This is PEO Soldier’s announcement regarding the release of the XM17 Modular Handgun System solicitation last Friday. I’d like you to peruse the actual RFP here.
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Sept. 2, 2015) – The U.S. Army announced Aug. 28 that it is seeking bids for its new modular handgun system, the XM17, to replace its current sidearm, the M9 pistol.
The announcement accompanied the release of the request for proposal (RFP), which is the official solicitation that specifies the new weapon system’s contractual requirements. It also details the procedures and schedule vendors must follow to compete for the contract.
The RFP was published on the government’s Federal Business Opportunities website. Interested vendors will have 150 days to respond to the RFP. This extra time allows the vendor to submit their proposals as well as sample “systems” that have integrated the handguns, ammunition and magazine prior to testing. Its release marks the official start of the “full and open” competition that will lead to selection of the new modular handgun system.
The selection process involves a two-phased competition. The first phase will evaluate all submissions received and will complete with a down-selection to up to three vendors who will participate in the second phase, the culmination of which will be a single production contract at the end of the competition.
The Army wants a new handgun system that outperforms its current sidearm. The weapon must be modular so it can be adjusted to fit all hand sizes and configured to meet mission needs through the use of rails and enablers. In addition, it must surpass the M9’s accuracy, ergonomics, reliability, durability and maintainability. The RFP calls for vendors to submit a weapon that meets the unique needs of the military services. It does not specify any particular caliber. The RFP encourages industry to optimize the weapon, ammunition and magazine for maximum performance.
Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 full-size handguns from a single vendor, and approximately 7,000 compact versions of the handgun. The other military services participating in the XM17 program may order an additional 212,000 systems above the Army quantity.
The Army held four industry days and issued a draft RFP prior to the announcement. These forums encouraged vendor-government communications, involved would-be competitors in the planning process and provided the Army with feedback on the proposed handgun system and strategy. Throughout the process, industry was encouraged to suggest ways in which the Army could improve the plan and process, a number of which have been considered and implemented.
The competition will result in selecting a handgun that performs best in the hands of Warfighters. More than 600 military personnel from all of the Services will play a critical part in the evaluation and provide feedback on the performance of the candidate systems after firing them in simulated combat scenarios. This assessment is an important part of the evaluation process.
In case you missed last week’s post on the US Army’s Soldier Protection System – Torso and Extremity Protection program’s issues regarding contracting and requirements changes, you need the go back and read it because there were a lot of revelations by a guy who works for the company that originally developed the winning system for the USMC, before it was adopted by the Army. A commentor who adopted the monicker “Nice Try” made some interesting assertions about the government design as well as the program overall, and even went so far as to admitting to purchasing at least one commercial armor vest while working on the Scalable Modular Vest program. I’ll call that his “Edward Snowden” moment. It’s an accepted fact in the international community that governments spy on one another. Nobody makes any noise about it unless obvious evidence is presented and that’s exactly what Snowden did when he disclosed classified document after document detailing US intelligence operations. Naturally, some of those governments complained. The same goes in the tactical industry. Companies know that their competitors are buying or otherwise getting ahold of their products but no one says anything, until someone admits to doing it. “Nice Try” is that guy. His employer should expect some fallout over his actions. He also made statements that led us to believe that his company continued to work on the SMV after it was not adopted by the Marines, and picked by the Army as their SPS-TEP candidate.
One of “Nice Try’s” claims is that no commercial technologies were transferred into the SMV design but this assertion was later disputed in a comment by TYR Tactical CEO Jason Beck. In particular Beck is concerned about his patent pending ballistic vein which looks surprisingly similar to the “card” found in the MSV during industry day.
This “card” was not a component of the original MSV tested by the Marine Corps so it had to have been introduced to the vest sometime later, after it was chosen by the Army to be their SPS-TEP candidate. TYR Tactical’s patent pending ballistic vein on the other hand was a component in their vest design submitted to the program via their prime, Point Blank. I asked Jason Beck to amplify information regarding the ballistic vein in his comment on the original post and he provided this statement.
I originally designed the ballistic vein in the summer of 2010 as part of our Modular Scalable Tailorable (MST) system, which was down selected by PEO for that solicitation. There were two original intents for the advent of the vein. (Editor’s note: MST was one of the Soldier Protection Demonstrations which were designed to investigate various commercial armor technologies. For example, SPD 7 resulted in the adoption of the Soldier Plate Carrier System.)
The first intent was to increase load carriage performance specifically for a tactical nylon carrier. Historically, tactical carriers have lacked stability and rigidity. For example, if you try to set one up vertically on a table or on the floor, it will likely just fall over. Once the carrier is being worn, the same lack of structure affects the wearer’s overall load carriage when placing pouches, tools or any additional weight to the nylon. The result is pulling or sagging of the carrier, ultimately causing fatigue due to improper load carriage.
The second intent was to incorporate the vein as part of an overall system to enhance ballistic performance of both soft armor and plates. When we tested the vein in our system (and in conjunction with other manufacturers armor), it actually enhanced the overall ballistic performance of both fragmentation and stability throughout first, second and third round hits of 9mm. Back face deformation was reduced, and V50 performance was enhanced. The vein helps prevent bunching of the soft armor and supports the plates and soft armor to improve edge hit protection.
The vein has been presented multiple times to the Army in several solicitations and white papers since 2010, including the most recent SPS solicitation for which we were down selected with our former partner for SPS. Our tactical carrier and ballistic vein were submitted along with PPEs soft armor solution. The vein was an integral part of every iteration of the system that we submitted for SPS. Obviously, the TYR Tactical/PPE system was not chosen, although a ballistic vein is present in the Army’s final selection.
We have placed the vein in all of our tactical systems, and many of our other ballistic and load carriage products since it was developed in 2010. It’s original intent was solely for tactical carriers and vests, but based on the performance we have seen, it is also incorporated into multiple ballistic products ranging from low vis carriers, collars, throats, biceps, belts, etc.
What is disheartening about the vein showing up in the system that was chosen for SPS, is that we followed the process as it was presented to us, and we were assured that process would be fair and open. We went down the path to protect our IP by filing a patent, which was well documented at the beginning and throughout every step of the SPS submission process. Industry was given left and right limits to follow, but in the end those same standards were not applicable to the Army’s selection.
Ultimately, along with many other factors, led me for the first time in 17 years of business, to come to the decision to file an official protest
Based on statements by Jason Beck and “Nice Try” we know that the Army saw the technology several times and in particular during the SPS-TEP source selection process. As far as we know, it was not present in any of the other candidate’s vests during the solictation and it is not a common item found in commercial or government design armor vests, so we can say that it was thought to be unique to TYR Tactical. Yet, both have similar designs and seem to function in a similar manner. We are not sure when the Army introduced it to the government design except that it happened after the USMC accepted the original MSVs but prior to the end of the down select. Nor do we understand why and how the Army developed the card. Although TYR Tactical was a subcontractor on the SPS-TEP solicitation, they still submitted a protest due in part, to the presence of the card in the Army design, as well as other irregularities with soliciation. In responding to the protest, the Army failed to address their concerns.
When the Army initially launched the Soldier Protection System program in 2013, contracts for soldier systems items were falling off drastically and companies were more than happy to participate with the promise of developing a new, leap ahead system consisting of multiple components. It was exciting. SPS was touted as the future and industry wanted to be a part of it.
To give readers a frame of reference, here is a basic description of Soldier Protection System – Torso and Extremity Protection:
SPS-TEP is a PEO Soldier sponsored development program managed by LTC Kathy M. Brown, PM Soldier Protective Equipment. While it includes armored combat clothing (BCS), Blast Pelvic Protector (BPP), and new Load Distribution System (LDS), the heart of SPS TEP is the Modular Scalable Vest, one of four systems which integrates into the SPS TEP and consists of a low profile vest with four soft armor panels (one front, one back, and two side cummerbunds) covered in a camouflage cloth and hook and loop. Like current systems, soft armor panels are inserted into a tactical outer carrier that also accommodates hard armor protective inserts. The tactical outer carrier also contains two side plate pocket that will accommodate soft armor inserts. The outer carrier is made of a flame resistant outer cloth, webbings, hook/loop, polyethylene stiffener, a quad-release system, and several other non-ballistic materials.
There is also a Load Distribution System designed to offer the capability to redistribute the weight burden on the torso vest and load bearing while being carried horizontally, close to the body’s center of mass. The LDS is an integral part of the SPS TEP design with the LDS belt containing soft armor that provides fragmentation and handgun protection to the lower back and abdomen region. The LDS will provide Warfighters with the ability to mount additional equipment directly to the belt using the MOLLE retention system. The ruck integration component includes: a frame adapter, torso vest compatible shoulder straps, and an LDS belt adapter.
Unfortunately, the program faced an early misstep when the original solicitation was released, canceled and then a revised version reissued not long after. Industry trust was shook when elements of industry bids were integrated into this new requirement for all to see. What companies considered advantages over others in the process were now there for all to integrate into their proposals. Interegtating good ideas is something that should have happened earlier in the requirement process, during the Sources Sought phase, when industry is expected to help government refine their requirement by serving as a barometer and forming a vision of the state of the art. It’s not fair to write a requirement, open a solicitation and then close it, rewrite the requirement with elements of proposals and then resissue it with those new elements. But, this isn’t the first point of contention in the SPS TEP program. It’s an issue that has been constant throughout all components of the overarching program strategy. The big issue is that they were trying to save a buck on Personal Protective Equipment.
Across the board, within all SPS components and in spite of language in the 2014 and 2015 National Defense Authorizations Acts calling for the use of “Best Value” contracting, the solicitations have been issued under “Lowest Price, Techically Acceptable” criteria. This is an oversimplification, and I’m sure a contracting officer will comment, trying to justify the Army’s defiance of the Congressional language, but LPTA means that your body armor is assured to be made by the lowest bidder.
(Former PM SPIE COL Robert Mortlock (right) and current PM SPE LTC Kathy M. Brown (center) explains SPS-TEP to Vice Chief of Staff GEN Daniel B. Allyn (left) during a June 2015 visit to PEO Soldier.)
With SPS-TEP, the Army has taken LPTA to a new level. Despite having three vendor teams (Hawk, Point Blank and Safariland) with competitive systems that met all of the solictation’s requirements, PEO Soldier decided to enter a fourth, government owned solution cobbled together from different components. Naturally, that is what they selected. Of course, industry was disappointed. Why wouldn’t they be? They had spent millions of dollars to prepare their submissions. The heart of this winning government solution is a developmental USMC modular scalable vest that the Marines do not plan to field. After testing the vest, the Marines chose rather to purchase additional Plate Carriers.
These photos show Maj James Pelland, former team lead for Marine Corps Systems Command’s Individual Armor Team demonstrating the Modular Scalable Vest. Below, you can see him negotiating an obstacle course wearing the MSV. The bottom portion of the Load Distribution System is also visible in the photo, which allegedly still has some issues. Additionally, Maj Pelland doesn’t appear to be wearing any plates in the MSV.
On 21 July, 2015, Bethel Industries, Jersey City, New Jersey, (W91CRB-15-D-0019); Hawk Protection Inc., Pembroke Pines, Florida, (W91CRB-15-D-0020); and KDH Defense Systems Inc., Eden, North Carolina, (W91CRB-15-D-0021), were awarded a $49,000,000 shared firm-fixed-price contract for the Soldier Protection System modular vest by the US Army. These lowest bidders are manufacturing the Army’s design. It all sounds great for the bean counters. In fact, everyone would be impressed if what they were buying was what the Army said it actually needed at the outset of the program. Unfortunately, it would take a requirement change to do that, and that’s just what they did.
In spite of all of the other issues, this next bit is probably the most disheartening part of the entire affair. The “Army” system didn’t meet all of the requirements of the solicitation, so they changed them mid-program. There are several minor conundrums such as the Load Carrying Equipment not quite working in concert with the Marine Corps body armor vest, and an immature Load Distribution System, but the most dramatic of these changes is the decision to drop the requirement for female fit body armor. The MSV option the Army has selected, doesn’t feature a female fit at all.
(PFC Cheryl Rogers grins as 2LT Chelsea Adams helps her into the new Generation III Female Improved Outer Tactical Vest, Nov 28, 2013. The Soldiers, who are part of the 1st ABCT Female Engagement Team, Third Infantry Division, were preparing to deploy to Afghanistan.)
The Army, who not long ago drew praise from Congress for their multi-year effort to develop a female version of the Improved Outer Tactical Vest (IOTV), decided to leave female Soldiers high and dry in the future by simply eliminating the requirement. They’ve put years into developing female body armor and now, they just toss it aside. To make matters worse, they are still under contract to work on improving female body armor fit with the firm, Body Lab.
Consider this; as of fiscal year 2014, women represent about 14 percent of the active Army, 23 percent of the Army Reserve and 16 percent of the Army National Guard as of fiscal year 2014. With the Army working to open additional positions in combat formations to women, this move can only be seen as a step backward.
Ultimately, SPS remains a developmental ‘science project’ with limited buys and actual system testing to commence after the new year. There is no promise of full type classification and issue across the force. However, while the Army was sure to have learned much from the program, and in particular from the commercial designs it evaluated, millions of dollars and countless hours were expended by both industry and government in pursuit of this requirement. It would be a pity if it turns out in further testing that the Army backed the wrong horse while trying to save a couple of bucks. Their actions regarding PPE contracts have certainly garnered the attention of those on the Hill who hold their purse strings. To make matters worse, they’ll probably have to explain why they failed to capitalize on their work to offer PPE for females and end up spending even more taxpayer money when several viable options were at their fingertips throughout the down select portion of this program. Conducting program after program where there is no return on investment for industry is starting to wear thin.
This image, just released by PEO Soldier’ Program Manager for Soldier Sensors and Lasers, depicts prototype versions of the upcoming AN/PSQ-20 Enhanced Night Vision Goggle (mounted to helmet) and the Family of Weapon Sights – Individual (mounted to carbine).
The ENVG III fuses Image Intensification night vision with thermal vision while the FWS-I is a stand alone or clip on thermal sight for the M4, M16 and M249.
What is extraordinary about these two pieces of equipment is that the FWS-I can “talk” to the ENVG III. The reticle image is wirelessly transmitted to the ENVG III and appears on the display. This facilitates Rapid Target Acquisition allowing the Soldier to see where his weapon is pointed and even engage targets off axis.
While both BAE and DRS are developing a FWS-I and ENVG III product, thid photo shows prototype samples from BAE’s FWS-I and DRS’ ENVG III. Production models may differ slightly. Additionally, versions of each device may look slightly different depending on vendor. However, they will all function the same and be fully compatible.
For more details on these two new technologies, read our full story.
Tags: BAE, DRS Posted in Optics, PEO-Soldier | Comments Off on PEO Soldier Unveils Prototype Optics
I recently received an email from PEO Soldier’s Public Affairs team inviting me to a media round table on a rather intriguing subject, “Shooting around corners? Sci-fi or battlefield reality?” With a promise like that, of course I had to find out more.
Yesterday, several members of the media had an opportunity to listen to a presentation by COL Michael Sloane, Project Manager Soldier Sensors and Lasers (PM SSL). He was accompanied by LTC Timothy Fuller, Product Manager Soldier Maneuver Sensors (PM SMS) and assisted via telephone by Mr. Phil Cheatham, Deputy Branch Chief, Electronics and Special Developments, Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCoE) at Fort Benning.
First off, I’ll give you a little background on PM SSL. COL Mike Sloane began by telling us about his team’s mission which is to provide the tools needed for the US Soldier and Squad to maintain overmatch, in any environment. In this case you’ll see, they are offering leap ahead technology to our Soldiers.
PM SSL provides Soldiers with improved lethality, mobility, and survivability in all weather and visibility conditions. Soldier-borne sensors and lasers enhance the Soldier’s ability to see in all battlefield and lighting conditions, to acquire objects of military significance before the Soldier is detected, and to target threat objects accurately for engagement by Soldiers or precision-guided munitions. These systems provide critical, on-the-ground direct support to U.S. forces.
As the security environment changes America’s Soldiers expect the best piece of equipment for the mission. They deploy anytime, anywhere around the world and thier equipment needs to work. COL Sloane told us this is why they keep their equipment reliability rates high; 100% availability.
It’s a Team Effort
PM SSL doesn’t do this in a vacuum. In addition to working closely with the other PMs at PEO Soldier, they maintain relationships with the Centers of Excellence (Maneuver, Fires and Aviation), the ARDECs under AMC, particularly CERDEC and its Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate (Night Vision Labs). Night Vision Labs is located in the same compound on Fort Belvoir as PM SSL making it easy to interface. In fact, PM SSL has embedded personnel in the lab. However, COL Sloane is quite proud of the rapport his team has built with the warfighter. They spend a lot of time visiting troops both CONUS and abroad.
While MCOE at Ft Benning identifies technology gaps, PM SSL solicits input from Soldiers. Throughout the process, PM SSL conducts sessions referred to as ‘Soldier touch points’ which help ensure that their fingerprints are on the designs. While these range days focus mainly on the warfighter, they strive to include every MOS in the process. They also work with the readiness centers such as JRTC to observe Soldiers and Squads as they train on live fire lanes to extract feedback on how they use their equipment. Whether something is ised can be just as important as how.
Last but not least, PM SSL regularly, and in great detail, interfaces with industry, conducting numerous industry days for each program as well as hosting industry for meetings at Ft Belvoir.
Better Buying Power
COL Sloane mentioned a couple of ways they make more effective use of their procurement funds. He said they continue to incentivize industry through competition. I’ll add to that by pointing out that they offer competition that results in contract awards, unlike some programs that end up being money pits for industry. This competition also helps control pricing and results in improved Size Weight and Power (SWAP) performance. Additionally, they also utilize Government Furnished Equipment as system components in some instances, which helps control cost. For one program, these combined measures have saved the U.S. Army $198 million.
New Technology
While the background was critical to a frame of reference, the true subjects of the presentation were two current issue pieces of equipment managed by PM SSL, the Thermal Weapon Sight and AN/PSQ-20 Enhanced Night Vision Goggle as well as the follow-ons to both of these systems.
LTC Tim Fuller walked us through these technologies. The current Enhanced Night Vision Goggle II (ENVG II) is being updated with the advent of the ENVG III, whereas the current Thermal Weapon Sight’s (TWS) follow-on is the Family of Weapon Sights-Individual (FWS-I). He described the fledgling Family of Weapon Sights as a “leap ahead”. They’ve been working for about two years with this capability which improves Soldier survivability, lethality, and mobility. Additionally, both of these new systems can be used alone or in conjunction with one another in a new way to offer what is called Rapid Target Acquisition or RTA.
Since in the late 1990s the Thermal Weapon Sight program has fielded three generations of sensors, each reducing size and weight while increasing performance. For example, they’ve decreased weight from the Gen I’s 3 lbs to just under 2 lbs with the latest variant. Additionally, that first variant was a stand-alone only model while the newest TWS can be used as a clip-on sight to extend the capability of existing optics. They’ve also lowered the original cost from around $11,000 to $5,000 now.
The evolution of the Enhanced Night Vision Goggle is interesting. The current ENVG II is a more elegant design than its predecessor and features a wider FOV for the thermal. That’s due to a higher resolution thermal sensor. While the original ENVG I, which was built by ITT, has a smaller I2 tube than we are currently used to experiencing with the AN/PVS14 monocular, the II and III generation each use a standardized tube which is provided by the Army to the manufacturer as Government Furnished Equipment, and integrated into the goggle during production at the factory.
This offers several advantages. First, it ensures a common I2 tube, meaning known performance characteristics. Second, it allows the government to negotiate directly with the I2 tube manufacturers for greater savings across these and other programs rather than having vendors in each program purchase the tubes at different prices. Finally, the government can determine schedule priorities of when programs will receive tubes.
Once again, the Army went to industry with a set of attainable technology goals and industry responded by using their own internal Research and Development (IRAD) Dollars to be competitive. FWS family will use uncooled, forward-looking infrared technology. The first of these, the Family of Weapon Sights – Individual which is currently in development, can be used with the M16, M4 and now the M249. It is the smallest and lightest thermal weapon sight in the Army’s inventory and can be used as a stand alone sight or as a clip-on for use in conjunction with optical sights.
Here’s where it gets interesting. The FWS-I can now “talk” to ENVG III. The FWS-I is attached to the Individual Weapon or SAW and its reticle can be superimposed as a Narrow Field of View image on the display of the helmet worn ENVG III, right on top of the already fused I2/onboard thermal sensor image. With this technology, a Soldier can see where his weapon is pointed, whether or not it is shouldered and characterize what he is looking at, thanks to the fused image.
These signals are now all digital and the Soldier can individually control the channels which are fused into a common display. Soldiers can toggle through three modes: Spatially aligned mode, Picture in picture mode and FWS-I only mode.
The digital image is transmitted from the FWS-I to an antenna on the ENVG III and then routed through a fiber optic cable to the smart battery pack mounted at the rear of the helmet. This is where the processor is located. This special, ENVG III compatible battery pack is a component of the FWS-I. The ENVG will continue to be fielded with its own standard battery pack. At the processor, the thermal image with reticle is stitched unto the ENVG’s display in the processor. Everything is lined up with one image embedded into the other. A major advantage is that RTA keeps the Soldier passive so no need to use active laser and create a signature.
Some of you may be interested in how the FWS-I ‘talks’ to the ENVG III. The Army has chosen a low power emitter with a range of about out to three feet but won’t go into any details on signal characteristics.
Separate Image Intensification (I2) and Thermal channels are fused into a single display. While the thermal signal offers 18 to 26 degree FOV, with the ENVG III you get 40 degree FOV in I2 mode. This is common to the standard PVS-14 tube manufactured by L3 Warrior Systems and Harris. These GFE tubes are provided to the two ENVG vendors. Once again, this means that ENVG manufacturers, BAE and DRS integrate the government furnished tubes into the ENVG, which saves money.
The fused image will allow the green I2 image to be enhanced by a thermal overlay in orange that indicates a heat signature. This is great for identifying camouflaged targets or those obscured by smoke. Now, the narrow FOV images from the FWS-I can also be integrated into the image, including the reticle, in the correct aspect of the Soldier’s view. This means that Soldiers can observe or engage a target without being directly behind the weapon’s sights. Soldiers can not only see around corners, but shoot around them without exposing themselves. Conversely, if the Soldier looks too far off axis, the FWS-I’s reticle will disappear from view.
With the FWS-I, you are looking at 18-26 degree FOV. The FWS-I significantly increases the effective range from 550 meters for the current issue light TWS out to an astounding 1000m range. This almost two-fold increase is due to focal plane array improvements. Such SWAP improvements also equate to a smaller Soldier load in size and weight.
What About Aiming Lasers?
There’s still a requirement for laser pointers and they aren’t going away. If you’re used to using them, you’ll continue to be able to.
New Helmet Mount On The Way As Well
There is a new single hole, helmet mount assembly that will come with the ENVG III to accommodate this new architecture. This is a government design that has been provided to industry for production and incorporated into all new helmet designs coming out of PM Soldier Protection and Individual Equipment. The full ENVG weighs in just under two lbs along with full battery pack, which also serves as a counterbalance for the sensor.
Who Gets Them and When
ENVG III goes into production this summer with fielding in early FY17. FWS-I is just behind with Low Rate Initial Production beginning this summer. Fielding should commence in late FY18, early FY19.
Fielding priorities are up to the Army but they have already fielded 9,011 ENVG I starting in 2009, with another 16,000 ENVG II in the ensuing years. PEO expects to field 41,000 of the new ENVG III. As you can imagine, there’s quite a bit more capability in the newest version so they’ve got a plan to replace those 9,000-plus original models. There are enough cost savings in this latest buy that they can not only purchase enough ENVG IIIs to replace the initial version, but they’ll even have some spare change.
Due to it’s limited numbers, the ENVG II has essentially been fielded as a sensor for leaders. According to Mr Cheatham, the Basis of Issue Plan for the ENVG III and FWS-I is much more generous. The plan is 24 ENVG III per Infantry platoon and 18 FWS-I per Infantry platoon, across all formations including Infantry, Stryker and Heavy as well as ABCT.
New Capability Spawns New TTPs
Considering Soldiers will more effectively be able to observe and engage targets without being directly behind their weapon, this capability will result in new Tactics, Techniques and Procedures. PEO Soldier has been working with MCOE’s Directorate of Training to identify ways in which this technology can be used so that they can incorporated into doctrine and training programs of instruction.
Some of this information will come with the system’s New Equipment Training which goes to the unit and uses a ‘train-the-trainer’ approach to prepare NCOs to train their subordinates. The planning for this transition to increased use of thermal weapon sights across the force is massive. The Systems Training Plan includes not only matching trainers and units with the fielding schedule but also ammunition and ranges outfitted with thermal target arrays.
Always Use Lithium Batteries
I’ll throw in another plug for Lithium batteries here. The Technical Manuals call for their use with these pieces of equipment. Not only do they provide better power than alkalines, but are more cost effective. Even at a unit cost of 1.5 to 2 times the rate of alkaline batteries, the L91 lithium battery last 5 to 10 times longer. Additionally, lithium batteries offer increased performance in cold weather.
Compatibility Is Key
As these two complimentary programs progress, the PM is working on cross compatibility between vendors to ensure that if a Soldier has a FWS-I from BAE and an ENVG III from DRS (or vice versa) that they work together.
Future Systems
The Family of Weapon Sights will grow to included Sniper and Crew Served Weapon sights, which are in development. A Request For Proposals is coming soon for the Crew Served variant which will offer an onboard display as well as a remote helmet mounted display (HMD). Soldiers manning crew served weapons won’t necessarily be equipped with the fusion goggle so that’s the reason for the dedicated HMD. The Sniper sight is envisioned as a clip on thermal sight that will interface with their daytime glass. It is still in requirement definition.
In Closing
COL Sloane finished the briefing by reiterating that their work with various stakeholders has been vital to the success of these programs. I for one, am pretty excited about the syndergy im seeing with this new capability. I can’t wait to see it placed in the hands of our Soldiers and how it changes the way they fight.
On 7 July, 2015 the US Patent and Trade Office issued Utility Patent 9,074,849, Entitled: “Camouflage for Garment Assembly” to the United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Army. It followed Utility Patent 9,062,938, Entitled: “Camouflage Patterns”, issued two weeks earlier on 23 June, 2015. Both cover Scorpion W20601, initially developed in 2010 by engineers at the Natick Soldier Systems Center and later, after further refinement, recently adopted as the Army’s new Operational Camouflage Pattern.
There are a few curious things about this patent. First off, it’s practically an opus at 59 pages, although admittedly, there are a lot of illustrations. Also, it was issued very quickly, and coincidentally, just in time for the beginning of the Army’s OCP transition. Next, it doesn’t feel like it was written by a patent attorney, but rather by an engineer who was sure to include a great deal of fascinating, although extraneous information on how the pattern was developed and tested. Oddly enough, the Army hasn’t said a peep about it, which is strange considering they continue to assert “appropriate rights to the pattern“. However, once you dig into the details of the patent, you may see why they’ve stayed mum. Finally, the type of data disclosed in the patent tells an interesting story. But before we get to that, let’s address the patent itself.
The Abstract
A garment assembly such as a uniform, a military uniform and a military combat uniform is presented. The garment assembly includes a helmet or head cover being cut from a fabric having a first camouflage pattern with a first set of intermixed colored blotches thereon. The colors of the first set of intermixed colored blotches being selected from a first group of colors including an Olive 527 color, a Dark Green 528 color, a Tan 525 color, a Brown 529 color, a Bark Brown 561 color and a Dark Cream 559 color. The uniform also includes a coat being configured to fit at least a portion of a human torso and a trouser configured to fit at least a portion of human legs, the coat and trouser each being cut from a fabric having a second camouflage pattern with a second set of intermixed colored blotches thereon, the colors of the second set of intermixed colored blotches being selected from a second group of colors comprising an Olive 527 color, a Dark Green 528 color, a Light Sage 560 color, a Tan 525 color, a Brown 529 color, a Bark Brown 561 color and a Dark Cream 559 color.
One could take this revelation at face value, concluding that “the Army did it, they beat Crye!” But not so fast. That Utility Patent might not be all it’s cracked up to be.
Types Of Patents
I’d like to point out that this is a Utility Patent which is very specific and the Army doesn’t seem to have done itself any favors in the specificity of its claims. For those unfamiliar, the claims of a patent are the points that are being protected and the patent itself is essentially a right to exclude, meaning the patent holder gets to decide who can use the intellectual property it protects.
Since it’s a patent, you’ll probably want to immediately put it on the same footing as Crye Precision’s existing MultiCam patent, thinking one cancels out the other. Not so. Lineweight LLC, which is the holding company for all of Crye Precision’s patents, holds a Design Patent for the MultiCam pattern (D592,861). But, a Design Patent is more broad in nature. Think of it as a picture rather than a description of specific elements of the picture.
A Patent’s A Patent, Right?
So what’s the difference between these two types of patents you might ask?
To get around a Utility Patent all you have to do is make changes to what you’ve got until you no longer violate the specific claims of the patent. The more specific the claims are, the easier this is to do.
On the other hand, to determine if someone has violated a Design Patent, they use the “ordinary observer” test. Essentially, if it looks like it infringes to the average person, it does.
At casual inspection, Scorpion W2 sure looks close to me. Just examine this photo. Which swatch of fabric is Scorpion and which is MultiCam?
What’s It All Mean?
While I’m sure Crye Precision is aware of this patent, it’s so new and so restrictive that I doubt they’ll do anything about it. There’s no reason to. Ultimately, the Scorpion patent doesn’t affect Crye’s existing MultiCam IP or any of its contractual agreements with printers. Despite the Army’s new Utility Patent, they will continue to pay a license fee to Crye through the printers in order to use the Scorpion pattern.
Update – Info Regarding Related Patent 9,062,938
The Army fasttracked not just one, but two patents; the “garment assembly” patent which is the main subject of this article, as well as another patent granted about two weeks earlier concerning just the pattern. Both are Utility Patents and contain much the same information regarding the percentages of color used to make up the Scorpion W2 camouflage pattern. While the “Camouflage Patterns” patent also contains all of the extensive information about the ACU and helmet cover substrate, it is just two pages shorter at 57, but does acknowledge up front that it is related to the “garment assembly” patent and incorprates the same data directly from the other patent.
Both patent also include this section:
This is the ‘Hail Mary’ play that the Army has included in the patents. Unfortunately for them, it won’t have the effect the Army has hoped for. They are showing these patents to printers and telling them that they no longer have to pay a royalty. All it seems to be accomplishing is causing further tension in the supply chain as the Army expects businesses to violate contractual obligations and then doesn’t understand why they can’t.
Crye Precision collects the licensing fees for MultiCam and Scorpion from printers through royalty agreements. The Army pays those fees as part of the per unit cost of each garment, just like they do for permethrin treatment. The printers entered into industry standard licensing agreements which were written to protect the MultiCam pattern. It’s business. These patents don’t nullify contracts between Crye Precision and the printers.
It’s All About The Colors
Although the document does go into detail as to why other, prior art camouflage patterns don’t quite work, the actual claims in the Army’s patent revolve mainly around percentages of colors, even down to the tenth of a percentile. That’s right, the Army patented colors. I seem to recall a certain Colonel at PEO Soldier telling the media that Crye couldn’t extend Intellectual Property protection to the colors in the MultiCam pattern and yet, that’s exactly what the Army just did. Feel free to eat some crow on me, Bob.
This heavy reliance on colors to attain the patent is the pattern’s very weakness and may be why the Army hasn’t trumpeted the issue of this Utility Patent, because it literally invites counterfeiters. It is so specific, even the slightest change gets around the limited protection of this patent. In fact, because it contains so much information, the patent itself serves as a recipe on how to get around its very protection. This leaves the Army at the mercy of Crye Precision who has the more expansive Design Patent. It would be up to Crye to determine whether any newly minted Scorpion knockoffs violate the MultiCam patent and then police them.
What About The Bookends?
What does this mean for the so-called bookend patterns? The Army’s new Utility Patent obviously doesn’t protect any color variants due to its specificity, so they wouldn’t be protected by this patent.
And Now, The Rest Of The Story
There’s another, bigger story, lurking in the language of the patent. For over a year now, we’ve been awaiting details on the Army’s rather abbreviated testing used to select the Scorpion pattern. The Army was able to determine in a matter of weeks that Scorpion was the one for them when previous, Camouflage Improvement Effort Phase IV testing had taken well over a year to complete. For some odd reason, they included a great deal of extraneous testing information in the patent, perhaps in their haste to rush the patent through, for the official transition from UCP to OCP on 1 July, 2015.
The application was just submitted on 12 December, 2014. While unusual to be granted so quickly, as I understand it, this is perfectly legal. Although, the application was never published and there was no period for public comment regarding the patent prior to it being granted.
But back to testing. According to the patent, the Army conducted picture-in-picture testing of MultiCam, Scorpion, Digital Transitional Patterns 1 & 2, MARPAT Woodland & Desert and the incumbent Universal Camouflage Pattern across several simulated environments. These were Transitional (Arid, Dormant and Verdant) and Woodland (Dormant and Verdant). This chart (Table 4), embedded in the patent, shows how the patterns performed.
UCP Performs Horribly
Before we go any further, take a gander at UCP’s performance; just abysmal. It makes you wonder how long the Army has known about its performance and how long they ignored it. As it is, this set of testing was conducted in Spring 2014 and we know for sure UCP was also tested during Phase IV, back in 2012 but the Army won’t release those test results.
With Camouflage, Specialization Is A Blessing As Well As A Curse
This chart also validates something else we know to be true. Environmental specific patterns do very well in the environment they are tuned to, but work against the wearer in other environments. Just take a look at the performance of the two MARPAT variants across the environments to see how that works.
Scorpion Doesn’t Perform As Advertised in Arid Environments
The Army also makes an untrue claim in the patent application, declaring the Scorpion pattern, designated 100 in the patent, “significantly better” than all other candidate patterns in the Transitional Arid environment during picture-in-picture testing. As you can see from the patent’s chart, this simply isn’t true. In reality, it performed fifth out of seven patterns. Considering that America’s Army continues to be engaged with our enemies in Arid regions, this is ridiculous to purposefully adopt a pattern that performs worse than what they’ve already got. They made a similar claim regarding the Woodland Dormant environment but naturally, Scorpion was outperformed by the encironmentally specific MARPAT Woodland.
Turns Out, MultiCam Is Best
Despite explaining in the patent why MultiCam doesn’t work, testing demonstrated otherwise. What we learn, from the Army’s own published research, is that OCP aka Scorpion W2 doesn’t perform as well as OEFCP aka MultiCam, except in one environment, the Woodland Dormant environment (think fall and winter). Let me put it another way. According to Army testing, MultiCam outperforms Scorpion in four out of five critical operating environments. And yet, the Army adopted Scorpion anyway and is paying Crye Precision a royalty for this lesser performing pattern. Scorpion or MultiCam, Crye Precision receives a royalty. The Army spent time and taxpayer money to develop a pattern that performs less well than what they already had. In summation, the uniforms our Soldiers are getting now (OCP) don’t perform as well as the uniforms they were issued even a month ago (OEFCP).
Bottom Line
Based on the data presented in the patent, you can only come to one conclusion. When you consider cost and performance, the Army should just drop the charade and fully adopt Crye’s MultiCam. Even better, the Army would gain access to Crye’s environmental specialty patterns which are already seeing limited operational use with certain customers.
A Note To Readers:
I’d like to wrap this up by pointing out that I am not a lawyer, but I did read the patent, and that for brevity, I’ve described some things, like types of patents, in rather generic terms. I’ll let the actual patent attorneys argue over the intricacies of Intellectual Property law but I’m sure there will be plenty of others who also want to chime in. All I ask is that you have an idea of what you are talking about and are prepared to explain the basis of any comments.
This article was updated on 16 July, 2015 to add imformation about patent 9,062,938 “Camouflage Patterns”, 23 June, 2015.
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (July 8, 2015) – The U.S. Army moved closer to releasing its long-awaited solicitation for a new, modern handgun system when it hosted a fourth industry day for interested vendors earlier today at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J.
The Army named the new weapon the “XM-17” Modular Handgun System. It will replace the current M9 standard Army handgun with a more state-of-the-art weapon system.
“More than 20 companies attended the event,” said Debi Dawson, PEO Soldier spokesperson.
Federal procurement restrictions do not allow the disclosure of the names of firms participating, she added.
The government presented changes to its latest draft solicitation for the XM-17 that were posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website on June 8 under Solicitation Number W15QKN15R0001, according to Dawson.
At the event today, among changes discussed was policy that now opens up the competition to rounds other than ball (full metal jacket) ammunition.
A representative from the Army Judge Advocate General’s Office discussed the decision in detail during the event.
Richard Jackson, Special Assistant to the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General for Law of War, told attendees that federal, state, local and military law enforcement elements routinely use expanding and fragmenting ammunition in their handguns due to the increased capability it provides against threats.
“Expanding the XM-17 Modular Handgun competition to include special purpose ammunition will provide the Warfighter with a more accurate and lethal handgun,” he said.
“Other types of ammunition allow the XM-17 Modular Handgun System to be optimized by vendors, providing a more capable system to Warfighters across the spectrum of shooter experience and skill level.”
Through the upcoming competition, the Army intends to replace the M9 with a more modern handgun system.
“Handgun technology has advanced significantly thanks to lighter-weight materials, ergonomics and accessory rails since 1986 when the M9 entered the Army’s inventory,” Dawson said.
“The Army is seeking a handgun system that outperforms the current M9 system. It also must be modular, meaning it allows adjustments to fit all hand sizes.”
The Army is encouraging Industry to optimize commercially available gun, ammunition and magazine components in order to provide a system for maximum performance.
Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 of the new handguns from a single vendor. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2018.
The Army also plans to buy approximately 7,000 compact versions of the new handgun.
Dawson said that other military services participating in the XM-17 program may order an additional 212,000 systems above the Army quantity.
The draft solicitation spells out likely procedural and schedule details that responding vendors will have to follow to participate in the competition.
We just received this notice from PEO Soldier. The XM17 Modular Handgun System is meant to replace the current M9 pistol across DoD.
XM17 draft request for proposals released
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Jun. 17, 2015) – The U.S. Army Program Executive Office Soldier announced today that a draft solicitation for a new military handgun was released on the Federal Business Opportunities website. This announcement follows the agency’s notice that the Army intends to host a fourth industry day July 7-8 at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J., to discuss the document and receive feedback from industry.
The draft lays out the latest proposed competition schedule, procedures and requirements for the XM17 Modular Handgun System. These were modified as a result of industry feedback and DoD’s decision to allow use of special purpose ammunition. It gives industry a final opportunity to review and provide feedback on the Army’s refined strategy prior to release of the final RFP.
Program Manager for Soldier Weapons, Colonel Scott Armstrong said the Army will procure the XM17 through full and open competition.
“We expect to release the final solicitation in 2016,” he said. “This will be followed a phased down-select process that will run through 2017.”
“When all is said and done,” Armstrong said, “the XM17 will provide Warfighters with greater accuracy, target acquisition, ergonomic design.” “The new handgun will also be more reliable, durable and easier to maintain.”
“Each vendor may provide up to two separate proposals of handguns with different calibers to the Army for evaluation and testing in early 2016,” he said.
“Our strategy will take full advantage of a world-class industrial base. Vendors must submit mature designs that are production ready. They are free to select a caliber that best meets the XM17 requirements.”
The XM17 is expected to be more effective and lethal than the Army’s current pistol. Current plans call for the Army to purchase more than 280,000 handguns from a single vendor, with full rate production scheduled for 2018. The Army also plans to buy approximately 7,000 compact versions of the handgun. The other military services participating in the XM17 program may order an additional 212,000 systems.
The updated Draft RFP page is www.fbo.gov and the latest version of the draft is now available.
