UNCLASSIFIED Rapid Acquisition March 10 2011 OSD CAPE

UNCLASSIFIED Rapid Acquisition March 10, 2011 OSD CAPE UNCLASSIFIED Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation

Purpose UNCLASSIFIED OSD How to not make the SD the PM for rapid acquisition items • Current process requires senior leader involvement ü How to balance urgent needs against the risk the system is willing to take ü How fast is it required, how much is the department willing to pay, and how much oversight is required UNCLASSIFIED 2

UNCLASSIFIED Current Acquisition Model OSD CAPE Complexity & Risk Difficult with Risk Year of Execution Re-Programming GH MRAP To shorten time requires more sr ldr involvement SD JIEDDO DSD MDA SM-6 Using Existing Auths and Contracts MC-12 Liberty Laser JDAM Theater Local Cmd COTS/GOTS ATR Weeks BTR SDB/C-130 PO Integration Months Quarters Year Need to Delivery Time UNCLASSIFIED OCO S&T at Government Labs SAE Days 5000 CAT I POM Years Theater Funding Total Program Costs Senior Leader Involvement Easy with No Risk

UNCLASSIFIED Rapid Acquisition Requirements Process OSD CAPE Capability Requirement Validation Identify Validate Prioritize Pick a Solution Develop Demonstrate Procure OR Procure Then Integrate to a Service or Agency Sustain & Transfer OR Sustain & Transition UNCLASSIFIED 4

UNCLASSIFIED How Can a Program Get an EZ-Pass? OSD CAPE • High priority JUON that must be tracked • Requires funding ü Initial (break another program, colorless? ) ü O&S costs must be signed up for • Requires Service support or buy-in • Requires breaking thru the risk adverse nature of the system it is being procured from • Government must take on a large integration role ü Established relationships with contractors ü Team in place UNCLASSIFIED 5

UNCLASSIFIED Rapid Acquisition Future Developments OSD CAPE • Standing up a Do. D-wide program office üCurrent organizations are commodity specific üAd-hoc from current program offices • Streamlining how the requirements come in üJCIDS is not nimble enough üHow to create a more open process • Appropriating colorless multi-year funding üKeeping Congress informed üTransition/transfer to services or agencies UNCLASSIFIED 6

UNCLASSIFIED Laser JDAM OSD Sep 2006 CENTAF Urgent Need for Engaging Fast Moving Targets • CSAF directed QRC--Weapons to GWOT in 15 month • Requirements: • CSAF go-ahead Mar 07; Requirements signed Apr 07 • Requirements did not change even with addition of Navy • Technology: • Boeing initial investment, development and demonstration • Funding: • Initial R&D funding ($6 M) from Warfighter Rapid Acquisition Program in 1 month • Initial production funds ($20 M) reprogrammed in 2 months • Follow-on funding kept pace with need • $6 M R&D in 4 months; Navy funding in 8 months • Team: • Existing JDAM program office used for LJDAM • Supported tailored processes UNCLASSIFIED Enablers • Rapid receipt of initial funding • Agile support from testers • Accelerated decision process 7

UNCLASSIFIED Precision Lethality MK-82 OSD 2009 JUON for Very Low Collateral Damage Weapon • Requirements: RAC directed QRC for USCENTCOM • Direction from JRAC Mar 10, R&D started May 10. Requirements finalized Aug 10, 4 months into effort. • Penetration and forward fuzing not critical to low collateral damage. Added 4 months to development effort. • Technology: • Composite technology integrated on a fielded system, JDAM • Funding: Unconventional funding sources • SPR leads to reprogramming of $11 M SAF/AQ funds for tech maturation through an AFRL ongoing effort • $29. 5 M RDT&E OCO money provided Aug 10 • $20 M RDT&E & $31 M production provided by JRAC Oct 10 • Team: AAC & AFRL Lab partnership key to success • AFRL led tech maturation effort w/transition to AAC Enablers • Early Funding – Available for effort • People – Committed to Warfighter • Flexibility • Rapid decision making ability • Adapt to change daily • Agile support from testers • New AAC program office stood up. Fulfills Sys Integrator role • Organic system level design and system logistics support UNCLASSIFIED 8

UNCLASSIFIED Back Up Slides UNCLASSIFIED 9

UNCLASSIFIED Focused Lethality Munition (FLM) OSD FY 06 2 Qtr JCTD Breakfast Club 3 Qtr FY 08 FY 07 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr AFRL Technology Development Program (25 Arena, Sled & Howitzer Tests) JCTD Integration/Test Program Contract Award 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 450 FLMs Technology Transition MS C Residuals Sustainment 50 FLM’s DD-250’d Original Fielding Schedule (50) Weaponeer Workshops 3 Phase Military Utility Assessment UNCLASSIFIED Static Live Fire Tests Guided Test Vehicle Flights Live Flight Test 10

