daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,341
- Points
- 1,160
Seems like they've toppled a monster they created themselves ....
While previous directives intended “to build momentum, this guidance primarily addressed roles arising early in the equipping lifecycle, when requirements are evolving and experimentation takes place,” she wrote. “It did not adequately account for the shifting roles and functions as requirements move into development as programs of record through production, fielding, and sustainment.”
The previous directives also “created ambiguity regarding the primacy of acquisition authorities vested in the Army Secretariat that preserve civilian oversight and control in acquisition matters,” Wormuth said.
To get capabilities delivered to soldiers, the Army needs input and contributions of a variety of organizations, “not the unitary direction of one Army command,” she said.
Now as modernization programs move through the lifecycle, different Army organizations will assume primary roles, Wormuth noted.
Retired Lt. Gen. Tom Spoehr, now with the Heritage Foundation, told Defense News the directive “returns the Army to the way things were pre-2018 with a few exceptions. Army Futures Command exists but does not share or drive any acquisition efforts.”
“AFC clearly still develops requirements and concepts, but now has a much more limited role in the acquisition of capabilities,” he added.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/mco/WWA7A7AT55C3JP2DOEH5VJ3M6I.jpg)
www.defensenews.com
In new directive, US Army reins in Army Futures Command
While previous directives intended “to build momentum, this guidance primarily addressed roles arising early in the equipping lifecycle, when requirements are evolving and experimentation takes place,” she wrote. “It did not adequately account for the shifting roles and functions as requirements move into development as programs of record through production, fielding, and sustainment.”
The previous directives also “created ambiguity regarding the primacy of acquisition authorities vested in the Army Secretariat that preserve civilian oversight and control in acquisition matters,” Wormuth said.
To get capabilities delivered to soldiers, the Army needs input and contributions of a variety of organizations, “not the unitary direction of one Army command,” she said.
Now as modernization programs move through the lifecycle, different Army organizations will assume primary roles, Wormuth noted.
Retired Lt. Gen. Tom Spoehr, now with the Heritage Foundation, told Defense News the directive “returns the Army to the way things were pre-2018 with a few exceptions. Army Futures Command exists but does not share or drive any acquisition efforts.”
“AFC clearly still develops requirements and concepts, but now has a much more limited role in the acquisition of capabilities,” he added.
In new directive, US Army reins in Army Futures Command
The Army's newest directive on modernization seeks to better define the roles between Army Futures Command and other enterprises like the acquisition branch.
www.defensenews.com
