Just a reminder that the Marine South Expo is April 27th through the 28th, today and tomorrow. The event is co-sponsored by and held at Marine Corps Base, Camp Lejeune. Marine commands from Camp Lejeune, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, and Marine Corps Air Station, New River attend the expo. In addition, Extreme Outfitters, SureFire, and Magnum USA are among the many companies and vendors in attendance, so make sure to check it out if you have the chance.
ADS Ventures, a government relations, business development and strategic communications firm based in Boston and Washington, D.C., announced yesterday that Vice Admiral (retired) Barry Costello former Commander THIRD Fleet and past Chief of Legislative Affairs, has joined the firm as Senior Policy Advisor. Admiral Costello will provide strategic advice and counsel to ADS Ventures clients on policy matters, with a focus on Department of Defense and Congress.
Vice Admiral Costello completed 34 years of military service in June 2007 which included command of all West Coast Navy Forces as Commander THIRD Fleet, responsibility for all aspects of coordination with the Congress and Navy leadership as Chief of Legislative Affairs, leadership of all Surface Naval forces in the Persian Gulf in 2003 during Operation Iraqi Freedom, and strategic advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs as Deputy Director for Strategy and Policy.
He attended the College of Naval Command and Staff where he was selected as honor graduate, graduating “With Distinction,†and earned a master’s of arts degree in Foreign Affairs. Additionally, he has participated in the National Security program at John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and attended Albany Law School, where he earned a Juris Doctor degree and is currently a member of the New York State Bar.
“We are truly honored that Admiral Costello has chosen to join ADS Ventures and apply his unique insight and experience into the needs of our clients,†said Chet Atkins, founding partner of ADS Ventures. “His unique knowledge of strategic planning, global initiatives and vast experience advising government at the highest levels will provide unparalleled guidance to the ADS Ventures Team.â€
“I have spent the last 40 years working to better defend and protect our nation, and honor our most precious treasure – our men and women in uniform,†said Vice Admiral Costello. “In my work with ADS Ventures, I hope to draw upon these experiences to help ensure that we continue to design, improve, procure and field the top-notch equipment and gear needed to ensure the safety and mission readiness of those who serve our country.â€
“Over the last 10 years ADS Ventures has grown in capacity and scope in efforts to better serve our clients and those who our clients protect – our troops. Excellence in this unique space necessitates guidance and insight from those who truly understand the specific needs of our armed forces and the ever-evolving challenges that they continue to encounter,†said ADS Ventures Managing Director, David Costello. “We are very excited to have Admiral Costello as a trusted advisor to our firm and believe that his expertise in this area will vastly benefit the hard work of our clients.â€
Vice Admiral Costello’s personal decorations include the Defense Distinguished Service Medal for service with the Secretary of Defense and Joint Staff while crafting the Unified Command Plan and the Nuclear Posture Review. Additionally, his leadership of CTF-55 during Operation Iraqi Freedom was acknowledged by the United Kingdom with the Honorary Award of Commander of the most Excellent Order of the British Empire (CBE).
Warrior Protection and Readiness Coalition (WPRC) membership visited Capitol Hill on April 6th and representatives met with over 100 members of Congress. While on Capitol Hill, WPRC members provided an overview of their business footprint and explained why it is critical that Congress and the DoD prioritize funding for the equipment and apparel that keep American Warfighters safe and combat effective. In addition to discussing policy and speaking from their own experiences, the WPRC membership was proud to share with Congress the results of new independent research findings by the Lexington Institute on the need for sustained funding and sustainable fielding of Warfighter protective equipment. The Lexington Institute’s “Dressing for Success: Equipping the 21st Century Warfighter Quickly and Efficiently†by Dr Daniel Goure can be found here:
Overall, this is a good document and provides a great history of funding challenges as well as the Rapid Equipping Force and Rapid Fielding Initiative. The Lexington Institute report urges the institutionalization of both the REF and RFI. In 2005 the REF became a permanent organization. With RFI, some may argue that this has already happened as we enter year 10 of this war.
What the document does not discuss is that RFI was initiated by GEN Schoomaker while he was Chief of Staff of the Army and was based on his experience in SOF. In fact, the program was led by COL Dave Anderson who had served in SOF as well and the initial issue was very much based on equipment already issued to SOF units such as cold weather gear. RFI is the best thing to every happen to the Soldier, at least in regard to his personal equipment. The intent of the program is to constantly upgrade the individual items as newer capabilities are introduced. It is absolutely essential that RFI remain a part of the Army.
