DOCUMENT ESUME 04397 - [B3494139] (Coast Guard Procurement of edium Range Surveillance Aircraft].. PSAD-77-63; B-114851. January 17, 1977. 2 pp. + 2 enclosures (11 PP.). Report to Sen. arren G. aanuson, Cheirman, Senate Committee on Commerce; Sen. James B. Pearson, Ranking inority ember; by Elmer B. Staats, Comptroller General. Issue Area: Federal Procurement of Goods and Services (1900); Science and Technology (2000). Contact: Procurement and Systems Acquisition Div. Budget Function: General Government: Other General overnment (806); General Science, Space, ani Technology (;'50). Organizaticn Concerned: Coast Guard. Congressional Relevance: Senate Committee on Ccmmerce. Sen. James B. Pearson. A review of the Coast Guard's procurement program for medium range surveillance (RS) aircraft covered mission requirements, specifications for procurement established by the Coast Guard in its request for proposals, and the Coast Guard's decision to limit its procurement to a single type of aircraft. Findings/Conclusions: The missions to be accomplished by tne new aircraft are similar to missions h?- have been performed by aircraft now in the Coast Guard inventory. These missions inr'ude: search and rescue operations, marine environmental protection operations, enforcement of laws and treaties y conducting surveillance patrols, marine scientific activities including tracking and icebergs, ad miscellaneous missions such as port safety and security natrols and searches. Procurement of a single type of aircraft to perform missions is preferable because training of personnel, repair parts reguizements, and maintenance programs are accomplished more efficiently and economically for one type rather than for two or more types of aircraft. Also, the use of several different types of aircraft would mean that some would not have a full multimission capability. A detailed technical specification contained requirements for the MRS aircraft including a requirement that the cabin/cockpit volume be at least 600 cubic feet. The requirement for a minimum cabin volume of 600 cubic feet appeared to be reasonable. (Author/HTH) COMPTROLLER GENERAL OP THE UNITED STATE 'WASHINGON,D.C. 2OI 0s,8 B-114851 The Honorable Warren G. Magnuson, Chairman Id The Honorable James B. Pearson, Ranking Minority Member Committee on Commerce United States Senate Your September 9, 1976, letter requested that we review the Coast Guard's procurement program for medium range surveillance aircraft. You requested specifically that we (1) review the mission require- ments assigned to the medium range surveillance air- craft, (2) test the mission requirements against the specifications for the medium range surveillance pro- curement established by the Coast Guard in itJ request for technical proposals, and (3) render an opinion on the Coast Guard decision to limit its procurement to a single type of large medium range surveillance air- craft with a cabin volume of at least 600 cubic feet. The missions to be accomplished by the new aircraft are well documented and are similar to mis- sions that have been performed for a number of years by aircraft now in the Coast Guard inventory. The primary missions, accounting for 85 percent of antic- ipated flight time, are search and rescue, marine environmental protection, and law enforcement. We believe that procurement of a single type of aircraft to perform missions is preferable because training of personnel, repair parts requirements, and maintenance programs are accomplished more efficiently and economically for one type rather than for two or more types of aircraft. Also, the use of everal dif- ferent types of aircraft would mean that some would not have a full multimission capability. Wi'th a relatively small fleet (41 aircraft) there could be serious scheduling and positioning problems because the aircraft would be dispersed at a number of loca- tions and some would be in maintenance and overhaul facilities. PSAD-77-63 B-114851 The key question to be resolved concerning this procurement was the size of the cabin. In our opii.ion, the Coast Guard's requirement for an aircraft with a minimum cabin voJume of 600 cubic feet appears reason- able. Ba;ed on drawings and equipment brochures for certain equipment on board, and judgments of Air Force, Navy, and manufacturers' representatives for ether items, we established that a cabin with somewhere between 550 and 650 cubic feet was required. We discussed our report informally with Coast Guard officials who agreed with its thrust. Specific data on mission requirements, technical specifications, and our analysis of cab'. volume re- quirements are attached. We will be happy to discuss this data with you if desired. Comptroller General of the United State Enclosures - 2 2 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I COAST GUARD PROCUREMENT OF MEDIUM RANGE SURVEILLANCE AIRCRAFT BACKGROUND Since 1973 the Coast Guard has attempted to purchase a fan jet aircraft to replace its aging medium range sur- veillance Albatross fleet. The Coast Guard plans to use the new aircraft for 20 to 30 years. Originally the Coast Guard attempted to purchase 41 Rockwell Sabre 75-A air- craft on a sole source basis. However, because of congres- sional concern over the absence of competition for the award, the Coast