The Insider

By John Liang
September 2, 2011 at 4:54 PM

With Labor Day almost upon us, a congressional "supercommittee" will soon begin the process of cutting billions of dollars in government spending. A sizeable chunk of those cuts will likely impact the defense budget.

In that spirit, five Republican House and Senate lawmakers -- one of whom is on the supercommittee -- will appear at an event next week hosted by the American Enterprise Institute, the Foreign Policy Initiative and The Heritage Foundation to talk about where some of those defense-spending cuts may be made. The GOP lawmakers are:

Rep. Randy Forbes (VA)

Rep. Duncan Hunter (CA)

Rep. Allen West (FL)

Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC)

Sen. Jon Kyl (AZ)

Kyl's appearance is contingent on the supercommittee's meeting schedule, according to the event announcement.

By John Liang
September 1, 2011 at 8:04 PM

A State Department official briefed attendees of an international meeting in New York today called the "High Level Workshop Against Nuclear Tests -- From Here to 2015: Meeting the Targets of the NPT Action Plan."

During her briefing, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance Marcie Ries had the following to say about the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, including tidbits about some upcoming studies due out soon:

The United States is committed to pursuing U.S. ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) and to its entry into force at the earliest possible date. Entry into force of the CTBT is an essential step toward the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. While the United States abides by the core prohibition of the CTBT through our nuclear testing moratorium promulgated in 1992, the principal benefit of the Treaty -- that of constraining all states from testing -- still eludes us.

We have begun a deliberate and methodical process of engaging the U.S. Senate and the American public on the importance of the CTBT. Entry into force of the CTBT is an essential step toward the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons, a vision articulated by the President when he spoke in Prague in 2009. Our recent experience working with the U.S. Senate to gain ratification of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty – New START – with the Russian Federation has prepared us for what is expected to be an equally thorough and robust debate over the CTBT. We do not expect it will be easy or happen quickly, but we will work hard to make it happen.

The Administration commissioned a number of reports, including an updated National Intelligence Estimate and an independent National Academy of Sciences report to assess the ability of the United States to monitor compliance with the Treaty and the ability of the United States to maintain, in the absence of nuclear explosive testing, a safe, secure and effective nuclear arsenal so long as these weapons exist. A public version of the Academy’s report is expected to be released soon. These authoritative reports, together with others, will give the U.S. Senate a wealth of information to assist them in making a determination on the merits of ratification of the CTBT.

By John Liang
August 31, 2011 at 8:20 PM

The Missile Defense Agency today awarded Teledyne Technologies Inc.'s Huntsville, AL-based subsidiary Teledyne Brown Engineering a contract worth up to $595 million over the next five years to work on the Objective Simulation Framework program.

OSF will integrate MDA's modeling and simulation architectures for the Ballistic Missile Defense System. Work will begin Sept. 1, according to a company statement. Further:

Under the contract, Teledyne will design, develop, test, implement and maintain the OSF.  It will be the centerpiece test and simulation framework for all elements of the missile defense system.  The OSF will be capable of supporting full scale simulations, ground tests and live fire events.  For the first time, it will tie together the Digital Simulation Architecture with the Single Stimulation Framework.

"Winning this significant contract reflects well on our capabilities for designing and developing test systems for complex applications such as missile defense," said Robert Mehrabian, chairman, president, and chief executive officer of Teledyne Technologies. "We expect similar test technologies will have use in other markets we serve including energy, marine, aviation, space and environmental applications."

Teledyne Brown developed the first digital and Hardware-in-the-Loop (HWIL) test and assessment capabilities for missile defense. Through the years, Teledyne Brown developed and supported advancements in test frameworks that established ground test standards for missile defense systems. The company also developed an OSF prototype that incorporates legacy digital and HWIL capabilities to support Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) test and assessment activities.  Teledyne Brown has executed BMDS tests and assessments at its headquarters in Huntsville, Ala. and at other locations.

One of the teams Teledyne beat out for the contract was a Northrop Grumman-Boeing one. As Inside Missile Defense reported in March:

A Northrop Grumman executive told Inside Missile Defense earlier this month that the company's proposed partnership with Boeing was meant to "cause the least disruption" to MDA as the agency consolidates its Digital Simulation Architecture program -- developed by Northrop -- with the Single Stimulation Framework effort being developed by Boeing.

"The OSF program will enhance and integrate these current frameworks into a system that accurately represents the performance of fielded BMDS equipment against a variety of threats in realistic environments," the Northrop statement reads.

