Back to news

December 9, 2020 | International, C4ISR, Security

DoD and Australia ink first-ever cyber training partnership

WASHINGTON — The U.S. military and Australia announced a first-of-its-kind agreement to develop a virtual cyber training range together.

U.S. Cyber Command will incorporate Australian Defence Force feedback into the Persistent Cyber Training Environment (PCTE), per a Cyber Training Capabilities Project Arrangement signed Nov. 3. This agreement is valued at $215.19 million over six years and provides the flexibility to develop cyber training capabilities for the future, Cyber Command said in a release Dec. 4.

PCTE is an online client that allows Cyber Command's warriors to log on from anywhere in the world to conduct individual or collective cyber training and mission rehearsal. In the physical world, military forces regularly go to a training facility, such as the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, to work on particular concepts or rehearse before deploying. But a robust environment has not existed for the Department of Defense's cyber warriors, creating readiness gaps.

The program is run by the Army on behalf of the joint cyber force.

“Australia and the U.S. have a strong history of working together to develop our cyber capabilities and train our people to fight and win in cyberspace,” said Australian Army Maj. Gen. Marcus Thompson, the Australian signatory and head of Information Warfare for the Australian Defence Force. “This arrangement will be an important part of the ADF's training program, and we look forward to the mutual benefits it will bring.”

In the past, the two countries created cyber training ranges separately, which could take months and stymied cooperation efforts, Cyber Command noted. U.S. officials have long held that the military will never fight alone, and this extends to cyberspace.

“This project arrangement is a milestone for U.S.-Australian cooperation. It is the first cyber-only arrangement established between the U.S. Army and an allied nation, which highlights the value of Australia's partnership in the simulated training domain,” said Elizabeth Wilson, U.S. signatory and Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Defense Exports and Cooperation. “To counter known and potential adversarial threats, the Army has recalibrated our strategic thinking; we've made smart decisions to refocus our efforts to invest in the new, emerging and smart technologies that will strengthen our ability to fight and win our nation's wars.”

Gen. Paul Nakasone, head of Cyber Command and the National Security Agency, has made partnerships — with other nations, private sector actors and academia — a key pillar of his tenure.

Cyber Command has deployed personnel to other nations to conduct what it calls hunt forward missions, which serve the dual role of helping shore up defenses of partners while allowing U.S. cyber personnel to potentially uncover tools used by adversaries to better understand their techniques.

Congress, in the annual defense policy bill for fiscal 2021, also authorized a pilot program with Vietnam — which many cyber experts assert is rapidly growing its cyber capabilities — Thailand and Indonesia to enhance their cybersecurity, resilience and readiness of military forces.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/cyber/2020/12/04/dod-and-australia-ink-first-ever-cyber-training-partnership/

On the same subject

  • The US Air Force wants to continue its light-attack experiment. Will industry buy in?

    February 4, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    The US Air Force wants to continue its light-attack experiment. Will industry buy in?

