The Land Warrior Soldier System: a Case Study for the Acquisition of Soldier Systems
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2008-12 The Land Warrior Soldier System: a case study for the acquisition of soldier systems Clifton, Nile L., Jr. Monterey, California, Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/38046 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA MBA PROFESSIONAL REPORT The Land Warrior Soldier System: A Case Study for the Acquisition of Soldier Systems By: Nile L. Clifton Jr. Douglas W. Copeland December 2008 Advisors: Keith Snider Michael W. Boudreau Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 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 2008 MBA Professional Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS The Land Warrior Soldier System: A Case Study for the Acquisition of Soldier Systems 6. AUTHOR(S) Major Nile L. Clifton; Major Douglas W. Copeland 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION ADDRESS(ES) REPORT NUMBER Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING ADDRESS(ES) AGENCY REPORT NUMBER N/A 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) This project provides an analysis of the Army’s acquisition of the Land Warrior (LW) Soldier System. Its objectives are to document the history of the LW and provide an overview of the program to establish the components of both its development and deployment and its associated business and management characteristics. The product is a document that provides an analysis of the actions taken and the obstacles encountered and how the materiel developers, warfighters, user representatives and lawmakers dealt with them. The LW need was approved in 1993. The requirement was to provide improvements for dismounted soldiers in the five specific capability categories of lethality, command and control, mobility, survivability, and sustainment. For a period lasting approximately 15 years, the LW has evolved. Despite this evolution, the Army in FY 2007 terminated it in FY 2007. Regardless, it has laid the foundation for follow-on soldier system initiatives. The LW was unsuccessful initially due to the misalignment of three interrelated and supporting components; 1) technical immaturity, 2) poor user acceptance, and 3) lack of senior leadership support. Successes that are more recent can be attributed to: 1) soldier-driven design, 2) improved technical maturity, and 3) proven employment of the system in combat by warfighters. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Land Warrior, Land Warrior Soldier System, Soldier as a 15. NUMBER OF PAGES System, Ground Soldier Ensemble, 4-9 Infantry Battalion, Unit System Integrators, 345 TCM Soldier, PEO Solider, Program Manager Soldier Warrior, Product Manager Land 16. PRICE CODE Warrior, General Dynamics C4 Systems, Net-Centric Warfare 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION ABSTRACT REPORT THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UU NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THE LAND WARRIOR SOLDIER SYSTEM: A CASE STUDY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF SOLDIER SYSTEMS Nile L. Clifton Jr., Major, United States Army Douglas W. Copeland, Major, United States Army Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL December 2008 Authors: _______________________________ Nile L. Clifton Jr. _______________________________ Douglas W. Copeland Approved by: _______________________________ Dr. Keith Snider, Lead Advisor ___________________________________ Professor Mike Boudreau, Support Advisor _____________________________________ Terry Rea, CAPT, USN Acting Dean, Graduate School of Business and Public Policy iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv THE LAND WARRIOR SOLDIER SYSTEM: A CASE STUDY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF SOLDIER SYSTEMS ABSTRACT This project provides an analysis of the Army’s acquisition of the Land Warrior (LW) Soldier System. Its objectives are to document the history of the LW and provide an overview of the program to establish the components of both its development and deployment and its associated business and management characteristics. The product is a document that provides an analysis of the actions taken and the obstacles encountered and how the materiel developers, warfighters, user representatives and lawmakers dealt with them. The LW need was approved in 1993. The requirement was to provide improvements for dismounted soldiers in the five specific capability categories of lethality, command and control, mobility, survivability, and sustainment. For a period lasting approximately 15 years, the LW has evolved. Despite this evolution, the Army in FY 2007 terminated it in FY 2007. Regardless, it has laid the foundation for follow-on soldier system initiatives. The LW was unsuccessful initially due to the misalignment of three interrelated and supporting components; 1) technical immaturity, 2) poor user acceptance, and 3) lack of senior leadership support. Successes that are more recent can be attributed to: 1) soldier-driven design, 2) improved technical maturity, and 3) proven employment of the system in combat by warfighters. v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 A. BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................3 B. OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH OF THIS STUDY .................................5 C. SCOPE ..............................................................................................................7 D. ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT..........................................................7 II. THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR THE LAND WARRIOR SYSTEM..........9 A. AN ABBREVIATED HISTORY OF THE LW SOLDIER SYSTEM......10 B. SOLDIER SYSTEM ORIGINS....................................................................10 C. THE SOLDIER’S COMPUTER ..................................................................11 D. SIPE ATD .......................................................................................................12 E. THE LW SOLDIER SYSTEM.....................................................................15 F. LW VERSION 0.6..........................................................................................17 G. LW INITIAL CAPABILITY (LW-IC) BLOCK I......................................21 H. LW BLOCK II ...............................................................................................23 I. LW STRYKER INTEROPERABLE (LW-SI) - “MANCHU”..................25 J. LW SUPPORTING STUDIES AND RELATED RESEARCH ................27 K. 1991 ARMY SCIENCE BOARD (ASB) SUMMER STUDY.....................28 L. 1994 ASB AD-HOC STUDY “TECHNOLOGY FOR THE FUTURE LW”.................................................................................................................29 M. UNITED STATES GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE (GAO) 1996 REPORT.........................................................................................................31 N. USAIC 1997 DISMOUNTED SOLDIER STUDY......................................32 O. GAO 1999 REPORT......................................................................................32 P. 2001 ASB SUMMER STUDY.......................................................................34 Q. 2002 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (DOD IG) REPORT..........................................35 III. THE LW MATERIEL DEVELOPERS’ PERSPECTIVES..................................37 A. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................37 B. 21ST CENTURY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES..........38 C. PM TENETS FOR MANAGING COMPLEXITY ....................................42 D. ACQUISITION STRATEGY .......................................................................44 E. LAND WARRIOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT....................................46 1. 2001......................................................................................................47 2. 2002......................................................................................................48 3. 2003......................................................................................................50