Defense Tech and Acquisition News
AI, Digital Engineering, Tech Talent, CMMC, Drone Evolution and DIU Unleashed
Welcome to the latest edition of Defense Tech and Acquisition. The big stories that interest us this week is:
Easier ways and tools for DoD to expand adoption of AI and digital technologies.
Digital engineering continues to be the future - and DoD needs help.
Innovative ways for DoD to access critical technical talent cost-effectively - yes there’s an app for that.
Debates on the value of the CMMC program continue - is it worth it?
Unmanned systems continue to shift the thinking on the future of war - and the technology continues to improve.
DIU is unleashed with a budget - and a plan!
Taiwan still isn’t so easy to capture for the PLA and an overseas fleet takes time to build and sustain.
We’ve also queued up a few interesting pods for your weekend listening. Enjoy!
Top Stories
Simplifying AI Deployment for Defense
Developing and deploying AI for national security is a challenging yet critical endeavor. While AI technology races ahead, deployment and operational integration lags, posing a significant risk to U.S. dominance in the Great Power Competition era.
This landscape is outlined in strategies like the DoD AI and Data Strategy and the National Defense Strategy, which highlight the surge in potential AI applications yet emphasize the need for strategic deployment.
The DoD and IC are sitting on “Scrooge McDuck” levels of unique data – decades worth of designs, operations manuals, war game results, geospatial and signals intelligence, human intelligence reports, cutting-edge scientific research, etc.
Currently this data is siloed, unorganized, overclassified, and difficult to find. Much of this data has yet to even be digitized (although the DoD is undergoing a number of digitization efforts).
Even when data is digitized, much of it is not in a format that is easily ingested by AI models (ex: it is unstructured, unlabeled, etc.).
Often, model developers need to employ tools like Unstructured to transform unstructured data sources (PDFs, PowerPoints) into a form that is AI-ready.
Project Maven spends about $100M each year on data acquisition, data curation, data labeling, and DevSecOps and has a team of 400 data labelers working eight-hour shifts year round, labeling GEOINT data from different sources.
Vannevar Labs focuses on developing AI tools to analyze OSINT, sidestepping classified data entirely (analysts can still use Vannevar for classified workloads, but the data being analyzed is not classified).
Datasets used to train national security AI need to be relevant and diverse.
AI model developers can gain a strategic advantage if they are able to get access to real combat data.
There are ongoing initiatives to develop evaluation frameworks for AI models:
The CDAO (in partnership with Scale AI) is actively working on releasing an open-source evaluation framework for LLMs.
Each service is separately working their own evaluation frameworks see the Navy’s GenAI guidance).
MIT Lincoln Lab is working to develop benchmarks for defense ML models.
NIST released a draft AI Risk Framework to assess risks present in ML models.
CDAO released its “Responsible AI Toolkit,” a toolkit to help model developers track and improve AI model performance based on ethical principles.
There are four pieces of the model deployment process that need attention when deploying AI applications for national security customers:
Integration
Certification and accreditation
Hardware constraints
Classified networks.
Our Take: If you’re involved in AI in defense, recommend reading the full piece that offer great insights and thinking on where the community needs to go. They get bonus points for a Scrooge McDuck reference.
Digital Twins’ Could Revolutionize Planes, Cars and Hearts
A new Air Force simulator initiative has a wealth of exciting applications in the civilian world as well.
The Air Force’s latest initiative will unleash the power of “digital twins”—computerized simulators that mimic real-world systems with great accuracy.
This bold effort, dubbed Model One, integrates 50 top military simulations into a unified system to adapt to the ever-evolving landscape of digital warfare.
The blistering speed of software and data, not industrial-era hardware, now drives the battlefield cadence.
DoD can’t currently simulate, much less master, such interconnected hyperwar.
The need to do so is escalating. Aside from improving military decision making, such integrated digital environments are the means to train battlefield AI.
The global digital-twin industry is projected to grow 20-fold, from $6.5B in 2021 to $125.7B by 2030. Some pundits predict it will spark a new industrial revolution.
Leading the charge is Formula 1. Teams began designing more than 1,000 digital twins per race, each iteration shedding make-or-break milliseconds.
By season’s end, F1 vehicles can evolve 85% from their initial designs thanks to this digital-first approach.
Model One is a much-needed attempt to revolutionize digital threading, automating it in a way all industries can use. If successful, such digital trust infrastructure could simplify and accelerate virtual technology globally.
Imagine billions of future technologies being digitally designed, tested, even certified each year—like Formula 1 cars—all without the time, cost, and environmental degradation of physical innovation.
From the racetrack to the skies, that future is starting to take shape. As humanity navigates new horizons, we hope for the wisdom to avoid dark clouds.
Our Take: Many companies are already employing digital engineering and digital twinning to execute their designs and better posture themselves for competitive markets. DoD has struggled as vendors are placed on contract to provide models but talent to make sense of those models in the program offices is limited. There is a heavy dependence on UARCs and FFRDCs. DoD needs to enlist the help of companies like Istari to streamline the digitization of existing analog designs and better posture government teams for the future.
Ukraine’s Robot Boats are Rewriting the Rules of Naval Warfare
Strategists around the world have taken note of the changing dynamics at play in the Black Sea and the implications for flashpoints elsewhere.
Ukraine’s use of aerial drones and robot boats are hampering Russian naval operations in the Black Sea and rewriting the playbook for war planners concerned with maritime chokepoints.
The turn to uncrewed weapons was born of necessity given Kyiv lost its naval headquarters at Sevastopol and a good portion of its fleet to Russian annexation.
Within weeks of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the Ukrainian Navy was effectively out of commission.
Instead of ceding the maritime dimension of the conflict, Ukraine adapted, relying heavily on missiles and, increasingly, drones.
Ukraine employed a legion of USVs and UAVs to hit Russian targets, often pairing the drones with missiles to saturate Russian defenses around Crimea.
Ukraine estimated that its missile and drone actions had knocked out around a third of the Black Sea Fleet’s vessels – a dramatic setback for Russia.
Drone swarms are fast becoming a pressing issue for modern navies.
Our Take: This is an area where the U.S. is woefully behind. Task Force 59, 4th and 5th Fleet are continuing to conduct important exercises, yet it still seems very small scale and the level of integration needed with carrier strike groups and other combat formations is yet to be accomplished. Replicator is tasked to build and deploy command and control systems needed to operate drone swarms. We need a lot more investment in this area and more dedicated leadership focus soon - or we will be learning the lessons the hard way like Russia had to.
Related Article: Ukraine launches new high-powered sea drone to terrorise Russia’s Black Sea Fleet
Why a Drone War in Asia Would Look Different from the One in Ukraine
In 2003, the first year of its war in Iraq, America had a paltry 163 drones, around 1% of its entire fleet of aircraft - now they have come to dominate the battlefield and have spread around the world.
Russia and Ukraine are both reliant on drones to spot targets or destroy them.
The average Ukrainian battalion is getting through 3,000 drones a month.
However, a drone war over Taiwan is likely to look very different from the one which has played out in Ukraine.
Taiwan could use kamikaze drones, such as the first-person view (FPV) racing-type ones employed in Ukraine, to batter a Chinese landing force on the beaches.
U.S. forces could also “flood the airspace” with thousands of larger kamikaze drones to hit any ship in sight.
The problem is range. Most of the small quadcopters used in Ukraine can only travel a few kilometers.
Even the fixed-wing Bayraktar TB2, which carries missiles, only manages 300km.
The closest U.S. base to Taiwan (on Okinawa) is 800km+ from Taiwan strait.
