Listen to the article
The Air Force is sweeping some of the offices that oversee its acquisition programs into groups with similar missions, part of an effort that aligns with—but also predates—recent acquisition-reform guidance issued by the defense secretary.
On Thursday, service officials revealed the first five of the new groups and the “portfolio acquisition executives” who will run them:
Ostensibly, these new PAEs replace and supersede program executive officers who were focused on narrower efforts. But most of the uniformed and civilian PAEs were already running acquisition efforts focused on sets of related missions rather than individual programs.
The new roles were seen as a key part of Hegseth’s November speech and memo to overhaul the existing defense industrial base and encourage faster acquisitions.
While some defense experts have praised the PAE model, one former defense official said the Air Force already had many of its portfolios more broadly focused on mission sets.
“From the Air Force perspective, they were pretty well aligned with mission sets to begin with,” the former official told Defense One. “Good things are happening here, but for the Air Force it’s more of a continuation of work that’s been going on for some time.”
The Space Force will also have two PAEs to oversee acquisitions related to space access and space-based sensing and targeting missions, according to a department news release. An Air Force spokesperson did not respond with the names of the new space-related PAEs by publication time.
“This transformation is a generational opportunity for the Department of the Air Force,” Air Force Secretary Troy Meink said in the news release. “It enables us to holistically reform our enterprise—from requirements, to acquisition, to test—in order to support the rapid and efficient development of our warfighting capabilities in order to get the operators what they need when they need it.”
But many of the service’s marquee acquisition programs now have been taken over by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Weeks after Hegseth’s speech, the Pentagon took over oversight of the Air Force’s biggest and costliest programs, sweeping them into a “Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapons Systems.” Air Force Lt. Gen. Dale White was nominated to the role, which oversees programs such as the Sentinel and Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, the B-21 bomber, the F-47 fighter jet, and the VC-25B presidential aircraft.
Read the full article here
19 Comments
The creation of the PAE model is a key part of Hegseth’s plan to overhaul the existing defense industrial base and encourage faster acquisitions, but it’s unclear how this will affect the overall quality and effectiveness of the acquisition process.
The role of the portfolio acquisition executives in overseeing acquisitions related to specific mission sets will be critical to the success of these changes, and it will be important to ensure that they have the necessary expertise and resources to fulfill their responsibilities.
The Air Force’s ability to ‘holistically reform our enterprise—from requirements, to acquisition, to test’ will be critical to the success of these changes, and it will be important to monitor progress and address any challenges that arise.
The takeover of the Air Force’s biggest and costliest programs by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, including the Sentinel and Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, raises questions about the level of autonomy the Air Force will have in managing its own acquisition programs.
This could potentially lead to more efficient decision-making, but it also raises concerns about the impact on the Air Force’s ability to prioritize its own needs and goals.
The Air Force’s ability to ‘get the operators what they need when they need it’ will be critical to the success of these changes, and it will be important to ensure that the necessary resources and expertise are allocated to support this goal.
The fact that the Air Force already had many of its portfolios focused on mission sets, as mentioned by the former defense official, suggests that this new approach may not be a drastic departure from existing practices, but rather a continuation of ongoing efforts.
The Pentagon’s decision to take over oversight of the Air Force’s biggest programs may be seen as a move to increase efficiency and reduce bureaucracy, but it’s also important to consider the potential impact on the Air Force’s ability to innovate and adapt to changing circumstances.
The statement by the former defense official that ‘good things are happening here, but for the Air Force it’s more of a continuation of work that’s been going on for some time’ suggests that the Air Force has already been moving in this direction, and these changes are a natural progression of existing efforts.
The fact that the Space Force will have two PAEs to oversee acquisitions related to space access and space-based sensing and targeting missions suggests a growing emphasis on space-based capabilities, which is an area that requires careful planning and execution.
This is a critical area of development, and the appointment of experienced personnel to these roles will be crucial to the success of these missions.
The potential impact of these changes on the defense industry and the military’s ability to acquire and develop new technologies will be significant, and it will be important to monitor progress and address any challenges that arise.
Air Force Secretary Troy Meink’s statement that this transformation is a ‘generational opportunity’ highlights the significance of these changes, but it’s also important to consider the potential challenges and obstacles that may arise during the implementation process.
The Air Force’s decision to consolidate its acquisition program offices into mission-focused groups is a significant development that will likely have far-reaching implications for the defense industry and the military’s ability to acquire and develop new technologies.
The emphasis on rapid and efficient development of warfighting capabilities, as mentioned by Air Force Secretary Troy Meink, highlights the importance of adapting to changing circumstances and staying ahead of potential threats.
The fact that the Air Force is consolidating its acquisition program offices into mission-focused groups suggests a shift towards a more integrated and coordinated approach to acquisition, which could potentially lead to more effective and efficient outcomes.
The Air Force’s decision to consolidate acquisition program offices into mission-focused groups is a significant step towards streamlining their operations, as evident from the creation of the first five groups and the appointment of portfolio acquisition executives to oversee them.
I’m curious to know more about the roles of the uniformed and civilian PAEs and how they will work together to achieve the Air Force’s goals, especially considering that most of them were already running acquisition efforts focused on related missions.
The appointment of Air Force Lt. Gen. Dale White as the Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapons Systems is a significant development, and his experience will be crucial in overseeing programs such as the B-21 bomber and the F-47 fighter jet.