Back to news

December 27, 2018 | International, C4ISR

Why the Pentagon’s cyber innovation could fall behind

By:

Silicon Valley is the home to the transistor and the birthplace of the IT industry. Boston is the home of prominent universities and technology companies such as Raytheon and Boston Scientific.

So where will the country's hub of cybersecurity innovation reside? A new paper argues that a nucleus of new cybersecurity technologies may struggle to form in the United States.

Because the Department of Defense's research facilities are dispersed throughout the country and located in smaller metropolitan regions, the Army is in danger of stagnating when it comes to technology innovation, a Dec. 18 paper in the Army's Cyber Defense Review argued.

“Without immediate, bold action, the Army will miss its best opportunity to seize the initiative in the current Cyber Cold War,” wrote Col. Stoney Trent, an Army official who now works for the Pentagon's top IT officer in the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center. “The Secretary of Defense fully understands the need for dramatic improvement, and fifteen years of Army acquisition failures have created the crisis necessary for change.”

Trent took aim at the Army's decision to move its cyber headquarters to Fort Gordon, Georgia, saying it “lacks most of the characteristics that have attracted technologists to other innovation regions.”

“Limited public infrastructure and services, sparse employment options, a humid subtropical climate, a lack of a private research university, and distance from urban centers will likely delay the emergence of innovative technologists in Augusta-Richmond County,” he wrote.

The state of Georgia, which is partnering with the Army on innovation near Fort Gordon, opened the first phase of a planned a $100 million dollar center earlier this year.

But while Trent argued that the Army has “limited input over the location of its installations and major activities,” because basing decisions are made by Congress, the dispersed locations are not ideal for improving the Pentagon's cyber prowess.

“Due to the location of Army research activities, very few scientists and engineers have access to the operators and analysts who will have to use the technologies under development,” he wrote.

On the contrary, large cities are engines of innovation because they have more local resources, a higher degree of subject area experts and a larger local workforce, Trent argued.

“This exponential increase in innovation is related to social networks and access to ideas, resources, and expertise in more populated urban settings.”

That makes locations like Moffett Air Field in Santa Clara County near Silicon Valley, Fort Devens near Boston, and Fort Hamilton in New York City as potential hubs that “have been left fallow,” Trent argued. “Decades of studies indicate the importance of a culture of experimentation. While our adversaries are experimenting, we must not dither.”

https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2018/12/26/why-the-pentagons-cyber-innovation-could-fall-behind

On the same subject

  • Disruption in Aerospace and Defense Is Here: Are You Ready?

    October 3, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Disruption in Aerospace and Defense Is Here: Are You Ready?

    The next generation of aircraft will be different from anything seen before. Disruptive technologies enabled by digitalization are transforming the industry, creating new business models and empowering new market entrants. The digitalization disruption is here. Are you ready for innovation through simulation? The aerospace and defense (A&D) industry is challenged to design more fuel-efficient, quieter and safer evolutionary and derivative aircraft to reduce operation lifecycle costs for the airlines. Simultaneously it is wrestling with the rapid revolutions of urban air mobility (UAM) and commercial drones. Global defense spending is increasing as organizations innovate to maintain or establish technology leadership. The new space race has begun as nontraditional companies and new spacefaring nations challenge the historic dominance of government funded agencies. Across the whole industry, these trends demand innovation at a pace never seen before, combined with the globally disruptive cross-industry forces of autonomy, electrification, connectivity and the digital twin, as well as new materials and additive manufacturing. It requires innovation in a design space for which there is no precedent. Full report: http://images.link.pentonaviation.com/Web/PentonAv/%7B8abc8a86-ee52-4ae3-b46f-5df9036d89fd%7D_Aerospace_and_Defense_Whitepaper.pdf