The REF on the other hand is concerned with the entire gamut of warfighting capability rather than just Soldier Systems items. A lot of goodness has come from the program as well as a few flops but this is to be expected due to the nature of the beast. The “R” in REF is for Rapid and when you do things quickly sometimes things get overlooked. This however, is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The REF’s biggest weakness is that after nine years, there is still no way for industry to identify solutions for teh myriad challenges posed to the REF. Instead, the REF relies on a team of contractors to identify candidate technologies and this approach suffers from, “we don’t know what we don’t know.” The perfect answer to a problem might exist with company X but if the contractors at the REF don’t know about company X the solution will never see the light of day. This needs to be fixed and could be with increased BAAs as well as APBIs (yes, multiple) as well as an industry requirements portal that identifies requirements. Currently, vendors can submit technologies through the REF portal but good ideas are not solutions without a problem that needs fixing.
What is very important to understand is that Afghanistan in particular is a Soldier-centric environment, much more so than any where the US military has operated since Viet Nam. The military that I cut my teeth on in the 1980s faced a peer competitor and the anticipated operational environment was system-centric with concerns over Nuclear Biological and Chemical threats on the Northern German plain. Consequently, Soldier Systems development was concerned more with development of NBC gear than boots, armor, and uniforms. For example, the Battle Dress Overgarment or MOPP Suit had pockets more suited for use in a combat environment than the so-called Battle Dress Uniform which, was truthfully a caricature of a combat uniform intended for wear in garrison. When the BDU made its combat debut in Grenada it was deemed too hot for tropical use. So naturally, the Global War on Terror caught the US military flat footed when it came to Soldier Systems items. The military’s concern was with recapitalizing the expensive fleet of armored vehicles and aircraft designed 20 to 30 years earlier. Naturally, a lot of Soldier gear needed updating. The military did a great job with a lot of kit (clothing systems, MOLLE), a so-so job on others (Armor) and got it completely wrong in a few instances (UCP). None of this would have been possible without the “all-in” approach industry has taken.
Is there an inherent goodness to consolidating and formalizing funding for the Soldier-as-a-System? Absolutely. But there is an inherent danger as well and Dr Goure’s study fails to identify this course of action. Right now, funding comes from disparate sources and often as supplemental funding. This means it does not directly compete with other budget line items within the various departments. Additionally, members of Congress can more easily support these measures as stand-alones because they can champion the Soldier. As part of a larger budget the Soldier gets lost in the weeds. Furthermore, as part of a larger whole, the Soldier now has to compete with other capabilities for their piece of the pie. When the Army desperately needs new combat vehicles it is easy to decide that what the Soldier has is “good enough”.
Then, there is the final danger to a large budget line item for the Soldier and that is that the “Primes” will notice the dollar amount and desire it. Take any of the large, independent companies left in the Soldier Systems industry and they are like fleas when compared to the size and political capital that any one of the “Primes” can bring to bear. The traditional Soldier Systems companies simply can’t compete with that. And, if the “Soldier-as-a-System” were awarded to any one of these “Primes” expect mediocrity to rule the day. Don’t agree? Take a look at any one of the programs currently run by one of these companies; vehicles, aircraft, satellites. You name it. All we see is cost overruns and schedule delays. Want new technology insertion, like maybe a new type boot? Sure thing once you let a new contract for the upgrade. In the Soldier Systems industry we have enjoyed almost ten years of continuous competitive development. This means increased capability and lower prices. No other commodity that DoD purchases benefits from an environment like that. Give the whole kit and caboodle to one company (or team) and that goes away. Why would competitors continue to develop new products if there is no hope of seeking a contract award? Americans innovate and we do it for capitalist reasons. Take away an incentive to turn a buck and you stifle innovation.
The Government does need to do a better job of working with industry to mitigate the feast and famine cycle that has plagued our industry. It can be difficult for companies to keep the lights on when there is delay after delay in releasing contracts. Due to globalization, the corporate desire for profit, and the desire on the part of the consumer to pay big box prices, the American textile base has all but disappeared. Except for a very narrow niche market, the domestic textile industry exists solely to support the Department of Defense’s Berry amendment requirements. Consequently, they are a national resource and should be looked upon by the Government as such. They must be supported and perpetuated. Some might call this a jobs program but how is employing Americans to build something we need a “jobs program”?
The Lexington report highlights some great issues and the work of the WPRC on behalf of industry should be applauded. I agree with the recommendations and conclusions of the report but caution against creating an unwieldy process that stifles innovation and competition in the industrial base. Additionally, I harbor a great deal of concern over turning the Soldier into just another program.
But don’t take my concerns to mean that I disagree with the WPRC. I am convinced that the WPRC is committed to providing our service members with the best equipment available. However, there are problems in both industry as well as how the military deals with industry that must be addressed. Keep the good and get rid of the bad. The American Warfighter has never been so well equipped. We’re on a roll. Let’s keep it going.
You, me, and probably every one you know missed out on the Magpul billet lowers released a few years back. AR15.com bought the rights to the design and after a couple of years of development hell, they have begun to roll off the line.
