Foreign Foreign

Comparative Comparative

Testing (FCT)Testing (FCT)Col Eric Burns

DirectorComparative Testing Office

(CTO)Office of the Deputy Under

Secretary of Defense (Advanced System &

Concepts)-----------------------------------

Email: richard.burns@osd.milWebsite: www.acq.osd.mil/cto

Phone: (703) 602-3740

Israel 2009 Israel 2009

Aug-Sept 2009Aug-Sept 2009

2

Outline• Global Defense Industry

• Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT)– What We Do

– Interest Areas

– Program Metrics

• FCT Activity with Israel– Current Ongoing Projects

– Successful Completions Procured

• Participation with FCT– Best Practices

– Timeline

The FCT Mission

Deliver innovative, world-class products that

counter unconventional and time-critical threats

Deliver innovative, world-class products that

counter unconventional and time-critical threats

4

4

Global Defense Industry - Based on 2008 Defense Revenue -

• Only 43 of the top 100 defense contractors, by revenues, are U.S.

companies

• 25 of the top 50 defense contractors are foreign

• 3 of the top 10 defense contractors are foreign

– #3: BAE Systems (United Kingdom)

– #7: EADS (Netherlands)

– #9: Finmeccanica (Italy)

• But 86% of the proposals we receive represent foreign contractors

smaller than the top 100

Source: Defense News (July 20, 2009)

5

Fund Testing of World-Class Items that Solve Warfighter’s ProblemsFund Testing of World-Class Items that Solve Warfighter’s Problems

FCT - What We Do

• Invest approximately $34M each year

• Find & Test “Here & Now” SolutionsProjects begin within a year, end within 2-3 yearsTesting at U.S. or foreign rangesProject value: Range of $200K - $2M; average of $800K

• OSD Selects & Funds ProjectsClear Goal: “Test to Procure”

• Services & USSOCOM Execute Our ProgramsNominate mature military or commercial products

Manage all testing and fielding

In 2009 we funded - -

• 15 continuing projects (~$18M)

• 16 new starts (~$14M)

6

Improved OperationsImproved Operations Effectiveness (lethality, accuracy, endurance) Survivability (protection, agility, stealth, medical) Force Protection (defensive systems, detection, armoring, chem - bio defense) Sustainability (lighter / combined equipment, longer missions, better batteries)

Direct Warfighter SupportDirect Warfighter Support Logistics (supply chain management in the field, equipment reliability) Teaming (e.g., Network & Info Centric Operations at the tactical or operational level) Surveillance, tagging & tracking (blue & hostile forces, friendly identification)

Warfighter EmploymentWarfighter Employment Planning capabilities (large unit employment) Coordinating capabilities (Network / Info Centric Operations at the strategic level) Transport capabilities (getting to and from the fight) Operational readiness (equipment availability, maintainability, training)

Proposals MUST Satisfy Warfighter’s Needs

in Support of Overseas Contingency Operations

Interest Areas

7

Army Army

• Platform & Soldier Protection

• Countermine / Counter IED Capabilities

• Precision Fire

• Improved Power Sources

• Robotics: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles & Unmanned Ground Vehicles

• Improved Logistics to Reduce the Footprint / Maintain tempo

Service / USSOCOM Interests (Examples)

Air ForceAir Force• Persistent ISR

• Space Situational Awareness (3-D Battlespace)

• High Resolution, Light Weight Sensors

• Counter IED Detonation & Protection

• Locate Target & Attack Moving Targets

• Low Yield Precision Weapons

• Locate & Recover Isolated Personnel

Navy / Marine CorpsNavy / Marine Corps

• Vehicle Cooling

• Airborne Countermeasures

• Maritime Force Protection

• Improved capabilities for– Fleet C4 ISR & Data Links

– Security Solutions with Coalition Partners

– Field Medical Capabilities

– Speed for Small Water Craft

US Special Operations CommandUS Special Operations Command

• Portable Unmanned Air Systems• Non-Gasoline Burning Engines• Aircraft Occupant Ballistic Protection

Systems• Psychological Operations Broadcast• Biometrics• Persistent ISR• Improved Medical Technology

8

• Tested Products from 28 Countries

• OSD Investment: $1.17 Billion (constant FY09 $)

• Estimated RDT&E Cost Avoidance: $7.60 Billion

• Accelerated Fielding Averages 5-7 years

• Procurement Rate ~ 80% in the Past 6 Years

• Foreign Vendor Teaming with U.S. Industry in 33 States

FCT Metrics - Over Last 29 Years - -

279 Projects Met Service Requirements279 Projects Met Service Requirements

601 Projects Started, 514 Completed601 Projects Started, 514 Completed

200 Projects - Procurements Worth $9.0B200 Projects - Procurements Worth $9.0B

* Reflects FY09 Constant Year Dollars

Israel6.3%

France 9.9%

Germany 15.7%

Canada 7.5%

Others * 17.7%UK

31.7%

Sweden 11.2%

FCT Funding Provided - $1.17BFCT Funding Provided - $1.17B(Percent by Country)(Percent by Country)

