Lockheed Martin Corp., Owego, N.Y., has been awarded a maximum $30,814,317 firm-fixed-price contract for receiver transmitters. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Philadelphia, Pa., (SPRWA1-13-D-2000-THAC).
Raytheon Co., McKinney, Texas, is being awarded a $9,522,446 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N68836-13-C-0084) for the full design, manufacture, and installation of test equipment, associated testing, and training to standup an organic depot maintenance facility to support the AN/APY-10 Radar. Naval Supply Systems Command Fleet Logistics Center, Jacksonville, Fla., is the contracting activity.
Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Information Systems and Global Solutions, Gaithersburg Md., has been awarded a $16,421,355 modification (P000064) for an existing cost-plus-incentive-fee contract (FA8726-09-C-0006) for Global Broadcast Service (GBS) Defense Enterprise Computing Center (DEC C) Software Sustainment and GBS Operations Center (GBSOC) Operations. This contract modification adds software sustainment to maintain the GBS DECC software baseline and provide personnel to staff the GBSOC 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year in support of worldwide GBS operations.
Plateau Software Inc., Issaquah, Wash., has been awarded a $9,000,000 firm-fixed-price, sole-source, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for support and maintenance of existing information technology systems that support the Environmental Protection and Sustainment program. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Mobile District, Mobile, Ala., is the contracting activity (W91278-14-D-0018).
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, Herndon, Va., has been awarded a $12,430,650 firm-fixed-price contract for Spectrum Monitoring Subsystem to be installed at U.S. Army Remote Monitor Control Equipment locations. The U.S. Army Contracting Command – Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (W52P1J-14-C-0021).
Internal change may be the key to managing external change as the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Coast Guard enter a new era of limited budgets and unlimited global challenges. From research and development to acquisition, these services are looking toward changing methods and technologies to keep the force viable and accomplish their missions. Meanwhile, a range of adversaries continue striving to find and exploit weaknesses in U.S. capabilities and operations.
Storming ashore from the sea is becoming increasingly difficult for the U.S. Marine Corps as it faces new missions on the heels of personnel cuts. The nature of Marine assault from the sea is changing, and its aging fleet of amphibious ships are losing their effectiveness both chronologically and evolutionarily.
The U.S. Navy will depend heavily on technology innovation to meet increasing operational demands on a fleet that is aging and suffering from budget constraints, according to the vice chief of naval operations. Adm. Mark E. Ferguson, USN, told the audience at the Thursday luncheon town hall that the Navy needs to work cooperatively with industry to develop the innovative technologies and capabilities it needs.
The U.S. Navy is looking to technology to help it fulfill its mission obligations in a time of severe budget constraints. Commercial technologies may provide effective solutions at a fraction of their military counterparts; innovations promise to add advanced capabilities to existing platforms; and new readiness plans may help economize deployments while increasing effectiveness. However, a lot of plans must fall into place for these technologies to take their places in the force.
Unmanned systems for reconnaissance, surveillance and warfighting have grown so quickly in popularity that they are spawning a familiar list of challenges that must be met sooner rather than later. Many of these issues have arisen with other military technologies that became popular quickly, and planners found that fixing these problems was significantly more difficult the deeper the technologies were embedded in everyday military operations.
The realm of cyberspace, created by the United States, could be the undoing of its next major military operation unless the country regains control of its own creation. The virtual realm was let loose on the world where it was embraced by all manner of users, and some of them are counting on their expertise in it to overcome the overwhelming power of the U.S. military.
The U.S. Navy is developing a new fleet readiness plan that aims to enable more operations amid less funding. It is designed to avoid redundant activities or situations that might delay operations, and it will provide structure as well as flexibility in a coordinated effort across the fleet.
The U.S. Marine Corps is considering a new relationship with special operations forces as it faces a personnel drawdown, said a Marine Expeditionary Force commander. Lt. Gen. John Toolan, USMC, commanding general of the I Marine Expeditionary Force, told a Wednesday panel audience at West 2014 in San Diego that the Corps is looking harder at how it integrates with special operations forces.
The U.S. Navy of the future will strongly resemble the U.S. Navy of the present, according to a group of admirals. Budget cuts and changing missions are impelling the Navy to rely on its existing platforms and improve them by implementing new technologies.
The U.S. Navy must “achieve a balance” between using custom information technology and adopting commercial products, according to its chief information officer. Terry Halvorsen, appearing in the Wednesday keynote panel at West 2014 in San Diego, told the audience that this balance must weigh all factors in determining the Navy’s information technology direction.
The U.S. Navy’s focus on information dominance is increasing along with its reach. Having organized the force along its lines, the Navy now is applying new operational tasks to its menu.
Having vast amounts of intelligence data will not serve U.S. military needs if it is applied only tactically, according to a U.S. Navy information dominance leader. This data must be used to understand an adversary’s strategic intent, or leaders may not act effectively.
In the second act of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, musing aloud, the heroine speaks that justly famous line: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” True enough—but The Tragedy of Fred and Juliet lacks a certain zing. Juliet’s lament aside, Shakespeare knew reality. We best remember those items rightly named.
That is as true in the military as any other line of work. And, it has more relevance today in an information age in which credibility often is suspect.
Even though the Cold War has ended and the monolithic threat against the West has disappeared, the relationship between Europe and the United States remains vital. Europe includes some of the United States’ strongest coalition partners and alliances; the two economies are closely tied and interdependent; and defense and security in Europe are evolving rapidly, just as in the United States. AFCEA chapters and members outside the United States number the greatest in Europe.
It’s impossible these days to attend a U.S. Defense Department information technology presentation without repeated mentions of the Joint Information Environment (JIE). But industry representatives often ask, “What does JIE mean to me?” I did some digging into the environment—leveraging the expertise of the AFCEA Technology Committee, discussions with several senior defense information technology leaders and insights from colleagues at my firm who participated in JIE Increment 1 in Europe.