Back to news

March 29, 2019 | International, C4ISR

Palantir wins competition to build Army intelligence system

By Shane Harris

The Army has chosen Palantir Technologies to deploy a complex battlefield intelligence system for soldiers, according to Army documents, a significant boost for a company that has attracted a devoted following in national security circles but had struggled to win a major defense contract.

Industry experts said it marked the first time that the government had tapped a Silicon Valley software company, as opposed to a traditional military contractor, to lead a defense program of record, which has a dedicated line of funding from Congress. The contract is potentially worth more than $800 million.

The Army's decision to go with Palantir, which was co-founded by Peter Thiel, the billionaire investor and sometimes adviser to President Trump, brings to a close the latest chapter in a fierce competition.

In March 2018, the Army chose Palantir and Raytheon to vie for the next phase of the Distributed Common Ground System (or DCGS-A, for Army), which lets users gather and analyze information about enemy movements, terrain and weather to create detailed maps and reports in real-time. The system is designed to be used by soldiers fighting in remote, harsh environments.

But critics within the Army and in Congress have for years complained that DCGS-A cost too much and didn't deliver the intelligence and capabilities that soldiers needed. Some soldiers said the system was too hard to use and searched for alternatives.

Many became backers of Palantir, which sells to governments and businesses, including in the financial and health care sectors.

Palantir and its advocates argued that their software was cheaper and could meet all the Army's requirements. But Army brass defended their decision to pay for a custom-built platform.

In 2016, Palantir successfully argued in court that the government was required by law to consider purchasing commercial products, when available, rather than custom ones.

That sent the Army back to the drawing board and led to the face off between Palantir and Raytheon.

Before his death. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) praised the new approach on Twitter, noting that after the Army had already spent $3 billion in development costs, “it was time to find another way.

Raytheon and Palantir were allowed to test their respective software platforms with a live audience of soldiers, who told them what they liked and didn't and what they would change. The two companies then refined their offerings to suit the Army's needs.

Traditionally, the government first chooses a company to build a system according to a set of detailed requirements. But this approach let the Army take both companies' products for a test drive before settling on the winner.

“The Army changed its approach to acquisition,” Doug Philippone, a former Army Ranger who leads Palantir's defense business, said in an interview.

He said the company was always confident it could win if it were allowed to adjust its technology after getting feedback from soldiers, who he said put the software through a rigorous test, even parachuting out of airplanes with reinforced laptops containing Palantir's software.

Chris Johnson, a spokesman for Raytheon, said the company was disappointed in the outcome. “We will wait for the Army's de-brief to understand their decision.”

The Army did not provide a comment for this story.

Raytheon and Palantir may compete for subsequent phases of work on the program.

Unlike most Silicon Valley start-ups, which aim to make their fortunes building consumer applications and software, Palantir at its founding set its sites on Washington, believing that its data analytics tools would find an eager market among U.S. spy agencies and the military, which are constantly trying to manage ever-expanding streams of information.

Philippone said the Army win had validated Palantir's strategy.

“We founded the company around solving this particular mission,” he said.

The company faced initial skepticism from investors, who thought it couldn't overcome entrenched bureaucratic interests and what they saw as political favoritism that led the Pentagon to spend billions every year with the same small group of Beltway contractors.

“Everyone told us we should stay away from Washington because it was corrupt and we didn't know how to play golf with senators,” Joe Lonsdale, a Palantir co-founder, said in a 2011 interview.

The company got an early investment in 2005 from In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital arm, which tries to quickly develop technologies that the intelligence agency might use.

The In-Q-Tel connection helped Palantir get meetings with U.S. officials and intelligence analysts, and even test its software with the CIA's counterterrorism center, according to people familiar with the matter.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/palantir-wins-competition-to-build-army-intelligence-system/2019/03/26/c6d62bf0-3927-11e9-aaae-69364b2ed137_story.html

