of those same products are required for sustainment.
In many cases we found
that we did not have an integrated enter- prise approach to buying licenses. As a recent example, Larry’s team and the project manager for War fighter Infor- mation Network – Tactical Increment 2 (WIN-T Inc 2) took a look at licenses for commercial software within the WIN-T system and how we can buy those licenses as a collective team to leverage that same enterprise contract. We are projecting more than $200 million in savings for WIN-T Inc 2 over the 20-plus years of the program. Now we’ll start to go through other high-priority programs and bring in PEO IEW&S, also located at APG, because they use a lot of the same COTS software applications that we use.
Martin: For the past 10 to 14 years, Sol- diers have relied extensively on contractor support and field technical assistant teams. CECOM, PEO C3T and PEO IEW&S conducted an analysis of field support technical assistance across our programs. By assessing trouble tickets entered by units during their combat training cen- ter rotations, we uncovered patterns and trends
highlighting opportunities in for
technical assistance right-sizing as well as areas where units were struggling with gaining proficiency
systems opera-
tions and maintenance. Tis insight has resulted in a number of actions, includ- ing improvements to system initialization and configuration steps and processes to reduce the Soldier burden.
We are now working to assess options for working collectively to improve the availability and delivery of home station training. Tere are a number of chal- lenges
associated with this, including
the availability of time to conduct new equipment training (NET), rotation of Soldiers shortly after NET has con- cluded and the volume of new systems
being fielded collectively under capa- bility set fielding, etc. MG [Bruce T.] Crawford (CG, CECOM), BG [Mitchell L.] Kilo (U.S. Army Forces Command G-6), BG [Tomas A.] Pugh (CG, U.S. Army Signal School) and I are working together to assess ways to synchronize training efforts at the Signal School, in new equipment training, at the mission command training centers and at the signal universities to better support the units and improve sustainment training. As we reshape training, part of that same process is rebalancing the technical assis- tance. Tat’s a delicate balance.
Muzzelo: We already started re-evaluating the training packages we have and are leveraging the mission command training centers and signal universities for sustain- ment training on the systems. Often the field tech assistance providers are not part of NET, and the training centers and uni- versities don’t have the latest equipment and software, so they can’t build the technical competence to conduct the sus- tainment training for these new systems we’re fielding.
Martin: In January, PEO C3T and CECOM began a phased implemen- tation of a new home station training initiative with the 101st Airborne Divi- sion that will help determine the skill gaps and how do we train for those bet- ter. We’re excited to see the results as this moves forward.
Jones-Bonbrest: What’s on the agenda when it comes to the future of sustainment?
Martin: One of the efforts we are going to take as a challenge for this coming year is to take a more critical look at ways to reintroduce competition as we buy our sustainment services. We have a real chal- lenge in this community with the pace of obsolescence and the proprietary nature
MS. NANCY JONES-BONBREST is a staff writer for DSA Inc., providing contract support to PEO C3T. She holds a B.S. in journalism from the University of Maryland, College Park. She has covered the Army’s tactical network for several years, including multiple training and testing events.
of
the technologies we buy. We have
started a conversation about assessing our highest-cost programs
in sustainment
and are looking for innovative ways to reintroduce competition.
Muzzelo: For example, we might buy a warranty that is good for three or five years, and then the system gets transi- tioned to sustainment. We’re looking at why we can’t put something on the con- tract for another five-year warranty that I can exercise at the point when the system comes into sustainment. Is there a way of getting a better deal? Another concept we are pursuing is to buy licenses in perpetu- ity when the system is contracted for and in a competitive environment when there may be a willingness to give the Army a better deal if we ask the question.
Martin: Right, and if you really look at Better Buying Power, the basic prin- ciple is being smarter about how we do business. Te ways we incentivize our industry partners—driving competition, being smarter buyers—are what we are looking to do. When it comes to sustain- ment, these objectives are much more achievable if we work together. Te real gains will come from early and persistent engagement by both the PEO and AMC community throughout the entire pro- gram life cycle.
For more information, visit http://www.
cecom.army.mil/organizations.html or
http://peoc3t.army.mil/c3t/.
ASC.ARMY.MIL
51
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203
