The Insider

The Army recently released its "Equipment Modernization Plan 2014," which "describes the Army Research, Development, and Acquisition (RDA) for ten capability portfolio areas and the Science and Technology portion of Fiscal Year 2014 (FY 14) President's Budget Request." Further:

The plan breaks down the RDA investments into ten capability portfolio areas, highlights the portfolio accomplishments over the last two years and provides intent for FY 14 investments as well as the way ahead. Dollars and quantities in this document do not reflect sequestration impacts.

In addition to capability portfolio investment strategies, the plan links RDA investments to Army Strategy and discusses specific modernization priorities and objectives, priority materiel programs, the Army's Science and Technology program, equipment fielding and distribution.

The Soldier and Squad are the foundation of our Army. Army equipment modernization builds from the Soldier out, equipping our Squads for tactical overmatch in all situations, connected to an integrated network, and operating in vehicles that improve mobility and lethality while preserving survivability.

The objective of Army equipment modernization is to develop and field versatile and tailorable equipment that is affordable, sustainable, cost-effective, enables our Soldiers to fight and win across the entire range of conflict. To achieve this objective the Army uses portfolio management to help ensure efficiencies and eliminate redundancies, evolutionary acquisition to ensure program risk is reduced by emphasizing mature technologies, and the Army readiness model to ensure the timely fielding of equipment.

View the plan here.

Inside the Army reported in March that the service had drafted a related equipment modernization strategy focused on developing "versatile, tailorable, yet affordable and cost-effective" capabilities for a time of fiscal austerity:

The document, first reported last week by InsideDefense.com, broadly outlines the service's goals for each of its equipment modernization portfolios for the next 35 years and is frank in its assessment of the current fiscal environment.

"We realize that the optimal strategy for developing capabilities includes steady funding and stable requirements, but the next decade does not provide us this opportunity," the strategy states. "Therefore, knowing that funding will be anything but stable and requirements will rapidly evolve based upon the threat and pace of innovation, we will seek to leverage existing government and commercial 'off the shelf' improvements, minimize development costs, invest in defense related disruptive technologies, make smaller but more frequent incremental procurements and always be prepared to 'scale-up' to meet the requirements to defeat an adversary when large scale mobilization is required."

The document was previewed last month when Lt. Gen. James Barclay, the Army's top budget programmer, said the service had crafted a new modernization strategy to account for billions of dollars in budget cuts over the next decade.

The main concepts in the strategy will be used in concert with the Army's 30-year plan being drafted by Heidi Shyu, the service's acquisition executive, to "provide the specifics of what will be modernized and when," the document states.

View the rest of that story here.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced yesterday it had notified Congress of a proposed $793 million foreign military sale to South Korea for F-35 aircraft weapons and associated equipment:

This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign policy goals and national security objectives of the United States by meeting the legitimate security and defense needs of an ally and partner nation. The ROK continues to be an important force for peace, political stability, and economic progress in North East Asia.

The proposed sale will provide the ROK with aircraft weapons for the F-35. These aircraft and weapons will provide the ROK with a credible defense capability to deter aggression in the region and ensure interoperability with U.S. forces. The ROK will use the enhanced capability as a deterrent to regional threats and strengthen its homeland defense. Additionally, operational control (OPCON) will transfer from U.S. Forces Korea/Combined Forces Command (USFK/CFC) to the ROK’s Korea Command (KORCOM) in 2015. This upgrade will enhance the capability needed to support OPCON transfer.

To view the full DSCA statement, which includes a detailed list of the weapons that would be sold if lawmakers approve the deal, click here.

Last month, F-35 Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan appeared before the Senate Armed Services airland subcommittee and discussed long-term plans to reduce sustainment costs on the F-35 aircraft -- and the potential to add new international partners Singapore and South Korea to the program, among many other issues. One issue outlined in his written testimony was the status of the F-35's developmental helmet, which has suffered from image latency, jitter and a coloration in the visor known as "green glow." As Inside the Air Force reported in April:

According to Bogdan's prepared statement, the F-35 program completed a five-month test period dedicated to helmet issues in March. That five-month test phase involved developmental and operational test pilots flying "a number of operationally representative missions," and has given the program significant new insight into why those problems exist and how to fix most of them, he wrote.

"As a result of this testing, the program now understands and has mitigated the effects of 'green glow,' latency, jitter and alignment," Bogdan said. "Additional work still needs to be done to ensure that the program has a night vision camera that is effective for operations as our testing indicated that the current night vision camera is unsuitable for operational use."

The program is developing a secondary or backup helmet that would require pilots to wear night-vision goggles over their helmet to meet night-vision requirements.

The F-35 program has a number of major decision points coming up in the next six months, ITAF reported:

JSF officials have completed a critical design review of the F-35C carrier variant's new tail hook and intend to ground-test it in New Jersey in the late summer or fall; Singapore and South Korea are expected to make a decision this summer on whether to buy into the program; and the Air Force and Navy are congressionally mandated to declare their projected initial operational capability dates by June 1. The Marine Corps has already done so, announcing that it plans to hit IOC in 2015.

Read the full story here.

The Navy has established its own component commander for U.S. Northern Command, according to a service memo.

The May 17 memo states:

This action establishes a Navy component commander for U.S. Northern Command, which had not previously had a Navy component commander. U.S. Northern Command had assumed many responsibilities of the former joint forces command for which Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command (COMUSFLTFORCOM) has served as Navy component commander, and Northern Command is seeking the same type of Navy component commander support.

