We begin FY25 once again under a CR with many critical national security challenges ahead. The top stories for the week include:
Defense acquisition executives champion speed and agility with new pathways.
DoD launches Replicator 2 focused on C-UAS.
GMU and CSIS ring the alarm bells for the U.S. DIB being unprepared for war.
Business coalitions advocate for much needed SBIR reforms.
Experts outline how DoD can acquire and deploy software more effectively.
The Services advance new capabilities and continue to face enterprise challenges.
Enjoy!
Top Stories
Acquisition Reforms Making Plodding Progress
Defense acquisition has long been plagued with red tape and cumbersome processes dragging down a system that demands speed but mandates from lawmakers to move faster have produced tools to loosen the system’s rigidity, so why isn’t it moving faster?
NDIA’s ETI Executive Director Arun Seraphin reflects on recent ETI conference.
William LaPlante, USD(A&S) said that today’s defense acquisition system is not the defense acquisition system of 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago.
GAO continues to find that DoD is still struggling to deliver new technologies quickly, even while faced with constantly evolving threats.
The acquisition system today is trying to balance "going faster” with “being careful” as well as balancing speed with transparency — to everyone’s satisfaction.
The Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act attempted to simplify the procurement process, followed swiftly by criticism that speed was sacrificing oversight and causing cost and schedule overruns.
Additional rules and regulations piled up for watching out for what is considered waste or fraud or abuse, rules that create even more bureaucracy.
DoD in 2020 released the Adaptive Acquisition Framework, which created six pathways meant to give programs the ability to choose your own adventure: depending on what you’re trying to get done, there’s a different pathway for you.
These new pathways included the Middle Tier of Acquisition — used to rapidly develop fieldable prototypes within an acquisition program — and the software acquisition pathway — a pathway designed to facilitate rapid delivery of software by integrating modern development practices.
Frank Calvelli said the Space Force has used the software acquisition pathway, but while that approach itself is “really good ... where the jury is still out is actually our ability to actually do software development. Large, complex software development is really hard. And so we’ve experimented with breaking things up into smaller pieces using the software pathway.”
Young Bang said: “The Army has been pretty aggressive in thinking about that because we have to think about how to get our capabilities to our soldiers faster.
“There are some friction points that we’re going to address on the software side. But I think one of the things that has allowed us to go a little bit faster is that we’ve actually used a combination of Middle Tier of Acquisition with the software pathway.”
Andrew Hunter said the pathways are “really an inside-the-department set of processes and procedures, If you couple those changes with the way that you’re interacting with industry, your contractual structure, the kinds of vendors you’re engaging with and how you offer business to industry, I think the power of those reforms or those changes is even greater for us.”
The system is moving in the right direction, but there are some crucial pain points that need to be addressed to help streamline reform efforts.
Move money faster
Address requirements.
Buy commercial things as much as possible.
Our Take: We’re happy to see the acquisition executives champion the AAF to include the MTA and SWP pathways. More can be done to enable greater speed, agility, and success with these pathways. We fully agree with Arun’s assessment on strategic reforms still needed. PPBE and JCIDS are a major risk to our national security and need to be modernized immediately for the 21st Century. While Buy Before Build is the law of the land, the DoD continues to develop custom solutions.
Pentagon Homes in on Counter-Drone Tech in Replicator 2 Initiative
The expectation is that Replicator 2 will assist with overcoming challenges we face in the areas of production capacity, technology innovation, authorities, policies, open system architecture and system integration, and force structure.
With the Pentagon on track to meet the fielding goal of the first Replicator initiative next summer, the department assessed validated joint capability gaps over a period of several months to determine where to focus Replicator next.
Hicks will work with Adm. Christopher Grady, VCJCS, as well as heads of the services and combatant commands through the Innovation Steering Group, to formulate the plan for Replicator 2.
Read: SECDEF Replicator 2 Memo
“I have determined that Replicator 2 will tackle the warfighter priority of countering the threat posed by small uncrewed aerial systems (C-sUAS) to our most critical installations and force concentrations. I am confident the Replicator Initiative will complement and advance the significant C-sUAS work already underway in the DoD.
The expectation is that Replicator 2 will assist with overcoming challenges we face in the areas of production capacity, technology innovation, authorities, policies, open system architecture and system integration, and force structure.”
Related Stories:
Defense Secretary Austin unveils aims to push counter-UAS tech in Replicator 2.0
Small-drone defense is next in Pentagon’s Replicator buying push
New Report Sounds Alarm about Our Nation’s Readiness to Confront Looming Military Threats
GMU’s new report entitled, Before the Balloon Goes Up: Mobilizing the DIB Now to Prepare for Future Conflict, makes clear that the U.S. today is not prepared for future national security conflicts.
“The defense industrial base is simply not ready for protracted conflict. We do not have the capacity to equip and sustain our forces in the event of a major conflict in the Taiwan Strait or elsewhere. That’s why it is so imperative that government and industry leaders learn from past crises to create and implement a new national strategy to mobilize the defense industrial base and prepare now for future conflict.” Jerry McGinn
The report examined these four national security crises in American history to understand how the U.S. has previously mobilized its industrial base:
Efforts to build and deploy the equipment necessary to win World War II.
The creation of MRAP vehicles in response to IEDs during OIF and OEF.
The U.S. COVID-19 response and the strains on our supply chains.
The supply chain and production issues in support of Ukraine.
The report outlines a National Mobilization Strategy to include:
National Leadership to Build Public Support for Mobilization
Increasing Resources Available
Maximize Manufacturing Capacity through a True Build Allied Approach
Enhancing Legal Authorities
Designing for Producibility and Streamlining Equipment Production
Acquisition Reform to Expand and Scale Production
Grow Sustainment Capacity
“As we’ve seen before, the U.S. is successful when we mobilize effectively. Mobilization, however, takes time, and there is no time to waste. The time to act is now, before the balloon goes up.”
