At a House Armed Services Committee posture hearing, the U.S. Central Command commander shared new details about that operation and said it underscores the military’s intensifying need for more and better counter-drone technologies and software.

“We absolutely need to be putting more work into directed energy [and] high-powered microwaves, I think, are some of the innovations that have come out of this since Operation Rough Rider. About 40% of the drones shot down were shot down by something called Advanced Precision Weapon Kill System, a laser-guided 2.75-inch rocket fired off our F-16s or F-15s. That’s a $25,000 munition going against a roughly $50,000 or $100,000 drone — that is an Iranian-provided drone,” Kurilla said.

Iran-backed Houthi fighters based in Yemen kicked off their attacks against vessels traversing crucial international shipping routes near the Red Sea in 2023. They indicated the disruption was meant as a form of protest of America’s support for Israel’s military actions in Gaza.

Early into his second administration, President Donald Trump initiated Operation Rough Rider to dismantle Houthi infrastructure and leadership in the region. Trump announced an end to the operation in early May, following an agreement between America and the Houthis — brokered in part through the Omani government — to suspend the strikes.

Operation Rough Rider cost the U.S. an estimated $1 billion, lawmakers pointed out at the posture hearing. It also resulted in the loss of multiple high-dollar military drones and fighter aircraft. 

“The president gave us a very specific mission, which was to get the Houthis to quit shooting at American ships. Six months ago on 12 November 2024, was the last time a destroyer went through the Bab-el-Mandeb. It was attacked 17 times with anti-ship ballistic missiles and anti-ship cruise missiles and [unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs]. In the last week, we put four destroyers back through the Bab-el-Mandeb,” Kurilla said.

After the conclusion of Rough Rider, however, Centcom is “still defending Israel with” its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system against ongoing assaults from the Houthis, which remain under the foreign terrorist organization designation by the U.S.

In the operation’s aftermath though, one major lesson the command learned, as Kurilla put it, is that “software is a weapon” that is rapidly changing the character of warfare.

“Our ability to do Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control, the things that we are doing with software — it’s amazing. We have advanced that. We have engineers every day making improvements on our ability to do that. It’s a warfighting headquarters,” Kurilla said.

Software is also driving significant transformations in ballistic missile defense on the contemporary battlefield, the commander noted.

“The same thing, I would tell you, as it comes to counter-UAS as well. We are making changes to the Navy’s software on the SPY radars based on what we’re seeing,” Kurilla told the committee. 

When asked by lawmakers to recommend the top weapons capabilities he views they should most quickly invest in, the commander repeatedly pointed to counter-drone systems, calling them the “number one” in-demand tool at this time.

“We’re only going to see the systems get smaller, more lethal. [On] the electromagnetic spectrum, we try and jam that. That’s why Ukraine and Russia went to fiber optics — going out to 40 kilometers with fiber optic drones — you can’t jam that. So those are the things I would ask for right now, the counter-UAS [and detection capabilities]. I think we need to put aerial [Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radars or ISAR] for low-radar cross section to be able to pick up, elevate it, and then [use] ballistic missile defense,” Kurilla said. 

The post Central Command looks to expand its counter-drone arsenal in the aftermath of Operation Rough Rider appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The Streamlining Procurement for Effective Execution and Delivery, or SPEED Act, unveiled Monday, seeks several changes to improve how the department fields systems to troops in a faster manner with more relevant technologies.

While Congress has taken aim many times in the recent past to hasten the delivery of tech to military users, the SPEED Act is directly targeting the requirements process left of the procurement cycle.

“As we began to look at the structure of the requirements process, the length of time it takes to move from a warfighter saying that they have a capability gap and need a materiel solution to the time it actually makes over in the hands of the acquisition community, we can be from six to 10 years,” a senior congressional official told reporters Monday. “During the course of that time, the threat has changed, the technology has changed, the political leadership in the nation has changed, and the budget priorities have changed. One of the things that the chair and ranking member had us go do is try to expedite the requirements process.”

In order to shrink that timeline, the bill seeks to alter the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and create a Requirements, Acquisition and Programming Integration Directorate (RAPID). The proposal is to get the JROC out of oversight, renaming it the Joint Requirements Council, which currently serves as a “chokepoint instead of a catalyst,” a summary of the bill states.

If approved, the new JRC will no longer validate specific capability documents, but rather, will focus on assessing evolving threats and technologies to shape future force design and joint operational needs, especially those identified by combatant commanders who are directly in the fight and require urgent capabilities in the face of evolving threats.

“You’ll see some significant changes in the bill with respect to the role of the JROC, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council and their current role in validating requirements, looking to move them more to an intake body, listening to the combat commanders, and then rapidly making requirements, alerting the need for a materiel solution, up into a new body that is designed to bring together all key stakeholders,” the senior congressional official said.

