News

Vice-président recherche, technologie, innovation du groupe Thales, David Sadek intervenait jeudi 24 octobre à Toulouse au Forum Innovation IA, un événement organisé par Sciences et Avenir pour le groupe Challenges. Explicabilité, validité, intégrité... " Pour une IA de confiance " : c'était l'intitulé de l'intervention de David Sadek, le vice-président recherche, technologie, innovation du groupe Thales. "Nous aimerions tous pouvoir toujours faire confiance à tous nos outils technologiques. Mais en réalité tout dépend du contexte. Dans le cas des outils reposant sur l'IA, si Netflix me recommande un film que je trouve détestable, ce n'est pas bien grave, on s'en remettra. Mais dans le cas des systèmes critiques tels que l'on en conçoit régulièrement chez Thales pour des applications défense, espace et aéronautique, la question de la confiance est primordiale". David Sadek énonce trois impératifs, qui sont autant d'axes stratégiques de la feuille de route IA chez Thales, pour aller vers cette " IA de confiance ". Pour qu'une application de l'IA soi digne de confiance, il faut d'abord qu'elle soit capable d'expliquer. Si elle se contente de proposer ou décider sans être capable de dire pourquoi et comment elle est arrivée à cette proposition ou décision, la défiance s'installera. Elle doit donc être capable de répondre à la question : " Pourquoi ? ". "Si par exemple un copilote IA recommande au pilote humain de virer à 45°, et que ce dernier demande " pourquoi ", le copilote doit pouvoir répondre par exemple : " parce qu'il y a un problème météo (ou une menace ...) droit devant ". Il ne s'agit pas de simplement tracer la décision, de pouvoir indiquer à ses concepteurs quels neurones, quelles couches de neurones, ont fait pencher la balance dans un sens ou un autre, mais bien d'expliquer dans une langue compréhensible immédiatement par le pilote". Ce qui indique qu'à l'aspect intelligence artificielle s'ajoute celui de " l'interaction homme-machine ". IA connexionniste et IA symbolique Cela implique, en restant sur cet exemple, une capacité de compréhension et de génération du langage naturel. Mieux, le pilote appréciera de pouvoir dialoguer dans un langage mixte, reposant sur l'oral et le geste (pour désigner un point sur une carte, etc.). Deuxième impératif selon David Sadek : il faut pouvoir démontrer la validité d'une application de l'IA. C'est-à-dire sa conformité aux spécifications. "Le système développé doit faire tout ce l'on attend de lui et rien que ce que l'on attend de lui. Ce qui suppose que l'on sache spécifier très proprement". On connait l'exemple d'un jeu de bataille navale, un " serious game " destiné à former des officiers de la marine, qui gagnait à tous les coups, parce qu'il sacrifiait systématiquement chaque vaisseau touché, pour ne pas ralentir la flotte. Aucune règle ne prévoyait, n'interdisait ce cas de figure, passablement inacceptable. Troisième impératif pour une " IA de confiance ", selon David Sadek, la responsabilité des systèmes reposant sur l'IA. C'est-à-dire leur conformité aux cadres légaux, réglementaires et moraux. On connait le tendon d'Achille des réseaux de neurones : ce sont des boîtes noires, on voit ce qui entre et ce qui sort, mais on ne sait pas (trop) ce qu'il se passe à l'intérieur. C'est pourquoi David Sadek insiste sur le fait qu'il faut s'intéresser aussi à " l'autre IA ", l'IA symbolique, celle qui repose sur des règles et des raisonnements et qui s'oppose à l'IA connexionniste des réseaux de neurones. Cette IA symbolique, qui fait moins les gros titres, qui n'a pas connu les progrès fulgurants de l'IA des réseaux de neurones, est plus à même de répondre à ces trois exigences : expliquer, valider, responsabilité. C'est pourquoi la réponse à cette triple exigence passe sans doute, entre autres, par " l'IA hybride ", une IA tirant parti de ces deux branches de l'intelligence artificielle. Par Pierre Vandeginste https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/high-tech/intelligence-artificielle/ia-pvdg_138526

By: Ben Werner The Navy exercised contract options with Boeing worth $84.7 million to buy three MQ-25A Stingray unmanned aerial refueling tankers as part of a modification to a previously awarded contract. The three MQ-25s covered by the contract options are to be completed by August 2024, according to the contract announcement released by the Pentagon late Thursday. For more than a decade, the Navy has conducted an on-again, off-again development process to build what will be the Navy's first unmanned carrier-based tankers. In 2018, Boeing beat Lockheed Martin and General Atomics to land the $805 million contract to build the first four MQ-25As. The Navy anticipates integrating MQ-25 aircraft into the carrier air wing for initial operational capability by 2024, according to a Navy's fact sheet about the program. The Navy's desire for an unmanned aerial refueling tanker is born out of necessity. Currently, between 20 and 30 percent of a carrier-based air wing's Super Hornet fleet is dedicated to aerial refueling operations. Introducing the MQ-25A Stingray will free those Super Hornets for strike missions. The MQ-25A is expected to deliver up to 15,000 pounds of fuel at 500 nautical miles. In