Our Take: Jerry as a former DASD of Industrial Base Policy knows this space all too well. In addition to outlining the issues, Jerry outlines a plan of action to move out on.
Coalitions Recommend SBIR Reforms
The Alliance for Commercial Technology in Government, The Software in Defense Coalition, and the National Venture Capital Association sent a joint letter to Congress with 13 recommendations as part of SBIR Reauthorization in FY25.
Bridge the Valley of Death by formalizing a Phase III SBIR program.
Require >50% of SBIR Funding go through Open Topics.
Institute and enforce a shot clock for award notification and contract award.
Ensure clear, consistent standards in Foreign Malign Influence Assurance.
Direct the FAR Council to put SBIR Phase III authority in the FAR.
Enforce market research requirements of FASA, 10 USC 3453, and FAR Part 10.
Eliminate SBIR Mills
Create evaluation criteria, incentives for primes that leverage commercial tech.
Implement and maintain a standard set of DoD-wide proposal formats.
Require evaluation teams to have commercial market experience.
Strictly enforce us of open interoperability standards.
Commission GAO to study common aspects of most successful SBIR companies.
Commission GAO study on what a small business in 2024 compared to 1982.
Our Take: During the last SBIR reauthorization, there was some brinksmanship on renewing and driving reforms. SBIRs can be a valuable tool in the ecosystem to fuel small business innovations, yet it is in dire need of reform as outlined above. We cannot continue to waste money and opportunities with a broken system.
The U.S. Isn’t Ready for a Modern War
A $3K drone can take out a $10M tank. When will the U.S. military learn that lesson?
If we ever had to fight World War III, the U.S. wouldn’t be ready.
No adversary could compete with us in the creation of exquisite technology.
The Germans were consistently the first to field what was then considered exquisite technology. The problem for the Germans was that they lacked industrial capacity. The Allies defeated the Axis with inferior technology that could be mass produced.
Today, the U.S. finds itself in the position of the Germans. We have divested ourselves of much of our industrial capacity.
The M1 Abrams tanks, arguably the most technologically advanced tank in existence; each costs $10M and requires $2M in annual maintenance.
Only 20 [of the 31 provided to Ukraine] of those Abrams survive and they have mostly been pulled off the front lines due to their ineffectiveness. The most recent Abrams was destroyed by a low cost Russian drone.
The most used drone by Ukraine is the $3K DJU Mavic 3 made by China.
The equivalent U.S. drone is the $60-80K Switchblade.
The F-35 is exquisite, costing $100M per jet.
A combination of armed surface drones and ballistic missiles have allowed Ukraine to sink or damage nearly half of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, denying Russia access to Ukraine’s southern coast.
The Battle of the Black Sea is historically significant because it’s the first time that a country with virtually no navy has won a naval battle.
An axis of nations—China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea—have marshaled their collective resources to prosecute multiple wars around the globe.
If the U.S. has to fight a war against a peer-level adversary, quality of systems will matter—but so will quantity, and we have discounted quantity for too long. If we fail to reinvest in our military industrial base, and if we continue to rely on a sclerotic, bloated defense acquisition system, we will be unprepared. We will be the Germany of the Third World War.
Defense-Tech Startups Need a New Supplier: Anyone But China
Defense startups developing weapons to counter China have a problem. They depend on the country for parts.
China is the dominant supplier of batteries, motors, sensors, rare-earth materials and other key components needed by U.S. defense companies. The industry’s outsize reliance on China for materials to build everything from drones to ships and missiles has become an untenable reality in Washington.
Defense-tech startups face particular challenges building without the most affordable and readily available parts.
China could stop the flow of components into the U.S.
Hundreds of new U.S. defense-tech startups captured much of the $130B VCs have plowed into the sector globally since 2021. Few are making much money yet.
Just 16 venture-backed defense-tech companies receive annual revenue from the federal government >$25M.
Established defense contractors depend on thousands of suppliers in China, which makes decoupling complicated, but they, too, are looking for solutions.
Lockheed Martin is investing in 3-D printing more components.
RTX is reviewing its options for alternatives but isn’t pulling out of China.
Anduril Industries reduced its spending on parts from China to 0.2%
DIU this summer started asking defense startups for a full list of their hardware to keep an eye on parts coming from China.
In a letter to SECAF, two members of Congress called the Air Force’s dependence on Chinese manufacturers a serious national security threat, citing a report that the Air Force last year increased its reliance on Chinese suppliers by 69%.
Both China and the U.S. have put restrictions on critical components from China that the defense industry wants, squeezing American companies.
There are also restrictions on Chinese suppliers that have been blacklisted for alleged connections to the Chinese military and for supporting Russia’s military.
Avoiding Chinese components increased TILT Autonomy’s costs by 6-10X.
“A lot of drone companies are still looking at this as an existential threat to their business.” Michael Robbins, AUVSI President
China Is Ready for War
And Thanks to a Crumbling Defense Industrial Base, America Is Not
Amid a growing bipartisan consensus that the U.S. needs to do more to contain China, much of the policy debate in Washington has focused on China’s economic and technological clout.
These assessments fail to recognize how much China’s defense industrial base is growing. Despite the country’s current economic challenges, its defense spending is soaring and its defense industry is on a wartime footing.
China caught up to the U.S. in its ability to produce weapons at mass and scale.
China has become the world’s largest shipbuilder by far, with a capacity roughly 230 times as large as that of the U.S.
