Robbin Laird, Author at Second Line of Defense

New Government: New Defense Industrial Review of the UK

Posted on March 14, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

03/14/2020

In a March 5, 2020 article published on the UK Ministry of Defence website, it was announced that “a review that will revitalize the UK’s defence and security industrial sectors and improve productivity has been launched.”

The review will identify how the government can take a more strategic approach to ensure competitive, innovative and world-class defence and security industries. It will also suggest how defence in particular might better drive investment and prosperity across the UK.

The Ministry of Defence will lead a cross-government team, engaging closely with industry, Parliament, and other stakeholders over the course of the review. The findings will feed into the broader Integrated review of foreign policy, defence, security and international development that the government is currently conducting.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said:

“Our relationship with industry is crucial to maintaining the UK’s position as a Tier 1 military power. The review will ensure we are in the best position to support industry whilst guaranteeing the most advanced, world-leading capabilities for our armed forces.”

Many of the UK’s defence and security companies are going from strength to strength, but there are a range of challenges for the future. The review will examine the way industry is being impacted by the pace of technological change, the need for innovation and partnership, and increased competition from abroad, alongside the difficulty of ensuring that we have the necessary skills. The review will then consider how these challenges are addressed and how the government can maximise potential opportunities.

The defence and security industry employs hundreds of thousands of people, including thousands of apprentices, across the UK. From building warships in Scotland and armoured vehicles in Wales, to manufacturing aircraft in England and satellites in Northern Ireland. The MOD invested £19.2-billion into industry, commerce and employment in the last year.

Defence Minister Jeremy Quin said:

“The UK defence and security industries play a crucial role in maintaining our global influence and relationships with allies, as well as supporting employment and economic growth across the country.

“The review will explore the role of the defence and security sectors in ensuring that we have the right capabilities for safeguarding our national security whilst driving prosperity and innovation across all parts of the United Kingdom.

“Our industries are also at the forefront of technology development in creating new ways to prevent and defend against terrorism and serious organised crime. On the international stage, UK defence and security companies play a crucial role in maintaining the UK’s global influence, underpinning our strategic partnerships with key allies.”

The analysis undertaken as part of the review will inform findings of the broader Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy which will be taking place in parallel.

This review will face a number of challenges, including Brexit and its impact on its relationships with European industries, notably for Thales, Airbus, Leonardo and MBDA.

And with non-European states, the relationships with Canada, Australia and the United States are crucial as well with key challenges facing those various partnerships as seen in the F-35, new frigate, loyal wingman and other key programs.

A recent piece published by RUSI by three former senior UK defense officials raised their concerns about the review.

Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister’s Chief Special Adviser, is planning a full review of defence procurement. This is welcome if, unlike recent reviews, it is thorough and does not shirk politically embarrassing issues. Over 90 percent of defence programmes are brought in on time and budget, and many by excellent agile small and medium-sized enterprises, so Cummings – or more appropriately those who will execute the review – will need to focus on large, high-risk programmes.

Almost all major public sector procurement is bedevilled by cost escalation. Just look at the Hinkley Point nuclear reactor programme (up from an estimate of £16 to over £20 billion), Crossrail (up 1½ times to £18 billion) or the HS2 high speed railway project, which was initially estimated to cost £34 billion, but may yet end up costing £88 billion). Cost overruns, serious delay, poor delivery and lack of political consistency are not problems confined to the Ministry of Defence. So a thorough review could yield benefits right across government.

The principal procurement failings include over-specification, over-optimistic initial cost forecasting (which our bidding process encourages), poor contracting, political and ideological interference, inappropriate use of public–private partnerships, delay and change in specification, inadequate examination of through-life costs, lack of adequate programme control, and political reprogramming caused by budget cuts. All these lead to avoidable cost increases.

In a recent letter to the Times, David Gould, a much respected senior civil servant, contrasted his experience in defence procurement in UK with his new employer in Australia: ‘Striving to execute UK strategic programmes without knowing how much money would be available in any year (sometimes monthly) [compared] with Australia where I was given clear and simple objectives by a Government willing consistently to fund them’.