"Missile defense calls for flexible, high-fidelity simulations that are affordable. OSF is crucial for increasing the cost-effective role of modeling and simulation in verifying and certifying BMDS performance," Kelley Zelickson, vice president of Air and Missile Defense Systems for Northrop Grumman Information Systems, said in the statement. "In response, we have assembled an extraordinarily talented, comprehensive and balanced team to offer the best value with our proposal. We will perform the work in Colorado Springs and Huntsville, and collectively, we bring unmatched experience with BMDS elements and legacy architectures, niche expertise and innovation to deliver a modular, scalable and reconfigurable system to the MDA."

"The Northrop Grumman-Boeing team is committed to working with the MDA to achieve an optimized, common framework that will reduce the costs associated with modeling and simulation while enhancing the ability to evaluate new ballistic missile defense capabilities," Zelickson added.

By John Liang
August 31, 2011 at 4:12 PM

The Senate Armed Services Committee plans to hold a hearing to consider Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter's nomination to become deputy defense secretary on Sept. 13, according to a panel statement issued this morning.

The hearing will be held at 9:30 a.m. in room 106 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, the statement reads.

Carter has recently sought to dispel "understandable confusion" among Defense Department procurement officials about how and when to implement two policies central to the Obama administration's efforts to wring inefficiency and new savings from DOD's procurement process -- "should-cost" targets and  "affordability as a requirement."

In a two-page, Aug. 24 memo to DOD's acquisition community, Carter provides a brief tutorial on how -- particularly early in a program's life cycle -- to calibrate the two policies, both of which are designed to keep the focus on program costs. As InsideDefense.com reported last week:

"The two are compatible, but they must be balanced differently across the product life cycle," Carter writes. "The emphasis prior to milestone B [engineering and manufacturing development] should be on defining and achieving affordability targets. Past this point, the emphasis shifts to defining and achieving should-cost estimates."

The acquisition executive notes that these two policies "have come into conflict early in programs," particularly when affordability requirements are formulated to be in accord with service budget plans, yet when the program is not yet mature enough to clearly define should-cost estimates for future production.

Carter directs that during the early stages of product development, the priority should be on establishing affordability constraints. Should-cost policies, during that early phase, "should not keep us from making sound investments in product affordability," he directs.

By Sebastian Sprenger
August 30, 2011 at 5:55 PM

The House Armed Services Committee is planning a series of hearings intended to shed light on what one staffer called “the future of the military.”

The introspection comes amid great tension on Capitol Hill, with deep budget cuts on the table in defense and elsewhere.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has spoken out vigorously against defense spending cuts deeper than the $350 billion to $400 billion range discussed for many weeks, a range that has come to serve as something of a goalpost. Notably, he has also offered a fresh definition of national security that may not sit well with some hawks -- namely, that Americans' overall quality of life plays a part in ensuring it.

House Armed Services Committee spokesman John Noonan said the details of the hearing series have yet to be finalized. “Look for a good selection of 'Formers,' especially flag officers,” he told us via email. Another staffer said the lineup is expected to include former cabinet secretaries and chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

By Christopher J. Castelli
August 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Pentagon spokesman Col. David Lapan declined to comment this morning on the substance of the recommendations of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, which the panel previewed today in a Washington Post Op-Ed. The panel's report is due out this week, Lapan said, noting he had not yet seen it and he was unsure whether the panel provided a prepublication copy to the Pentagon. He said the department has been aware of contracting "deficiencies" and has been working to fix them.

By Jason Sherman
August 29, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Gen. Robert Kehler, head of U.S. Strategic Command, will convene an advisory panel in early November to examine a wide range of policy issues including space, intelligence and cyber operations, an assessment of the nuclear weapons stockpile, global strike, command and control, and missile defense.

Kehler, an Air Force officer who assumed command of the Nebraska-headquartered command in January, will meet with the STRATCOM Strategic Advisory Panel on Nov. 1-2 in a closed session at Offutt Air Force Base, NE, according to a notice in the Federal Register last week.

“The purpose of the meeting is to provide advice on scientific, technical, intelligence, and policy-related issues to the commander, U.S. Strategic Command, during the development of the Nation's strategic war plans,” states the Aug. 23 notice.

No further specifics about the meeting are available, according to a spokesman for the body. An identical agenda was published this spring in advance of a April 7-8 meeting of the advisory group, the 85th plenary meeting of the body.

