The Insider

InsideDefense.com is reporting today that the Navy has formally advised Congress that the Northrop Grumman-led MQ-4C Triton program -- a $26.8 billion effort to develop, field and fly a naval variant of the high-flying Global Hawk unmanned aircraft -- will exceed research and development cost targets and miss key acquisition milestone dates set by the service in 2008:

The issues are detailed in a 33-page Selected Acquisition Report dated December 2012 and delivered to Congress in May. "These cost and schedule breaches are based on delays due to technical challenges associated with system integration and developmental testing, which delayed entry into flight test," the report states. As a result, the Navy is preparing a revised acquisition baseline program to reflect new schedule and cost goals, the report states.

The Navy wants to buy a total of 70 MQ-4C aircraft, including the five developmental systems, and plans to spend $3.5 billion on development; $11.3 billion on procurement; and $11.6 billion to operate and sustain the systems through 2039, bringing the estimated cradle-to-grave cost for the capability to $26.8 billion.

The projected research and development costs for the MQ-4C program have grown to $3.5 billion, $335.5 million more than the Navy's original $3.2 billion target -- an increase of 10 percent, according to the report.

In related news, Inside the Navy reports this week that Northrop Grumman is working with the Navy on options for a sense-and-avoid radar on the Triton after the service issued a stop-work order on the radar due to technical challenges and cost growth, according to the company and the service:

On April 25, the Navy issued a stop-work order for Triton's air-to-air radar subsystem, which is made by ITT Exelis. The service is assessing the status of the effort and evaluating alternatives for meeting program requirements, Navy spokeswoman LaToya Graddy wrote in an Aug. 21 email.

"The Navy is working with Northrop Grumman Corp. to review all options that could potentially be leveraged to fulfill this requirement," she added.

ITT Exelis remains committed to developing a leading-edge sense-and-avoid system for unmanned aerial vehicles to help make the skies safer for all aircraft, company spokeswoman Courtney Reynolds wrote in an Aug. 20 email.

For more of our recent Triton coverage, see below:

After First Flight, MQ-4C Triton Slated For First Deployment In 2016
Inside the Navy - 05/27/2013

Official: Germany Seeking Insights On Navy's Triton UAS For Euro Hawk
Inside the Navy - 05/27/2013

MQ-4C Triton Completes First Flight At Palmdale
DefenseAlert - 05/22/2013

The Pentagon recently issued a joint doctrine document for homeland defense "across the range of military operations."

The July 29 document "provides information on planning, command and control, interorganizational coordination, and operations required to defeat external threats to, and aggression against, the homeland, or against other threats as directed by the president." Further:

It sets forth joint doctrine to govern the activities and performance of the Armed Forces of the United States in joint homeland defense operations and provides the guidance for US military coordination with other US Government departments and agencies during operations and for US military involvement in multinational operations supporting homeland defense. It provides military guidance for the exercise of authority by combatant commanders and other joint force commanders (JFCs) and prescribes joint doctrine for operations, education, and training. It provides military guidance for use by the Armed Forces in preparing their appropriate plans. It is not the intent of this publication to restrict the authority of the JFC from organizing the force and executing the mission in a manner the JFC deems most appropriate to ensure unity of effort in the accomplishment of the overall objective.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) today urged the United States to take military action against the Syria regime following reports suggesting Syrian forces have “escalated their use of chemical weapons.”

Arguing that the “most recent massacre of innocent men, women, and children should shock our collective conscience,” McCain added, “It is long past time for the United States and our friends and allies to respond to Assad's continuing mass atrocities in Syria with decisive actions, including limited military strikes to degrade Assad's air power and ballistic missile capabilities.”

It has been two years since President Obama called for Syrian President Bashar Assad to leave power and a year since Obama said that the use of chemical weapons in Syria would constitute the crossing of a red line, the senator noted. “But, because these threats have not been backed up by any real consequences, they have rung hollow. As a result, the killing goes on, Assad remains in power, and his use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians apparently continues,” McCain said.

The Senate Armed Services Committee announced this afternoon that it plans to hold a hearing on Sept. 19 to consider the following nominations:

- Deborah Lee James to be Air Force secretary;

- Jessica Garfola Wright to be under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness;

- Marcel Lettre II to be principal deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence;

- Kevin Ohlson to be a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces; and

- Frank Klotz to be energy under secretary for nuclear security.

In another personnel move, the Pentagon announced today that Daniel Prieto had been appointed director of cybersecurity and technology in the office of the Defense Department's chief information officer. Prieto had been working as vice president with IBM's Global Business Services unit.