September, Boeing conducted the first flight of its unmanned aerial refueling test aircraft the T1. Boeing tested both the T1's handling and the Navy's ability to fast-track the long-stalled program. Boeing first unveiled photos of the T1 prototype months before winning the contract award. Having the T1 available enabled the Navy and Boeing to perform tests much earlier in the development process than would be typical for a new build. The type of testing performed in September, a year after the contract award, usually doesn't start until the first engineering development models (EDM) are built. With the MQ-25 program, the first EDM airframes are expected to be ready for testing by the end of 2021, according to the Navy. Boeing previously announced plans to hoist the T1 onto an aircraft carrier and conduct deck handling tests this year. Boeing plans to shift to using the first EDM airframes for testing in 2021. The first carrier-based tests and sea trials are expected to occur in 2022 and 2023, the Navy previously stated. https://news.usni.org/2020/04/02/navy-exercises-84-7-million-option-with-boeing-for-three-mq-25a-stingrays

Shawn Snow Even Marine Raiders are feeling the impact of COVID-19 as the elite special operations unit headquartered in state under a stay-at-home order is being forced to adjust training to comply with state, defense and federal health guidelines. The Marine Raider Training Center aboard Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, is home to the seven-month Marine commando special operator school known as the Individual Training Course, which creates Critical Skill Operators who earn the 0372 military occupational specialty. While COVID-19 continues to rampage across the U.S., North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper issued a stay-at-home order to stem the spread of the virus. According to the New York Times, there are 1,582 reported cases of COVID-19 across North Carolina. To comply with the governor's order, Marine Forces Special Operations Command says it has made adjustments to training to include restructuring the ITC course and adding online training where possible. “The ITC schedule has been restructured to ensure the safety and health of the two classes currently undergoing training. Some of the in-class material has been shifted to online learning, to include parts of the Basic Language Course,” Gunnery Sgt. Lynn Kinney, told Marine Corps Times in an emailed statement. The ITC course is a seven-month training evolution broken down into several phases that includes land navigation, patrolling, small unit tactics, irregular warfare and close quarters battle. MARSOC did not provide any other details regarding the restructuring of the ITC course. “Other parts of the training have been shifted to ensure COVID-19 response requirements,” Kinney said. https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/02/marine-raiders-adjust-training-add-online-courses-to-weather-covid-19/

Desperate times call for bold measures, and the $2.2 trillion coronavirus economic rescue package passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump certainly passes that test. Tucked into the gargantuan measure was $58 billion for airlines and cargo carriers, including $29 billion in grants to keep workers paid for the next six months, even if they are staffing empty flights. Boeing did not get the $60 billion directly that it had sought for aerospace manufacturers, but the aircraft giant and its suppliers still qualify for hefty rescue loans or guarantees. The secretary general of the United Nations has called COVID-19 the worst crisis the world has seen since World War II, and governments have a duty to ensure that this unprecedented pandemic does not wipe out vital industries. But the torrent of rescue money could have negative side effects, and it is imperative that governments step back when the crisis subsides. The market distortions of state aid already are apparent in the airline industry, where a lack of coordination among governments—even those within the EU—has tilted the playing field. And what if Boeing receives government backstops that Airbus has said it does not need? It is increasingly likely that when the pandemic subsides, the aviation industry will be facing a long uphill march to recovery, rather than the quick bounce-back that had been hoped for. As such, we urge the industry's stakeholders to start looking ahead and taking steps that will position them to recover as quickly as possible. Consider this Code of Conduct: Take care of your employees. You will need them to excel and work as a team when you recover. Do whatever possible to keep them healthy and well-informed. In the near term, furloughs, wage freezes and hiring freezes may be unavoidable to control costs. But prioritizing shareholders or senior executives over workers would create labor issues that could slow any recovery. Take care of your customers. You will only recover if they recover, so be flexible in responding to their issues during the crisis. Relationships cemented during hard times will pay off, while fractured relationships could cause long-term damage. Take care of your suppliers. Aviation manufacturers have spent decades pushing risk