TOP 100

Special Report
Page Topic Hed See page 10

AUG. 17, 2020 / VOL. 35 NO. 5

THE MOMENTUM
OF ARMS TRADE
THE BATTLE
FOR LIBYA
WHAT IS GOING ON, WHO
IS WINNING AND WHAT
HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT
AIR WARFARE?
see page 22

PENTAGON ADOPTS
FRESH TAKE ON
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
TOP US NAVY CHIEF
ON CONNECTING
Globalization and US defense spending drive TECH, RECOVERING
growth across the defense industry FROM ACCIDENTS
BY JOE GOULD
jgould@defensenews.com
WASHINGTON — Defense revenues of the top 100 defense Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Steven Grundman. “For an
companies in the world climbed for a fourth consecutive industry generally regarded as mature, revenue growth that
year, pushed upward by growth in U.S. defense spending runs at two times global GDP is downright sporty.”
combined with strong foreign military sales. The defense sector remained top heavy, as the top 10 firms
Fiscal 2019 defense revenues recorded in Defense News’ accounted for 50 percent of total defense revenue on this
DILOK KLAISATAPORN/GETTY IMAGES

Top 100 list totaled $524 billion, up about 7 percent from
$488 billion in fiscal 2018, according to numbers compiled
by Defense News.
“The single most striking thing about these data is the year-
over-year growth, the median of which is 7 percent,” said
year’s list, and the top 25 companies accounted for about
75 percent of the total.
Geographically, U.S. firms made up seven of the top 10,
and 10 of the top 25. The combined defense revenue of the
41 U.S. firms in the Top 100 list comprised more than half of
See ANALYSIS page 40
The threats of modern warfare are no match for Oshkosh Defense vehicles.
Highly specialized systems and superior off-road capabilities enable them
to carry out any mission. Anytime. Anywhere.
 C4ISRNET
MEDIA FOR THE
The Rundown INTELLIGENCE-AGE MILITARY
c4isrnet.com

IN THIS ISSUE ONLINE SPOTLIGHT

8 PROGRAM VIEW
NATO allies ramp up drone
purchases

6 IN BRIEF
Why does the US Space
Force have horses?

24 NAVAL CUSTOMIZE THE TOP 100 LIST AND

What’s it take to develop a COMPARE THE DATA TO PREVIOUS YEARS
fleet of robot warships? defensenews.com/top-100-rankings
26 LAND
US Army hangs back on SPECIAL MEDIA REPORT
interceptor pursuit

28 C4ISRNET
New approach for collecting
military weather data

38 ON THE MOVE
Controversial nominee
gets a top defense job

SPECIAL FEATURE

WHAT ARE NATO’S STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

WHEN IT COMES TO AIR POWER?
10 TOP 100 defensenews.com/smr/nato-air-power

DefenseNews (ISSN 0884-139X) Vol. 35 No. 5 © Sightline Media Group; Defense News is published 12 times per year by Sightline Media Group, 1919 Gallows Road, Suite 400, Vienna, VA 22182. Annual subscription rates: (print and digital) $169 U.S. domestic mail;
(digital only) $99 worldwide. Defense News is not a publication of the Department of Defense. Periodicals postage is paid at Vienna, Va., and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send all UAA to CFS. (See DMM 707.4.12.5). Non-postal and military facilities: Send address
corrections to Defense News, Circulation, 1919 Gallows Road, Suite 400, Vienna, VA 22182-4038. ©2020 Sightline Media Group All content within this publication requires proper authorization for reuse. Photocopies: To request photocopies, order online from the Copyright
Clearance Center at www.copyright.com, specifying ISSN 0884-139X. The fee is $3.50 per photocopy per article, limited to 500 copies. Reprints & Permissions: To reprint or license content including text, images, graphics and logos please submit your request by phone:
212.221.9595. Advertising Email: advertisingsales@sightlinemg.com. Subscriptions: Call (800) 368.5718 (domestic) or 703. 750.7400 (international), email cust-svc@defensenews.com, or write to Defense News, Subscriber Service, 1919 Gallows Road, Suite 400, Vienna, VA
22182. For change of address, attach address label from a recent issue.

DEFENSENEWS.COM 08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 3

 In Brief
The AlphaDogfight Trials were created to demonstrate advanced AI systems’
ability in air warfare. Eight teams were selected last year to participate in the
final competition that runs from Aug. 18-20. The competition is also part of
DARPA’s Air Combat Evolution, or ACE, program, which was started in 2019,
and seeks to automate air-to-air combat as well as improve human trust in AI
systems to bolster human-machine teaming.
“We weren’t able to host the finals at AFWERX in Las Vegas as we’d
originally planned with fighter pilots from the Air Force Weapons School at
nearby Nellis Air Force Base,” Col. Dan Javorsek, program manager in DARPA’s
Strategic Technology Office, said in a statement.
“We are still excited to see how the AI algorithms perform against each
other as well as a Weapons School-trained human and hope that fighter pilots
from across the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, as well as military leaders
and members of the AI tech community will register and watch online. It’s
been amazing to see how far the teams have advanced AI for autonomous
dogfighting in less than a year.”
The eight teams are Aurora Flight Sciences, EpiSys Science, Georgia Tech
Research Institute, Heron Systems, Lockheed Martin, Perspecta Labs,

HUMAN F-16 PILOT TO FACE PhysicsAI and SoarTech.

On the first day of the competition, the teams will fly their respective algo-

OFF AGAINST AI
c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence
An artificial intelligence algorithm will face off against a human F-16 fighter pilot in an aerial combat simulation
in late August, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency announced Aug. 7.
The simulation — the third and final competition in DARPA’s AlphaDogfight Trials — will take place Aug. 20.
The event will be virtual due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
rithms against five AI systems developed by the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics
Lab. Teams will face off against each other in a round-robin tournament on
the second day, with the third day featuring the top four teams competing in a
single-elimination tournament for the championship. The winner will then fly
against a human pilot.
“Regardless of whether the human or machine wins the final dogfight, the
AlphaDogfight Trials is all about increasing trust in AI,” Javorsek said. “If
the champion AI earns the respect of an F-16 pilot, we’ll have come one step
closer to achieving effective human-machine teaming in air combat, which is
the goal of the ACE program.”

BIGDEAL “WE’VE BECOME

“QUOTE TEXT
QUOTE
A CHEAP TEXT
DATE

$9.6
$25B
QUOTE TEXT
IN CYBER.”
QUOTE TEXT”
— Sen. Angus King,
I-Maine, a co-chair of—theQuote
Cyberattribution.
Solarium
Commission, telling a House Armed Services

billion
Committee subpanel that the U.S. has done a
The amount India wants poor job imposing costs against adversarial

ZACH GIBSON/GETTY IMAGES

to make from defense activity in cyberspace
production by 2025. This
includes a $5 billion target
from exports. Current
Big deal body
DFN

turnover is $11.42 billion, of

IMAGES;
PHOTO CREDIT_UNV45

which $1.53 billion comes

DEVRIMB/GETTY

from exports.

4 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM

In government contracting, there’s no such thing as a job
almost done. To meet your needs to the letter, you need the
highest quality products and services delivered by a motivated
workforce of people with disabilities.
Learn how precisely we can help at
SourceAmerica®, an AbilityOne® Authorized Enterprise. SourceAmerica.org/ExactlyRight
In Brief

GOODFORALAUGH
SADDLE UP FOR A RIDE THROUGH THE COSMOS
There is an equine arm of the U.S. Space Force — no, we’re
not horsing around.
The military’s newest and most continually bewildering
service branch released a video welcoming the addition of a
military working horse — a mustang named Ghost — to the
ranks of the 30th Space Wing.
The 5-year-old horse, acquired through the Bureau of Land
Management, is part of a team at California’s Vandenberg Air
Force Base that carries out tasks ranging from conservation
efforts to the enforcement of hunting and fishing laws.
And while no one can fault the service members involved for
landing perhaps the most enjoyable gig in the entire military,
the notion that these tasks are even performed by a military
unit and once fell under the command of the Air Force remains
perplexing.
“Before this program I had never ridden a horse before,
but I came in every day and rode and volunteered,” Senior
Airman Michael Terrazas said in a March 2019 profile of the
detachment.
“We are able to go through creeks and water with the
horses, high hills that we wouldn’t be able to get through with
off-road vehicles. There are places we’ve gone where the
water is so deep that my boots are wet while on horseback,
but the horses can walk through with no problems,” the
airman added.
OK we’re jealous. But should pleasant strolls on horseback
through picturesque landscapes be included in the budget of a
branch that has its eyes turned toward the cosmos?
Recent evidence compiled by top astrophysicists suggests
oxygen-breathing horses cannot survive in the vacuum of
space. Additionally, it’s widely accepted in the scientific
community that a very small number of horses have
participated in the development of celestial programs such
as lunar modules, Mars rovers, satellites for deep-space
exploration or other extraterrestrial endeavors.
Still, this is space, the final frontier, and there’s never been a
better time to provide a celestial cowboy with a trusty steed.
According to the service’s official page, the Space Force
mission is to organize, train and equip “space forces in order
to protect U.S. and allied interests in space and to provide
space capabilities to the joint force.”
The branch also summarizes its responsibilities as
“developing military space professionals, acquiring military
space systems, maturing the military doctrine for space power,
and organizing space forces to present to our Combatant
Commands.”
Equestrian instruction is noticeably absent in those
descriptions, barring any fine print under the mission
statement that will allow Ghost to boldly go where no horse
has gone before.
But horses?
Where we’re going, we don’t need horses.

PENTAGON CIO TALKS ONGOING CLOUD PROJECTS

The Pentagon’s top IT official provided an update July 30 on a wide range of ongoing initiatives underway at the department as it continues to grapple with a remote workforce amid the coronavirus
pandemic. Chief Information Officer Dana Deasy highlighted several ongoing projects related to artificial intelligence, big data and cloud computing, while also discussing the department’s
Commercial Virtual Remote Environment that’s allowed nearly 1 million Department of Defense employees to collaborate while working from home.

1 2
The Pentagon has struggled to procure its enterprisewide The Joint Artificial Intelligence Center is pivoting to focus on
cloud — the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure — meant Joint All-Domain Command and Control, a Pentagon-led effort
to break down data silos and enhance artificial intelligence to connect sensors and shooters. Through its Joint Common
capabilities. But work on the JEDI cloud, which was awarded Foundation, Deasy said, the JAIC has tools and capabilities to
to Microsoft in October last year and subsequently protested by develop AI capabilities at scale.
Amazon Web Services, is on hold after a federal judge issued The JAIC, he said, is working on a cognitive assistant to de-
3
AIRMAN 1ST CLASS HANAH ABERCROMBIE/U.S. AIR FORCE; MF3D/GETTY IMAGES;
MASTER SGT. BARRY LOO/U.S. AIR FORCE
In June, the DoD announced Dave Spirk, the former Special Op-
erations Command chief data officer, will become the depart-
ment’s new CDO. Deasy said Spirk will focus on “strengthening
data governance, interoperability, and data protection.”
“The chief data officer is on a directed, 90-day listening tour
where he is talking to senior leaders in the Pentagon, war fight-
IMAGES;DFN
PHOTO CREDIT_UNV45

an injunction related to how the DoD evaluated proposals. liver commanders relevant data from the hoards of information ers and at the combatant commands, industry and academia
In the meantime, the DoD has stamped the Air Force’s Plat- that come from the battlefield to quicken decision-making. But to assess the overall department’s progress,” Deasy said. “At
DKOSIG/GETTY

form One cloud offering as an enterprise service, giving DoD he added there are other areas of focus, including the electro- the conclusion of the 90-day tour, Dave will provide a written
components a certified place to go for DevSecOps, Deasy said. magnetic spectrum, force mobility and targeting. assessment with a plan of action.”

6 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM

Nexter,
Land defense architect and system integrator in France, is a major reference in armored
combat systems, artillery, and in the ammunition field. Nexter designs innovative solutions for
land, air, sea and security forces, in order to bring French and foreign armed forces a decisive
operational advantage.

