Back to news

November 18, 2019 | International, C4ISR

One way for the Pentagon to prove it’s serious about artificial intelligence

By: Mark Pomerleau

Department of Defense officials routinely talk about the need to more fully embrace machine learning and artificial intelligence, but one leader in the Marine Corps said those efforts are falling short.

“We're not serious about AI. If we were serious about AI we would put all of our stuff into one location,” Lt. Gen. Eric Smith, commander of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command and the Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration, said at an AFCEA Northern Virginia chapter lunch Nov. 15.

Smith was broadly discussing the ability to provide technologies and data that's collected in large quantities and pushed to the battlefield and tactical edge. Smith said leaders want the ability to send data to a 50-60 Marine cell in the Philippines that might be surrounded by the Chinese. That means being able to manage the bandwidth and signature so that those forces aren't digitally targeted. That ability doesn't currently doesn't exist, he said.

He pointed to IBM's Watson computer, noting that the system is able to conduct machine learning and artificial intelligence because it connects to the internet, which allows it to draw from a much wider data pool to learn from. Military systems aren't traditionally connected to the broader commercial internet, and thus are limited from a machine learning sense.

“We have stovepipes of excellence everywhere from interagency, CIA, NSA. The Navy's got theirs, Marine Corps' got theirs, everybody's got theirs. You can't do AI when the machine can't learn from one pool of data,” he said.

Brown noted that he was not speaking on behalf of the entire department.

Pentagon leadership has come to similar conclusions. Top officials have noted that one of the critical roles the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure cloud program will do is provide a central location for data.

“The warfighter needed enterprise cloud yesterday. Dominance in A.I. is not a question of software engineering. But instead, it's the result of combining capabilities at multiple levels: code, data, compute and continuous integration and continuous delivery. All of these require the provisioning of hyper-scale commercial cloud,” Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan, director of the Joint AI Center, said in August. “For A.I. across DOD, enterprise cloud is existential. Without enterprise cloud, there is no A.I. at scale. A.I. will remain a series of small-scale stovepipe projects with little to no means to make A.I. available or useful to warfighters. That is, it will be too hard to develop, secure, update and use in the field. JEDI will provide on-demand, elastic compute at scale, data at scale, substantial network and transport advantages, DevOps and a secure operating environment at all classification levels.”

Overall, Smith said that industry should start calling out DoD when policies or technical requirements hinder what it can offer.

“If we're asking for something that is unobtanium or if our policies are keeping you from producing something we can buy, you've got to tell us,” he said

https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence/2019/11/15/one-way-for-the-pentagon-to-prove-its-serious-about-artificial-intelligence/

On the same subject

  • Are meetings with industry actually accelerating military acquisitions?

    September 20, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Are meetings with industry actually accelerating military acquisitions?