Missile Defense Agency Director Vice Adm. James Syring, during a presentation last week at the annual Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, AL, touched on the deployment of a second AN/TPY-2 radar to Japan.

According to the presentation slides he used, a second radar system in that country "enhances [the] defense of Japan, U.S. forward deployed forces, and the U.S. homeland from North Korean ballistic missiles" and "bolsters regional security allowing flexibility in deploying Aegis [Ballistic Missile Defense] ships."

A "Technical Capability Declaration" (TCD) is expected within one year after the U.S. is granted access to the proposed site, discussions between the two countries on which "are ongoing," according to the slides.

MDA spokesman Rick Lehner told Inside Missile Defense this week that TCD "is declared by MDA and is system-focused." It differs from the initial operational capability designation in that "IOC is declared by the warfighter and is broader in scope than TCD, i.e. it includes the warfighting organization's ability to employ and maintain the system."

The United States has five forward-based AN/TPY-2 radars that are operational. Four are being used in Northern Japan, Israel, Turkey and within the U.S. Central Command area of operation and one is used for testing. Once the fifth radar is deployed to Japan, a forward-based radar would not be available for testing purposes. The fifth radar was available for MDA's large-scale test in the Kwajalein Atoll in October 2012. Another MDA test of a similar caliber is scheduled for later this year.

According to Syring's briefing slides, that test -- designated FTO-01 -- is "on track" for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2013. Its purpose is to "demonstrate regional-theater [Ballistic Missile Defense System] ability to defeat, in a layered architecture, a raid of two threat-representative medium range ballistic missiles, each flying challenging and realistic attack profiles."

The Aegis BMD system will attempt to intercept the first MRBM, while the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense system will try to shoot down the second MRBM, and could engage the first target if needed, according to the presentation.

Inside the Army reported in July that in order to have a forward-based AN/TPY-2 radar available for future tests once a fifth radar deploys to Japan, the Army plans to borrow a radar from an existing THAAD battery or grab a radar intended for THAAD as it comes off of Raytheon's production line, according to Lehner.

"We will have a TPY-2 available for future tests after Japan deployment, with either a radar coming off the production line prior to deployment to a future THAAD battery, or a radar from an existing THAAD battery will be requested," Lehner told ITA in a July 17 statement.

The Army intends to procure a total of 12 AN/TPY-2 radars -- six forward-based radars and six radars for THAAD batteries, ITA reported, adding:

Because building an AN/TPY-2 radar takes around 30 months, the next forward-based version would not roll off the production line for at least 36 months. According to Raytheon's missile defense and space programs' director, Jim Bedingfield, the 12th AN/TPY-2 radar the company will build -- intended to be forward-based -- is not on contract yet. The contract is expected to be cemented in September or October this year, he said.

Radars meant for THAAD batteries will be completed before that time. Raytheon and the Army signed contracts for the ninth and 10th radars in December 2011. The 11th radar's contract was finalized in December 2012 and is also in production.

The Army deployed its first THAAD battery to Guam in April, has a second battery standing by at Ft. Bliss, TX, and is working to stand up a third. Radars nine, 10 and 11 will go to THAAD batteries four, five and six.

While Raytheon supports the need to deploy a second radar to Japan, Bedingfield told ITA in a July 15 interview, "testing is extremely important to us on many levels both as a nation from our national security strategy down to proving our system works and down to the operating level where you must have proper tactics, techniques and procedures. The question is not whether the agency will continue a robust testing regimen, they will and they have told us they will and we stand ready to test with them. We want to test, we like to test, nobody does everything perfectly, we have to learn from our tests both when we succeed and when we fail."

Bedingfield said the real question is "how much will testing without some sort of dedicated asset to test in a very robust testing scheme, how will that affect our nation's ability to deploy, for example, a THAAD battery to Guam. These are obviously weighted questions that the government wrestles with in a tough budget time."

A pair of House lawmakers are urging the Navy to maintain its fleet of 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, regardless of the budget sequester, the just-completed Strategic Choices and Management Review, and the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review.

That said, House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee Chairman Randy Forbes (R-VA) and Ranking Member Mike McIntyre (D-NC) in an Aug. 12 letter to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus call on the service to "articulate the impact to the current defense strategy (Defense Strategic Guidance, 2012) if the nation were to only retain eight or nine CVNs."

InsideDefense.com reported last week that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's recent announcement that the Pentagon might slash the number of carrier strike groups from the 11 required by law to eight or nine had begun raising questions about how the Navy and industry would handle such a change:

Huntington Ingalls Industries President and Chief Executive Officer Mike Petters today advocated maintaining 11 carriers, but added, "If you hypothetically went and tried to say, 'We’re going to change the number to something else,' the real question is how are you going to do that?"