Guard decided to use the formally adver- tised competitive two-step procurement method. Under step one, the Coast Guard solicited technical proposals from aircraft manufacturers on the basis of operational and engineering requirements. During this step five aircraft manufacturers submitted technical proposals and all were judged acceptable. All proposed aircraft had cabins of at least 600 cubic feet. Under step two, the Coast Guard solicited firm fixed price proposals and three of the five firms responded by the procurement closing date of Octo- ber 28, 1976. The Falcon Jet Corporation submitted the lowest bid of $4.996 million each for its Falcon 20-G aircraft. The Coast Guard plans to award a firm fixed price with escalation contract for 41 aircraft by the bid expiration date of January 26, 1977. MISSION REQUIREMENTS The new medium range surveillance (MRS) aircraft will be a multimission aircraft, as is the Albatross. The mis- sions will include the following: -- Search and rescue (SAR) operations which aid persons and property in distress. -- Marine environmental protection (MEP) operations designed to minimize damage to the marine environ- ment caused by intentional or unintentional acts of man, such as oil spills from ships. -- Enforcement of laws and treaties by conducting surveillance patrols (ELT). Although Coast Guard enforcement and surveillance patrols are mainly concerned with protection against unau- thorized foreign fishing within U S. waters, ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I other law enforcement activity includes preven- tion of illegal entry of drugs and aliens into the United States and protection of U.S. property. -- Marine science activities which include tracking icebergs in the North Atlantic Ocean and Air- borne Radiation Thermometer Surveys to measure water temperatures on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. -- Other miscellaneous missions, such as port safety and security patrols and searches, transporting litter-borne patients, and checks of navigation; aids such as buoys, lights, and radio beacons. The Coast Guard's latest approved Aviation Plan, dated April 4, 1975, indicated that the MRS aircraft's primary missions will be SAR, MEP, and ELT operations. According to the plan, about 85 percent of the total MRS's operational flight-hours will be devoted to these three missions by fiscal year 1986. MRS TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS The Coast Guard prepared a detailed technical specifi- cation containing the requirements for the RS aircraft for the first step of the two-step procurement approach. An imoortant characteristic of the new airccaft was quirement that the cabin/cockpit volume be at least a re- 600 cubic feet. The Albatross aircraft has a cabin/cockpit volume of approximately 1,200 cubic feet. The specifica- tion noted that 600 cubic feet was necessary to carry crew and equipment needed to perform the MRS aircraft'sthe missions. 6 The 00-cubic-foot requirement was broken down as follows: --75 cubic feet for a sensor surve:llance console. --72 cubic feet for communications and navigation (avionics) equipment. --15 cubic feet for a forward looking radar. -- 19 cubic feet of storage space for air droppable equipment, such as dewatering pumps, liferafts, etc. 2 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I -- 15 cubic feet of storage space for crew survival equipment, such as radios and parachutes. -- 150 cubic feet for three crew positions including a sensor surveillance console operator and two scanners. -- 254 cubic feet for cockpit, aisle, headroom, and additional space to allow for crew movement. Because some questions were raised on the Coast Guard's need for 600 cubic feet in the MRS aircraft, the Secretary of Transportation requested a detailed itemized list of the volume requirements. On November 19, 1976, the Coast Guard provided the Secretary with a list totaling 616 cubic feet. The following is a comparison of the Coast Guard's list with the volume requirements included in the technical specification. Cubic feet required Per technical Per Nov. 9, 1976 Item proposal listing Sensor surveillance console 75 75 Avionics 72 65 Fcrward-looking radar 15 15 Droppable equipment 19 14 irew survival equipment 15 47 Three crew positions 150 150 Remaining space 254 250 Total 600 616 ANALYSIS OF CABIN VOLUME REQUIREMENT We reviewed the November 19, 1976, listing to determine if the Coast Guard's 600-cubic-foot requirement was reason- able. We verified some items by reviewing brochures and other documents. Many of he items included in the cabin/ cockpit volume requirement involved judgment and were not readily verifiable to documents. In these cases we con- tacted Government agency and private industry officials to determine if the Coast Guard's estimates were reasonable. 