    By: Adam Stone Military leaders say they are determined to find faster ways to buy cutting-edge technologies. “We can't afford to spend seven years thinking about a requirement,” Army Undersecretary Ryan D. McCarthy said during a 2018 visit to Fort Belvoir, Virginia. “If it is going to take that long, you are probably not going to get it. So, we need to get these capabilities sooner.” To that end, the Department of Defense has increased the number of engagements with industry, launched alternative contracting vehicles, and taken other steps to streamline innovation more effectively. Industry officials are often clamoring for that interaction, but some say the Pentagon's efforts are beginning to bear fruit. ‘Big change' One area where those changes are most visible has been in the Army's modernization of its battlefield network. David Huisenga, president and chief executive at Klas Telecom Government, said he has noticed a marked difference in the quality and quantity of engagements between industry and the Department of Defense. After more than two decades in the business, “I have seen a really big change in the past two years with how the Army is adopting technology,” he said. “They are really focused on rapid-insert capabilities. I had heard that talked about a lot in the past, but it's only recently that we have really seen that put into action.” The Army's establishment of cross-functional teams has helped to focus energy around priority areas within the C4ISR realm. Those areas include the Synthetic Training Environment Team (STE); the Network, Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence Team (NET); and the Assured Positioning, Navigation and Timing Team (APNT). “They have really clarified their priorities within that here are the top five or 10 things they want to do and they have released actual timelines for implementation of those priorities,” Huisenga said. Klas has taken advantage of the technical exchange meetings, supported by the cross-functional teams and Program Executive Office Command Control Tactical, where both industry and military leaders together work through all of the practical details of emerging requirements. “Now you have the CFT with the charter to identify and rapidly field the technology, and you have the program executive office that procures and sustains that equipment, working together with industry, all at the same time,” Huisenga said. For Klas, those engagements helped lead to a recent contract supporting Army's Security Force Assistance Brigade with an initial trial deployment of advanced networking equipment components. Those are slated for service officials to quickly test and refine those components before a final acquisition. Army leaders have said they plan to upgrade the network with new capabilities approximately every two years. “The PEO made these purchases rapidly, probably the fastest acquisition I have ever seen, and now we will be getting real feed-back on that product,” Huisenga said. “We, as industry, know that they will refresh every two years, so we can really focus our engineering on those requirements.” ‘One-stop' model Rosemary Johnston, senior vice president of operations at Savi, a maker of geospatial-enabled logistics solutions, likewise gives the military high marks for its efforts to accelerate tech buys. “The services are doing a phenomenal job of trying to hasten the acquisition process,” she said. She pointed to the Air Force's emerging “one-stop” model as an example. “They encourage vendors to come to a pitch day and if they like what they are hearing they can go ahead and execute a contract right away.” Another helpful tool for Savi is the Pentagon's blanket contract for logistics solutions, under which vendors can be pre-vetted for price and suitability, thus allowing end users in the military to effectively buy direct and bypass the usual prolonged procurement process. Savi recently took advantage of its place on that list to help secure a contract with the Defense Logistics Agency, under which the company will supply 23,000 sophisticated tracking devices to help DLA manage vast inventories of vehicles and equipment stored at multiple distribution sites. That opportunity arose in 2018, with just two months to go before the close of the fiscal year, when there was pressure on the agency to get a deal done before the clock ran out on the 2018 money. Thanks to the rapid acquisition process, “they were able to place the order with us, obligate those 2018 funds, and take delivery before the end of calendar year 2018,” Johnston said. Tools and tactics Officials from both PEO C3T and the network cross-functional team told C4ISRNET these are exactly the type of outcomes that the military is looking for. While it is difficult to gauge the specific outcomes of these early efforts, and many acquisitions departmentwide still drag, officials point to early metrics that suggest industry is responding well. Take, for instance, those technology exchange meetings. “We are averaging 400 people per meeting representing more than 120 companies, from large defense contractors to small businesses and startups,” said Maj. Brian Wong, chief of market research for the network cross-functional team at Army Futures Command. “I don't think we could have seen something like this in the past.” Another tool that officials say has proven useful is the Middle Tier Acquisition authority: Granted by Congress in the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act, it gives the military the ability to make small purchases for rapid prototyping. “If we see innovation coming out of industry, whether it's server infrastructure or radio waveforms, we can use rapid prototyping and see how that fits in our network design in order to make better decisions,” said Paul Mehney, who helps manage the office's industry affairs. Rapid Innovation Funds offer another means to keep the department ahead of the technology curve. With projects worth as much as $3 million per project, Mehney said, these dollars have been used to explore ways that soldiers can communicate when their first line of communications fail. The funds have also supported advances in dismounted blue force tracking. Rather than require soldiers to access vehicle-mounted equipment for identifying their status in the field, the Army is testing prototypes of handheld variants that could make soldiers jobs easier. On the contracting side, the increasingly popular OTA — or Other Transaction Authority — has freed military planners to buy small quantities of emerging tech solutions for prototyping and testing. The military also is deepening its market research “We are taking a wider look — beyond the traditional defense contracting space — to include startups and smaller companies,” Wong said. “We have discussions with incubators and with the venture capital community to see what may be in their portfolios that could be of interest to government.” The close ties between the CFTs and PEOs help ensure that streamlined buys are targeted to actual military need. PEO C3T leaders point to the fact that they've held four technology exchange meetings with the network team and other program offices. For the vendor community, the fast-track environment presents new opportunities but also new challenges. Klas, for instance, outsources production of its core product. In order to meet new demand for accelerated deployments, Huisenga said, the company must keep up through more frequent and more specific communications with its manufacturer. Johnston said her firm's biggest challenge lies in ensuring that military procurement professionals understand the emerging rules of the road. “We still get requests from contracting officers who aren't familiar with these contracts,” she said. “They'll ask for a quote, they'll send a statement of the work, and we have to let them know that a lot of this has already been negotiated. We need to explain to them the process we have already gone through to get to this point.” Military officials, meanwhile, say their challenge lies in ensuring industry is up to speed on the emerging requirements. Especially in the rapidly evolving C4ISR environment, the military can only meet its accelerated objectives if industry is already up to speed on emerging needs. “It's up to us to make sure industry is informed about what our network design looks like currently, what we anticipate our network design goals to shape up like for future capability sets, and to ensure that industry knows what our architecture looks like so they know how to plug into it,” Mehney said. “We aren't totally there yet. We still owe industry a better lay-down on those three critical components.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/industry/2019/09/19/are-meetings-with-industry-actually-accelerating-military-acquisitions