For the complete RUSI article, see the following:

https://rusi.org/commentary/spotlight-britain’s-impending-defence-procurement-review

HMAS Toowoomba Operating in the Middle East

Posted on March 14, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

HMAS Toowoomba is currently providing support to the United States led International Maritime Security Construct (IMSC) in the Middle East Region as part of the ship’s six month deployment on Operation MANITOU.

Toowoomba’s Ship’s Company of 190 will support both the IMSC and the Combined Maritime Force 150 as part of the Australian Defence Force’s contribution to support international efforts to promote security, stability and prosperity in the region.

This is the 68th rotation of a Royal Australian Navy unit in the Middle East Region since 1990 and is Toowoomba’s sixth deployment to the region and second as part of Operation MANITOU.

Credit: Australian Department of Defence

March 4, 2020.

The New Build Australian Attack Submarine: Convergent Forces and Expectations

Posted on March 14, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

By Robbin Laird

This week I have had the opportunity to visit Western Australia.

I visited both the Henderson shipyard and HMAS Stirling, the Collins submarine base.

I will write in detail about those visits and discussions at the two facilities in the near future.

These visits when combined with earlier visits with the Royal Australian Navy in Sydney and in Adelaide have provided an opportunity to look at the real-world aspect of reshaping the Australian Navy as part of the ADF’s transformation.

In various visits to Canberra over the past six years, I have had the chance to talk with many civilians and uniformed military about the launch of the new “continuous shipbuilding” approach.

This approach is how the Commonwealth is shaping its way ahead in building the three new classes of ships, the Offshore Patrol Vessels, the ASW frigates, and the new attack submarine.

In all three cases, the Australians are working with European primes to build the new class of ships, but with American combat systems as the integrative force throughout the entire fleet.

The Aegis system is a key thread throughout the surface fleet.

And the OPV will use a Saab 9LV derivative which will be the Australian tactical interface that will allow it to talk to the Aegis based combat management system in the major surface combatants.

There clearly is significant debate about the way ahead with the new build attack submarine.

But this article is not about the political debate.

My focus here is upon what I see as the convergent expectations, pressures, and forces that shape Commonwealth and Royal Australian Navy expectations about what the new attack submarine will deliver in the future.

The first is obvious at Henderson shipyard.

The OPV is establishing a template for what the Aussies mean by continuous shipbuilding.

The digital build process coupled with industry 4.0 management and integration processes are clearly being put in place by the LUERSSEN Australian team.

And the template being shaped in this program lays down the foundation of what is expected or the launch point from which shipbuilding in Australia needs to look like going forward.

I will deal with this template in more detail based on my visits to Henderson in a future piece, but the template being shaped by OPV will evolve with the ASW Frigate and further evolve with the new build attack submarine.

This means that the Naval Group team needs to pay close attention to what the OPV build process will deliver.

The second key aspect is the evolution of Collins operations and capabilities over the next decade and a half.

Although this is a legacy platform, the combat capabilities and experience are not. The Collins submarine force with its combat systems which allow for integration with the US Navy and other key allies is part of the evolving distributed maritime force being shaped for full spectrum crisis management in the Pacific.

Lessons to be learned will be taken forward to the new class of attack submarines, with an expectation that the capabilities onboard the evolving Collins will be enhanced by new shipboard infrastructure onboard the new short fin Barracuda.

To give one example, U.S. nuclear submarines have different capabilities and con-ops from the Collins, but the Collins delivers a number of capabilities which a nuclear attack submarine is not optimized to perform.

In an era where new C2 capabilities are being shaped to better integrate the undersea force into an integrated air-sea naval force, these capabilities which will be shaped in the decade ahead will require skill sets on Collins which will be transferred to the new build attack submarine.

A third key aspect is infrastructure.

A challenge which Collins posed for the Royal Australian Navy clearly has been to build the appropriate infrastructure, including training, to unlock the potential of the fleet.

As Vice Admiral (Retired) Barrett highlighted with regard to the strategic focus by the Navy on shaping a submarine enterprise and its importance going ahead:

“In the last ten years of Collins capability management Navy has embraced the outcomes of the Coles Review that prompted an enterprise approach and fundamentally changed how the submarine force looked at Collins maintenance and availability.

“The result has been resounding turnaround in capability which has allowed much greater engagement with allied submarine forces and a more meaningful contribution to theatre ASW.”