down to suppliers while trying to limit their rewards to reduce costs. If your suppliers do not survive or take too long to recover, all those risks will rebound onto you. Take care of your industrial base. The Pentagon wields an enormous amount of buying power at the taxpayers' expense. That should be deployed to keep its supply base healthy in the near term, even if it is at the expense of delaying long-term capabilities. Take care of your business. You need to come back more agile and flexible than ever to adjust to the immediate challenges of a recovery and to tackle future challenges unrelated to the coronavirus, such as climate change. And what about taking care of shareholders? Consider that in one recent year Boeing returned nearly six times as much money to shareholders through stock buybacks and dividends as it invested in R&D. Or consider that U.S. airlines sent 96% of their free cash flow to shareholders over the last five years. Now that hard times have hit, taxpayers are being asked to step in and foot the bill to save the industry. Shareholders need healthy airlines and healthy manufacturers. They can wait their turn. https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/editorial-code-conduct-aviations-recovery

Andrew Eversden The Department of Defense released its fourth and final request for prototype proposals for 5G technology development on April 1, according to a news release from the National Spectrum Consortium. In the request for the next-generation network, the DoD asks for industry input on a three-pronged 5G prototype project at Hill Air Force Base and Utah Test and Training Range, both in Utah. Like previous solicitations, the request is divided into three categories: the 5G network itself, enhancements to the network, and applications for a deployable spectrum-coexistence and -sharing system. Here are the projects that the DoD wants, as described by the consortium: 5G prototype test bed to design, construct and operate a localized, private, full-scale 5G mobile cellular network to evaluate the impact of the 5G network on airborne radio systems. 5G prototype enhancements specifically to improve dynamic spectrum-sharing and spectrum coexistence capabilities. 5G prototype applications to design, construct and deploy a spectrum coexistence and sharing (SCS) system to identify and demonstrate deployable SCS. “This effort will demonstrate mid-band spectrum sharing critical to our national 5G plan. Sharing technology can bring spectrum to market while protecting and enhancing future military capabilities,” said Joseph Dyer, the National Spectrum Consortium's chief strategy officer and a retired vice admiral. “We strongly encourage our members to collaborate and respond to these important RPPs to support innovation and make sure that the United States remains a global technology leader on 5G.” The release follows a March 12 RPP for development of smart warehouses using 5G technology at the Marine Corps Logistics Base in Albany, Georgia. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/5g/2020/04/02/pentagon-announces-final-5g-prototype-proposal/

By: Aaron Mehta How will US Marines adjust for the future fight? | Reagan Defense Forum 2019 WASHINGTON — The top officer in the U.S. Marine Corps is sticking to the planned procurement of the F-35 joint strike fighter — but indicated a willingness to cut planes in the future if analysis says it makes sense. Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger told reporters Wednesday that he is a firm believer in the capabilities the F-35 is bringing, in particular the jump-jet B model favored by the service. However, Berger made it clear he's not wedded to long-term procurement plans, at a time the corps is shedding legacy missions as it pivots to focus to a primarily naval-focused service. “Right now, the program of record plows ahead as it is,” he said. “But I'm signaling to the industry, we have to be prepared to adjust as the operating environment adjusts. Right now, the program of record stays the same, but we will — we must — adapt to the adversary and we must adapt to the operating environment that we're challenged with being in.” Berger noted that an upcoming independent review of his force posture plans, expected to be completed in the next few months, could be a forcing function for more changes. Already, his planning guidance to the corps changed how many planes are featured in each F-35 squad, from 16 to 10. Longstanding plans call for the Marines to procure 353 of the F-35B and 67 of the F-35C carrier variants. “There's nothing like it,” Berger said of the jet. “The F-35B, the ability to operate from austere airfields and ships both, [is] incredible. In wargames, it's one of the handful of capabilities that really caused an adversary problems, because it is so flexible, it's deployable ashore or from ship. Gamechanger is sort of an overused phrase, but I'm a huge advocate of the F-35 and its capabilities.” Broadly speaking, Berger said, what will drive how many F-35s are in a squadron going forward, or how many the Corps eventually buys, comes down to maintenance — a longstanding issue for the stealthy jet. “If the maintenance readiness of the F-35 proves to be very, very strong, then of course, like any other system you need less of them because more of them are up all the time. On the other hand, if it turns out not to be so, then you're going to need more of them, to account for the ones that are in repair, that are down right now,” he said. Complicating that issue is what he called the “unique” supply chain for the jet, which in theory lets parts flow in from all over the world, as opposed to the traditional U.S. based supply. “In all aspects, we absolutely know we will learn along the way, and if its appropriate we will make adjustments” to either the squad level or the overall buy, Berger said. “But it's not a lack of confidence in the airframe at all.