There are plenty of critics who have said over the years that Army acquisition has problems and doesn’t deliver, but two officers intimately involved in the process say that’s just not true, and point to a host of programs that ensure the land force is able to remain the nation’s decisive force as it modernizes.
“The myth is Army acquisition can’t deliver; the truth is we deliver for our soldiers,” said Lt. Gen William Phillips, Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics & Technology, at a Pentagon roundtable Friday.
The point of acquisitions is to support the president’s strategy, to prevent conflict, shape situations as they evolve, and if it comes to conflict, to prevail.
It’s not just Pentagon generals who think Army acquisition is delivering–it’s what they hear in the field from soldiers and commanders, most recently in Afghanistan. Phillips said: “Nine times out of 10 they’re talking about how this equipment is helping them and only maybe one case out of 10 will they talk about things we can improve on…and most of that is associated with ‘I need more of this.’”
Of 40 incidents where Stryker DVH vehicles encountered IEDs, soldiers had minor injuries or no injuries in all but two instances. “Actually, that vehicle has performed beyond our expectations,” Phillips said.
Another acquisition success: pelvic protection. The Army has now fielded some 15,000 sets of Tier 2 protection worn outside the uniform, and more than 52,000 Tier 1 protection, worn under the uniform. In several cases, Phillips shared, soldiers were injured, but their groin areas were left intact. A commander told him, as soon as soldiers understood that, it went through the command “like wildfire,” and now they’re wearing that undergarment protection.
Phillips went on to list other on-schedule equipment deliveries: Mine-Resistant, Ambush Protected vehicles, the MRAP-All terrain vehicles, the exponential growth of unmanned aerial vehicle systems and upgrades to the M-4 carbine and all major helicopter systems.
Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo, director, Force Development in Army Headquarters G-8, said he sympathized with his acquisition colleagues who bear the brunt of the criticism.
However, he’s been operational and seen changes as a former brigade and division commander. He has seen progress–though it needs to continue. In Iraq 2003-2004, as deputy commander of the 10th Mountain Div., he had only satellite to communicate with a special forces unit at a forward base. Two years ago, he found every brigade had communications networks and full motion video terminals.
Granted, the service hasn’t always gotten its network efforts right, Phillips said, but using the Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) has made strides to get it better, so commanders in the field get a useful product, not something they have to focus on to make it work with their systems.
Additionally, the Nett Warrior soldier system–essentially a wearable data system–through the NIE process and its own program officials, was redesigned and restructured, and moved from a top level ACAT 1 D program, overseen by the Pentagon’s acquisition leader, to a lower level program, with milestone decision authority with the Army acquisition chief.
“The bottom line is we saved over $800 million dollars, and a considerable amount of weight, Phillips said.
Yet, despite assorted success and the implementation of 63 of 76 recommendations from the Decker-Wagner acquisition report, critical rhetoric says Army acquisition can’t deliver.
Phillips said,“Yes, we’ve had some issues in the past. We’re working to make sure that we address those issues and we deliver that capability.”
“The myth is Army acquisition can’t deliver,” he said. “The truth is we have delivered to our soldiers. We delivered yesterday, we’re delivering today and we’ll deliver tomorrow.”