Defense related policy and procurement developments in uk as well as within us
Download
1 / 46

Defense Related Policy and Procurement Developments in UK as well as within US - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 202 Views
  • Uploaded on

Defense Related Policy and Procurement Developments in UK as well as within US. British Embassy team: Jonathan Hoyle – Minister (Defence Materiel) Adrian Baguley - Defence Science and Technology Counsellor Andrew Radcliffe – Defence Equipment Counsellor

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Defense Related Policy and Procurement Developments in UK as well as within US' - Jimmy


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Defense related policy and procurement developments in uk as well as within us l.jpg

Defense Related Policy and Procurement Developments in UK as well as within US

British Embassy team:

Jonathan Hoyle – Minister (Defence Materiel)

Adrian Baguley - Defence Science and Technology Counsellor

Andrew Radcliffe – Defence Equipment Counsellor

Bill Cruickshank – Attache Defence Equipment (Legal)


Agenda l.jpg
Agenda well as within US

  • General Policy Overview & Global Context

  • Facts & Figures

  • Procurement

  • Science & Technology

  • Industrial Strategy

  • Conclusions



The uk defence policy vision l.jpg
The UK Defence Policy Vision well as within US

  • Defending the UK and its interests

  • Strengthening international peace and stability

  • A force for good in the world

  • Achieved by being:

    • Fit for the challenge of today

    • Ready for the tasks of tomorrow

    • Capable of building for the future


New threats and instabilities l.jpg
New Threats and Instabilities well as within US

  • We face new challenges and unpredictable conditions.

  • Strategy must evolve to reflect these new realities.

  • This means:

    • Evolving strategy and military doctrine that is flexible and geared to changing conditions.

    • Behaving with speed, flexibility and creativity.


Military imperative since 1900 areas in red where us uk forces have fought together since 1900 l.jpg
Military Imperative – since 1900 well as within US(areas in red where US & UK forces have fought together since 1900)


Combined uk us ops since 1990 l.jpg
Combined UK & US Ops Since 1990 well as within US

IFOR

UNPROFOR

Operation Desert Shield

UNOMIG

Operation Enduring Freedom

ISAF

KFOR

UNIKOM

SFOR II

UNTAET

UNMIL

Operation Desert Storm

Operation Iraqi Freedom

Operation Active Endeavour


Uk defence policy vis vis us l.jpg
UK Defence well as within US Policy vis-à-vis US

“ Maintenance of the transatlantic relationship is fundamental to our security and defence policy”

“ Our Armed Forces will need to be inter-operable with US Command & Control structures”


March 2003 iraq l.jpg
March 2003 well as within US - Iraq

1 Marine Expeditionary Force

3 Commando Brigade

15 Marine Expeditionary Unit


Slide10 l.jpg

Facts & Figures well as within US


Dod mod comparison l.jpg

$442Bn well as within US($148Bn proc/RDT&E)

3.3% of GDP

Single-services train and equip

Widespread acquisition community

Several major prime contractors

Strong Congressional influence

$57Bn ($16Bn procurement, etc)

2.4% of GDP

Tri-service reqs, research and acq.

Focused acquisition community

Single major national defence prime contractor

Little legislative influence

DoD / MoD Comparison


Per capita defence spending l.jpg
Per Capita well as within USDefence Spending ($)


Defense expenditure per head of armed forces k l.jpg
Defense well as within USExpenditure per Head of Armed Forces ($k)


Equipment expenditure per head of armed forces k l.jpg
Equipment well as within USExpenditure per Head of Armed Forces ($k)


Slide15 l.jpg

Procurement well as within US


Slide16 l.jpg

Public Perception well as within US


Smart acquisition l.jpg
SMART well as within USAcquisition

  • Deliver within time, cost and performance parameters

  • Integrate

  • Reduce risk

  • Cut the time for new technologies to be introduced

  • Whole life approach

  • Clear customer / supplier relationship

“To acquire Defence capability faster, cheaper, better and more effectively integrated.”


