RTX’s Raytheon Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor excels at latest, most complex live fire test

On the same subject

• 

  January 31, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Silicon Valley investors to DoD: Dual-use tech is a bad strategy

  By: Jill Aitoro SIMI VALLEY, Calif. — Dual-use technology — that is, tech that can be adapted from the commercial market to serve the needs of the military — is core to the U.S. Department of Defense's innovation strategy. But those willing to put money toward big ideas argue it's the wrong approach. “In terms of how to build a startup and how to scale really fast, you can't have two missions,” said Katherine Boyle, an investor with venture capital firm General Catalyst, during a Defense News roundtable in California. “You can't be a 10-person startup saying: ‘OK, we're going to sell to the DoD, but we're also going to sell to these commercial customers, and it's just going to work out magically.'" For the second year in a row, Defense News hosted the roundtable to dig into Pentagon's efforts to engage with the commercial tech community — this year digging into the challenges and opportunities that come with investment in defense development. To the Pentagon, dual-use technology offers an attractive means of drawing new players into the military fold, while also leveraging the more rapid development that happens on the commercial side. But the model is evolving, said Mike Madsen, director of strategic engagement with the government's Silicon Valley outreach hub Defense Innovation Unit. With DoD, “it takes two years to get to a ‘yes,' when a lot of companies need a ‘no' in 30 days because they don't have the capital,” he said. “So we flipped it. Now we start with the DoD problem set and take it out to industry. And we've lowered a lot of the barriers to entry — we negotiate [intellectual property] for each contract, we negotiate auditability, we move quickly. We look to award prototype contracts in 60 to 90 days.” The approach also attempts to rebalance the gradual shift in research and development investments in the last couple of decades. As noted by Tom Foldesi, DIU's commercial engagement director, one-third of worldwide R&D was tied to the Department of Defense in the 1960s. That percentage has since tanked to 3.7 percent. A separate business line allows R&D to continue to iterate to the next generation of technology so the DoD can “go back to the cookie jar” and tap into the technology to solve future problems, Foldesi said. But to Trey Stephens, a partner at venture capital firm Founders Fund and a co-founder and executive chairman of Anduril Industries, the model ensures the large, traditional defense contractors continue to dominate as the small businesses only “dabble in defense.” It also means the DoD won't bear sole responsibility for the economic growth of these small tech startups. “Where I'm not on board is where a traditional defense company is being asked by the government to integrate dual-use capabilities as a way to prevent that oligopoly from being shaken,” he said. “We have to break this oligopoly. We can only do it if we find companies that are willing to own their responsibility for execution on programs.” To be clear, Stephens acknowledged cases where commercial technology companies can be primes. Lawsuit aside, he's “on board” with awarding the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure contract to a commercial business — Microsoft — “because the capability is similar enough.” Microsoft was awarded the Pentagon's JEDI cloud contract, but Amazon Web Services has asked a federal court to block the department and the company from beginning work on the project, according to a Jan. 13 court filing. In terms of new capabilities, Stephens advocates for turning the model on its ear: Enable startups to first development a solution to a problem faced within the DoD, then turn that around and sell it to commercial industries. “The commercial industry is oftentimes looking to the government for aspirational solutions to some of its hardest problems, whereas the inverse doesn't really work,” he said. General Catalyst, which counts The Honest Company, Snapchat and Airbnb among its portfolio of companies, has invested in two pure-play defense companies: Anduril, and Palo Alto machine-learning company Vannevar Labs. The latter is developing a product that would bring natural language-processing technologies to support counterterrorism missions. “We actually think this is a better model,” Boyle said. “If you're scaling rapidly, you have to be very focused on your customer set. And if you're going to have to sacrifice a customer, even if you're a multibillion-dollar company, you're going to sacrifice the one who's moving the slowest. And that's usually the government.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/smr/cultural-clash/2020/01/30/silicon-valley-investors-to-dod-dual-use-tech-is-a-bad-strategy/

• 

  January 21, 2021 | International, Aerospace

  Just hours before Biden’s inauguration, the UAE and US come to a deal on F-35 sales

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON —The United Arab Emirates on Jan. 20 signed off on a deal to purchase up to 50 F-35 joint strike fighter aircraft and 18 MQ-9 Reaper drones from the United States. According to Reuters, which broke the news, the agreement was one of the final acts of the Trump administration, occurring just an hour before President Joe Biden was inaugurated. A source with knowledge of the situation confirmed separately to Defense News that the U.S. and UAE officials on Wednesday signed a letter of agreement, which solidifies the terms of a foreign military sale between two nations. The departments of State and Defense did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The agreement delineates the cost of the aircraft, technical specifications and the schedule for F-35 deliveries to the UAE, people familiar with the deal told Reuters. Those sources could not confirm when the first F-35 is due to be delivered to Abu Dhabi, but stated that an initial proposal stipulated 2027 as one possible date. The UAE deal was previously estimated at a $23.37 billion value, including 50 F-35A fighters worth $10.4 billion, 18 MQ-9B drones worth $2.97 billion, and $10 billion worth of air-to-air and air-to-ground munitions. Those dollar totals are expected to shift around during further negotiations with F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin and MQ-9 maker General Atomics. It's unclear whether the incoming administration will seek to undo the deal. Biden's pick for secretary of state, Antony Blinken, told reporters in late October that the sale is “something we would look at very, very carefully,” due to U.S. obligations to preserve Israel's qualitative military edge. In December, the Senate rejected an attempt to block the sale, with Republicans largely voting to preserve the deal. The first vote concerned the drones and munitions and failed 46-50, while the second concerned the F-35s and fell 47-49. Aaron Mehta and Joe Gould in Washington contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2021/01/20/just-hours-before-bidens-inauguration-the-uae-and-us-come-to-a-deal-on-f-35-sales

