20 décembre 2023 | International, Terrestre
26 décembre 2018 | International, C4ISR
By: Justin Lynch
President Donald Trump announced in a Dec. 23 tweet that Patrick Shanahan will become acting secretary of defense Jan. 1, replacing outgoing Pentagon chief Jim Mattis two months early. While it is not clear how long Shanahan will remain in the job, he is on the short list of officials who could become the full-time Pentagon chief.
Regardless of the length of his tenure, Shanahan, the Pentagon deputy since 2017, has been one of the Pentagon's top advocates for stronger contractor cybersecurity and IT acquisition and will lead the department months after it was given expansive and loosely defined authorities to conduct offensive cyber operations.
How Shanahan will handle these greater cyber authorities, even on a temporary basis, remains an open question that will be tested immediately amid evolving challenges, such as an alleged hacking campaign from China.
Unclear views on cyber operations
In August, the secretary of defense was given the ability to conduct offensive cyber operations without informing the president as long as it does not interfere with the “national interest” of the United States, four current and former White House and intelligence officials have told Fifth Domain.
A Pentagon official told Fifth Domain that while there is a general outline of what specific operations may affect the American “national interest,” some details are not explicitly defined.
And a review of his public remarks show that Shanahan has not made significant comments about how America should conduct offensive cyber operations. He has shiedaway from giving detailed responses about U.S. Cyber Command.
“There are two new war-fighting domains, cyber and space, for which we are developing doctrine and capabilities,” Shanahan said Sept. 19.
A spokesperson for Shanahan did not respond to questions from Fifth Domain.
Focus on defense contractors
As deputy, Shanahan has focused on “re-wiring” the Pentagon. He has called good cybersecurity “foundational” to working with the department.
“Cybersecurity is, you know, probably going to be what we call the ‘fourth critical measurement.' We've got quality, cost, schedule, but security is one of those measures that we need to hold people accountable for,” Shanahan said Sept. 19 during an Air Force Association conference.
Shanahan's focus on contractor cybersecurity comes as China is believed to be targeting defense contractors, particularly those on the lower end of the supply chain, in an attempt to steal sensitive American secrets, according to intelligence officials and industry executives.
Shanahan, however, has placed responsibility among the top defense firms.
“I'm a real strong believer that the Tier 1 and Tier 2 leadership has a responsibility to manage the supply chain,” Shanahan said in the Sept. 19 speech.
In October, Shanahan was put in charge of a new Pentagon task force to combat data exfiltration that focuses in part on these defense firms.
“Together with our partners in industry, we will use every tool at our disposal to end the loss of intellectual property, technology and data critical to our national security,” Shanahan told Fifth Domain in October.
A specific area of focus inside the department is finding out which companies are in the Pentagon's supply chain, according to officials involved in the process, but it is not clear if it is specifically part of Shanahan's task force.
Inside the Pentagon, Shanahan has also emphasized the need for smarter IT acquisition.
In an October. interview with Fifth Domain, Shanahan expressed frustration with the Pentagon's procurement process, but said to expect “a number of things that are foundational to being able to achieve enterprise solutions.”
He hinted that those changes are focused on the “right platforms and the right level of integration” that can support high-end computing and artificial intelligence.
“I'm super frustrated that we can't go faster on like basic things like the cloud,” Shanahan said. “Most of everything we do is software-driven.”
Aaron Mehta contributed to this report.
https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2018/12/24/how-the-new-acting-pentagon-chief-views-cybersecurity
20 décembre 2023 | International, Terrestre
5 août 2019 | International, C4ISR
By Benjamin McNight III, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division Public Affairs WEST BETHESDA, Md. (NNS) -- In the world of simulations, getting a system to act as close to authentic as the real-world situations it represents is always the main goal. Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC), Carderock Division develops high-fidelity acoustic simulation and training systems, giving naval personnel the ability to practice combat scenarios virtually. The Combined Integrated Air and Missile Defense (IAMD) and Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Trainer, better known as CIAT, made its official debut in December 2018 at Naval Base San Diego. In June, Naval Station Norfolk became the site for another CIAT installation. Motions to create this trainer began in 2014, according to Rich Loeffler, Carderock's senior scientific technical manager, director for signatures, tactical decision aids and training systems (Code 705). “CIAT is what we refer to as a Combat Systems Team Trainer,” Loeffler said. “Meaning that your goal is to bring in the whole portion of the crew that would be operating the combat system and train them in a shore site how they can best utilize the system when they are at sea.” Carderock shares CIAT responsibilities with NSWC Dahlgren Division. Dahlgren is responsible for the overall system integration and manages the IAMD aspect of the trainer, while Carderock leads the development of the acoustic and ASW capabilities. Carderock also has capabilities that contribute to the IAMD training. Using the periscope simulation that creates a real-time visual simulation of what one could see through the periscope of a submarine, Loeffler said they were able to utilize that technology for the surface ship trainer in the CIAT. “In this case, they have deck cameras if they want to be able to see when a missile launches from the forward or aft launchers. We basically provide the visuals for that,” he said. By modeling the threats and the ocean environment and then stimulating the actual tactical combat system software, the CIAT system is highly flexible in the ability to train real-world scenarios. With the many possibilities of training situations that can be created within the CIAT comes the need to use multiple sources of knowledge to create effective training situations that will benefit the fleet. “We'll work with people like the Office of Naval Intelligence to get threat intelligence data, we'll work with folks like the Naval Oceanographic Office to get the latest environmental models and databases, and then we'll work with the tactical programs themselves to get the tactical software,” Loeffler said. “Our role here at Carderock has been to leverage