Between 2021-2024, China’s defense industrial base produced more than 400 modern fighter aircraft and 20 large warships, doubled the country’s nuclear warhead inventory and more than doubled its inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles, and developed a new stealth bomber.
ADM John Aquilino, the former INDOPACOM commander described this military expansion as the most extensive and rapid buildup since WWII.
The U.S. defense industrial base is failing to keep up.
U.S. defense production has atrophied, and the system lacks the capacity and flexibility that would allow the U.S. military to deter China and, if a conflict does break out, to fight and win a protracted war in the Indo-Pacific region or a two-front war in Asia and Europe.
Washington must fix critical bottlenecks, and act fast if it wants to keep pace.
The U.S. needs to commit much more attention and resources to military readiness if it is to succeed in assembling a new arsenal of democracy.
In 2023, China conducted 67 space launches—the most in a single year in the country’s history.
The PLA Army is the world’s largest ground force. It operates more battle tanks and artillery pieces than the U.S. Army.
China’s suite of antiship ballistic missiles threatens U.S. surface ships operating in the South China and East China Seas and beyond.
The U.S. defense industrial base lacks the flexibility and surge capability to make up this and other shortfalls.
The U.S. labor market is unable to provide enough workers with the right skills to meet the demands of defense production.
The problem is particularly acute in shipyards, which suffer from a shortage of engineers, electricians, pipefitters, shipfitters, and metalworkers.
A year before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor brought the U.S. into World War II, Roosevelt exhorted the country to “build now with all possible speed every machine, every arsenal, every factory that we need to manufacture our defense material.” China’s rapid rearmament and the ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are signs that the clouds are darkening. To be ready for a wartime environment, the U.S. must once again follow Roosevelt’s advice.
Defense Tech
The 27-Year-Old Billionaire Whose Army Does AI’s Dirty Work
Alexandr Wang’s Scale AI deploys gig workers around the globe to shape how the big AI models behave.
Alexandr Wang became one of the world’s youngest self-made billionaires by building a sprawling army of more than 100,000 contractors, who perform the grunt work that powers the modern AI boom.
The labor-intensive operation has become so in demand by businesses eager to enter the AI race that Scale’s revenue pace tripled last year, boosting its valuation to $14B. Wang’s stake is estimated at about $1.7B.
The 27-year-old founder likens his company’s importance in the AI revolution to the computing chips developed by Nvidia—currently the hottest tech company in the world.
Reflections on Software Lock-In at the Defense Department
While America’s adversaries pour billions into artificial intelligence and machine learning, the DoD has yet to fully embrace its most powerful ally: the world-leading innovation of America’s commercial tech sector.
The paradox is that when the government does succeed in building software platforms, they end up locked into their homegrown solution.
When it comes to software, don’t waste your time and resources building a solution you can easily buy.
Agencies spend more on making systems flexible than the actual switching cost.
Good platforms reduce the cognitive load on product teams, improve reliability, accelerate development, reduce risks, and enable more cost-effective use of services. Unfortunately, plenty of custom-built platforms do the opposite. Some of them just plain suck.
Building a platform can take five to 10 years to reach maturity. A $7M estimate soon turns into $70M costs — money that would have been spent on mission apps.
A true subscription platform as a service model can save agencies 50-75%.
It also offers faster time to value and a higher likelihood of success while focusing agency development teams on mission-critical applications.
The path to effective DevOps implementation in government agencies doesn’t have to be paved with expensive do-it-yourself platform projects.
How to Get a Continuous ATO: The Secret to Success
In May, the Pentagon blessed a new methodology for supporting rapid software updates: The continuous ATO (cATO) requires a cultural and process change, but is ultimately a more secure and reliable alternative, according to the cATO Evaluation Criteria.
cATO involves a lot of continuous monitoring. Automation can ease that burden, with machines tackling much of the routine compliance work, but that too can be scary—requiring a level of trust, confidence, and commitment from all parties.
“People hem and haw about how bad RMF is. But having a framework is the first step to developing better processes. Rather than wringing one’s hands over one more set of requirements, he said, project managers should just Go understand the system, go read the RMF—it’s a surprisingly good set of documentation.
When we go fast, we actually are able to reduce some risks. Security flaws get fixed faster, and the risk of under-provisioning warfighters is mitigated by more rapid software delivery.” Bryon Kroger
With Foundations Laid, Pentagon Building CJADC2’s Data Backbone
“Imagine thousands of missiles, hundreds of ships, hundreds of tanks, not only in the Pacific but in the Middle East and Europe … and then imagine actually managing that in an integrated way in an era of great power competition. The only way to do that is to leverage digital technologies such as AI, advanced computing, and analytics.” Greg Little
The CJADC2, initiative seeks to connect the sensors and shooters of every branch of the U.S. armed forces — as well as those of allies and partners — through a unified network powered by AI to increase decision speed.
Since it became operational in 2022, the CDAO played a key role in the initiative.
With a lot of hard work across many teams — pairing operators across multiple commands with engineers from DoD and industry — they delivered, on time and on target, combining software applications, live data integration, real-world networks, new cross-domain operational concepts and warfighters around the world to provide even better decision advantage for DoD and our military commanders.
CDAO runs series of Global Information Dominance Experiments which are designed to iteratively test, measure, optimize and field CJADC2 solutions using a unified data layer that is vendor agnostic.
Previous editions of GIDE focused on collaborative planning between combatant commands and on joint long-range fires, and the office is working with the Joint Staff and operators to determine the next problem we want tools to help get after.
The Open Data and Applications Government-owned Interoperable Repositories initiative (Open DAGIR), is a multi-vendor ecosystem … that enables industry and government to integrate data platforms, development tools, services and applications in a way that preserves government data ownership and industry IP.
