August 21, 2023 | International, Aerospace
Manned Marine helicopter refuels unmanned helo for 1st time
The hefty Super Stallion transferred approximately 700 pounds of fuel to the Fire Scout.
January 24, 2020 | International, Aerospace
How Top Military Contractors Raytheon And BAE Systems Are Drawing Non-Traditional Suppliers Into Defense
During the long years that U.S. forces were fighting Islamic extremists in Southwest Asia, Russia and China were investing in new warfighting technologies.
Russia's hybrid military campaign against Ukraine in 2014 was a wake-up call for Washington to start paying more attention to “near-peer” threats. China's steadily increasing investment in long-range anti-ship missiles, anti-satellite weapons and cyber warfare reinforced awareness that America's military might be falling behind in the capabilities needed for winning high-end fights.
These trends led the Trump Administration to produce a new national defense strategy in 2018 focused mainly on countering the military challenges posed by Moscow and Beijing. Most of that strategy's content is secret, but one element is clear enough: the Pentagon wants novel solutions to emerging near-peer threats, and it wants them fast.
Policymakers in both the Obama and Trump administrations have repeatedly stated non-traditional military suppliers are a vital part of the Pentagon's effort to get ahead of overseas rivals and stay there. “Non-traditional” has a specific legal definition in defense acquisition policy that potentially allows suppliers to bypass burdensome regulations when offering commercial products from outside traditional military channels.
In more common-sense usage, non-traditional simply means any company capable of offering the military a better mousetrap that doesn't usually do business with the five-sided building. That includes a majority of tech companies in places like Austin, Boston and Silicon Valley, especially startups with cutting-edge ideas. It may also include larger industrial companies like General Motors that are re-entering the military market after a long absence.
The challenge facing policymakers is how to leverage the skills and intellectual property of these non-traditional players without suffocating them under a blanket of bureaucratic requirements that contribute little to finding novel solutions. One way to tap the dynamism of commercial enterprises is to partner them with longtime military contractors who can assume most of the burden for negotiating the bureaucratic landscape.
Here is how two companies, Raytheon and BAE Systems, have stepped up to the challenge.
Raytheon. Massachusetts-based Raytheon has been a major military contractor since it pioneered radar during World War Two. It is in the process of merging with United Technologies, an aerospace conglomerate that has long managed to operate successfully in military and commercial markets (both companies contribute to my think tank).
Raytheon executives say the pace of change and the expectations of military customers have changed radically in recent years. It is not uncommon for military customers to seek new ways of sensing, processing or communicating that must be delivered within months rather than years. This emerging dynamic has led the company to rethink who it partners with in producing such solutions, and how to interact with them.
Raytheon has a cultural affinity for diversity, which may help it to think outside the box about who its partners should be. Although not all of the non-traditional suppliers with whom it teams are Silicon Valley startups, a majority have not previously offered defense products as part of their portfolios.
The role the company has fashioned for itself in partnering with such enterprises is to act as a translator between the fluid world of commercial innovation and the rule-based environment of military acquisition. Raytheon has always been driven by its engineering culture, so the company knows how to identify promising technologies that can be assimilated into cutting-edge combat systems. But it also knows the ins and outs of a baroque acquisition system that outsiders frequently find impenetrable.
Raytheon seeks to leverage the energy of non-traditional sources while remaining in compliance with relevant government standards. For instance, there needs to be effective communication between the company and commercial sources, but the ability of the partner to observe the intricacies of sensitive projects must be tightly constrained. The tension of being a valued supplier but not accustomed to working in a classified environment must be managed.
Non-traditional partners provide Raytheon with base technologies that potentially enable unique military capabilities, and they often can generate novel solutions to technical challenges quickly, thanks to their entrepreneurial cultures. Raytheon configures and integrates these inputs for military customers while translating the needs of those customers into terms the non-traditional supplier can understand.
BAE Systems. The military electronics unit of another major defense contractor, BAE Systems, Inc., is headquartered across the border from Raytheon's home state in Nashua, New Hampshire. BAE concentrates on many of the same technologies Raytheon does such as sensors, signal processing and secure communications—which isn't surprising, since the core of its electronics operation was founded after World War Two by former Raytheon employees. BAE is a consulting client, which has given me some insight into how the company views non-traditional suppliers.
In addition to pursuing partnering initiatives such as those at Raytheon, BAE Systems has fashioned an internal mechanism for leveraging the technology of entrepreneurial startups by helping them to finance their businesses. That mechanism is called FAST Labs, and as the name implies it was conceived to help generate novel solutions to military challenges quickly.
