Cost, schedule, and performance tradeoffs in the acquisition of major weapon systems by Jeffrey D. Voltz

Cover of: Cost, schedule, and performance tradeoffs in the acquisition of major weapon systems | Jeffrey D. Voltz

Published by Naval Postgraduate School, Available from the National Technical Information Service in Monterey, Calif, Springfield, Va .

Written in English

Read online

Edition Notes

Book details

ContributionsBoger, Dan C.
The Physical Object
Pagination64 p. ;
Number of Pages64
ID Numbers
Open LibraryOL25495140M

Download Cost, schedule, and performance tradeoffs in the acquisition of major weapon systems

Cost, schedule, and performance tradeoffs in the acquisition of major weapon systems (unclassified) personal author(s) jeffrey d. voltz 13a. type of report 13b. time covered date of report (year, month, day) 1s. page count master'sthesis Cost from to june 71 supplementary notationFile Size: 2MB.

An illustration of an open book. Books. An illustration of two cells of a film strip. Video An illustration of an audio speaker. Cost, schedule, and performance tradeoffs in the acquisition of major weapon systems.

Item Preview remove-circlePages: FY Program Acquisition Costs by Weapon System Introduction Major Weapon Systems Overview The performance of tates (U.S.) weapon systems are United S unmatched, ensuring that U.S.

military forces have a tactical combat advantage over any adversary in any environmental situation. The Fiscal Year (FY) 20 21 acquisition (Procurement and. Costs of these systems are influenced by performance characteristics of the system and schedule demands placed on the acquisition process.

The objective of this thesis is to investigate previous research performed in the area of cost, schedule, and performance tradeoffs in the acquisition of major weapon : Jeffrey D. Voltz. FY Program Acquisition Costs by Weapon System (Source: US Department of Defense; issued Ma ) The performance of United States (U.S.) weapon systems are unmatched, ensuring that U.S.

military forces have a tactical combat advantage over any adversary in. In Aprilwe reported that the DOD expects to invest $ trillion in total to develop and procure its portfolio of 86 major defense acquisition programs.

Congress and DOD have long sought to improve how major weapon systems are acquired, yet many DOD programs continue to fall short of cost, schedule, and performance goals. tradeoffs of performance (especially in regard to the technologies employed) and/or costs in order to achieve the schedule gh the current Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) contains several provisions requiring tradeoff analyses among cost, schedule, and performance, there is no explicit provision to consider the.

Cost is one of the key performance parameters of the defense acquisition system; cost is controlled and traded against schedule and technical performance of weapon systems. A new measure of cost growth (and thus cost control and tradeoffs) was developed to help look for longitudinal performance trends over the last three decades.

This book shows the major weapon systems funded in the FY President’s Budget, organized by the Mission Support Activities. Each Mission Area Category chapter heading further breaks out the funding allocation in FY by subgroups, and provides a summary programmatic and financial description of the major weapon systems within each.

Implementation of Weapon Systems Schedule Reform Act (WSARA) of (Public Law) Octo – Cost, Schedule, & Performance Tradeoffs must be considered in consideration” to qualified sources other than themselves for major subsystems and components.

Acquisition Of Major Weapon Systems E Department of Defense BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL, I OF THE UNITED STATES -- Continuous trade-off between cost and performance 41 Technical Assessment 43 Schedule Changes Economic Changes.

Requires, with respect to DOD weapon systems acquisition policy: (1) the Secretary of Defense to develop and implement mechanisms to ensure the consideration of tradeoffs between system cost, schedule, and performance; (2) the milestone decision authority for an MDAP to have received a preliminary design review and conducted a formal post.

(4)(A) For each major defense acquisition program, the Secretary of the military department concerned and the Chief of the armed force concerned shall, in each Selected Acquisition Report required under section of this title, certify that program requirements are stable and funding is schedule to meet cost, schedule, and performance.

8) The Navy is in the early stages of developing the next generation attack submarine with state-of-the-art capabilities in terms of speed, power, and weapon capacity. Data are available on a variety of U.S. and British submarines over the past thirty years.

This data indicates a clear relationship between each of the desired performance characteristics (speed, power, weapon capacity) and. -Making tradeoffs in performance and schedule to achieve cost objectives within affordability constraints.-Use of commercial design practices to save development and production costs.-Making tradeoffs that will provide the best possible system in the least amount of time.

Appendix V Programs’ Cost and Schedule Performance and design, feasibility, cost, and schedule before making major funding commitments.

It can also help ensure that new, innovative, and disruptive by Congress in the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of (WSARA)—and February 2 For those 22 programs.

10 U.S. Code § b – MDAP: Certification Required before Milestone B Approval. A Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) may not receive a Milestone B approval until the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) certifies, without modification, from 10 USC b of ti United States Code (USC) and as amended by Public Law“Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of.

other services on improving future systems acquisition. Price Based Acquisition: Issues and Challenges for Defense Depart-ment Procurement of Weapon Systems, by Mark Lorell, John C. Graser, and Cynthia R. Cook, MGAF, documents for the acquisition, planning, and cost-estimating communities cost sav.

Section — Comptroller General of the U.S. Reports on Costs and Financial Information Regarding MDAPs: Requires two reports: on growth in operating and support costs of major weapon systems; and how DoD collects financial information for MDAPs (in consultation with Chief Management Officers of DoD & MilDeps).