• 

  January 31, 2019 | International, Naval

  The US Navy is planning for its new frigate to be a workhorse

  WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy is looking to get a lot of underway time out of its new frigate and is eyeing a crewing model that swaps out teams of sailors to maximize the operational time for each hull. The so-called blue-gold crewing model effectively creates two crews for each ship of the class. The blue crew and gold crew switch out to keep the ships at sea for as long as possible without breaking the sailors and their families. It's the model the Navy has used for years on the ballistic missile submarines and is employing on the littoral combat ships, but now the model is likely to extend to the LCS successor, said Rear Adm. Ron Boxall, the Chief of Naval Operations' surface warfare director. “We're looking at the blue-gold construct on FFG(X). We're planning on it, which gives us a larger operational availability – it should double it,” Boxall told Defense News in an interview late last year. The use of blue-gold crewing hints at how the Navy is viewing its new frigate: as a ship that can carry out a a broad range of tasks that have consumed the operational time of larger combatants. That includes exercises with allies and freedom of navigation operations to counter-piracy and routine presence missions that don't require an Arleigh Burke destroyer to be successful but are time-intensive. The Navy has bemoaned the lack of a small surface combatant that can hold down low-end missions but still contribute in a high-end fight, which has been the impetus behind the whole FFG(X) program. Even though the crews will catch a break in the blue-gold construct, off-hull crews won't be kicking back during their shore rotation, Boxall said. The surface force has been investing in higher-end training facilities in fleet concentration areas in an effort to increase the proficiency of its watch teams. Crews on shore will be going through those trainers, he said. “So, these ships are going to be out there half the time while the [off-hull] crews are back training in higher-fidelity training environments,” Boxall explained. “And what [commanding officers] will tell you is that as we get to higher and higher fidelity training, time to train becomes equally as valuable. “So, in an increasingly complex environment, it's just intuitive that that you have to have time to train. We think Blue-Gold makes sense for those reasons on the frigate.” Lessons from LCS Getting more simulator time for surface sailors has been an initiative championed by the Navy's top surface warfare officer Vice Adm. Rich Brown. It's an off-shoot from lessons-learned from FFG(X)'s predecessor, the LCS, which has extremely high-fidelity simulator trainers for its crews before they take over their assigned hulls. One thing the surface force has been intrigued to see has been the high quality of the officers that come up through the LCS program, something the Navy in part attributes to the trainers, Boxall said, and the SWOs want to replicate that for the FFG(X). “One really interesting side-note with LCS has been the quality of the training,” Boxall said. “As we went back and looked at the lessons learned from McCain and Fitzgerald, we're trying to apply some of the good things about LCS to that. “Those officers, because they are smaller ships they get a lot more water under the keel. And they're faster ships so they are getting that water under the keel in a faster-moving environment. So we're creating a generation of officers who are getting tougher navigation environments thrown at them more quickly, and we're also getting the quality and fidelity of their trainers.” This has meant that LCS officers more-than stack up to their peers from larger, more advanced ships, he added. “What we're seeing is they are doing very, very well against their contemporaries coming off the bigger ships,” Boxall said. “Why is that happening? It's fairly logical: More stick time, better fidelity trainers and more time in the trainers.” Ownership The littoral combat ship adopted the Blue-Gold crewing model after a series of high-profile breakdowns, some caused by crew errors. The original model was to have three crews for two hulls, a rotational model that the Navy worried was taking away from the sense of ownership for a single, specific hull that permanently attached crews might have to a greater degree. The program was reorganized to a Blue-Gold model, which required hundreds of new billets for the LCS program, under then-head of Naval Surface Forces Pacific, Rear Adm. Thomas Rowden. Expanding Blue-Gold to the FFG(X) would further spread the model inside the surface warfare community. Both minesweepers and patrol craft, two other workhorse platforms in the surface community, operate under a Blue-Gold crewing model as well. However, it may not be a model that the Navy will pursue on the large surface combatant now in development. That ship may be better with a lower operational tempo, Boxall said. “We'll look and see if that makes sense on the large surface combatant or not,” he said. “Maybe those are better ships to keep as a surge force, maybe they're fine operating on a lower rotational model.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/30/the-us-navy-is-planning-for-its-new-frigate-to-be-a-workhorse/