May 15, 2024 | International, Naval
In platform design and construction, the best surprise is no surprise
Opinion: The case of the ubiquitous Boeing 737 airliner can provide a useful guide to ensure ships are scalable, affordable and relevant.
September 25, 2018 | International, C4ISR
Former Symantec boss takes over the Defense Innovation Unit
By: Aaron Mehta
WASHINGTON — Michael Brown spent two decades running companies in Silicon Valley, eventually rising to CEO of Symantec, one of the largest software companies in the world, with annual revenues of $4 billion and more than 10,000 employees.
On Sept. 24, he starts a new job as the next leader of the Pentagon's Defense Innovation Unit. While it comes with a much smaller budget, in the range of $40 million, it's a job Brown believes he's stepping into at a critical time.
“My fundamental view is we are in a technology race. We didn't ask to be in this, but we're in it,” Brown said in an exclusive interview with Defense News. “I'm concerned that if we don't recognize that we're in a race and take appropriate action, then we let China move forward and we don't put our best foot forward in terms of leading in these key technology areas.”
Brown spent the last two years as a White House presidential innovation fellow with the Pentagon, meaning he's not coming into the world of defense cold with the DIU job. During that period he met Raj Shah, the previous DIU leader, as well as Mike Griffin, the Pentagon's undersecretary of defense for research and engineering, who now will be Brown's boss. Brown also co-authored a Pentagon study on China's influence in the U.S. tech scene, an experience that has influenced his views as he prepares to take over DIU.
“One of the things I carry with me is I understand the motivation of companies, CEOs, investors because I've been working with these folks my whole life,” he said of his qualifications.
Created in 2015 to be the Pentagon's outreach effort to Silicon Valley, DIU — until recentlyknown as the Defense innovation Unit Experimental — has gone through several high-profile iterations. It opened offices in Austin, Texas, and Cambridge, Massachusetts, but also worked through two leaders. It went from reporting directly to the secretary of defense to the Pentagon's undersecretary of defense for research and engineering.
The group has also faced questions about its future from skeptical members of Congress, and resistance inside the building. The hiring of Mike Madsen to handle the office's Washington operations is expected to ease those concerns, but Brown acknowledged he would be spending time in Washington every few weeks to shore up internal and external support.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Griffin wanted a leader for the agency with a large commercial background, Brown said, “because that's the community we need to access.”
Brown wants to create “the ideal exchange where we have access to all the leading technologies from whatever companies we want to work with on the supply side — and on the demand side we have the effective relationships with the Pentagon, throughout the military, so we can be select about what are the most interesting problems to work on in national security that have the greatest impact.”
The China problem
Brown's comments on China put him in line with the broader Trump administration, whose officials have repeatedly pointed to China as a competitor, and the Mattis-led Pentagon, which has warned of risk from China both as a military competitor and in influencing American supply chains.
DIU, to Brown, has a specific role to play in that race: getting the Pentagon the best commercially available technology, and hence freeing up funding to invest in the military-only capabilities, such as hypersonics, needed to check Chinese ambitions.
More nebulous but just as important for Brown is a new mission for DIU: doing outreach into the commercial tech community to explain the Pentagon's views on China, and why contributing to the departments efforts are worthwhile. Or as Brown puts it, “making sure the companies in these innovation hubs are aware of the technology race that is going on, so that they're not only viewing China as an economic opportunity but also seeing the geopolitical consequences. Being part of that debate is going to be an important role for DIU.”
Brown said some of DIU's top priorities will include human systems engineering, information technology, cyber or advanced computing, autonomy, and artificial intelligence. He is also ordering a look at the various processes DIU uses to see if areas can be sped up, and whether other transaction authorities are being used to their full potential.
He said he did not expect a significant restructuring of the office, but one priority is getting a human resources leader and new general counsel to smooth the transition of future hires. Capt. Sean Heritage, who has been acting as DIU interim head, will return to being the Navy lead for the office.
The former CEO acknowledged that his background and high-level ties to the tech community may open doors that would be otherwise be shut (Brown was reportedly forced out by Symantec's board in 2016 due to company numbers, making him the third CEO to be removed by the company in the space of four years). He also envisions working with academic institutions located near the three DIU hubs to encourage a debate on the issue.
Part of DIU's role is explaining to companies why they should support the department's efforts. Silicon Valley has a reputation as being hostile to the military — a reputation that has only increased in recent months following an employee-led pullout by Google of the department's Project Maven, an effort to incorporate AI into analyzing drone footage.
Brown, however, said those concerns are largely “overblown,” noting the office is already in discussions with well over 500 different tech firms.
“We haven't found there's a reluctance on the part of companies developing the technologies we're interested in working with the Pentagon,” he said. “They are interested in how DIU can help make that process easier for them.”
Brown thinks he is the man to make that happen.
“Contrary to what a lot of folks read or talk about with government, my experience is if you have good ideas and have persistence, you can make that happen.”