  • L3Harris looks to shed as much as 10 percent of company

    February 5, 2020 | International, C4ISR

    L3Harris looks to shed as much as 10 percent of company

    By: Jill Aitoro WASHINGTON — L3Harris Technologies could divest up to 10 percent of the company, according to CEO Bill Brown, as its recent decision to sell its airport security business for $1 billion is seen as the first of more transactions expected to refine the firm's portfolio. L3Harris signed a definitive agreement to sell the business unit to Leidos, according to an announcement Tuesday. The transaction is expected to close in mid-2020, barring any issues tied to regulatory approvals. Proceeds from the divestiture are expected to be used to repurchase shares and offset dilution. The deal is part of a larger strategy to reshape the portfolio, focusing on what Brown described on a call with analysts as “high-margin, high-growth, technology-differentiated businesses where we can win and generate attractive returns.” “Although this is the first and largest transaction we're contemplating, our portfolio-shaping process is ongoing and may ultimately result in 8-10 percent of total company revenue being divested over time,” he said. The company's 2019 revenue of $18.1 billion could translate to as much as $1.8 billion in divestitures. Brown told Defense News in June 2019 — one month before the merger of Harris and L3 Technologies was completed — about plans to divest a “pretty significant” piece of the business in the first six months as a single company. “Anytime you put two companies with two portfolios together and you rethink what strategy you want to accomplish, there's going to be some pieces of the portfolio at the back end of the bus,” Brown said at the time. “We have to look at where we want to put our management time, capital, and [research and development] investment. We can't put it on pieces that might not be as strategic." Brown told analysts that the deal would not impact the company's $3 billion free cash flow target in 2022. That in theory would set up L3Harris for a sizable acquisition down the road, should the company choose to go in that direction. A company spokesman could not comment on the specific defense-nondefense split post divestiture, but L3Harris would presumably see a larger slice of the business focusing on defense opportunities. In the 2019 Defense News Top 100 list of the largest defense companies, Harris and L3 reported 72 percent and 81 percent of revenue as defense-focused, respectively. L3Harris reported $18.1 billion in fiscal 2019 revenue. Once the deal with Leidos closes, the airport security businesses' $500 million in annual revenue would transition off the books. That said, L3Harris is forecasting 5-7 percent revenue growth in 2020 — so it won't be a straight reduction. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/02/04/l3harris-looks-to-shed-as-much-as-10-percent-of-company

  • Calls grow louder for a fresh European air-defense push

    June 17, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Calls grow louder for a fresh European air-defense push

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — NATO members in Europe should band together and sharpen their focus on short- to medium-range air defense, with Germany taking the lead in forging a coalition, analysts on the continent argue. The call by the German Council on Foreign Relations is based on the assumption that air superiority can no longer be taken for granted in future conflicts. Researchers argue that the playing field of air warfare has leveled out in recent years, with more countries deploying aircraft, missiles and drones capable of threatening NATO from the skies. At the same time, European nations have divested sizable chunks of their air defense capabilities with the idea that shooting down enemy planes or missiles would be more of a tactical requirement in the future rather than a permanent, strategic one, according to Christian Mölling, a senior analyst at the think tank who co-authored a study on the issue. “Air defense is a huge headache for NATO,” he told Defense News, adding that the situation is especially dire in the Baltic nations. Germany already holds the designation of a so-called framework nation when it comes to missile defense within the alliance. And while defense officials in Berlin are fond of touting that responsibility in arguing for the ambitious TLVS program to replace the legacy Patriot air and missile defense fleet, there is little to show for, in a practical sense, until the new weapon is actually fielded. That is especially the case when it comes to short-range air defense, which covers threats up to about 8 kilometers away. Within the alliance, those weapons were “largely dismantled” over the last two decades, according to the study. “Building a multi-layered, integrated air defense is a common challenge for all European countries in terms of procurement and operation,” the study says. “Effective defense is only possible if threats can be identified early and jointly. National systems are not sufficient.” On the longer-range side, Germany is holding out hope that the TLVS project can attract buy-in from within Europe over the coming years. In Italy, for example, the military brass appears interested in the technology, but the preferences of politicians in the government are harder to predict. The idea of a European-wide, short-range air defense initiative has been on the table since officials at the European Defence Agency in Brussels concluded the inaugural Coordinated Annual Review on Defence of 2017 and 2018. Member states included the capability in their top priorities for future collaboration. In that sense, there is reason to believe that the idea of a new PESCO project, as proposed by the German Council on Foreign Relations, could get traction. And if European Union officials are to be believed, whatever actual capabilities come out of that intra-continental process will also benefit the NATO alliance as a whole. PESCO is short for Permanent Structured Cooperation, a key policy in the EU's quest for greater defensive capabilities. A new round of collaboration proposals is expected to take shape over the summer to be approved by member states later this year. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/06/16/calls-grow-louder-for-a-fresh-european-air-defense-push/

All news