RAPID — which would be co-chaired by the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the director of the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office — would assess proposed solutions, evaluate costs, review experimentation results and make recommendations to the deputy secretary of defense much earlier in the requirements process.

The goal behind RAPID is to make an assessment of technologies once they come in and prioritize them to move forward much faster.

“Collectively, these reforms will streamline the requirements process and focus it on addressing capability gaps and urgent needs, rather than prescribing fixed solutions and generating volumes of paperwork. As a result, PEOs and program managers will be unbound from overly prescriptive—and in many cases non-essential—requirements that are all but set in stone once validated by the JROC,” a summary of the bill states. “Instead, PEOs and program managers will be able to iterate quickly and make informed tradeoffs. Moreover, these reforms accelerate the new requirements process to between 90 and 150 days, which is more than five times faster than the current process.”

The legislation overall outlines five pillars for reform:

-Aligning acquisition to warfighter priorities and operational outcomes.

-Accelerating the requirements process.

-Striking the right balance between regulation and efficiency.

-Strengthening the defense industrial base and leveraging commercial innovation.

-Developing a mission-oriented defense acquisition workforce.

In many instances, the bill doesn’t always provide new authorities, but rather, codifies certain practices and provides top cover.

“With our legislation, there’s not a lot of new authority that the department needs. The problem is that they’ve not been using the authorities that they have, because the system has become one that exists to serve itself and it’s very risk averse. You’ve got really good people trying to do really good work, but they’re in a broken system,” the senior congressional official said. “Where it may be just that the department needs the Congress to say, ‘Go do,’ then that’s — that’s another question to be asked.”

The committee wants to be able to fully empower PEOs and program managers to make the necessary decisions.

“One important area where we said we’ve got to fix is having senior acquisition leaders actually have the responsibility to go and make the changes they need. There are many areas where even a two-star PEO may not be fully empowered to make all the decisions he or she may need to make to get something fielded correctly and fast,” another senior congressional official told reporters. “We took a stab at that, and I think we created a new process where the people that should be empowered to make decisions have the actual roles and responsibilities and then can be held accountable.”

Leadership on the Senate Armed Services Committee released legislation in November, similarly aimed at improving innovation and reducing the time it takes to get warfighters new capabilities.

Both panels will have to agree on a final version of reform legislation before it can be enacted.

The post House Armed Services leaders unveil bill to reform defense acquisition, speed up requirements process appeared first on DefenseScoop.

In 2016, State Department officials in Havana, Cuba, started reporting experiences with mysterious, unexplainable medical symptoms impacting their capacities to serve. Intelligence and military staff operating in the U.S., Russia, Serbia, Vietnam, India, Colombia, France, Taiwan and other nations have since recorded similar complications associated with such anomalous health incidents (AHI), or what is now also referred to as “Havana syndrome.”

Often, those suffering from AHI report severe dizziness, headaches, nausea, vertigo, hearing loss, vision problems, anxiety, cognitive difficulties, fatigue and memory loss. 

The precise cause of Havana syndrome still remains unclear, but experts have suggested that a microwave weapon or directed-energy device could be a possible source. Five U.S. intelligence agencies previously concluded in their own federal assessment that the primary cause was likely not a U.S. adversary. However, the New York Times reported on Monday that the House Intelligence Committee has moved to look into the handling of that investigation and possibly challenge those conclusions.

The members of Congress behind this new bill noted in their announcement that the National Defense Authorization Acts for fiscal 2022 and fiscal 2023 included provisions mandating interagency coordination on AHI, and explicit reporting requirements for the State Department — but not the Pentagon.

“I’ve spoken directly with public servants, including from Virginia, impacted by anomalous health incidents. These Americans include U.S. diplomats, servicemembers, intelligence officers, and civilian personnel. As a former CIA case officer and member of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I believe that lawmakers and the Pentagon must better understand the extent of these incidents and develop a strategy to address the issue,” Rep. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., said in a statement.

Spanberger introduced the new bill last week alongside Reps. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, Rick Crawford, R-Ark., Don Bacon, R-Neb., and Trent Kelly, R-Miss., and it was subsequently referred to the House Armed Services Committee.

Text of the Initiating Imperative Reporting on Anomalous Health Incidents Act (or IIR on AHI Act) was shared with DefenseScoop.

Specifically, the legislation would direct Pentagon officials to supply lawmakers in both chambers of Congress with new information regarding all the confirmed or suspected cases of AHI affecting DOD employees and military service members. Details such as the total number of officials that have been impacted to date (broken down by military occupational specialty), the location of the incidents, and the time frame when they occurred, would need to be incorporated. 

