The document, dated June 17 and signed by acting CTO Justin Fanelli, noted the need to “accelerate the adoption of game changing commercial technology.”

The list of priorities “can help shape resource allocation decisions across the enterprise,” he wrote, adding that it should serve as a “signaling tool” to industry partners and private capital to inform how they allocate their resources and focus their efforts.

Artificial intelligence and autonomy top the list of “Level 1” technologies in the hierarchy.

“AI and autonomy play a vital role in information warfare by enabling decision advantage and enhancing the ability of human-machine teaming. The DON seeks AI-driven solutions for real-time data analysis and automated decision-making to enhance operational effectiveness,” Fanelli wrote.

Level 2 technologies under this category include capabilities like applied machine learning and natural language processing; model verification and AI risk governance; mission platforms and human-machine interfaces; and edge AI infrastructure and DevSecOps pipelines.

Next on the list is quantum tech, which Fanelli said will transform secure communications, computing and sensing for information warfare. He noted that quantum encryption could protect the department’s networks from adversaries, and quantum computing would boost data processing and cryptographic resilience.

Level 2 technologies in this area include tools such as post-quantum cryptography and quantum-enhanced communication; hybrid quantum-classical architectures; quantum gravimetry and inertial navigation; and “quantum interconnects and cryogenic systems.”

“Transport and connectivity” are third on the list. According to Fanelli’s memo, the Navy is prioritizing advanced networking, secure communications, 5G and FutureG tech to enable real-time data sharing and command and control.

Level 2 technologies under this category include things like 5G and FutureG nodes and mesh architectures; dynamic spectrum sharing and anti-jamming techniques; datalinks and “ship-to-X” mesh networks; and cloudlets and intelligent routing.

Fourth on the list is command, control, communications, computers, cyber, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance — also known as C5ISR — as well as counter-C5ISR and space capabilities.

“The DON seeks to integrate advanced sensor networks, improve automated data fusion, and develop resilient space-based architectures to support real-time intelligence gathering,” Fanelli wrote.

Level 2 technologies in this area include capabilities such as multi-INT engines and automated targeting; operational pictures and targeting algorithms; hybrid constellations and positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) from space; and open architectures and multi-coalition information sharing.

Fifth on the list is tech related to cyberspace operations and zero trust.

“Cyber threats are evolving rapidly, making Zero Trust Architecture essential for securing DON information networks. Priorities include advanced cyber defense frameworks, threat intelligence automation, and proactive security measures to counter adversarial cyber operations,” per the memo.

Level 2 capabilities under this category include things like identity and access management — such as attribute-based access control and federated identity systems — micro segmentation and risk-adaptive controls for zero trust, cyber threat hunting and deception, and operational technology (OT) security — such as industrial control system and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) protection and remote access.

The complete list of tech priorities for Levels 1, 2 and 3 can be found here.

“A lot of these areas are mainly being driven by commercial tech,” Deputy CTO Michael Frank said in an interview. “It’s going to be a mix of … traditional defense vendors, traditional primes. But you know, we are really focused on getting some new entrants in, right? So, expanding the defense industrial base, getting some new players on the field. And this is a signal to them. This memo is meant to be a signal to them and what we’re focused on, what our priorities areas are, so they can better make decisions … If you’re an entrepreneur in this area or if you’re a VC who’s looking to invest, you know these are the general areas that we’re looking at.”

The Navy is looking to cast a wide net for new capabilities.

“We’re going to be looking at emerging tech from anybody and everyone who is operating in these areas and developing things in these areas, to include the other players in the defense innovation ecosystem. So, you know, looking at what DIU is doing, partnering with In-Q-Tel and what they are doing, because we want to make sure that we have awareness of all the various efforts across government to reduce waste, to reduce redundant spend, reduce redundant efforts, given the fact that we are operating in a resource-constrained environment, both with money and with people and time and effort and all of that,” Frank said.

The CTO’s office is aiming to accelerate the transition of key capabilities to the Navy and Marine Corps.

“We are absolutely more interested in higher [technology readiness levels],” Frank said. “We are more focused on things that we can start testing, validating and transitioning to the warfighter now.”

The list of priority technology areas is meant to be updated over time, he noted.

“This is a living list, it’s an evolving list. You know these technology areas are not going to be static. I mean, Level 1 will probably not change for a while, but the Level 2 and Level 3 … will and should be regularly updated in order for it to be useful to industry partners,” Frank said.

The post Navy CTO unveils list of priority areas for tech investment appeared first on DefenseScoop.

