from: Defense Issues: Volume 11, Number 86

  The JROC oversees the requirements generation process and mission need determination to ensure that it is linked to our military strategy. The OSD Cost Analysis Improvement Group performs an independent cost estimate. The director of program analysis and evaluation conducts an independent assessment of the analysis of alternatives performed by the services and also assesses the affordability of the service programs annually through the program review process.

Independent oversight is one of the key elements in the department's acquisition oversight process. The department's key decision-making bodies, the Defense Acquisition Board and Defense Resources Board, combine membership from both the acquisition and requirements communities to ensure a critical review from all perspectives is accomplished. This is an institutionalized, well-structured process.

Advanced concept technology demonstrations are a preacquisition activity designed to determine if the selected programs have sufficient military utility to justify transition into acquisition. The oversight of ACTDs contains three main elements.

First, the selection/approval process includes reviews by the senior technical representatives from the services and OSD from technology maturity and program viability perspectives and to ensure no unnecessary duplication. The candidates that pass that review are then reviewed and prioritized by the JROC with final approval by the USD(A&T).

Second, a management plan is prepared for each ACTD, defining technical and programmatic aspects of the program. This plan is approved by the deputy undersecretary of defense for advanced technology, the commander of the sponsoring operational user organization, the acquisition executives of the executing service or director of the executing agency and senior representatives of all key participants. An oversight group that includes senior representatives of each of the same organizations holds a semiannual review to assess progress.

Third, the strategy for transition of an ACTD into acquisition is developed early in the ACTD, addressing such things as procurement strategy, operational testing, life cycle costing and supportability. A transition integrated product team is created at that time to review the strategy and to oversee the preparations for transition.

Entry into acquisition occurs only if justified by the demonstrated military utility, in which case a formal program review is conducted to confirm readiness to transition. Entry into the acquisition process would typically occur either at the start of E&MD [engineering and manufacturing development] or low rate initial production, depending on maturity of the design.

The key features and characteristics of the defense acquisition process are the customary milestones and program phases. The milestone decision authority can tailor these milestones and phases based on a program's size, risk or complexity.

Four major milestone decision points and four phases typically provide a basis for comprehensive management and progressive decision making. Phases and milestone decision points facilitate the orderly translation of broadly stated mission needs into system-specific performance requirements and a stable design that can be produced efficiently.

Assessments are made of program execution status and plans for the next phase and the remainder of the program at each milestone decision point. The risks associated with the program and the adequacy of risk management planning are explicitly addressed. Additionally, the milestone decision authority approves program-specific results to be achieved prior to entering the next phase, called exit criteria.

The milestone decision authority also ensures that contracts are structured so that milestone decisions are made well before expenditure of funds on activities in subsequent phases. Contract options and phases are structured so that information on exit criteria completion is provided in time to support the acquisition review. The objective is to provide proper fiscal controls without delaying the acquisition decisions or contracting actions.

The plan for executing an acquisition program -- the approach used to design, develop and deploy a system through its life cycle -- is the acquisition strategy. It is prepared by the program manager and submitted to the milestone decision authority for approval early in the program. The acquisition strategy documents the program manager's approach for minimizing the time and cost of satisfying an identified, validated need. It evolves through an iterative process and becomes increasingly more definitive as the program proceeds.

Depending on the selected acquisition strategy, combined or repeated milestone decision points and associated activities within the acquisition phase may be required. For example, in an evolutionary acquisition strategy, there may be multiple decision points, depending on the amount of functionality provided in each increment.

In coordination with the integrated product team members, the program manager may propose delegation of the incremental decision points. A second example is the use of commercial off-the-shelf or nondevelopmental item products, requiring no custom changes, which may result in the consolidation of the acquisition program definition and risk reduction and the engineering and manufacturing development phases. In that case, a Milestone II may not be required. Similar tailoring may be applicable to migration systems.

The DAB reviews the execution status of all major defense acquisition programs in each mission area. Collectively and individually, the DAB assesses the department's progress in implementing acquisition reforms and commercial buying practices. The following five sections provide an overview of selected individual TACAIR aircraft and weapons programs.

Click to continue

The F-22's low-observable characteristics, supersonic cruise speed, maneuverability and advanced avionics will guarantee its effectiveness in the air superiority role. It will be capable of conducting air-to-ground operations, carrying two JDAMs internally with a future growth capability for external carriage of air-to-ground weapons.

The first engineering and manufacturing development aircraft is scheduled to fly in May 1997. Tests of a full-scale pole model will begin this fall to confirm the aircraft's low-observable signature qualities; software development and integration are continuing as well. Plans call for production deliveries of the first four of a planned total buy of 438 aircraft to begin in fiscal year 2001, with initial operational capability slated for fiscal year 2005.

The F-22 entered E&MD in 1991. The E&MD program consists of all required design activity needed to field the F-22 weapon system. This includes design, fabrication and development testing of 13 flight test vehicles; design, fabrication and development testing of 39 E&MD flight qualified engines; update of the demonstration/validation avionics flying laboratory into a flying test bed for use in developing and integrating the E&MD avionics suite (including the electronic warfare systems); and the design and development of the F-22 support and training systems.

From the outset, the F-22 program has placed balanced emphasis on performance, survivability, reliability/maintainability and affordability. The aircraft is meeting or exceeding all performance requirements. The first flight is scheduled for May 1997. Release of long lead production funding for the first production lot of four aircraft is scheduled for fiscal year 1998.

F-22 affordability initiatives date back to the initial acquisition strategy of the advanced tactical fighter. During the demonstration/validation phase of the ATF program, the Air Force implemented many of the 1986 Packard Commission recommendations. Those initiatives included streamlining of the acquisition organization and procedures; the use of technology to reduce cost, which included a competitive prototyping strategy and early operational testing; and the balancing of cost and performance through early tradeoffs on user requirements. This approach defined an executable, affordable program before committing to the increased costs associated with engineering and manufacturing development.

When the F-22 successfully transitioned into engineering and manufacturing development, the use of integrated product teams was a centerpiece of the acquisition strategy. This approach employs multifunctional government-industry teams, all working towards a design that properly balances cost, schedule and performance. The IPT approach has been shown to result in less redesign, scrap and rework than the traditional serial development process. The product is an affordable, highly effective and properly time-phased weapon system.

Recent program efforts have continued to focus on streamlining to ensure affordability. Required military specifications and standards for the air vehicle preproduction verification contract have been reduced by 85 percent and by 88 percent on the engine PPV contract.

Contract data deliverables are expected to be reduced from 262 on the original E&MD air vehicle contract to 20 on the PPV and production contracts. Statement of work directions have been reduced from 147 pages for the original E&MD contract to less than 20 pages for follow-on production. Program office manning is projected to be reduced from the current 350 people to 191 in the year 2000.

The F-22 program from its inception has led the way in implementing Lean Enterprise initiatives, beginning in E&MD and flowing forward into the production phase. The goal is to reduce costs, reduce delivery timelines and improve quality in all areas. These initiatives will lead the way in reducing unnecessary oversight. These Lean Enterprise initiatives are geared towards reducing cycle times by 40 percent on the air vehicle and 60 percent on the engine.

Other affordability initiatives include reducing security compartmented areas, migrating the advanced integrated avionics toward greater levels of open systems architecture, establishing a factory-to-depot support concept, using a common integrated logistic support analysis data base, using proven commercial practices whenever practical and using commercial off-the-shelf software alternatives.

Join a discussion forum on this article by clicking HERE.