The tech powering the Open DAGIR ecosystem is Palantir’s Maven Smart System.
CDAO also awarded Palantir a $33M contract to rapidly and securely onboard third-party vendor and government capabilities into the Maven Smart System to meet priority combatant command digital needs.
No one company has all of the innovation in CJADC2. What the Open DAGIR approach and the Maven Smart System provide is a platform for information exchange between the repositories of government-owned data and user applications created by industry or government developers.
OSC Announces First Notice of Funding Availability to Secure the U.S. Industrial Base
The Office of Strategic Capital (OSC) today announced the release of its first Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA), which lays out eligibility criteria and initiates the application process for OSC loans.
This will be the first OSC application call to accelerate commercialization and scale production for critical technologies.
The NOFA will finance companies' equipment needs to help them scale production in the 31 covered technology categories identified as promising critical technologies and assets in the FY24 NDAA.
Congress formally enacted OSC into law through the FY24 NDAA, granting the office new authorities to issue loans and loan guarantees.
Congress also appropriated funds for OSC in March 2024 to loan up to $984M to eligible companies in this NOFA.
Notice of Funding Availability-Covered Technology Categories-Equipment Financing
Related Story: Defense tech companies can apply for Pentagon loans starting next year
DIU CSO: Long Range One-Way Platforms
The DoD is seeking commercial solutions for ground-launched, one-way UAS platforms that can operate at ranges from 50-300 km+, launch quickly and expeditiously, navigate at low altitudes, carry a variety of payloads, and operate beyond line of sight in disrupted, disconnected, intermittent and low-bandwidth (DDIL) and Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) denied environments.
Related Story: Pentagon Wants to Fastrack Buy of Cheap One-Way Drones
Is the US military Learning Enough from Ukraine?
Relatively few analysts at the services’ doctrine organizations are working full-time to glean lessons from the war.
The Air Force has sought to evaluate the Ukrainian military’s methods for detecting drones, while the Army has revamped training, fielded new drones, and re-evaluated its artillery stockpiles based on observations of the nearly three-year-old hot war there.
The Army’s various analytic outlets have produced report after report by officers, intelligence analysts, and academics on the conflict.
But at some of the military’s key centers for studying warfare, the services appear to treat the grinding yet tech-forward war with NATO’s top potential adversary as just one topic among many. Few analysts are tasked to study the war full-time.
In April, the DOD IG announced it would audit the DoD’s success in studying and applying lessons from the war to doctrine, planning, training, and equipping.
Some believe the military branches are at least partially writing off the conflict based on assumptions that the U.S. would not struggle with the same types of problems as Ukraine, such as establishing air dominance over Russia.
US Will Spend $1.2B to Restock Arms After Iran, Houthi Attacks
The Pentagon will spend about $1.2B to maintain ships deployed as part of operations in the Red Sea and to replenish stocks of missiles fired to repel attacks by Iran and its proxies, according to new budget documents.
The spending, detailed in budget documents submitted to congressional defense committees and posted online, helps shine a light on the cost of maintaining a stepped-up presence in the region, as well as shooting down drones and missiles deployed by Iran and one of its proxies, the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
About $190M will be spent on the restock of the sea-launched RTX SM-3 and about $8.5M will go for more heat-seeking air-to-air AIM-X Sidewinder missiles.
The largest chunk of projected Pentagon spending from a year’s worth of Middle East operations is $300M for unplanned depot maintenance on the USS Bataan amphibious assault ship and ships with the USS Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group that conducted Red Sea operations.
Requests for $276M to buy additional SM-6 , $57.3M for Tomahawks and $6.7M for Enhanced Sea Sparrow self-defense missile.
Other Defense Tech News
Army
3ID Building Network Architecture to Move Complexity From Brigades
The concept, while in line with strategic Army priorities to move complexity to division, is being done using existing capabilities differently.
As the Army is shifting for potential conflict against sophisticated nation states at much greater distances, senior leaders have expressed the need to move network complexity up from brigades and into their parent division headquarters.
The 3rd ID is taking it upon itself — using existing capabilities and tools without purchasing anything additional — to produce a new network architecture that will unburden brigades and make units more mobile for large-scale combat ops.
One of the main thrusts of the effort was keeping these cyber defenders and infrastructure in a static, sanctuary location, which allowed greater overwatch of the network and made it easier for units to maneuver and plug in.
As part of the overall concept, the division built a security operations center with all the cyber defenders and sever personnel. With the network personnel, they built a network operation security center following the deployment to Europe to be able to control the whole network.
Army Making Moves in Signature Management Chess Match
How the Army employs and exploits information — and counters an adversary’s efforts to do so — has come into focus as of late. The service released its first doctrinal publication dedicated to information in November 2023 and the U.S. no longer has a leg up on the competition.
While technological advancements and increased global connectivity have expanded the Army’s own capabilities in the information space, our primary adversaries now have many of the same capabilities to employ or exploit information as the U.S. does, and they are willing to employ them during competition, crisis and conflict.
Army Cyber Command will use exercises and experiments in FY24 and FY25 to wargame the TIAD concept, which will inform what capabilities the units will require to excel in this mission space.
The command’s permanent theater information advantage detachment is expected to activate in 2026.
Having digital twins of its capabilities would give the Army a near real-time view about what our systems emit and how they appear to adversary surveillance.
“The issue of signature management actually now has to involve more thinking not about reduction but deception. The Ukrainians are reporting that the time from detection of some kind to a fires coming in is roughly three-plus minutes, and so it gives real meaning to shoot and scoot. And so I think there needs to be a comprehensive rethink, everything from acquisitions to training, to take this into account.” Peter Singer
The Army’s Chief of Staff Has Ideas on the Force of the Future
Range George wants to reinvent the Army continuously for a new age.