The mission of the new head of U.S. Naval Forces Northern Command, which will be based in Norfolk, VA, is to "contribute to the defense of North America through coordination, collaboration, and communication with allied, coalition, and joint forces in the U.S. Northern Command area of responsibility," according to the memo.

Joint Staff Director Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti has been tabbed by President Obama to become the next head of U.S. Forces in Korea, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said today.

Scaparrotti will replace Gen. J.D. Thurman, Hagel said during a Pentagon briefing.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey said this about Scaparrotti:

I can think of no finer officer to be promoted to general and to take command of U.S. Forces-Korea than Mike Scaparrotti. Scap's an exceptionally competent leader, with the moral character to match. Like our current commander, General J.D. Thurman, he is extraordinarily well suited to sustaining our strong alliance with the Republic of Korea. Scrap's quiet confidence has delivered success throughout his career, and whether as deputy commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, or more recently and currently as the director of the Joint Staff.

The Defense Department should "periodically review and improve [the] visibility of combatant commands' resources," a new Government Accountability Office report recommends.

"Authorized military and civilian positions and mission and headquarters-support costs have grown considerably over the last decade due to the addition of two new commands and increases in authorized positions at theater special operations commands," the May 15 report states. Additionally, military and civilian personnel positions went up by "about 50 percent" between fiscal years 2001 and 2012, to about 10,100 authorized positions.

GAO further found that "mission and headquarters support-costs at the combatant commands more than doubled from fiscal years 2007 through 2012, to about $1.1 billion. Both authorized military and civilian positions and mission and headquarters-support costs at the service component commands supporting the combatant commands also increased."

While the Pentagon "has taken some steps" to manage COCOMs' resources, GAO found that DOD's processes to review size and oversee those commands have "four primary weaknesses that challenge the department's ability to make informed decisions." Those are:

• DOD considers the combatant commands' requests for additional positions, but it does not periodically evaluate the commands' authorized positions to ensure they are still needed to meet the commands' assigned missions.

• DOD tracks some assigned personnel; however, all personnel supporting the commands are not included in DOD's personnel management system and reviews of assigned personnel vary by command.

• The service component commands support both service and combatant command missions. However, the Joint Staff and combatant commands lack visibility and oversight over the authorized manpower and personnel at the service component commands to determine whether functions at the combatant commands can be fulfilled by service component command personnel.

• Each military department submits annual budget documents for operation and maintenance to inform Congress of total authorized positions, full-time equivalents, and mission and headquarters-support funding for all combatant commands that they support. However, these documents do not provide transparency into the resources directed to each combatant command.

"GAO's work on strategic human capital management found that high-performing organizations periodically reevaluate their human capital practices and use complete and reliable data to help achieve their missions and ensure resources are properly matched to the needs of today's environment," the report states. "Until DOD effectively manages the resources of the combatant commands, it may be difficult to ensure that the commands are properly sized to meet their assigned missions, or to identify opportunities to carry out those missions efficiently."

View the full report here.

Six Senate Republicans have notified their colleagues that they will not support any legislation that fails to meet certain standards.

In their May 14 "dear colleague" letter, Sens. Tom Coburn (OK), John McCain (AZ), Ron Johnson (WI), Rand Paul (KY), Kelly Ayotte (NH) and Jeff Flake (AZ) note that the House "has enacted a number of requirements to ensure any bill considered by the chamber does not grow the size or cost of the government or increase our national debt. We believe the Senate should apply these and other commonsense practices to restore fiscal responsibility and increase accountability and transparency in the legislative process."

Consequently, the senators list five standards that, if not met, would be dealbreakers for them:

* All New Spending Must Be Offset With Cuts To Lower Priority Spending

* Government Programs Must Be Periodically Reviewed And Renewed

* The Cost And Text Of Bills Must Be Made Available Prior To Passage

* Duplicative Government Programs Must Be Consolidated Or Eliminated

* Congress Must Not Infringe Upon The Constitutional Rights Of The People

"By making clear these expectations now, it is our hope we can work together earlier in the legislative process to resolve any differences that could otherwise delay or stop the passage of your legislative priorities," the senators' letter states. "And while we expect all of these standards to be met for each bill the Senate considers, this is not an exhaustive list of all the reasons we may individually object to a particular bill or unanimous-consent request."

View the letter here.

Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter issued a memo last week that updates the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's "mission, organization and management, responsibilities and functions, relationships, authorities, and administration."

View the memo here.

Inside the Pentagon reported earlier this month that the Defense Department is at work on a new generation of science and technology efforts aimed at weaning the military from a potentially fatal over-reliance on space platforms, giving rise to alternative technologies for precision navigation and long-haul communications. In the same story, ITP reported that DARPA had recently released a new strategy that describes several efforts underway to develop GPS alternatives:

For example, the combination of inertial measurement units and chip-sized atomic clocks can provide precise position, navigation and timing capabilities, according to the DARPA strategy.

These new technologies can be integrated onto weapon systems, providing onboard precision navigation without relying on satellite signals, according to [acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Al] Shaffer. "Maybe not as exquisitely, but good enough to operate," he added.

With those kinds of technologies on the rise, GPS could one day be a capability geared more toward civilian applications, Shaffer mused. "I think the nation would still be in need of a GPS," he said. "But that would be a debate that would have to be had. It would no longer have to be a critical Department of Defense system, so I can see a date when we would start to come out of that."

View the full story.