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/01/top-marine-signaling-to-industry-that-f-35-cuts-are-on-the-table/

By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Missile Defense Agency plans to hold a competition that could split up the work among contractors to modernize and sustain America's missile defense system, which is designed to destroy intercontinental ballistic missile threats. Boeing has held the development and sustainment contract for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense systems in place at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. Boeing's contract is set to expire in 2023. The GMD system is made up of more than 44 Ground-Based Interceptors buried in silos in the ground along with ground control stations, detection and fire control systems, and other support infrastructure. Boeing received a sole-source $6.6 billion award in 2018 to build a new silo and 20 more GBIs, as well as to sustain the system. But Vice Adm. Jon Hill, the MDA's director, told an audience in March at an Association of the U.S. Army event that “we know that contract is not giving us everything that we need for the future, so we are going to compete that contract downstream.” The agency is working to develop a Next-Generation Interceptor that would replace the current GBIs with more capable interceptors. Its plan to upgrade the GBI's exoatmospheric kill vehicle with a redesigned version was canceled in 2019 due to technical problems. Rather than rework that program, the agency decided to design an entirely new interceptor and stop building new GBIs. A request for proposals for the NGI is due imminently. But along with a new NGI, “we are going to make sure that ground systems, sensors and fire control, all the rest of the system, we have the opportunity to inject that competition because I think that is very important,” Hill said. The MDA previously considered splitting up the contract several times, believing that would reduce cost and create efficiency in the program, but nothing materialized toward that goal. This time, the MDA has released two requests for information with the possibility of splitting up the contract. The most recent RFI was posted on Beta.Sam.Gov in March. “I will tell you that our lead system integrator does a great job today and the partnerships with industry within that construct do a great job, but we think that it's so large and complex we should be doing everybody a favor by being able to split that up without losing the integration among all those pieces,” Hill said, “so our intent is to move in that direction.” The agency “is exploring different approaches for fulfilling the GMD Program Element requirements. Acquisition approaches under consideration range from an award of multiple contracts to execute segments/missions of the program scope to a single contract to execute the entirety of the program scope,” the RFI states. “Essential to all of the acquisition approaches under consideration is the establishment of an enduring arrangement strategy for the execution of the [Weapon Systems Integration (WSI)] functions across the program lifecycle, either under a single prime contract, or as one of the multiple contracts.” The RFI lays out a possible plan to split up the contract into five pieces. One contractor would provide the NGI, which is being addressed through a separate request for proposals. Another would be responsible for legacy and future ground systems, and another for sustaining the existing GBIs. And a company would operate the weapon system along with military operators and would run fleet maintenance scheduling and deconfliction, site operations, test support, and depot and parts management, the RFI lays out. Lastly, a contractor would serve as the weapon systems integrator, making it responsible for overall GMD integration “including physical and logical integration of the GMD components, GMD system and MDA enterprise level integration, planning and execution of all necessary testing to verify and validate overall requirements compliance,” the RFI states. Responses to the RFI are due April 10. https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/04/02/missile-defense-agency-to-inject-competition-into-homeland-missile-defense-contract/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The amount of funding for defense research awarded through other transaction authorities have increased nearly tenfold in five years, according to a new analysis seen exclusively by Defense News. The report, by data and