As Australia focuses on building up to 12 new submarines, new infrastructure clearly will have to be built, perhaps as well in the Eastern part of the country, and this build will be almost certainly largely Australian.

So when one is discussing % of Australian content in the new submarine, it would make sense to expand the discussion to embrace the overall submarine enterprise.

The visit to Henderson was notable in terms of seeing what the joint venture partner of Lurseen, CIVMEC, has done from an infrastructure point of view.

I will highlight this in a future article, but the infrastructure being built for the OPV is impressive, and clearly, something of this scale will happen as infrastructure is built for the new class of submarines as well.

A fourth key aspect is evolving approaches to fleet management.

It is clear from several discussions which I have had with the Royal Australian Navy and Department of Defence officials, that a significant effort is underway to establish much more effective fleet management situational awareness and tools for determining both platform availability as well combat effectiveness.

This requires the Australian Navy to shape data which flows from distinct platforms to be managed in ways that allow for much more effective common force would evaluations and determinations.

This means that by the time the new build submarine enters the force, there will be a clear expectation that its logistical and operational parameters will flow into a common management data base.

Or put another way, the short fin Barracuda is NOT a replacement for the Collins class.

It will enter the force as a key asset in the evolving integrated distribute force in which Collins may be a legacy platform, but not the skill sets and systems which will have evolved over the next decade or more in front of the operation of the submarine.

And the decade ahead will be a very demanding one, in terms both of how the threat evolves as well as the expectations of how to integrate distribute assets into an effective combat force tailored for crisis management.

For submarines, this means more multi-mission capabilities will built into the fleet, along with the evolution of the types of weapons which will be operated form the fleet or targeting determinations for other platforms to perform strike missions.

This experience will precede the first deployments of the new build submarine but will form a clear set of expectations from the Royal Australian Navy concerning what the new class of submarines will need to deliver in terms of capability for the ADF as an integrated distributed force.

Northern Viper 2020

Posted on March 13, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

03/13/2020

U.S. Marines and members of the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force conduct a Heliborne insert at Hokudaien Training Area, Hokkaido, Japan, Feb. 5, 2020.

Northern Viper is a regularly scheduled training exercise that is designed to enhance the interoperability of the U.S. and Japan Alliance by allowing Marine Air-Ground Task Forces from III Marine Expeditionary Force to maintain their lethality and proficiency in MAGTF Combined Arms Operations in cold weather environments.

HOKUDAIEN TRAINING AREA, HOKKAIDO, JAPAN

02.05.2020

Video by Lance Cpl. Dylan Hess

3rd Marine Division

Political Will Is Key To European MALE UAV

Posted on March 11, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

03/11/2020

By Pierre Tran

Paris – Political support has been vital for a European medium-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle, and even with that backing, years have passed before a program contract appears to be in reach, analysts said.

France expects to green light a deal by mid year, which would clear way for a long awaited European MALE program, seen by the government as a strategic asset, but not one to be pursued at any price.

It will have taken some six or seven years since the Direction Générale de l’Armement, the French procurement office, decided to back a European project for a MALE UAV, said François Lureau, a former DGA chief.

“Political will is a necessity,” said Jean-Pierre Maulny, deputy director of Institut des Relations Internationales et Strategique, a think tank.

Industrial rigor in mitigating risk is also critical, with much depending on the technology proposed.

With that political backing, the authorities will insist the MALE UAV will at the very least match similar platforms on the market and that the expense is justified.

France is in close talks with the prime contractor, Airbus, in an effort to narrow program risk on the prospective MALE UAV project.

Occar, the European procurement agency, will oversee the program for the partner nations France, Germany, Italy and Spain.

It has taken years for industry to draw up an acceptable design and cost for a European MALE UAV program, which has taken on the elusiveness of the Holy Grail.

“As long as it has not been signed, it is under negotiation,” Lureau said.

No Blank Check

“Sovereignty comes at a price, but not any price” armed forces minister Florence Parly told Dec. 2 the French senate.

Europe has lagged behind Israel and the U.S., and the question has been whether there was really a will to catch up.

There have been many announcements which have led to nothing.