FEATURES
• Magazine well – aggressively flared for easier loading, and with a textured front
• Markings – Bolt Face Logo is milled rather than outlined, and other than the company name below it, all text is on the right side of the magazine well. We chose to mark these 5.56mm vs. ‘multi’ to differentiate the 5.56 platform vs. the 7.62 platform to come later. Also, FIRE selector pictograms on both sides are at 68 degrees vs. 90 degrees to support both 45 and 90 degree selectors.
• Trigger guard – integral “Magpul” style vs. the often seen ’round’ version to maintain the clean lines
• Roll Pins – there are no roll pins required in the assembly of this lower; the trigger guard is built in, and the bolt catch/release assemblies both use a threaded pin
• Takedown pin – comes with a threaded takedown pin detent spring channel so your takedown pin detent and spring remain in place when the stock is removed
• Ambi-Bolt release – receiver features a bolt release on the right hand side, and this lever includes the AR15.com name
• Trigger – Geissele Automatics Super 3 Gun trigger with a slightly heavier spring and a laser etched BFL on the hammer
• Selector – Battle Arms Development Short Throw ambi selector
• Stock – Magpul CTR, UBR, PRS
• Grip – Magpul MIAD
• Mag Release – Norgon Ambi
The lower assemblies are currently restricted to AR15.com Lifetime members but eventually, they expect to keep them in production as a general release item.
In the case of this article, PPI is not the armor company but rather something altogether different. Apparently, ERGO Falcon (Hines) who actually holds patent #7,627,925 for the “Electrified Handguard”, has licensed their design to Prototype Productions, Inc. who further assigned rights to a company with the inspiring name of PPI Ventures Two (we didn’t make this up).
Last week, PPI filed suit in US District Court of Eastern Virginia against RESET Inc for patent infringement for their RIPR. When you absolutely want to get someone into court quickly for Intellectual Property issues, file in the US District Court of Eastern Virginia.
We wrote last year about RESET’s Rifle Integrated Power Rail (RIPR). RESET is working with ATK on the design but we haven’t heard much about the project since we mentioned that it would be at the Infantry Warfighter Conference at Fort Benning.
As you can see from this extract from a marketing brochure, despite its name, the RIPR is not an actual rail but rather an adapter that attaches on top of a weapon’s Mil Std 1913 railed fore end and upper receiver. This is a little bit problematic as it will only fit a rail and upper receiver that are exactly the same height. As we know, this isn’t always the case. I’m still not sure why they call it a rail, as it isn’t. Unfortunately, that the RIPR is an actual rail seems to be central to PPI’s claims against RESET.
For full details of the suit please refer to the court filings obtained by SSD.
The real issue at hand here is that while the lawyers representing PPI have been very diligent in spelling out exactly what damages they want awarded by the court, they haven’t specified exactly what RESET is alleged to have done other than a very broad, “RESET has infringed and is infringing the Hines patent.” But how? In addition to the Hines patent, the exhibits submitted to the court by PPI seem to want to show how successful RESET has been in their endeavor. Perhaps that is the crux of the suit?
Furthermore, neither ERGO Falcon nor RESET are exactly pioneers in the powered rail market. Wilcox has had prototypes for years and we have seen European efforts as well. I haven’t seen the PPI model but I have seen the RIPR and it actually works. On the other hand, Falcon ERGO developed the initial IP and is a pretty popular brand that produces small arms accessories. PPI used the Hines (Falcon ERGO) patent to develop their powered rail under an Army tech development contract called a Small Business Innovative Research award. Based on this fact, some might make the argument that the US Government might own a stake in the IP rights for the Electrified Handguard which, by the way, is an awful name for something you want Soldiers to carry.
Generally, these things seem to work themselves out and the ensuing agreements keep both parties mum on the subject so we may never know how exactly RESET violated the Hines patent.
“POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” is the ultimate sellout movie. Detailing how product placement in media and entertainment actually works, this documentary by Morgan Spurlock opens this Friday (April 22, 2011). As you can see, POM get the above the title spot, but what we found most interesting was that Director Morgan Spurlock is running the streets wearing sponsor Merrell, footwear. For once, it’s cool to sell out.
National Molding would like to announce Ian C. Stout as their new National Sales Manager for Military and Commercial products. Ian is a former United States Marine with an Infantry background, so he has end user experience using their products and he understands firsthand how tactical equipment works. Since leaving the Marine Corps, Ian has held positions in several defense sector companies as an independent Security Contractor as well as Applications Specialist, Product Manager and National Sales Manager. He can be reached via email istout@natmo.com.
www.natmo.com
Jeanette Kozwolski at Tactical Gear Blog caught up with Dan Bergeron, tactical gear designer extraordinaire. It’s a great read, and offers good insight into Dan and his perspective on design and the industry in general. I have known Dan since his days at Arc’teryx and I have to say that this is a must read.