ARMORED
VEHICLES

ARTILLERY
SYSTEMS
AMMUNITION

TURRETS EQUIPMENT
& GUNS

CREATING REFERENCES IN DEFENSE

Program View
EASTERN EUROPEAN
NATO ALLIES RAMP UP
DRONE PURCHASES
BY JAROSLAW ADAMOWSKI
jadamowski@defensenews.com
WARSAW, Poland — Several Eastern
European countries are developing pro-
grams to acquire UAVs for their militar-
ies as Russia’s military activities in the
Baltic and Black seas mount pressure
on NATO’s eastern flank.
In Romania, local analysts say the
country’s Ministry of National Defence
aims to boost the military’s intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance capa-
bilities by acquiring new drones, ensur-
ing the country’s armed forces can effi-
ciently monitor Romanian borders.
“Romania wants to increase its [ISR]
capacity in the Black Sea, taking into
account that the militarization of the
region by Russia is intensively con-
tinuing,” George Scutaru, head of the
Bucharest-based New Strategy Center
think tank as well as a former member
of Parliament and government adviser,
told Defense News. “At the end of last
April, the joint defense committees of
the Romanian parliament adopted the
request of the Ministry of National De-
fence to start the procurement proce-
dures for five new programs, including
the acquisition of UAV systems. Within
this program, an acquisition of seven
tactical-operative UAV systems is to be
carried out.”
Romania’s previous attempt at pur-
chasing drones for its military came
8 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
in 2018 under a procedure to buy tac-
tical UAVs for some 250 million lei
(U.S. $61 million). The bidders includ-
ed American firm AAI Corporation,
Israel’s Aeronautics Limited, BlueBird
Aero Systems and Israel Aerospace In-
dustries, as well as Romanian company
Ymens Teamnet. However, a Romanian
court canceled the tender after some
bidders filed complaints.
George Visan, the coordinator of the
Black Sea Security Program at the Bu-
charest-based think tank Romania En-
ergy Center, told Defense News it was
“known that Romania would like to
acquire at least six medium-altitude,
long-endurance UAVs as well as a num-
ber of smaller tactical UAVs.”
Similar to the failed drone tender
from 2018, the new competition is ex-
pected to attract bids from American,
Israeli and Romanian companies. An-
ticipating the forthcoming procedure,
Israel’s Elbit Systems in May signed a
memorandum of understanding with
local state-run aircraft companies
Avioane Craiova and Romaero.
“Elbit Systems can easily sell in Roma-
nia what it manufactures in Israel, but
depending on the order, it is willing to
integrate and transfer production here.
Avioane Craiova used to produce train-
ers, IAR-99 aircraft and aero-structures
A KZO reconnaissance drone of the German military launches with the
help of a booster rocket during Thunder Storm 2018, a multinational
NATO military exercise on June 7, 2018, near Pabrade, Lithuania.
for various manufacturers,” Visan said.
The analyst added that the ministry,
in parallel to its drone procurement
programs, is also funding the devel-
opment of two UAVs by the state-run
Research Agency for Military Hard-
ware and Technologies, hoping to se-
cure foreign partners and ensure trans-
fer of technology.
“This doesn’t preclude other acquisi-
tions,” Visan said.
Meanwhile, Poland’s Ministry of De-
fence is developing several acquisition
programs to acquire UAVs. To date,
the ministry has ordered short-range
drones and mini-drones, with more
programs to procure surveillance and
combat drones underway.
“In the long-term, the Polish Armed
Forces are planning to acquire about
a dozen sets of mid-range UAVs un-
der the Gryf program, several MALE
combat-reconnaissance UAVs under
the Zefir program, and vertical takeoff
and landing, short-range UAVs for the
Navy under the Albatros program,” a
spokesperson for the Polish ministry
told Defense News.
In 2018 and 2019, Polish privately
owned defense company WB Group
secured two orders to deliver a total of
48 mini-drones to the Territorial De-
fense Forces, or TDF, a military branch
comprised of volunteers.
“We have supplied two types of
drones to the Polish military. The
first one is FlyEye … It can be
used in a variety of missions, in-
cluding reconnaissance, artillery
guidance, search and rescue, but also to
extend the range of battle management
systems. This drone can guide missiles,
becoming the heart of an anti-tank sys-
tem,” company spokesman Remigiusz
Wilk told Defense News. “The second
one is Warmate, which combines re-
connaissance capabilities and combat
capacities as loitering munition.”
WB Group is also exporting its drones,
with Warmate’s deliveries to four allies
carried out through the NATO Support
and Procurement Agency. Most recent-
ly, the manufacturer established a sub-
sidiary in Ukraine where the country’s
military has operated its UAVs.
Other countries in the region that plan
to acquire drones include the Czech
Republic. Last November, Czech Presi-
dent Milos Zeman spurred controversy
when he called on the government to
buy Israeli UAVs for the military.
Combat drones are expected to be
SEAN GALLUP/GETTY IMAGES
acquired under the country’s mili-
tary modernization program by 2027,
in an effort worth 100 billion koruny
(U.S. $4.53 billion). DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM

Innovation as a Catalyst
 ^HZHZPNUPÄJHU[`LHYMVY0(0YLHJOPUN
PTWVY[HU[TPSLZ[VULZHUKYLJVYKIYLHRPUN
YLZ\S[Z(TVUN[OLPTHNLZVMZ\JJLZZHUK
HJOPL]LTLU[Z^HZ[OL(YYV^HU[PIHSSPZ[PJ
TPZZPSLZ[YLHRPUNHJYVZZ[OL7HJPÄJ6JLHU
PU[LYJLW[PUNHTLKP\TYHUNLIHSSPZ[PJTPZZPSL
[HYNL[0[^HZHSZV[OLPTHNLVM)LYLZOLL[
ZWHJLJYHM[ZLUKPUNP[ZSHZ[ºZLSÄL»^P[O[OL
TVVUZLJVUKZILMVYLOHYKSHUKPUNVUP[Z
Z\YMHJLRPSVTL[LYZMYVTP[Z
OVTLWSHUL[
;OLZLPTHNLZKLÄUL0(0»Z
LTWSV`LLZ»X\LZ[MVYL_JLSSLUJLHJOPL]LK
HZMHYHZ[OL`WVZZPIS`JHU
;OLJVTWHU`OHZ\UKLYNVULH
JVTWYLOLUZP]LI\ZPULZZ[YHUZMVYTH[PVUZ[YH[LN`
W\YZ\LKZPUJLHUK\WKH[LZKLYP]LKMYVT
[OLJOHSSLUNLZKLÄULKI`*6=0+ 
¸6\YYLJVYKIYLHRPUNYLZ\S[ZMVY HUK[OL
ÄYZ[X\HY[LYVMHSYLHK`YLÅLJ[[OPZZ[YH[LN`¹
5PTYVK:OLќLY7YLZPKLU[
*,6VM0(0ZHPK ¸>LTHKLL_[LUZP]L\ZLVMTHJOPULSLHYUPUN
<UKLY[OPZYLMVYT0(0\UPÄLKHJ[P]P[PLZ\UKLYMV\Y
NYV\WZLTWOHZPaPUN[OLJVTWHU`»Z\UPX\LJVYL
JVTWL[LUJ`HUKL_WLYPLUJL
Cross-Enterprise Innovation
0(0THPU[HPUZP[Z[LJOUVSVN`SLHKLYZOPW
W\YZ\PUNZ\JJLZZM\SI\ZPULZZ]LU[\YLZHJYVZZ
KLMLUZLOVTLSHUKZLJ\YP[`J`ILYHUK[OL
JVTTLYJPHSTHYRL[Z0(0»ZHWWYVHJO[V*YVZZ
,U[LYWYPZL0UUV]H[PVUOHZILLUPTWSLTLU[LK
Z\JJLZZM\SS`PUTHU`KPќLYLU[PUUV]H[P]L
]LU[\YLZMYVT[OL)HYHR4?HPYKLMLUZLZ`Z[LT
[V[OL)LYLZOLL[S\UHYSHUKLY;H_PIV[ZLTP
YVIV[PJHPYJYHM[[H_PZVS\[PVUHUKTVYL
¸0UUV]H[PVU
WYVJLZZLZHYLJYP[PJHSMVY
HUVYNHUPaH[PVUZ[YP]PUN
MVY[LJOUVSVNPJHSHUK
WYVMLZZPVUHSL_JLSSLUJL
Z\JOHZ0(0¹:HPK(TPYH
:OHYVU7O+=7VM
:[YH[LN`HUK9
+¸0[
PZLZZLU[PHS[VTHPU[HPU
V\Y[LJOUVSVNPJHS
HK]HU[HNL[VPU]LU[
Dr. Amira Sharon KL]LSVWHUKKLSP]LY[OL
IAI’s CTO ºUL_[IPN[OPUN»0[PZHSZV
LZZLU[PHS[VH[[YHJ[HUK
RLLWYLJY\P[Z^P[OL_JLSSLU[ZRPSSZ[VTHPU[HPUV\Y
HK]HU[HNLHUKHJOPL]LV\YNVHSZ¹
¸>LZ\WWVY[HUKSLHKPUP[PH[P]LZHUKHJ[P]P[PLZ
[OH[WYVTV[LHUKLUJV\YHNLPUUV]H[PVUIV[O
^P[OPUHUKV\[ZPKLVM[OLJVTWHU`¹:OHYVU
HKKLK0(0U\Y[\YLZHUHJ[P]LJYVZZLU[LYWYPZL
PUUV]H[PVUJVTT\UP[`[OH[PZJVU[PU\V\ZS`
\WKH[LKHUK[HWZRUV^SLKNLJVTT\UP[PLZ
^P[OPU[OLKP]PZPVUZ
PAID ADVERTISEMENT
COVID 19 - a Test Case in Agility
>OLU0(0Z[HY[LK[VHK]HUJL[OLPU[LNYH[PVU
VMPUUV]H[P]L[LJOUVSVNPLZPUP[ZVWLYH[PVUZ[OH[
TV]L^HZUV[TLHU[[VÄNO[HOPKKLULULT`
Z\JOHZ[OL*VYVUH]PY\Z)\[^OLU*6=0+ 
WHUKLTPJIYVRLV\[0(0^HZYLHK`MVY[OLUL^
JOHSSLUNL¸;OLSH[LYHSPUUV]H[PVUWYVJLZZLZ
^P[OPU0(0[VVRHUL^KPYLJ[PVUZLLRPUN[VZH]L
SP]LZ¹:OHYVUL_WSHPUZ¸;OLVWLUPUUV]H[PVU
MYHTL^VYR^LOH]LI\PS[PU[OLYLJLU[`LHYZ
HSSV^LK\Z[VILÅL_PISLHNPSLHUKYLZWVUZP]L
^OPSLSL]LYHNPUN[OLJVUULJ[PVUZ^LOH]L
LZ[HISPZOLK^P[O[OLOPNO[LJOLJVZ`Z[LTZ¹
;OPZHNPSP[`LUHISLK0(0[VJVU]LY[HTPZZPSL
WYVK\J[PVUSPUL[VWYVK\JLYLZWPYH[VYZ^P[OPU
KH`Z([[OLZHTL[PTL0(0LUNPULLYZYLZWVUKLK
[V[OLULLKZVMTLKPJHS[LHTZPUOVZWP[HSZ
KL]LSVWPUNKH[HJVSSLJ[PVUHUKHUHS`ZPZZ`Z[LTZ
HUKJVTWSL_WYLKPJ[PVUTVKLSZ[VMVSSV^
\UKLYZ[HUKHUK[HJRSL[OLWHUKLTPJ
IPNKH[HHUK(0[VVSZHZWHY[VMP[ZYV\[PUL
VWLYH[PVUZ¹+Y,PUH[2SLPU*OPLM0UUV]H[PVU
IAI’s UVC Robot for sterilization of large spaces
,UNPULLYH[0(0»Z:`Z[LTZ4PZZPSLHUK:WHJL
in an airplane
.YV\WUV[LK;OLWYLKPJ[P]LJHWHIPSP[PLZ0(0
KL]LSVWLKHSLY[TLKPJHSZ[HќVU[OLWVZZPISL L_WLYPLUJLMYVT[OLPU[LSSPNLUJLJ`ILYYHKHY
KL[LYPVYH[PVUPU[OLWH[PLU[»ZJVUKP[PVU[O\Z HUKHY[PÄJPHSPU[LSSPNLUJLZ\WLY]PZPVUHUK
LUOHUJPUNWH[PLU[JHYLHUKÅHNNPUN[OLJHZLZ JVU[YVSZ`Z[LTZ¹@VH];\YNLTHU,_LJ\[P]L=PJL
^P[OOPNOLYJOHUJLZVMHTLKPJHSLZJHSH[PVU 7YLZPKLU[0(0HUK*,6VM,S[HJVTTLU[LK
[O\ZZPNUPÄJHU[S`PTWYV]PUN[OLWH[PLU[V\[JVTL 6[OLYZVS\[PVUZHWWS`[V[OLIYVHKLY
0UHUV[OLYTLKPJHSJLU[LY0(0HUK4PJYVZVM[ ULLKMVYI\ZPULZZJVU[PU\P[`\UKLYIPVOHaHYKZ
JVSSHIVYH[LK^P[O[OL:VYVRH4LKPJHS*LU[LY Z\JOHZ[OL*VYVUH]PY\Z
[VJYLH[LH¸*VJRWP[¹Z[YLHTSPUPUN[OLTLKPJHS º;HTHY»JVTIPULZNPNHOLY[aYHKHY
Z\WLY]PZPVUVMWH[PLU[ZOVZWP[HSPaLKPUPU[LUZP]L [OLYTHSPTHNPUNZLUZVYZHUK(0HZZPZ[LK
JHYL\UP[Z¸0U[OPZWYVQLJ[^LPTWSLTLU[LK ZPNUHSWYVJLZZPUN[VJVSSLJ[O\THU
]P[HSZPNUZYLTV[LS`
()::HKKYLZZLZ[OL\YNLU[ULLKMVY[OL
KPZPUMLJ[PVUVM[YHUZWVY[H[PVUZ`Z[LTZH]PH[PVU
THYPULHUKYHPSLTWSV`PUN9VIV[PJ+PZPUMLJ[PVU
:`Z[LTZ9+:I`WYV]PKPUNX\PJRHUKLJPLU[
Z[LYPSPaH[PVUVMSHYNLZWHJLZZ\JOHZVWLYH[PUN
YVVTZHPYJYHM[JHIPUZHUKYHPSJHYZ)`JV\WSPUN
WYV]LU<=<=*PYYHKPH[PVU[LJOUPX\LZ^P[O
PUOV\ZLL_WLY[PZLPUH\[VUVTV\ZVWLYH[PVU
HUKJVU[YVS0(0VќLYZHULJPLU[ZVS\[PVUMVYH
JVTWSL_VWLYH[PVUHSWYVISLT
¸0(0Z[YP]LZ[VSLHKPUL]LY`PUP[PH[P]LP[
LTIYHJLZ[VWYV]PKL[OLTVZ[LќLJ[P]LZVS\[PVU
[VLHJOJOHSSLUNL;OPZZ[YH[LN`L]VS]LK
[OYV\NOKLJHKLZHZ0(0^HZJHSSLK[VKLSP]LY
[LJOUVSVNPJHSZVS\[PVUZHKKYLZZPUN0ZYHLS»Z
[V\NOLZ[ZLJ\YP[`JOHSSLUNLZ¹:OHYVUUV[LK
¸;VKH`0(0OHYULZZLZP[ZPUUV]H[PVUHUKHNPSP[`[V
YLZWVUK^P[OZVS\[PVUZ[VJOHSSLUNLZWVZLKI`
[OL*6=0+ WHUKLTPJPU[OLZHTL^H`^L
PU[YVK\JLKKPZY\W[P]LKLMLUZL[LJOUVSVNPLZ[OH[
OH]L[YHUZMVYTLK^HYMHYLWYV]PKPUNKYHTH[PJ
JVTIH[WYV]LUMVYJLT\S[PWSPLYZMVY0ZYHLS
IAI’s TAMAR system HUKP[ZHSSPLZ¹
PAID ADVERTISEMENT
TOP 100

THE
LIST
The largest defense companies
in the world, revealed
BY MIKE GRUSS
mgruss@defensenews.com

The adage is that it is difficult for an aircraft carrier to turn on a dime.