Defense officials would be required to participate in that briefing by March 1, 2025. 

Further, the bill also would direct the DOD to supply an updated strategy to guide how it can protect and treat personnel for AHI effects moving forward.

“Usually where there is smoke, there is a fire and since 2016 we’ve seen too many documented cases of unexplained medical symptoms affecting our diplomats and intelligence officers stationed around the world. We need to hear from the Department of Defense about how many this has affected and what they are doing to treat and better protect our people stationed overseas,” Bacon said. 

The post Lawmakers question how ‘Havana syndrome’ is affecting DOD appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The specific item, which was included in the chairman’s mark for the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, directs the comptroller general and the Government Accountability Office to review the Department of Defense’s management of cyber operations.

The chairman’s mark generally reflects the priorities of the committee’s chairman and includes input from other members as well. It was released Monday ahead of the full committee markup on June 21.   

Specifically, the provision seeks an evaluation of:

• The number of commands, organizations, units and personnel responsible for conducting cyberspace operations across the Department of Defense;
• The command and control relationships associated with such commands and organizations;
• The number of command staff with any responsibility for budgetary, personnel, policy, or training matters;
• The ratio of personnel within commands, organizations and units determined to be fully trained and qualified, as defined by the commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, relative to the total number of such personnel assigned to operational billets;
• The ratio of command staff relative to the total number of personnel assigned to billets within the cyber mission force of Cybercom provided by each of the services, and;
• An assessment of potential duplication in effort or cost between the various entities, among others.

“There is a robust infrastructure within each service that establishes curriculums, funding profiles, manning rosters, upon which cyberspace operations are built. In practical terms, that means that there are four independent teams across the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines conceiving and implementing cyber training requirements,” a senior House Armed Services Committee aide told DefenseScoop regarding the provision. “The aspect that required the dedicated study by the Comptroller General is the degree of redundancy and unnecessary duplication of effort towards the organize, train, and equip functions for cyberspace operations which exists across the services.”

This provision follows similar proposals in previous years’ bills, most notably last year’s NDAA, which raised issues about how the services present forces to Cybercom to conduct cyber operations.

As it currently stands, the services are responsible to train forces – based on uniform training standards, in principle, provided by Cybercom – and provide a set number of teams to Cybercom as part of the cyber mission force. Cybercom last year was granted enhanced budget authority, which will be effective October 1 and allow it to assume the budgetary responsibility and authority for its programs and operations that previously were provided by the services.

With this unique model for force presentation, Congress has grown concerned recently regarding the state and readiness of teams. A provision in last year’s NDAA required a study, which among many aspects, called for an examination of the current cyber enterprise, requested how the services should man, train and equip for cyber, and inquired if a single military service should be responsible for basic, intermediate and advanced cyber training of the cyber mission force.

The post House bill directs study on redundancies in cyber training and funding across military services appeared first on DefenseScoop.

Their proposals come as lawmakers are working on fiscal 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) legislation — and as software is considered increasingly critical to ensure military advantage in modern conflicts.

In a three-page letter penned to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees on Wednesday, the executives spotlighted some of what they deemed to be “key challenges in the defense acquisition process that slow the cycle time and impede innovative software companies’ ability to quickly deliver” capabilities to the Pentagon. 

“Software is critical in the new battlespace to ensure proactive defense, responsiveness, and adaptability when competing with near-peer adversaries,” they wrote in the letter, which was obtained by FedScoop on Thursday.

In particular, they called for a better Defense Department pathway for buying readily available Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offerings. SaaS capabilities essentially provide a means of delivering technology applications remotely over the internet — as opposed to locally. 

“We recommend funding and authorization to allow military services to contract directly with SaaS product providers for software capabilities within programs of record for the acquisition of hardware platforms,” the executives wrote. 

“Fortune 500 companies today routinely use SaaS-based systems to stay competitive in the commercial world,” they noted. The U.S. “national defense community urgently needs to leverage SaaS products, so we can stay ahead of our adversaries in the rapidly-evolving digital battlespace.”

Further, the group called on policymakers to standardize the application of existing acquisition pathways across all of the military branches. They’d also like to see the reauthorization of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer Research (STTR) program and the institution of “targeted reforms to assist small businesses in scaling contracts with the government from prototypes to production.”

Additionally, the executives urged the establishment of a clear pathway for extensive use of continuous Authority To Operate, which is the formal declaration that authorizes products to be used by agencies.

