Perhaps of greatest importance, the success of this effort rests on the abil- ity to solicit valuable feedback from our industry partners and to draw from their expertise regarding how best to analyze requirements, make trade-offs, and therefore reduce costs. If there is a requirement that does not make sense for a given platform, we want our expert industry partners to weigh in and let us know their thoughts on how to improve the system. The Army’s ongoing efforts to work closely with industry partners are also aimed at improving the acquisition process so as to emphasize technological maturity and focus on achievable, cost- informed goals.
As we have experienced numerous times, this process may include the need to make certain requirements trade-offs to reduce cost and maintain program sched- ule parameters. To be successful, we must change our previous assumptions on how we execute key events like Industry Days, in order to seek greater senior leader par- ticipation and more effective dialogue.
In fact, this collaborative effort is already underway in some of our large-scale programs, such as the Joint Light Tacti- cal Vehicle (in full partnership with the Marines) and the Joint Tactical Radio System Ground Mobile Radio programs, ensuring that we are developing impor- tant new capability for Soldiers and are using taxpayer dollars wisely through an examination of unnecessary requirements.
BUILDING ON SUCCESSES Changing the paradigm along these lines implicitly encourages us to build upon and institutionalize our many acquisition successes. The Army has learned to be adaptive over the last 10 years of war and has often adjusted its acquisition practices to meet urgent wartime demands in the face of a rapidly changing threat. We can
ASC.ARMY.MIL 143
take advantage of these processes and seek to improve. In short, we do both rapid and deliberate acquisition very well, and we can learn from both!
The notion or claim that the Army has not successfully developed or acquired major systems since the big five in the 1980s is, simply stated, an inaccurate
“myth.” We’ve rapidly delivered thousands of systems and currently have more than 600 programs in either development or production.
The best example of rapid acquisition might be MRAPs and M-ATVs that were delivered in 12 and 15 months,
REDUCING REQUIREMENTS
Collaboration between the Army and industry has identified opportunities to reduce requirements and cost for the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS). Here, LTC Mark Stiner (left), Product Manager JTRS Hand- held, Manpack and Small Form Fit, shows GEN Peter W. Chiarelli, Army Vice Chief of Staff, how to operate part of the JTRS during a training event with paratroopers from 1st Battalion, 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team (BCT), 82nd Airborne Division, at Fort Bragg, NC, in March 2011. (U.S. Army photo by SSG Joshua Ford, 3rd BCT Public Affairs.)
respectively; both were engineered to improve Soldier protection. In addition, there are now hundreds of unmanned aerial systems in the fight. We have upgraded our body armor nine times, and it remains the very best in the world today. We’ve made more than 60 improvements to the M4 Carbine, which is simply a world-class weapon.
In January 2010, the combat-proven, blast-deflecting Stryker Double-V Hull was a drawing that LTG Robert P. Lennox, Deputy Chief of Staff, G-8, and I first saw on a PowerPoint chart. Today we have nearly 200 systems in the fight saving Sol- diers’ lives—an enormous improvement!
COMMENTARY
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
