Back to news

October 8, 2020 | International, C4ISR

Meggitt Training Systems changes name to InVeris Training Solutions

WASHINGTON ― The live-fire and virtual weapons training company Meggitt Training Systems is rebranding to InVeris Training Solutions, the company announced Wednesday.

The Suwanee, Ga., firm, is shedding the name of its former parent company, Meggitt Plc., which sold the former subsidiary to private investment firm Pine Island Capital Partners LLC for $146 million in July. The new name is meant to connote trust and integrity, the company said.

Pine Island's partners include former former U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen, former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt and former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy.

Partner Clyde Tuggle, a former Coca-Cola executive, serves as interim CEO for InVeris, and Chambliss ― a partner at Pine Island ― is non-executive chairman for InVeris.

Chambliss, now with Washington law firm DLA Piper, represented Georgia as a Republican and served on the armed services and intelligence committees before retiring from Congress nearly six years ago. He became aware of the company now known as InVeris while serving in Congress and said it was a natural fit for Pine Island because of his partners' backgrounds in the defense space.

“We clearly understood at the time of the purchase back on July 1 that we were buying a company that is the gold standard when it comes to providing training for the United States military as well as to international clients in the same arena,” Chambliss said.

“Going forward, we think that clearly we have the opportunity, number one, to provide the resources to what is now known as InVeris to expand from a technology standpoint the products that we have been making for years, and to further develop and bring those products into the 21st Century.”

The company, which employs roughly 450 people, will retain its ownership of its legacy brands, FATS (a line of virtual systems) and Caswell technologies.

The company continues to work on the U.S. Army's Engagement Skills Trainer II contract and Squad Advanced Marksmanship-Trainer program, as well as the U.S. Marine Corps' Indoor Simulated Marksmanship Trainer, according to Vice President of Strategy, Sales and Marketing Andrea Czop. It's also fielded derivatives of those systems to the Navy and Air Force.

The company has fielded over 15,000 live-fire ranges and 5,100 virtual training systems globally in its 90-year history. It also has clients in more than 55 countries―including programs of record in Canada, Australia and the U.K. for more than 25 years.

Foreign sales are key to its growth plans, company executives say.

“We continue to be very active with all those international customers, and we're growing,” said Czop. “There are a lot of opportunities for us right now, and the focus is our international strategy.”

https://www.defensenews.com/2020/10/07/meggitt-training-systems-changes-name-to-inveris-training-solutions/

