General Dynamics Mission Systems to Provide Littoral Combat Ship Support Services

On the same subject

• 

  May 12, 2020 | International, C4ISR

  US Risks Losing 5G Standard Setting Battle To China, Experts Say

  "We need some coherency around what we're actually doing on the public policy front, and we need some more technical coordination ... so we could at least be at the stage where we're still on the field, versus sitting on the sidelines trying to figure out how to catch up," said Brookings fellow Nicol Turner Lee. By THERESA HITCHENSon May 11, 2020 at 3:46 PM WASHINGTON: The United States needs to take a stronger role in setting international standards for 5G networks or risk losing the international market to China and undercutting US national security. Washington is faltering due to a lack of coherent policy on a wide swathe of foundational issues such as spectrum management for 5G usage, network supply chain security, infrastructure development and data sharing, experts say. As Breaking D readers know, the question of spectrum access is at the heart of DoD's fierce battle to overturn the FCC's approval last month of a plan by Ligado to convert L-band spectrum for satellites to build a terrestrial 5G mobile communications network that DoD and many other US agencies say will jam GPS receivers. “The US-China competition is essentially about who will control the global information technology infrastructure and standards,” said Frank Rose, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution and former assistant secretary of State for arms control, during a Brooking's webinar on Friday. “I think an argument can be made that in the 21st century, whoever controls the information infrastructure will dominate the world.” The webinar, called “Global China: Assessing China's technological reach in the world,” was based on a new series of Brookings' papers on topics ranging from Chinese plans for 5G, its progress in developing artificial intelligence (AI) weapons systems to biotechnology. The panel discussion echoed the concerns raised by a group of powerful Republican senators in an April 14 letter to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Led by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James Inhofe, the senators worried that the Trump administration's moves to blacklist Chinese 5G behemoth Huawei (about which Sydney has written extensively) are in effect pushing the US into international irrelevance as Washington struggles to set a unique domestic path for network development. Commerce put Huawei on its so-called entity list last May citing national security concerns, and in August expanded its list of related entities subject to restricted US sales. Despite President Donald Trump's wild swings on whether to keep or lift the ban, those restrictions still stand. “Since Huawei's designation on the Department's Entity List in May 2019, U.S. technology leaders have been constrained from full participation in 5G standards-setting bodies because of uncertainty over whether such participation is prohibited by the Commerce Department's export control regulations. We are deeply concerned about the risks to the U.S. global leadership position in 5G wireless technology as a result of this reduced participation, and the economic and national security implications of any diminished U.S. role in 5G,” the senators wrote. Such standards bodies include the influential private-sector Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the widely-recognized International Standards Organisation (ISO) and the UN's International Telecommunication Union (ITU) that sets global standards for spectrum usage. China's Houlin Zhao currently holds the ITU Secretary-General post, and China has been extremely active in ITU work to establish standards for 5G — an issue that the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission raised in its 2018 report to Congress. To remedy this, the senators called on the White House “to issue regulations as soon as possible confirming that U.S. participation in 5G standards-setting is not restricted by export control regulations.” And according to a May 6 article by Reuters, the Commerce Department is currently figuring out how exactly to do just that. Commerce, however, did not respond to a request for comment by press time. Nicol Turner Lee, a Brookings fellow specializing in Internet governance issues, told the panel while it was Europe that set the standards for 3G communications technologies, the US learned from losing that battle and so “stepped up” to lead the world in developing the technologies and standards for 4G LTE communication. US leadership on 4G in turn allowed it dominate the information revolution that underpins today's “digital sharing economy,” enabling tech giants Google and disruptive firms such as Uber. But the US now risks losing the 5G race to China, she argued, which will be at the heart of the next technological revolution. Mobile 5G cellular networks will provide the high speed and low latency (the time between data being broadcast and received by a user) communications capabilities required by the Internet of Things (IoT) and AI, both technologies hotly pursued by the US the Chinese militaries alike. In her paper, “Navigating the U.S.