ARTICLE 

Washington Pulse 

12  2,000 

by NDIA Staff 

Don’t Cut Back on Testing, Defense Official Pleads
Military acquisition program managers are under pressure to limit testing of new equipment, according to Philip E. Coyle III, the Defense Department’s director of operational test and evaluation.

"Program managers–across the board, in every service–are really stretched thin in what they are trying to achieve," Coyle explained to a breakfast meeting of defense writers. The pressure is on to limit testing during early development in order to get the equipment into use as quickly as possible, "but that can come back to bite you," he warned.

Coyle cited the USS Cole–the destroyer attacked by terrorists in Yemen–as example of the value of testing. Full-ship shock tests were conducted on an earlier ship of the same class to ensure that such ships could survive the sort of blast that devastated the Cole and killed 17 sailors, Coyle said. As a result of the tests, Coyle said, the Navy was able to develop criteria for how large a hole a ship could accept without sinking. That information, he said, was put to good use in saving the Cole.

Does the United States Want Defense or Security?
Marine Commandant Gen. James L. Jones, speaking to reporters at the Fifth Annual Expeditionary Warfare Conference, in Panama City, Fla., drew a distinction between national defense and national security. "If you invest only for defense, then that is just what you get," he said. "National security is another matter."

Strictly speaking, he said, national defense means protecting U.S. territory and U.S. citizens, he suggested, while national security involves looking out for U.S. interests in the world in a larger sense. "We have to ask ourselves what it means to be a global power," he said. "There needs to be an understanding of how military presence permits access to world markets. It re-enforces our involvement in the global economy."

U.S. military presence also encourages the growth of democracy around the world, Jones said. "Generally, where the United States chooses to engage, there is stability and some moves toward democracy," he concluded.

Space Force Unlikely
The congressionally appointed "space commission" that currently is evaluating the organization of U.S. space programs is unlikely to recommend the creation of a "space force," said Lt. Gen. John Costello, chief of the Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command.

The commission, led by former defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, is expected to complete its report and recommendations by April 2001.

Even though the Army has not endorsed the establishment of a separate agency to manage space programs, most of which currently are managed by the Air Force, "we do see the need for the development of a better requirements process," Costello said. "We see a need for better coordination with the agencies outside of the Defense Department," such as the intelligence community, he told reporters during the recent annual convention of the Association of the U.S. Army, in Washington, D.C.

"There were some discussions [within the commission] about creating an assistant secretary of defense for space," he said. "I don’t know how that is going to go. ... I think you are going to see more focus on professional military education for space forces."

Army Col. Glen Collins, who heads the so-called force development integration center, noted that "there are some very powerful minds on that commission."

Russia’s Painful Downsizing
Russian plans to reduce the size of the nation’s armed forces by 300,000–from a current authorized strength of 1.2 million to 900,000 troops–are turning out to be "quite a problem," a senior Russian defense official told a luncheon sponsored recently in Washington, D.C., by the National Defense Industrial Association.

Absorbing former military personnel into the civilian economy has been a major headache for cash-strapped Moscow since the collapse of the Soviet Union a decade ago, the official acknowledged. At that time, the Soviets had more than 5 million people in uniform.

The latest reductions are supposed to be complete by 2005, but "five years is not enough time to do that," said the official, who asked not to be identified. Furthermore, he said, the reduction "definitely could not be tackled without the help of the international community."

Moscow Reserves the Right to Use Nuclear Weapons
As its forces dwindle, Moscow’s nuclear weapons are becoming even more important to its military strategy, said a senior Russian defense official, speaking to U.S executives in Washington, D.C., on condition of anonymity.

Russia sees nuclear weapons–not conventional forces–as the most effective means to guarantee its security and that of its allies, he said. Russia, he said, retains the right to use nuclear weapons:

‘Saturday Reviews’ Have Helped Industry, Says Gansler
The "Saturday" meetings that Jacques S. Gansler asked defense industry executives to attend during the past two years have paid off, he said. Gansler is the outgoing defense undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics.

These meetings were triggered by failures by some top defense contractors to deliver products on time and on budget. At the time, Gansler said he would conduct "reviews" with the top four or five defense firms.

It was "the only way I could get all the senior people in the government to spend a day reviewing programs," he said during a breakfast with reporters in Washington, D.C. The meetings, he said, weren’t "geared toward punishment" for companies that weren’t performing well, but to remind executives to focus more on customer satisfaction and less on mergers and acquisitions.

After the reviews were completed, Gansler said, "the companies have told me that this had helped them, because it’s given the senior management much higher visibility.

"We have also improved the government’s communications with industry by giving them status reports on programs. That helps them know how we think they are doing. [As a result], we have fewer programs in trouble. The management is much more on top of it, and the government is doing a better job communicating their concerns. It’s not a punishment."

Replacing Aircraft
The Air Force needs to replace as many as 150 aircraft per year for the next 15 to 20 years, according to Air Force Secretary F. Whitten Peters.

That’s three times the number that was replaced this year, he told defense reporters. And it will cost an additional $20 billion to $30 billion per year more, he said.

The service doesn’t have any choice, Peters said, because of the age of its fleet. "We have a lot of old iron that’s going to go away in the next few years," he said.

Peters doesn’t see any savings to be had by ordering new versions of the F-15 or F-16 fighter. "Bringing the F-15 or even the F-16 into the modern world is a very expensive proposition."

Needed: A National Debate
When the new administration takes over, the next president and defense secretary should prompt a national discussion about U.S. defense aims, said Air Force Secretary F. Whitten Peters.

"I think the country needs to have a debate about what it wants the military to do," he said. "What risk do you want us to take in doing that, and how much are you willing to pay?

"Tell me the number of missions that you want me to run, and I’ll tell you how much I need."

Reorganization Pays Off
A reorganization of Defense Department test and evaluation operations over the past year has "dramatically improved" the department’s ability to address the declining state of testing for new military technology, said Philip E. Coyle III, director of operational test and evaluation.

In 1999, Defense Secretary Cohen consolidated most of test and evaluation functions within Coyle’s office, he explained to reporters. Coyle’s office now oversees test ranges and facilities with a total of 18,000 square miles of land, 180,000 square miles of airspace and more than 30,000 personnel. But the test and evaluation workload is growing, while "resources ... are down significantly," Coyle said. "Investment funding is inadequate to fill the gap." In 1999, for example, $110 million was taken from the test line of the F-22 program, he said.

  Bookmark and Share