Slide18 l.jpg

Joy well as within US

delivery of

reduced by more than

thrilled by the news that the DPA had yet again succeeded in delivering key

ends

A Vision…

Cost reductions welcomed by defence chiefs


Major project report l.jpg
Major Project Report well as within US

Headline Performance - Post Main Gate Projects

MPR 2003 MPR2004

In-Year Cost Variation £3,121m £1,731m

In-year ISD slippage 144 months 62 months


Still more to be done l.jpg
Still More To Be Done . . . well as within US

  • Improve through-life management

  • Improve relationship with industry

  • Increase early investment to de-risk projects

  • Improve approach to project approvals

  • More effective performance/time/cost trade-off

  • Better skills planning, development & incentives

  • Improved corporate approach to business



Joint strike fighter l.jpg
Joint well as within USStrike Fighter

  • UK requires 150 JSF:

    • Replace RAF & RN Harriers

    • Equip 2 new carriers

  • US lead co-operative venture

  • UK is sole Level 1 Participant

  • BAES is major contractor


Future strategic tanker aircraft l.jpg

Replace 28 VC10’s / Tristars well as within US

High replacement capital cost

AirTanker Consortium Selected

Airbus A330

Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft

  • FSTA contracts for a ‘service’:

    • 5-8 aircraft needed for training etc.

    • Rising to ~20 during peak operations

    • Contractor uses aircraft commercially (for freight and passengers) when not required by RAF


Astor l.jpg
ASTOR well as within US

  • World-leading airborne Ground Surveillance system

    • First to interleave Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) & Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)

    • 3 operators (c.f. E10’s 35)

    • 5 aircraft, first flight imminent

  • Contract is with US firm (Raytheon)


A400m l.jpg
A400M well as within US

  • European Multinational Airlifter

    • 7 nations

    • 180 aircraft

  • Clear requirement for European airlift capability

    • Only current capability is small UK C-17 fleet


Slide26 l.jpg

Network well as within USEnabled Capability


Slide27 l.jpg

Science & Technology well as within US


Uk defence science technology budget l.jpg
UK Defence Science & Technology well as within USBudget

  • Annual UK Defence S&T Spend: $880M / £480M


Uk science technology priorities l.jpg
UK Science & Technology well as within USPriorities

For Directed Research

  • Command structures and decision support for NCW

  • Information and data management

  • Detection and identification of difficult targets, BDA and Combat Id

  • Unmanned systems

  • Precision weapons, including for HDBT

  • CBR detection and countermeasures

  • Improved mobile communications

  • Recruitment, retention, reduced manning and duty of care

  • Detection and disruption of explosive devices

  • Technology Insertion

  • Modelling and simulation for effects based operations, experimentation, urban ops, human systems and logistics supply chain


Uk science technology priorities30 l.jpg
UK Science & Technology well as within US Priorities

For Innovative Research

  • Autonomous systems

  • Wireless sensor networks

  • Generic biological detection and countermeasures

  • Novel sensor and processing technology

  • Active or Multifunctional material technologies

  • Technology enabling low cost, low maintenance or high availability systems

  • Technologies to reduce environmental impact

  • Information systems

  • Power Sources


Towers of excellence l.jpg
Towers of well as within USExcellence

  • Improve transition and pull-through

  • Partnership with industry

  • Focus resources on priority areas


Defence technology centres l.jpg
Defence well as within USTechnology Centres

  • Development of enabling-level technologies

  • Formal collaboration between MoD, industry and academia

Data Information Fusion Defence Technology Centre


Us uk collaborative framework l.jpg
US - UK well as within US Collaborative Framework

24 Collaborative Acquisition Programs

30+ Active Collaborative Research Programs

120 Information Exchange Agreements

The Technical Cooperation Program


Cooperative research programmes 12 new programmes totaling 230m commenced in 2004 l.jpg
Cooperative well as within USResearch Programmes(12 new programmes totaling >$230m commenced in 2004)