Retired Gen. James McCarthy, professor at the Air Force Academy, headed a panel on Nuclear Enterprise and Global Strike that focused on command and control (C2); planning; intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; execution; and, mission assessment, according to minutes of the April meeting. "In order to maintain the current level of security, we need to engage in a robust analytical assessment of our C2 capabilities leading to a modernization program," the panel reported to the advisory group.

Priscilla Guthrie, chief information officer in the Office of the Director for National Intelligence, this spring delivered a report of a panel assigned to examine the authorities, responsibilities, and relationships needed for an effective joint approach to conduct STRATCOM's missions in, through, and from cyberspace.

"The panel's recommendation was to develop relationships and interfaces with USG policy-development components similar to those for Strategic Deterrence and Space, recognizing that the USG cyberspace policy landscape is evolving rapidly," according to the minutes of that meeting.

Former National Reconnaissance Office Director Keith Hall delivered a report on space operations, including an assessment of the feasibility of using a capability similar to the Space-Based Infrared System to substitute for radio-frequency systems for missile-defense trajectory tracking. "It was concluded that a SBIRS Low-like capability could theoretically replace RF systems for theater missile defense if deployed in sufficient numbers with adequate on-board and ground processing," according to the minutes.

Keith Payne, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for forces policy during the George W. Bush administration, and an outspoken critic of the priority President Obama placed in April 2009 of pursuing the eventual elimination of existing nuclear arsenals, presented a policy panel report. The panel presented a report on the "pros and cons" of completely jettisoning the bomb, according to the minutes:

They considered how much deterrence and assurance is needed and what has proven historically effective. What future threat do Russia and China present? What is the impact of proliferating weapons of mass destruction? How does human nature drive state nature? They recognized that there are no "universal truths" regarding how, what capabilities and how much deterrence and assurance is necessary to maintain stability. The panel recommended continuing a dual track capability to provide deterrence and assurance while working toward zero nuclear weapons.

Another panels, led by Joan Dempsey, senior vice president at Booz Allen Hamilton, headed a group that looked at how DOD's intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets can better serve STRATCOM's priorities. According to the minutes:

The resources needed to focus on strategic issues do not exist. The intelligence community is not responsive to the needs of USSTRATCOM. Resources needed for strategic analysis are focused on direct support to on-going combat operations.

By John Liang
August 26, 2011 at 4:41 PM

The Air Force Research Laboratory's Munitions Directorate and Lockheed Martin have signed a five-year, cooperative research and development agreement to assess the viability of the company's cooled tri-mode seeker for integration onto Air Force weapon platforms, according to a Lockheed statement issued this morning:

"We will work closely with Lockheed Martin to leverage their mature seeker technology with some of our novel in-house targeting concepts. Our scientists are excited to begin incorporating these proven tri-mode seekers into data collects, algorithm developments and subsystem evaluations," said Buddy Goldsmith, chief of the U.S. Air Force's Weapon Seeker Sciences Branch and Seeker Phenomenology Evaluation and Research (SPEAR) facility.

Lockheed Martin and AFRL will work together over the next five years to thoroughly assess tri-mode weapon capabilities, emerging targeting concepts and guidance techniques.  Data and analysis from this effort will enable AFRL to develop a baseline for integrating seekers onto future U.S. Air Force weapon platforms intended to engage stationary and mobile targets in day, night and adverse weather conditions.

"We are pleased the U.S. Air Force is interested in further evaluating our tri-mode seeker and pushing it to its operational limits," said Frank St. John, vice president of tactical missiles in Lockheed Martin’s Missiles and Fire Control business. "We have continued developing and testing our seeker hardware and software for other customers and applications since the end of the Small Diameter Bomb II competition, and we look forward to demonstrating our mature seeker still offers superior effectiveness at the best value."

Lockheed Martin’s cooled tri-mode seeker is based on three combat-proven weapon systems: Javelin, LONGBOW and HELLFIRE. The first-generation tri-mode seeker was developed in 2001 for the Common Missile program; later generations were developed for the Small Diameter Bomb II and other weapon systems. The seeker, now in its fourth generation, has undergone thousands of hours of laboratory, tower and captive-carry tests and has been proven in dirty battlefield testing and in guided flight.

The tri-mode seeker combines a semi-active laser sensor, an imaging infrared (I2R) sensor and a millimeter-wave radar into a single seeker with a common aperture. The cooled I2R sensor provides passive detection and lock-on-before-launch from substantial standoff ranges, significantly increasing warfighter survivability. All three sensor modes run simultaneously and share information in flight, allowing warfighters to defeat moving and stationary targets on land, at sea, in adverse weather and in an obscured/countermeasure environment, with true fire-and-forget capability.