-China 5G Competition,” Turner Lee explained: “The United States and China are in a race to deploy fifth-generation, or 5G, wireless networks, and the country that dominates will lead in standard-setting, patents, and the global supply chain. While some analysts suggest that the Chinese government appears to be on a sprint to achieve nationwide 5G, U.S. government leaders and the private sector have been slowed by local and federal bureaucracies, restrictive and outdated regulations, and scarcity of available commercial spectrum.” The “current national security concerns of Huawei and ZTE, which are integral to the global supply chain for 5G equipment and software” not only are hindering the ability of US tech firms to play a leading role in international standard setting bodies, she said, but also cramping their ability to cooperate with firms in allied nations — leading to US market isolation. “To date, only five other partners have followed the U.S. lead in banning Huawei equipment in their communications infrastructures: Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Australia and New Zealand.25 Other U.S. allies, including France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the U.K., are moving forward with their deployments with some restrictions,” Turner Lee wrote. Key to China's success in development of 5G networks has been the use of low- and mid-band radio frequency (RF) spectrum, according to experts, that for reasons of domestic regulation the US has been unable to match. Meanwhile, the US has been “spectrum stuck” — unable to move rapidly to figure out how different RF user communities — including military and commercial satellite operators and US military radar systems — can share the limited resources. Low-band spectrum, which includes the 600 megahertz (MHz), 800 MHz, and 900 MHZ bands, can cover longer distances and penetrate through walls of buildings. Mid-band spectrum is in the 2.0 gighertz (GHz) 6 GHz range, works at a higher speed and in some instances provides higher fidelity. Indeed, the mid-band includes portions of the L-band spectrum, in the 1 GHz to 2 GHz range, at the heart of DoD's battle with the Federal Communications Commission over Ligado. L-band signals, used by GPS, are less likely to be degraded by clouds, fog and rain and can pass through heavy foliage. DoD, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Transportation — and a wide range of private sector companies ranging from satellite operators to truckers — are convinced that Ligado's planned network will jam GPS receivers.They are supported by a number of powerful members of Congress, including Inhofe and SASC Ranking Member Sen. Jack Reed, as well as the leadership of the House Armed Services Committee. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith and Ranking Member Mac Thornberry, together with 20 other members representing both political parties, weighed in last Thursday in a letter to the FCC Commissioners questioning the Ligado decision and expressing concern: “Section 1698 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 prevents the commission from approving commercial terrestrial operations in these bands until 90 days after the commission resolves concerns of widespread harmful interference by such operations to covered GPS devices. We are concerned that your approval of any mitigation efforts not rigorously tested and approved by national security technical experts may be inconsistent with the legislative direction to resolve concerns prior to permitting commercial terrestrial operations. We urge the commission to reconsider and impose additional mitigation steps to address the concerns of these users.” HASC intends to hold a classified hearing to focus on the issue, including both DoD and the FCC. However, the Trump administration is divided on the worthiness of Ligado's plan — with the spat pitting Esper and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao against Pompeo, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow, and Attorney General William Barr. Kudlow, Pompeo and Barr, who all are close Trump political allies, have praised the FCC's decision to approve Ligado's network — along with many in the terrestrial wireless industry — as a move towards helping the US gain primary over China in the 5G race. And the need for the US to move out quickly to establish 5G networks figures prominently in Ligado's various FCC filings. In a marathon SASC hearing last Wednesday, DoD CIO Dana Deasy and Research and Engineering head Mike Griffin strongly pushed back against that assessment. Griffin told the SASC that “5G is about capacity, latency, and scale. The Ligado proposal has absolutely nothing to do with latency and scale, and its capacity is on the order of three-and-a-half percent of the total spectrum capacity. Ligado's existence, plus or minus, makes absolutely no difference to the involvement of the US in the so-called 5G race,” he said bluntly. Deasy chimed in to back up Griffin, telling the SASC that “Ligado does not provide a 5G solution.” He explained that “the band in which Ligado operates is not even part of the FCC's 5G FAST Plan, which is the commission's blueprint for advancing US interest in 5G. The non-continuous bands that Ligado could bring the market are both fragmented and impaired.” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai last April approved the FAST Plan — for “Facilitate America's Superiority in 5G Technology — to free up some designated low-band, mid-band, and high-band spectrum now assigned to other uses use by 5G networks, as well as some spectrum currently unlicensed. That effort, however, has been complicated by squabbling among various operator communities. Deasy stressed that DoD “clearly recognizes the huge value of 5G not only for commercial use, but across the US military as well.” And for that reason, he said, DoD not only has a plethora of 5G projects underway, but also has launched a pilot project on how best to share mid-band spectrum being used by DoD radar systems with commercial 5G networks. DoD is partnering on the pilot with the National Spectrum Consortium, he said, which involves government, industry and academia. “The geopolitical battle is standard setting,” Turner Lee summed up during the Brookings' webinar. “We need some coherency around what we're actually doing on the public policy front, and we need some more technical coordination ... so we could at least be at the stage where we're still on the field, versus sitting on the sidelines trying to figure out how to catch up.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/us-risks-losing-5g-standard-setting-battle-to-china-experts-say