GEN George’s priority is building lethal and cohesive teams. Everything else is secondary.
Army ammunition factories are working at full pelt. They produced 40,000 rounds of 155mm artillery shells in August, up by one-third from February, and are nearing 50,000 per month. That is expected to double in a year’s time.
After years of missing its recruitment targets, the army last month exceeded its goal for the year by 10,000 soldiers.
America’s national defense strategy is explicit: China is the priority. But any war over Taiwan would involve mainly air and naval forces, and the army maintains a big presence in Europe.
The war in Ukraine has shown that weapons may work well for a while until the enemy adapts.
America’s GPS-guided shells have been blunted by Russian jamming. Drones’ software and sensors need updating every six to 12 weeks to stay effective.
Three brigades serve as laboratories for innovation, testing the newest tech in exercises and giving feedback on what works.
Alex Miller, Army' CTO, said in the past the Army would gold plate requirements and push over-engineered kits to units years late. The experimental brigades instead quickly buy things to suit their environment.
They have users, developers, and testers all there together.
The Army’s new requirements document for a C2 system is only 5-pages, a bureaucratic revolution to the long tomes of past weapons systems.
The ultimate test is scaling new processes from three experimental brigades to 59.
“We’re fully aware of how much the world has changed just over the last couple years, with commercial tech.” GEN Randy George
Our Take: There are promising opportunities in this story. Streamlined requirements, rapid iteration with users and developers, and harnessing commercial solutions.
Army Awards Big Contract for Coyote Interceptors Amid Growing Demand for Counter-Drone Weapons
Raytheon received another large contract from the Army for its Coyote interceptors, one of the latest moves in efforts to expand its arsenal of counter-drone systems.
The $197M contract is cost-plus-fixed-fee.
Bids were solicited via the internet and one was received
Earlier this year, the service awarded a $75M contract to RTX Corp., the parent company of Raytheon, to produce 600 Coyote Block 2C interceptors.
Army views Coyote as a key component of its counter-drone system of systems.
The ground-launched, radar-guided interceptor — which comes in kinetic and non-kinetic variants — integrates into fixed site-low, slow, small-unmanned aircraft system integrated defeat systems and mobile-slow, small-unmanned aircraft system integrated defeat systems.
Army’s Future Helicopters Could be More Autonomous and Launch Their Own Drones
As battlefields become increasingly hostile to conventional combat platforms, the Army is pushing forward with its two-decade effort to develop a new family of helicopters and rotorcraft through its Future Vertical Lift program while incorporating lessons from the war in Ukraine.
The Army recently concluded a major experimental event focused on its Future Vertical Lift program at its Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona.
Five unidentified companies were selected to participate out of 36 applicants.
Experimental Demonstration Gateway Event (EDGE) 24 ultimately included one robot, seven ground technologies, three aerial platforms, and 28 launched-effect surrogates – launched effects refers to uncrewed vehicles that can be fired from another platform.
“The future is going to be about who can properly integrate humans and machines effectively, how do you optimize those two things.” GEN James Rainey
Other Army News:
Army Seeks New Industry Input for Next Generation C2 Initiative
FLRAA 2: Army to Enhance Next-Gen Assault Aircraft To Replace Black Hawk
Navy
Navy Struggling to Contain Costs for Columbia-Class Sub Program
The government could be responsible for hundreds of millions in additional construction costs for the lead submarine.
A new independent audit of the Columbia-class submarine program shows the Navy is struggling to contain the price of the shipbuilding program with cost overruns reaching 6X the prime contractor’s estimates and 5X the Navy’s.
Cost and schedule performance for lead submarine construction has consistently fallen short of targets.
The program has reported that the shipbuilder needs to take swift and significant actions to address the causes of poor construction performance.
GAO acknowledges the billions in funding the Navy has distributed to its suppliers since 2018 to strengthen the industrial base, but auditors said the service has failed to ensure the investments support construction goals or that outsourced work meets quality expectations.
The Navy just recently awarded a $950M contract to Texas-based, non-profit BlueForge Alliance to continue doing as much.
Read GAO Report on Columbia Class Submarine Challenges
A Memo to Our Presidential Candidates—Restore Our Naval Dominance
A nation’s standing in the world has always been judged by the strength of its naval fleet—both the quantity and quality of its ships and the people who man them.
President Theodore Roosevelt sent the world a powerful message by building the Great White Fleet and sent 16 new battleships on a worldwide cruise in 1907.
Teddy Roosevelt’s message was the U.S. was a maritime power with a capable and congressionally supported blue-water fleet.
Support for a strong maritime capability continued during the Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt administration when the fleet’s size was tripled.
While multiple Presidents were influenced by Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan’s "The Influence of Sea Power Upon History,” military and political leaders have either forgotten his work or have chosen to put his books on the shelf.
Chinese leaders meanwhile have studied his theories as China’s navy has been transformed into a modern and capable force that is the largest in the world with a battle force of over 370 ships growing to 395 by 2025 and 435 by 2030.
Presidential candidates should understand that our nation’s security and prosperity depend on free and open international waters.
In a $115T global economy, 80% of trade by volume and 70% by value moves be sea. Additionally, 95% of international data moves along undersea cables.
The next President and Congress should support Adm Franchetti’s recent plan to increase the Navy’s readiness and have 80% of the force ready for combat by removing delays in ship maintenance and using drones and autonomous systems.
If we are to prosper as a country, we have no choice but to restore our Navy to its greatness and help shape the world to one that is peaceful and stable. Otherwise, China, Russia and Iran will do it for us.