UNCLASSIFIED Laser JDAM OSD J M Milestones 15 Month Timeline FY 07 J A S O N Direction Contract Actions AF Prod $ AF R&D $ Final AF $ D J F FY 08 M A Navy FY 08 Funds M J AF 1 st 50 Requirement Navy Rqmt - UCA - Definitization FDR 1 A S O N FY 09 D J DON 1 st 50 1 st Operational Requirement Engagement F M AF 400 th Requirement FDR 1/PRR 1/FAAT 1 – SDD+ Configuration PRR 2 (Elbit) FDR 2/PRR 2/FAAT FCA 2 – LRIP PRR 2 (ESA) Configuration FDR 2 PRR 1 Qualification - Design J Producibility Enhancements - Logistics - Software (Blk 7) FAAT 2 - AF Testing Stationary Target Eval FAAT 1/ OUE Obj A/C Integration and Moving/Maneuvering Target Eval - Navy Testing Operational Unit Production Long-Lead Procurement AF Units 50 100 Navy Units 50 200 300 400 100 200 Fielding UNCLASSIFIED 11

UNCLASSIFIED BLU-129/B QRC Schedule Time Now 4. 5 -month RR OSD 8 -month IOC M DIRECTION RQMNTS FUNDING CONTRACTS A JRAC Directio n FY 2010 M AFRL $ J J A • • • N D J Risk Reduction Arena Ground Rules/Assumptions No key requirements changes BLU-129 ~ legacy MK 82 (except roll inertia) No JDAM OFP change allowed Receive IM waiver for initial fielding Receive high priority on test range JDAM / LJDAM kits and fuzes are GFE Warhead characterization, design margin and objective testing post-IOC Paveway II certification dates TBD F FY 2011 M A M S O N FY 2012 D J F M Capability Transition Review Lethality Evaluation Point Sled Qual Margin DVTs Structural Data Package Navy safe Sep/Cats & Traps USN Exp Quals E 3/HERO NNMSB Approval Environmental /Safety AFSEO CFP - Captive Flt Profile CTV - Controlled Test Vehicle DVT - Design Verification Testing EGTV - Environmental Guided Test Vehicle IM – Insensitive Munitions PHST – Packaging, Handling, Storage, Transportation RAA – Required Assets Available TDP – Technical Data Package Post-IOC TRR Final TDP Initial CDR TR R TDP Case DVTs Test Clear (T) Flt Clear(O) IM/Haz Class Tests USN Flt Test Navy Fleet Clearance Sled Design Margin Sleds JTCG/ME Weaponeering Design Margin Lethality A/C Flt Certification Arenas EGTVs Fit Checks CTV CFP OUE Rpt DT/OT Objective Live Flights Fielding Recommendation Tech Orders PHST UNCLASSIFIED A Prod CA EOD Eval WARHEAD MANUFACTURING J AF TRL Readiness Review PDR J RAA RDT&E CA SRR • • O Do. N Rqmt’s RDT&E/Pr od Reprog $ AF Rqmt’s RDT&E OCO $ RR CA RISK REDUCTION AND QRC RDT&E S Transition from QRC 5 -month post-IOC Warhead Aging Study Warhead Surveillance Plan Mc. Alester Qual PRR FAI/PCA 50 RAA Closeout 12

UNCLASSIFIED Focused Lethality Munition (FLM) OSD 2006 Urgent Need for Low Collateral Damage Weapon • SECAF directed JCTD--Weapons to GWOT in 18 mos • Requirements: Well defined from JCTD process • Limited blast zone and focused lethality • Requirements were fluid. Penetration requirement reduced • Technology: • Composite technology integrated on a fielded system, SDB • Funding: Out of cycle JCTD • SAF/AQ found $10 M. Initial $6 M went directly to AFRL, $3. 6 M managed by AAC for AFRL. • Follow on funding from misc sources including $10 M BTR from SDB I and SDB II. Enablers • Accelerated Funding • People & Teamwork • Leadership • Vision, Strategy, Focus • Accepting failure and taking risk • Mature Technologies • Clear and Valid Requirement • Agile support from testers • Team: AAC & AFRL Lab partnership key to success • AFRL led tech maturation effort w/transition to AAC • SDB program office supplemented for FLM effort • Partnered w/National Labs for composite design expertise UNCLASSIFIED 13