The same could be said for the defense industry or Pentagon budgets and as such,
the Defense News Top 100 list.
Changes are slow and can take time to appear on our list. For example, for the
first time, this year’s list reflects the result of the L3-Harris merger. L3, ranked 18th
on last year’s list, and Harris, ranked 26th a year ago, merged to form what everyone
expected: one of the world’s largest defense corporations in L3Harris Technologies,
ranked 9th on our list.
Next year, observers will see the results of the merger between Raytheon, ranked
5th on this year’s list, and United Technologies Corp., ranked 10th on this year’s list.
Thematically, the shifts that defense and military leaders have spent years discussing
are becoming fully reflected in industry. China’s heavy investments in defense are

10 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM

 TEASER KNOCKOUT_KN70
RANKINGS
ONLINE TEASER
SEE HOW
KNOCKOUT
COMPANIES
HTF50
HAVE
12
PERFORMEDdefensenews.com
OVER THE YEARS
defensenews.com/top-100-rankings

becoming evident by the inclusion of Aviation Industry into the defense market in a meaningful way. Advocates
Corporation of China (6th), China North Industries Group will likely point by how few are in the list. Other companies WHAT'S INSIDE
Corporation Limited (8th), and China Aerospace Science have complained that the big primes have too much of a Page 14: South Korean reform efforts drive momentum for
defense industry growth
and Industry Corporation (11th) on this year’s list. The lock on Pentagon contracts, perhaps seen in how the top Page 15: Europe’s next-gen fighter club faces a dilemma:
role of integration and communication tools is becoming five bring in more than twice the revenue of the next five. Who else can join?
Page 16: Turkish industry prospers, but poor foreign affairs
more important, as is evidenced by Leidos, Peraton Each year, the Defense News Top 100 is part art, part are limiting its potential
and Perspecta’s inclusion. Medium-sized businesses are science. Every year, the Defense News team tries to push Page 18: China’s industry reaps benefits of political
connections
becoming increasingly critical players. it a bit closer to science. This year’s list, like years past,
Page 19: A look at the aerospace business
And, for years, U.S. military leaders have heard from is a snapshot of what’s happening in defense markets and Page 20: Q&A with Boeing’s defense CEO
Silicon Valley startups that it remains too difficult to break maybe, just maybe, a hint of what’s to come. DN Page 21: Euro radar collaboration, plus Russia’s economy

Top 100 companies, by defense-related revenue (1-20) See TOP 100 page 10
2019 2018 2019
DEFENSE DEFENSE % TOTAL
LAST REVENUE REVENUE DEFENSE REVENUE REVENUE
YEAR'S (USD IN (USD IN REVENUE (USD IN FROM
RANK RANK COMPANY LEADERSHIP COUNTRY MILLIONS) MILLIONS) CHANGE MILLIONS) DEFENSE
1 1 Lockheed Martin 1 James D. Taiclet, President and CEO * U.S. $56,606.00 $50,536.00 12% $59,812.00 95%
2 2 Boeing David Calhoun, President and CEO * U.S. $34,300.00 $34,050.00 1% $76,559.00 45%
3 6 General Dynamics 2
Phebe Novakovic, Chairman and CEO U.S. $29,512.00 $27,507.00 7% $39,350.00 75%
4 3 Northrop Grumman Kathy J. Warden, Chairman, CEO and President U.S. $28,600.00 $25,300.00 13% $33,841.00 85%
5 4 Raytheon Company 1, 3
Thomas Kennedy, Chairman and CEO U.S. $27,448.00 $25,163.94 9% $29,200.00 94%
6 5 Aviation Industry Corporation Tan Ruisong, Chairman of the Board, and Luo Ronghuai, President China $25,075.38 $24,902.01 1% $66,858.02 38%
of China
7 7 BAE Systems 1 Charles Woodburn, Group CEO U.K. $21,033.27 $22,477.48 -6% $23,370.30 90%
8 8 China North Industries Group Jiao Kaihe, Chairman, and Liu Dashan, President China $14,771.60 $14,777.77 0% $68,074.15 22%
Corporation Limited
9 NEW L3Harris Technologies 4 Bill Brown, Chairman and CEO U.S. $13,916.98 $12,303.08 13% $18,074.00 77%
10 17 United Technologies Corp. 1, 3
Gregory J. Hayes, Chairman and CEO U.S. $13,090.00 $9,310.00 41% $77,000.00 17%
11 10 China Aerospace Science and Yuan Jie, Chairman and Secretary of the Party Committee, and Liu Shi- China $12,035.25 $12,130.93 -1% $37,610.17 32%
Industry Corporation quan, General Manager and President *
12 9 Airbus 5 Guillaume Faury, CEO NL/France $11,266.57 $13,063.82 -14% $78,916.36 14%
13 13 Leonardo Alessandro Profumo, CEO Italy $11,109.27 $9,828.51 13% $15,429.55 72%
14 14 China Shipbuilding Industry Lei Fanpei, Chairman, and Yang Jincheng, Director and General Manager * China $11,019.56 $9,795.47 12% $55,097.78 20%
Corporation 6
15 12 China Electronics Technology Chen Zhaoxiong, Chairman of the Board, and Wu Manqing, President * China $10,148.87 $10,275.58 -1% $32,951.25 31%
Group
16 16 Thales Patrice Caine, Chairman and CEO France $9,251.68 $9,575.57 -3% $20,596.61 45%
17 15 Almaz-Antey Yan Novikov, CEO Russia $9,191.60 $9,660.14 -5% $9,651.71 95%
18 11 China South Industries Group Xu Xianping, Chairman of the Group and Secretary of the Party Committee, China $8,845.87 $11,963.37 -26% $28,550.02 31%
Corporation and Gong Yangde, Group Company Director and General Manager *
19 20 Huntington Ingalls Industries Mike Petters, President and CEO U.S. $8,119.00 $7,767.00 5% $8,899.00 91%
20 19 China Aerospace Science and Wu Yansheng, Chairman of the Board, Xu Qiang, President, and Fang China $7,745.57 $8,138.47 -5% $36,223.21 21%
Technology Corporation Xiangming, Executive Director *
Notes are not reflected unless otherwise noted. Thomas A. Kennedy ran Raytheon until the companies are part of the post-merger military engine businesses. defense revenue as submitted this year by Defence & Aerospace group, which owns
1 11
Data for the Top 100 list comes from Total defense revenue is based on a merger was complete, when Gregory J. structure. KNDS includes defense revenue of the company. 49.9 percent of Patria.
7 15 21
information Defense News solicited percentage of total revenue given by the Hayes, who ran UTC, became CEO of the Defense revenue reflects awards made by Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (based in U.S. private equity firm Advent Interna- Kongsberg holds 49.9 percent of the
from companies, from companies’ annual company. combined companies. Japan’s Ministry of Defense for the fiscal Germany) and Nexter (based in France). tional acquired Cobham in January 2020. shares in Patria. Patria’s revenue includes
2 4 12
reports, from analysts, and from research Total defense revenue comes from four of L3 Technologies (ranked 18 last year) year ending March 31, 2019. On Jan. 31, AECOM (ranked 31 During 2019, Cobham was based in the U.K. 50 percent ownership of Nammo.
8 16 22
by Defense News and the International the company’s defense businesses: Marine and Harris Corporation (ranked 26 last Eric Trappier is CEO of Dassault Aviation. last year) completed the sale of its Man- A miscalculation in last year’s list Patria owns 50 percent of Nammo.
9
Institute for Strategic Studies. Systems, Combat Systems, Information year) completed a merger July 1, 2019. Safran attributes the large rise in defense agement Services business to affiliates of overstated ST Engineering’s 2018 total Associated revenue is also included in
Companies were contacted by Defense Technology and Mission Systems. This Bill Brown, who led Harris Corporation, revenue from the previous Top 100 list to a Lindsay Goldberg and American Securities defense revenue. That has been corrected Patria defense revenue.
23
News and asked to fill out a survey includes some nondefense work that the is chairman and CEO of the combined difference in calculation for this list. Since LLC, who created a new entity, Amentum. in this year’s list. Yong-Bae Lee became CEO in
17
reporting their total annual revenue and IT business performs, and does not include companies. 2015, the numbers were the revenue of W. Troy Rudd will become CEO on Oct. 1. The company’s defense business is March 2020.
5 13 *
revenue derived from defense, intelligence, defense work at its subsidiary Gulfstream Airbus lists its “headquarters” in the Safran Electronics & Defense activities. Jacobs attributes the change in 2018 GKN Aerospace, which was acquired by Leadership changed since last year’s list if
homeland security and other national Aerospace Corporation. Omitted in last Netherlands and its “main office” in France. This year, Safran changed its approach by defense revenue on this year’s Top 100 Melrose in 2018. company appeared on list
6 18
security contracts. year’s list from the total defense revenue China’s two largest shipbuilding adding the military activities of the group’s list from the previous list to a difference Viasat uses the revenue of its N/A: Not available
Currency conversions for non-U.S. firms of General Dynamics was a subsidiary’s conglomerates, China Shipbuilding Industry other subsidiaries. in how the company calculated defense Government Systems business as its total NEW: Did not appear on last year’s list
10
were calculated using average market defense revenue. That additional revenue is Company and China State Shipbuilding Hanwha Group has four defense-related revenue this year. defense revenue.
14 19
conversion rates over each firm’s fiscal accounted for in the 2018 defense revenue Corporation, merged in November 2019 to affiliates: Hanwha Corporation, Hanwha Omitted in last year’s list from the total From Jan. 1, 2020, Urs Kiener assumed
year to mitigate the effects of currency as submitted this year by the company. create China State Shipbuilding Corporation Aerospace, Hanwha Systems and Hanwha defense revenue of Turkish Aerospace the role of CEO. Urs Breitmeier left the
3
fluctuations. Raytheon Company and United Technol- Limited. The revenue figures are provided Defense. All four are run independently, Industries were a number of projects Group Executive Board effective
Company adjustments made to 2018 de- ogies Corporation merged in April 2020 to for each individual company prior to the but revenue is combined here. Hanwha supporting defense efforts. That additional Dec. 31, 2019.
20
fense revenue during the subsequent year form Raytheon Technologies Corporation. merger. The leaders listed for these two Aerospace operates both commercial and revenue is accounted for in the 2018 Reflects revenue of Kongsberg’s

DEFENSENEWS.COM 08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 11

TOP 100
Top 100 companies, by defense-related revenue (21-59), continued For notes, see page 11

2019 2018 2019

DEFENSE DEFENSE TOTAL
LAST REVENUE REVENUE % DEFENSE REVENUE REVENUE
YEAR'S (USD IN (USD IN REVENUE (USD IN FROM
RANK RANK COMPANY LEADERSHIP COUNTRY MILLIONS) MILLIONS) CHANGE MILLIONS) DEFENSE