The U.S. could use larger motherships to carry drone fleets closer to their targets, but transport aircraft and bombers are already “in high demand and…overtaxed.”
A CNAS study recommends that America develop not only a broad mix of drones, but among them a “much larger” class of uncrewed aircraft than the sorts that have been prominent in Ukraine and other recent warzones.
That will bring higher costs as drones with longer ranges need larger batteries or larger engines; these, in turn, disproportionately increase the weight and size of the aircraft, driving up the power needed per minute of flight.
Low cost means they can be shot down more easily than a fast cruise missile and can only hit fixed targets. Improving that means better sensors and seekers capable of striking moving things, like ships.
Regardless of some cost increases, there is room for a weapon that comes in cheaper, and can thus be procured in larger numbers, than high-end $3m cruise missiles like the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile.
Proximity to Taiwan means China will operate on a more favorable part of the range-cost curve than the U.S. and can build a larger number of cheaper systems that do not have to travel as far. It also dominates the consumer-drone market.
CNAS Study: Swarms over the Strait: Drone Warfare in a Future Fight to Defend Taiwan
Our Take: The unarguable bottom line is that DoD needs cheaper and more easily produceable systems that can target various adversary assets. There needs to be high-low mixes of drones operating in different domains that can be leveraged for various missions - exploiting an adversary’s weak spot with cheaper, shorter-range drones while reserving more survivable, longer-range ones for higher risk missions.
Gig Work and the Joint Force: A Modern Solution to Leverage Reserve Component Talent
Roughly half of the US military is in the reserve component yet the US military in 2024 is organized and manned by a system designed largely in the 1970s and 1980s, with active-duty forces as the central focus.
Individuals and units of the Reserves and National Guard are wrongfully managed and measured against active-duty readiness and force management constructs.
Predictably, the level of frustration in the reserve forces is very high—the Army Reserve cannot even fill 100% of its battalion command vacancies.
People want to serve, but they are tired of the unnecessary complications or unpaid overtime.
GigEagle.mil is a completely new approach to how DoD understands and leverages its citizen soldiers.
Initially developed by DIU, it is a secure talent marketplace that allows units to access civilian skills from across the joint force for tours ranging from four hours to one year. Crucially, it introduces three unprecedented capabilities to DoD.
GigEagle recognizes that each service member is more than just a rank, occupational specialty, and skill identifiers.
It captures the full talent profile - an individual’s civilian skills and experience.
Instead of viewing reserve component mobilizations through the usual 365- or 180-day lenses, units can be more precise and use their limited budgets much more effectively while being attractive to part-time service members.
GigEagle is a visionary and transformational solution, but as anyone who works on government technology knows, technology is easy, but policy is hard.
Although many units are already tapping into talent via GigEagle, DoD needs to update or clarify policies about how to mobilize and fund reserve component service members to fully leverage this new capability.
A match on the marketplace is worthless without a clear route to making use of it.
Our Take: It becomes tiresome to hear leaders continue to grip about talent issues but then not make the changes needed to the Reserves and Guard and take advantage of programs like GigEagle to bring in critical skillsets when needed. There is great complacency in the personnel side of the military - that needs to change ASAP.
DoD and Congress Should Walk Away from CMMC
After much delay, the DoD’s CMMC 2.0 is reportedly on track to be released in the first quarter of next year, however, it’s worth considering if CMMC 2.0 even needs to see the light of day.
The rise of a CMMC compliance ecosystem — assessors, consultants, explainers, articles, and tutorials, all trying to cash in on the new system — presents CMMC 2.0 as if it is on an unobstructed glide path to implementation.
Frank Kendall before he returned to government said: “Let’s kill this bureaucratic monster before it gets any bigger than it already has.”
Despite CMMC’s worthy underlying goal of better cyber hygiene, problems such as compliance costs, shifting definitions and standards, and adversarial relationships all threaten the viability of this contractor cybersecurity mechanism.
CMMC imposes a largely static cybersecurity architecture around a problem that is evolving using a check-the-box mentality of cybersecurity requirements.
CMMC’s costs are significant and equate to nearly $4B annually over the next two decades - the real costs will likely be much higher.
The largest defense contractors will be reimbursed by the government as part of G&A and Overhead rates on future contracts.
For small businesses, exactly the type of company that DoD is looking to attract in its latest industrial base strategy, these costs may prove to be prohibitive as the price to pay to merely bid on a contract.
DoD has noted it will cost small businesses over $100,000 to have a third-party certify their compliance with just Level 2 requirements.
CMMC sets up an adversarial relationship between industry and the Pentagon.
Instead of bringing industry along and demonstrating to them how it’s in their own interest to safeguard information, CMMC relies on audits and a whole new layer of bureaucracy to support them.
A better approach would be for DoD to help promulgate flexible industry-wide standards, encouraging companies to comply and offering incentives to do so rather than punishing them.
In the end, DoD and industry both want the same goals: cybersecurity for information that matters for business and our national defense.
CMMC 2.0 is not the way to achieve these objectives and it would be best for DoD to cancel the project. If it doesn’t, Congress should act before too many resources are wasted on this effort.
Our Take: We have observed CMMC from its beginnings, have provided feedback to OSD, offered alternative solutions and been critics of its evolution. We held out hope that common sense would prevail but sadly the final version is as bad as its original formulation. There was a point where this could have been saved but that opportunity seems to have been missed. It now (as Bill articulates) needs to be ended in its current form, retitled something new and structured in a more sustainable way.
Reagan Institute Summer Survey
The latest Reagan Institute survey demonstrates a growing desire for American leadership in the world. The American people believe a strong U.S. role in international affairs benefits both our country and the world.
Bipartisan majorities agree on the issue of deterring a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Most Americans (58%) support increasing the U.S. military presence near Taiwan in order to deter an invasion, and 56% support increasing U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.
Defense Tech
DIU Announces Strategic Allocation of 2024 Budget and Plan to Scale Commercial Tech Adoption
DIU announced it is beginning the strategic allocation of the $983M budget.
The spending plan is the result of a rapid, rigorous planning effort in partnership within the DoD, including the Services, Combatant Commands, OSD, and the Joint Staff.
It will focus on expanding and accelerating the delivery of commercial technology to the warfighter with the focus, speed, and scale required for strategic effect—while also aligning with Congressional intent.
DIU’s enhanced budget will be allocated across four categories designed to:
Accelerate vital, ongoing projects (50%): Expanding and accelerating strategic areas of project activity, such as uncrewed system initiatives (including the current all-domain attritable autonomous focus of the Replicator effort), contributions to the Joint Fires Network, critical initiatives in commercial space, cyber, energy, and human systems, and programs advancing operational logistics capability across contested areas.
Initiate new, critical lines of effort (25%): Launch new projects in strategic areas including counter-unmanned aerial systems, space transport, advanced manufacturing, and critically, cross-cutting software and other complementary capabilities.
Bolster strategic initiatives led by partners in the Defense Innovation Community of Entities (DICE) (15%): Accelerate work pioneered by other members of the DoD’s innovation community and partnerships with other DoD teammates.
Break down systemic barriers to capability adoption at scale (10%): Expand regional outreach capabilities through the expanding network of Defense Innovation OnRamp Hubs across the country, increased portfolio and cybersecurity support for small and nontraditional vendors, and access to physical and digital ranges for testing and evaluation.
Over the next few months, DIU expects to release ~two dozen solicitations using our FY24 appropriations for new projects, leveraging our Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) process.
