Back to news

September 25, 2018 | International, C4ISR

Former Symantec boss takes over the Defense Innovation Unit

By:

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.”

https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/09/24/former-symantec-boss-takes-over-the-defense-innovation-unit

On the same subject

  • Northrop expands team for program to replace US Air Force ICBMs

    February 26, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Northrop expands team for program to replace US Air Force ICBMs

    By: Chiara Vercellone WASHINGTON — In its quest to modernize the U.S. Air Force's stockpile of intercontinental ballistic missiles, Northrop Grumman has partnered with Bechtel and Kratos Defense and Security Solutions, the company announced Tuesday. The two companies are the latest addition to Northrop Grumman's nationwide team devoted to replace the Minuteman III with next-generation missiles, as the company announced in September its collaboration with hundreds of companies across the defense, construction and engineering industries. “Together, this expanded team has the capacity, capability and credentials needed to deliver – on time – a safe, secure, reliable and effective nuclear deterrent capability for the U.S. and its allies for the next 50 years,” said Greg Manuel, vice president of Northrop Grumman's Ground Based Strategic Deterrent team. Bechtel, an engineering, construction and project management company, will provide construction and integration, and launch system design, according to the announcement. Kratos Defense and Security Solutions, which specializes in unmanned systems and missile defense, will provide vehicle transporters. Northrop Grumman is the de facto winner of the $85 billion contract, expected to be awarded in the fourth quarter of 2020, after Boeing declined to bid on the program by the Dec. 13 deadline. Boeing claimed Northrop Grumman had an advantage to offer the lowest-cost system, thanks in part to its acquisition of one of only two U.S. solid-fuel rocket motor manufacturers. Boeing proposed, unsuccessfully, that the Air Force demand a joint team be formed between the two companies. The Air Force said it will proceed with “an aggressive and effective sole-source negotiation,” according to a statement released in December. Members of Congress have expressed concern over a sole-source contract. House Armed Services Committee Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., suggested the Air Force has shown bias toward Northrop Grumman and questioned the need for the program. “It is very troubling that it's going to be a sole source contract,” Smith said at an event sponsored by Ploughshares Fund in October. “The thing to do would be to address the concerns that Boeing raised about the procurement process. Because, if Boeing is to be believed, they didn't say ‘We just can't do this anymore.' They said the process wasn't fair.” In August, Northrop Grumman broke ground near Hill Air Force Base on a new facility that will serve as the headquarters for the company's workforce, which will add thousands of jobs in the state of Utah, according to the release. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/02/25/northrop-grumman-expands-team-for-program-to-replace-air-force-ballistic-missiles

  • US Navy facing early challenges in modernizing dry docks for submarine maintenance

    June 23, 2021 | International, Naval

    US Navy facing early challenges in modernizing dry docks for submarine maintenance

    The Navy needs to overhaul several dry docks at its four public shipyards so they can accommodate new attack submarines and aircraft carriers -- but the first attempt to build a new dry dock in Maine is already facing cost-overruns and schedule delays.

  • Guam’s air defense should learn lessons from Japan’s Aegis Ashore

    July 31, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Guam’s air defense should learn lessons from Japan’s Aegis Ashore