On the same subject

  • DARPA Seeks Secure Microchip Supply Chain

    June 1, 2020 | International, C4ISR

    DARPA Seeks Secure Microchip Supply Chain

    "Once a chip is designed, adding security after the fact or making changes to address newly discovered threats is nearly impossible," explains a DARPA spokesperson. By THERESA HITCHENSon May 29, 2020 at 2:46 PM WASHINGTON: DARPA has launched a four-year project to find ways to design security features into microchips as they are being made to help ensure the future supply chain. While the name of the project is daunting — Automatic Implementation of Secure Silicon (AISS) — and the technical requirements are a serious challenge, the concept is pretty simple. “AISS aims to automate the process of incorporating security into chip designs, making it easier and potentially more cost effective for any organization with even a small design team (start-ups, mid-size companies, etc.) to build security measures into their designs,” a DARPA spokesperson told Breaking D today. “Overall, with AISS DARPA aims to bring greater automation to the chip design process to profoundly decrease the burden of including security measures,” the spokesperson said. The two winning teams, according to a May 27 DARPA press release, are: The two AISS research teams are: Synopsys, Arm, Boeing, Florida Institute for Cybersecurity Research at the University of Florida, Texas A&M University, UltraSoC, and the University of California, San Diego Northrop Grumman, IBM, University of Arkansas, and University of Florida “Research and development on the $75 million program was commenced two weeks ago and incremental capabilities are expected to roll out to the chip design community over the next four years,” the spokesperson said in an email. “Our hope is that many of the capabilities will start appearing as features in commercial design automation software before the program completion.” Digital integrated circuits are the engines that drive modern computers, and everyday digital devices such as smart phones. They are critical to the evolution of the Internet of Things (IoT). As such, they increasingly have become a key target of hacking by US adversaries and cyber criminals alike, DARPA explains. “Threats to IC chips are well known, and despite various measures designed to mitigate them, hardware developers have largely been slow to implement security solutions due to limited expertise, high cost and complexity,” the DARPA release says. “Further, when unsecure circuits are used in critical systems, the lack of embedded countermeasures exposes them to exploitation.” Indeed, the Department of Commerce on May 15 took another swipe at Chinese telecoms behemoth Huawei and tightened its earlier efforts to block it from exporting its semiconductors and products to the US and allies. The Trump administration alleges that Huawei's hardware and software, in particular that related to 5G wireless technology, are full of deliberate security holes in order to enable Chinese government spying. The ruling by Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security, which will take effect in September, seeks to prevent companies around the world from using American-made software and machinery develop chips for Huawei or its subsidiary firms. The problem for device-makers, particularly in the IoT world where the market is largely for commercial products (think smart refrigerators), is that fixing potential security holes often isn't seen as worth the time, effort and most importantly, money. “The inclusion of security also often requires certain trade-offs with the typical design objectives, such as size, performance, and power dissipation,” the DARPA spokesperson said. “For example, something like a sprinkler isn't likely to require the highest level of security protections. Investing in security mechanisms that take up a lot of space on the underlying chip, or significantly impact chip performance likely doesn't make sense based on the sprinkler's expected use and application.” And yet, that future IoT sprinkler also will be other IoT devices and computer networks in operation by an individual, a company or a facility, such as a weapons depot. Even more unfortunately, the spokesperson explained, “modern chip design methods are unforgiving – once a chip is designed, adding security after the fact or making changes to address newly discovered threats is nearly impossible.” Thus, the AISS program is aimed at spurring research into two areas that can address four types of microchip vulnerability, the release says: “side channel attacks, hardware Trojans, reverse engineering, and supply chain attacks, such as counterfeiting, recycling, re-marking, cloning, and over-production.” The first area of research will be focusing on “development of a ‘security engine' that combines the latest academic research and commercial technology into an upgradable platform that can be used to defend chips against attacks, and provide an infrastructure to manage these hardened chips as they progress through their lifecycle,” DARPA said. The second area, led by software specialists Synopsys, “involves integrating the security engine technology developed in the first research area into system-on-chip (SOC) platforms in a highly automated way,” the DARPA release said. The Synopsys team also will be working on how to integrate new security designs and manufacturing tools with currently available off-the-shelf products. Nicholas Paraskevopoulous, sector VP for emerging capabilities development at Northrop Grumman, said in a May 27 press release that the firm's “design tools will enable the development of secure and trusted integrated circuits with reduced costs.” Northrop Grumman is involved in the first AISS research area. Synopsis could not be reached for comment by press time. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/darpa-seeks-secure-microchip-supply-chain/