21 NEW Mitsubishi Heavy Industries 7 Seiji Izumisawa, President and CEO Japan $6,570.00 N/A N/A $37,670.00 17%
8
22 38 Dassault Eric Trappier, Chairman and CEO France $5,708.84 $2,934.43 95% $8,171.48 70%
23 21 Leidos Roger Krone, Chairman and CEO U.S. $5,364.00 $5,378.00 0% $11,094.00 48%
24 22 China State Shipbuilding Lei Fanpei, Chairman, and Yang Jincheng, Director and General China $5,356.75 $4,954.07 8% $33,495.61 16%
Corporation 6 Manager
25 25 Honeywell Darius Adamczyk, Chairman and CEO U.S. $5,326.00 $4,665.00 14% $36,709.00 15%
26 23 Booz Allen Hamilton Horacio D. Rozanski, President and CEO U.S. $5,182.96 $4,700.00 10% $7,463.84 69%
27 24 Rolls-Royce Warren East, CEO U.K. $4,712.36 $4,682.36 1% $19,725.28 24%
28 56 Safran 9 Philippe Petitcolin, CEO France $4,413.05 $1,636.67 170% $27,581.55 16%
29 29 GE Aviation David Joyce, GE Vice Chairman; President and CEO of GE Aviation U.S. $4,400.00 $4,100.00 7% $32,875.00 13%
30 28 Naval Group Pietre-Eric Pommelet, CEO * France $4,155.14 $4,260.53 -2% $4,155.14 100%
31 35 Elbit Systems Ltd. Bezhalel Machlis, President and CEO Israel $4,056.00 $3,326.65 22% $4,508.00 90%
32 27 Hanwha 10 Seung Youn Kim, Chairman South $3,976.23 $4,281.48 -7% $42,900.00 9%
Korea
33 30 Rheinmetall AG Armin Papperger, CEO Germany $3,942.46 $3,803.54 4% $7,001.73 56%
34 37 CACI International Inc. John Mengucci, President and CEO * U.S. $3,489.85 $3,032.75 15% $4,986.34 70%
35 32 Tactical Missiles Corporation JSC Boris Obnosov, Director General Russia $3,474.90 $3,591.46 -3% $3,546.46 98%
36 42 SAIC Nazzic Keene, CEO U.S. $3,317.08 $2,795.40 19% $6,379.00 52%
37 40 Perspecta Inc. Mac Curtis, President and CEO U.S. $3,300.00 $2,817.70 17% $4,504.00 73%
38 34 Textron Inc. Scott C. Donnelly, Chairman and CEO U.S. $3,271.20 $3,350.00 -2% $13,630.00 24%
39 39 Babcock International Archie Bethel, Chief Executive U.K. $3,233.92 $2,909.79 11% $6,220.17 52%
40 36 Saab AB Micael Johansson, President and CEO * Sweden $3,185.19 $3,243.68 -2% $3,747.29 85%
41 44 Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd. Nimrod Sheffer, President and CEO Israel $3,006.00 $2,647.00 14% $4,108.00 73%
42 47 KBR Stuart Bradie, President and CEO U.S. $2,852.62 $2,425.78 18% $5,639.38 51%
11
43 45 KNDS Frank Haun, Co-CEO, and Stephane Mayer, Co-CEO NL $2,798.45 $2,597.89 8% $2,798.45 100%
44 46 Rafael Advanced Defense Yoav Har-Even, President and CEO Israel $2,746.65 $2,592.00 6% $2,746.65 100%
Systems Ltd.
45 43 Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Rajagopalan Madhavan, Chairman and Managing Director India $2,710.00 $2,754.60 -2% $3,010.00 90%
46 NEW Amentum 12 John Vollmer, CEO U.S. $2,700.00 $2,200.00 23% $4,100.00 66%
47 31 Bechtel Brendan Bechtel, Chairman and CEO U.S. $2,303.00 $3,745.00 -39% $21,800.00 11%
48 52 Aselsan A.S. Haluk Görgün, Chairman, President and CEO Turkey $2,172.57 $1,792.63 21% $2,290.61 95%
13
49 41 Jacobs Steve Demetriou, Chair of the Board and CEO U.S. $2,115.00 $1,567.00 35% N/A N/A
50 50 Oshkosh Defense John Bryant, Executive Vice President, Oshkosh Corporation; Presi- U.S. $2,032.00 $1,828.90 11% $8,382.00 24%
dent, Oshkosh Defense
51 49 Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc. Eileen Drake, CEO and President U.S. $1,982.00 $1,895.90 5% $1,982.00 100%
1
52 62 TransDigm Kevin Stein, President, CEO and Director U.S. $1,932.59 $1,333.89 45% $5,223.20 37%
53 69 Turkish Aerospace Industries 14 Temel Kotil, President and CEO Turkey $1,858.35 $1,307.65 42% $2,266.79 82%
15
54 57 Cobham Shonnel Malani, Chairman * U.K. $1,787.40 $1,588.37 13% $2,628.76 68%
55 54 Korea Aerospace Industries Ltd. Ahn Hyun-ho, President and CEO * South $1,740.87 $1,694.35 3% $2,667.20 65%
Korea
56 51 DynCorp International George Krivo, CEO U.S. $1,730.34 $1,803.40 -4% N/A N/A
16
57 48 ST Engineering Vincent Chong, President and CEO Singa- $1,685.80 $1,556.58 8% $5,790.36 29%
pore
58 55 Fincantieri S.p.A. Giuseppe Bono, CEO Italy $1,682.74 $1,693.51 -1% $6,547.50 26%
59 58 Sierra Nevada Corp. Eren Ozmen, Chairwoman, President and Owner, and Fatih Ozmen, CEO U.S. $1,591.00 $1,500.00 6% $1,989.00 80%
and Owner

12 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM

 ANALYSIS
READ MORE ABOUT THE STATE OF
THE GLOBAL DEFENSE INDUSTRY
defensenews.com/top-100

Top 100 companies, by defense-related revenue (60-100), continued For notes, see page 11

2019 2018 2019

DEFENSE DEFENSE TOTAL
LAST REVENUE REVENUE % DEFENSE REVENUE REVENUE
YEAR'S (USD IN (USD IN REVENUE (USD IN FROM
RANK RANK COMPANY LEADERSHIP COUNTRY MILLIONS) MILLIONS) CHANGE MILLIONS) DEFENSE
60 64 Serco Rupert Soames, CEO U.K. $1,493.76 $1,264.02 18% $4,146.78 36%
61 66 Bharat Electronics Ltd. M V Gowtama, Chairman and Managing Director India $1,390.00 $1,144.94 21% $1,780.00 78%
62 60 Melrose Industries 17 Simon Peckham, Chief Executive U.K. $1,376.30 $1,366.40 1% $14,799.70 9%
63 65 Vectrus Chuck Prow, President and CEO U.S. $1,367.63 $1,232.74 11% $1,382.64 99%
64 68 Austal David Singleton, CEO Australia $1,289.64 $1,055.14 22% $1,324.47 97%
65 67 QinetiQ Plc Steve Wadey, CEO U.K. $1,274.16 $1,118.80 14% $1,369.92 93%
66 75 Ball Corporation John A. Hayes, Chairman, President and CEO * U.S. $1,256.00 $934.00 34% $11,500.00 11%
67 63 Hensoldt Thomas Mueller, CEO Germany $1,247.17 $1,310.89 -5% $1,247.17 100%
68 61 LIG Nex1 Kim Ji Chan, President and CEO South $1,246.42 $1,341.23 -7% $1,246.42 100%
Korea
69 74 Viasat 18 Mark Dankberg, Chairman of the Board and CEO U.S. $1,138.10 $955.60 19% $2,300.00 49%
70 71 PAE John Heller, President and CEO U.S. $1,082.00 $980.00 10% $2,764.00 39%
71 76 Moog Inc. John R. Scannell, CEO U.S. $1,081.43 $925.02 17% $2,904.66 37%
72 73 Curtiss-Wright Corporation David C. Adams, Chairman and CEO U.S. $1,079.05 $960.60 12% $2,487.96 43%
73 72 Meggitt Tony Wood, CEO U.K. $1,052.01 $975.98 8% $2,905.81 36%
74 70 CAE Marc Parent, President and CEO Canada $1,001.08 $995.33 1% $2,724.55 37%
75 78 Ultra Electronics Simon Pryce, CEO U.K. $906.26 $890.29 2% $1,053.80 86%
76 77 Ruag 1, 19 Urs Kiener, CEO ad int. and Chief Financial Officer * Switzerland $886.86 $898.65 -1% $2,015.59 44%
20
77 80 Kongsberg Geir Haoy, President and CEO Norway $823.43 $750.00 10% $2,736.93 30%
78 79 Day & Zimmermann Hal Yoh, Chair and CEO U.S. $821.10 $773.77 6% $2,457.00 33%
79 84 Embraer Francisco Gomes Neto, President and CEO Brazil $775.00 $728.00 6% $5,463.00 14%
80 82 Teledyne Technologies Robert Mehrabian, Executive Chairman, and Aldo Pichelli, President U.S. $759.80 $655.30 16% $3,163.60 24%
and CEO
81 90 AAR Corp. John M. Holmes, President and CEO U.S. $739.79 $493.72 50% $2,051.80 36%
82 87 Cubic Corporation Bradley H. Feldmann, Chairman, President and CEO U.S. $646.70 $532.18 22% $1,496.00 43%
83 81 Indra Fernando Abril-Martorell, Chairman and CEO, and Ignacio Mataix, Spain $633.57 $732.13 -13% $3,586.50 18%
Executive Director, Indra; Senior Vice President, Transport &
Defense business
84 NEW Peraton Stu Shea, Chairman, President and CEO U.S. $631.29 $638.27 -1% $1,029.69 61%
85 92 Mercury Systems Mark Aslett, President and CEO U.S. $622.59 $473.46 32% $654.74 95%
86 86 Diehl Group Karl Tragl, CEO Germany $577.60 $547.92 5% $4,062.23 14%
87 94 Battelle Lewis Von Thaer, President and CEO U.S. $560.00 $440.00 27% $8,200.00 7%
88 83 John Cockerill Defense Thierry Renaudin, President Belgium $548.16 $595.15 -8% $548.16 100%
89 85 BMC Otomotiv Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. Bulent Denkdemir, CEO Turkey $533.56 $554.18 -4% $676.59 79%
90 88 Patria 1, 21 Esa Rautalinko, President and CEO Finland $522.64 $524.00 0% $568.09 92%
91 89 Roketsan A.S Selcuk Yasar, President and CEO Turkey $515.18 $522.76 -1% $515.18 100%
92 85 STM Savunma Teknolojileri Murat Ikinci, General Manager Turkey $485.08 $564.83 -14% $503.73 96%
Muhendislik ve Ticaret A.S.
93 NEW DLT Solutions Chris Wilkinson, President U.S. $468.70 $437.39 7% $1,241.09 38%
1, 22
94 91 Nammo Morten Brandtzaeg, President and CEO Norway $461.26 $487.67 -5% $576.57 80%
95 93 Hyundai Rotem Company 23 Yong-Bae Lee, CEO * South $449.82 $459.95 -2% $2,040.00 22%
Korea
96 96 Chemring Michael Ord, Group Chief Executive U.K. $385.17 $336.90 14% $427.96 90%
97 NEW Allegheny Technologies Inc. Robert S. Wetherbee, President and CEO U.S. $377.10 $277.10 36% $4,122.50 9%
98 NEW FNSS Savunma Sistemleri A.S. Nail Kurt, General Manager and CEO Turkey $374.94 $367.54 2% $374.94 100%
99 NEW Havelsan A.S. Ahmet Hamdi Atalay, General Manager and CEO Turkey $295.61 $278.60 6% $342.27 86%
100 97 Telephonics Corporation Kevin McSweeney, President U.S. $295.51 $288.11 3% $2,209.29 13%

DEFENSENEWS.COM 08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 13

Page
Top Topic Hed
100
SOUTH KOREA’S REFORM EFFORTS
DRIVE INDUSTRIAL GROWTH
BY MIKE YEO
myeo@defensenews.com
MELBOURNE, Australia — South Korea
has, over the past decade, become a
defense industry powerhouse in its own
right, and it’s seeking to widen its reach,
with progress in international markets
marking the maturity of its defense
equipment.
This year’s Defense News Top 100
list of the biggest defense companies
in the world features four South Ko-
rean businesses. They are Hanwha
(ranked 32rd), Korea Aerospace Indus-
tries (55th), LIG Nex1 (68th) and Hyun-
dai Rotem Company (95th), all of which
made last year’s list.
The strong performance of South Ko-
rean defense companies comes in the
wake of a series of reforms over the
past decade. Those changes are part
of President Moon Jae-in’s Defense Re-
form 2.0 program announced in 2018 —
a complement to efforts seeking to cre-
ate a slimmer, yet more efficient South
Korean military that is less reliant on
foreign defense technology.
The push for greater self-reliance is
most prominent in Korea Aerospace
Industries’ KF-X program. KAI is devel-
oping a next-generation fighter for the
South Korean Air Force. Although an
American GE F414 turbofan will power
14 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
the aircraft, its avionics will primarily
be indigenous. These include the ac-
tive electronically scanned array radar
under development by Hanwha and the
country’s Agency for Defense Develop-
ment, with support and some compo-
nents supplied by Israel’s Elbit Systems.
The Defense Reform 2.0 initiative
also emphasizes defense industry in-
vestment, and it comes as little surprise
that the domstic market still takes up
the biggest share of the pie where sales
are concerned, backed up by the steady
growth in defense spending. South Ko-
rea’s defense budget grew 20 percent
from 2009 to 2017, reaching $43 billion.
In addition, the reform program pri-
oritizes defense exports. The country
is already successful in this area, with
research by the Stockholm Internation-
al Peace Research Institute think tank
showing the country was the 11th big-
gest arms supplier in the world in 2017,
with sales totaling $5.5 billion.
In a further indication of how much
South Korea’s industry has grown,
SIPRI also noted in a 2018 report that
the country’s defense exports grew
94 percent in the 10 years prior, a growth
figure that only Turkey beat during the
same period.
This growth is underpinned by two
of the highest-profile South Korean de-
fense exports in the past decade: the
KAI T-50 Golden Eagle family of trainer
and light combat aircraft, and Hanwha’s
K9 Thunder self-propelled howitzer.
The T-50 was earmarked by the Air
Force as its mainstay advanced trainer
and light combat aircraft. Despite los-
ing a number of trainer competitions,
including in Poland, Singapore and the
United States, the Golden Eagle has
since scored a number of notable con-
tracts for export.
Compared to its rivals in the trainer
market, such as the Leonardo M-346
and the Boeing T-7, the main draw of
the T-50 family is its combat capabili-
ty in the form of the TA-50 and FA-50
equipped with sophisticated combat
capabilities in the form of radars and
precision weapons employment capa-
bility. This makes the aircraft attractive
to nations unable to afford a high-end
trainer with a light attack capability,
and the list of the type’s customers
bears this out, with Indonesia, Iraq, the
Philippines and Thailand operating the
type in their respective air forces.
Meanwhile, Hanwha’s K9 Thunder
has carved a niche for itself in the glob-
al market for self-propelled howitzers.
The 52-caliber, 155mm system has been
selected by a number of NATO nations,
beating out the similar Panzerhaubi-
tze 2000 by Germany’s Rheinmetall in
Estonia, Finland and Norway. Turkey
is building the K9 under license as the
T-155 Firtina.
The system has also been selected for
license production by India and Poland,
and had previously been selected by
Australia in the early part of the 2010s
only to be canceled following budget
issues caused by the global financial
crisis.
Hanwha is also one of two companies
left in the running to supply the Aus-
tralian Army with a new fnfantry fight-
ing vehicle. The AS21 Redback, which
is based on the K21 vehicle operated
by the South Korean Army, is to take
part in an evaluation program against
the Rheinmetall KF41 Lynx to supply
450 vehicles to replace M113 armored
personnel carriers.
Like much the rest of the world, the
COVID-19 pandemic has hit South
Korea hard. It has claimed at least
one sale for the South Korean defense
industry, with Argentina, which had
appeared set to be the next customer
for the T-50 family, deciding in April to
put off the acquisition indefinitely. The
South American country is yet to sign a
contract, despite choosing the aircraft
for purchase in July 2019.
However, the South Korean govern-
ment is not waiting for foreign action.
Defense Minister Jeong Kyeong-doo
has unveiled plans for the country to
spend more on locally produced de-
fense articles, partly as a move to help
curtail the effects of the pandemic. He
also plans to expand an existing strat-
egy aimed at establishing “defense in-
dustry innovation clusters”; this move
adds to the first one established in April
with an initial government investment.
As a result, more funding will be made
DONG-A ILBO/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
available to industry and research in-
stitutes, and will be used to support re-
gional collaboration in defense-related
research and development as well as
manufacturing. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM

Page Topic Hed
HOW EXCLUSIVE IS EUROPE’S
NEXT-GEN FIGHTER CLUB?
BY SEBASTIAN SPRENGER
ssprenger@defensenews.com
COLOGNE, GERMANY — With main-
land Europe and the United Kingdom
pursuing their own sixth-generation
fighter programs, differing views have
started to emerge about how many na-
tions should partake in the action.
At issue is whether the British Tem-
pest and the German-French-Spanish
Future Combat Air System can coexist
in the long run without cannibalizing
the continent’s defense budget.
What’s more, while leaders in the
U.K. have openly advertised their ap-
petite to pick up partner countries for
DEFENSENEWS.COM
Tempest, Paris and Berlin are divided
about admitting additional members,
besides Spain, for fear of slowing down
their effort.
German defense officials early this
year told Bundestag lawmakers they
consider it risky to keep the circle of
participants too small because team
Tempest could snag contributors,
though that concern has yet to bear
out.
To Dirk Hoke, the CEO of Airbus
Defence and Space, the issue comes
down to the budget. His company is
the co-lead for the FCAS program
along with France’s Dassault Aviation.
Notably, the French have the lead for
the Next-Generation Fighter, envi-
sioned as the central aircraft for the
larger program of supporting drones
and command-and-control equipment.
“Europe can’t afford two new sys-
tems,” Hoke said in a virtual panel
discussion organized by a German de-
fense industry lobbying association.
That is especially the case, he ar-
gued, because a competition between
the U.K. and members of the European
FROZEN
CONGRESS SECRETLY BLOCKED
AMERICAN ARMS SALES TO TURKEY
defensenews.com/congress
Union would reinforce the perception
that Britain’s divorce from the bloc has
weakened defense.
Finding a way to merge FCAS and
Tempest should become a top priori-
ty for decision-makers once a Brexit
agreement on future trade and defense
relations is in the bag, according to
Hoke. Until then, he said, “we simply
have to be patient.”
In contrast, Dassault Aviation CEO
Eric Trappier has urged caution when
it comes to broadening the FCAS cir-
cle too soon.
“If we change partners every six
months, I can tell you that we will not
reach 2040,” he added, referring to the
envisioned in-service date for the fu-
turistic weapon.
The next significant milestone for
the program is fielding a demonstrator
aircraft in 2026. DN
08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 15

Top 100
TURKISH INDUSTRY
PROSPERS, BUT FOREIGN
RELATIONS LIMIT POTENTIAL
BY BURAK EGE BEKDIL
bbekdil@defensenews.com
ANKARA, TURKEY — The official
numbers are impressive. In President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s narrative, the
number of Turkish defense industry
programs jumped from 62 in 2002 to 700
today. In the same period, the number
of defense and aerospace companies
skyrocketed from 56 to 1,500. The gov-
ernment was administering $5.5 billion
worth of programs then; now this is at
$75 billion. Local industry turnover rose
from $1 billion to $10.8 billion; and ex-
ports jumped from a mere $248 million
to more than $3 billion.
Two Turkish companies that weren’t
on the Defense News Top 100 list last
year have made their way into the group
this year, pushing the total number of
Turkish firms on the list to seven, from
five the year prior. Those companies are
military electronics specialist Aselsan
(48th on the list), Turkish Aerospace In-
dustries (53th), armored vehicles maker
BMC (89th), missile maker Roketsan
(91st), military technologies specialist
STM (92nd), armored vehicle maker
FNSS (new this year at 98th) and mili-
tary software specialist Havelsan (new
16 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
this year at 99th). Of the seven, five
are government-controlled companies.
BMC, a Turkish-Qatari partnership, and
FNSS are privately owned.
The defense market has been a suc-
cess, by many criteria. According to
the Turkish government, the country’s
dependence on foreign defense systems
plunged from 80 percent to 30 percent.
Erdogan says he aims to end dependen-
cy on foreign systems by 2023, the cen-
tennial of the Turkish republic.
However, while the Turkish defense
industrial base has made progress,
there are lingering roadblocks. For ex-
ample, it can be difficult to determine
the percentage of foreign input in a
system. And what the Turkish author-
ities portray as “indigenous systems”
(or 100 percent national systems, in
local jargon) are often not.
One weakness of the Turkish industry
is the lack of engine technology. For in-
stance, one of Turkey’s most prestigious
“indigenous” programs, the Altay tank,
is struggling to make progress, despite
a serial production contract, due to the
lack of a power pack — the engine and
PROCUREMENT PLANS
SERBIA CONSIDERS BUYING CHINESE
the transmission mechanism.
Similarly, Turkey’s most ambitious
indigenous program — the design, de-
velopment and production of a nation-
al fighter jet, dubbed TF-X — appears
stalled, as Turkish authorities are yet to
find an engine for the planned aircraft.
The TF-X program officially launched in
December 2010. In January 2015 then-
Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu an-
nounced the planned fighter would have
a twin engine and the search began.
The amphibious assault ship
TCG Anadolu, the Turkish Navy’s flag-
ship vessel under construction with
license from Spain’s Navantia, is pro-
gressing as planned, but industry ex-
perts say it is no more than 60 percent
Turkish-made and is a copy of the Span-
ish Navy warship Juan Carlos I.
Turkey’s indigenous T129 attack heli-
copters are a Turkish variant of the A129
built by the Italian-British company
AgustaWestland. The T129 is produced
under license from AgustaWestland. A
$1.5 billion export deal with Pakistan
for a batch of 30 T129s has long been
stalled as it awaits U.S. export licenses,
MISSILES DESPITE US WARNING
defensenews.com/global/europe
which is required because the helo is
powered by an American engine.
For the past decade, Turkey’s local
industry has been unable to produce
a national solution for long-range air
and anti-missile defense systems. Af-
ter years of uncertainty, Turkey signed
a $2.5 billion deal for the acquisition
of the Russian-made S-400 system. In
response, the United States ejected
Turkey from the American-led multina-
tional Joint Strike Fighter program that
builds the F-35 fighter jet.
“That will cost the Turkish industry
critical capabilities it could have earned
during the production cycle,” a Western
industry source in Ankara told Defense
News. “It also means a loss of signifi-
cant income for the Turkish industry.”
Otherwise, local and international
analysts agree that drone, shipbuilding,
military electronics and armored vehi-
cles technologies have been progress-
ing exponentially in Turkey. The coun-
try has found foreign customers for
these systems due to high technologi-
cal standards and competitive pricing.
Turkish exporters have been augment-
ed by a steady decline of the country’s
national currency. The U.S. dollar was
trading at 1.7 Turkish liras five years
ago. Today, the exchange rate is $1 to
7 liras. That plunge gives a boost to
firms with higher local input rates and
export potential. In other words, when
the local currency declined, the com-
modities produced in Turkey generally
became cheaper for foreign customers.
However, those companies depen-
dent on now pricey foreign technology
have seen their international competi-
tiveness badly pruned.
The lira’s slide downward also slows
or altogether suspends government-run
programs. Overseas investors have
withdrawn $7 billion from Turkey’s lo-
cal currency bond market in the first
six months of 2020. At the end of
May 2020, Turkey’s national budget
produced a deficit of 90.1 billion li-
OZAN KOSE/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES
ras (U.S. $12.9 billion), or 65 percent
of the government’s deficit target for
2020. That macroeconomic picture
may further squeeze the government
in financing its weapons programs,
economist warn. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM
The increased speed, maneuverability, and lethality delivered by the Bell V-280 Valor and
%HOO,QYLFWXVJLYHOHDGHUVRSHUDWLRQDOưH[LELOLW\WRRYHUFRPHPXOWLGRPDLQFKDOOHQJHV
(PSRZHULQJWKH86$UP\oV)9/SULRULWLHV%HOOLVUHDG\WROHDGWKHZD\

BELL.CO/FVL
Page
Top Topic Hed
100
CHINA’S INDUSTRY REAPS
THE BENEFITS OF POLITICAL
CONNECTIONS, FOREIGN TRADE
BY MIKE YEO
myeo@defensenews.com
MELBOURNE, Australia — China’s
defense companies continue their
strong showing in the Defense News
Top 100 list, with two of its companies
in this year’s top 10.
Overall, eight Chinese state-owned
defense companies made it into this
year’s Top 100 ranking of defense
companies around the world, includ-
ing China’s two largest shipbuilding
conglomerates — China Shipbuilding
Industry Corporation and China State
Shipbuilding Corporation — which
merged in November 2019 to create
China State Shipbuilding Corporation
Limited, or CSSC.
China’s industrial base has been the
beneficiary of the country’s economic
reform efforts and globalization since
the 1970s. The state of Chinese indus-
try took a quantum leap with the end
of the Cold War; the Asian economic
powerhouse reaped the benefit of an
exposure to advanced technology and
modern manufacturing methods.
These advances have made their way
18 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
to its defense industry, partly as a re-
sult of the transfer of civilian technolo-
gies. As a result, China’s defense indus-
try is practically unrecognizable from
its early days when it mostly made
both licensed and unlicensed copies of
Soviet-era equipment.
Beginning in the early 1990s with the
acquisition and license production of
the Su-27 interceptor, which has since
morphed into the Shenyang J-11B
equipped with indigenous avionics and
weapons, China has subsequently im-
ported the multirole Su-30 and Su-35
interceptors. The former has created
the basis of the Shenyang J-16, and it
is likely both Russian types may form
the technological basis for continued
upgrades to the J-11 design.
The unprecedented modernization of
the People’s Liberation Army over the
past two decades in lockstep with Chi-
na’s economic development has also
meant that the defense industry has
been lavishly funded to equip a captive
home market.
China’s first home-built
aircraft carrier sets out from
a port of Dalian Shipbuilding
Industry Co. for sea trials on
May 13, 2018.
Meia Nouwens, research fellow for
Chinese defense policy and military
modernization at the London-based
International Institute of Strategic
Studies, which helped Defense News
compile the Top 100 data for Chinese
defense companies, noted that Presi-
dent Xi Jinping is prioritizing defense
as part of an effort to simultaneously
pursue geostrategic goals and eco-
nomic development.
She added that China’s defense
industry is capable of producing
high-quality, high-tech defense prod-
ucts, although companies “still seek
to cooperate with international coun-
terparts in academia and industry to
gain access to cutting-edge know-how,
skills and technology.”
This has taken place alongside a
large investment in domestic research
and development, which Nouwens
said has led to breakthroughs, specif-
ically in the development of China’s
air-to-air missiles and quantum tech-
nology.
Export potential
China’s ongoing military moderniza-
tion efforts means the local defense
industry doesn’t need to rely on the ex-
port market to sustain itself. Neverthe-
less, Nouwens said, Chinese defense
conglomerates may be encouraged to
increase exports given that Xi wants
them to become increasingly self-suffi-
cient and globally competitive.
She added that the trend of defense
exports and transfers being a corner-
stone of Chinese diplomacy is likely to
continue. The most obvious manifesta-
tion of this is China’s continued export
of materiel to and support for Pakistan
and its defense ndustrial base. A side
effect of this includes wedging China’s
geostrategic rival India, who is also
frequently at odds with Pakistan.
Nouwens also touched on the two-ti-
er policy when it comes to China’s
defense exports, with its top-of-the-
line equipment unavailable for ex-
port. However, she noted, China has
improved the capabilities of defense
articles available for export, including
submarine technology, more modern
frigates and collaboration with Paki-
stan in developing the JF-17 fighter jet.
The latter has also been exported to
Myanmar and Nigeria.
One of China’s most prominent ex-
ports remains its unmanned aircraft.
Nouwens noted this market provided
a “perfect combination of a capability
that addressed a certain gap at a cost
significantly cheaper than competitors
on the market.”
The window of opportunity has nar-
rowed, however, with the U.S. having
relaxed its own UAV export regula-
tions. Countries such as Jordan, the
United Arab Emirates and Saudi Ara-
bia, which have all acquired Chinese
unmanned aircraft in the past, may
now turn to American designs; Jor-
dan is already selling its Chinese-built
CH-4 drones.
Despite reforms, Nouwens said, Chi-
na’s defense industry is bloated and, in
some cases, requires further stream-
lining, with several of the industry’s
GETTY IMAGES
conglomerates involved in sectors as
varied as hospitals and schools. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM

Page Topic Hed
Market exposure in the Top 100
Defense, commercial aviation and much more
This year’s Defense News Top 100 list
of global defense companies coincides
with a steep economic downturn
created by COVID-19. Although the
defense sector has faced pandemic-re-
lated business disruptions, it remains a
safe haven, with most defense-oriented
firms reporting only modest impact
on revenues and profits. Seeing how
diversified players rely on their defense
units is of particular interest at a time
when the commercial aviation mar-
ket has all but collapsed. While many
defense firms are bracing for stagnation
in defense-spending growth, other
markets could experience an extended
downturn.
Avascent drew on the Top 100 list to
examine the broader mix of market
exposure among firms comprising
the global defense industrial base. We
segmented company revenues across
more than two dozen defense and
commercial end markets. This analy-
sis provides insight into how compa-
nies with defense business leverage
Defense News Top 100 list by
business category (USD millions)
Defense Aerospace Revenue
Other Defense Revenue
Commercial Aviation Revenue
Other Commercial Revenue
DEFENSENEWS.COM
DOUG
BERENSON
is a managing
director at Avascent
exposure to other markets, either as
a complement or as a hedge to their
defense activities.
One can think of defense companies
in three categories:
Defense/government pure-plays:
Companies that focus overwhelming-
ly on military markets generate about
23 percent of the defense-oriented
revenue on this year’s list. To the
extent these companies have revenue
outside defense, it comes from close
adjacencies in intelligence, civil space
or others. Indeed, the top ranks of the
Defense News Top 100 list includes
numerous firms for whom defense
and government comprise 85 percent
or more of total revenue. Lockheed
Martin, Northrop Grumman, BAE
Systems, LIG Nex1, and Huntington
Ingalls Industries and many others
fall in this category. BAE Systems
and L3Harris maintain significant
positions in the commercial aviation
supply chain, but these activities rep-
resent a small portion of their total
revenues.
The unique demands of military and
government markets has led many
leading defense players to maximize
their position across the defense
product range. These frustratingly
unique features of government cus-
tomers have deterred many commer-
cial technology firms from pursuing
this space.
Within government markets, the
different economics that characterize
the sale of products and services has
increasingly led to the separation
between these two distinct segments.
Many of the market leaders in U.S.
government services, including
Leidos, Booz Allen Hamilton, CACI
A STRATEGIC COMPETITION IS ON THE
defensenews.com/smr/frozen-pathways
CHRIS HIGGINS
is a principal at
Avascent.
International and SAIC, feature a
near-exclusive focus on government
customers. A range of firms provid-
ing such services continue to find
business with both the government
and commercial clients, including
Bechtel, Jacobs, Babcock Internation-
al and KBR. But companies with a sig-
nificant focus on mission-oriented re-
quirements have increasingly focused
solely on government customers.
Commercial and defense
sectors: Nearly 60 percent of
the defense revenue tracked in the
Top 100 list comes from firms that
compete in sectors that cross the
defense-commercial divide. These
include shipbuilders and automotive
manufacturers, but the vast majority
of firms serving both defense and
commercial customers are focused
on commercial aerospace.Airframe
primes like Boeing and Airbus are
chief among these. But many oth-
er household names have sought
opportunity in commercial aviation,
either as airframe primes (General
Dynamics via Gulfstream, Textron via
Cessna) or as suppliers of avionics,
structures, and other content.
Because it calculates 2019 revenue,
this year’s Defense News list does
not count Raytheon Technologies,
which was created with the merger
of Raytheon Company and United
Technologies Corp. in April 2020. The
new “RTX” would have pro forma
2019 revenue of about $43.4 billion in
defense and $33.7 billion in commer-
cial markets; this excludes Otis (ele-
vators) and Carrier (air conditioners),
which were spun off concomitant
with the Raytheon-UTC merger.
Many firms with heavy commercial
FROZEN PATHWAYS
HORIZON IN THE ARCTIC
market exposure now face unprece-
dented economic headwinds. Be-
tween March 1 and Aug. 1, 2020, stock
prices for firms spanning defense and
commercial aerospace declined by
33 percent, as global air travel nearly
ground to a halt amid the coronavirus
pandemic. By contrast, an index rep-
resenting defense/government pure-
plays has dropped by just 5 percent
over the same period. Conglomerates
were in the middle, declining about
16 percent.
The silver lining, however, may
be the ability of some companies to
draw on defense-related cash flows
to sustain commercial aerospace
investment.
Industrial conglomerates: Finally,
there are firms with a foot squarely
in defense but which also pursue
markets far afield.
About 18 percent of the defense
revenue tracked in the Top 100 list
is earned by firms with interests that
have almost no technical or customer
link with defense. Large Asian con-
glomerates top this category in total
revenue.But several Western firms
also follow this approach to varying
degrees.
With defense versus commercial
valuations relatively high, there
may be competing instincts in the
boardrooms of these giants. On one
hand, these companies may decide to
reorient their portfolio more toward
defense activities by exiting under-
performing industrial businesses. On
the other hand, firms could elect to
use defense cashflows to support the
broader corporation and position the
company for an economic rebound.
While defense budgets could face
downward pressure in much of the
world, many U.S. contractors have
good predictability through 2021
because of DoD outlays already in
process. It is the wider commercial
economy where the real uncertainty
lies. DN
08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 19
Top 100
to make a decision on adopting it?

8 QUESTIONS WITH THE CEO We’re still waiting for that. They partic-
ipate in the flight testing. As a matter of
fact, we had [then-Chief of Staff of the

OF BOEING’S DEFENSE WING

When Boeing Defense, Space and Security CEO Leanne Caret dials into really going to aid us. I’m not going to
Air Force] Gen. [Dave] Goldfein out in
Seattle. He was with me just a couple
of weeks ago.
We’re getting real pleased with
predict, other than to say we are better the feedback. I think you’ve heard
our hourlong interview on Aug. 4, she comes prepared with 15 minutes
positioned now to handle a resurgence [Air Force acquisition executive]
worth of opening statements that include thoughts ranging from the than we were when the thing first start- Dr. [Will] Roper’s comments about
company’s performance during the coronavirus pandemic to the state of ed. it, and [he’s] really pleased with the
the KC-46 tanker program. path that we’re on. But that’ll be an
Do you expect an impact on for- Air Force decision, and so I will defer
She knows she has a lot to cover, and a lot to answer for.
eign military sales because of the to them on that.
Caret stepped into the top Boeing defense job in 2016. Under her lead- global economic downturn or as
ership, Boeing has logged a number of major wins, but amid the progress, countries trim defense spending? The Air Force will award a Ground
the company has met stumbling blocks. Most prominently, the KC-46 has Absolutely. The industry is already see- Based Strategic Deterrent contract
ing that nations have been affected by in August, and Boeing did not bid
been hampered by a list of technical issues.
spending on COVID similar to the U.S., because of complaints with how
But with COVID-19 devastating the travel industry and eradicating and they’re having to go look at their the competition was run. Is Boeing
near-term sales opportunities for commercial airliners, Boeing’s defense timelines. looking at its legal options? Will it
sector finds itself as the company’s model pupil. We have not seen any cancellations. file a protest?
But we have seen some acquisitions We made the decision to not bid on
This interview was edited for length and clarity.
and some contracts pushed to the GBSD due to what I was concerned
The COVID-19 pandemic is ongo- concerned about delays in getting right. Now, you also know that many about with the process, and I’ll just
ing, and there could be a second parts, components or subsystems of our international deals take — you leave it at that.
wave. In that context, what is the as the fall approaches? know, they’re years in the making
health of Boeing’s defense busi- We’ve already seen delays. Think about anyways. But I think it’s only prag- What do you see as the sales
ness? What are the challenges? what we went through in both Mexico potential for F-15EX?
It’s not unique to Boeing, but our work- and India. We have suppliers in both of We are already getting inquiries. We’re
force — think about this — they have those countries. And again, this is not “One big focus very excited, and they are nations that
masks on, safety glass-
es, bump caps, vests,
unique to Boeing.
One big focus for us has been making
for us has been you would not be surprised about.

gloves, 6-feet proxim-
ity. This environment
that they’re working
in, it’s just hard. We are
still right in the middle
of the pandemic. You’ll
see states that have different proto-
cols. From a Boeing Company position,
our goal is to make certain that our em-
ployees are safest at work.
One of our biggest lessons learned
is the quick benefit you can have from
minimizing contact and quarantining.
So when a case is identified, we do an
entire trace of where the individual has
been so that we can quarantine those
who are potentially at risk, and then
also make certain that they have the
ability to go get the testing.
How are your second-tier
suppliers and below that? Are you
sure we’ve been aggressive in making
certain that they have cash flow, they
have liquidity. We’ve actually hosted
events with the Small Business Admin-
istration for our supply base. On one
level, it’s making certain that we help
them get what they need.
We also adjust how we do business
so it makes it more efficient. A great
example of that is how we’re doing
virtual inspections now.
Is the worst over for Boeing’s de-
fense business?
I mean, let’s be honest: If nothing else,
we know the flu always hits hard in the
fall/early winter time frame. So there’s
a compounding effect there. And so we
are planning for another resurgence,
but we have the benefit of what we’ve
already been through, and a disciplined
approach for how we manage it. That’s
making sure we’ve
been aggressive
in makingg certain
that theyy [[our
suppliers] have
cash flow, they
have liquidity.”
matic for us to look at it through
the lens that they’re going to face
the same pressures the U.S. does in
terms of spending decisions. And so
that’s why we really need to be flexi-
ble and we need to be innovative.
With ongoing flight tests for an
interim version of the KC-46’s
remote vision system, RVS 1.5,
when do you expect the Air Force
Are you satisfied that the Navy is
committed to MQ-25? What future
do you see for that program?
We’re absolutely thrilled with the part-
nership with the U.S. Navy. And you
probably saw that in April they in-
creased the quantity to a total of seven.
So we’re well on track to what we were
working with in our assumptions when
we bid on the program.
We have completed nearly 30 flight
hours to date, and what [Assistant
Secretary of the Navy for Research,
Development and Acquisition James]
Geurts saw while he was out there
[at MidAmerica St. Louis Airport in
St. Clair County, Illinois], was the ae-
rial refueling store already mounted
under the wing of the aircraft. As as
we get back into flight testing later
this year, we’ll be able to collect more
performance data. DN