“A good Navy is not a provocation to war. It is the surest guaranty of peace.” President Teddy Roosevelt.
The Key to an Overarching Navy Warfighting Concept
As great power competition becomes an increasingly grim reality, senior officers are coming to terms with the end of a globally permissive, power projection environment.
Strategists and planners can no longer assume that limited naval forces in theater can transit to some crisis epicenter and influence events by threatening or projecting power ashore with little interference.
The impact of this change is only now reverberating across Navy communities, raising the specter of profound disruption of long-standing procedures and the obsolescence of familiar capabilities.
Several emerging warfighting concepts shape today’s Navy operations.
The quest to develop distributed maritime operations – that is, to disperse long-range fires, sensors, communications, and command and control nodes across platforms separated by significant distances – is an ongoing project intended to defeat opposing anti-access and area denial capabilities.
In the Pacific, non-traditional sea denial capabilities, so-called “hellscape” swarms of autonomous platforms, have become a centerpiece of the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s plan to defeat a cross-strait assault on the Island of Taiwan.
This operational churn is a healthy reaction to the waves of techno-strategic change confronting the Navy.
However these operational concepts focus on warfighting, they fail to address the movement of U.S. defense strategy towards a more robust deterrent posture.
When it comes to Integrated Deterrence (as articulated in the NDS), the Navy can make two key contributions that signal to friend and foe alike the U.S. capability and willingness to make good on its diplomatic and military commitments.
These contributions to deterrence take the form of a bi-modal deterrent strategy and concept of operations that draws a distinction between sea control and sea denial forces.
Sea control demonstrates that the U.S. will always be able to influence worldwide events and that opponents will not succeed in efforts to isolate allies and partners - it is the glue that binds America’s alliances together.
Sea denial deters aggression by complicating opponents’ planning, by placing the onus for initiating a significant conflict on the opponent, and by holding the line until the Joint Force can be brought to bear in battle.
Current Navy strategy, Distributed maritime operations (DMO), could be seen as increasing both sea denial and sea control capabilities by harnessing the offensive capability of far-flung forces, while minimizing vulnerability to hostile action.
However, a new Maritime Deterrent Strategy is needed that adapts a bi-modal operational concept of operations and serves as a useful blueprint to synchronize the Navy’s response to today’s security setting.
Navy Will Pick a 6th-Gen Fighter as Air Force Pauses NGAD
In the race to field the first sixth-generation fighter, the Navy is pressing ahead as the Air Force pauses its program amid concern that it’s too expensive and might not be the best answer to emerging threats.
The Navy will soon decide between competitors Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman.
The Navy expects to award a contract for its next-generation, carrier-based fighter and expects the long-range attack jet to enter service in the 2030s
The Navy’s F/A-XX (NGAD) is meant to replace its F/A-18 Super Hornet multi-role fighters and E/A-18 Growler EW attack aircraft, have greater range and possess more sensing and electronic warfare capabilities than the F-35C.
Air Force leaders have indicated they prefer a less-costly option and are willing to sacrifice range and payload, which could mean opting for a single engine rather than two (although requiring a new tanker).
The Navy is not without budget challenges of its own, however Franchetti’s comments indicate a new crewed fighter is still a Navy priority at the very moment when the Air Force effort appears to be in limbo.
Earlier this year the Navy delayed roughly $1B in investments for F/A-XX to focus on near-term readiness.
Congress may also cut the F/A-XX budget even more.
“We expect that sixth-generation platform to be able to have advanced sensors, advanced lethality, advanced range, and being able to integrate with manned and unmanned capabilities together. That’s one of the things, as we learn from the Air Force and the work they’re doing, to integrate that with what we know that we need to be able to do. I think more broadly, as all the services work together to make sure that they have complementary capability.” ADM Lisa Franchetti, CNO
Adding Second Virginia-Class Sub Would Come at Expense of Navy’s Next-Gen Fighter
Lawmakers hoping to authorize a second Virginia-class submarine in FY25 could throw a wrench into the development of the Navy’s sixth-generation fighter, potentially delaying the fielding of the new aircraft.
Adding a second submarine would require the Department to reduce the Next Generation Fighter program by $400M, making the fighter program unexecutable and degrading the Navy’s ability to field next generation aircraft capabilities required in the 2033 to 2037 timeframe.
The Navy has stated that industry would not be able to produce a second submarine “on a reasonable schedule,” and urges lawmakers instead to stick to the budget plan laid out by the Navy, which called for only one Virginia-class sub.
SSN(X): The U.S. Navy’s Next Generation Submarine Is in Zombie Land
The SSN(X) futuristic submarine that will replace the Virginia-class boats is experiencing delays. The SSN(X) may not come to fruition until the early 2040s.
The problem is that the SSN(X) is not receiving enough research and development funds in the FY25 defense budget. The experimental sub-program will likely not begin full-time work at the shipyard until 2031.
Funding for these next-generation programs may take a hit in the coming years. It isn’t easy to convince Congress to open up the purse strings for a submarine that will take two decades to build.
Our Take: DoD needs to stop allocating billions of dollars [SSN(X) is getting ~$500M in FY25 which is likely to continue year over year] to develop new exquisite programs when the ones they are currently fielding have major challenges and the lifecycle costs are likely to impact future investments. This is especially true given current systems are supposedly being designed for modularity and to be rapidly upgradeable. Let’s instead focus more funding on hedge capabilities that can augment/amplify the already exquisite capabilities being fielded.
Navy’s Continuing to Learn Countering Drones, Missiles in the Red Sea
One of the key lessons from the Navy’s recent engagements with Houthi missiles and drones in the Red Sea is being adaptable on the battlefield to use existing systems differently.