Lockheed Martin’s tri-mode seeker recently defeated a variety of countermeasures and obscurants in a series of challenging and realistic battlefield environments. Test results demonstrated all three sensor modes successfully communicated and worked collaboratively to effectively address and defeat each countermeasure and obscurant, targeting both moving and stationary targets.

By John Liang
August 25, 2011 at 7:46 PM

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is "becoming a budgetary bargaining chip," according to a just-released research note from analysts at Wall Street firm Credit Suisse.

The analysts' note references a letter sent yesterday by a key Republican senator urging Ashton Carter, the Obama administration's deputy defense secretary-nominee, to "step up" his defense of the JSF, suggesting that Carter's role in recent Pentagon decisions to restructure the program demonstrates "a lack of commitment to the success" of the F-35. As InsideDefense.com reported yesterday:

In a letter sent to Carter today, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) directly links the Senate's consideration of Carter's nomination for the Pentagon's No. 2 post to the lawmaker's concerns about the F-35, which is assembled by prime contractor Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX. Carter, the Pentagon's acquisition executive, has played a pivotal role in decisions over the last two years to restructure the program, including deferring the procurement of 246 aircraft and plowing an additional $7.2 billion and two more years into the fighter's development phase.

"I am concerned that the DOD’s failure to sufficiently defend and advocate for the F-35 program has enabled and even invited unwarranted criticisms from many corners, including calls for partial or complete cancellation of the program," Cornyn writes. "It is my hope that, as deputy secretary of defense, you would be a champion of the F-35 program, using your voice to remind Congress that this weapon system is one our nation cannot do without."

"I strongly encourage you to step up your defense of this key program," Cornyn's letter states.

In a statement to InsideDefense.com, a Defense Department spokeswoman said: "We've received the letter, it asks important questions, and we look forward to sending a response."

The Credit Suisse research note issued this afternoon states that the Cornyn letter "illuminates proponents' rising fear of F-35 program vulnerability." Specifically:

Sen. Cornyn's perception triggers strong inference that [the Office of the Secretary of Defense] may target both F-35 Force Structure and Procurement quantities, under constrained 2013-2017 [program objective memorandum] deliberations. This concern is exacerbated by immediate flat-lining of [Defense Department] Base Budget for 2012-2013, under recent Budget Control Act.  (USAF currently plans to procure 1,763 CTOL; and Navy/USMC 680 CV/STOVL; for 2,443 total DoD orders - see F-35 funding charts inside)

Cornyn's Approach May Have Limited Impact: This Congressional effort at "hard-bargaining" bears obvious risk, given overriding focus by OMB & OSD Leadership on meeting Defense Funding "caps"; delayed nature of final 2013-2017 POM decisions in November-December; and level of Senate goodwill for Secretary Panetta. We think Senator Cornyn's action is unlikely to be supported by [Senate Armed Services Committee] Chairman [Carl] Levin (D-MI) or Ranking Member [John] McCain (R-AZ), who both harbor strong concerns over F-35 production cost-growth, and estimated future sustainment costs. (Nor does Senator Cornyn sit on SASC Air/Land Subcommittee, with jurisdiction over F-35). This also reinforces importance of F-35 LRIP 5 "Should Cost" Review (~October), because that will be the next insight into F-35 Unit-cost affordability.

By John Liang
August 25, 2011 at 5:23 PM

The Pentagon earlier this month released an updated doctrine document on conducting joint operations. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen writes in the introduction to Joint Publication 3-0:

This revised edition of Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations, reflects the current guidance for conducting joint activities across the range of military operations and is the basis for U.S. participation in multinational operations where the United States has not ratified specific doctrine or procedures. This keystone publication forms the core of joint warfighting doctrine and establishes the framework for our forces' ability to fight as a joint team.

Often called the "linchpin" of the joint doctrine publication hierarchy, the overarching constructs and principles contained in this publication provide a common perspective from which to plan and execute joint operations independently or in cooperation with our multinational partners, other U.S. Government departments and agencies, and intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations.

As our Nation continues into the 21st century, the guidance in this publication will enable current and future leaders of the Armed Forces of the United States to design, plan, organize, train for, and execute worldwide missions as our forces transform to meet emerging challenges. To succeed, we need adaptive and thinking professionals who understand the capabilities their Service brings to joint operations; how to integrate those capabilities with those of the other Services and interorganizational partners to optimize the strength of unified action; and how to organize, employ, and sustain joint forces to provide national leaders with multiple options for addressing various security threats. Above all, we need professionals imbued with a sense of commitment and honor who will act decisively in the absence of specific guidance.