The choice in 2013-14 was whether that type of UAV should be bought off the shelf — either from Israel or the US — or built in Europe, Lureau said.

Back then, Jean-Yves Le Drian was defense minister, with François Hollande in the Elysées presidential office after winning the 2012 election and heading a socialist administration.

The political impact could be seen in Le Drian’s decision to reverse the pick of the previous Nicolas Sarkozy administration of the Heron TP drone offered by Dassault and Israel Aerospace Industries. Dassault had rebranded that drone Voltigeur, or tightrope walker.

That Israeli drone fell — or was pushed off the tightrope — and in its place, Le Drian opted for the General Atomics Reaper, offered by Airbus. French interest in the Reaper included a signals intelligence pod, in addition to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

Purchase of the Reaper, an interim solution, moved the French preference to the U.S. and away from Israel, which had supplied the Harfang, a French interim drone based on Heron and supported by Airbus.

A Harfang flew the first test flight on Sept. 9 2006 from Istres air base, the first mission over Afghanistan in February 2009, and was retired from service Jan. 8 2018.

Political Backing

Backing a European MALE drone was essentially a political decision, one which carried large expenditure and required long term commitment to industry, Lureau said.

“Does Europe have the will to assign the status of sovereignty to a drone for long distance observation?” he said.

“It is a policy decision of strategy, a decision which restructures industry.”

Le Drian, backed by the Elysées, gave that political approval, he said.

An estimated budget of some €7 billion ($8 billion) is “not negligible and requires a commitment which assigns sovereignty status to MALE UAVs,” he said.

The twin engines on the drone account for 10-15 percent of that estimated budget.

On the industrial side, there is concern to safeguard engineering expertise in the drone sector.

Airbus is channeling know-how from its Talarion MALE UAV into studies for remote carriers in a planned Future Combat Air System, a source said.

There is a deadly sidelight on Turkish work on the cancelled Talarion project.

Turkey had signed up to join the Talarion and when that project was closed, Ankara recalled some 35 engineers who had worked in the Airbus office at Manching, Germany, the source said.

TheTurkish staff were able to draw on that know-how to build Turkey’s own armed MALE drone, intended by Ankara “to give it an edge.”

Turkey has flown combat drones against Syrian forces around Idlib province, northwestern Syria, including hitting a Russian-built air defense system, according to media reports.

Lessons from A400M

Airbus, in its negotiations on the European MALE UAV, is seeking to avoid a repetition of the heavy financial hit taken on the A400M airlifter program.

For Maulny, one of the lessons learnt on the A400M was the need for industry to select sufficiently mature technology and measure the mitigation of risk.

The technology risk on A400M should have been resolved before its development phase, so avoiding excessive expense, he said.

That approach should have applied in other arms programs such as the US F-35 fighter and British Astute attack submarine.

When Airbus was selected to build the A400M, it was seen as unusual for a company which built civil airliners to manufacture a military cargo plane.

The rejoinder to that was Airbus would apply its experience in building commercial aircraft to the military program.

Airbus has reported charges of some €10 billion on the A400M program.

A Long Search

The European pursuit of its own UAV has spanned some 20 years, Maulny said.

A Feb. 25 report from the National Audit Office pointed up stalled efforts to the 2004 announcement of a French-led EuroMALE drone.

Paris failed to find consensus among partner nations on strategy and operational requirements, while industrial partners bickered.

In 2006 Airbus pitched its Advanced UAV, dubbed Talarion, to France, Germany, Italy and Spain, but that also failed to fly, due to a hefty price tag.

Talarion was seen as the Rolls-Royce of UAVs, an executive said.

There was also competition from Telemos, an Anglo-French project, backed by BAE Systems and Dassault and which stemmed from the 2010 Lancaster House defense cooperation treaty.

That joint bid also crashed and burned, as did a cross-Channel project for an unmanned combat aerial vehicle.

Part of the lack of progress between Berlin and Paris over those years stemmed from reluctance in certain parts of the DGA to work with Germany, Maulny said.

A European MALE UAV contract appears to be in reach, if political will and industrial rigor are delivered.

“A lot of patience is needed,” Lureau said.

The featured graphic is credited to Airbus Defence and Space.