analytics firm Govini, shows the use of OTAs and small business innovation research contracts has expanded to the point that, in 2019, the two methods accounted for $9.6 billion, or 10 percent of the Defense Department's research, development, test and evaluation spending. OTAs are small contracts awarded to companies of any size, in theory targeted at nontraditional defense contractors, with the purpose of conducting research or prototype efforts on a specific project; they are not subject to Federal Acquisition Regulation rules. SBIR contracts are targeted at small businesses in order to act as seed money for them to conduct research and development efforts; they are subject to the FAR rules. Overall, $34.5 billion have been handed out in the last five years through the two contracting methods, to 6,503 unique vendors. However, more than half the OTA dollars are going to only three consortia. The two contracting methods may be about to jump in importance for the department, in light of the new coronavirus outbreak. Navy acquisition head Hondo Geurts, in a March 24 memo, ordered his workforce to do what they can to keep small companies assigned to naval research programs on track, including specifically calling out the need to protect SBIR efforts. Govini tracked the use of OTA and SBIR contracts over a five-year period, from fiscal 2015 through fiscal 2019. “The Defense Department's surging use of OTAs reflects its strong desire to break free from the stringent acquisition process, better access innovative technologies, and lure new companies to the defense ecosystem who otherwise may not see the federal government as a viable or lucrative potential market,” said Tara Murphy Dougherty, Govini CEO. “Fundamentally, the Department is driven by the imperative to outpace China's military modernization in order to retain a military advantage, and they understand that leveraging emerging technologies and the very best technology available in American industry — not just the Defense Industrial Base — are critical to achieving that goal,” she added. OTA dominance The numbers tell a particularly stark story of how the department is increasing its use of OTA contracts. From 2015-2017, the government awarded $12.5 billion in SBIR contracts, versus $4.9 billion in OTA contracts. But from 2018-2019, the government awarded $5.7 billion in SBIR contracts, while it handed out $11.4 billion in OTA deals — an increase large enough to nearly draw even over the five-year period. That increase in OTA funding also ties into the mission laid out by the National Defense Strategy, which encourages a focus on great power competition with China and Russia. According to Govini, the two biggest OTA investments of RDT&E dollars during this time period were $5 billion for munitions and long-range fires, and $3 billion for space systems. While the dollar totals are becoming closer, overall SBIR recipients continue to dwarf OTAs — 6,213 to 290 during the five-year period. In the number of OTA awards per service, the Army leads the way. (Govini) The Army leads the way with use of the two contract methods ($14.1 billion) during this period, followed by the Air Force ($10.4 billion), defensewide agencies ($6 billion) and the Navy ($4 billion). The two contract types also split their dollars in divergent ways. The top SBIR vendor, Colsa Corporation, received 4 percent of total SBIR awards, and the top ten (which includes Colsa) received less than 20 percent of the overall total. In comparison, the top three OTA vendors are consortia managers that make up more than half of total OTA contracts. Those three are Analytic Services Inc. ($5.429 billion), Advanced Technology International ($1.616 billion) and Consortium Management Group Inc. ($1.238 billion). Traditional defense corporations are taking advantage of OTAs as well. The fourth highest recipient of OTA money is United Launch Alliance, co-owned by Lockheed Martin and Boeing; the sixth highest recipient is Lockheed; the eight highest is Northrop Grumman; and the 10th highest is Boeing. Given that OTAs were designed to reach out to nontraditional defense firms, “it's surprising how many traditional defense contractors benefit from OTA arrangements,” Murphy Dougherty said. “Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing were all top OTA vendors over the past five years. This is a good example of how accessing the data can help the Department measure its success in terms of achieving intended outcomes through actions like increased OTA use.” Earlier this month, Ellen Lord, the Defense Department's top acquisition official, was asked at a McAleese & Associates conference about data that shows prime contractors taking advantage of OTA contracts. Lord indicated her office needed to gather more data on the issue before taking a look. “The whole premise of OTAs was to get the nontraditional [vendors] and the smalls there,” Lord responded. “I find it hard to imagine a situation where large primes would predominately use OTAs, but I don't know what I don't know. That wasn't the objective. “Oversight is one of our responsibilities in A&S [the office of acquisition and sustainment] that I take very seriously, so we need to make sure that we don't have unintended results from some of the polices that we implement. We're always trying to improve that.” https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/04/01/pentagon-turns-to-new-buying-tools-10-times-more-often/