I challenge all commanders to ensure the widest distribution of this keystone joint publication and actively promote the use of all joint publications at every opportunity. I further challenge you to study and understand the guidance contained in this publication and teach these principles to your subordinates. Only then will we be able to fully exploit the remarkable military potential inherent in our joint teams.

By
August 24, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Michael Schifer, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia, will hold a press briefing today on the Pentagon's report to Congress on the “Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China.”

The briefing is set for 2:00. We'll have details and the report as they are available.

By Christopher J. Castelli
August 23, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Pentagon spokesman Col. David Lapan told reporters this morning that the Defense Department expects to send Congress a tardy annual report on China's military later this week.

Defense officials will also brief reporters on the document, he said.

The report is due to Congress each March, but is typically late. Asked why this year's edition is late, Lapan said, "It's a very complicated undertaking."

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) has been urging DOD to submit the document. (See his letter here.)

By Sebastian Sprenger
August 22, 2011 at 8:06 PM

The losing contractor team in the Army's Ground Combat Vehicle competition is slated to get a debriefing from the government tomorrow in Detroit, according to Melissa Koskovich, a spokeswoman for lead company Science Applications International Corp.

While an SAIC-Boeing team was not selected to partake in technology development for the program last week, the meeting is crucial because it could determine whether the contractors believe they have grounds to file a protest with the Government Accountability Office.

Following a debriefing, companies typically have 10 days to file their case with GAO.

The SAIC-Boeing team had pitched a vehicle based on the chassis of the German Puma, which was to be extended to house a nine-man squad.

Citing federal procurement laws, an Army spokesman said he was unable to confirm or deny the date of the SAIC-Boeing debriefing.

By John Liang
August 22, 2011 at 6:26 PM

The National Governors Association is continuing its push for legislation that would clarify and strengthen the National Guard's role within the Defense Department. In a letter sent today to Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the NGA states:

The nation's governors appreciate your work to support the National Guard and thank you for introducing the National Guard Empowerment and State-National Defense Integration Act of 2011. This legislation represents an important step forward in ensuring that our National Guard is properly trained, equipped, and resourced to fulfill its federal and state missions and that the Guard is properly represented within the Department of Defense.

The National Guard serves as a unique resource in the nation’s defense by supporting overseas missions and protecting the homeland.  Since September 11, 2001, hundreds of thousands of National Guard members have served in federal combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. At the same time, the men and women of our National Guard have helped protect the safety and security of citizens during the response to domestic emergencies. The National Guard’s presence in our communities is a cornerstone of state preparedness and response capabilities and helps reduce the need for federal assistance during times of crisis.

The National Guard Empowerment and State-National Defense Integration Act recognizes the importance of the Guard’s overseas and homeland defense missions.  Governors agree with the legislation’s objectives of further clarifying and strengthening the role of the National Guard within the Department of Defense and ensuring the National Guard is able to carry out domestic operations in support of civilian authorities.  These initiatives reflect and support the important role of the National Guard. We look forward to working with you to further these efforts.

By Jason Sherman
August 22, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the Pentagon is working with OMB to revise spending blueprints for fiscal year 2013, his first comments on budget matters since OMB Director Jacob Lew on Aug. 17 directed executive branch agencies to prepare plans that are 5 percent and 10 percent below FY-11 spending levels.

“As always, we will work with OMB,” Panetta told the DOD-run American Forces Press Service in a story published online Friday afternoon. “They provide all kinds of guidance as we discuss how we approach these issues.”

The Pentagon's FY-11 budget allocation, excluding war costs, is $530 billion. A 5 percent cut, or $26.5 billion, would lower the military's FY-13 base budget to $503.5 billion. A 10 percent cut to projected FY-13 Pentagon spending, a $53 billion decrement, would push DOD's topline down to $477 billion and be in line with defense spending cuts required under the new law if Congress this fall does not agree to a long-term plan to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion.

More from the AFPS story:

Defense Department officials are working with the Office of Management and Budget on guidance issued yesterday that all agencies’ fiscal 2013 budget requests be at least 5 percent less than current appropriations.

Pentagon Press Secretary George Little told reporters today that Defense officials are working with OMB to determine what that will mean for the DOD budget.

“I don’t think this is necessarily a sea-change event,” he said, adding that Pentagon officials for months have been working toward a goal of cutting $400 billion from the budget over the next 10 years.