Also, see the following:

Loyal Wingman: Part of the Next Generation Autonomous Systems to be Examined at the Next Williams Foundation Seminar

Audit Office Calls on France to Boost UAV Fleet – With Caution

Dassault: Looking Forward to a European MALE UAV as FCAS Building Block

Abandoning Pegasus?

Testing EMALS

Posted on March 11, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

A C-2A Greyhound, assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20, lands aboard USS Gerald R. Ford’s (CVN 78) flight deck. Ford is currently conducting Aircraft Compatibility Testing to further test its Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG).

01.16.2020

Video by Petty Officer 2nd Class Ruben Reed

USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78)

The Return of ASW to the Front Burner for NATO: Dynamic Manta Exercise

Posted on March 10, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

03/10/2020

A NATO anti-submarine warfare exercise began off the coast of Italy in late February 2020.

Dynamic Manta (DYMAN20) involves ships, submarines, aircraft and personnel from nine NATO countries.

The aim of the exercise is to provide all participants with complex and challenging warfare training, to enhance their interoperability and proficiency in anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare skills, with due regard to safety.

The footage below includes shots of an Italian Navy submarine, an Italian Navy helicopter and an interview with US Rear Admiral E. Andrew Burcher, Commander Submarines NATO.

In an article by Megan Eckstein of USNI News published on March 2, 2020, the focus and scope of the exercise was highlighted.

All across the Mediterranean Sea, more non-NATO countries are fielding submarines while NATO allies are increasing the size of their own undersea fleets. Those submarines are also becoming harder to find.

All told, the ability for NATO to find, track and identify submarines is not just a matter of defense against Russia, but a matter of basic traffic safety on and under the Mediterranean.

Set against the backdrop of the increasingly crowded Med, NATO is hosting the Dynamic Manta 2020 anti-submarine warfare exercise, bringing together nine nations to combine ASW capabilities from ships, maritime patrol aircraft, helicopters and submarines, and improve their ability to work together to keep these southern European waters safe….

In the complex undersea environment in the Mediterranean, squeezing out the most capability from SNMG-2 and the ships and aircraft it partners with during exercises like Dynamic Manta is key.

“This August, Russia did Exercise Ocean Shield, which was the largest post end of the Cold War exercise conducted by Russia. And one of the components of [NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe]’s guidance is that we conduct deterrence and defense of the Euro-Atlantic Area. The point of Dynamic Manta is to show a credible defense, that we have the ability to act interoperably within the ASW realm,” Rear Adm. Andy Burcher, commander of NATO submarines at MARCOM, said during a press conference aboard Carabiniere on Feb. 24 the first day of the exercise.

“In addition to that, I would say that all of the large number of nations that surround the Mediterranean are increasing the number of submarines that are operating in the Mediterranean: Algeria, Egypt, Russia and Israel are now all operating submarines in the Mediterranean. And a large number of our NATO alliance countries are increasing their submarine footprint in the area: Spain, Italy, Turkey, I believe Greece, are all conducting expansion programs within the submarine realm. So from a submarine perspective, the number of submarines that are operating in the Mediterranean is increasing, so it’s important that we understand how the Mediterranean operates, and in particular, all of these submarines that are coming in have advanced capabilities in comparison to the past. So we have to stay both proficient and capable in the ASW realm. So those are the factors that I see in the Mediterranean that make this exercise important.”

On Russia specifically, Fantoni said that, “they are military vessels, they don’t belong to the alliance, they are present – so we could consider them as a threat, but I don’t see a threat, an immediate threat to the forces. We respect their potential capability but also confident that we are as well prepared for any type of emergency.”

For the rest of the article, see the following:

Dynamic Manta Exercise Trains NATO in Anti-Submarine Warfare As More Attack Boats Prowl the Mediterranean

Lt. Stefan Knight, a naval flight officer assigned to Patrol Squadron (VP) 4, speaks to the press about VP-4’s involvement in Dynamic Manta 2020, Feb. 25, 2020.

Naval Aircrewman (Operator) 2nd Class Douglass Harris, assigned to Patrol Squadron (VP) 4, speaks to the press about the capabilities of the P-8A Poseidon and the squadron’s involvement in Dynamic Manta 2020.