Related Reporting: Pentagon tech hub to launch dozens of new projects with FY24 funding and Here’s how DIU will spend almost $1B this year
Our Take: This is incredibly exciting. DIU finally has real funding and can execute on some of the more significant initiatives that I’m sure past directors only dreamed of. It is a healthy portfolio that supports efforts underway, hedges on some new technologies and works to expand the broader innovation ecosystem. We can’t wait to see the impacts that the DIU team is able to achieve.
Robot Craze in Russia-Ukraine War Shines Light on Their Drawbacks
Despite the notable lineup and exploits of crude ground robots seen whizzing over the battlefield in Ukraine, experts say deploying them in combat remains a costly affair in terms of labor and their vulnerabilities.
The robot craze has engulfed Russia and Ukraine, with the former planning to make them integral military units and the latter’s intent to create robot armies.
The two main issues relate to the lack of higher numbers of UGVs present in military units and their vulnerability to different Russian countermeasures.
UGVs are as much of a target for enemy drones as are crewed armored vehicles, but robots are also highly vulnerable to Russia’s EW tools.
Another factor constraining the use of robots in combat is the absence of fully autonomous navigation in many platforms, hence the necessity for additional equipment dedicated to their protection.
Despite these limitations, Ukrainian forces have successfully used ground robots in demining and cargo-transport missions with systems like the Ratel S (Honey Badger) UGV.
Russia is moving beyond using land robots in a primarily logistics role, with the development of its latest Buggy UGV designed to detonate upon reaching its target (a loitering munition on the ground).
“As there is no truly autonomous UGV yet that can navigate itself to [a] target, the vehicle’s remote control today is also aided by drones providing tactical overwatch, helping to guide it towards intended destinations in logistics, supply and evacuation operations…[making it] very manpower-intensive.” Samuel Bendett, a Russia defense expert at CNA
Is Seat-Based Pricing Dead?
If AI delivers on its promise, it may spell the end of the SaaS business model as we know it.
Historically, cloud software businesses charged a recurring fee based on the number of users of their software - the SaaS model.
Then infrastructure / dev tools software companies took a different approach - more of a consumption-based pricing model
A lot of infra / dev tools, seat-based models:
Don’t align value delivered with price charged (i.e. they undercharge).
Blow up the margin structure of the vendor as product usage creates incremental marginal costs without generating incremental revenue.
The promise of AI is that it will allow you to do “more with less.”
The less here is people. As a vendor, if you’re customers are now able to do “more” (i.e. use the product more / get more value) with “less” (ie seats)
Zendesk (as an example) is shifting to a different pricing model for their AI Agent product (article). They will start pricing based on the number of automated tickets fully resolved by their AI bot without human intervention.
They still charge per seat for human use but charge differently for their AI product. As their customers shift to consume Zendesk more through AI agents vs human agents, the mix shift of their overall business will tilt to consumption.
Our Take: This is an important trend to follow because seat pricing was a relatively straight-forward model (even if it was often overly expensive). DoD is going to have to get more sophisticated in its understanding of different commercial models (including these new hybrid consumption ones) if it wants to maximize adoption of innovation that is being developed for the market.
Spectrum Shortage Threatens U.S. National Security
Congress needs to bring significant concern and attention to the electromagnetic spectrum, which while not visible is incredibly important.
The U.S. has already run out of licensed spectrum for 5G — to say nothing of future demand for AI and quantum computing — and the FCC authority to auction it has expired.
The nation desperately needs more licensed spectrum for 5G to protect national security and promote its technological edge.
The next wireless industry taking root is low-Earth orbiting satellites and its applications for hypersonics, meteorology and reconnaissance, to name a few.
However, wireless networks are under attack from Chinese actors. Volt Typhoon, for instance, is a coordinated Chinese hacker effort to compromise internet-connected devices and hinder U.S. readiness for an invasion of Taiwan.
China conducts these malicious attacks on other nations while it jockeys to dominate spectrum allocation and harmonization on its terms. It wants other countries to follow its standards, so technology is tuned to its frequencies.
China allocates over 370% more 5G spectrum than the U.S. and engages in lawfare to disrupt patent and licensing efforts for spectrum and wireless applications.
The U.S. military and private sector run mission critical systems on spectrum whether for weapons, defense, or commercial applications.
While these technologies have advanced, the military spectrum allocations have stayed the same.
We cannot afford to fall further behind on China in spectrum allocation. U.S. economic supremacy, military superiority, technological stability, and long-term economic vitality are at risk.
Anduril to Build Factory to Increase Dive-LD Unmanned Systems Capacity
Anduril Industries will build a new production facility in Rhode Island capable of churning out as many as 200 of its Dive-LD autonomous underwater vehicles annually.
The company will use its own money, plus some support from the state of Rhode Island, to establish the factory in Quonset Point.
The factory is set to open in late 2025, being operations in early 2026, and then reach full capacity by the end of that year: 50 hulls a year, with the ability to scale up to 200 a year if customer demand calls for that.
The Navy awarded Anduril an $18.6M award to build Dive-LD vehicles.
This new factory will allow Anduril to try to realize its vision to build a massive fleet of AUVs.
The Quonset Point factory will “show the U.S. government that we are ready to and able to deliver on large contracts, if those contracts are forthcoming.” Chris Brose
Memo to the President on U.S. Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing
The U.S. requires a national effort to apply technology to manufacturing at scale.
America’s national competitiveness hinges on the ability to produce key technology products, yet this is a clear area where the U.S. has fallen behind.
In 1980, the U.S. manufactured over 40% of global high-technology goods, compared to just 18% today.
A core set of technologies, from Industrial AI to 3-D printing and intelligent robotics, are converging to transform the nature of industrial production.
Tech like AI, robotics, and additive manufacturing and their application to the manufacturing process create a new paradigm where America can compete.
Such an effort could pave the way for a high-tech industrial renaissance and is necessary to ensure the U.S. and its allies could prevail in protracted conflict.
China vaulted from producing just 5% of merchant tonnage in 1999 to becoming the world’s leading producer of both military and commercial hulls in 2023, with roughly 230 times the shipbuilding capacity of the U.S.
A Call to Action for the U.S. to Lead in Advanced Manufacturing
Launch: Moonshots to Strengthen the Industrial System-of-Systems.
Organize: Close Gaps in the Manufacturing Innovation Ecosystem.
Innovate: Establish U.S. Leadership in Manufacturing Technology Innovation.
Promote: Accelerate Technology Adoption and Enable Scale-Up Capacity.
Pushback: Defend U.S. Markets from PRC Overcapacity.
Defend: Cyber-Harden the Allied Industrial Base.
Cultivate: Tackle Talent Shortages and Skills Gaps.
Ultimately, in order to counter China’s manufacturing dominance, the U.S. must do more to encourage process innovation and spur more rapid deployment of advanced manufacturing technologies.
Our Take: We fully agree with the brilliant minds at SCSP. We need more builders at home. While U.S. companies turned to China and Mexico to mass produce items at lower costs, we lost the skills to design and build. Matt will be at Reindustrialize next week with many of you to build upon on many of these ideas.
Defense Industry Rushing to Hire Workers as Military Spending Spikes
Defense giants have been on their heels after decades of competition with Big Tech over talent.
Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, whose combined market cap exceeds $250B, have nearly 6,000 roles to fill.
Ten more major players are aiming to add roughly 37,000 positions altogether — or about 10% of their collective workforce — ranging from apprentices, engineers, software developers and analysts to senior executives.
A trustworthy supply chain and reliable munitions production is critical to waging war.