• 

  April 19, 2021 | International, Aerospace

  Air Force New Fighter Jet: What the Secret NGAD Plane Looks Like

  This is our first look at the Air Force's secret new fighter jet under the NGAD program. Here's everything we can see on the mysterious sixth-generation plane.

• 

  May 14, 2020 | International, Land

  Contractors Recovering From COVID Shutdowns: Bruce Jette

  While the pandemic continues, Pentagon metrics show production on Army programs is returning to normal, the Army's acquisition chief told Breaking Defense. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on May 14, 2020 at 4:01 AM WASHINGTON: The number of defense contractors reopening after COVID-19 quarantines now exceeds the number of new shutdowns, the Army's senior acquisition official said in an interview. That is happening, Bruce Jette told me, because industry is learning and adapting. New health precautions, from disinfecting tools between shifts to social distancing on the factory floor, should contain further outbreaks of COVID-19 and keep Army programs on track, he said – even if there's a new upsurge in infections nationwide. According to daily updates from Defense Contract Management Agency, Jette said, “the openings are outweighing the number of closings, and total number of closings is down significantly, so things are improving quite a bit.” Of 10,509 facilities large and small that DCMA is tracking, 248 had closed at some point — but only 40 are still closed. The number of reopenings has exceeded the number of new closings since April 20. But, I asked, what if there's another spike, whether from states relaxing shutdown orders or a change in weather come the fall? Because of the new precautions now in place, Jette told me, “I would say that in the long run, if we had some degree of a resurgence, I don't think it would be as marked as the first one.” Learning To Cope There was an initial wave of shutdowns in the first days of the pandemic, Jette said, because a single case of COVID-19 might require putting the entire workforce at a facility into quarantine, particularly at smaller companies. That wasn't a panicked reaction, but a reasonable precaution. Workers had been mingling freely in close quarters, most coronavirus carriers were asymptomatic, and virtually no reliable tests were available. A company facing a single case had no way of knowing who else might already be infected. But that's no longer true, Jette went on. Private companies and government agencies alike have now broken up large groups of workers into smaller ones, creating “bubbles” in which any contagion can be contained. “For example, in the past, one shift came in and started using the tools from the other shift,” Jette said, as one example. “Now, between shifts, a cleaning team comes in and disinfects all the tools.” Wiping down shared equipment, surfaces, and spaces is just one part of a multi-layered defense against contagion. Workers on the same shift who once all came in and out together, chatting in close quarters and shaking hands, may now arrive and leave on staggered schedules so they can stay six feet apart at all times. Workflows have been changed and workstations physically moved, where possible, to permit social distancing on the factory floor. Employees who must work side-by-side wear masks and gloves. Those precautions reduce the chance of someone catching the coronavirus in the first place – and just as important, they make it harder for one infected employee to spread the disease, especially to colleagues outside their “bubble.” So when somebody does get sick, you only need to quarantine their particular team, not shut down the whole factory. “If somebody in the bubble comes down [with COVID],” he said, “ only that bubble ends up isolated.” Even Pentagon offices like Jette's own are getting cleaned more frequently and more thoroughly, he told me, even when no one working in them has actually gotten sick. “[Even when] nobody has become infected in a particular office,” he told me, “we are having a cleaning team go through and do one office here, one office there, and just do a thorough wipe-down to make sure that there's nothing that got into that office undetected.” These precautions aren't excessively onerous, disruptive, or costly, Jette said. They're just things nobody had thought about doing before – but now they might be useful even after the pandemic is under control. “I don't see it being a significant burden on the system; it was just something we didn't see was an issue before,” he said, “[but] I may well help us have fewer flus and colds if we just continue the same practice.” Dealing With Disruption Industry may be adapting well, but a global pandemic is still extraordinarily disruptive. Like the rest of the Defense Department, the Army is closely tracking not only its prime contractors but the smaller subcontractors and sub-sub-contractors, which are much more fragile. To date, the Army has pumped $167.5 million into small businesses to help them ride out COVID disruptions. “There have been some cost implications to the government,” Jette said, “but mostly with respect to the CARES Act,” which ensures workers at facilities closed by COVID are paid instead of let go. The main way the Army has helped out companies is by making payments they already had coming, just ahead of schedule. For example, Jette said, the service has started writing checks