On the same subject

  • Netherlands ‘very welcome’ to join European sub program — with a caveat

    April 5, 2018 | International, Naval

    Netherlands ‘very welcome’ to join European sub program — with a caveat

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — The Netherlands would be welcome to join a German-Norwegian submarine acquisition program, even as the door is closing for final design work on the boats, the Norwegian defense ministry said. The statement comes as German defense industry officials have talked for weeks about what they believe is an impending move to reshuffle big-ticket shipbuilding programs by way of a new naval cooperation umbrella with the Dutch. In that telling, The Hague would join the purchase of 212CD-class submarines, built by Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems' undersea division, and gain a say in the fate of Germany's Mehrzweck-Kampfschiff 180 frigate program, from which the surface division of TKMS was excluded last month. While Berlin and The Hague have officially kept mum about details, several German industry officials and analysts surveyed for this article believe the prospect of a Dutch move is keeping the MKS-180 program's fate unpredictable. When asked about the Netherlands' interest in the German combat ship effort, Dutch defense ministry spokesman Peter Valstar only wrote in an email to Defense News that senior acquisition officials from both countries had met recently to discuss “various topics like possible cooperations on all kinds of defense projects.” As for submarines, “We're currently in the B-phase (research) of our so-called ‘Defence Material Process,‘” Valstar wrote. “The ‘need' (A-phase) of a submarine purchase is clear. The C-phase (further research) and D-phase (product and supplier) are still to come.” Norway has always considered the door open for additional submarine buyers since Oslo teamed with Berlin last year. The joint acquisition would see Norway buy four boats and Germany two. Buying and maintaining identical submarines would keep cost down for both countries, the argument goes. “Norway and Germany would like to see additional partners joining the cooperation, and it would be very welcome if the Netherlands should decide to join,” Norwegian defense ministry spokeswoman Ann Kristin Salbuvik wrote in an email to Defense News. “We are working together towards several potential nations, and we have a good dialogue with potential partners,” Salbuvik added when asked if the Dutch had formally expressed an interest. But the door is closing for would-be partners to have a say in the boats' configurations. “The design of the German-Norwegian submarines will soon be frozen in order for the supplier, TKMS, to be able to provide a binding offer in July 2018,” the spokeswoman wrote. “After this point in time, design changes will be costly, and will also have a negative impact on time and delivery schedules for the German-Norwegian submarine building program,” she added. “If additional partners join the cooperation, it will be beneficial for them to strive for as identical a design as possible.” It is unclear how far discussions for a Dutch-German naval armaments pact have bubbled up toward the defense ministries' leaders. But the issue is “very much a topic of conversation in political Berlin,” one source noted. If given the chance to tweak the MKS-180 configuration, the Dutch would push for a smaller ship design than is currently envisioned, one industry source predicted. With Damen Shipyards, the Dutch already have local industry in the running for the program, teaming with Germany's Blohm &Voss, which is now part of the German Lürssen group. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/04/04/netherlands-very-welcome-to-join-european-sub-program-with-a-caveat/

  • Pentagon’s historic R&D request has billions for advanced networks, AI

    March 13, 2023 | International, C4ISR

    Pentagon’s historic R&D request has billions for advanced networks, AI

    The $145 billion request includes $1.4 billion for Joint All-Domain Command and Control and $687 million for the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve.

  • Inside the Army’s futuristic test of its battlefield artificial intelligence in the desert

    September 28, 2020 | International, Land, C4ISR

    Inside the Army’s futuristic test of its battlefield artificial intelligence in the desert