Talent exchanges — where troops circulate across private-sector, academic and military projects, as has been floated by the Pentagon — could also grow the workforce pipeline.
5 Ways Your Government AI Project Can Fail
Scientists Squeezed Infrared Light Down to 10% of Its Wavelength
Scientists from North Carolina State University successfully “squeezed” infrared light to 10 percent of its wavelength while maintaining its frequency.
This breakthrough was achieved using a thin membrane of strontium titanate and the phono polaritons it produced after using synchrotron near-field spectroscopy.
This thin film could lead to a variety of new infrared imaging devices and other thermal management systems—potentially shedding heat by turning it into infrared light.
The Future of Nuclear = Small, Mobile, Microreactors
ARPA-H Enters $19M Contract With Palantir for AI, Data Software
Palantir’s AI Platform and Foundry software will support the young health research agency’s data infrastructure and track the progress of its programs.
“We want to find what is revolutionary, not evolutionary, and so to do that, we’ve got to understand really what is the state of the art in a particular field? And so a lot of that comes from data.” Alastair Thomson, ARPA-H Acting Director of Data Innovation
Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) will use Palantir’s AI and data software to support its data infrastructure and track the progress of its research programs under a $19M contract.
Under the two-year contract, ARPA-H will deploy Palantir’s software to rapidly collect, synthesize, analyze, and make decisions from a range of data sources.
Those tools will be used with a variety of agency operations, including with performance data related to ARPA-H’s programs to help the agency track progress and make decisions.
Palantir’s software is going to do is provide a lot of the core infrastructure necessary to run those programs, make those R&D investments, and allocate those dollars as effectively as possible.
“Making good data-driven decisions about when to stop and pivot and try a different approach is really, really critical to us.” Alastair Thomson
Army
Missiles, Drones, and … Microwaves? Introducing the Army’s Latest High-Tech Weapon
“At the moment, there aren’t any really good options for defeating large swarms of 100 or more drones that are simultaneously attacking a target. Today, we not only have a good system for short-range air defense against those types of threats, we believe we are the only effective program solution to counter large swarms.” Andy Lowery, Epirus CEO
The Army took possession of a platoon of four Leonidas high-powered microwave weapons from defense contractor Epirus. And like their laser cousins, several of those systems are reportedly slated to undergo testing at the hands of American soldiers in the Middle East.
A high-powered microwave is a type of directed-energy weapon that generates a cone of electromagnetic interference to disable the electronics of drones and missiles.
In contrast to a high-energy laser weapon, which generates a narrowly-focused beam of energy to literally burn targets out of the sky, a microwave weapon can deliver effects across a much wider area, making them more effective at engaging multiple fast-moving drones simultaneously.
Epirus recently inked a contract to furnish the Marine Corps with a smaller version of Leonidas called ExDECS that connects to JLTVs for convoy protection.
The Navy plans on testing another version against small boats during an at-sea technology experiment in June.
The Pentagon current has several other HPM weapons in its arsenal, but the CRS found none of these systems appear ready for prime time.
“We’re flipping the entire coin over on this equation” with microwave weapons, Lowery says. “Instead of saying, ‘we’re going to build 20,000 drones and meet you drone-for-drone on the battlefield’ in a drone arms race, Leonidas says that there’s actually no need for an arms race. The system has an infinitely deep magazine, we don’t run out of bullets; you keep sending ‘em, we’ll keep shooting ‘em down.” Andy Lowery, Epirus CEO
“High-powered microwaves like the Leonidas put out a beam of energy that’s basically like a forcefield. Instead of using large and unwieldy magnetron vacuum tubes like those employed in the THOR system, the Leonidas system is made up of several solid-state gallium nitride semiconductor pods that are far more compact and generate far more power.” Shane Karp, Epirus spokesman
New Interoperability Standards Key to Implementing Army’s Digital Engineering Strategy
As the Army streamlines its use of digital engineering, the service is promoting new standards that will enable interoperability and data sharing between government- and industry-owned digital environments.
In May, the Army released a new directive to broadly adopt digital engineering techniques in order to improve weapon systems development — from the early acquisition stages of new capabilities to the sustainment of systems already fielded.
Promoting interoperability and implementation throughout the department is one of four lines of effort outlined in the directive, and a critical hurdle will be ensuring that all of the digital engineering technologies the service uses are interoperable with one another.
The Army is supporting an update to the Systems Modeling Language standard that will be known as SysML 2.0 and is expected to be published before the end of the summer.
SysML is an industry standard that provides general-purpose modeling language for systems engineering applications. Developed by a consortium of stakeholders from industry, government and academia, the standard supports system specification, analysis, design, verification and validation.
Nearly all of the digital engineering vendors have communicated that they will adopt and implement SysML 2.0 within the next year.
XM30 and FLRAA are both early in the acquisition process. Other pathfinders include the Joint Targeting Integrated Command and Control Suite (JTIC2S) — also in the early stages of acquisition — and the Integrated Fires Mission Command (IFMC), which is currently in production.
“There have not really been clear standards that digital engineering tools are developed to comply with, and so what we end up with is a lack of interoperability across these tools, which makes that data sharing between environments hard.” Jennifer Swanson
Related story: Army Moves Out on Digital Engineering Strategy
Delays Push Army’s Hypersonic Missile to FY25
Problems with the launcher and launch sequence of the new Long Range Hypersonic Weapon System will keep the Army from fielding its first LRHW battery until FY25.
The Army aims to fix the problems and test the missile and launcher together no later than the fourth quarter of FY24.
Even a successful launch might not be the end of the Army’s worries.
Army officials told the GAO that problems with missile performance in flight testing could further delay the program. They expect to have the eight missiles required for a battery ready within 11 months after a fielding decision is made.
The Army originally said it would field the first battery in FY23. The LRHW has failed several tests since 2021, some of which were attributed to problems with the missile itself. In 2023, two tests were canceled after problems were found in the launcher and launch sequence.
The weapons face problems with navigation due to their high speeds, which may also make them easier to target.
The weapons are also costly, limiting the number that can be produced even as DoD officials emphasize the importance of munitions stockpiles. CBO calculated that a missile similar to the LRHW would cost as much as $41M per shot.
Navy
Navy Eyeing Industry for Readily Available Medium USVs
The new solicitation is another instance where the US Navy seems to be opting for technology that is commercially ready, rather than exquisite and unique.
The Navy is seeking information from industry about imminently available medium USVs it can use for T&E of certain payloads within a year of a contract being awarded.
The Navy’s unmanned maritime SPO is contemplating an accelerated approach with industry to leverage existing, manned or unmanned surface ship designs that can be modified to enable rapid delivery of an unmanned or optionally unmanned surface ship capability.
The Navy’s interest in readily available MUSVs is significant because the service’s marquee unmanned programs of record have often focused on the exquisite over the widely available.
Some of the Navy’s premiere R&D endeavors for medium USVs include Sea Hunter and Sea Hawk, born out of a 2016 DARPA program and later built by Leidos, as well as DARPA’s more recent NOMARS concept, the “No Manning Required Ship” program which selected Serco as its builder in August 2022.
As for the Navy’s Medium USV program of record, the service awarded an initial contract to L3Harris back in August 2020, which allows procurement options to be added if funding becomes available.
However, the service’s current budget request does not show any plans to procure MUSVs within the next five years.
Our Take: Kudos to the Navy for seeking “readily available” commercial solutions instead of exquisite, unique systems. The Navy needs many more MUSVs deployed ASAP. We strongly recommend not exploring “optionally manned” solutions as that constrains operational employment of USVs, sub-optimizes designs, and wastes limited resources. We continue to be disappointed that MUSVs are not funded across the FYDP. The Navy could communicate to industry what its objectives are over the next 5 years with a clear commitment of a certain level of funding - then let industry go to work. We need to rapidly acquire the best solutions offered each year in a competitive environment.
