Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT) Col Eric Burns Director Comparative Testing Office (CTO) Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Advanced System & Concepts) Website: Phone: (703) Israel 2009 Aug-Sept 2009

2 Outline Global Defense Industry Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT) –What We Do –Interest Areas –Program Metrics FCT Activity with Israel –Current Ongoing Projects –Successful Completions Procured Participation with FCT –Best Practices –Timeline

The FCT Mission Deliver innovative, world-class products that counter unconventional and time-critical threats

4 4 Global Defense Industry - Based on 2008 Defense Revenue - Only 43 of the top 100 defense contractors, by revenues, are U.S. companies 25 of the top 50 defense contractors are foreign 3 of the top 10 defense contractors are foreign –#3: BAE Systems (United Kingdom) –#7: EADS (Netherlands) –#9: Finmeccanica (Italy) But 86% of the proposals we receive represent foreign contractors smaller than the top 100 Source: Defense News (July 20, 2009)

5 Fund Testing of World-Class Items that Solve Warfighter’s Problems FCT - What We Do Invest approximately $34M each year Find & Test “Here & Now” Solutions Projects begin within a year, end within 2-3 years Testing at U.S. or foreign ranges Project value: Range of $200K - $2M; average of $800K OSD Selects & Funds Projects Clear Goal: “Test to Procure” Services & USSOCOM Execute Our Programs Nominate mature military or commercial products Manage all testing and fielding In 2009 we funded continuing projects (~$18M) 16 new starts (~$14M)

6 Improved Operations Effectiveness (lethality, accuracy, endurance) Survivability (protection, agility, stealth, medical) Force Protection (defensive systems, detection, armoring, chem - bio defense) Sustainability (lighter / combined equipment, longer missions, better batteries) Direct Warfighter Support Logistics (supply chain management in the field, equipment reliability) Teaming (e.g., Network & Info Centric Operations at the tactical or operational level) Surveillance, tagging & tracking (blue & hostile forces, friendly identification) Warfighter Employment Planning capabilities (large unit employment) Coordinating capabilities (Network / Info Centric Operations at the strategic level) Transport capabilities (getting to and from the fight) Operational readiness (equipment availability, maintainability, training) Proposals MUST Satisfy Warfighter’s Needs in Support of Overseas Contingency Operations Interest Areas

7 Army Platform & Soldier Protection Countermine / Counter IED Capabilities Precision Fire Improved Power Sources Robotics: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles & Unmanned Ground Vehicles Improved Logistics to Reduce the Footprint / Maintain tempo Service / USSOCOM Interests (Examples) Air Force Persistent ISR Space Situational Awareness (3-D Battlespace) High Resolution, Light Weight Sensors Counter IED Detonation & Protection Locate Target & Attack Moving Targets Low Yield Precision Weapons Locate & Recover Isolated Personnel Navy / Marine Corps Vehicle Cooling Airborne Countermeasures Maritime Force Protection Improved capabilities for –Fleet C4 ISR & Data Links –Security Solutions with Coalition Partners –Field Medical Capabilities –Speed for Small Water Craft US Special Operations Command Portable Unmanned Air Systems Non-Gasoline Burning Engines Aircraft Occupant Ballistic Protection Systems Psychological Operations Broadcast Biometrics Persistent ISR Improved Medical Technology

8 Tested Products from 28 Countries OSD Investment: $1.17 Billion (constant FY09 $) Estimated RDT&E Cost Avoidance: $7.60 Billion Accelerated Fielding Averages 5-7 years Procurement Rate ~ 80% in the Past 6 Years Foreign Vendor Teaming with U.S. Industry in 33 States - FCT Metrics - Over Last 29 Years Projects Met Service Requirements 601 Projects Started, 514 Completed 200 Projects - Procurements Worth $9.0B

* Reflects FY09 Constant Year Dollars FCT Funding Provided - $1.17B (Percent by Country) * Others -- Australia, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Iceland, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore, Spain, South Africa, Switzerland, Ukraine Procurements ($Million – Overall $9.06B) ** Others -- Belgium, Denmark, Finland, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa, Switzerland FCT: Testing & Procurement By Country (FY 1980 – 2009)

FCT with Israel On-going Projects Since 1980 … 62 FCT Projects with Israel $65M in FCT Testing Funds to US Services & USSOCOM 13 Successful FCTs, with Procurement of $820M ProjectCompanyServiceStarted FY M1A1 Crew Cooling SystemKineticsUSMC2009 Advanced Airborne ExpendableIMINavy2008 Projects Leading to Procurements (four most recent) ProjectCompanyServiceYear Procurement Initiated Corona Monitoring System for VLF/LF CommsOFIL, Ltd.Navy2003 Man-Portable Multi Sensor System Headsets And Sensors (Eagle Headset) Source of SoundUSSOCOM2003 Night Vision Goggle Camera SystemVectop, Ltd.Air Force2001 F Gallon TanksIsrael Military Industries (IMI) Air Force1999

Post FCT Key Procurements from Israel 13 Procurements Totaling $820M Man Portable Multi- Sensor System Headsets and Sensors Night Vision Goggle Camera F Gallon Tanks Corona Monitoring System for High Power VLF/LF Comms Improved Mobile Subscriber Equipment UHF Radios

12 What Makes Foreign Companies Successful in FCT? Presence in the United StatesPresence in the United States –Strong support from their embassy in the US Industry days How DoD does business –Professional consultants / active industry associations –Trade shows for visibility –Partnering with a US company (not required) Good relationship with the US Embassy Office of Defense Cooperation (or similar organization) in their home countryGood relationship with the US Embassy Office of Defense Cooperation (or similar organization) in their home country –Great place to find out where to start Strong capabilities that fulfill U.S. Warfighter needsStrong capabilities that fulfill U.S. Warfighter needs –Can be a dominating industry presence –Can be a niche market provider

13 Sep- Dec 2008 Services & USSOCOM Initiate Internal Proposal Call Fiscal Year 2010 Final Proposals Submitted Jul- Aug Oct 2009 Fiscal Year 2010 Begins New project start OSD Approval Sep2009 Subject Matter Expert Review Jun 2009 Fiscal Year 2010 Timeline Milestones for Fiscal Year 2010 Budget & Execution Feb2009 Project Management Reviews with Services & USSOCOM Project Management Reviews with Services & USSOCOM Projects can be started throughout the fiscal year Bottom-Up Project Proposal Process – Submitter Works with Services & USSOCOM to Develop Testing Proposals

14 OSD CTO Main Army Al Trawinski AF Ronald Meyers pentagon.af.mil USSOCOM Ron Schwartz Navy / USMC Arthur Webb Key Points of Contact

15 Our conventional modernization programs seek a 99 percent solution in years. Stability and counterinsurgency missions – the wars we are in – require 75 percent solutions in months. The challenge is whether in our bureaucracy and in our minds these two different paradigms can be made to coexist. In Summary The Challenge to Change Secretary Gates at National Defense University (September 29, 2008)