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — If the U.S. Air Force takes two years to conduct a light-attack experiment — made possible in part by industry investments — and then abandons it, why should defense contractors buy into the next one? That was the question posed to the Air Force's top uniformed acquisition official by one attendee of a Feb. 1 event held by the Air Force Association. "I think there's a skepticism out here,” said Mike Loh, a retired Air Force four-star general who now runs a consulting firm. “There's got to be a requirement or funding or both at the end of that, otherwise you've got guys in industry that are investing a lot of money, and they're looking back at light-attack aircraft,” he said. “What did you do? Nothing. You put it on the back burner.” Loh's question highlights the confusion surrounding the Air Force's path forward on the light-attack experiment, as well as unease about the way the service approaches industry investment in short-term experimentation or development campaigns with no clear contract award at the end of the process. Industry investments have already allowed the service to fly the aircraft, set up logistics infrastructure and try new capabilities Last month, Air Force officials confirmed the service would not put out a final solicitation for the light-attack program. Matt Donovan, its undersecretary, said on Jan. 18 that the service preferred to conduct additional experiments and wanted to broaden the campaign. This latest shift follows a failed attempt to acquire a light-attack plane about a decade ago. In 2009, the Air Force began the Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance program, and its competitors — the Textron AT-6 and Sierra Nevada Corp.-Embraer A-29 Super Tucano — are the same two aircraft involved in the current experimentation campaign. That program fizzled out due to political reasons around 2013, but the Air Force is still hopeful it can press ahead with its latest light-attack effort. “I have ideas of how we go forward, and I think we know how we go forward,” Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, the military deputy for the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, said of the light-attack experiment on Friday. ”We are planning to broaden the experimentation out and carry the experimentation forward, and I think when our budget hits, you'll understand more of what we're doing." Bunch said the experiment has helped validate the Air Force's requirement for a light-attack capability that can counter violent extremist threats in a low-cost manner. “What I don't want to do is end up in a position that I've got F-35s chasing small buses or mopeds or whatever else we may be trying to chase,” he said. But when it came down to it, Air Force officials looked at the new National Defense Strategy — which prioritizes a high-end fight — and decided against making a large-scale buy of light-attack planes in the upcoming budget, he said. The Pentagon's annual report by the director of operational test and evaluation, released Thursday, shed some light on what may have been the Air Force's initial plans for the light-attack program. The service would have purchased 359 aircraft for eight operational squadrons and three training units, with a contract for either the AT-6 or A-29 to be awarded before September, the report said. The Air Force also considered getting a waiver so that it conduct component-level, live-fire tests for both aircraft before making a final downselect. An Air Force spokeswoman confirmed to Defense News that the timeline and procurement quantities noted in the DOT&E report are no longer accurate. Expanding the experiment What becomes of the light-attack experiment remains unknown — Air Force officials haven't made it clear what the service wants to see in future stages of the effort. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein stressed the importance of getting buy-in from international militaries during a Jan. 26 interview with Defense News. He also said aircraft like helicopters and drones could be considered in addition to the turboprop planes that dominated the first phases of the experiment. On Friday, Bunch said the service could look at “technologies we may be able to put on platforms or solutions that we may not have thought of” during the first phase of the experiment. “I know many people have talked about specific platforms. What I want to talk about [is] not necessarily that,” he said. That may point to a systems-of-systems approach similar to what the Air Force is seeking with its Advanced Battle Management System — a replacement for its JSTARS ground surveillance planes that will be comprised of a network of existing and new sensors. But the Air Force will need to be clear with industry about what it wants, said Andrew Hunter, head of the defense-industrial initiatives group at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. For example, “if the answer is that they need to do some kind of dramatic cost-cutting initiative, give them a number,” he said. It might also benefit the Air Force to incorporate prototypes in the large-scale international exercises it regularly holds with partners, which has the added benefit of giving foreign militaries more exposure to technology that the U.S. might buy, he said. “I think people will stick with it for a while because there's still a belief that the Air Force will invest and, more important, that there is still a broad international market for this capability,” Hunter said of the light-attack experiment. But, he added, the uncertainty regarding the future of the effort illustrates the constraints of rapid prototyping and experimentation: There's no promise of a program of record at the end of the road. “[While] there is some value of exercising the muscle ... not every one of these is going to lead to a production program,” he said. After two years of experimentation, the Air Force still doesn't have an answer for how it should fill its light-attack requirement, but Bunch, the acquisition official, was adamant the experiment has had value. "I may be the only one that believes it, but I actually believe it has been a success. We tried something we hadn't done. We built a partnership with industry. We experimented. We learned a lot, and we got to the point where we weren't ready to make a large buy decision at this stage. I still believe that is learning,” Bunch said. “And I believe it is something we will take the lessons learned and roll it into how we go forward,” he added. “We've got to look at ourselves in the mirror and say: ‘Was that good or was it bad, and how do we do it better?' We've got to do our own image check." https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/02/01/the-us-air-force-wants-to-continue-its-light-attack-experiment-will-industry-buy-in

  • US Air Force to issue new refueling tanker request in September

    August 2, 2023 | International, Aerospace

    US Air Force to issue new refueling tanker request in September

    However, much remains undecided over how to field an advanced refueling aircraft the service now calls the next-generation aerial refueling system.

  • How the intel community could use machines and AI

    January 30, 2019 | International, C4ISR

    How the intel community could use machines and AI

    By: Mark Pomerleau The intelligence community has unveiled its multi-pronged plan to compete in the increasingly digital and data-centric world. The strategy, titled “Augmenting Intelligence using Machines (AIM)” and released Jan. 16, outlines how the intelligence community will adjust its investments, personnel and practices to better incorporate associated technologies “To meet its vision of ensuring intelligence advantage, the IC must adapt to the rapid global technological democratization in sensing, communications, computing, and machine analysis of data,” Sue Gordon, principal deputy director of national intelligence, said in the document. “These trends threaten to erode what were previously unique [IC] capabilities and advantages; going forward, we must improve our ability to analyze and draw conclusions from IC-wide data collections at scale.” During remarks at an August 2018 conference, Gordon said she wants the strategy to help focus on what the IC is trying to achieve rather than the technologies that they use.She described the need for getting machines as partners to help derive intelligence as one of the two most existential threats facing the community. The strategy lists four primary investment objectives ranked chronologically. They include: - Immediate and ongoing needs: Creating digital foundations, data and science and technical intelligence. - Short-term needs: Adopting commercial and open source narrow AI solutions, which are AI solutions that are designed with very specific tasks and functions. - Medium-term needs: Make investments in the gaps such as AI assurance and multimodal AI. - Long-term needs: Make investments in basic research focused on sense-making. The strategy notes that the “IC must be willing to rethink or abandon processes and mechanisms designed for an earlier era, establish disciplined engineering and operations practices, and maintain an absolute focus on assuring advantage in an intensely competitive global adversarial environment.” However, it also warns that artificial intelligence and associated technologies are not a panacea or a substitute for creating a digital foundation. Instead, the intelligence community must understand how AI algorithms may succeed and fail. The strategy also aims to bring together disparate efforts in artificial intelligence, process automation, and IC officer augmentation as a way to match investments in AI and data from other countries. One example includes the use of such technologies to create forgeries of audio and video, often referred to as deepfakes, which could lead to difficulties in deciphering fact from fiction. Gordon said in August that the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency is using AI to automate image processing and the National Reconnaissance Office is using artificial intelligence tools to automate analysis of streaming multi-intelligence data for detecting activity and automating tasks of scarce and expensive collection resources. The strategy also focuses on the workforce. It notes that it is much more than technology and implementing the strategy will entail addressing workforce challenges and understanding and shaping the policies and authorities governing how the IC deploys and uses AI. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2019/01/28/how-the-intel-community-could-use-machines-and-ai

All news