A P-8A Poseidon Aircraft assigned to Patrol Squadron (VP) 4 makes a pass over Naval Air Station Sigonella following a flight in support of Dynamic Manta 2020.

A P-8A Poseidon Aircraft assigned to Patrol Squadron (VP) 4 comes in for a landing at Naval Air Station Sigonella following a flight in support of Dynamic Manta 2020.

A P-8A Poseidon Aircraft assigned to Patrol Squadron (VP) 4 comes in for a landing at Naval Air Station Sigonella following a flight in support of Dynamic Manta 2020. Dynamic Manta is an annual exercise hosted by NATO’s Allied Maritime Command to provide training in anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare in order to enhance overall multi-lateral operations among NATO allies.(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Juan Sua)

The Italian Navy frigate ITS Carabiniere, flagship of Standing NATO Maritime Group Two (SNMG2), prepares to push into the Mediterranean Sea during Exercise Dynamic Manta 2020. Dynamic Manta is an annual anti-submarine warfare exercise.

Cope North 2020: The Role of the KC-30A

Posted on March 9, 2020 | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment

03/09/2020

While the USAF is still waiting for its new tanker, the RAAF has been using the original tanker downselected by the USAF 12 years ago.

In the slideshow, the KC-30A is seen operating in this year’s Cope North exericse.

In a story published on February 29, 2008. the award of the new tanker contract to Northrop Grumman was highlighted by a USAF article.

WASHINGTON (AFPN) — Secretary of the Air Force Michael W. Wynne and Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Duncan J. McNabb announced the selection of Northrop Grumman as the winner of the KC-X competition for development and procurement of up to 179 tanker aircraft for approximately $35 billion.

The initial contract for the newly named KC-45 is for the system design and development of four test aircraft for $1.5 billion. This contract also includes five production options targeted for 64 aircraft at $10.6 billion.

“The tanker is the number one procurement priority for us right now,” General McNabb said. “Buying the new KC-45A is a major step forward and another demonstration of our commitment to recapitalizing our Eisenhower-era inventory of these critical national assets. Today is not just important for the Air Force, however. It’s important for the entire joint military team, and important for our coalition partners as well. The KC-45A will revolutionize our ability to employ tankers and will ensure the Air Force’s future ability to provide our nation with truly Global Vigilance, Reach, and Power.

“It is the first step in our critical commitment to recapitalize our aging fleet to move, supply and position assets anywhere. In this global Air Force business, the critical element for air bridge, global Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and global strike is the tanker,” he said.

The KC-45A will provide significantly greater air refueling capabilities than the current fleet of Eisenhower-era KC-135 Stratotankers it will begin replacing. For example, it will be able to refuel Air Force and Navy aircraft on every flight. These aircraft have different systems for receiving fuel and today, KC-135s must be set up for one or the other before takeoff.

The KC-45A will be equipped for both systems on every flight and also will have connections for wing pods. When wing pods are installed, it can refuel two probe-equipped aircraft, such as those flown by Navy and many allied aircrews, at the same time. The KC-45A can even be refueled in flight by other tankers.

The KC-45A also will have defensive systems that allow it to go into dangerous environments that tanker aircrews currently have to avoid. It will also supplement the airlift fleet by carrying cargo, passengers and medical patients in a secondary role.

The KC-X source selection used a “best value” determination to select a winner based on five factors: mission capability, proposal risk, past performance, cost/price and an integrated fleet air refueling assessment — performance in a simulated war scenario. These five factors were developed after consulting with industry and were finalized prior to starting the competition. Considered together, these grading criteria ensured the Air Force maximized the capability delivered to the warfighter while optimizing the taxpayers’ investment.

Air Force officials followed a carefully structured process, designed to provide transparency, maintain integrity and promote fair competition. Air Force officials met with offerors on numerous occasions to gain a thorough understanding of their proposals and provide feedback on their strengths and weaknesses. Officials also provided insight into government cost estimates throughout the process instead of waiting until the post-decision debrief. The competitors indicated they’ve been very pleased with the degree of communication.

The evaluation team comprised experts covering a broad spectrum of specialties from acquisition to operations and was hand-picked from across the Air Force and other government agencies.