While officials acknowledged operating inside the so-called weapons engagement zone, or WEZ, is not new, what is becoming more challenging is having to deal with advanced sensors to detect forces and weapons with longer ranges that push U.S. military units farther away from key objectives.

“Operating effectively in the WEZ,” Capt. Colin Corridan, deputy director of the Navy’s Disruptive Capabilities Office, said at the annual WEST conference this week when asked to identify the most challenging ops the Navy will have to perform in the future.

Other officials explained the importance of persistence to operating within those zones to have greater understanding of malicious activity and be better postured to counter it, if needed.

“We also need persistence. What I’m talking about here is persistent power projection and persistent domination of the battlespace, leading to denial of adversaries’ objectives. It means forces are able to execute prolonged operations against evolving threats, and our forces are able to operate within our adversaries weapon engagement zone,” Adm. Stephen Koehler commander of U.S. Pacific Fleet, said at the conference. “Operating forces within the range of enemy weapons, with the needed persistence to have an effect takes ingenuity, creativity in both tactics and equipment. That’s how we’re going to manage the inherent risk of those operations.”

The Marine Corps, part of the Department of the Navy, has articulated its concept of being the “stand-in force” for the military, which requires troops to already be present in theater near the enemy before crisis or conflict breaks out.

“We got to get the capabilities in the hands of the Marines where they can sense and make sense of the operating environment and really bring the concept of every Marine as a sensor, so that in the competition phase we have a good understanding of the battlespace — and should we have to go to high-end conflict, we really have a head start on understanding how the adversaries think and deconstructing that system,” Lt. Gen. Melvin “Jerry” Carter, deputy commandant for information, said in an interview at the conference. “It starts with persistent presence. As you know, for the commandant’s vision it is to develop the capabilities to ensure that the Marine Corps is not only that crisis response force, but as we look at the [Indo-Pacific Command] area, what we may have to face in the future, that inside force … in the weapons engagement zone, our goal as an institution, as the Marine Corps, is persistent presence inside the first and second island chain, preferably the first.”

Officials noted that the big changes to these types of ops are the range of enemy weapons, advanced technologies and sensors — and thus the need to increase the speed of decision to counter them.

There are roughly three broad buckets officials described when thinking about how to enable operations in the WEZ, both from an offensive and defensive perspective: counter-command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting (C5ISRT), terminal defense and contested logistics.

Counter-C5ISRT is a top priority for the commander of Indo-Pacific Command, according to Rear Adm. Nicholas Homan, commander of Fleet Information Warfare Command – Pacific, who noted it’s also one of the five key pillars in the chief of naval operations’ priorities related to Project 33, part of the CNO’s Navigation Plan released last year to modernize the force quickly.

“Our task as information warfare professionals is to counter command, control, computing, communication, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting at scale, as it is this enabling capability that will bring victory in crisis and conflict versus our adversaries,” Homan said. “Without an effective C5ISRT system, military forces are essentially blind and unable to respond in a coordinated manner … To do this right, we will be required to integrate non-kinetic effects with kinetic effects at scale, something that has never been done but is absolutely doable. Our success in this arena will depend on integration of cutting-edge technology, robust evolving targeting strategies and perhaps most importantly, developing TTPs [tactics, techniques and procedures] and policy that enable our military, contractor and civilian personnel to innovate and evolve in real time.”

Officials also noted they’re learning a lot about terminal defense from military operations in the Red Sea against a barrage of missile and drone attacks launched by the Houthis — a group backed by Iran that controls portions of Yemen — in response to U.S. support for Israel’s war against Hamas. Lessons are related to both kinetic and non-kinetic capabilities.

From a contested logistics perspective, officials noted that the Navy and the other services must be able to sustain and resupply their forces while they’re being heavily targeted by high-tech adversaries such as China. This is an area where counter-C5ISRT will be mutually supportive.

Officials also articulated that in these contested environments, timelines will be accelerated and American forces must take advance of fleeting opportunities to execute effects.

Fighting from maritime operations centers will be a way to help coordinate these capabilities in a dynamic battlespace.

“In terms of bringing it all together and enabling it, we’re doing a lot of that from the MOC and then working at both the MOC level and then getting it down to the tactical end in terms of understanding the TTPs and [concept of operations] of the kit that we’re going to bring to bear to get after those three lines of effort,” Vice Adm. Michael Vernazza, commander of Naval Information Forces, told reporters.

For the Marines, they must have capabilities to allow them to be nimble, mobile and lethal in this dynamic operating space.