Over the last year, Navy assets in the region have come under fire from a barrage of systems launched by the Houthis to include one-way drones and missiles.
Navy ships have used a variety of expensive missiles to shoot down these assets.
One of the biggest lessons Franchetti touted was the ability to take data from weapon systems to learn and improve tactics. Engineers can work with industry to devise fixes against these capabilities the Houthis are employing.
“Using Hellfire against unmanned surface vehicles, air-to-air, aviation platform shooting down UAVs. These are things where we’re really learning. I think that Ukraine has shown us that you can innovate on the battlefield. I want to innovate before the battlefield, so we can stay ahead of any adversary any time.” ADM Lisa Franchetti
Other Navy News:
Navy Tests Sonobuoy Deployment from CH-53E Super Stallion Helicopter
RTX’s Raytheon contracted for Navy Next Gen Jammer Mid-Band Expansion
Lockheed Martin Secures Combined $3.3B Deal for Trident II D5 Missile
Navy’s 80% surge-readiness target is a ‘stretch goal,’ says CNO
Air Force
Air Force Awards Lockheed $3.2B Multiyear Missile Contract
The sole-source contract is for AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles (LRASM) and AGM-158B Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSM) and will include foreign military sales to Japan, the Netherlands, Finland and Poland.
The plan included a strategy called a large lot procurement pilot program. This contract will allow Lockheed to increase the number of JASSMs and LRASMs it can produce each year.
The Air Force is providing $1.5B in missile procurement funds and $2M in O&M funds at the time of the award, and the Navy is providing $176M in its own weapon procurement funds.
The Pentagon is also obligating another $752M of FMS funds for the contract.
The JASSM is a cruise missile designed to allow aircraft to strike ground targets while keeping a safe distance away from enemy air defenses or other hostile aircraft. The LRASM, based on the JASSM’s design, is intended to penetrate enemy air defense targets to take out ships from standoff range.
CCA Drones Could Cost Less Than $1,200 per Pound—But Can They Get Sensors to Match?
Collaborative Combat Aircraft—the autonomous “wingmen” drones the Air Force is pursuing to pair with manned fighters—can truly provide “affordable mass” because their per-pound cost could be two-thirds or even less than a crewed fighter.
What is not yet in hand are “exquisite” sensors whose price matches the low cost of the airframe.
The major cost of CCAs is going to be mission equipment including items such as radars, electro-optical cameras, and ISR equipment.
“Crewed fighters and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft normally cost somewhere between $4,000 and $6,000 a pound but years of development have seen that drop to $1,200 a pound for CCA-type equipment, and everybody’s working hard to get even below $1,000 a pound. That’s how you get the affordability, at the same time that you get the survivability.” Robert Winkler, VP at Kratos Defense and Security Systems.
The Rise of Small, Fighter-Like Drones in Air Force Thinking
CCAs are the disruptive agent in USAF force planning, which has invested heavily in a structure that risks being overmatched in the Western Pacific.
The expansion of Chinese counter-air forces—fighters, missiles, airborne radars and air-warfare ships—presents more threats than the projected US force can handle, regardless of quality or training.
Hence the watchwords for the CCA effort are ‘speed’ and ‘affordable mass’—the ability to generate credible threats for Chinese forces at a fraction of the cost of crewed aircraft and to start fielding in numbers by the late 2020s.
Test platforms are designed to allow live evaluations of CCA concepts of operations (CONOPS) to determine how the crewless aircraft will be controlled and operated alongside current and future combat aircraft and support assets.
Anduril has been putting in a lot of CONOPS work over privately owned land, with a fleet of manned surrogate aircraft.
For the USAF, the purpose of early increments in the CCA effort is to evaluate CONOPC and tactics. Increment 1 will be aimed at air-to-air combat with the CCA serving a missile truck role.
Increment 2 CCAs will be designed to support electronic attack and demonstrating a resilient sensing grid.
The second CCA increment will evaluate different styles of sustainment, and different modes of take-off and landing.
An emerging requirement is to operate CCAs in small, disaggregated units in the first island chain (from Japan to Indonesia) using shorter or improvised runways substantially shorter than the 8000-foot (2400-metre) military standard.
This reduces the range requirement for the CCA, shortens response time and potentially increases sortie rates, but will require mobility, camouflage, concealment, deception and air defense to survive Chinese attacks.
The advent of CCAs and planned changes to NGAD came as a shock to the industry, against a background of contentious politics and rising world tension.
Kendall and senior Pentagon leaders seem to have made up their minds that the hour of the unmanned combat aircraft is upon us.
Air Force Taps Leidos to Lead Digital Infrastructure for Connect-Everything Effort
The $303M contract covers “planning, analysis, and operations” for the digital infrastructure network of the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System
Is a Stealth Bomber-Shaped Plane the Future of Air Travel?
Start-up JetZero and its backers hope the new aircraft will be the future of commercial aviation and offer a way to slash carbon emissions. The eye-catching design — which borrows from the “blended wing” appearance of stealth bombers — has attracted interest from airlines on both sides of the Atlantic.
The company plans to start flights with a full-scale demonstrator in 2027.
JetZero last year won a $235M contract from the Air Force to develop a demonstrator aircraft.
JetZero’s design combines wings and fuselage in a manner similar to the Air Force’s B-2 bomber.
This design, according to the company, will allow its aircraft to use 50% less fuel than a comparable conventional design but with existing engine technology. It should also produce 50% fewer emissions.