signature simulation capabilities we have developed over the years across submarine, surface and surveillance ASW trainers and provide the system design, development, integration and testing support to implement the CIAT requirement to support the fleet's training needs,” he said. Before the CIAT existed, the Surface ASW Synthetic Trainer (SAST) was developed by Carderock as an on-board embedded training system within the AN/SQQ-89 A(V)15 Sonar system. Loeffler said beginning in 2008, they went through a series of large analyses to compare and contrast what the simulation produced with what operators saw at sea. The data from that testing helped further develop the SAST and subsequently create the CIAT. Now, they are able to represent all components of the operations they run from the physics modeling perspective, such as what sounds are generated and how they propagate through the water, interactions with interfering objects and sea-state effects on these variables. “Since we're acoustically stimulating the actual tactical software of the sonar system, the users are operating the systems just as they would at sea,” he said. Loeffler believes that there is not anything off limits for what the CIAT can do, but adapting with new threats will require the right development within the trainer to represent the real-world situation. Although the system is relatively new, discussions on the next steps in the development of the trainer are already taking place with the help of Center for Surface Combat Systems (CSCS) defining and prioritizing fleet training requirements “CSCS is basically the primary stakeholder that owns the surface-ship training schoolhouses, and they've done their requirements review to see what additional capabilities they'd like to see in the next version of CIAT,” Loeffler said. “So, we're going through that process, assessing those requirements and looking for what would go into the next version to further improve training and also address training of the new combat system capabilities as they are being introduced into the fleet.” https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=110471
16 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial
By Antoine Gelain Behind the big aerospace and defense (A&D) primes like Boeing and Airbus and the “Super Tier-1s” such as United Technologies (UTC) and GE, a very different type of company is shaping the global A&D industrial landscape in a way that may be even more impactful than high-profile UTC-Raytheon-type mergers. Companies such as Teledyne, TransDigm and Heico are the spearheads of a breed of A&D players dedicated to “components and subsystems,” with explicit and perfectly executed “horizontal” external growth strategies. Their track records are impressive: These three companies—with combined revenues of more than $10 billion—have collectively made close to 200 acquisitions and delivered more than 20% average annual growth rate in either profitability or share value over the last 20 years. Thanks to such returns and skyrocketing market valuations, they are able to outbid most other contenders when going after an acquisition target by leveraging the so-called “accretive effect.” This effect boosts the acquiring company's earnings per share, as long as the price paid for the target as a ratio of the enterprise value (EV) over its earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) is lower than that of the acquiring firm. As it happens, the current EV/EBITDA ratio of the three above-mentioned companies stands at more than 18 (see graph). By comparison, most other A&D companies have an EV/EBITDA ratio in the 9-13 range. Such “buying power” is enhanced by operational synergies (for instance, in corporate overheads, sales and marketing), which immediately boost the profitability of the acquired company and can therefore be factored in the offer price. This gives them an additional edge against pure financial investors like private equity (PE) funds, which have historically been strong buyers of such component and subsystem businesses. Two recent deals in Europe (one still ongoing) illustrate this new balance of power. The first concerns Souriau-Sunbank, a $360 million-revenue specialist in interconnection technology for harsh environments. After being owned successively by two PE funds and bought by Esterline (now TransDigm) in 2011, it was again put up for sale last year. While expectations were that a PE fund would grab it, another industrial buyer, Eaton Corp., won the contest, paying the hefty price of $920 million (an EV/EBITDA multiple of 12). The second deal relates to a French company called Photonis, a world leader in night-vision technology for defense and space applications, for which Teledyne is apparently bidding—and offering a price 30% higher than the highest PE bid! These deals highlight the limits of the traditional private equity model (too short-term and too short-sighted) and why the “new predators”—all publicly listed companies—are in a much better position to continue to thrive. In fact, by combining “private equity-like growth in value with liquidity of a public market,” as TransDigm puts it, they are not only beating PE players at their own game, but they are also capturing a significant share of the A&D capital market by offering investors an attractive alternative to the traditional vertically integrated groups such as UTC, Thales or Safran. These groups are typically too busy focusing on large systems and equipment to realize that they would actually benefit from articulating a proper “component and subsystem” strategy. They would benefit not only because their portfolios are still full of such businesses, but also because their long-term competitiveness largely depends on their ability to nurture a strong network of strategic suppliers, in terms of both criticality for their own systems and national sovereignty. As it happens, Photonis seems to be such a strategic supplier, since the current French government just announced it would veto the Teledyne deal, hoping to give other French or European companies or investors time to make a competitive offer for the business. But because PE funds, at least in Europe, are somewhat faint-hearted when it comes to ambitious sector-specific “horizontal” portfolio strategies, and because Europe has no industrial player able to compete with the likes of Teledyne, the outcome of the process is still highly uncertain. In any case, Teledyne, Heico, Transdigm and similar companies are surreptitiously reshaping the A&D industrial landscape by buying technological nuggets and component businesses left and right, on both sides of the Atlantic. In the process, they are boosting their shareholders' returns and changing the balance of power with both traditional private equity investors and large vertically integrated A&D groups. As the saying goes: One man's meat is another man's poison. https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/manufacturing-supply-chain/opinion-how-new-predators-are-reshaping-aerospace-landscape