“We're gonna have to brave the storm together, especially some of the smaller suppliers,” said Lucas Hicks, vice president of new construction aircraft carrier programs. By PAUL MCLEARY WASHINGTON: The Navy is rushing to award several major shipbuilding contracts several months early to keep shipbuilders on the job and save smaller suppliers in danger of going out of business amid the wider manufacturing halt cause by the coronavirus crisis. The biggest is a contract to build the next San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship, (LPD 31) which serves as a jumping-off point for Marines heading ashore. The push to accelerate work is part of a wide-ranging effort to buttress the shipbuilding industry and the thousands of small suppliers that make parts for the Navy. The Navy's top acquisition official, James Geurts, told reporters Wednesday morning the Navy is worried about the effect the state and local shutdowns could have on its shipbuilding and repair efforts. “It's a national emergency and this is critical national infrastructure,” so the issue is, “how do we orient quickly to get at this aggressively and try not to be reactive in nature.” Ingalls Shipbuilding in Mississippi is currently building the USS Richard M. McCool (LPD 29) and Harrisburg (LPD 30), and would be in line to start work on the next ship in the class. The Navy is also pushing to move forward the award for a landing craft program that was slated to kick off later this year. Funding for the new LPD was approved in the 2020 NDAA defense policy bill which authorized $525 million for the LPD Flight II program. Any breaks in the build and repair schedule would throw the Navy's planned deployments out of whack but also could be devastating to the thousands of small businesses across the country that literally provide the nuts and bolts that make the complex machinery that powers the fleet. “Nobody right now is in the position to float gaps,” Geurts said. His staff has done a detailed analysis of the Navy's industrial base. They are looking for ways to help the smaller companies not only through moving forward orders, but also finding money for research and development that would help small, innovative companies. “I hear stories of second-, third- and fourth-tier suppliers that were worried about going out of business, worried about how they would keep paying their salaries, and our ability to move and accelerate work into the defense base and then have that be pushed out to the suppliers is absolutely critical, because if they're not there it won't matter when we're ready to recover,” Geurts said. Geurts is gathering all of the large shipbuilders and shipyard owners several times a week to check on the status of the workforce and what problems they see coming if the current crisis continues. At the center of these worries is the nation's largest shipbuilder, Huntington Ingalls, which is the only company that builds both Nimitz and Ford-class aircraft carriers, in addition to sharing work on Virginia-class submarines with Electric Boat. The company has taken steps to attempt to apply social distancing at its shipyards, and has staggered shifts to accommodate workers who might now need to work different hours, company officials say. In an interview earlier this week, several Huntington executives told me they've reached out to over 2,000 suppliers in 48 of the 50 US states, and are working to speed up and push contracts as far down the supply chain as possible to keep these small businesses running. “We're gonna have to brave the storm together and especially some of the smaller suppliers,” said Lucas Hicks, vice president of new construction aircraft carrier programs. “We need their products today, but we also need them in 90 days, so we want to help them brave the storm,” he added. “We've actually changed some payment terms on some of our supplier contracts to try to make sure that we can front them what they need to stay afloat. We're doing some creative stuff to try and help them be able to weather the storm.” The company hasn't seen any reduction in parts received yet, but acknowledges that the situation changes on a daily basis, as different parts of the country feel the pain of local shutdowns in different ways. Lucas said Huntington does not anticipate it will stop work, but is allowing employees the option of working from home and providing liberal leave to others. Eventually all of this “will have an impact,” especially if the shutdowns are prolonged. “At some point, if it extends for months and months at the rate we're on, it would have an impact but it's too early to tell.” Geurts appears to see things the same way. The crisis and its downstream effects is “going to have both a time dimension and geography dimension, and so it will remain a fluid situation,” when it comes to how much the defense industry, and the navy, are affected, Geurts said. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/navy-rushes-shipbuilding-deals-to-keep-yards-going-in-panddemic