Space Force
NGA Seeks Help Training AI to Translate Imagery for Targeting Intel
The Sequoia ID/IQ contract will support the Maven Program, which applies AI capabilities to ISR sensors and platforms, primarily through computer vision.
NGA issued a call to industry — worth up to $708M over a maximum of seven years — for help training AI-driven computer vision systems to, among other tasks, process satellite imagery and identify targets of interest.
The increasing amount of GEOINT data pouring in from myriad new satellites and other sensor platforms is posing a challenge for the IC.
While AI systems will help speed analysis, AI visual models first must be taught to accurately recognize military targets and ferret out abnormal activities.
DoD Seeks Innovations in Small-Satellite Propulsion
DIU issued a solicitation for proposals on electrospray thrusters.
Other Space News:
Space Force’s Move to Define Concepts Wins Praise, Courts Concerns
Space Force Taps Impulse Space for Next Round of Tactically Responsive Demos
NRO New Proliferated Spy Sat Constellation Moving into Operational Phase
International
AUKUS Eyes Opportunities for Expansion On a Project-by-Project Basis
The AUKUS trilateral security partnership is making progress in new discussions with Japan about deepening collaboration to jointly advance the interoperability of their militaries’ maritime drone systems.
Pillar 1 is a complex, multi-year effort that requires significant detail, commitment, and investment from all participating countries without the ability to easily add additional nations.
Under Pillar 2, DoD sees more opportunities to offer other countries the ability to work on specific projects.
Momentum is building in terms of amending respective export control regimes, particularly reforms to ITAR, to make it easier for the partners’ industry players to share software, hardware and technical data in a safe and compliant manner.
Pillar 2 announcements included the results of the first-ever AUKUS innovation challenge, which was facilitated by and with the DIU.
What Reports Got Wrong About China’s Sunken Nuclear Submarine
The purported sinking of a Chinese nuclear submarine at a Wuhan shipyard pier is the latest example of Western reporting on military developments in China that overlooks important details and context, or even takes the wrong lessons from the fragments of stories they tell.
The media reports focusing on the potential nuclear nature of the shipyard accident missed what this submarine actually does tell us about PLA naval modernization.
Today’s Chinese subs lack a vertical launch system, or VLS, limiting their ability to carry and quickly fire land-attack and anti-ship missiles - the ill-fated submarine, by contrast, had an extended hull that appears to contain a VLS.
Nuclear-powered or not, the prospect of numerous, difficult-to-locate submarines that can deliver a vastly larger salvo of weapons against ships or air bases would boost Chinese capability and complicate allied defense plans.
Chinese Firms Lead US firms in Remote Sensing Olympics
A new assessment of global commercial remote sensing satellite systems shows that Chinese firms are edging out U.S. commercial firms in capabilities across a broad range of sensor technologies.
The report, “Gold Rush: The 2024 Commercial Remote Sensing Global Rankings,” was released today by the CSIS.
The stakes are high. Should any one country dominate the commercial remote sensing market, not only could it gain economic advantages, but it would also control the information narrative about the entire planet, from the environment to natural resources to human conflict.
The authors presented recommendations that the US government should take as ‘a regulator, investor, and customer’ to keep U.S. companies at the cutting edge of technology and globally competitive.
“Those China flags matter. We’re in a competition. It’s not a secret, okay? It’s an open competition, and as any world competition, state competitors are going to use everything at their wherewithal to create their advantage. So we should take it also as a warning that this game is afoot.” Robert Cardillo, former NGA Director
Podcasts, Books, and Videos
There’s More in the Defense Industrial Base Than the DoD May Be Aware Of w/Jeb Nadaner, Federal News Network
Unlocking AI’s Future: Alexandr Wang on the Power of Frontier Data, a16z
XM-30, CJADC2, and Poland, National Defense
High Stakes Learning: Winning Strategies for Sports and Defense w/TJ Rowe, Second Front
AI Takes the Mic, Defense Mavericks
Evan Smith, CEO Altana AI, Building the Base
NGAD, Chinese ICBM Test, and Spacepower, Aerospace Advantage
Upcoming Events and Webinars
Stanford Conference on Technology + National Security, Oct 8-9, Stanford, CA
Defense Conference 24, PSC, Oct 8, Arlington, VA
Stanford Conference on Technology + National Security, Oct 9, Stanford, CA
Pacific Defense Contracting Summit, DLF, Oct 8-10, Honolulu, HI
AUSA Annual Meeting and Expo, Oct 14-16, Washington DC
Midwest Defense Innovation Summit, Oct 16-17, Indianapolis, IN
Integration for Innovation: CNAS Defense Tech Task Force Event, Oct 18
Leveraging AI in Acquisition Symposium, NDIA, Oct 18, McLean, VA
Integrating cATO With Agile, DevSecOps Practices, Aquia, Oct 22, Webinar
TechNet Indo Pacific, AFCEA, Oct 22-24, Honolulu, HI
Expeditionary Warfare Conference, NDIA, Oct 22-24, Laurel, MD
AI+Robotics Summit, SCSP, Oct 23, Washington DC
Microelectronics Commons and NSTC Symposium, Oct 28-30, Washington, DC
Systems and Mission Engineering Conference, NDIA, Oct 28-31, Norfolk, VA
AI Summit, GovCIO, Nov 7, Reston, VA
Reagan National Defense Forum, Dec 6-7, Sumi Valley, CA
Defense Manufacturing Conference, JDMTP, Dec 2-5, Austin, TX
I/ITSEC Training/Simulation Conf, NTSA, Dec 2-6, Orlando, FL
See our Events Page for all the other events over the next year.
Join the thousands of subscribers to get our weekly recaps and thought pieces. Paid subscribers also get budget and legislative analysis and are valued supporters of our work.