Navy Awards USV Contract to 49 Companies
The Navy awarded a Multiple Award IDIQ to 49 industry partners to support current and future USV systems and subsystems.
Each are awarded tasks involving one or more functional areas, i.e. payloads, non-payload sensors, mission support systems, autonomy and vehicle control systems, ashore and host platform elements, and logistics and sustainment for USVs.
The maximum dollar value for all contracts combined is $982M.
Each awardee will be awarded $1,000 (minimum guarantee) at contract award.
These contracts include a five-year ordering period option which, if exercised, will continue work through February 2030.
FY24 RDT&E funding in the amount of $49,000 will be obligated at the time of award and will expire at the end of the current FY.
Our Take: The Navy needs more contract vehicles that it can begin procuring USVs of different sizes with different payloads. This contract appears to provide a lot of flexibility in terms of the business arrangements that can be structured and the various systems/components that can be procured. The Navy had 55 interested offerors and awarded 49 of them $1,000. That doesn’t cover the B&P costs. They have a $982M ceiling, but until the Navy and appropriators fund this USV work, the 49 companies are on standby with their participation trophies.
A Little Ray of Sunshine for Beleaguered Navy
To say the Navy had a “no good, very bad week” in April would be an understatement.
It started when it was reported days before Sea-Air-Space, four of its major shipbuilding programs including the Columbia-class submarine, Ford-class aircraft carrier, the Constellation-class frigate and the newest iteration of the Virginia-class sub were all over budget and years behind schedule.
A CBO report said the Navy had seriously underestimated the price tag for the upcoming Landing Ship Medium program, an amphib it was building for the Marine Corps. It would cost $340-430M per ship rather than the $150M figure the Navy published.
Jim Juster, the director of the Rapid Capability Office in the service’s PEO IWS, explained how for very little money, his organization took a Marine Corps landing craft and transformed it into an Aegis-capable missile defense ship.
His focus is on solving kill chain gaps using capabilities across the Services.
His office containerized the radars and interceptors and virtualized the operating system by reducing what normally goes in massive computers into two suitcase-sized boxes. It was able to fire at a target. “That’s the day Aegis went portable.”
Doing a similar experiment on a LCS failed spectacularly and the missile went the wrong direction. Instead of getting fired, Navy sponsors asked him how quickly he could try again. The second attempt went as planned.
This was all accomplished through experimentation, which is about bringing together capabilities that already exist to come up with a new capability. It must be based on mature technology.
You can’t go from concept to prototype in 12 months if you’re inventing something new. The current problem is that experimentation doesn’t have a clear-cut funding stream.
Our Take: Kudos to Jim and the RCO team. This is the intrapreneur spirit the Navy needs. Hopefully Navy leaders continue to resource and scale efforts like this to fuel innovative solutions that offer additional lethality faster and reduces costs.
DIU Seeks Systems to Counter Red Sea Drone Attacks
As Iran-backed Houthi rebel groups continue to use attack drones to target ships in the Red Sea, the Navy and DIU are partnering to prototype a counter uncrewed aircraft system that can disable or shoot them down.
The Navy is looking for a system it can easily integrate with a range of platforms to defend against such adversary drone attacks.
The program, dubbed Counter NEXT, aims to quickly test prototypes and field them on vessels around the globe.
It is expected that solutions will be capable of expeditious worldwide deployment, integrated with a variety of naval platforms and must display the ability to be easily integrated into the existing sensors onboard a naval vessel.
DIU plans to use a portion of the $800M budget increase Congress provided in FY24 to fund efforts like Counter NEXT.
Counter Next is focused on kinetic systems that cost less than a traditional missile or air defeat system and rely on mature technology that can be ready for testing within 90 days of a contract award.
While it’s not required, DIU may prioritize proposals that demonstrate the ability to take out surface vessel threats.
Companies must also be able to deliver at least five systems within 12 months of being selected.
Our Take: Buy commercial and deliver at the speed of relevance. BZ!
Related story: DIU Helping Navy Find Cheaper Drone Interceptors
DoD Successfully Deploys Commercial AI Infrastructure to Support Underwater Target Threat Detection
The Navy relies on ML models to support underwater target threat detection by UUV, but, until recently, has lacked a way to monitor and quickly improve post-deployment performance to maintain the models’ operational utility at scale.
AI infrastructure is required to continuously monitor and improve model performance to ensure the systems remain effective.
Without this monitoring and retraining capability, ML models within this mission critical systems risk producing inaccurate or unreliable results.
In 2022, the Navy partnered with DIU to resolve this issue by leveraging commercial technology that could be integrated into the Navy’s existing systems.
Using DIU’s CSO process, the team identified commercial MLOps vendors who could collectively provide a pipeline to track, modify, and redeploy ML algorithms for underwater target threat detection.
DIU awarded five prototype agreements in the fall of 2022 to Arize AI, Domino Data Lab, Fiddler AI, Latent AI, and Weights & Biases as part of Project Automatic Target Recognition using MLOps for Maritime Operations (AMMO).
Under Project AMMO, each vendor successfully prototyped and deployed their portion of the broader AMMO MLOps pipeline - which sets the stage for DoD to safely deploy and manage ML algorithms effectively at scale.
Our Take: This is the type of infrastructure that is so desperately needed across DoD. This will help improve the trust in proposed AI models and provide a responsible approach for deploying them into critical mission workflows. Related story below.
AI-Equipped Underwater Drones Helping US Navy Scan for Threats
Technology halves time needed to identify hard-to-find mines.
The Navy is boosting its deployment of AI that automatically detect targets after successfully testing it on underwater drones.
The DIU effort has helped cut in half the time it takes to comb the ocean floor for underwater mines, said Alex Campbell, DIU’s Navy service lead.
The Navy is now introducing new production contracts to expand the use of the tech in undersea drones and explore how it can be used to identify enemy ships, planes and other threats.
The Navy has been testing machine learning algorithms that rely on sonar sensors to detect underwater shapes and navigate the ocean floor.
AI models loaded onto underwater drones have mostly replaced a time-consuming chore for sailors: parsing underwater drone footage to distinguish fish traps from explosives.
The Navy is also speeding up how quickly it can update the AI models, sending them to the drones remotely when the machines surface on the water, rather than having to remove them from the ocean altogether.
Before, it would take six months to deploy such models. Now, they are down to less than one week.
Successful AI models often require rapid retraining to help adapt to new terrains.
The initiative highlights the Pentagon’s efforts to deliver hundreds of AI warfare projects as the US seeks a technological edge over China, which has put the technology at the heart of its approach to modern warfare.
DIU is working with Arize AI, Domino Data Lab, Fiddler AI, Latent AI, and Weights & Biases on the project. DIU said that its contracts with the firms have a ceiling of $7.5M.
Air Force
Air Force Shifting to Systems First, Platforms Second Approach
The Air Force is evolving how it does capability development as part of its effort to reoptimize for great power competition, prioritizing the underlying systems rather than the platforms carrying them.
Developing the platforms first requires more time to integrate bespoke systems such as radars and communications suites.
But if you start with the systems first, such as common architectures and agile mission systems that form the central core of the capability, and then the platforms — the price of admission when you develop those platforms is to snap into this architecture — that allows you to upgrade at the speed of software rather than integration on all the platforms.