Beyond determining whether the company should manufacture key technology inputs internally or go outside, FAST Labs continuously scouts for promising innovations that are emerging from U.S. startups. When it finds ideas with high potential, it seeks to build trusted partnerships with the enterprises, venture capital investors, universities and government agencies aimed at speeding the pace of innovation. For example, BAE has sponsored technology accelerators at places like MIT.
Most of the startups FAST Labs assists are commercial companies with “dual-use” technologies potentially applicable to military purposes. Although the company has a significant commercial electronics business, the focus of FAST Labs is mainly on meeting the demands of military customers. It takes its cues as to what might be most worthy of support from agencies like the Air Force Research Lab and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
FAST Labs seems to be a unique business model within the U.S. defense sector. Because the electronics technologies on which the Nashua operation concentrates are fungible across diverse markets, BAE Systems has benchmarked FAST Labs against renowned commercial R&D centers such as the old Bell Labs. It is an unusual approach to military innovation, but like executives at Raytheon, BAE execs say the usual approach to developing warfighting systems just doesn't cut it anymore with their Pentagon customer.
On the same subject
-
-
December 2, 2020 | International, Land
US clears weapon sales for Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Croatia, Canada, Brazil and South Korea
By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department on Tuesday cleared six Foreign Military Sales cases, potentially worth a combined total of $1.55 billion. The six cases, spread across South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Croatia, Lebanon and Canada, were announced on the website of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. DSCA announcements mean that the State Department has decided the potential FMS cases meet its standards, but this does not guarantee the sales will happen in their announced forms. Once approved by Congress, the foreign customer begins to negotiate on price and quantity, both of which can change during the final negotiations. Here are the details on each case: Croatia: The largest dollar value of the announced FMS cases comes from Croatia, which seeks to spend $757 million on refurbishing its 76 M2A2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles. The NATO ally operates older models dating to Operation Desert Storm, and is looking to upgrade capabilities. In addition to maintenance, upgraded radios, armor and simulators, the package includes 84 M240 machine guns, 1,103 TOW 2A radio frequency missiles, 100 TOW 2B radio frequency missiles and 500 TOW bunker buster radio frequency missiles. Work will primarily be done by BAE Systems' York, Pennsylvania, facility as well as Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, Arizona. Canada: America's northern neighbor wants to upgrade its fleet of five C-17 transport aircraft to the tune of $275 million. The package includes “aircraft hardware and software modification and support; software delivery and support; ground handling equipment; component, parts and accessories; GPS receivers; alternative mission equipment; publications and technical documentation; contractor logistics support and Globemaster III Sustainment Program (G3) participation; other U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistical support services; and related elements of program and logistical support,” according to the DSCA announcement. Boeing would perform the work. Saudi Arabia: The most unique of the six cases, the Saudi request involved $350 million in support services for five years, covered through the U.S. Military Training Mission to Saudi Arabia, or USMTM, located in Riyadh — an office of roughly 330 service members and U.S. contractors who help train the Saudi military. Services included in the package are “pay and allowances for U.S. Military, U.S. Government, and Foreign National staff members; USMTM communications support costs; local contracting costs; construction and renovation costs of housing area; transportation costs; U.S. Mail services support costs; dependent education (grades K through 12); administrative costs; temporary duty costs for USMTM personnel; Value Added Taxes (VAT) assessed by Saudi Arabia; and future transition costs to move USMTM” to a proposed new housing location in Saudi Arabia, per DSCA. Brazil: The government in Brazil wants to spend $70 million on 22 MK 54 conversion kits, which would convert existing MK 46 Mod 5 A(S) torpedoes to MK 54 Mod 0 lightweight torpedoes. Those would be equipped on the country's fleet of Sikorsky S-70B Seahawk helicopters and its surface ships. Work would be performed at Raytheon Integrated Defense System's Portsmouth, Rhode Island, facility. Lebanon: The country seeks to spend $55.5 million to procure 300 M1152 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles in two tranches of 150 each. Beirut currently operates more than 1,000 HMMWVs of various designs, according to the DSCA, which are primarily used to “counter violent extremist organizations and to secure its border.” The primary contractor would be American General, with work happening in its South Bend, Indiana, facility. This is the first FMS case cleared for Lebanon since the start of the Trump administration. South Korea: A frequent customer of