Search

Begin New Search Topic Defense Policy

1361. Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Tactical Battlefield Communications

Publication Date:
12-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Abstract:
At the outset of this study, the Task Force observed that there was no such thing as “just” tactical communications. Rather, it saw requirements for conducting military operations in two major theaters of war as well as for conducting a wide variety of other missions. It also saw emerging requirements for a telecommunication infrastructure to support rapid force projection, early entry, reachback/split-base, and high mobility operations. Furthermore, Joint Vision 2010 (JV2010) assumed information superiority to be necessary for dominant maneuver, precision engagement, full dimensional protection and focused logistics. All these factors have led our Military Services to express a need for a fully integrated, strategic/tactical, voice/data/information telecommunications infrastructure rather than merely “tactical” communications. This infrastructure must bring post-camp-station information services to deployed forces and, conversely, bring information from our deployed forces to the continental United States (CONUS) or to other locations geographically distant from areas of operations.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Industrial Policy, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
United States

1362. 100 Companies Receiving The Largest Dollar Volume Of Prime Contract Awards - Fiscal Year 1998

Publication Date:
01-1999
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
U.S. Economic Statistics Briefing Room
Abstract:
This report presents summary data on the 100 companies, and their subsidiaries, receiving the largest dollar volume of Department of Defense (DoD) prime contract awards during fiscal year (FY) 1998. Table 1 lists the 100 companies in alphabetical order and gives their associated rank. Table 2 identifies the parent companies in rank order, with their subsidiaries, and gives the total net value of awards for both the parent company and its subsidiaries. In many cases, the parent company receives no awards itself, but appears on the list because of its subsidiaries. Table 2 also shows what percentage of the total awards each company's awards represent, as well as the cumulative percentage represented by all companies. Table 3 lists the top 100 companies DoD-wide in rank order and breaks the totals into three categories of procurement: Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT); Other Services and Construction; and Supplies and Equipment. Table 4 lists the top 50 companies for each of the Reporting Components in rank order, and by category of procurement.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Development, and Economics
Political Geography:
United States

1363. 100 Contractors Receiving The Largest Dollar Volume Of Prime Contract Awards for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation - Fiscal Year 1998

Publication Date:
09-1999
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
U.S. Economic Statistics Briefing Room
Abstract:
This report presents summary data on the 100 prime contractors receiving the largest dollar volume in Department of Defense (DoD) awards over $25,000 for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT) work during fiscal year (FY) 1998. RDT work can include research (basic and applied) and development (exploratory, advanced, engineering, operational systems, or management and support services). Full definitions for each of these categories are provided in Section 235.001 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement. These data rank each corporation according to its relative standing. The order of ranking is based on the net value of each contractor's RDT awards. Beginning in FY 1994, the contractors have been ranked by the parent company vs. subsidiaries or divisions of the company as in past issues of this publication. For example, figures for General Motors Corporation include awards to Hughes Aircraft Company. Also, classification of a company as foreign is based on the parent company. Beginning in FY 1996, only the top 100 contractors are listed in this publication. When percentages are used for dollar amounts they are based on whole dollars. Table 1 lists the 100 contractors in alphabetical order, displays the order of ranking for each, and shows how each has been categorized for reporting purposes. The categories are business firm (B), foreign contractor (F), and nonprofit institution (N). Table 2 shows the net value of awards to U.S. business firms. Those firms which qualify as small businesses are further identified by an "S." The net value of awards to each of the firm's reported locations is also provided. Tables 3 and 4 provide the net value of awards to U.S. educational and other nonprofit institutions and foreign contractors. As in Table 1, contractors in Tables 2 through 4 are shown by order of ranking, with their total awards indicated by an asterisk (*). The value of awards to each of the contractor's reported locations is also shown for these tables.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Economics, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
United States

1364. Prime Contract Awards, Size Distribution

Publication Date:
01-1999
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
U.S. Economic Statistics Briefing Room
Abstract:
This report provides data on prime contract actions (PCAs) over $25,000 awarded by the Department of Defense (DoD) in fiscal year (FY) 1998. For reporting purposes, contracts have been distributed by dollar value into 11 different size categories. The tables provide information on the number of total actions, their net value, and their percentage of distribution, by size, and according to a variety of categories. The categories include Defense Component, type of contract involved, extent of competed procurements, kind of contract action taken, selected procurement programs, and labor standard statutes. Table 1 presents data by individual size category (e.g., $25,000 to $49,999, $50,000 to $99,999) while Tables 2 through 7 present data in cumulative categories (e.g., $25,000 or more; $50,000 or more). The information in Prime Contract Awards, Size Distribution, assists DoD management in projecting the workload that will be required by various proposed projects. For example, using data in this publication, DoD officials could determine that a proposal to review all contract actions of $500,000 or more in FY 1998 would require examining approximately 27,000 transactions, or 11.7 percent of the total transactions as shown in Table 2. These data can also be used to identify trends in DoD procurement, (e.g., to identify which of the various types of contracts were most frequently awarded, in terms of number of contract actions, during FY 1998).
Topic:
Defense Policy and Economics
Political Geography:
United States