Built to last is a tremendous 20th century bumper sticker, but the assumption was whatever you had was relevant as long as it lasted. I’m not sure that’s relevant anymore. So, that's why we aren’t building in a sustainment structure.
“In the past, Air Force capability development revolved around core functions, so we developed our Air Force in pieces around what's the next fighter platform or what is the next iteration of long-range strike? But when you do that, you start to develop it individually and you miss opportunities in the environment that we're in to be able to come up with innovative solutions.” Gen David Allvin
Air Force’s New Goal: 24 Deployable Combat Wings
The Air Force plans to field 24 Deployable Combat Wings (16 active duty, 8 reserves) to meet its rotational demands and provide a cushion for times of crisis.
Combat Wings replace squadrons as the “units of action” that the Air Force presents to combatant commanders when forces are needed.
Deployable Combat Wings will include command, sustainment, and mission layers, and can either pick up and deploy as an entire unit, or add or exchange mission elements depending on a combatant command’s needs at the time.
Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin said his staff is still developing the roadmap that will enable combat wings to be the operable deployable elements by late 2026.
Two dozen Deployable Combat Wings would allow the Air Force to maintain six wings each in the four phases of the Air Force force generation cycle: Prepare, Ready, Available to Commit, and Reset.
The exact makeup of the Deployable Combat Wings’ force elements may vary, but the wings will be designed to be modular enough that the command and support elements can take on different kinds of capabilities.
What Will Happen to the Air Force’s Next-Gen Fighter Jet?
Aviation observers were thrown for a loop when service chief Gen. David Allvin declined to commit to building the future Next Generation Air Dominance aircraft—a program that was once the service’s top air dominance priority.
This could also be a message to Lockheed to make Block 4 happen on F-35 and demonstrate success there before the Air Force considers giving them more work.
Service officials have said that budget constraints are motivating their hesitancy towards NGAD.
Paying for this next-gen fighter, which is expected to cost about $300 million a pop, will be tough as the service expects to spend increasing amounts of money in the coming years on F-35s, B-21 Raider, and the Sentinel ICBM program.
New technology developments and drones also have the service rethinking the future of air dominance.
NGAD may be the only place the Air Force can take a reduction given all the other programs the Air Force needs to pay for, and the desire to grow its new collaborative combat aircraft program.
The service also may be rethinking its overall concept of operations to rely on B-21, CCAs, and stand-off weapons rather than a traditional aircraft.
“The Air Force may be waffling on NGAD because it’s dealing with a “truly miserable choice. Boeing, which still hasn't replaced the worst senior management team in history, even though it intends to do so, and has a dismal track record, at best, with just about everything in recent years. Or Lockheed Martin, which has absolutely no incentive to execute on this in a cost-effective way.” Richard Aboulafia, managing director for AeroDynamic Advisory
Air Force Mobility Fleet Seeks On-Board Defenses Against Small Drones
The US Air Force is asking industry for help for potentially carrying defensive systems aboard mobility aircraft that can fend off small drones.
According to a request for information (RFI), it’s interested in “concepts and technologies related to an on-aircraft C-sUAS) capability.
Group 1 and 2 UAS are of primary interest, with an objective capability for Group 3 UAS (this comprises the ranges of smaller air drones).
Mobility aircraft already carry defensive systems, such as flares and laser jammers, to defeat threats like missiles.
The proliferation of drone warfare and increasing civilian use of UAS appears to be motivating the Air Force to field new defenses against these threats.
There is also a need for greater situational awareness of the presence of drones, and a way to handle civilian drones that don’t intend harm - this could be very important in a humanitarian mission where different drones are used.
Two Startups Join Forces to Make Self-Flying Tankers, Dogfighting AI, and More
One startup has Air Force contracts to rig a KC-135 tanker and C-130 airlifter for autonomous flight; the other created the AI pilot moving on in a DARPA dogfighting program. Now they’re joining forces.
Merlin Labs is to buy F-16 AI driver EpiSci.
EpiSci, and its sub, PhysicsAI, are the only teams that have been a part of all three chapters of DARPA’s effort to develop an AI fighter pilot:
the 2020 AlphaDogfight Trials
the 2020-24 Air Combat Evolution Program, and
the Artificial Intelligence Reinforcements program.
Merlin, which makes an AI pilot of its own, expects to test it aboard an Air Force KC-135 tanker within the next year.
Merlin’s recent contracts and acquisition of EpiSci come as the future of the Air Force looks more and more unmanned.
Merlin signed a deal with the Air Force to demo its AI pilot on a KC-135 and also won a $105 million contract to bring that pilot onto C-130 transport aircraft.
The company will start its KC-135 work the next couple of months and fly the aircraft with the autonomous system in the next year - then move onto the C-130.
Space Force
Pentagon Seeks to Prevent ‘Titanic-Level Catastrophe’ in Orbit
Space is becoming increasingly congested with both commercial and military systems, and DoD is seeking greater collaboration with partners in industry and internationally to prevent disasters in orbit.
The Space Force is also looking to integrate commercial systems into its orbital architectures with a strong focus on space domain awareness which will help provide insight that can be used to enhance collaboration and prevent mishaps.
Commercial communications constellations such as SpaceX’s Starlink, Amazon’s Project Kuiper and Eutelsat’s OneWeb will hopefully have the ability to connect directly in space to the data transport satellites within DoD’s low-Earth orbit Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture.
Space Force Takes Another Swing at Modernizing Satellite Ground Systems
The Rapid Resilient Command and Control (R2C2) program is the Space Force’s third attempt in recent years to revamp the systems used to monitor, operate and direct the activities of satellites in orbit.
The R2C2 program started over a year ago when it unveiled a roster of 20 companies selected for an (IDIQ) contract valued at $1B over five years.
Under this contract, the vendors compete for task orders to provide the software tools and systems needed to modernize the satellite ground infrastructure.
This aligns with the Space Force’s thinking that previous attempts to revamp ground systems got bogged down in part because they relied too heavily on traditional prime contractors unaccustomed to delivering the type of agile, software-driven capabilities required.
R2C2 follows earlier efforts like the Enterprise Ground Systems (EGS) initiative launched in 2018, which was hampered by overly ambitious goals and cumbersome legacy architectures.
A subsequent program called Ground Command, Control and Communications (GC3) started in 2020 was too narrowly focused on just the Space Rapid Capabilities Office’s satellites.
R2C2 aims to take a more pragmatic, incremental approach by tapping commercial vendors and cloud computing to deliver upgrades to the military’s current ground infrastructure.
Why Is This Year’s Budget Request Cutting the Space Force?
DoD’s $825 billion request was a top-line increase of 1 percent over 2024 and the top line of every military branch increased, except for one.
The Air Force budget and intelligence pass-through both grew 2 percent.
The Navy, Marine Corps and Defense Wide Agency budgets grew 1 percent.
The Army saw minimal 0.2 percent growth.
The Space Force saw a 2 percent decrease.
DoD’s Joint Warfighting Concept, the result of a five-year effort to define what U.S. forces must do to fight and win in the future, is heavily dependent on space capabilities that do not exist today.
Our military forces will need to surveil the battlefield, find opposing forces and target them, all while protecting themselves from attack.
The approach will fail unless we can observe and understand what is happening across a vast area in real time, and our forces and their commanders can connect with certainty while preventing the enemy from doing the same.
This cannot be done at the speed, range and scale required except through space.
The People’s Liberation Army has 480 intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellites in orbit today, and is using them as a space-based network, to find, track and target U.S. forces.