"Are you going to continue to use the ships that you have until their service life is expended?" he said during an earnings conference call. "Are you going to take them offline and tie them up at piers and have them be dead assets sitting at the pier? There's a whole host of decisions that would have to be made . . . that really then drive the way that the industry would support it."

The Navy has not yet publicly discussed that decision process. "The proposal to bring down the number of aircraft carriers is really still being evaluated," Rear Adm. Timothy Matthews, the Navy's director of fleet readiness, said during an Aug. 1 House Armed Services subcommittee hearing. "Obviously, one of the cost savings would be in personnel because there are, you know, roughly 5,000 folks that are assigned to the airwing and the aircraft carrier. So that's a large cost that we would be looking to reduce. But you can't just park an aircraft carrier, because it's got a nuclear reactor on it. So you would have to maintain some sort of a minimum crew or decommission the ship entirely."

If the Navy were directed to reduce the size of the carrier force from 11 to some smaller number, and if Congress amended the law to permit the reduction, the service would have three basic alternatives for implementing the directive, according to Congressional Research Service analyst Ron O'Rourke.

The first option -- canceling the procurement of one or more new carriers -- might be the least likely, O'Rourke told InsideDefense.com. Under this approach, the force would not shrink for years -- until the dates when the canceled carriers would have entered service. And the Navy would face a challenge preserving carrier-unique construction skills at Huntington Ingalls Industries' shipyard in Newport News, VA, "which in turn could increase, possibly quite substantially, the time, costs, and technical risks for building the next carrier, once construction of carriers resumed," he said.

Petters cast this option in even more dire terms. "Keep the construction process and capability alive," he said. "I think if we ever stop building the carriers we’ll never really start building them back again."

Specifically, Forbes and McIntyre in their letter this week want the following questions answered:

* What is the risk to the current defense strategy with a fleet of just eight or nine CVNs?

* At this reduced level, how many CVNs could the Navy provide our combatant commanders, both for deployment and surge?

* What is the impact of this reduced force structure on the ability of the combatant commanders to execute their current Operational Plans?

* Given the range of options the Navy would have for reducing its CVN fleet to this level, how would you assess the impact to both the carrier shipbuilding and ship-maintenance industrial base?

* Assuming a path in which the Navy attempts to maximize the operational availability of the 8 or 9 carrier fleet discussed, what would be the impact on the estimated service life of the carriers retained?

* What are the estimated annual costs of retaining a CVN in a reduced operational status?

* What are the estimated costs to bring a CVN from a reduced operational status to fully operational?

The Forbes-McIntyre letter calls on the Navy to provide as much information as possible in unclassified form, "and then we would be happy to receive any of the remaining explanations to this query in classified form."

The Pentagon yesterday evening announced $15 million "preliminary design review assessment" contract awards to Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing and General Atomics for the Navy's Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) Air Vehicle.

"The objective of the UCLASS system is to enhance aircraft carrier/air wing operations by providing a responsive, world-wide presence via an organic, sea-based Unmanned Aerial System, with persistent intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and targeting, and strike capabilities," according to a Defense Department contract announcement.

Inside the Navy reported last week that the UCLASS program had cleared a major hurdle when lawmakers released the remaining funds -- nearly $600 million -- needed to launch the effort. This puts the Navy on track to release a request for proposals for the program before the end of the fiscal year, ITN reported:

The service plans to invest $2.3 billion in the program from fiscal years 2013 to 2017, Congress has restricted some early funding due to concerns over the Navy's acquisition plans. In the FY-12 and FY-13 defense authorization bills, lawmakers directed that not more than 75 percent of the funds appropriated for the program be obligated until the Navy submitted a report on the threshold and objective key performance requirements for the program, a certification that these requirements are achievable and a description of system requirements.

These reports and certifications were received by Congress on June 10. Following a 60-day waiting period, the Navy has gotten word from Capitol Hill that the program will receive the funds today, Navy spokeswoman Capt. Cate Mueller confirmed to ITN on Aug. 8. The funds will be obligated shortly, she said, and "the RFP is still on track timing wise and expected before the end of the fiscal year."  This would be the draft request for proposals for the program ahead of the final version in fiscal year 2014.

Essentially, the Navy, the Joint Staff and the under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics "sufficiently met the reporting requirements specifically outlined in the legislation and further expounded on information that the Congress previously considered lacking in detail," allowing lawmakers to move forward with releasing the $575 million -- or 25 percent -- of the appropriated funds for the program, a congressional aide told ITN Aug. 9.