Industry s role in cooperation l.jpg
Industry’s role well as within US inCooperation

  • Seeking to increase involvement of UK/US supplier bases in S+T collaboration

    • National research is being increasingly contracted out to non-government bodies

    • Better prepare for technology transition

    • Early engagement increases viability of downstream procurement collaboration

  • Can be achieved:

    • Via government – industry contracting

    • Through government and industry partnerships


International technology alliance l.jpg
International well as within USTechnology Alliance

  • A new model of collaboration

  • UK/US government, industry and

    academic partnership

  • Network & Information Sciences

    • Network Theory

    • Security across a system of systems

    • Sensor information processing and delivery

    • Distributed coalition planning and decision making

  • Competition in progress – ITA begins work early 2006


Slide37 l.jpg

Industrial Strategy well as within US


Uk defence industrial policy l.jpg
UK Defence well as within US Industrial Policy

  • Healthy & globally competitive defence industry - to provide the Armed Forces with:

    • the equipment they require

    • at best value for the taxpayer

  • UK defence industry = suppliers who create:

    • value

    • employment

    • technology

    • intellectual assets

  • Open & fair competition is the bedrock:

    • improved flow of info / tech across borders

    • no market distortion but wide range of factors


Uk defence industrial strategy dis l.jpg
UK Defence well as within US Industrial Strategy (DIS)

  • Recently announced.

  • Will build on the Defence Industrial Policy.

  • Address some of the more difficult questions surrounding future of the defence industrial base.

  • Intended to develop clearer joint understanding between Gov & Industry of essential technologies and capabilities.

  • Publish before end 2005.


Dis way forward l.jpg
DIS well as within US Way Forward

  • Will not address all industrial sectors by year end to the same depth.

  • Work has to be prioritised.

  • Major decisions required shortly on key acquisitions such as the Future Carrier project.

  • DIS will concentrate on:

    • Shipbuilding and support

    • Fixed wing aircraft (Inc. UAVs)

    • Rotorcraft

    • Guided weapons

    • General munitions

    • Armoured fighting vehicles


Dis expectations l.jpg
DIS well as within US Expectations

  • DIS will require change for MoD and wider government as well as supply side.

  • This will include:

    • Reassessing the use of competition at different stages.

    • Optimising contract durations to encourage investment.

    • Fresh approaches to demonstrating value for money.

    • Challenging structures, policies and processes.

    • Being more open and transparent.


Dis international context l.jpg
DIS well as within US International Context

“We also need to be clear on the relationship with other technologies and equipment, developed by our allies. We – the MoD and industry – need to think carefully about where, and how, we match, complement, or disinvest in areas compared to key allies. I explicitly include continental Europe in that.”

Lord Drayson, Minister (Defence Procurement)

15 September 2005


Slide43 l.jpg

Conclusions well as within US


Immediate challenges l.jpg
Immediate Challenges well as within US

  • Sustaining an adequate defence industrial base on an inadequate defence budget

  • Investing in new technology, developing new processes:

    • NCW / NEC

    • UAVs / UCAVs / UUVs

    • Pulling R&D through into production

  • Interoperability and transatlantic cooperation:

    • Making the JSF work

    • Protectionism

    • Information sharing

    • Technology transfer restrictions

  • Growing the talent - skills for industry & government


Why cooperate l.jpg
Why well as within US Cooperate?

  • Military Imperative

    • Improved interoperability

    • More capable allies – increased burden-sharing

    • Lessons identified / learnt

  • Fiscal Imperative

    • Reduced research and acquisition costs

  • Intellectual Imperative

    • Wider intellectual pool

    • Peer review

  • Technology Imperative

    • Access to unique capabilities

    • Improved technology access


Slide46 l.jpg

Questions? well as within US


ad