|
|
 |
22 Oct 08. Finmeccanica, S.p.A. (Milan: FNC), a world leader in the aerospace, defense and security industry, announced today to have successfully completed its acquisition of DRS Technologies, Inc., a leading supplier of integrated defense electronics products, services and support. The acquisition received all the required regulatory approvals as well as the approval of DRS shareholders.
Finmeccanica purchased all outstanding shares of DRS for 81 U.S. dollars per share in cash. The enterprise value of the transaction is 5.2 billion U.S. dollars, including the assumption of approximately 1.6 billion U.S. dollars in outstanding indebtness (including the convertible notes). DRS will be known as DRS Technologies, a Finmeccanica Company.
“Today begins a new era for Finmeccanica”, said Pier Francesco Guarguaglini, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Finmeccanica. “The acquisition of DRS further solidifies our position as a top-tier international competitor and reinforces our commitment to the U.S. market, industrial base and, most importantly, the American armed forces, establishing a strong transatlantic Defence Electronics capability”.
“Finmeccanica’s investment in DRS will allow the company to increase new business opportunities globally, accelerate growth while strengthening our presence in the United States”, said Mark S. Newman, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of DRS. “With an increased emphasis on research and development, DRS will continue to create new and innovative products that provide the American armed forces superior technology and value”.
DRS will operate as a U.S. subsidiary of Finmeccanica under agreements with the U.S. Department of Defense, including a plan to mitigate foreign ownership control and influence (FOCI).
In September 2005 the U.S. Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Capability Manager for Platform Battle Command and Combat Identification (TCM PBC/CID), Program Manager Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (PM FBCB2), combat system developers, and engineers from the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines began discussions to eliminate the capability gaps created by incompatible and non-interoperable Command and Control (C2) and Situational Awareness (SA) platform level battle command and blue force tracking (BFT) systems. This was in response to extensive platform battle command and CID lessons learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and exhaustive research on platform battle command requirements across the joint team. The Joint Requirements Oversight Counsel (JROC) approved Joint Battle Command–Platform (JBC-P) requirements are the result of a 2003 JROC memorandum that directed the US Army and USMC to converge on a single joint platform C2/SA capability.
JBC-P is Increment II to the current FBCB2 program. This ‘purple’ version of the Army’s FBCB2 system is being re-designed to meet a broader set of requirements. Funding in 10-15 POM period has been set aside to provide the installation of JBC-P systems into the majority of U.S. Army and USMC ground vehicles, aviation platforms, and for dismounted application by 2015. It is designed to be interoperable with the Future Combat System (FCS) Battle Command System being developed for FCS.
The JBC-P Capabilities Development Document articulates the operational requirements for a full platform (mounted, dismounted, aviation), partial, and beacon family of systems for C2/SA to be used by joint warfighters. JBC-P will establish standards to achieve interoperability among land platforms, which includes ground vehicles, helicopters and dismounted Soldiers, Marines and Airmen. Interoperability between the systems will help commanders and troops achieve enhanced C2 and SA.
Background to JBC-P
During Operation Iraqi Freedom, PM FBCB2 installed more than 1,200 of its FBCB2 BFT (using a celestial based network and commonly referred to as BFT) and FBCB2 enhanced position locating and reporting system (EPLRS) (using a terrestrial based network) systems on Army, Marine, and United Kingdom vehicles. Each equipped vehicle had a computer map display with their location pinpointed on the map as well as the location of other FBCB2 BFT-equipped vehicles. Each system fed data via satellite transmission into secured Internet servers so that various command centers could display current troop locations. Troops with the system, command centers, even the Pentagon, thousands of miles away, had a minutes-old computer displayed update that marked ground platform locations to within 800 meters down to the company level.
A number of other devices with similar functionality were also used in OIF. The Army’s logistics community used the Movement Tracking System (MTS) to track the locations of supplies and supply vehicles. Marines relied on the Mobile Data Automated Communications Terminal (M-DACT) and the Command and Control Personal Computer, while the Air Force used its initiative called Talon Reach. Other commercially available products were also in use, according to Al Mosher (COL, USA (RET) and former TCM PBC/CID). FBCB2 (EPLRS), used by units in III Corps, has software nearly identical to FBCB2 BFT (currently both systems use software version 6.4.4.2 and either a EV4 or JV5 HW system), although its communications systems are based on line-of-sight radios rather than satellite.
The systems accomplished more than just battlefield tracking. Platform C2 capabilities allowed troops to send and receive free-text and formatted-text messages, and share graphical representations to mark the locations of various observed activities as well as minefields, routes, boundaries and other military symbolic representations.
Because of early differences in software, message formats, security levels and network architectures, however, interoperability between systems has seen a number of limitations. Examples include: Marines using M-DACT unable to see the locations of or communicate directly with BFT systems; MTS users unable to see the locations of and communicate with BFT users; BFT users seeing the locations of FBCB2 users but unable to send certain messages because of differences security classification levels.
Soldiers could compensate by operating multiple systems simultaneously or by having engineers create ‘patches’ that allowed data from several systems to be displayed in command posts and down to the platform level through a process called tunnelling, but the fixes did not meet the timeliness and accuracy of information exchange required on the modern battlefield.
Prior to OIF, system developers weren’t required to engineer interoperability into their systems, they built systems to meet only the requirements of a specific role. Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have forced change.