to contractors every 15 days instead of the normal 30. It's also increasing progress payments, normally limited to 80 percent of total contract value (85 percent for small business) to 90 percent (95 for small business). “Cash flow was one of those things we concerned ourselves with,” Jette said. “Congress gave us flexibilities there. There were things passed down from OMB in the White House that gave us some flexibility as well.” To help figure out which subcontractors might be in trouble, the Army's prime contractors have opened their books and shared information with the service, far beyond anything they were contractually obligated to do, Jette said. Since the early days of the pandemic, even before shutdowns began, he's been getting a daily report on the health of subcontractors, which now routinely runs over 60 pages. “The primes ... were all very cooperative in trying to give us visibility down to the lowest level supplier,” Jette said. “It's really been helpful for us, because it helps us get a better gauge on what we have to do if something goes awry. In some cases when a subcontractor shuts down, the primes can find an alternative supplier. But despite the huge size of the defense industrial base, Jette said, there are single points of failure where only one company that's been formally qualified to build a certain part or perform a certain industrial process. It takes time to get a back-up supplier up to speed – sometimes longer than the 16.8 days that, on average, it takes a quarantined facility to reopen. That has resulted in delays, Jette acknowledges, but, so far, Army programs are finding ways to make up the time elsewhere in their schedules and still deliver new weapons to the troops on time – what's called First Unit Equipped, or FUE. “Delivery schedules on some products have slipped a little bit right...but at this point, none of them has assuredly slipped the FUE,” Jette told me. “As of right now, the vast majority of challenges that we've had with COVID, we've been able to accommodate within the current contracts with minor changes.” But the factories aren't the only part of the system that has to function. “The most significant thing isn't production,” Jette said. “It's trying to get all the testing done to make sure that all the systems work.” While some testing takes place in labs, what's most complex is operational testing, which puts a new technology in the hands of soldiers in the field to see how it works in for a real unit, interacting with all the rest of that unit's gear, conducting a realistic mission in realistic conditions. That requires bringing together not only the soldiers but technical specialists from the manufacturers, Army program offices, and Army testing organizations across the country. “Those are not simple to just change or move around, [and] that's part of what we've struggled with,” Jette said. “In some cases, we have suppliers who provide a capability and it's ready to be tested and we just don't have the facilities or the units available yet for full testing.” Officials need adequate test data before they can approve a program to start production – what's known as a Milestone C decision. But, Jette said, if you have to delay that formal approval, you can compensate by getting ready to jump-start manufacturing as soon as you have the go-ahead. The contractor can even start production ahead of Milestone C at its own risk, if it's confident that testing will not find any significant problems. At some point, it comes down to what kind of risk you're willing to take. If you rev up your manufacturing base before testing is complete, but then testing discovers a problem you have to fix, you may have to make expensive, time-consuming changes to your design, to your production process, or even to items already built. But if you wait for all the testing to get done, no matter how long it takes, you may not get the kit to troops on schedule. Unprecedented Stresses It's a difficult and stressful time; Jette can't recall anything like it in his 30 years in the defense sector. “At least based on my experience which goes back to the early '90s,” he told me, “you may have had strains on a particular vendor, [but] this is fundamentally a nationwide challenge that covers all of our programs.” “I can't think of any time where we had such a longstanding challenge to keeping programs fully operational,” he said. “Probably the closest thing,” he said, is when Congress can't pass defense funding bills on time and passes a stopgap Continuing Resolution. A CR essentially puts spending on autopilot at last year's levels with no ability to start new programs, ramp up existing ones, or cancel failing ones. Like the pandemic, a CR can impact every function of the Defense Department, or even the entire federal government, for weeks or months on end. But funding problems don't threaten the health and safety of every worker the way the pandemic does. “In this case, we have to consider the financial underpinnings, but we also have to consider the impact to the people themselves.” “Our most valuable resources are people,” Jette said. “If I don't have good people, I'm not getting good work done. I want to make sure those people want to work here, and a big piece of that is giving them a safe and healthy environment.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/contractors-recovering-from-covid-shutdowns-bruce-jette/