DAU. Acquisition

Problem /Situation

Firebird unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are nearing the end of fielding, and the Services have used them extensively in a number of conflicts. When this first increment of the Firebird was in development, a second increment was planned to provide additional survivability from current and projected threats from heat seeking shoulder-launched missiles. Although military operators are extremely pleased with Firebirds combat capabilities, they are unhappy with its poor availability due to higher-than-anticipated combat losses. Most of these losses have been from heat-seeking shoulder-launched missiles. Records show that several air vehicles were shot down by these missiles over the last few years. The losses have created a serious air vehicle shortage, leading to unacceptably low operational availability. The second increment is now in the early part of the Materiel Solution Analysis Phase. This increment will significantly increase Firebirds survivability against the shoulder-launched missile threat. This increment and a future 3rd increment are supported by a time-phased requirement, originally documented in the approved Firebird I Capability Development Document (CDD). This increment of the program, dubbed Firebird II, is now being planned to meet the new survivability requirement. This activity is supported by the Acquisition Strategy created in Firebird Is development. The users have drafted the following requirement language: DRAFT REQUIREMENT FOR FIREBIRD SURVIVABILITY ENHANCEMENT Capabilities required: 1. Firebird II will incorporate improved survivability measures such that the probability of survivability during a single engagement by a shoulder-launched heat-seeking missile is greater than or equal to 90%. This is a Key Performance Parameter (KPP). 2. Firebird II must meet all unamended requirements in the CDD for the first increment. Using the draft requirement language as a guide, three alternative approaches for enhancing survivability have been studied by Mitronix, a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC). Their report is provided below.

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES FOR INCREASING SURVIVABILITY Approach 1: Modify Firebird to fly high enough to avoid shoulder-launched missiles. Research shows that existing shoulder-launched missiles have an effective ceiling of 15,000 ft., but intelligence sources indicate that near-term improvements are expected to increase the ceiling to 18,000 feet. Analysis indicates that increasing Firebirds ceiling to 20,000 ft. when loitering in the threat zone will meet the new survivability requirement. Increasing Firebirds operational altitude will require some changes to existing control software in both the vehicle and ground station. The software effort should have minimal impact on the overall time and cost for the upgrade and is considered low risk. Higher altitudes will necessitate a modified or new propulsion system, redesign of fuel systems, and upgrades to vehicle sensor packages, resulting in moderate hardware risk. Research and development (R&D) costs are expected to be $140M (RDT&E appropriation) due to the extensive testing and work required to design all the modifications. Production costs are estimated at $285M (Procurement appropriation). Operations and Support (O&S - a combination of O&M and MILPERS appropriations) costs with this upgrade are estimated at $32.5M per year. Disposal cost is estimated to be $65M. It is expected this approach will take 34 months from program initiation to initial operational capability (IOC). However, if new engine technology now in advanced development does not mature as planned, IOC would end up slipping to 36 months.

Approach 2: Add on-board countermeasures (flares) and pre-programmed evasive maneuvering to avoid heat-seeking targeting systems of incoming missiles. Flares are missile decoy devices that are released from air vehicles when a heat-seeking threat is detected. When combined with evasive maneuvering, flares are effective survivability enhancers that have been successfully used for years by manned aircraft. Adding flares and evasive maneuvering would allow Firebird to meet the new survivability requirement without increasing altitude. This approach requires integration of new control capabilities into both the ground control console and the air vehicle. Also, the addition of missile sensing and evasive maneuvering capabilities necessitates writing and rigorously testing a large amount of new software. Missile sensing technology is widely available and considered a low risk. Some of the existing flight control software will be re-usable for the evasive maneuvering. Past experience shows that flight control software complexity is often underestimated. Therefore, this approach entails moderate software risk. Required integration of both the mechanical operation and the physical characteristics (size, weight, attachments, etc.) of new countermeasures into the air vehicle is considered low risk. R&D costs are estimated to be $150M (RDT&E). Most of those costs are due to the extensive software effort required. Production costs are expected to be $300M (Procurement). Operations and support costs with this upgrade are estimated at $28.75M (O&S) per year. Disposal cost is estimated to be $58M This approach will take 30 months from initiation to IOC. There is a relatively low risk that the flight control software will not be reusable, which would add three months and $4M (RDT&E) to this approach.

Approach 3: Reduce the heat signature of the vehicle. Reducing the heat signature of air vehicles to increase survivability has a proven track record in numerous existing aircraft. Heat signature reduction techniques and materials in use are relatively mature and cost-effective. If Firebirds heat signature can be reduced sufficiently it will meet the new survivability requirement. This option requires significant hardware redesign of portions of the airframe structure, mostly in the engine exhaust area. While the technology is mature it is expected that current techniques and materials cannot reduce Firebirds signature sufficiently to meet the requirement. Also, characteristics of Firebird, such as low speed, small size, and the need for short takeoffs and landings, will make this a high-risk hardware redesign effort. Extensive testing will be required to prove performance and reliability, but much of the data should be available from the labs and/or modeling and simulation. Software risk is low since this approach will require only minimal changes to existing software code. R&D costs are expected to be $160M (RDT&E) due in large part to the redesign challenges. Production costs are estimated at $320M (Procurement). Most of those costs are driven by the anticipated need for expensive materials and unique manufacturing processes. Operations and support costs with this upgrade are estimated at $26.25M (O&S) per year. Disposal cost is estimated to be $53M. This approach is projected to take 32 months from initiation to IOC. There is a moderate risk that a new propulsion system or major redesign of the existing system will be required. If that happens, both R&D and production costs will increase 30% and the schedule will stretch 6 months. For teams assigned Activity A (Increased Survivability), here is your tasking: 1. Choose a team leader/briefer. Use the information in the Mitronix report to build a matrix that shows the cost, schedule and technical characteristics of each of the three approaches. 2. Preliminary discussions among the PM, PEO, service officials and other stakeholders indicate that money and time are tight, as usual, but the user has a valid need for the survivability enhancement. Taking these discussions into account, along with an affordability analysis and the urgency of the requirement, the PM has provided the following guidance:

Question:

Explains how you built your matrix. - Lists and explains any assumptions made by your team. - Lists and explains the rationale behind your approach rankings

Use the information in the Mitronix report to build a matrix that shows the cost, schedule and technical characteristics of each of the three approaches.

2. Preliminary discussions among the PM, PEO, service officials and other stakeholders indicate that money and time are tight, as usual, but the user has a valid need for the survivability enhancement. Taking these discussions into account, along with an affordability analysis and the urgency of the requirement, the PM has provided the following guidance: This survivability enhancement should not take longer than 36 months from initiation to IOC, the R&D affordability goal is $160M (RDT&E), and the Production affordability goal is $320M (Procurement). O&S costs should be no more than $32.5M per year. Total Life Cycle Cost (LCC) should not exceed $1.19B. Also, cost, schedule and technical risks should be weighted equally when considering alternative approaches. Assume a 20-year operational life for the Firebird II UAVs. Your team has been asked to help assess technology that is currently under development to determine applicability to the Firebird II. Assuming the draft requirement language will be approved as written, and considering the PMs guidance: