DOCSLIB.ORG

Rogers, Joseph O'donnell

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rogers, Joseph O'donnell ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS Rogers Joseph O'Donnell is highly respected as one of the leading government contracts law firms in the country. For several years the firm has been recognized by Chambers USA as one of the top eight government contracts law firms in the nation and "far and away the best government contracts lawyers on the West Coast." Three of our lawyers have been identified as among the nation’s leading government contracts lawyers. Allan Joseph and Neil O’Donnell are in our San Francisco office. Bob Metzger has opened our new office in Washington, D.C. For thirty years, RJO has been committed to excellence in public sector procurement. Allan Joseph and Neil O’Donnell have earned distinction for their experience, expertise and the wisdom accumulated from their years of practice. Their specialties include civil litigation in government procurement and construction projects, terminations, bid protests, investigations and defense of actions under the False Claims Act. Bob Metzger brings diverse skills and accomplishments to RJO. Recognized for his scholarly work in areas such as bid protests and Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI), Bob is an accomplished litigator who has represented leading companies in civil litigation and in defense of False Claims Act cases. Allan, Neil and Bob enable RJO to offer strategic counseling services to sophisticated clients which leverages the breadth of their experience, their industry knowledge, and their recognized subject matter expertise in government contracts policy and law. They enjoy the support of a very deep bench which includes shareholders Mark Linderman, Pat Meagher, Thomas Blanford, Gayle Athenacio and Aaron Silberman, as well as a team of dedicated associates. The value proposition of RJO is straightforward. RJO offers the agility and responsiveness of a small firm with the credentials, concentration of expertise and depth of a large firm. Reflecting its lean operation and the commitment of its government contracts team, RJO can staff matters and deliver services at budgets which many competitors cannot match. Because of the breadth of our practice, government contractor clients benefit from our experience on prior cases. With our new office in Washington, D.C., our government contracts attorneys handle all aspects of government contracting at the federal, state and local levels throughout the country. With Bob Metzger’s presence, we also advise aerospace and defense companies in international procurement opportunities. RJO’s practice encompasses counsel on response to solicitation and procurement requirements, teaming and joint venture agreements, bid protests, claims, cost allowability and CAS, negotiation and drafting of prime contracts and subcontracts, procurement integrity, conflict of interest and ethics matters, matters arising from allegations of fraud, labor, rights in data and computer software, and general counseling in the voluminous and complex web of federal, state and local regulations that apply to government contracts. Our government contracts lawyers practice in federal and state courts, before the Boards of Contract Appeals, in the United States Court of Federal Claims and in the Federal Circuit. We regularly handle protests before the GAO. In addition to handling litigation and appeals, we also are skilled at mediation and arbitration. We are regularly called upon to conduct internal investigations. We assist in preparing voluntary disclosure and in dealing with federal and state compliance, oversight and enforcement agencies. We have extensive experience defending actions brought under the False Claims Act. Reflecting our subject area expertise, RJO attorneys regularly advise clients in business planning, risk assessment and compliance matters. We assist in M&A and other transactional roles, such as due diligence, in corporate deals involving government contractors. Allan Joseph was a lead editor in an ABA book on best practices in government contractor acquisitions. Bob Metzger has acted as a strategic 307605.1 ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com advisor on domestic and international business ventures involving government contractors and has managed complex aerospace and defense business projects. RJO encourages its government contract lawyers to be active in the bar and trade associations. Two of our shareholders, Allan Joseph and Pat Meagher, are past Chairpersons of the ABA’s Public Contracts Section, and Aaron Silberman is a member of the leadership council of the Section. Bob Metzger is an officer of the Aerospace & Defense Industries Committee of the Section of International Law. Our shareholders regularly lecture and publish on major developments in public sector procurement. Representative List of Clients Accenture, LLP, Apple Computer, AT&T, ATK Thiokol, Agilent Technologies, BAE Systems, Brown and Caldwell, Deloitte Consulting, DynCorp International, Educational Testing Services, Gateway Inc., Health Net, Hewlett Packard Corporation, Hexcel Corporation, Honeywell, John Bean Technologies, Karem Aircraft, Kiewit Corporation, KLA Tencor, Inter-Con Security Systems, Lockheed Martin, Molina Healthcare, Northrop Grumman, SAP America, Stanford University, URS Corporation, Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Visionary Integration Professionals (ViP) Representative Cases and Issues • Representation of Northrop Grumman in its dispute with Boeing over the award by the U.S. Air Force of a $40 billion contract for aerial refueling tankers • Representation of Accenture LLP in its dispute over the performance of an IT services contract for the State of Colorado • Representation of Deloitte Consulting in successful protest of award of an IT services contract by the State of California. • Representation of Hewlett Packard in connection with its acquisition of Electronic Data Systems Corporation • Representation of Accenture LLP in successful defense of bid protest against $450 million “best value” contract award • Representation of PlanetSpace in its dispute at the GAO with SpaceX and Orbital Sciences Corporation over the award by NASA of $3 billion in contracts for commercial resupply of the International Space Station • Representation of Ticketmaster in litigation at the Court of Federal Claims where an awarding federal agency disregarded the results of a GAO bid protest • Representation of MCI and Pacific Bell in defense against bid protest and writ actions challenging the State of California award of a $1 billion telecommunications contract • Representation of AT&T in litigation with local governments in California seeking to establish the carrier’s right to offer video services via a telephone network without local “franchise” • Representation of Filtration Development in successful OCI challenge at Court of Federal Claims to Army contract awards for helicopter systems. • Representation of a California manufacturer in successful defense against criminal and civil False Claims actions alleging nonconforming aircraft parts. 307605.1 ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL www.rjo.com • Representation of Applied Technology before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in a contract dispute between contractor and U.S. Air Force over cost accounting issue of first impression • Representation of Northrop Grumman Information Technology in connection with challenges to and investigation of State of California Software Enterprise License Agreement • Integrity Management International, Inc. v. Secretary of the Army, United States District Court, San Francisco; successfully overturned award of contract to client’s competitor • Lockheed v. Garrett, et al., United States District Court, Central District of California; enjoined Navy from withholding $124 million in unliquidated progress payments • Representation of Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. in successful GAO protests of guard contracts at U.S. Embassies in Ivory Coast and Guatemala • San Joaquin Helicopters v. State of California; Dyn Corp. Technical Services, Real Party in Interest; successful defense in California Superior Court and Court of Appeal of protest to award of contract for operation and maintenance of State firefighting airplanes • Titan Systems v. General Electric, United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania; disputed contract between prime and subcontractor on government contract • United States ex rel. Boisvert v. FMC Corporation, United States District Court, San Jose; amendment to False Claims Act held not retroactive • Representation of United Defense, L.P. in termination for convenience of Crusader program • Representation of HealthNet in successful defense of challenge to award of California Medicaid contract • Representation of BAE Systems in defense of Navy’s claim for environmental clean-up costs at a former government owned, contractor operated site For information contact: ROGERS JOSEPH O'DONNELL Neil H. O’Donnell 311 California Street (10th Flr) San Francisco, CA 94104 415.365.5355 direct | 415.956.2828 main 415.956.6457 fax Robert S. Metzger 750 Ninth Street, N.W., Suite 710 | Washington, D.C. 20001 202.777.8951 direct | 202.777.8950 main | 415.956.6457 fax 213.880.4224 mobile [email protected] www.rjo.com 307605.1 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mp-Avt-108-56
    UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED Active Defense Systems (ADS) Program – Formerly Integrated Army Active Protection System Program (IAAPS) Mr. Charles Acir USA TARDEC AMSTA-TR-R MS211 6501 East 11 Mile Road (Building 200) Warren, Michigan 48397-5000 586 574-6737 [email protected] Mr. Mark Middione United Defense, Advanced Development Center 328 West Brokaw Road, MS M51 Santa Clara, California 95052 408 289-2626 [email protected] SUMMARY United Defense’s Advanced Development Center was selected as the prime contractor for a program currently known as the Integrated Army Active Protection System in 1997. Along with our teammates, BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman Space Technology, United Defense performed a series of technology investigations, conducted simulation-supported concept development and down-selected to a best value integrated survivability suite (ISS) consisting of an optimal mix of armor, electronic warfare sensors, processors and soft kill countermeasure, and hard kill active protection in November of 1998. At that point the program transitioned to a development and demonstration phase in which the United Defense led team designed and fabricated the selected survivability suite (ISS), integrated the ISS onto a customer-selected EMD version BFVA3 test-bed and conducted live threat defeat testing. Static testing against a wide array of live threats successfully concluded in September of 2002. By December of 02, the IAAPS team was back at the range with the test-bed reconfigured for on-the-move (OTM) testing. Successful OTM defeats were conducted with the soft kill countermeasure in January of 2003, with hard kill defeats conducted in February through May of 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • United Defense Industries
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FORM S-1/A General form of registration statement for all companies including face-amount certificate companies [amend] Filing Date: 2001-11-30 SEC Accession No. 0000950109-01-505339 (HTML Version on secdatabase.com) FILER UNITED DEFENSE INDUSTRIES INC Mailing Address Business Address 1525 WILSON BLVD 1525 WILSON BLVD CIK:1051719| IRS No.: 522059782 | State of Incorp.:DE | Fiscal Year End: 1231 SUITE 700 SUITE 700 Type: S-1/A | Act: 33 | File No.: 333-71986 | Film No.: 1803159 ARLINGTON VA 22209-2411 ARLINGTON VA 22209-2411 SIC: 3790 Miscellaneous transportation equipment 7033126100 Copyright © 2012 www.secdatabase.com. All Rights Reserved. Please Consider the Environment Before Printing This Document As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 30, 2001 Registration No. 333-71986 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 ----------------- Amendment No. 1 to FORM S-1 REGISTRATION STATEMENT Under THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 ----------------- United Defense Industries, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) ----------------- <TABLE> <S> <C> <C> Delaware 3790 52-2059782 (State or Other Jurisdiction of (Primary Standard Industrial (IRS Employer Incorporation or Organization) Classification Number) Identification No.) </TABLE> 1525 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 700 Arlington, Virginia 22209 (703) 312-6100 (Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Registrant's Principal Executive Offices) ----------------- Thomas W. Rabaut President and Chief Executive Officer United Defense Industries, Inc. 1525 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 700 Arlington, Virginia 22209 (703) 312-6100 (Name, Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Agent for Service) ----------------- Copies to: <TABLE> <S> <C> Scott C.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Transformation and the Defense Industry After Next
    U.S. Naval War College U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons Newport Papers Special Collections 2003 Military Transformation and the Defense Industry after Next Peter J. Dombrowski Eugene Gholz Andrew L. Ross Follow this and additional works at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers Recommended Citation Dombrowski, Peter J.; Gholz, Eugene; and L., Andrew Ross, "Military Transformation and the Defense Industry after Next" (2003). Newport Papers. 17. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers/17 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Newport Papers by an authorized administrator of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cover This perspective aerial view of Newport, Rhode Island, drawn and published by Galt & Hoy of New York, circa 1878, is found in the American Memory Online Map Collections: 1500–2003, of the Library of Congress Geography and Map Division, Washington, D.C. The map may be viewed at http://hdl.loc.gov/ loc.gmd/g3774n.pm008790 Military Transformation and the Defense Industry after Next The Defense Industrial Implications of Network-Centric Warfare Peter J. Dombrowski Eugene Gholz Andrew L. Ross NAVAL WAR COLLEGE 686 Cushing Road Newport, Rhode Island 02841-1207 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dombrowski, Peter J., 1963– Military transformation and the defense industry after next: the defense industrial implications of network-centric warfare / Peter J. Dombrowski, Eugene Gholz, Andrew L. Ross. p.
    [Show full text]
  • The Defence Industry in the 21St Century
    The Defence Industry in the 21st Century “With nine countries (and their collective industrial prowess) involved in its development, the F-35 repre- sents a new model of inter- national cooperation, ensuring affordable U.S. and coalition partner security well into the 21st century” – Sources: Photograph by US Department of Defense, Quote by Lockheed Martin Corporation Thinking Global … or thinking American? “With nine countries (and their collective industrial prowess) involved in its development, the F-35 represents a new model of international cooperation, ensuring affordable U.S. and coalition partner security well into the 21st century” – Sources: Photograph by US Department of Defense, Quote by Lockheed Martin Corporation Welcome The purpose of this paper is to provoke a debate. To stimulate further the dialogue we enjoy with our clients around the world. As the world’s largest professional services firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers works with clients in every segment of the defence industry – from the Americas to the whole of Europe; from the Middle East and Africa to Asia and the Pacific Rim. On many occasions, our discussions focus on the technical issues in which we are pre-eminently well-qualified to advise. Here, however, we seek to debate the issues that affect your industry. To review the factors that shaped today’s environment, to assess the implications for contractors and to look at the factors that might shape the future. Our views are set out in the following pages. We have debated some of these issues with some of our clients already but the time is right for a broader discus- sion.
    [Show full text]
  • Europeantransatlanticarmscoope
    ISB?: 960-8124-26-3 © 2003 Defence Analysis Institute 17, Valtetsiou Street 10680 Athens, Greece Tel.: (210) 3632902 Fax: (210) 3632634 web-site: www.iaa.gr e-mail: [email protected] Preface Introduction The European Defence Industrial Base and ESDP RESTRUCTURING OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE INDUSTRY THE INDUSTRY-LED RESTRUCTURING PROCESS. 1997-1999: the European defence industry under pressure 13 Firms seek economies of scale and enlargement of the market State/industry consensus on the need for industrial consolidation From international cooperation to transnational integration 18 The first cooperative programmes, common subsidiaries and joint ventures Privatisation Concentration Groups with diversified activities Appraisal by sector of activities 27 Defence aerospace and electronics: a strategy of segment consolidation The land and naval armaments sectors: an industrial scene divided along national lines Trends in European defence industrial direct employment 37 Overview Situation by country THE OPERATING ENVIRONMENT 41 The permanence of the Europe/United States imbalance 43 Unfavourable conditions... …in the face of the American strategy of expansion in Europe First initiatives aimed at creating a favourable environment for European defence industries 48 Creation of ad hoc structures by the principal armaments producing countries (Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain and Sweden) First steps towards an institutional strategy for the EU in the field of armaments ALL-UNION INITIATIVES, ENHANCED COOPERATION AND CONVERGENCE OBJECTIVES
    [Show full text]
  • Northrop Grumman Douglas Helicopter Co
    FutureFuture CombatCombat SystemsSystems Cari Garrison FCS SM&P Director The 7th Annual Army Small Business Conference Export Controlled: Not Releasable to a Foreign Person or Representative of a Foreign Interest. File Name.ext “GOVERNMENT PURPOSE RIGHTS The Government is granted Government Purpose Rights to this Data or Software. Use, duplication, or disclosure is subject to the restrictions as stated in Agreement 1 MDA972-02-9-0005 between The Boeing Company and the Government.” FCS Small Business Policy • FCS policy is to actively encourage and seek out Small/Diversity Business participation • The FCS SDD contract awarded to the Lead Systems Integrator (LSI) establishes small business goals • The LSI has a small business subcontracting plan that is aligned to be SDD contract goals. The LSI recognizes the benefits of a Small Business File Name.ext Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited, Unclassified 2 FCS Goals FCS SDD Goals (% of Boeing subcontracted Dollars) Small Business 17.5% Small Disadvantaged Business 3.5% 2.5% Woman Owned Small Business 0.3% Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business 1.5% Veteran Owned Small Business 0.2% Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business File Name.ext Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited, Unclassified 3 Contracting Approach • Broad Industry Announcements (BIA’s) – Utilize BIA process to identify and include the Best of Industry for FCS – Significant industry participation (over 4500 proposals evaluated) • Conducted Nine industry briefings with over 1100
    [Show full text]
  • United States Companies' Corporate Structure-Rev 4 4 February 2003 European Ownership of U.S
    Revision 4 United States Companies' Corporate Structure-Rev 4 4 February 2003 European Ownership of U.S. Companies The Boeing Company Raytheon Ltd. General Electric Ltd. Lockheed Martin Ltd. BAE Systems plc 40% Tanker Transport 100% Malaga, S.A. 50% CFM Intl (with Snecma) 50% LMATTS (with Alenia) Support Company, plc 50% Sika International BAES No. America Ltd. 50% Aviation Training 49% Indra ATM, S.A. (with BAE Systems) 100% BAES Canada Inc. Intl (Other 50% Boeing) (Other 51% Indra) 50% MEADS Intl 40% Tanker Transport 35% Aero Vodochody 50% TRS (Ireland) with Thales ( Other 50% AMS / EADS) Support Company, Ltd. (Other 65% Czech Govermnt 50% “Florako” with Thales 50% GLVS (PAC-3) 33% Team Lancer (with 100% Boeing Australia Ltd. General Motors Ltd. (with EADS) Alvis; Raytheon; BAES) 33% Team Lancer (with Alvis; 50% Bell-Boeing (V-22) 20% Fiat S.p.A UDLP; BAEs) 50% Longbow Intl (w/NG) 50% Sika International 50% Boeing-Sikorsky (RAH-66) (with BAES) 100% Raytheon Systems, 100% LM GmbH Canada Ltd. 37.5% MBDA Ltd. 49% Flight Safety Boeing 100% Lockheed Martin, 50% Air Command Systems, UK, Ltd. 100% MBDA-US Inc Intl (with Thales) General Dynamics Ltd. 100% MBDA Inc 100% Raytheon Systems, Ltd. 100% Santa Barbara, S.A. 81% LFK Missiles and Air Defence Systems 100% Raytheon Systems 100% General Dynamics United Defense Ltd. Carlyle Group Company, Australia Canada Ltd. 33% EUROMEADS 33% Team Lancer (with Alvis; 100% Gen Dynamics UK, Ltd. 50% MEADS Int'l 33% QinetiQ 100% Raytheon GmbH Raytheon; BAes)BAE Systems) (Other 50% LM) 50% GLVS (PAC-3) (W/ Lockheed Martin) Northrop Grumman Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study on the Relationship Between Opm-Crusader, Udlp, and Tacom-Ardec in the Development of the Crusader Armament
    NPS ARCHIVE 1997.12 COLE, W. NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California THESIS A CASE STUDY ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OPM-CRUSADER, UDLP, AND TACOM-ARDEC IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CRUSADER ARMAMENT by William E. Cole December 1997 Principal Advisor: Michael W. Boudreau Thesis Associate Advisor: Sandra M. Desbrow C5328 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DUDLEY KNOX LIBRARY SCHOOL NAVAL POSTGRADUATE MONTEREY CA 93943-5101 REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED December 1997 Master's Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS A CASE STUDY ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OPM- CRUSADER, UDLP, AND TACOM-ARDEC IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CRUSADER ARMAMENT 6. AUTHOR(S) Cole, William E. 8. PERFORMING 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) ORGANIZATION REPORT Naval Postgraduate School NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/ MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Defense Industrial Base Past, Present and Future
    STRATEGY FOR THE LONG H AU L The US Defense Industrial Base Past, Present and Future BY BARRY D. WATTS II CSBA > Strategy for the Long Haul About the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute es- tablished to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, security policy and resource allocation. CSBA provides timely, impartial and insightful analyses to senior decision makers in the executive and legislative branches, as well as to the media and the broader national security community. CSBA encourages thoughtful partici- pation in the development of national security strategy and policy, and in the allocation of scarce human and capital re- sources.ABOUT CSBA’s CSBA analysis and outreach focus on key ques- tions related to existing and emerging threats to US national security. Meeting these challenges will require transform- ing the national security establishment, and we are devoted to helping achieve this end. About the Author Barry D. Watts, Senior Fellow, is an expert on a range of topics, including air power, Air Force transformation, net assessment, and the military use of space. He headed the Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation in the Defense of Department during 2001–2002. Following retirement from the Air Force in 1986, Watts worked for, and later directed, the Northrop Grumman Analysis Center. His recent publications include US Fighter Modernization Plans (with Steve Kosiak), Six Decades of Guided Munitions and Battle Networks, and Long-Range Strike: Imperatives, Urgency and Options.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Potential for Civil-Military Integration: Technologies, Processes, and Practices
    Assessing the Potential for Civil-Military Integration: Technologies, Processes, and Practices September 1994 OTA-ISS-611 NTIS order #PB95-109666 GPO stock #052-003-01394-1 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Assessing therhe Potential for Civil-MilitaryCi\’il-Military Integration: Technologies, Processes, and Practices, OTA-lSS-611 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1994). hn ,aiL- hy the I: .S. ('UVl'rTllllent "flntin),! OfficL' SupcrinlL'llliL'nt 01 DucUIlll'nh. 1\1ail Stop: SSOP. \'v'a'hin),!ton. DC 204()2-l).~2K ISBN 0-16-045309-7 .— Foreword merica's national security and economic well-being have long rested on its techno- logical and industrial prowess. Over the four-decade-long Cold War, the Nation’s defense technology and industrial base became largely isolated from the commer- A cial base, thus losing some of the benefits of the larger base. This isolation raised the cost of many defense goods and services, reduced defense access to fast-moving commercial technologies, and made it difficult for commercial firms to exploit the results of the Nation’s large defense science and technology investments. Government officials and private sector executives have advocated the integration of the defense and commercial sectors (often termed civil-military integration or CMI). The claimed benefits of CM I include cost savings, increased technology transfer, and an increase in the number of potential defense suppliers. A CM I strategy, however, demands extensive modification of acquisition laws and regulations, and concerns over potential costs and risks of such modifications have hindered change. Although several congressional and adminis- tration initiatives have been launched to promote integration, to date, much of the defense base remains isolated and the promised benefits of integration remain elusive.
    [Show full text]
  • Delivering Real Advantage
    BAE SYSTEMS plc Annual Report BAE SYSTEMS plc Annual Report 2005 6 Carlton Gardens London SW1Y 5AD United Kingdom Telephone +44 (0)1252 373232 Registered in England and Wales No. 1470151 Website details www.baesystems.com 2005 Bradley A3 In 2005 BAE Systems acquired United Defense, who have produced the Bradley Combat System for over 20 years. The Bradley family of vehicles is a key vehicle system for the US Army supporting a variety of missions. Delivering real advantage BAE SYSTEMS plc Annual Report BAE SYSTEMS plc Annual Report 2005 6 Carlton Gardens London SW1Y 5AD United Kingdom Telephone +44 (0)1252 373232 Registered in England and Wales No. 1470151 Website details www.baesystems.com 2005 Bradley A3 In 2005 BAE Systems acquired United Defense, who have produced the Bradley Combat System for over 20 years. The Bradley family of vehicles is a key vehicle system for the US Army supporting a variety of missions. Delivering real advantage Operating and financial review BAE Systems at a glance BAE Systems is the premier transatlantic defence and aerospace company delivering a full range of products and services for air,land and naval forces as well as advanced electronics, information technology solutions and customer support services. Electronics, Land & Armaments Programmes Customer Solutions Integrated Systems Commercial Intelligence & Support & Support & Partnerships Aerospace Principal operations An industry leader in a variety of A global leader in the design, Comprises the Company’s air Provides support solutions for current Comprises
    [Show full text]
  • Land Combat Systems Industry
    Spring 2007 Industry Study Final Report Land Combat Systems Industry <insert ICAF graphic here> The Industrial College of the Armed Forces National Defense University Fort McNair, Washington, D.C. 20319-5062 i Land Combat Systems 2007 ABSTRACT: The seminar surveyed the state of the U.S. Land Combat System industry. The study found that the current LCS industry has responded well to the demands of wartime production. Funding fluctuations, Berry Amendment requirements, and long lead times contributed to delays in some procurements, leading the study to make recommendations for improvements to wartime acquisition processes. In the near future, the demand for tactical wheeled vehicles will increase because the Iraq conflict has led to a new emphasis on survivability. Commanders want their trucks armored, networked, and carrying weapons. Current plans also call for an increase in the demand for combat vehicles. Refurbishment and modernization will continue on current systems, and new systems are in development now. A combination of budget problems make it unlikely, however, that DoD will be able to afford to fund all its programs while retaining its current industrial base. DoD may have to make hard decisions about whether to consolidate government depots, and the drop-off in funding may cause more mergers and acquisitions in industry. The study concludes with recommendations for how the United States should manage the industrial base during the inevitable funding drop-off if it wants to be ready for the next war. COL Yousef Al Sheybah, United Arab Emirates Army Lt Col Robert T. Atkins, US Air Force Ms. Jean Beal, Department of the Navy Mr.
    [Show full text]