  • Democrats face internal ‘fight’ on defense spending, says Smith

    October 8, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

    Democrats face internal ‘fight’ on defense spending, says Smith

    Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The Democratic split over the size of future defense budgets will come to a head in the new Congress, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., predicted Tuesday. The outcome of the long-simmering dispute would take on higher stakes if some pre-election polling becomes a reality and Democrats retake Congress and the White House. Though President Donald Trump and his supporters claim the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the far left, Smith's remarks suggest the party's future direction, at least on defense spending, is not yet settled. Instead of slashing next year's $740 billion defense budget, as some progressives want, Smith is pushing, “a rational Democratic, progressive national security strategy,” as he called it. That stance seems to align Smith with his party's pragmatic standard-bearer, Joe Biden, who's said he doesn't foresee major defense cuts, if elected. “I don't think that rational policy involves 20 percent defense cut, but that fight is going to be had,” Smith said at an event hosted by George Mason University. “There are extremists on the right and extremists on the left, and what I'm trying to do is say, ‘Let's go for pragmatic problem solving.' I don't see extremism solving problems.” If Democrats are swept into power Nov. 3, it will be by voters opposed to President Donald Trump from across the political spectrum, Smith said. To hold on that mandate, Democrats would need to govern with a broad coalition and not overreach from the left on issues like defense. “Okay, we can win an election because people are appalled by Donald Trump,” Smith said, “but that doesn't mean that they're endorsing us in any sort of huge, dramatic way.” After the House passed an early version of last year's defense policy bill without Republicans aboard, negotiations to reconcile it with theWhite House and GOP-held Senate dragged for months before a compromise bill passed Congress with progressive priorities stripped from it, leaving them dissatisfied. This year, many of the progressives' priorities were deflected from the House's version of the bill, and it passed the chamber with support from more than half of Republicans and more than two-thirds of Democrats. Military spending remains popular with most Republicans, and they largely opposed progressive amendments in the House and Senate this summer to slash the authorization bill by 10 percent. HASC member Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., called the House amendment, “a deeply irresponsible stunt.” Biden and congressional Democrats are already under pressure from progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who have been part of a campaign to direct spending away from the military in favor of healthcare, education and jobs. Massive spending on national security, they say, didn't protect the country from COVID-19. “You have a progressive movement in the party now that is really motivated and mobilized around foreign policy and national security issues, and that's not going away,” Matt Duss, a Sanders foreign policy aide, told Defense News last month. “That is something a President Biden will have to work with, and I think his team understands that.” As both Biden, Trump and lawmakers of both parties have called for the U.S. to extricate itself from the Mideast and end the “endless wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan, Smith said it's important to educate a war-weary American people about why it's unwise to retreat from the world stage ― marked by hotspots in Libya, Syria and West Africa. “We've got to make the case to them: ‘Here's why the defense budget is what it is, here's why we're trying to accomplish what we're trying to accomplish, and here's why it's in your best interest,'” Smith said. “And we're going to be very aggressive about having public hearings and public discussions to listen to people, to listen to those concerns and try to address them.” The Pentagon's five-year defense plan indicates it will request flat defense spending after 2021, and ― amid pandemic-related expenses and historic deficits ― the budget is widely expected to stay flat regardless of who is president. Smith pretty much echoed that view Tuesday. “I think the reasonable assumption is yeah, the defense budget is going to be flat for a while ― and there is no reason on Earth in my view that we cannot defend the United States of America for $700 to $740 billion,” Smith said. “So I think the better question, the question to focus on, is how do we get more out of it?” On that one, Smith echoed some ideas from his committee's bipartisan Future of Defense Task Force. Its report emphasized the need, in order to compete with a surging China, to divest from some legacy programs and heavily invest in artificial intelligence, among other potentially game-changing technologies. Citing a spate of acquisition failures, Smith said Washington has to work with its defense contractors “about how we spend our money and the results we get for that money.” He also acknowledged the need to protect key contractors stressed by the pandemic's economic impacts and strengthen the industrial base overall. Smith defended the Pentagon's allocation of hundreds of millions of dollars in pandemic relief funding for items like jet and submarine parts instead of increasing the country's supply of medical equipment. The remarks seemed to set him at odds with liberals like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who have asked the Defense inspector general to look into the department's “reported misuse” of funds. The Democrat-led House Oversight and Reform Committee, Financial Services Committee, and select subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis are conducting a joint investigation. “Three committees in Congress are now investigating this, and I'm not one of them because there's nothing to investigate here, in my view,” Smith said. “This was part of the CARES Act: We gave a billion dollars to DoD to deal with COVID-related expenses. Very specifically, it said one of the COVID related expenses you could deal with was the defense industrial base, which they did. And now we're chewing on them for doing that.” Smith said the Pentagon did “nothing illegal,” but he suggested it's reasonable to explore whether DoD balanced the money it received appropriately and whether its payments to large contractors are flowing to smaller, more vulnerable firms, as they should. “I think it is important to make sure we keep the industrial base going,” Smith said, “but there's going to be pressure on that [decision].” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/10/07/democrats-face-internal-fight-on-defense-spending-says-smith/

  • Resilient Together with Priority Telecommunications Services (PTS) | CISA
All news