As part of the process, Air Force officials will now provide a written notice to both the selected and not-selected and offer to provide a debrief on their bid proposals. To maintain the integrity of that process, officials will be unable to provide additional information about the proposals and contract.

“Today’s announcement is the culmination of years of tireless work and attention to detail by our acquisition professionals and source selection team, who have been committed to maintaining integrity, providing transparency and promoting a fair competition for this critical aircraft program,” Secretary Wynne said. “Through these efforts, we believe we will provide a higher-value resource to the warfighter and the taxpayer.”

That was then and after various tanker acquisition dynamics, here we are 12 years later and no new tanker.

Not only that, we will have to wait THREE MORE YEARS for the delivery of the new tanker to the operational USAF.

In an article by Brian W. Everstine published on February 10, 2020, we learn that the USAF will further reduce its tanker fleet while waiting for the troubled Boeing tanker.

The Air Force wants to retire 28 legacy tankers, even though the KC-46 is years away from operational capability.

“The bottom line is: To try ensure we have the capabilities we’re going to need in the future, we’re going to have to take some risk,” Maj. Gen. John Pletcher, the Air Force deputy assistant secretary for budget, said in a Feb. 10 briefing. “We can’t continue to fund everything … that we have in our force today without eventually having to make some tough choices, so this budget does that.”

The Air Force’s budget request calls for retiring 16 KC-10 Extenders from the Active Duty fleet, eight KC-135s from the Active Duty, and five KC-135s from the Reserve. These tankers will be the oldest and least capable, according to the Air Force. At the same time, the service plans to spend about $2.85 billion on 15 new KC-46s, along with $24 million in modifications and $106.3 million in research, development, test, and evaluation.

The KC-46 fleet has been plagued by problems, especially with its Remote Vision System, which links the boom operator to the refueling system. Air Force leaders have said the problems with the RVS and Boeing’s slow progress toward fixing it means the KC-46 will not be deployable for at least three years.

Lest you were wondering, many of our allies do not have this problem as they are operating the advanced Airbus tanker, and in the case of the RAAF, for many, many years.

Collectively, the global fleet of Airbus tankers has logged more than 125,000 flight hours and has been acquired by eight customers worldwide. The first KC-30A aircraft was accepted by the RAAF in June 2011 and the maiden flight was performed in September 2011, The RAAF took its second KC-30A in September 2011 and its third in November 2011.

Let us see.

The USAF selected its variant of the A330MRTT in 2008, 12 years ago.

The RAAF RECEIVED its new tanker sin 2011.

And the USAF is projected to get their new Boeing air tanker in 2023.

Not exactly agile contracting and delivery.

No 33 Squadron personnel in front of a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport at Anderson Air Force Base during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

Two United States Air Force F-16C Fighting Falcons from the 18th Aggressor Squadron fly in formation after refuelling from a No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport as part of a mission during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

No 33 Squadron Maintenance Manager Sergeant Jason Bahadur in front of a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

No 33 Squadron Maintenance Manager Sergeant Jason Bahadur on board a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport Air Mobility Officer, Flying Officer Robert Borrillo conducts air-to-air refuelling during Exercise Cope North 20.

A United States Air Force F-16C Fighting Falcon from the 18th Aggressor Squadron refuels from a No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport as part of a mission during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

A trio of United States Air Force F-16C Fighting Falcons from the 18th Aggressor Squadron fly alongside after refuelling from a No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport as part of a mission during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport Air Mobility Officer, Flying Officer Robert Borrillo conducts air-to-air refuelling during Exercise Cope North 20.

No 33 Squadron Pilot Flight Lieutenant Kristen Crick at the controls of a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport during an air-to-air refuelling mission for Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

A No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) taxis past another KC-30A MRTT before taking off to conduct an air-to-air refuelling mission during Exercise Cope North 20.

A No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport taxis out to the Anderson Air Force Base runway during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

Three No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transports sit on the Anderson Air Force Base flighline during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.

A No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport leaves contrails as it takes off from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam during Exercise Cope North 20.

A No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport takes off from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam during Exercise Cope North 20.

A No 33 Squadron KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport waits on the taxiway as a United States Air Force RQ-4 Global Hawk comes in to land at Anderson Air Force Base during Exercise Cope North 20 in Guam.