U.S. weapons, South Korea now seeks to purchase two MK 15 MOD 25 Phalanx Close-In Weapons System Block 1B Baseline 2 systems for $39 million. This anti-missile defense weapon for ships would come along with training and 4,000 rounds. According to DSCA, Seoul plans to use the systems aboard its first KDX III Batch II-class ship “to provide it with effective means of detecting and defending itself against incoming airborne threats.” The primary contractor is Raytheon, with work to be done at its be Louisville, Kentucky, location. All told, the six notifications mean the Trump administration has cleared 23 FMS cases since Oct. 1, the start of fiscal 2021, with an estimated price tag of $58.75 billion. However, that number is inflated by the inclusion of two pre-cleared cases for Finland's fighter competition; while Finland may pick either the F-35 (for $12.5 billion) or the F/A-18 (for $14.7 billion), it would only select one, and may still choose a European bidder instead. https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2020/12/01/us-clears-weapon-sales-for-saudi-arabia-lebanon-croatia-canada-brazil-and-south-korea
-
December 19, 2018 | International, C4ISR
CENTCOM chief: The future of warfare demands more cyber authorities
By: Justin Lynch The Pentagon has received more power to conduct cyber operations in the past 18 months. But for the top Army commander in the Middle East and Central Asia, the new authority is not enough. The head of U.S. Central Command, Gen. Joseph Votel, wrote in a Dec. 18 paper that the Pentagon must “normalize” electronic warfare and cyberattacks and incorporate them into daily operations. “Normalizing the cyberspace domain means broader authorities that are more responsive than current bureaucratic processes,” Votel wrote in the Army's Cyber Defense Review. “It also means we need simple and streamlined organizations and processes to increase lethality and enhance performance.” The paper was coauthored by Votel, Maj. Gen. Julazadeh and Maj. Weilun Lin. “Our failure to operationalize and normalize the cyberspace domain effectively cedes it to our adversaries, gives them a competitive advantage and, ultimately, creates an increased attack vector against our objectives,” the authors said. President Trump gave the Pentagon new authorities to conduct cyber operations in August and minimized the process where other agencies can object to cyberattacks, known as “deconfliction.” Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis can conduct hacking operations without approval from the White House so long as they do not interfere with the American “national interest,” according to four current and former White House and intelligence officials who were either part of internal deliberations or briefed on the changes. Yet some current and former U.S. officials are skeptical that the new authorities will mean more effective hacking operations for the Pentagon, because it does not solve the nuances of cyberattacks. But the new mandates do not go far enough for the three officer authors, who argued that cyberwarfare should be under the same authorities as other types of operations. “We must not see cyberspace as drastically different and separate from other domains that we create new processes to prepare, plan and fight in this new domain. We continue to seek processes that smooth and simplify operations, reducing friendly friction and accelerating decision-making.” Current and former Pentagon officials have pointed to conducting cyberattacks against enemies that use networks of neutral or partner nations as an area where the Pentagon has changed its decision-making process in recent years. Those officials also pointed to how the Pentagon was able to use hybrid warfare tactics during the 2016 liberation of Mosul, Iraq, as a textbook example of future hybrid operations. Votel, Julazadeh and Lin echoed the sentiment of other Pentagon officials who have advocated for cyberattacks, electronic warfare and other information operations to be integrated earlier in military operations. “We need to proactively execute cyberspace and information operations early in 'Phase 0 / steady state' of the planning process — well before operation execution. Only then can we shape the [information environment], hold our adversaries' capabilities at risk and execute at the speed of war,” the three wrote. For example, Pentagon officials say they closely monitored Russia's 2014 hybrid war in Ukraine and learned from Moscow's tactics. Votel, Julazadeh and Lin shed light on the changes, writing that information operations were previously “integrated as an afterthought.” Yet over the last two years, Central Command has incorporated cyberattacks, electronic warfare and military deception at the “strategic level.” And this hybrid warfare has driven new acquisition demands in the Pentagon. “We need technology and capabilities to keep pace with the operational environment and continue to build the partnerships to do so,” the three officers wrote. In recent years, Central Command has bolstered its hybrid warfare through new contracts. The centerpiece of that effort is a July 2017 contract worth $621 million to Science Applications International Corporation for IT support to Central Command that could last seven years. In August 2018, Vistra communications was also awarded a $22 million contract to support offensive and defensive cyber operations for Central Command. https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2018/12/18/centcom-chief-the-future-of-warfare-demands-more-cyber-authorities