3 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I The results of our review of the items in the 616-cubic- foot cabin requirement follow. Sensor surveillance console--75 cubic feet The MRS aircraft technical specification the aircraft would carry a remote sensor showed that system console occupying 75 cubic feet of cabin/cockpit with a sensor system, Aireye, will consist of volume. The several sensing de- vices, integrated to perform reliably under varying environ- mental conditions. Major Aireye subsystems will include side-looking airborne radar, a dual frequency a an aerial reconnaissance camera, and line scanner, an sion. Although the primary purpose of active-gated televi- will be oil spill detection, it will the sensor system also aid the SAR and ELT missions. The Coast Guard and the 75 cubic feet isforstill developing the the sensor console Aireye system, represents the development goal. The Coast Guard has an earlier de- velopment model of the sensor system installed on a C-130 aircraft; its sensor console volume is over 100 cubic feet. Althouah the Coast Guard made provisions technical specifications for installing in the on each MRS aircraft, the Coast Guard a sensor package whether or not sensor systems will be has not decided aircraft. procured for each A major factor for the indecision on the sensor system procurement appears to be its acquisition cost. Ac- cording to an undated Coast Guard draft it will cost about $5.5 million acquisition paper, 2rototype and about $5.2 million toeach develop a sensor system to procure five additional systems for a total cost of Coast Guard's Commandant told us that S31.5 million. Th? he will probably approve the procurement of six sensor systems, includina the prototype, but that because of the major rapidly developing technology in this cost involved and field, the number of additional sensor systems to be procured In any event, each of the MRS aircraft is questionable. will be wired to accept a sensor ackage, and the sensor designed so that it can be easily system is being transferred from one air- craft to another. We looked into the ossibility of a sensor package now operating aboard the Coast Guard using a Custom Service aerial interdiction aircraft instead of the Aireye system. The Customs system uses a navigational forward-looking airborne 4 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I radar rather than a side-looking radar and a forward-looking infrared device instead of a line scanner. The Customs sys- tem does not use an aerial reconnaissance camera or an active- gated television. Coast Guard officials did not analyze the Customs Ser- vice sensor system in depth, but had Aerojet Electrosystems Company evaluate several alternative system components. The contractor concluded that the forward-looking infrared system would not satisfactorily perform the functions of the line scanner; e.g., it could not reliably identify and record ship names i darkness. Coast Guard officials also told us that the Customs forward-looking radar cannot perform s re- liably as the side-looking radar in detecting and mapping oil spills. The Naval Air Development Center (NADC) helped develop both the Customs Service and Aireye sensor systems. Ac- cording to an NADC official, the Customs system will not adequately meet the MRS mission requirements because it lacks the data annotation capability needed to successfully prosecute vessels violating marine environmental laws. He also told us that the Customs forward-looking radar costs and weighs more than the proposed MRS forward-looking radar. Avionics--65 cubic feet The corer letter transmitting the Coast Guard's current MRS aircraft cabin/cockpit volume requirements to the Secre- cary of Transportation noted that the volume required for avionics equipment decreased from 72 cubic feet set forth in the technical speciff.cation to 65 cubic feet. The de- crease was attributed t advanced technologies resulting in smaller equipment. We verified 17 cubic feet of their reported actual equipment by checking manufacturers' equip- ment brochures. However, the remaining space (about 72 per- cent) was for wiring, racking, working space, etc., and was a Coast Guard estimate with no documentary support. Most of the individuals we contacted agreed some additional space was needed for cooling, working space, wiring, etc., but their estimates varied from 25 to 66 per- cent. Other officials said they could not determine how much space would be needed without detailed information on types of equipment, location in aircraft, size and shape of the space, etc. 5 ENCLOSURE I ENCIOSURE I We also looked into the possibility of of the avionics equipment outside installing some the cabin in portions of the aircrafz lacking temperature and as the nose or tail, and we discussed pressure controls, such Collins Radio, Cessna, Lockheed, NARCO this with officials of Navy. Most of the officials agreed that Avionics, and the some equipment could be installed outrtide the cabin, but they also agreed that there would be a sacrifice in reliability the equipment outside the cabin. Therefore, by installing tailed analysis comparing the extra maintenance without a de- avionics equipment installed outside costs of the cabin to possible .aving associated with procuring an aircraft smaller cabin/cockpit volume, we could with a slightly approach would be most advantageous. not determine which Forward-looking radar--15 cubic feet We concluded that 12 of tne 15 forward-looking radar the Coast Guardcubic feet for the the cabin/cockpit volume included as part of equirement should not be included. According to the Falcon Jet Corporation the radar equi.ment, except the radar proposal, all of scope and some small items, will be installed n the unpressurized