  • Congress has questions about the Air Force’s and Navy’s next-generation fighter programs

    June 25, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Congress has questions about the Air Force’s and Navy’s next-generation fighter programs

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee wants to limit the amount of money the Air Force and Navy get for their respective sixth-generation fighter programs until it gets some answers. The Navy and Air Force are leading separate efforts to develop a follow-on fighter jet to the F-35, with both services calling their programs “Next Generation Air Dominance.” Both projects are in the early stages of development, with the services hoping to ramp up activities this year. But HASC intends to fence off 85 percent of the fiscal 2021 funding requested for the NGAD until the committee receives an independent review performed by the Pentagon's director of cost assessment and program evaluation, according to the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee's markup of the FY21 defense policy bill. A committee aide told reporters on Monday that the stipulations are “nothing out of the ordinary” and are meant to allow lawmakers to gain further insight into the programs, not to permanently strip funding from the efforts. “When they field their capabilities, we just want to make sure that they've thought them through, that the department has determined that they are affordable and that anything else that is already in the budget into the future that's high priority as well is not going to get pushed out unintentionally if they have unexpected cost growth or run into problematic issues when they field the capabilities,” the aide said. How's the Air Force effort going? Earlier this month, Air Force acquisition executive Will Roper said the service is on track to finalize a business case for its NGAD program this summer. The Air Force envisions NGAD as a family of systems that could include aircraft, drones and other advanced technologies. But when it comes to developing new advanced aircraft, Roper wants to pursue a new strategy he calls the “Digital Century Series” that would have multiple companies continuously developing new jets and competing against each other for small-batch contracts. The business case, which is being put together by the program executive office for advanced aircraft, will explore whether the Digital Century Series idea is technically feasible, how the development and procurement process should be structured, and whether it would be cheaper than traditional contracting methods. “That is going to really help us, I hope, because we'll show that data and argue that it is not just better from a ‘competing with China and lethality' standpoint. It's just better from a business standpoint,” Roper said. “If it breaks even or is less [than traditional methods], I will be exceptionally happy. If it's more expensive — and I hope not exceptionally more — then we're going to have to argue” on behalf of the program. The Air Force has asked for $1 billion for its NGAD program for FY21. It received $905 million for the program in FY20. How's the Navy's effort faring? The Navy's NGAD program, also known as F/A-XX, is more mysterious. In its FY21 budget rollout this year, the service announced it would curtail its Super Hornet buy, purchasing a final 24 F/A-18E/Fs and then using the savings from a planned 36 jet buy from FY22 to FY24 to invest in its own future fighter. Little is known about the Navy's requirements. The service completed an analysis of alternatives in June 2019, as well as broad requirements and guidance for a concept of operations. The effort is now in the concept development phase, during which defense companies explore ideas “that balance advanced air dominance capabilities and long-term affordability/sustainment,” Navy spokesman Capt. Danny Hernandez told Defense News earlier this month. Congress has signaled that it may not be willing to allow the Navy to stop buying Super Hornets in future years. HASC inserted language into the FY21 defense policy bill urging the Navy to continue buying new Super Hornets, warning the service that next-generation fighter procurement does not always proceed according to plans. “The committee recalls the Navy curtailed F/A-18 procurement approximately 10 years ago with aspirational goals to maintain strike-fighter inventory levels with planned procurement of F-35C,” the committee said. “That plan was not realized due to F-35 program execution and subsequently required the Navy to procure additional F/A-18E/F aircraft to reduce operational risk. The committee expects a similar outcome may occur with the Navy's current plan for FA-XX due to affordability and technological challenges.” The bill also directs the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Department's inspector general to provide more information on the operational risk incurred by not buying additional Super Hornets, as well as F/A-18 squadron adherence to maintenance practices. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/06/23/congress-has-questions-about-the-air-force-and-navys-next-generation-fighter-programs/

  • Joint Expeditionary Force to strengthen sharing of tactical intelligence

    June 13, 2023 | International, Other Defence

    Joint Expeditionary Force to strengthen sharing of tactical intelligence

    A British-led defence alliance of several European countries will strengthen its sharing of tactical intelligence, the group, known as the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF), said on Tuesday.

All news