They are fielding weapons to destroy our satellites and outpace us in space. A reduced Space Force budget helps them toward that goal.
A 1% increase in the Space Force budget for FY25 is needed, is consistent with the overall defense budget - and would send the right message.
The nearly $900 million difference between the 2 percent reduction request and a nominal 1 percent increase could be used to great effect in any number of ways.
This includes funding space communications and data relay services from commercial companies, increasing the resilience of ground systems and experimenting with new technologies needed for the future fight.
Starlab Space Adds Palantir as Strategic Partner on Commercial Space Station Effort
Commercial space station developer Starlab Space has added Palantir Technologies as a strategic partner, seeking to use its artificial intelligence capabilities to support station operations.
The companies will use Palantir software to develop a digital twin, or software-based model, of the Starlab station.
That digital twin will be used to optimize operations of the station, detect potential issues and identify preventative maintenance.
“Palantir’s advanced AI technologies will revolutionize how space stations are managed and operated. Further, Palantir’s expertise in data analytics and predictive modeling will drive innovation and efficiency across the entirety of our joint venture.” Tim Kopra, chief executive of Starlab Space
Blue Origin Cleared to Bid on National Security Launches
The Pentagon has picked three companies—Blue Origin, SpaceX, and United Launch Alliance—for its new satellite launch competition that was built to usher new entrants into the market.
The companies will compete for $5.6 billion worth of contracts over the next five years under “Lane 1” of the National Security Space Launch Phase 3 program.
At least 30 missions will be awarded from fiscal 2025 to 2029.
The company pitched its heavy-lift rocket New Glenn, which is set to fly for the first time in September.
Newer companies, such as Rocket Lab, weren’t ready for this first tranche since they had to have a credible path to first flight by the year’s end to qualify.
Emerging launch providers, like Relativity Space, Firefly Aerospace, and ABL Space Systems, will be permitted to join the Lane 1 contract starting next year—if they are ready.
“As we anticipated, the pool of awardees is small this year because many companies are still maturing their launch capabilities. Our strategy accounted for this by allowing on-ramp opportunities every year, and we expect increasing competition and diversity as new providers and systems complete development.” Brig. Gen. Kristin Panzenhagen, program executive officer for Assured Access to Space
International
Think China Can Already Take Taiwan Easily? Think Again.
Chinese strategy is often characterized by its reliance on deception, but like so many authoritarian regimes, the Chinese Communist Party often says exactly what it’s doing and why it’s doing it.
It is through the lens of propaganda and political warfare that China watchers should analyze the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA’s) “punishment exercises” around Taiwan, collectively referred to as Joint Sword 2024A.
When viewed in concert with China’s sustained pressure campaign against Taiwan, an acceleration of Chinese shipbuilding that increasingly dwarfs Western naval production, and a growing Chinese missile inventory with increasing threat ranges, one can easily see a bleak picture of Chinese invincibility.
But looking past the propaganda, China’s real military strength, while dangerous, is less impressive and more brittle than Beijing would have the world believe.
Taking Taiwan would require both the isolation and blockade of Taiwan, as well as an amphibious assault across the Taiwan Strait.
China certainly has the air and maritime strength to establish a blockade around Taiwan, but maintaining one could become strategically tenuous for Beijing if it upends China’s economy, especially its international trade.
Should the United States and its allies intervene militarily, the “patrol boxes” vaunted on Chinese diagrams of their latest drill could just as easily become “kill boxes” for Taiwanese and US forces to target Chinese ships.
Taiwan’s east coast is also more easily supported by allies and partners, who could intervene from the territory of Japan and the Philippines or via air and naval power from the Pacific.
The sheer difficulty of a cross-strait attack is immense. An amphibious assault from China into Taiwan would be larger and more complex than the Allied invasion of Normandy in World War II, requiring joint planning and coordination that the bifurcated and politically divided services of the PLA lack.
Exposing China’s misinformation for what it is and revealing the Chinese vulnerabilities it seeks to cover requires a multipronged approach.
First, policymakers and the analysts who inform them must understand the nature and depth of Beijing’s influence operations.
Second, they must appreciate the relative weaknesses of China and strengths of Taiwan in an invasion scenario.
Finally, they must comprehensively counter the narrative of overwhelming Chinese strength and inoculate their populations against malign Chinese influence activities.
South Korean Giant Hanwha Agrees to Acquire Philly Shipyard
South Korea’s Hanwha Systems and its shipbuilding arm Hanwha Ocean have agreed to purchase Norwegian-owned Philly Shipyard for $100M.
Philly Shipyard was once the site of a US Navy facility. It was founded in 1997, best known for its work producing container vessels and tankers, and is a subsidiary of the Norwegian industrial investment group Aker.
The news of Hanwha’s acquisition comes as South Korean shipbuilding giants have taken a keen interest in American-based shipyards at the behest of Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro who has eagerly encouraged as much.
Earlier this year, Hanwha made a play to purchase Australian shipbuilder Austal, which would include its Alabama-based facilities, but the deal was rejected.
If approvals are given, the deal could close in the fourth quarter of 2024.
“Hanwha’s acquisition of Philly Shipyard is a game-changing milestone in our new Maritime Statecraft. This will bring good paying union jobs to Philadelphia, a city with a 250-year relationship with the U.S. Navy. Knowing how they will change the competitive U.S. shipbuilding landscape, I could not be more excited to welcome Hanwha as the first Korean shipbuilder to come to American shores—and I am certain they will not be the last.” Navy Secretary Del Toro
Related News: South Korean Shipbuilder Hanwha Makes $100M Bid to Buy Philly Shipyard, SECNAV Del Toro Praises Deal
NATO Ready for Battle, but Lacks Stamina, Report Finds
The alliance has made significant strides toward forward defense and deterrence in the last few years, and a recent report said the alliance is prepared for war — as long as it’s short.
The CSIS report found the alliance has made “substantial progress” since 2022 on defense spending, forward defense, high-readiness forces, command and control, collective defense exercises and the integration of Sweden and Finland.
It noted that a long-tern conflict would inevitably expose gaps that will require allies to spend more, boost industrial capacity, address critical capability gaps and bolster resilience.
This includes challenges with the level of military investment (likely needs to be higher than 2% GDP), NATO force structure sizing and its industrial base.
This is not great news as any “serious conflict” between NATO and Russia would likely be a protracted war.
“NATO is ready to fight tonight, as it were, in a way that it hasn’t been in the last two years. But NATO’s maybe not ready for a protracted war.” Sean Monaghan
NATO Targets AI, Robots and Space Tech in $1.1B Fund
The NATO Innovation Fund has confirmed the first tranche of companies awarded funding as part of the group’s one billion euro ($1.1 billion) innovation fund.
The body has allocated funding to:
Fractile, a London-based computer chipmaker aiming to make large language models (LLMs) like those that power ChatGPT run faster.
Germany's ARX Robotics, which designs unmanned robots with functions ranging from heavy-lifting to surveillance.
British manufacturer iCOMAT, which makes lighter materials for vehicles.
Space Forge, a Welsh company that harnesses the conditions of space – such as microgravity and vacuum conditions – to build semiconductors in-orbit.
The fund has also partnered with venture capital firms Alpine Space Ventures, OTB Ventures, Join Capital and Vsquared Ventures to support further investment in deep tech on the continent.
Related Article: NATO Fund Backs German Startup Making Self-Driving Battlefield Robots
US Seeks Allies’ Help in Curbing China’s AI Chip Progress
A senior American official is set to visit Japan and the Netherlands to ask the two countries to add fresh restrictions on China’s semiconductor sector, including on its ability to make the high-end memory chips needed for artificial intelligence.
