Tactical radio efforts are moving forward faster with contract awards– such as the Mid-Tier Networking Vehicular radios (MNVR) award to Harris in September–and new competitions preparing to get under way, all leading to an increasingly robust network that can be fielded to Army troops, a Harris [HRS] executive said.
For Harris, it’s all starting to come together, Dennis Moran, vice president, Government Business Development, Harris RF Communications, told Defense Daily. The bits and pieces of equipment are becoming “a coherent network.”
Harris on Sept. 24 was awarded the MNVR indefinite quantity contract for the radios that will link forces at company and platoon echelons with their higher headquarters for the rapid distribution of data, imagery and other information. The $8.4 million delivery order is for as many as 232 of the multi-channel radios, which will be used for test, certification, and integration with current and future Army vehicles. This is the first phase of a total of some 2,500 radios for awards worth $140 million over two years.
 |
| AR-330E Wideband Team Radio Developed for the Rifleman Radio Photo: Harris |
he competition for Rifleman Radio with a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) will be out soon, and Harris expects to be working on its proposal for the radios during the Association of the United States Army annual conference, Moran told Defense Daily.
In the draft RFP stage is a competition for the multichannel Handheld, Manpack and Small Form Fit (HMS) radio.
The newest competition to come is the RFP for the restructured Small Airborne Networking Radio (SANR)–something else Harris and its competitors are pursuing. SANR is designed as a two-channel radio for Apache, Chinook, Gray Eagle, Black Hawk and Kiowa Warrior.
Vendors now are offering capability that is integrated into the Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) process, Moran said. Vendors offered contracts are then providing equipment that is fielded to Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) through the Army Force Generation Model. Now, the fielded equipment is part of Capability Set 13.
“The Harris business model, on the shoulders of Frank Kendall’s Better Buying Power 2.0, sees the acquisition of tactical radios in the ground domain and to some degree in the air domain as a good example of changing the acquisition strategy to fit concepts of BBP 2.0,” Moran said. “The most important thing is that it will bring much needed capability to warfighting, dismounted troops, vehicles or rotary wing aircraft.”
The value to the taxpayer comes in the form of the competitive environment, where prices go down and companies innovate to maintain or capture market share, he said.
Taking the strategic view, Moran said Army leaders have spoken of the Army and Marines leaving the period of adaptation during conflict for a period of innovation to prepare for the next fight and do it in a time of significant downward pressure for resources for the Defense Department.
“This will demand a dialogue between DoD and the (Department of the Army) and industry so we understand these future capabilities they’re looking for and deliver in timely and cost effective manner,” Moran said.
With less dependence on overseas contingency operations funds, programs are going to be defined not so much by the kind of capability needed in the future, but informed by what is affordable that delivers the kind of capability is going to be needed in the future, he said.
“What we’re doing in our labs and in our discussions with our users is thinking through how to innovate and provide more capability at a lower cost,” Moran said.
On the commercial side, he said, where, if a company launches a capability and it is not adopted or accepted by the market, “you’re literally left on the side of the road.”
DoD will continue to specify the capability it wants, the waveforms it wants to operate–size, weight and power–and tell industry to bring solutions and put it through the process–the NIE–and then there will be the procurement opportunity.
There will always be unique military features because the Army has to operate where there are challenges such as spectrum, weather extremes, and conditions that are rougher than if it’s a commercial product.
Going forward, Moran said, Harris and other companies particularly must consider life-cycle support, maintenance, training, updating software, and similar issues. The Army has to think through how they are going to change the sustainment process in a cost-effective way to maintain a new capability or concept in a way that is affordable.
The proliferation of electronics and the waveforms to control them or bring information down from platforms all used to reside in radios in command vehicles. Now all these devices are embedded in everything: weapons, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and mission command.
All military systems demand connectivity in some pretty rugged environments, and the integrated network connects the fox hole to the sustaining base with the goal of providing the right information at the right time in a secure manner.
However, nothing will ever replace the voice and physical and personal leadership, Moran said. Where the network helps is in moving information down to the squad leader and team leaders–useful, combat relevant information for mission effectiveness and survivability.
There are themes emerging for the future, he noted.
“Simplicity of use and functionality are key,” Moran said. “More and more important is logistical support and how easy it is to train and maintain over time and how to institutionalize it.