By Ann Roosevelt
The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) wants to know if the Army is “missing an opportunity,” to test alternatives and introduce competition” by sticking with its Brigade Combat Team Increment 1 unattended ground sensor (UGV) program developed by Textron [TXT].
Accordingly, in the SASC report on the fiscal year 2011 National Defense Authorization bill, the committee “recommends a decrease of $29.7 million in [Other Procurement Army] OPA for BCT-UGS.”
The president’s budget request included $29.7 million in OPA for the BCT UGS.
The committee also said that after six years of development and an approximately $130 million investment, the system “has failed in user tests to demonstrate required technical performance, is unreliable, and has not proven its tactical effectiveness or utility.”
The report stated the UGS system demonstrated poor communications connectivity, inadequate transmission ranges, poor images, and frequent system failures.
However, the sensors have been reworked and are undergoing a strict test regime for the test community and then will face soldier tests.
Paul Mehney, director for public communications for the Army Program Executive Office Integration, said, “The program continues to test and evaluate the unattended tactical and unattended urban ground sensors that have been part of the Increment 1 program. We are currently conducting technical tests of those sensors that will lead into the [limited user test] LUT of sensors in September 2010.”
If the sensors produce positive test results and if the initial operational test and evaluation is positive on the first brigade combat team set of equipment, then the Army will look “at what the best contracting method and the best set of equipment to meet operational capabilities,” he said (Defense Daily, June 4). However, to get to that point, the tests must be accomplished.
The SASC report also said the Army will conduct a System Breakout/Contracting Review in December to address whether the BCT-UGS full-rate production will be multi-sourced through an open competition to qualified technologies and vendors.
While the Army reports non-BCT-UGS systems already procured and deployed do not meet all the Capability Production Document’s requirements or are not compliant with the Army’s communications network, the committee report said it knows the program of record BCT-UGS system does not meet all the requirements, either.
Therefore, the committee expressed concern the service was “failing to take advantage of multiple technologies from multiple vendors that may have developed or are capable of developing and producing unattended sensors.”
Given the technical challenges, procurement is premature, the committee report said.