1365. Prime Contract Award: Fiscal Year 1998

Publication Date:
01-1999
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
U.S. Economic Statistics Briefing Room
Abstract:
This report presents a variety of current and historical data pertaining to Department of Defense (DoD) prime contract awards. All historical tables commence with fiscal year (FY) 1988 data. Six categories of data on DoD prime contracts are provided. Data are displayed by type of contractor, by procurement program, by competition, and by type of contract pricing provision. Awards for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT) are discussed separately, as is the DoD Small Business Subcontracting Program. Amounts in this report are shown for the DoD Agency that awards the prime contracts and not the department or agency that budgets for the supplies or services. In addition, data for the Army, Navy, and Air Force include prime contracts awarded on behalf of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other Federal Agencies, as well as for foreign countries whose Defense purchases are reimbursable. Percentages are derived by dividing the detail line or the subtotal line by the base line designated by 100 percent, unless otherwise noted. Column headings, footnotes, or section narrative are used to identify these exceptions. Indentation is used to provide assistance in recognizing total, subtotal, and detail line information. The data are collected in whole dollars and the totals given in some tables may not add due to rounding. This report includes awards made by Other Defense Agencies (ODAs), which are listed in the Glossary. It also includes tariff or regulated acquisitions under $25,000. It does not include obligations for “in house” work performed at government owned and operated establishments, such as Navy shipyards, Army arsenals, and Air Force research laboratories, except to the extent that such establishments place contracts for supplies and services with industry or other Federal Agencies. The estimated dollar amounts of indefinite quantity petroleum contracts are included in this report, but the number of individual orders written against these contracts has not been included in the totals for procurement actions. For the definition of terms used in this publication, see the Glossary.
Topic:
Defense Policy and Economics
Political Geography:
United States

1366. Illuminating Tomorrow's War

Author:
Martin C. Libicki
Publication Date:
11-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
The United States is midway through what may be called a revolution in military affairs (RMA). 9 This revolution opened in the 1970s with the development and refinement of precision-guided munitions 1° (PGMs), which can hit anything that can be located. It is likely to culminate with the multiplication and integration of the DOD C41SR assets, thereby creating a well-populated Grid. In the process, the physical battlespace will become illuminated better than ever. As this occurs, conventional warfare will change from force on force to hide-and-seek. Hence the need for a Grid capable of illuminating the battlespace, a case that rests on five tenets: With precision weaponry, seeing a target is tantamount to being able to kill it. The guidance for such weaponry is potentially shifting from shooters or internal sensors to externally provided information. Defenses exist against PGMs, but the link between seeing and hitting is likely to strengthen over time.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and International Law
Political Geography:
United States

1367. The Revolution in Military Affairs: Allied Perspectives

Author:
Robbin F. Laird and Holger H. Mey
Publication Date:
04-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
The revolution in military affairs (RMA) is an American concept that frames a debate about the restructuring of American military forces in the period of globalization of the American economy. A core task for U.S. allies is to seek to understand the American debate and to identify opportunities for and the risks to themselves in variant patterns of development of the American military in the years ahead.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and International Law
Political Geography:
United States and America

1368. European Political Considerations on Operations Beyond Europe

Author:
Klaus Becher
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The nations of the European Union represent not only one of the two most important economic actors in the world, but also include some countries of world-wide political importance. Half of the G-8 membership is from the EU, as are two permanent members of the UN Security Council. The responsibilities and obligations that, historically, European powers accumulated in all continents still have many remnants. The two big European wars of the 20th century were also fought in Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. Europe, while enjoying the benefits of a large, expanding internal market, depends for its prosperity on a secure and functioning global order.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Lebanon, Iceland, Nagasaki, and Taipei

1369. The Persian Gulf

Author:
Shahram Chubin
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
In the past fifty years five US President's from Truman to Clinton have directly or indirectly, affirmed US interests in the Middle East. The 'doctrines' in the case of Carter (1979) and Reagan (1981) specifically addressed the security of the Persian Gulf. The same period has seen the withdrawal of imperial powers. Three decades ago Britain managed the security of the Persian Gulf. Two decades ago France had the largest naval force in the Indian Ocean. The contraction of these commitments was encouraged by the US, which was unwilling to be associated with colonialism and its evils. Yet since Britain's withdrawal from the Gulf which occasioned the Nixon doctrine, the US has been grappling with how best to assure security. Reliance on regional states ("twin pillars") was upset by the Iranian revolution. In the 1980's the long Iran-Iraq war underscored the need for a Western role, but neither its shape nor its duration were clear. Local forces were reluctant to envisage any thing beyond an "over the horizon presence."
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
Britain, United States, Iraq, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and France

1370. Emerging European Power Projection Capabilities

Author:
Francois Heisbourg
Publication Date:
07-1999
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The Kosovo air war was an eye-opener for many Europeans, particularly for those who normally follow defence issues at a distance. There was no escaping the realisation that close to three-quarters of the aircraft and more than four-fifths of the ordnance released against Serbian targets were American. America's massive dominance in C31 was similarly spectacular, with media commentators using the over-simplified but effective equation: "Fifty U.S. military satellites, a single European satellite". Under such circumstances U.S. influence on all strategic and operational aspects of the war could only be overwhelming, for better or for worse, a situation summarised by the syllogism "no capability-no responsibility". Despite deep strategic flaws, questionable tactics and occasional rank incompetence (the Apache episode, the China Embassy bombing), the U.S. edge is so great that it can afford even serious blunders.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and NATO
Political Geography:
America, Europe, and Middle East