* Others -- Australia, Austria, Belgium, Croatia,

Denmark, Finland, Greece, Iceland, India, Italy,

Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland,

Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore,

Spain, South Africa, Switzerland, Ukraine

ProcurementsProcurements($Million – Overall $9.06B)($Million – Overall $9.06B)

** Others -- Belgium, Denmark, Finland, India,

Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand,

Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian

Federation, South Africa, Switzerland

Israel$858

France $687

Germany $1,249 Canada

$335

Others ** $649

UK$3,129

Sweden $1,109

Australia $415

Norway$629

FCT: Testing & Procurement By Country (FY 1980 – 2009)

FCT with IsraelFCT with Israel

On-going ProjectsOn-going Projects

Since 1980 …• 62 FCT Projects with Israel• $65M in FCT Testing Funds to US Services & USSOCOM• 13 Successful FCTs, with Procurement of $820M

Project Company Service Started FY

M1A1 Crew Cooling System Kinetics USMC 2009

Advanced Airborne Expendable IMI Navy 2008

Projects Leading to Procurements (four most recent)Projects Leading to Procurements (four most recent)Project Company Service Year

Procurement Initiated

Corona Monitoring System for VLF/LF Comms OFIL, Ltd. Navy 2003

Man-Portable Multi Sensor System Headsets And Sensors (Eagle Headset)

Source of Sound USSOCOM 2003

Night Vision Goggle Camera System Vectop, Ltd. Air Force 2001

F-16 600 Gallon Tanks Israel Military Industries (IMI)

Air Force 1999

Post FCT Post FCT Key Procurements from IsraelKey Procurements from Israel

13 Procurements Totaling $820M

Man Portable Multi-SensorSystem Headsets and Sensors

Night Vision Goggle CameraF-16 600 Gallon

Tanks

Corona Monitoring System for

High Power

VLF/LF Comms

Improved Mobile Subscriber

Equipment UHF Radios

12

What Makes Foreign Companies Successful in FCT?

• Presence in the United StatesPresence in the United States– Strong support from their embassy in the US

Industry days How DoD does business

– Professional consultants / active industry associations

– Trade shows for visibility

– Partnering with a US company (not required)

• Good relationship with the US Embassy Office of Defense Good relationship with the US Embassy Office of Defense Cooperation (or similar organization) in their home countryCooperation (or similar organization) in their home country

– Great place to find out where to start

• Strong capabilities that fulfill U.S. Warfighter needsStrong capabilities that fulfill U.S. Warfighter needs– Can be a dominating industry presence

– Can be a niche market provider

13

Sep- Dec Sep- Dec

20082008

Services & USSOCOM Initiate Internal Proposal CallServices & USSOCOM Initiate Internal Proposal Call

Fiscal Year 2010 Final Proposals SubmittedFiscal Year 2010 Final Proposals Submitted

Jul- Jul-

Aug Aug

20092009

1 Oct1 Oct

20092009

Fiscal Year 2010 BeginsFiscal Year 2010 BeginsNew project startNew project start

OSD ApprovalOSD Approval

Sep Sep

20092009

Subject Matter Expert ReviewSubject Matter Expert ReviewJun Jun

20092009

Fiscal Year 2010 Timeline

Milestones for Fiscal Year 2010 Budget & Execution

FebFeb

20092009

Project Management Reviews with Services & USSOCOMProject Management Reviews with Services & USSOCOM

Projects can be started throughout the fiscal yearProjects can be started throughout the fiscal year

• Bottom-Up Project Proposal Process – Submitter Works with

Services & USSOCOM to Develop Testing Proposals

14

OSDOSD CTO Main CTO Main fct@osd.milfct@osd.mil 703.602.3740703.602.3740

ArmyArmy Al Al TrawinskiTrawinski

allan.trawinski@us.army.milallan.trawinski@us.army.mil 703.866.0999703.866.0999

AF AF Ronald Ronald MeyersMeyers

ronald.meyers@ ronald.meyers@ pentagon.af.milpentagon.af.mil

703.588.8949703.588.8949

USSOCOMUSSOCOM Ron Ron SchwartzSchwartz

schwarr@socom.milschwarr@socom.mil 813.826.1035813.826.1035

Navy / Navy /

USMCUSMC

Arthur Arthur Webb Webb

arthur.webb@navy.milarthur.webb@navy.mil 703.696.0340703.696.0340

Key Points of Contact Key Points of Contact

15

Our conventional modernization programs seek a 99 percent solution in years. Stability and counterinsurgency missions – the wars we are in – require 75 percent solutions in months. The challenge is whether in our bureaucracy and in our minds these two different paradigms can be made to coexist.

In SummaryThe Challenge to Change

Secretary Gates at Secretary Gates at

National Defense National Defense

UniversityUniversity(September 29, 2008)(September 29, 2008)