Specifically, the U.S. will press to limit the activities in China of Dutch supplier ASML Holding NV and Japan’s Tokyo Electron Ltd.,
ASML and Tokyo Electron machines are used to produce dynamic random access memory dies, which stacked together make High Bandwidth Memory chips.
The U.S. has tried for years to limit China’s ability to buy and produce advanced semiconductors, arguing such steps are necessary for national security.
Yet results are mixed, with Huawei and others making significant advances.
The US is seeking support from allies, who have implemented their own less stringent controls, to create a more effective global blockade.
Japan and the Netherlands are key providers of semiconductor equipment. While they have restrictions on exports, they are lacking on servicing, and that’s a critical limitation in the overall technology controls architecture.
The Dutch and Japanese governments are resisting the US pressure, wanting more time to evaluate the impact of current export bans on high-end chip-making equipment and to see the outcome of the US presidential election in November.
While We Quibble & Fool, the PRC Builds
CDR Salamander makes the important point that the continued growth and investment in Chinese shipyards (although the analogy extends to other industries) shows what country is more serious - asking the questions:
“Who is the rising power on a mission, and who is the complacent, entitled power?”
“Who is the power that wants to control the seas by mid-century, and which power cannot see the world?”
Developments at Changxing Island show (1st one is from 2008, second one is from this year) show this perfectly.
China’s Overseas Bases Aren’t a Big Threat, Yet
China’s growing interest in opening more military bases abroad does not pose a big threat to U.S. forces in the next six years.
China is not well positioned to build foreign bases or run them in a way that will improve their ability to contest U.S. naval power.
One reason is that China doesn’t have the same sort of sophisticated command and control structures overseas as the United States.
China also isn’t good at building bases outside of China. There is a dependence on China’s geological features; locally plentiful resources, such as concrete and steel; and sweeping government permissions to harden structures by building deeper underground.
China’s external relations with host countries are also more limited than those of the United States with partners abroad, as China’s are based largely on loans and less on deep military-to-military relationships.
However, they are learning and making moves to correct their deficiencies - by 2030 they could present more of a threat.
The Chinese logistics base at Djibouti is large enough to support vessels like submarines and even aircraft carriers.
China is working base agreements in Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea, Namibia, the Solomon Islands, the United Arab Emirates, and Vanuatu.
The main challenge for the PLA’s employment of overseas bases is the fact that their navy is currently contained by the First Island Chain and South China Sea archipelagos.
Those assets only become very strategic if China can escape out of its containment—such as by attempting to conquer Taiwan.
US Approves Sale of Hundreds of One-Way Attack Drones to Taiwan
The US State Department approved the potential sale to Taiwan of approximately $360 million-worth of drones capable of one-way attack.
They had requested 291 ALTIUS 600M-V drones made by Anduril and 720 Switchblade 300 All Up Rounds made by AeroVironment.
The proposed deal comes amid a global rush to acquire relatively low-cost, expendable, one-way attack drones, as the conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated their usefulness in ever-evolving modern combat.
The US has included both Altius and Switchblade drones in aid packages to Kyiv.
Congress
Wittman: Pentagon Needs to Narrow the Scope of CJADC2
DoD has been full steam ahead on CJADC2 for several years. But an influential member of Congress now thinks the Pentagon needs to take a breath, slow down and reassess the way forward.
Wittman emphasized that while CJADC2 is the right approach, he’s worried that the department’s aims have become too broad without having the basics down.
We wanted it to gather data, we wanted it to essentially annotate data, we wanted it to be able to get it in a targetable form. We wanted to get it out to all these platforms, we wanted to make sure that it was used for decision making. We wanted it to be used for targeting.
When the scope is that big, it’s hard to have one thing to accomplish all of that.
The Services are pursuing their own CJADC2 initiatives, each prioritizing their own connectivity needs.
The Air Force has its Battle Network that reaches through outer space, the Navy is working on its secretive Project Overmatch and the Army’s effort is called Project Convergence.
This has led to past concern there’s not enough jointness in the joint fighting concept.
“What the Pentagon needs to do is, they need to narrow the scope of what they want to try to accomplish initially with CJADC2.” Rep Rob Wittman
Our Take: There is a lot of wisdom in this position. There was always talk of an MVP with JADC2 but it’s unclear if that has ever been adequately defined and accepted by the different departments. The fact is that JADC2 will always be a moving target, there will be greater amounts of data to process and targets to prosecute. DoD should be clearer with the Hill on what an initial capability looks like.
The Senate Steps Up on Defense
A committee adds $25B as it recognizes growing world threats.
Good political news is rare these days, but there are glimmers of light in Congress as it negotiates the annual military policy bill. A Senate committee last week added $25B to the defense budget outline, and in a better era this would trigger a larger election debate about America’s deteriorating defenses.
The SASC voted 22-3 for a NDAA that approves $923B for defense in FY25.
The committee bill is especially notable because it exceeds the $895B defense cap for 2025 set by last year’s debt-limit deal between former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and President Biden.
That cap is a defense cut after inflation, and lawmakers are right to break it. Global threats have become more evident even in the past few months, as China, Russia, Iran and North Korea collaborate.
The committee bill adds money to buy two Virginia-class attack submarines next year, instead of one as the White House proposed. The bill also adds a destroyer and an oiler and speeds up the Navy’s next aircraft carrier.
The budget caps were written for a world that no longer exists, and Congress will now have to adapt its priorities to the new global reality—which means reorganizing from butter to guns.
Our Take: A primary argument for constraining defense budgets per the FRA was to reduce the massive budget deficits, yet the CBO just announced the FY24 deficit for the federal government will grow by $300B from last year to $1.9T.
Podcasts, Books, and Videos
Simple But Not Easy: How to Lead Innovation w/BG Frank Lozano
Overcoming Defense Barriers to Accelerate Innovation, Defense Mavericks
Innovating Defense: Agility Over Arsenal w/Rob Murray, Second Front
Is Russia’s Window for Gains this Summer Narrowing? War on the Rocks
Upcoming Events and Webinars
Reindustrialize: Modernize the US Industrial Base, Jun 25-26, Detroit, MI
TechNetCyber, AFCEA, Jun 25-27, Baltimore, MD
Digital Engineering for Defense, DSI, Jun 26-27, National Harbor, MD
Swarms over the Strait: Drone Warfare in a Future Fight to Defend Taiwan, CNAS w/Hon. Bob Work, Jun 27, Online
Defense Technology Review Conference - AI, UMD Jul 8-10, College Park, MD
DIA TECHINT 2024, AFCEA, Jul 9, Springfield, VA
Capitol Hill Modeling and Simulation Expo, NTSA, Jul 11, Washington DC
GIDE Industry Insights Forum, CDAO, Jul 16, Reston, VA
Aspen Security Forum, Aspen, CO, Jul 16-19
Zero Trust Government, DSI, Jul 17-18, National Harbor, MD
NCMA World Congress feat. Will Roberts, Jul 21-24, Seattle, WA
Space and Missile Defense Symposium, Aug 6-8, Huntsville, AL
Emerging Tech for Defense Conference, NDIA, Aug 7-9, Washington DC
Ground Vehicle System Eng and Tech Symposium, Aug 13-15, Novi, MI
Space Warfighting Forum, NDIA, Aug 14-16, Colorado Springs, CO
Fed Supernova, Aug 20-24, Austin, TX
Intelligence and National Security Summit, AFCEA, Aug 27-28, Washington DC
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.
Thank you for the shout out!