give contracting officers necessary information for negotiations to close contracts.
DCAA also has turned down some audit requests from non-Defense agencies that pay for its services, forcing those departments to seek audit help from private firms, and causing some to revive suggestions for another audit agency within the federal government to serve non-DoD agencies.
Saccoccia said audits of incurred contract costs can be put on the back burner because they can be picked up more easily at a later time than forward-pricing audits, which can hold up a contract award.
"The audit effort on those high-risk proposals is crucial to ensure the fair and reasonable price is established by the contracting officer," he said.
At a Senate contract oversight committee hearing this month, Schwellenbach spoke in favor of creating another audit agency.
He said the contract auditing done by DCAA is highly specialized and often cannot be replicated by inspectors general or outside auditors. And with more contracts coming out of non-Defense agencies, DCAA's problems could get worse, he said.
Schwellenbach pointed to recent criticisms of DCAA's past auditing practices as the cause of the backlog, saying auditors now take much longer to perform their duties for fear of mistakes.
"Some of that makes sense given the problems, but some think the pendulum has swung too far the other way," he said. "Essentially, taxpayers are going to be the big losers."
Despite the slowdown, Saccoccia said the percentage of costs DCAA questioned more than doubled in 2010 when compared with the average between 2001 and 2008, resulting in a savings of almost $3 billion.
"Really, we focus on the high-risk areas," he said. "Right now, I would say wartime contracting is our highest risk. So this year, we're dedicating resources in that area for looking at those incurred costs."
DCAA plans to get auditors to spend one-third more time on incurred cost audits then they did in 2010, Saccoccia said.
"That's our initial plan," he said. "That always can change, based on higher-risk forward-pricing effort that comes in."

IDEX: ATK To Modify Planes for Jordanian Military

ABU DHABI - The Jordanian military is turning two CASA-235 aircraft into heavily armed gunships and has contracted ATK to modify the transport aircraft, the U.S. firm announced Feb. 20 at IDEX 2011.

A graphic of the gunship that ATK will produce for the Royal Jordanian Air Force. (ATK)

ATK is partnering with Jordanian state-owned King Abdullah II Design and Development Bureau to modifying the EADS-built aircraft in time for a late spring 2013 delivery to the Royal Jordanian Air Force.

ATK will install and integrate electro-optical targeting systems, a laser designator, aircraft self-protection equipment, and an armaments capability that includes Hellfire laser-guided missiles, 2.75-inch rockets, and a M230 link-fed 30mm chain gun similar to the one ATK supplies for the Apache attack helicopter.
Work will be performed in Jordan and at three ATK sites in the U.S.
ATK's special mission aircraft business in 2008 modified a Cessna Grand Caravan to an armed configuration for the Iraqi military. The aircraft has a similar weapons fit to the Jordanian aircraft. Its capabilities include air-to-air and air-to-ground data links.
In a separate announcement involving Jordan, the Austrian rotary unmanned air systems supplier Schiebel said it had delivered two Camcopter S-100 machines to KADDB. The vehicles will be used by the Royal Jordanian Air Force for surveillance and reconnaissance duties.

ABU DHABI - A David-and-Goliath pairing of L-3 Communications and armored vehicle minnow Total Mobility Vehicles (TMV) made their debut together Feb. 20 on the opening day of IDEX 2011, marrying a new 6x6 platform with an integrated network of sensors and displays.

U.S. systems giant L-3 is teaming with the British vehicle maker to showcase an array of capabilities based on what it calls its Ruggedized Command and Control Network.

L-3 demonstrated a virtual version of a generic vehicle, deploying its RCCN system to potential customers in the U.S. last year.
This time it has gone one better, and it brought the real deal in the shape of the imposing TMV vehicle fitted out with its systems and products to IDEX 2011, which runs through Feb. 24.
The "best way to demonstrate the company's vehicle networking capabilities is on a rolling test bed and the newly designed TMV vehicle is the perfect fit," said Pete Alexander, business development director for L-3's San Diego-based Ruggedized Command & Control Solutions business.
The tie-up with TMV doesn't mean L-3 is getting into the platform business. But Alexander said it does show L-3's ability to integrate systems from across the marketplace, including many in-house technologies, in a rugged open architecture network.
"We are vehicle agnostic and equipment agnostic; we are not vertically aligned; and we can play in the field as a neutral, trusted supplier," he said.
Alexander said some of the vehicle primes have been bringing equipment capability back in-house in recent times - and in doing so they "have pigeon holed themselves" to provide only what solutions they can offer from their own product ranges.
L-3 marketing literature at the show claims the RCCN is the "first operationally proven, truly agnostic vehicle network solution."
Alexander said L-3 can supply solutions free of U.S. technology export restrictions, if required.
TMV brought a special forces-configured vehicle to IDEX, with L-3's RCCN providing the electronic backbone for a baseline suite of capabilities that includes displays, data receiver terminals, vision enhancers, event recorders and electronic jammers.
Other 6x6 versions of the TMV, like an armored personnel carrier, could include remote weapons stations, mast mounted sensor suites, weapon sights and electro optical/infrared systems.
For TMV, the association with L-3 "demonstrates to potential customers the ease of integrating top-line systems into our vehicle and helps people recognize our ambitions in the marketplace," said John Stretton, the British company's managing director.
TMV, an outgrowth of the Leyland Technical Centre, has matured the high protection, high mobility 6x6 vehicle to the point where it could deliver a fully integrated machine to a customer in the first quarter of 2012, Stretton said.
It's not just the military on which TMV is focusing, Stretton said. Applications like border patrol and emergency response vehicles are also in the company's sights. And 4x4 and 8x8 versions of the vehicle also are on the drawing board.

Israel Remains Alarmed At Iranian Ship Moves

JERUSALEM - Israel views with "gravity" what Iran says is the "routine" dispatch of two warships to the Mediterranean, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Feb. 20, as the vessels were expected to pass through the Suez Canal.
During his weekly cabinet meeting, Netanyahu said Israel viewed the movement as an Iranian power play.

"Today we are witnessing the instability of the region in which we live and in which Iran is trying to profit by extending its influence by dispatching two warships to cross the Suez Canal," Netanyahu said, according to a statement from his office.
"Israel views with gravity this Iranian initiative and other developments that reinforce what we have said in past years about the Israel's security needs."
Last week, Israel Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman called the move a "provocation."
Egypt has given two Iranian ships permission to use the waterway en route to Syria.
The move - the first time Iranian warships will have transit ted the canal since the Islamic revolution of 1979 - is "routine" and "short term," an Iranian diplomat said.
"This will be a routine visit, within international law, in line with the cooperation between Iran and Syria, who have strategic ties," the diplomat said.
"The ships will spend a few days in Syrian ports for training purposes," having already visited several countries including Oman and Saudi Arabia."
A senior Suez Canal official said that the warships had yet to reach the waterway, after Iranian television earlier reported that they were already in the Mediterranean.
"No Iranian ships have passed. Not today, not yesterday, not the day before," according to operations room chief Ahmed al-Manakhly.
Manakhly did not say when the Iranian ships were scheduled to arrive, but canal officials have privately said they were expected early Feb. 21.
Kharg has a crew of 250 and can carry up to three helicopters. Alvand is armed with torpedos and anti-ship missiles.
Egypt's MENA news agency reported that the request for the ships to pass through the Suez Canal said they were not carrying weapons, or nuclear or chemical materials.