Shows & Panels
- The 2014 Big Picture on Cyber Security
- AFCEA Answers
- Ask the CIO
- Building the Hybrid Cloud
- Connected Government: How to Build and Procure Network Services for the Future
- Continuing Diagnostics and Mitigation: Discussion of Progress and Next Steps
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal Tech Talk
- The Future of Government Data Centers
- The Future of IT: How CIOs Can Enable the Service-Oriented Enterprise
- Government Perspectives on Mobility and the Cloud
- The Intersection: Where Technology Meets Transformation
- Maximizing ROI Through Data Center Consolidation
- Mitigating Insider Threats in Virtual & Cloud Environments
- Modern Mission Critical Series
- Moving to the Cloud. What's the best approach for me
- Navigating Tough Choices in Government Cloud Computing
- The New Generation of Database
- Reimagining the Next Generation of Government
- Satellite Communications: Acquiring SATCOM in Tight Times
- Targeting Advanced Threats: Proven Methods from Detection through Remediation
- Transformative Technology: Desktop Virtualization in Government
- The Truth About IT Opex and Software Defined Networking
- Value of Health IT
- Air Traffic Management Transformation Report
- Cloud First Report
- General Dynamics IT Enterprise Center
- Gov Cloud Minute
- Government in Technology Series
- Homeland Security Cybersecurity Market Report
- National Cybersecurity Awareness Month
- Technology Insights
- The Cyber Security Report
- The Next Generation Cyber Security Experts
Shows & Panels
DoD seeks more collaborative S&T research
Tuesday - 3/8/2011, 7:20am EST
By Jared Serbu
Federal News Radio
The Defense Department plans to focus its science and technology research dollars in seven specific areas in the next several years, and wants to get industry, academia and government all on the same page as it pursues work in those fields.
Zachary Lemnios, DoD's assistant secretary for research and engineering told a Congressional subcommittee last week that he has spent his time since being appointed in the summer of 2009 trying to shape the Pentagon's research activities into an integrated enterprise-one that has clear objectives that are clear to both the Defense industrial base and to academia.
DoD's research programs aim to meet three challenges, he said. They include preparing for future technological threats, staying in front of technical advances that give the entire world access to first-rate technology, and meeting those objectives in a world in which other countries' students are outperforming Americans in the "STEM" areas: science, technology, engineering and math.
"We realize that our technical goals are only achievable with exceptional research and engineering talent," Lemnios said at a hearing of the House subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities.
Lemnios talked separately with investors and vendors-something he said he has been doing a lot of--at last week's McAleese-Credit Suisse conference in Crystal City, Va. He told attendees that he wanted their help in building bridges with academia and industry as DoD attempts to align outside research activities with its own in seven priority areas it identified in a two-year review of its science and technology programs.
The seven areas are:
- Cyber science and technology
- Electronic warfare
- Engineered resilient systems
- Countering weapons of mass destruction
- Autonomous systems
- Enhancing the interfaces between people and machines
Lemnios said his office has also been trying to zero-in on areas in which industry has been investing its own independent research dollars. In many cases, that research is reimbursed by DoD if it can be linked to a contract, even indirectly. Reimbursements under the Industry Independent Research and Development (IR&D) program amount to $4 billion per year, he said, but DoD has not scrupulously tracked those investments since the early 1990's, when the system of government monitoring and scoring for IR&D projects devolved into what he said was now a largely pro-forma exercise.
Lemnios said the old system was very effective in terms of tracking private-sector research priorities, but that the tradeoff was enormous overhead costs to DoD.
"I'm not at all comfortable with going back and grading, I don't think that's at all scalable," he said. "But I do think we should be able to put levers into the system to motivate industry to make investments in areas where we want to move forward, and in fact that's the approach we've taken. Be clear about where we think the next acquisition programs are, where we think the long-range investments should be based on how we see our needs moving over time. That should be reflected in our contract research and development strategies, and it should be mirrored in industry's investment in those areas."
Lemnios said DoD is doing its best to make its priorities clear. At the investors' conference, he said the data-to-decisions objective ranked among the highest, given the ever-growing number of terabytes of raw data flowing through DoD's systems and awaiting analysis.
An example of the challenge, he said, was the vast amount of information generated by intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems such as unmanned aerial vehicles.
"It's about managing very large data sets in time-critical environments," he said. "It's about integrating disparate sensors-sensors that were never designed to interoperate-that aren't structured with a common data environment. This is a challenge for the research community, it's a challenge for our operational community as we field more ISR sensors."
Another key area, he said, would be building what in DoD parlance are known as engineered resilient systems: The ability to build reliable weapons systems out of components made in and procured from a globalized and sometimes untrusted marketplace.
"I can buy a component from a chip supplier, and in many cases I have no idea where that was fabricated," he said. "I have no idea if that part has only the information that I've asked for and not some special sauce. Our Defense industrial base needs those tools to architect systems that are correct by design, to include a vulnerability assessment of how that system would be exploited or defeated. It's about building trusted systems from parts that I can't actually validate."
In the 2012 budget, cybersecurity was another major winner on DoD's science and technology list. The administration has asked for a doubling of cyber research funding for the coming fiscal year, and $500 million in new cyber research spending at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), said Dr. Regina Dugan, DARPA's director.