This report includes observations on (1) the cost and schedule performance of DODs portfolio of 78 major defense acquisition programs, (2) program implementation of key acquisition reform initiatives, and (3) the knowledge attained at key decision points for 54 weapon programs in development or early analyzed cost, schedule.

the DOE, and shall consider total weapon cost and performance (including DOE costs and other resource requirements) in establishing military requirements and design objectives.

The Department of Defense and DOE will jointly determine the classification of developmental systems. DODIJanu 2. acquisition performance from ongoing DoD compliance with the Improve Acquisition Act of and the earlier Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act.

Although similarly motivated, our efforts go beyond the specifics of those laws to seek additional insights for improving the defense acquisition system’s performance. This study also fulfills.

The Systems Engineer balances the conflicting design constraints of cost, schedule, and performance while maintaining an acceptable level of risk. SE solves systems acquisition problems using a multi-disciplined approach. The Systems Engineer should possess the skills, instincts and critical thinking.

The combined capabilities and performance of U.S. weapons systems are unmatched throughout the world, ensuring that our military forces have the advantage over any adversary.

The DoD (FY) request totals $ billion, of which $ billion is for Procurement, and Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) programs. The funding. There have been substantial shifts in the defense acquisition system over the past two years as it begins to rebound after sequestration and the defense drawdown.

1 At a most basic level, defense contract obligations have grown in each of the past two years after a trough in defense contract spending in Fiscal Year (FY) Beyond topline contract growth, the administration change.

The time required to create a new weapon system from idea inception to a fielded system is an important element to understand in the overall acquisition process.

Cost and schedule overruns in the development of major weapon systems are continuing problems that plague the acquisition. Get this from a library. Defense Acquisitions: Major Weapon Systems Continue to Experience Cost and Schedule Problems under DOD's Revised Policy.

[GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE WASHINGTON DC.;] -- The Department of Defense (DOD) is planning to invest $ trillion between and in researching, developing, and procuring major weapon systems. requirements for compatibility with existing or future systems or programs and (ii) any known cost, schedule, and capability or performance constraints.

Capability or Performance FAR (a)(4) Specify the required capabilities or performance characteristics of the supplies or the performance standards of the services being. A Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) may not receive a Milestone B approval until the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) certifies, without modification, from 10 USC b of ti United States Code (USC) and as amended by Public Law“Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of ”, Maythat.

Although advances in computer technology have improved the performance of major weapon systems, software-intensive systems require more complex testing. This is particularly true where multiple systems must be integrated. Estimates of future T&E costs should carefully consider the realism of software development and test plans.

A letter report issued by the Government Accountability Office with an abstract that begins "In the last 5 years, the Department of Defense (DOD) has doubled its planned investments in new weapon systems from about $ billion in to nearly $ trillion in While the weapons that DOD develops have no rival in superiority, weapon systems acquisition remains a long-standing.

requirements for 13 Major Defense Acquisition Programs, with estimated total costs exceeding $ billion; however, JROC officials could not ensure that appropriate tradeoffs were made between life-cycle cost, schedule, performance, and procurement quantity.

We considered management comments on a draft of this report. The Vice Chairman of the. Shown Here: Public Law No: (05/22/) Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of - Title I: Acquisition Organization - (Sec.

) Establishes within the Department of Defense (DOD) a Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, to act as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense and other senior DOD officials and provide independent analysis and advice on matters.

Life-cycle cost isdefined as the sum of four major cost categories: (1) research and development costs; (2) investment costs, consisting of procurement, military construction, and acquisitionrelated operations and maintenance (O&M) - associated with the production and deployment activities; (3) O&S costs; and (4) disposal costs.

Figure Work Breakdown Structure Overview Whenever an organization has a large project to manage, whether organizing a training session for several hundred people or developing a major weapon system, breaking down the effort into manageable parts is the first step. The DoD uses a specific format, called a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), to organize the breakdown of work into small areas and parts.

Roughly $70 billion in Pentagon weapon systems are deemed major acquisition programs. But it's the other $ billion that is a bit more of a mystery. a tool that allows both Government and contractor Program Managers to have visibility into technical, cost and schedule planning, performance, and progress.

a widely accepted industry best practice for project management, used across DoD, the federal government, and the commercial sector, and objectively measures progress toward goals. First, the cost function estimates minimum recruiting costs for a particular mix of enlistments costs, a necessary input in determining the minimum personnel costs for a given set of performance goals.

16 Second, the cost function correctly captures the increasing average cost nature of recruiting costs. 17 This is particularly important given. Senators Carl Levin and John McCain, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, talked about their new legislation to reform weapon systems acquisition.

Their bill. Weapon System Cost Analysis: an analysis of resource requirements for past, present, and future systems to obtain the cost of research and development, investment, and operation. Proposed weapon systems can be cost and compared to other proposed or existing systems to assist the decision maker in selecting the most appropriate system.

Explore Performance & Cost Tradeoffs Conduct Sensitivity Analyses Capability Portfolio Analysis Tool (CPAT) Optimal fleet‐level management and investment, identifying the “best” investments across fleet to maximize performance.

Ensure strategic investments balance performance, cost, and schedule.objectives and to facilitate cost-performance tradeoffs, the Overarching IPT (OIPT) for each Major Defense Acquisition Program will establish a Cost-Performance Integrated Product Team (CP-IPT) (as directed in the previously-referenced J, memorandum of USD(A&T)).

It is critical that the user community have representation on the CP-IPT.Cost, schedule, and performance goals for the investment (or the planning segment or useful asset being proposed) that can be measured throughout the acquisition process using a perfo rmance-based.

25822 views Monday, November 9, 2020