Carter said from a platform perspective, the Corps is looking at lighter systems that can more easily be moved from island to island in the Pacific, if needed.

“Heavy tanks, the capabilities of the past, the heavy armor, even the amphibious ships, they’re not going to cut it,” he said. “We are looking at, in terms of our platforms, something that is highly maneuverable and survivable.”

The service must apply technologies to those platforms to make them more stealthy and employ capabilities that allow forces to pass data back and forth quickly and securely.

“We have to give Marines the right capabilities and tools out there to not only sense the operating environment and how do you transmit … that information all the way back to decision makers that they can in the instant and make a decision, informed decision, get a targeting solution, and if you have to, identify and kill that thing very quickly,” Carter said.

The post Proliferation of sensors will make operating close to the enemy more challenging for US naval forces appeared first on DefenseScoop.

During his confirmation hearing Thursday and in written responses to advance policy questions, Adm. Samuel Paparo, who currently commands Pacific Fleet, noted the importance of being able to counter the People’s Liberation Army’s command, control, computing, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting (C5ISRT) systems.

Behind defense of the homeland, C-C5ISRT is the top priority for U.S. Indo-Pacom, he told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“It has been the number one priority that I’ve communicated to the chief of naval operations in my integrated priority lists. And if confirmed, it is the enabling capability … that will bring victory to the allies” in a potential conflict with China, he said.

In their list of advance policy questions, lawmakers asked Paparo to identify the key areas in which each U.S. military service must improve in order to provide the necessary capabilities and capacity to the joint force to prevail in a potential conflict with the People’s Liberation Army.

“Specifically, the joint force requires capabilities to blind (Counter-Command, Control, Computing, Communications, Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance and Targeting (C-C5ISRT), see (persistent real-time awareness of the battlespace in all domains) and kill (long-range precision fire enabled the Joint Fires Network). Additionally, we require capabilities that assure air superiority, sea control, undersea warfare dominance, space control, integrated air and missile defense, and logistics to support our distributed operations. If confirmed, I look forward to working cooperatively with each service regarding these capabilities,” he wrote.

In addition to blinding the PLA, the Department of Defense must be able to maintain a “persistent stare” at the operating environment through a variety of sensors, he noted.

“ISR is inherently, due to the ephemera of the capability, blinking. The closer we can come to a persistent stare from the seabed to the surface of the sea, distributed throughout geography, in the air and in the [space] constellation — all of it must sum to a persistent stare of [People’s Republic of China] forces in response to this shrinking strategic, operational and tactical warning,” Paparo said.

The Pentagon has identified sea, air, land, space and cyberspace as warfighting domains. The latter two are where the “fist battle” will take place in a potential conflict between the Pentagon and the PLA, Paparo said.

In 21st century warfare, the advantage goes to the side that can see, decide and act faster, according to the admiral.

The Defense Department is pursuing a next-generation warfighting construct known as Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control (CJADC2), which calls for more effective and holistic networking of sensors, shooters and data streams across the entire battlespace from all the services and key foreign partners to provide the right data to commanders for better decision-making.

“Increasingly, we’re dependent on our cyber networks and in our constellations to be able to see, understand, make sense of and to act. And accordingly, we must build the resiliency of our constellation of sensors on orbit, as well as our constellation of … sensors from the seabed to the Karman Line. They must be resilient, they must be redundant, they must include the elements of graceful degradation so that when one thing is out, it’s just a small loss in capability, but it’s still it still provides enough. And we’ve got to work tirelessly to close those gaps,” Paparo told lawmakers.

“If and when conflict comes, it is that C5ISR in space and cyber, that shall be the first battle and will be either the enabling capability for the joint force, or the Achilles heel for the PLA if that day comes,” he added.

U.S. advances in cutting-edge and emerging technologies such as AI, directed energy, hypersonic missiles and quantum computing will also be critical as Washington seeks to keep pace with Beijing, he noted in his written responses to policy questions.

The Pentagon and its allies in Australia and the United Kingdom are partnering to work on these types of capabilities under what’s known as pillar two of the AUKUS alliance.

However, trilateral cooperation under AUKUS has faced hurdles from U.S. export control restrictions that have limited technology sharing with allies, according to Paparo.

AUKUS provisions that were included in the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act “should alleviate these challenges significantly. As we begin working within the new authorities, and if confirmed, I will alert the committee to any impediments that may arise,” he told the panel.

The post Counter-C5ISRT is top priority for nominee to lead Indo-Pacific Command appeared first on DefenseScoop.