They wrote that they believe these recommendations “would significantly ease barriers to entry and allow small businesses dedicated to building mission-focused software the opportunity to break through the valley of death more quickly, thereby increasing innovation and technological superiority for the Department of Defense.” The term “valley of death” in the federal acquisition world refers to struggles to transition promising technologies into large-scale procurement.

The companies involved aimed to inform NDAA conference discussions before Congress’ August recess, FedScoop confirmed.

Those signed on to the correspondence include: Rebellion Defense, Recorded Future, Copado, Fiddler AI, Percipient.ai, Keeper, CalypsoAI, Interos, SandboxAQ, Nuvolo, LeoLabs, SparkCognition Government Systems, Second Front Systems, Tricentis, Aqua, Armis, Devo Security, Corelight and Jama Software.

The post Startups press Congress to improve how DOD buys software appeared first on DefenseScoop.

In an “item of special interest” of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Cyber, Innovative Technologies, and Information Systems’ fiscal 2023 markup of the annual defense policy bill, the panel is requesting a Comptroller General review of JADC2.

“The committee is concerned about the Department of Defense’s progress in implementing the Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) concept,” the committee wrote in the item of special interest, which aims to prep continued legislation upon merging the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act with the Senate’s version. “The committee recognizes the Department has made progress on JADC2 planning, but each of the military services has a separate effort to address the Department’s JADC2 requirements concept, and it is unclear what capabilities will be delivered to the warfighter, how much they will cost, and when they will be delivered.”

A committee aide, who like others that briefed reporters on the contents of the mark asked not to be identified by name, said this provision is not meant to be punitive, but rather to ensure the committee fully understands JADC2 to better support it.

“This is fundamental to how we’re going to need to be able to operate as a military in the future, so we’ve got to get it right,” the aide said.

The Comptroller General’s report should include an overview of current DOD investment plans, schedules and cost estimates for JADC2, an evaluation of the process for monitoring JADC2 cost, schedule and performance and an assessment of challenges in developing and implementing JADC2, as well as plans to address those challenges.

The subcommittee is also asking for the secretary of Defense to submit a report by Dec. 30 that includes an inventory of JADC2-related development efforts with descriptions of performance, costs and schedules, a description of JADC2-related performance goals and metrics, and a list of potential JADC2 capability gaps along with a plan to address and fund them.

The committee will mark up the provision Wednesday.

The post Lawmakers want clarity on Pentagon’s JADC2 efforts appeared first on DefenseScoop.

And as the U.S. is figuring out its role and how to brush back revisionist adversaries and competitors, it must be thoughtful about building and investing in its military, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., said in an appearance Thursday at the American Enterprise Institute.

The U.S. cannot afford the types of large military build-ups that occurred during the Cold War against the Soviet Union. As a result, it must be smarter about investments and put more stock into emerging technologies.

“When you’re thinking about how we need to change the force, think about two things: information and survivability,” Smith said. “Those are the two keys. The ability to move information quickly, get it to the person who needs it the most in real-time and to protect that information infrastructure.”

The DOD is currently trying to transform the way it conducts warfare with a new concept dubbed Joint All Domain Command and Control, which seeks to more seamlessly connect sensor information to shooters to allow for faster decision-making.

On the survivability piece, Smith noted that the force cannot be so vulnerable as to be crippled by cyberattacks and anti-satellite strikes that eliminate command and control and the ability to share information.

He noted that in challenging other world powers that seek to upend international order, the military’s crucial role will be deterrence.

“Deterrence matters. I think when you look at Ukraine, if Putin had thought that he couldn’t do what he’s doing right now, if Ukraine had had a more robust military, he wouldn’t be doing it,” Smith said. “As we look at the other nations in Eastern Europe as a starting point, the Baltics, Poland, Romania, shoring up our NATO responsibilities, deterrence is one way to keep peace in the world.”

New technologies, such as artificial intelligence and even drones, can play a huge part in that deterrence. Smith cited how small and inexpensive drones have turned the tide in recent conflicts, pointing specifically to Ethiopia’s civil war in which the government used small drones to gain control back from rebels seeking to overthrow it.

“That type of use of new technology is going to be the key to deterrence,” he said. “If China thinks that we have the ability to protect our systems and to be survivable and to make their systems vulnerable, that’s the best deterrence we can have. It’s not just a matter of building a lot of things, we have to make sure that those things meet the technological challenges of today’s warfare.”

When it comes to an actual number for the 2023 budget, Smith said he hasn’t landed on an exact number yet, but acknowledged it has to be bigger than previously thought.

“The Russian invasion of Ukraine fundamentally altered what our national security posture, what our defense posture needs to be. It made it more complicated and it made it more expensive,” he said.

The post DOD must make smarter investments in 2023 budget, says Rep. Adam Smith appeared first on DefenseScoop.