On the same subject
-
-
November 2, 2018 | International, Aerospace
General Electric beats Rolls-Royce to power Turkey’s indigenous fighter jet
By: Burak Ege Bekdil ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey's aerospace authorities have chosen General Electric's F110 family of engines to power the prototype and an initial batch of what will become Turkey's first indigenous fighter jet, the TF-X. A senior procurement official confirmed the choice, saying that the twin-engine TF-X will be powered by the F110-GE-129 or the F110-GE-132 engine. “This is a stopgap solution until we have built our indigenous engine for the TF-X,” the official said. Under the deal, the first prototype of the TF-X and an unknown number of initial batches would be powered by the F110 engine. Turkey then plans to switch to an engine to be developed by TRMotor, a national engine consortium. But some aerospace sources say the F110 may not be the ideal engine for a fifth=generation fighter. “If the Turks go for the GE option, they will have to compromise on the stealth capabilities of the TF-X,” a Paris-based defense specialist said. Earlier this year, Turkey and Rolls-Royce came close to a strategic cooperation deal for the development and co-production of an engine for the TF-X. The British company and the Turkish government signed a letter of intent to finalize negotiations on the engine program by July 31, but the plan did not come to fruition. Turkish officials say the idea behind the GE deal is to rely on foreign technology to eventually in the long term build an indigenous engine to power the TF-X. Turkey wants to build the TF-X with know-how from BAE Systems. In January 2017, Britain and Turkey signed a deal worth more than £100 million (U.S. $128 million) to develop the Turkish fighter jet. Turkey hopes to have the first test flights of the aircraft in 2023. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/10/31/general-electric-beats-rolls-royce-to-power-turkeys-indigenous-fighter-jet/
-
July 26, 2019 | International, Aerospace
Boeing drops from next-generation ICBM competition
By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Boeing has announced its withdrawal from the $85 billion Ground Based Strategic Deterrent competition, potentially leaving Northrop Grumman as the only contender vying to replace the Air Force's Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles. “After numerous attempts to resolve concerns within the procurement process, Boeing has informed the Air Force that it will not bid Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) under the current acquisition approach,” reads a Boeing statement. “We've evaluated these issues extensively, and determined that the current acquisition approach does not provide a level playing field for fair competition.” Boeing Defense CEO Leanne Caret detailed the company's issues in a July 23 letter to Air Force acquisition executive Will Roper, which was obtained by Defense News and other outlets. “Throughout the procurement process, Boeing has been transparent with the Air Force about its concerns with the competition,” she wrote. “The final RFP released on July 16 made only modest changes to the draft RFPs that had been previously released. As relevant to the concerns Boeing had raised, the final RFP extended the proposal submission deadline by 60 days, from 90 days after the RFP's issuance to 150 days, and allowed offerors to submit ‘an alternative proposal in addition to their principal proposal,' that could include ‘a single, combined proposal' from both competitors." But Caret said that those changes did not address Boeing's primary concern: that Northrop Grumman would have an unfair advantage in the competition due to its recent acquisition of solid rocket motor manufacturer Orbital ATK, now known as Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems. NGIS is one of two U.S. manufacturers of solid rocket motors, alongside Aerojet Rocketdyne, but both Boeing and Northrop had chosen Orbital as its supplier for GBSD prior to the merger. According to Caret, Northrop only recently — as of July 3 — signed off on an agreement that would firewall Boeing's proprietary information from Northrop's own GBSD team as Boeing negotiates with NGIS for solid rocket motors. Even though an agreement has now been reached, Caret contends that Boeing does not have enough time to negotiate a competitive price for the motors. Caret said the current acquisition approach gives Northrop “inherently unfair cost, resource and integration advantages related to SRMs,” adding: “As I said in my July 8 letter, we lack confidence in the fairness of any procurement that does not correct this basic imbalance between competitors.” Even the Air Force's accommodation that would allow Northrop and Boeing to submit a joint bid “is not a workable solution to these issues,” she said. “Because the final RFP does not address Northrop's inherent advantage as a result of its control of SRMs, Northrop retains the ability to compete on unequal terms against either a Boeing or a joint ‘alternative' proposal — and as a result, would not be incentivized to devote the significant resources required to develop such a proposal,” Caret said. Additionally, Caret said it is “not realistic” to expect that Boeing and Northrop could develop a competitive joint bid in the five months before proposals are due, given that both companies have been working on their separate proposals for more than two years. An Air Force spokeswoman declined to comment on the news, as the competition is currently in source selection. Inside Defense broke the news of Boeing's departure from the competition. Boeing's decision comes a week after the Air Force released its final request for proposals on July 16. A contract for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase is expected to be awarded by the end of 2020. Lockheed Martin had previously competed for the contract, but was ousted in August 2017, when the service awarded technology maturation and risk reduction contacts to Boeing and Northrop. It's unclear how Boeing's departure will affect the ultimate price of the GBSD program. In April, Gen. Timothy Ray, head of Air Force Global Strike Command, said he was counting on competition between Northrop and Boeing to help offset a near-term bump in cost expected as the Air Force makes investments in current infrastructure that will be reused for the GBSD system. Ultimately, that competition would help drive “billions” of dollars in savings over the lifespan of he weapon, he said. “Between the acquisition and the deal that we have from a competitive environment, from our ability to drive sustainment, the value proposition that I'm looking at is a two-thirds reduction in the number of times we have to go and open the site. There's a two-thirds reduction in the number of times we have to go and put convoys on the road.” It would be unusual for the Air Force to move forward with this program with only one competitor, Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, noted in an email. “One option would be for the Air Force to re-write the RFP to address some of Boeing's concerns, which could delay the program,” he wrote. “The RFP had been seen by some analysts as favoring Northrop Grumman because the initial portion was cost-plus, but Boeing's concerns suggest it's worried about a strategic bid by Northrop Grumman.” During an earnings call on Wednesday, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg referred to the GBSD program a single time — to say that the company would leverage its development work on GBSD for future programs such as NASA Commercial Crew effort and next-generation space launch. https://www.defensenews.com/space/2019/07/25/boeing-drops-from-next-generation-icbm-competition/