DRS involvement in JBC-P
DRS has supplied the majority of the FBCB2 hardware from its Palm Bay facility since 1998, it is now the baseline hardware system for the U.S. The FBCB2 system and has also been supplied to the U.K., Dutch and Australian Armed Forces.
“The DRS JV-5 hardware solution could certainly serve as the baseline equipment for the JBC-P hardware Requirement. DRS has already supplied nearly 75,000 FBCB2 ultra-rugged computers and displays to the US Army and USMC. We continue to manufacture 600 systems a week. Indeed, at the height of the increased MRAP requirement, we were supplying 1400 systems a week. The total JBC-P systems requirement is nearly 200,000 systems by to 2015. DRS is already working on a number of key enhancements to allow FBCB2 systems to enable JBC-P and Unified Battle Command (UBC) capability.” Bill Guyan VP of DRS Tactical Systems told BATTLESPACE.
(Note: UBC is US Army initiative to provide for interoperability between Future Combat Systems (FCS) and other battle command systems like FBCB2/JBCP)
“Will JBC-P cover vehicle-mounted systems only?” The Editor asked.
“No, as you can see, the great emphasis at this year’s AUSA is shifting focus to the lighter force and protection of the dismounted soldier. Thus, we at DRS are looking at producing handheld versions of our FBCB2 hardware for JBCP. These systems could be a small one-way device for position locating or a larger two-way device linking into the network by the vehicle’s JV5 system. We are looking at four systems from the lightweight position locating device thru to the all-up vehicle location system, all with embedded GPS system.” Guyan continued.
JBC-P is a family of systems that can share C2/SA across the joint community from vehicle-mounted, dismounted (including SOF), and aviation platforms. The JBC-P product line consists of a scalable set of capabilities which include JBC-P full, JBC-P partial, and JBC-P beacon capabilities. The JBC-P full capability will include a system that is the same size or smaller than the current FBCB2 EV4 or new JV5 for ground platforms. It will have an integrated GPS, more memory, faster processors, and will be dismountable from the platform so a soldier can use it as a digital map out of the hatch of his vehicle and be able to move around his vehicle up to at least 15 feet away. Select leaders will also have a dismountable personal digital assistant (PDA) like product which will dock with the full capability and be able to be used by the leader for C2/SA at 300+ meters from the platform.
JBC-P partial systems requirements describes a level of interoperability with JBC-P that may not use the same hardware or software to achieve interoperability. Partial systems may be so small they can not host the full capability or they might use the minimum required C2/SA in conjunction with another software application. This would include rotary wing platforms with systems similar to the electronic data manager (EDM) knee board and for dismounted hand helds for scouts, combat engineers, and special operations forces. All partial systems are required to share select C2 messages, text messaging, and all types of SA (friendly, enemy, neutral, and unknown).
JBC-P beacon systems are one way devices that provide a platform or soldier’s location, describes what type of entity he is, and has the ability to send a 911 emergency message. Beacons will be less expensive so the intent is to ensure that at least every 2 vehicles has a full, partial, or beacon system and that all vehicles that are shooters have a system for CID purposes in order to prevent fratricide.
There are three essential characteristics that must be achieved to meet warfighter requirements for adequate C2, SA, and CID. These characteristics are accuracy, density, and interoperability. JBC-P will achieve this when fully fielded to the JROC approved levels.
“Does you new Armor computer meet these requirements?”
“Our ARMOR Product Line is the most rugged Industrial line of computers available. Armor is directed at the rugged commercial market where we are seeing increasing demand month over month. These computers are certainly more than suitable for us inside Tactical Operation Centers (TOCs); however, Soldiers and Military Platforms require an even higher degree of ruggedness, given the extreme “on-the-move” environments and mission-critical nature of the jobs that they are meant to perform on the digital battlefield.”
Unfortunately, many so-called rugged computers are being put to use in mission-critical applications without truly being capable of meeting the “worst case” operational requirements. This works out fine in garrison and on short duration training exercises where repairs and spare parts can be obtained; however, on today’s battlefield a computer has to be as reliable as any other weapon system. Soldiers need to be able to rely on it for C2 and access to critical timely information. A multi-million dollar network doesn’t help our commanders - or the Soldier/Marine - if their computers stop working when needed.”
“On the rugged military side, we are working with the U.K. MoD, and our BOWMAN partners General Dynamics UK, to potentially upgrade and enhance the existing suite of 13000 in-service Scorpion Data Terminals and we are certainly interested in emerging new Requirements for rugged hand-held devices.” Guyan concluded.
Software
The JBC-P software will be competed. At its core the Army intends that the Joint Capabilities Release (JCR) software version of FBCB2 (latest version) will serve as a starting point for JBC-P enhancements. The FBCB2 software has been re-done according to the Battle Command Product Line (BCPL) architecture that PM FBCB2 did with Carnegie Mellon.
Initial Operational Capability (IOC) for JBC-P is slated for late CY 2011; however, JBC-P capable hardware is being delivered today in the form of the DRS JV-5 computer and display system - at more than 500 systems per week.
The JBC-P procurement strategy has not yet been released. It is programmed for funding from 2010 to 2015. In total, nearly 200,000 Army, Marine Corps, and other services will have JBC-P hardware and fully interoperable JBC-P Situational Awareness software.
References: TRADOC Executive Summary for the JBC-P CDD
For more information on DRS go to www.drs.com
Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Next Page
|
|
Advertisers
 |
|
|
