2 juillet 2024 | International, C4ISR
Intelligence Community’s IT roadmap shows way to a data-centric future
Opinion: To achieve data-centricity at scale, the IC must govern and manage data cohesively, at every point of the data lifecycle.
11 juin 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Sécurité
Why the new Raytheon Technologies will eschew platforms for new technology development
By: Aaron Mehta
WASHINGTON — “Platform agnostic.”
It's a term getting a lot of play from United Technologies CEO Greg Hayes and Raytheon CEO Tom Kennedy, in the wake of this weekend's surprise announcement that the two companies would be merging into a new firm,known as Raytheon Technologies Corporation.
Neither company works as a platform producer, eschewing the production of aircraft or ground vehicles and instead focusing on the technology that makes them work. It's a business model that has produced well for both firms, and in a Monday interview with Defense News, the two CEOs made it clear they see no need to deviate now.
“One of the first and foremost things we absolutely agree on is, we want to be platform agnostic,” Hayes said, noting that UTC sold off its Sikorsky helicopter unit almost five years ago because “we didn't like the programmatic risk associated with platforms.”
“We'll supply all the content and all the systems, all of the offensive, defensive capabilities necessary to make the system successful, but we really think it's important that we remain agnostic among the platform providers,” Hayes added.
Said Kennedy, “Neither of us essentially develop platforms or sell platforms. Why that's important is, really, the amount of capital that you have to go and spend in maintaining and creating these platforms kind of takes your eye off the ball relative to investing in technology moving forward. So that was a big feature, that both companies are platform agnostic.”
Instead, both men said the new firm will remains focused on developing high-end technologies which can be inserted on, or in, platforms developed by the other major defense primes. With that goal in mind, the company is preparing to spend $8 billion in R&D funds in the year following its merger.
When the merger is completed in early 2020, Kennedy will become chairman of the board, with Hayes serving as CEO. Two years later, Kennedy will step down, with Hayes adding the chairman title.
One area Kennedy highlighted as having good synergies is hypersonic weapons, a major interest for the Pentagon. Raytheon has already been working on hypersonic missiles, including the guidance and control systems, but UTC's experience with propulsion and materials science might be able to help deal with a specific challenge for Raytheon's weapon designers.
“It just turns out when you're flying at Mach 5, you really increase your temperature on all your surfaces," Kennedy said. "If you have a propulsion system, the air is coming in at such a high speed, that creates a significant amount of heat; it has to be dissipated in a very efficient way,” Kennedy said. “And one of the areas that the United Technologies has, really based in the Pratt & Whitney guys, is all the technology that they've developed over the years in working very high temperatures internal to their turbine engines,” he continued. “So not only do they have, I would call it the heat management capabilities, but also the material science to go implement those.”
Hayes identified two areas where shared R&D will have a near-term impact, and they underline the benefit of having a new company that will be roughly 50-50 defense and non-defense business.
The first is on aircraft control systems, where each company has technologies that can be brought to bear for the FAA's next-generation air traffic control networks. The second comes in the form of cybersecurity.
“I think Raytheon is second to none as it relates to cyber, and we view this as a core competency that can benefit the entire commercial aerospace ecosystem,” Hayes said. “Not just the connected aircraft, which is probably the first order of business, but the whole ecosystem. How do you protect passenger data, how do you protect the equipment that's on the ground? How do you protect the airplane while it's flying?
“I think we'll see that shortly in the marketplace.”
Sur le même sujet
-
-
22 août 2022 | International, Aérospatial
Space Force Hopes for Wear Testing of Uniforms in Spring 2023 - Air Force Magazine
The Space Force is making progress with its new service dress uniforms, with plans for fit and wear testing in the coming months.
-
21 juin 2019 | International, Naval
Naval Engineers Must 'Lean In' to Advance Technological Agility
BY C. TODD LOPEZ Rebuilding "strategic momentum" and growing advantages in the maritime domain are challenges Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John M. Richardson addressed in "A Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority, Version 2.0," which updated a 2016 document. At an annual meeting of the American Society of Naval Engineers today in Washington, Richardson said meeting those challenges is a "human problem" that must be met, in part by naval engineers. His plan for how the Navy will maintain maritime superiority relies in part on three aspects of agility. "With the joint force, we will restore agility — conceptual, geographic, and technological — to impose cost[s] on our adversaries across the competition-conflict spectrum," the report reads. For engineers, Richardson focused on their contribution to technological agility. "The technological landscape is changing so fast across all of technology," Richardson said. "It's really fueled by this information revolution that we are in the middle of right now. And so as we think about the Navy as a learning engine in and of itself, restoring these technical agilities is really important. We do need to move at pace." For comparison, the admiral referred back to Dec. 8, 1941 — a day after the bombing at Pearl Harbor. It was then, Richardson said, that the Navy began a quick transition from battleship-based tactics to aircraft carriers and aerial battles. He said the switch in strategy wasn't a surprise for the Navy, because it had been researching and engineering for that possibility for years. "We had been 20 years into naval aviation," he said. "This was not just something that we did as a pickup team on Dec. 8. We had been putting investments in with folks like [Joseph] Reeves and [William] Moffett and all those pioneers of naval aviation. We had evidence. A lot of experimentation, a lot of engineering that had gone into that." Now, Richardson said, the Navy must again have that kind of experimentation, engineering and prototyping to ready it for the next conflict — and it must get on that mission quickly to stay ahead of adversaries. "We do not want to be the second navy on the water with these decisive technologies: the directed energy, unmanned, machine learning, artificial intelligence, etc., you name it," he said. "That's the great challenge now: to get out, start prototyping, get at this pace, plus evidence ... to yield a relevant Navy that is ready to defend America from attack and protect our interests around the world." The admiral said that a knee-jerk reaction might be to cite Defense Department acquisition regulations, like DOD 5000, for inhibiting the type of rapid development, engineering and research he thinks will be needed to maintain maritime dominance. But he said that's not entirely correct. "I think a new set of rules would help," he said. "But this is, I think, a human problem at the end of the day. If we are all biased for action, if we all lean into this, we will get it done. There is nothing that will prohibit us or inhibit us from getting that done if we are all leaning in." https://www.defense.gov/explore/story/Article/1882567/naval-engineers-must-lean-in-to-advance-technological-agility/