aircraft. Coast Guard officials said nose of the manufacturers that submitted proposals all of the aircraft planned the forward-looking radar in the aircraft's on installing nose. Droppable and crew su~vival eauipment--61 cubic feet The current estimate and crew survival equipmentof was 61 cubic feet for droppable 27 cubic feet greater than the amount in the technical proposal. transmitting the Coast Guard's current The cover letter requirements noted that the increase cabin/cockpit volume definitions of required miscellaneous was due to continued equipment. We found documentary support for 47 of the 61 cubic the current estimate erroneously included feet; however, for equipment which will either be 14 cubic feet cabin/cockpit area or is smaller thaninstalled outside the what the Coast Guard computed. Three crew ositions--150 cubic feet The Coast Guard's original and current requirements specified 50 cubic feet MRS cube members including two observers and each for three crew a sensor console operator. The technical specification noted that enough 6 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I space was needed to allow for movement and the Coast Guard specified that a swivel seat was necessary for the scanner positions to allow for extended search missions. Coast Guard officials referred to Military Standard 1333 in sup- port of their crew volume requirements. The standard indi- cated that about 35 cubic feet is desired for a nonswivel pilot seat. Navy and Air Force officials familiar with air surveillance missions confirmed the Coast Guard's require- ment for swivel seats. They noted that, to reduce crew fatigue, both Navy and Air Force aircraft have swivel chairs for their surveillance crews. In addition, Lockheed, an aircraft manufacturer, agreed that the 50 cubic feet repre- sented a reasonable requirement for an observer in a swivel chair. We also attempted to determine if one of the MR£ pilots and/or sensor console operators could serge as al observer, thereby possibly eliminating the need for one crew member. Coast Guard officials offered the following rationale supporting their MRS five-man crew requirement (including the two pilots). -- The pilots cannot be effective observers because they must be fully attentive to flying the air- craft, especially when flying at low altitude and slow airspeed over water and in bad weather. Also, when flying at slow seeds and low altitudes, the aircraft must ssume a noseup attitude thereby ob- scuring the pilots' downward vision. -- The sensor console operator would be fully occupied with scanning the sensors and maintaining communica-- tions with the base and would not be useful as a scanner except to periodically relieve the other two scanners. The Coast Guard officials said scanners are efficient for only 20 to 30 minutes at a time and must be relieved. -- The unaided eye can detect certain items which the sensor cannot, such as survivors in the water, wooden hulled ships, and rubber rafts. Therefore, scanners are required in addition to the MRS sensors. -- In ddition to their scanner duties, the crew members perform other in-flight duties, such as equipment re- pair, safety checks, and SAR drops. 7 ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I Navy and Air Force SAR cfficials agreed with the Coast Guard position that pilots arid copilots are not effective observers and that their full time attention is needed to fly the air- craft, especially at low altitudes and slow speeds over water. They also ag:eed that scanners are efficient for only short time periods. Remaining spa. ~--250 cubic feet The current estimate of reArining space includes 100 cubic feet for the cockpit and 150 cubic feet for movement areas. The cockpit space includes 70 cubic feet for the pilot and copilot which, as discussed previously, agrees with Military Standard 1333, and 30 cubic feet for con- soles, instruments; panels, etc. We checked the cockpit size of several comparable aircraft and found them to range from 84 to 110 cubic feet. The 150--cubic-foot movement area includes aisles and walkways, overhead and eilings, and nonfunctional and passenger space. Based on a military standard, average aisle width of 1-1/2 feet and cabin height of 5-1/4 feet, multiplied by a cabin length of about 20 feet (shortest aircraft cabin with 500 or more cubic feet shown in enc. TI) we estimated a firm need of about 150 cubic feet for aisle space. The 150-cubic-font requirement for movement areas seems conservative since it also includes space for possible passengers and nonfunctional space. CONCLUSION ON VOLUME REQUIREMENT In our opinion, the Coast Guard can perform its MRS mission with a cabin volume of somewhere between 550 and 650 cubic feet. There is a possibility that the Coast Guard could slightly reduce the requirement below 600 cubic feet by all wing less space for crew and avionics. On the other hand, the MRS aircraft is planned to be used by the Coast Guard as a multimission aircraft and it is possible that new missions and/or more efficient search and rescue equipment and techniques will be developed which will require additional space in the aircraft. We believe it is preferable to have some additional space for flexibility and future growth for an aircraft to be used for 20 to 30 years. ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I MIX OF AIRCRAFT An assessment of whether the Coast mix of smaller (10,000 to 20,000 pound) Guard could use a to 30,000 pound) aircraft would entail and larger (20G,000 a of the Coast Guard's MRS mission, includingdetailed analysis (1) number of multiple missions flown, determining the initial missions are diverted to handle (2) number of times emergencies, (3) number of flight-hours required. to accomplish the missions, and (4) by each type of aircraft cost training, repair parts, and maintenance, of additional able to make this assessment in time etc. We were un- to provide you with a timely response to your letter. However, the Coast Guard has several show that a mix of aircraft would result analyses, which cycle costs, even though the smaller in higher life aircraft's tion nd operating costs are considerably acquisi- less than the aircraft te Coast Guard plans to procure. son for the higher life cycle cost is A major rea- Guard's analyses assume the larger that the Coast aircraft would be equipped with a full sensor system, whereas the smaller aircraft would not. Thus, the larger wider track spacings thereby rducing aircraft could fly the number of flight- hours required and the number of aircraft. previously, however, there is a question As mentioned craft will be sensor equipped on how many air- Accordiiing to one Coast Guard anaJ-7sis, smaller aircraft without sensors would twice as many form the same missions as the larger be needed to per- aircraft with sensors, plus some missions would have to be range C-130 aircraft. A Coast Guard performed by a long- official estimated that, excluding the sensor question, would be needed instead of 41 larger 47 smaller aircraft manufacturing representatives agreed aircraft. Aircraft that more smaller aircraft would be needed although they the number. could not specify A major reason the Coast Guard has mix of aircraft is that they want the rejected using a MRS to be a multi- mission aircraft capable of being diverted sion to another. from one mis- Coast Guard officials told us that, according to a Coast Guard analysis of flight records from several Coast Guard fiscal year 1976 about 20 percent of all Albatross SAR air stations, from diverted aircraft and about 30 missions resulted percent of the SAR cases were first reached by an aircraft diverted from ENCLOSURE I ENCLOSURE I a non-SAR mission. We did not verify these figures; however, the computation used by the Coast Guard seemed reasonable. According to Coast Guard officials, smaller aircraft would have to be dedicated rather than multimission the smaller aircraft would not be capable because of carrying all the crew and equipment needed to perform example, the interior volume of the cabinsall missions. For of two smaller aircraft which we examined are less than 300 cubic feet each. Another major Coast Guard objection to a is the higher logistics, maintenance, anj mix of aircraft training costs associated with a mix of aircraft. We agreed cost and logistics problems would occur with that additional an aircraft mix although the amount would be difficult to quantify. lieve that for the relatively small number of We be- MRS aircraft to be procured by the Coast Guard, logistics ciated with maintaining more than one aircraftcosts asso- become very expensive. Also, because of the type could relatively small size of the proposed MRS fleet, the multimission seems advantageous by providing the Coast Guard capability flexibility to perform its MRS missions with with more of multimission aircraft. a single type Conclusion on aircraft mix The small size of this fleet makes a mix of extremely difficult from a logistics, aircraft training, and utili- zation standpoint. In our opinion, the possible resulting from a mi::ed fleet outweigh the limited problems ment cost advantages. procure- 10 ENCLOSURE II ENCLOSURE II COMMEhCIAL A IRCRAFT WITH TURBOFAN OR TURBOJET ENGINES WI1. CABIF VOLUME OF 500 TO 2,000 CUBIC FEET EACH LISTED IN "JANE'S ALL THE WORLDS AIRCRAFT 1974-1975" Maximum Cabin Range takeoff Vo"Ime Lngth (note a) weight Engines (cubic feet) (mfTeST (pounds) Dassault Mystere 2 0/Falcon 700 23' 2-3/4" 2,220 28,660 2 Turbofans Grumman American Gulfstream 71 1,300 33' 11" 3,886 62,000 2 Turbofans Hawker Siddeley 125/600 628 21' 4" 1,796 25,000 2 Turbojets Lockheed Jetstar II 850 28' 2-1/2" 3,187 43,750 4 Turbofans Rockwell Sabre 60 b/app.580 24' 5" 1,992' 20,000 2 Turbojets Rockwell Sabre 75 b/660 24' 5" 1,738 2i,000 2 Turbojets Rockwell Sabre 75A b/660 24' 5" 1,938 23,000 2 Turbofans VFW-Fokker VFW 614 1,748 36' 9-1/4" 1,249 43,960 2 Turbofans Yakolev Yak 40 c/app.900 23' 2-1/2" 1,118 33,750 3 Turbofans Cessna Citation III (note d) app.550 23' 2,760 17,150 2 Turbofans a/Varies according to passengers and fuel. b/Data on cabin volume obtained from manufacturer to modify data con- tained in Jane's. c/Exact cabin volume not shown. Dimensions are: length--23' 2-1/2"; maximum width--7' 3/4"; and maximum height--6' 3/4'. d/The Cessna Citation III is not shown in Jane's 1974-75 edition. Data was obtained from manufacturer. 11
Coast Guard Procurement of Medium Range Surveillance Aircraft
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1977-01-17.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)