    Nathan Strout YUMA PROVING GROUND, Ariz. — After weeks of work in the oppressive Arizona desert heat, the U.S. Army carried out a series of live fire engagements Sept. 23 at Yuma Proving Ground to show how artificial intelligence systems can work together to automatically detect threats, deliver targeting data and recommend weapons responses at blazing speeds. Set in the year 2035, the engagements were the culmination of Project Convergence 2020, the first in a series of annual demonstrations utilizing next generation AI, network and software capabilities to show how the Army wants to fight in the future. The Army was able to use a chain of artificial intelligence, software platforms and autonomous systems to take sensor data from all domains, transform it into targeting information, and select the best weapon system to respond to any given threat in just seconds. Army officials claimed that these AI and autonomous capabilities have shorted the sensor to shooter timeline — the time it takes from when sensor data is collected to when a weapon system is ordered to engaged — from 20 minutes to 20 seconds, depending on the quality of the network and the number of hops between where it's collected and its destination. “We use artificial intelligence and machine learning in several ways out here,” Brigadier General Ross Coffman, director of the Army Futures Command's Next Generation Combat Vehicle Cross-Functional Team, told visiting media. “We used artificial intelligence to autonomously conduct ground reconnaissance, employ sensors and then passed that information back. We used artificial intelligence and aided target recognition and machine learning to train algorithms on identification of various types of enemy forces. So, it was prevalent throughout the last six weeks.” The first exercise featured is informative of how the Army stacked together AI capabilities to automate the sensor to shooter pipeline. In that example, the Army used space-based sensors operating in low Earth orbit to take images of the battleground. Those images were downlinked to a TITAN ground station surrogate located at Joint Base Lewis McCord in Washington, where they were processed and fused by a new system called Prometheus. Currently under development, Prometheus is an AI system that takes the sensor data ingested by TITAN, fuses it, and identifies targets. The Army received its first Prometheus capability in 2019, although it's targeting accuracy is still improving, according to one Army official at Project Convergence. In some engagements, operators were able to send in a drone to confirm potential threats identified by Prometheus. From there, the targeting data was delivered to a Tactical Assault Kit — a software program that gives operators an overhead view of the battlefield populated with both blue and red forces. As new threats are identified by Prometheus or other systems, that data is automatically entered into the program to show users their location. Specific images and live feeds can be pulled up in the environment as needed. All of that takes place in just seconds. Once the Army has its target, it needs to determine the best response. Enter the real star of the show: the FIRES Synchronization to Optimize Responses in Multi-Domain Operations, or FIRESTORM. “What is FIRESTORM? Simply put it's a computer brain that recommends the best shooter, updates the common operating picture with the current enemy situation, and friendly situation, admissions the effectors that we want to eradicate the enemy on the battlefield,” said Coffman. Army leaders were effusive in praising FIRESTORM throughout Project Convergence. The AI system works within the Tactical Assault Kit. Once new threats are entered into the program, FIRESTORM processes the terrain, available weapons, proximity, number of other threats and more to determine what the best firing system to respond to that given threat. Operators can assess and follow through with the system's recommendations with just a few clicks of the mouse, sending orders to soldiers or weapons systems within seconds of identifying a threat. Just as important, FIRESTORM provides critical target deconfliction, ensuring that multiple weapons systems aren't redundantly firing on the same threat. Right now, that sort of deconfliction would have to take place over a phone call between operators. FIRESTORM speeds up that process and eliminates any potential misunderstandings. In that first engagement, FIRESTORM recommended the use of an Extended-Range Cannon Artillery. Operators approved the algorithm's choice, and promptly the cannon fired a projectile at the target located 40 kilometers away. The process from identifying the target to sending those orders happened faster than it took the projectile to reach the target. Perhaps most surprising is how quickly FIRESTORM was integrated into Project Convergence. “This computer program has been worked on in New Jersey for a couple years. It's not a program of record. This is something that they brought to my attention in July of last year, but it needed a little bit of work. So we put effort, we put scientists and we put some money against it,” said Coffman. “The way we used it is as enemy targets were identified on the battlefield — FIRESTORM quickly paired those targets with the best shooter in position to put effects on it. This is happening faster than any human could execute. It is absolutely an amazing technology.” Dead Center Prometheus and FIRESTORM weren't the only AI capabilities on display at Project Convergence. In other scenarios, a MQ-1C Gray Eagle drone was able to identify and target a threat using the on-board Dead Center payload. With Dead Center, the Gray Eagle was able to process the sensor data it was collecting, identifying a threat on its own without having to send the raw data back to a command post for processing and target identification. The drone was also equipped with the Maven Smart System and Algorithmic Inference Platform, a product created by Project Maven, a major Department of Defense effort to use AI for processing full motion video According to one Army officer, the capabilities of the Maven Smart System and Dead Center overlap, but placing both on the modified Gray Eagle at Project Convergence helped them to see how they compared. With all of the AI engagements, the Army ensured there was a human in the loop to provide oversight of the algorithms' recommendations. When asked how the Army was implementing the Department of Defense's principles of ethical AI use adopted earlier this year, Coffman pointed to the human barrier between AI systems and lethal decisions. “So obviously the technology exists, to remove the human right the technology exists, but the United States Army, an ethical based organization — that's not going to remove a human from the loop to make decisions of life or death on the battlefield, right? We understand that,” explained Coffman. “The artificial intelligence identified geo-located enemy targets. A human then said, Yes, we want to shoot at that target.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence/2020/09/25/the-army-just-conducted-a-massive-test-of-its-battlefield-artificial-intelligence-in-the-desert/

All news