Space Force must define acceptable risks of rapid acquisition push: Senior official

WASHINGTON — As the Space Force doubles down on its efforts to further speed acquisition cycles to implement the Pentagon’s reform push, it needs to figure out how to define what minimum capability is good enough for any new kit to be operationally useful, according to the service’s top acquisition official.

The Space Force hasn’t yet “gotten the work done on test and operational acceptance,” needed to hash out the issues that “center around risk and operational risk,” Maj. Gen. Stephen Purdy, acting assistant secretary for space acquisition and integration at the Department of the Air Force, said today at a conference sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Hudson Institute.

Reducing testing requirements, and cutting the time the testing and validation process takes, will be key elements of the Space Force’s acquisition reform efforts that will focus on rapid delivery of systems with “minimum viable capability” that can be incrementally improved, Chief of Space Operations Gen. Chance Saltzman told the conference in his opening remarks.

“The goal is not to chase perfection in requirements or performance, but rather to deliver some capability incrementally, improving on what we have that can be ready quickly, and then we improve on that continually and use it operationally. … [T]his new mindset requires an evolution of our test and fielding framework,” he said.

Saltzman said the goal is “continuous, streamline test approaches, shifting our test mindset to validate only what is required to ensure the minimum viable capability is effective for the users and no more. Streamlining test documentation and execution with a focus on acceptance, not assurance, will ensure testing is integrated, focused and does not unnecessarily slow down fielding of capability.”

The rub, Purdy cautioned, is how to ensure that those minimum viable products are actually useful and beneficial to warfighters — with the unspoken implication being that getting something out the door at top speed won’t matter if it’s not fit for purpose.

“We’re really set for some really interesting discussions. Because I can go ramp up the acquisition system … I can start low, and I can pump things out fast. But we need to have a real discussion on the operator side and the requirements side, because … these are war fighting systems, and there’s a joint warfighting force that has to produce guaranteed results,” he said.

[W]hat is the appetite for fast, rapid delivery of capability? Because that capability will not be the 100 percent capability. It probably won’t even be the 80 percent; it might be the 40 percent. It might have issues. It might have some bugs. It might cause you [the operators] to be down a little bit,” he said. “I want to deliver as fast as possible … but there’ll be risks there; there’ll be operational risk there. And there’s not a good answer to that question yet. So, that’s going to be a hot moment of debate here going forward over the next few months,” he said.