    By: Timothy A. Walton and Bryan Clark The head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said last week his top priority is establishing an Aegis Ashore system on Guam by 2026. New air defenses will help protect U.S. citizens and forces in Guam; but as Japan's government found, Aegis Ashore may not be the best option to protect military and civilian targets from growing and improving Chinese and North Korean missile threats. Guam is pivotal to U.S. and allied military posture in the Western Pacific. Home to Andersen Air Force Base and Apra Harbor, it is far enough from adversaries like China and North Korea to negate the threat from more numerous short-range missiles but close enough to support air and naval operations throughout the Philippine Sea and South and East China seas. Although the current Terminal High Altitude Area Defense battery on Guam can defend against some ballistic missiles, its single AN/TPY-2 radar is vulnerable and cannot provide 360-degree coverage. Moreover, THAAD's focus on high altitudes makes it a poor fit to defeat lower-flying aircraft or cruise missiles that would likely be used by China's military against Guam. The island needs a new air defense architecture. Aegis Ashore is highly capable, but has its own limitations. Designed primarily to counter small numbers of ballistic missiles, its fixed missile magazine and radar would be vulnerable to attack and would fall short against the bombardment possible from China. Instead of installing one or more Aegis Ashore systems on Guam, a more effective air and missile defense architecture would combine the latest version of the Aegis Combat System with a disaggregated system of existing sensors, effectors, and command-and-control nodes. A distributed architecture would also be scalable, allowing air and missile defenses to also protect U.S. citizens and forces operating in the Northern Marianas. Guam's geography enables longer-range sensing than would be possible from a ship or a single Aegis Ashore radar. Fixed, relocatable and mobile radio frequency sensors should be positioned around the island's perimeter, such as compact versions of SPY-6 or Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor radars and the passive Army Long-Range Persistent Surveillance system. During periods of heightened tension, passive and active radio frequency and electro-optical/infrared sensors could also be deployed on unmanned aircraft and stratospheric balloons to monitor over-the-horizon threats. This mixed architecture would provide better collective coverage and be more difficult to defeat compared to one or two fixed Aegis Ashore deckhouses. To shoot down enemy missiles and aircraft, the architecture should field mobile, containerized launchers for long-range interceptors like the SM-6 and SM-3 rather than Aegis Ashore's finite and targetable in-ground vertical launch magazines. They should be complemented by medium- to short-range engagement systems to protect high-value targets such as the Patriot, the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System or the Army's planned Indirect Fire Protection Capability, as well as non-kinetic defenses such as high-powered microwave weapons and electronic warfare systems that could damage or confuse the guidance systems on incoming missiles. Today, destroyers patrol the waters around Guam to provide ballistic missile defense capacity beyond that available with THAAD. A new distributed architecture would place more capacity ashore to free surface combatants from missile defense duty. In a crisis or conflict, the architecture could add capacity with surface action groups and combat air patrols capable of intercepting threats at longer ranges. Instead of Aegis Ashore's large, single C2 node, a distributed architecture would virtualize the Aegis Combat System to allow multiple facilities or mobile vehicles to serve as miniature air operations centers. The mobility of sensors, effectors and C2 nodes in this architecture would enable the employment of camouflage, concealment and deception, including decoys, to complicate enemy targeting and increase the number of weapons needed to ensure a successful attack. INDOPACOM's plan for implementing new Guam air defenses should also apply lessons from Japan's aborted Aegis Ashore program, whose accelerated timeline contributed to the selection of the least expensive and technically risky option — two fixed Aegis Ashore systems — and the discounting of alternatives. Adm. Phil Davidson's 2026 goal of improving Guam's defenses faces a similar risk. Bound by an iron triangle, Guam's air and missile defenses can be good, fast or cheap — but not all three. If 2026 is held as a rigid constraint, the only solution able to meet the schedule and requirements may be the familiar, and ineffective, fixed Aegis Ashore architecture. Compared to one or two Aegis Ashore sites, a distributed architecture may require slightly more time to develop or funds to field. But a phased approach could introduce new systems as funding becomes available and allow expanding the system's capability to meet the evolving threat. For example, SPY-6 radars, C2 bunkers and composite THAAD-Patriot-NASAMS batteries could be fielded before 2026, quickly followed by the introduction of mobile assets. Guam and the Northern Marianas are essential to U.S. strategy and operations in the Western Pacific. Their defenses have long been ignored, and Adm. Davidson should be lauded for charting a path forward. A disaggregated architecture, however, will be more likely to realize INDOPACOM's vision of resilient and scalable air and missile defense. Timothy A. Walton is a fellow at the Hudson Institute's Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, where Bryan Clark is a senior fellow. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/07/30/guams-air-defense-should-learn-lessons-from-japans-aegis-ashore/

All news