20 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM


Spain’s Indra joins Eurofighter radar project
BY SEBASTIAN SPRENGER
ssprenger@defensenews.com
COLOGNE, Germany — Spanish de-
fense contractor Indra is joining Ger-
many’s Hensoldt as a co-lead in the
development of a new radar for the
Eurofighter warplane, the company
announced.
The news comes after the Ger-
man parliament in June approved
a contract award to aircraft manu-
facturer Airbus worth almost $3 bil-
lion for a new version of the active
electronically scanned array radar,
dubbed Captor-E. More than half
of that investment will go to sensor
specialist Hensoldt, a former Airbus
subsidiary. The contract is aimed at
retrofitting roughly 130 German and
Spanish aircraft in the mid-2020s, ac-
cording to Hensoldt.
Officials in Europe have billed the
Pandemic presents challenges to Russian industry
The two Russian defense compa-
nies in this year’s Top 100 list — air
defense missile systems manufacturer
Almaz-Antey and weapons developer
Tactical Missiles Corporation JSC —
have again fallen in rank.
Almaz-Antey has fallen to
17th place from 8th and 15th in 2018
and 2019 respectively. Similarly, Tac-
tical Missiles Corporation JSC has
fallen to 35th place from 25th and
32nd in 2018 and 2019 respectively.
The falling revenues of the com-
panies this year reflect the difficult
market conditions these enterprises
are operating in as a result of the
impact of COVID-19 on government
budgets.
Even before the pandemic and the
consequent contraction in econom-
ic output emerged, the outlook for
Russia defense spending was already
subdued in light of persistently low
oil prices in 2019.
The International Monetary Fund
DEFENSENEWS.COM
radar upgrade as a key prerequisite
for keeping the Eurofighter relevant
for future missions and possible
sales — including ongoing acquisi-
tion decisions in Finland and Swit-
zerland.
Indra becoming the co-lead for
the Captor-E’s follow-on generation,
dubbed Eurofighter Common Radar
System Mk1, represents a boost to
the company’s prospects when it
comes to developing a new genera-
tion of air warfare equipment.
“The contract will allow Indra to
create long-term highly-skilled jobs,
in addition to reinforcing its tech-
nological expertise and role as a
key supplier in the field of airborne
sensors, as well as the leader of the
Sensors technological pillar within
the FCAS program,” the company
wrote in a statement, referring to
the German-French-Spanish Future
forecasts a 6.6 percent contraction in
Russia’s real gross domestic prod-
uct this year as lockdown measures
to prevent the spread of COVID-19
subdued domestic and international
economic activity.
Last month, as part of wider mea-
sures to offset the bleaker fiscal set-
ting, the Russian Ministry of Finance
proposed a 5 percent reduction in
financing for the state armament
program over the next three years.
Under the new plans, the 20 trillion
rouble (U.S. $271 billion), 10-year
military appropriations program
(known as GPV 2027) that runs to
2027 covering defense procurement,
repairs, research and development,
and infrastructure investment will be
reduced by a total of 225 billion rou-
bles between 2021 and 2023. Wider
defense funding could be reduced by
as much 323 billion roubles.
The previous state armament
program (GPV 2020) saw signifi-
RAYTHEON AND RAFAEL TO BUILD IRON DOME
defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd
Combat Air System program.
The pairing of Hensoldt and Indra
for the fully digitized Mk1 version of
the radar represents something of
a fork in the road for the aircraft’s
radar developments. To date, the
“Euroradar” consortium — made
up of Leonardo’s British and Italian
arms as well as Hensoldt and Indra
— has overseen technology devel-
opment for the multinational fighter
program through the Captor-E, or
Mk0, version.
Kuwait and Qatar also purchased
Mk0 upgrades for their respec-
tive Eurofighter fleets, though the
Mk1 version is slated to go only into
Spanish and German planes.
The British military has said it
wants its own sensor for the fleet of
Royal Air Force Typhoons, report-
edly with more specialized perfor-
mance in the areas of air-to-ground
FENELLA
MCGERTY
is a senior fellow for
defense economics
at the International
Institute for
Strategic Studies.
cant increases enacted to defense
investment between 2011 and 2016.
Progress was remarkable but by no
means comprehensive. Pockets of
advanced capability evolved along-
side less efficient entities that failed
to deliver against the ambitions of
GPV 2020.
Nonetheless, as Russia approached
the overarching target of 70 percent
“modern” equipment within the
armed forces inventory, defense
spending increases slowed. Official
projections of the national defense
budget saw slightly stronger growth
in 2021 and 2022, although this was
proposed in the months before the
full economic ramifications of the
JOINT VENTURE
IN UNITED STATES
and electronic warfare, as well as
with an eye on connectivity to the
American-made F-35 fighter jet.
Italy has yet to declare which way
it wants to go, meaning Leonar-
do stands to lose a lead role in the
Mk1 development.
The ongoing industrial teaming
arrangements for the Eurofighter
radar, complete with hedging and
betting on political developments,
can be seen as a precursor for a sim-
ilar dynamic in Europe’s race for a
next-generation air weapon. The
United Kingdom is spearheading the
development of the Tempest fight-
er jet as a competition to the main-
land’s FCAS proposal.
For Airbus, a co-lead in the proj-
ect with France’s Dassault, the Eu-
rofighter is something of a test bed
and bridging technology on the way
toward more futuristic weaponry. DN
pandemic were realized. Russian
companies therefore face a tighter
domestic market while the burden
of debt has stifled investment in new
technologies and R&D. This lack of
funds to invest in research has creat-
ed a challenge for firms facing polit-
ical pressure to diversify production
efforts toward the civil market.
The reported moves to restructure
defense industry debt will ease some
stress on firms and provide some
temporary bandwidth with which to
focus on investment. However, such
moves will further constrain domes-
tic defense spending, as funds to
absolve debt will inevitably squeeze
investment elsewhere in the budget.
Perhaps on the positive side, the
further weakening of the rouble
against the dollar in 2020 has the
potential to provide Russian defense
equipment with an added price
advantage in global defense markets
and to facilitate exports. DN
08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 21
Page Topic Hed
Air
LIBYA IS TURNING INTO A
BATTLE LAB FOR AIR WARFARE
BY TOM KINGTON
tkington@defensenews.com
ROME — During Libya’s proxy war this
year, the skies over the North African
country have filled with Turkish and
Chinese drones as well as Russian MiG
29s and Sukhoi 24s, and Emirati Mirage
2000s — reportedly — with Turkish
F-16s and Egyptian Rafales waiting in
the wings.
Russian air defense systems have tak-
en down drones while fighters, civilians
and air bases have been bombed by jets
as C-130s and Turkish A400M aircraft
keep up deliveries of new weaponry and
fighters into the country.
In short, Libya has been transformed
this year into something of an air war-
fare laboratory, begging the question:
What exactly is going on, who is win-
ning and what has this conflict taught
generals about modern air combat?
“On one level, Libya yet again simply
underscores the value of air power —
you do not want to get in a fight without
it,” said Douglas Barrie, senior fellow
for military aerospace at the Interna-
tional Institute for Strategic Studies in
London.
The conflict in lawless Libya began to
escalate in April 2019 as local strong-
man Gen. Khalifa Haftar launched
his campaign to take the capital Trip-
oli. Backed by Egypt, the United
Arab Emirates, Russia and France,
he felt confident going up against the
22 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
Chinese-made Wing Loong II drone in
Libya. Here, the unmanned system is
on display at the 2017 Dubai Airshow.
U.N.-recognized government in Tripoli
backed by Turkey, Italy and Qatar.
In April 2019, Chinese Wing Loong II
drones operated by the UAE bombed
civilian targets in the city, reflecting the
recent and rapid procurement of Chi-
nese drones in the Middle East.
“The Chinese have been adept at sell-
ing drones in the Middle East, includ-
ing to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt
and Iraq. With the U.S. previously con-
strained in selling systems, the Chinese
saw a gap in the market,” Barrie said.
Turkey has proved the exception.
Around May 2019, it introduced its
own TB2 drone into the fray, attacking
Haftar’s forces, knocking out Russian
Pantsir air defense systems supporting
him and helping end his ambitions to
take Tripoli.
“Turkey has majored in UAV de-
sign and manufacture and likely used
Libya in part as a test-and-adjust battle
lab, and its systems are now ‘combat
proven’. Its industry, like Roketsan, has
also developed small, precision-guided
munitions for UAVs,” Barrie said.
A second analyst said Turkey’s use
of its TB2 in Libya had been a game
changer. “Turkey decided it was OK to
lose them from time to time, that they
were semi-disposable, and that novel
approach caught their enemy off guard,”
said Jalel Harchaoui of the Clingendael
The UAE has operated the
Institute in Holland.
The reason? Cost. “They used to cost
the Turks $1-1.5 million apiece to build,
but thanks to economies of scale as
production volumes rose, the cost has
dropped to below $500,000, exclud-
ing the control station,” Harchaoui
explained.
He added that software and other
technical changes boosted the TB2’s
efficiency and reconnaissance capabil-
ities, which allowed them to find the
right altitude to avoid the Russian Pan-
tsir systems.
“The performance of the Wing
Loong IIs in the hands of the UAE has
meanwhile been largely static. They
didn’t evolve, so they have been much
less impressive,” he said.
Barrie said Libya is also an example of
the normalization of drone use in mod-
ern warfare.
“UAVs are a capability now pursued
by state and nonstate actors alike. Ob-
viously states can afford more capable,
larger systems, while nonstate actors
may have to make do with home-built
systems akin to being made with Radio
Shack-like components, or acquiring
systems from state sponsors,” he said.
“In Libya, UAVs have suited this kind of
ugly, attritional warfare against small,
lightly armed units.”
Last July, a missile strike on a mi-
grant center near Tripoli, which killed
53 people, was likely the work of the
UAE, the BBC reported, quoting a con-
fidential U.N. investigation.
Analyst Harchaoui alleged that Emi-
rati Mirage 2000-9 aircraft flying out of
an Egyptian base had been supporting
Haftar periodically since June 2019.
“Misrata airbase, which has hosted
Turkish TB2 drones, was bombed mul-
tiple times last year by Emirati drones
and jets until the Turks brought in Kor-
kut and MIM-23 Hawk air defense sys-
tems. The raids over Misrata stopped in
2020 — probably because the UAE did
not want to see a captured pilot show
up tortured on Facebook,” he said.
On July 4, fighter jets attacked
The U.S. military
published
imagery that
officials said
show Russian
aircraft being
used to support
private military
companies
sponsored by
the Russian
government
to fight in the
KARIM SAHIB/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES; U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Libyan war.
Al-Watiya air base, just after Turkey
had brought in its MIM-23 Hawk air
defense missiles there.
“Sonic booms heard over Sebha, in
southwest Libya, suggest the aircraft
took off from Egypt, then flew to Libya
via the Sahara to avoid being spotted by
Turkish frigates off the Libyan coast,”
Harchaoui said. “Could it have been
DEFENSENEWS.COM
Egyptian Rafales? They are good but
don’t have enough experience for an
ultra-precise mission like this. French
pilots flying Egyptian Rafales is unlike-
ly in case one was captured, leaving the
UAE Mirages as most likely.”
Added Barrie: “Of all the Gulf states,
the UAE is the most capable of this
kind of mission — they have the com-
bat experience and could do this.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. military com-
mand in Africa reported in late May
that satellite imagery showed Russian
aircraft arriving in Libya to support
Haftar.
“At least 14 MiG-29s and several Su-
24s were flown from Russia to Syria,
where their Russian markings were
painted over to camouflage their Rus-
sian origin,” U.S. Africa Command said.
The aircraft are reportedly being
used to support the Wagner Group, a
mercenary operation on the ground in
Libya that is said to have Russia’s back-
ing, though Moscow denies a link to
the organization.
The American command warned the
aircraft might be flown by “inexperi-
enced” mercenaries who “will not ad-
here to international law.”
According to Harchaoui, eye witness-
es in Libya reported a number of miss-
es notched up during bombing raids by
the aircraft. “That suggests they were
not Russian Air Force pilots,” he said.
This summer, the conflict has
slowed, as Haftar’s forces retreated
from Tripoli and took up position to
fight for the coastal city of Sirte, which
is key to controlling Libya’s oil trade.
With Al-Watiya air base now repaired
and back in business after the July air
raid, Turkey may be considering basing
its F-16s there, finally giving it a beach
head for fighters in Libya.
Bringing in American-built aircraft
could, however, rely on the say-so of
the United States.
“Is the U.S. so concerned about Rus-
sia’s intervention in Libya it would sup-
port the deployment of Turkish F-16s
to stop it?” Harchaoui wondered. “Or
will it come down on the side of Egypt,
which is a U.S. ally? The ball is in its
court.” DN

DEFENSENEWS.COM 08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 23


Naval
AVOIDING ANOTHER
LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP
In developing robot warships, US Navy wants to
steer away from previous mistakes
BY DAVID B. LARTER
dlarter@defensenews.com
WASHINGTON — As the U.S. Navy
pushes forward with developing its large
unmanned surface vessel, envisioned as
a kind of external missile magazine that
will tag along with larger manned sur-
face combatants, a growing consensus
is forming that the service needs to get
its requirements and systems right be-
fore making a big investment.
Congress has, for the second year
in a row, slowed the development of
the large unmanned surface vessel,
or LUSV, in the 2020 National Defense
Authorization Act. The language in this
year’s bill would essentially force the
Navy to have a working prototype with
all systems tested and fully integrated
before using procurement dollars for
the boats.
In an exclusive July 16 interview with
Defense News, Chief of Naval Oper-
ations Adm. Michael Gilday said that
while the marks were frustrating, he
agreed with Congress that requirements
must be concrete right up front.
“The approach has to be deliberate,”
Gilday said. “We have to make sure
24 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
that the systems that are on those un-
manned systems with respect to the
[hull, mechanical and electrical sys-
tem], that they are designed to require-
ment, and perform to requirement. And
most importantly, are those require-
ments sound?
“I go back to: Do I really need a litto-
ral combat ship to go 40 knots? That’s
going to drive the entire design of the
ship, not just the engineering plant but
how it’s built. That becomes a critical
factor. If you take your eye off the ball
with respect to requirements, you can
find yourself drifting.”
Gilday has called for the Navy to pur-
sue a comprehensive “Unmanned Cam-
paign Plan” that creates a path forward
for developing and fielding unmanned
systems. Right now, the effort exists in a
number of different programs that may
not all be pulling in the same direction,
he said.
“What I’ve found is that we didn’t nec-
essarily have the rigor that’s required
across a number of programs that would
bring those together in a way that’s driv-
An unmanned surface vessel
autonomously navigates a
predetermined course through
the water during Advanced
Naval Technology Exercise
2019 at Camp Lejeune, N.C.,
on July 12, 2019.
en toward objectives with milestones,”
Gilday told Defense News.
‘A lot of risk’
According to the Congressional Re-
search Service, the Navy’s approach is
to adapt a commercial design and put
a bare-bones crew onboard while the
service figures out how to move toward
a fully unmanned system.
“The Navy wants LUSVs to be low-
cost, high-endurance, reconfigurable
ships based on commercial ship de-
signs, with ample capacity for carrying
various modular payloads — particu-
larly anti-surface warfare (ASuW) and
strike payloads, meaning principally
anti-ship and land-attack missiles,” the
report read.
But some very basic questions still
need to be answered about how a large
unmanned, or lightly manned, surface
vessel might work, said Matthew Col-
lette, an associate professor of naval
architecture and marine engineering at
the University of Michigan.
“One of the biggest challenges peo-
FLEET GROWTH
US NAVY COMMISSIONS ANOTHER
LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP
defensenews.com/naval
ple are realizing now is the machin-
ery systems and keeping the systems
operational for six months [over a
deployment],” Collette said. “If you
think about a ship today, there are daily
machinery rounds and constant pre-
ventative maintenance. The Navy has
its casualty reporting system, and the
commercial world has something very
similar. And over six months, that’s a lot
of work that’s not getting done on the
autonomous ship.
“And there are two approaches to
this that I’ve seen: One is you design it
essentially like a space craft where you
really limit what you do with the ship to
make it as robust as possible and really
accept that today that means less capa-
bility. We’re just not going to be able to
throw all the bells and whistles on that
kind of a ship today. And for the smaller
size ships, that’s a good approach.
“But the other approach is to try and
monitor it and put in a lot of redundan-
cy and figure out how we get this sys-
tem reimagined so it can do a six-month
deployment. And I can’t really assess
where we are with that at this point, I
just don’t have enough insight to know
if that’s six months away. Is it six years?
Is it never reachable?”
It’s unclear that adapting an existing
design will get the Navy where it needs
to be, in large part because the Navy
is going somewhere radically different
from what the commercial offshore oil
and gas or ferry industry is going, Col-
lette said.
“It’s important to note that where
the commercial industry is going is dif-
ferent from where the Navy wants to
go,” Collette said. “In the commercial
marine industry, you have a licensed
captain ashore who is able to teleport
to the ship whenever it needs human
intervention. And we’re really talking
about short runs.
LANCE CPL. NICHOLAS GUEVARA/U.S. MARINE CORPS
“The Navy has really asked for a
much harder, much more difficult prob-
lem. And you could see how something
like the [extra-large unmanned under-
water vehicle] as a technology trail
that works toward this direction, but
jumping toward something like large
unmanned surface vessel, is a big, big
step with a lot of risk.” DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM

NATO’s Deterrent Force: Turkey
PROTECTION, OPERATIONS AND FIREPOWER WILL DETERMINE
THE TURNING POINTS IN THE FUTURE OF LAND WARFARE.
Sami ATALAN
s.atalan@mildata.com.tr
As in the past, future war tactics will be based on
three principles: innovative operations, rapid force
concentration and force protection. Founded on this
trio, the Turkish defense industry provides trusted
design and production infrastructure with maintenance
and logistics capabilities in NATO standards.
As a key country in the defense of Eurasia and the
Middle East, Turkey, a member state of NATO since
1952, is aware of its responsibilities. Furthermore, Turkey
is the only NATO country, which has been fighting
against asymmetric warfare of various terrorist groups
for many years in its own territory. This experience
acquired from the field Is directly transferred to the
industry, thus enabling quick enhancement of the
product portfolio. Turkish defense procurement
authority, Presidency of Defence Industries acts
as a bridge between the industry and the user. Its
expertise in coordination and project management
facilitates the experience and knowledge transfer and
it provides necessary tools for exchange between the
user and the industry. The Defence and Aerospace
Industry Exporters’ Association - SSI Is an authorized
and important actor in the promoting of the defense
industry throughout the international arena, accessing
new markets, and developing existing markets.
Competition and New Technologies
In recent years, Turkey has become one of the top
five countries in land systems procurement. The main
vision of the Turkish land system focused companies
is the continuous adaptation to meet the requirements
and realities of ever-changing land warfare. The
main strengths of the land system Industrials Include
precision fire capability, self-defense capacity, stealth
ability, C4ISR and network-centric warfare, and big
data based new software technologies that form the
circles of protection. Based on the user’s requirements
and needs, the circles of protection can be modified
and improved according to the combat environment.
Turkish defense industry gets an edge over its
international competitors in the innovative digital
production technologies due to its head-start. Adoption
of new production technologies enables the Industry to
have constructive and creative competition capability
in product development. The creative and innovative
alternatives increase the product variety as well as
become the fuel for fast growth. For example, Turkish
companies developed and put on the market more
than 15 different types of remotely controlled weapon
stations, the use of which has been increasing In
recent years. Another advantage of having innovative
alternatives is the ability to have a fruitful cooperations
with partners and success In International markets.
Today, the Turkish defense industry, with its developed
infrastructure to meet the all the requirements of the
land warfare, is able to produce weapon systems,
such as MBTs, medium tanks, IFVs, APCs, armoured
reconnaissance vehicles, armoured engineer vehicles,
armoured tactical vehicles, MRAPs, self-propelled
artillery systems and remote-controlled weapons
stations, with a high degree of fidelity. Even at the Initial
design stage, the mid-life maintenance is planned to
keep the platforms operational for a minimum of 40 to
50 years. Indigenously designed and produced passive,
active and semi-active protection and electronic warfare
PAID ADVERTISEMENT
systems support these land systems to increase their
survivability. In the modern networked environment,
combat, improved communication and intelligence
capabilities shape the future of land warfare. Aware of
this fact, the Turkish defense industry is the architect
of encrypted communication, electro-optics and other
electronic systems that are integrated into the platforms.
Infantry Weapons and Ammunitions
The traditional weapons and ammunition production
capabilities, with the addition of new technologies,
enable the Turkish defense industry to acquire
modern electromagnetic railguns and laser weapon
production capability. Furthermore, the industry has
years of experience in producing artillery systems such
as howitzers, mortars and multiple rocket launcher
systems. It's with this experience that the Industry
has earned an important place in simultaneous
modernization/integration chains in the world. The
industry’s guided and unguided ammunition production
and export capability has an internationally recognized
reputation. Production of a wide range of missiles,
from anti-tank to guided rockets, is being improved
continuously. Today, Infantry weapons, service pistols
and hunting rifles as well as the “Made In Turkey” barrels
that are being used in all corners of the world, are
another showcase of Turkey’s production prowess.
The defense industry, by its nature, should be
able to adapt to each country’s specific needs.
The process that started with the retention of
field-tested and combat-proven technologies
and adaptation to new technologies will continue
with Innovation to shape the future.
Turkish
(U7^\ Defence &
Aerospace
PAID ADVERTISEMENT
Page Topic Hed
Land
US ARMY CONTINUES RESEARCH
BUT SLOWS NEXT INTERCEPTOR
The service will look for a capable replacement
BY JEN JUDSON
jjudson@defensenews.com
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is
slowing its pursuit of a future ballis-
tic missile interceptor to replace the
Patriot family of missiles, but it is con-
tinuing to conduct research on a less
expensive, more capable replacement
in preparation to field a new missile
down the road.
There’s no question a new interceptor
— one that will have to keep up with
higher performing radars and launch-
ers — will be needed, Army officials
told Defense News earlier this month.
But the timing on when the Army plans
to pursue a new missile has slipped by
a year, according to a review of the ser-
vice’s fiscal 2020 and fiscal 2021 budget
request justification documents.
The Army laid out a plan in its FY20
budget request to spend $232.9 million
for the program over five years.
The service planned to kick off the
program in FY20, using $8 million to
start a competitive selection of a future
26 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
interceptor for its Integrated Air and
Missile Defense System, the replace-
ment for the Patriot air and missile de-
fense system.
The service would conduct an analy-
sis of alternatives in FY20 and use oth-
er transaction authorities — a special
contracting mechanism — to work on
competitive concept developments.
The Army was due to make a mate-
riel development decision in the sec-
ond quarter of FY20, and would then
take a year to conduct an analysis of
alternatives. Then, the service would
work on concepts over a two-and-a-
half-year period, ending in the begin-
ning of FY23. A competitive request for
proposals would drop midway through
FY22 with a competitive downselect in
the second quarter of FY23, when the
Army would also reach a technology
maturation decision point.
But at the time of the plan, the ser-
vice hadn’t chosen a future radar for its
In a U.S. Army-led test, the
Patriot Advanced Capability-3
Missile Segment Enhancement
missile broke its own distant
record to take out an
air-breathing target.
IAMD System, and it has yet to field its
Integrated Battle Command System,
which is the brains of IAMD. IBCS
has been delayed over the years, but
is progressing through a limited-user
test. The service expects it to reach
initial operational capability in FY22.
The Army has since picked Ray-
theon to build prototypes for a new
Lower-Tier Air-and-Missile Defense
Sensor to replace the Patriot radar,
which the company also produces.
Now, according to Army FY21 bud-
get documents, the service has pushed
its plans by a year and has budget-
ed less than $40 million from FY21
through FY25 for the effort. The docu-
ments show the Army spent $2 million
in FY20 on the program and will spend
roughly $8 million annually across the
five-year plan.
If the service follows its FY21
through FY25 plan as laid out in bud-
get documents, it will make a materiel
development decision in the second
quarter of FY21 and kick off an anal-
ysis of alternatives, one that will be
complete in early 2022.
A request for proposals would be re-
leased in the first quarter of FY23 fol-
lowed by a competitive downselect to
a single vendor in the third quarter of
FY24 and entry into a technology mat-
uration phase.
Yet, Army officials didn’t clearly lay
out a timeline to move forward on the
program when asked.
“We just made the full-rate produc-
tion decision just in the last year or
two” on Patriot Advanced Capability-3
Missile Segment Enhancement mis-
siles, or PAC-3 MSE — the latest vari-
ant of the interceptor — said Brig.
Gen. Brian Gibson, who is in charge
of Army’s air and missile defense mod-
ernization effort. Gibson spoke to De-
fense News in its Space and Missile
Defense Symposium Debrief on Aug. 5.
“Even though it feels like they’ve
been out there a long time, in some
cases, the oldest ones have,” Gibson
said, “we’ve just, as a department,
made full-rate decisions in our recent
past.”
Gibson stressed that cost is going
to play an important part in how the
service chooses its next interceptor.
Current missiles are roughly $3 million
each and have been used to take out
exponentially less expensive targets,
like commercially purchased drones
worth $100.
At the same time, Gibson said, “our
missiles in the future have to evolve
to greater altitudes, greater speed,
greater maneuverability, and the com-
bination of those three things depend
a whole lot on what sensors see and
when they see it, but it also depends
on the physical kinematics and design
of our missiles. They need to operate
in concert.”
Maj. Gen. Robert Rasch, the Army’s
program executive officer for missiles
and space, argued that evolving threats
may determine when and how a new
LOCKHEED MARTIN
interceptor is pursued. For now, the
Army is in the research phase of “the
art of the possible,” Gibson said. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM
 BEYOND MACH 5
HOW DoD PLANS TO MEET ITS AMBITIOUS
HYPERSONIC MISSILE TEST SCHEDULE
defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd

US ARMY GIVES
NEW LIFE TO OLD
ROCKET MOTORS
BYJENJUDSON
jjudson@defensenews.com

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is

recycling demilitarized rocket motors
and repurposing the materials to make
test missiles, and it’s saving the service
money, according to Thomas Webber,
director of the Army’s Technical Center
within Space and Missile Defense Com­
mand.
These test missiles are called “zom­
bies” and save the Army from having
to destroy old boosters, instead giving
them a new life, Webber said during the
Defense News Space and Missile De­
fense Symposium Debrief event Aug. 5.
The effort started years ago when the
Army’s Program Executive Office Mis­
siles and Space as well as the Patriot air
and missile defense lower-tier product
office began running out of targets for
tests and spending “a lot” of money to
buy more targets, Webber said.
The tech center proposed a “signifi­
cantly cheaper” solution of using recy­
cled motors reaching the end of oper­
ational life that would be appropriate
for both developmental and operational
missile tests, which are accurately rep­
resentative of ballistic missile threats,
he said.
Following a demonstration at the end
of 2016, the zombies have taken off and
provided targets not only for Patriot
testing, but also the Missile Defense
Agency and Foreign Military Sales test
events.
The Army has built seven targets to
date. There are three variants: Pathfind­
er Zombie; the Black Dagger Zombie
that adds an additional booster — the Focusing on human capital is critical to my mission success.

Terrier MK70 — for longer ranges; and
Sabre, a shorter-range version.
A Zombie was used in a recent test
showing the Patriot system could be
interoperable with the Army’s Termi­
nal High Altitude Area Defense system,
Webber said. Another target was suc­
cessfully deployed June 25. dn
"I want to stress my deep respect for your expertise and insights
g OPM H R SOLUTIONS
in analyzing our human capital needs. For now, please accept We make people and organizations better
the big Navy salute you earned in making a difference for us."
- Program Manager, U.S. Navy
OPM's HR Solutions is committed to helping you raise the bar by providing
exceptional services and technology systems to meet the dynamic
Get your start at opm.gov/raisethebar-today
human capital and training needs of the Federal Government.

DEFENSENEWS.COM 08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS


SHARING THE COST
A trio of prototyping contracts brings new approach
for collecting military weather data
BY NATHAN STROUT
nstrout@c4isrnet.com
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Space
Force hopes its prototype low-Earth
orbit weather satellites will entice com-
mercial businesses and allied nations
to partner up on projects, reducing the
cost of delivering critical weather data
to the war fighter.
The U.S. Air Force has been trying
to replace the aging Defense Meteo-
rological Satellite Program, or DMSP,
for years, ever since Congress opted
to can the last satellite in 2015. Two
capabilities in particular have prov-
en a challenge for replacement: cloud
characterization and theater weather
imagery.
But now the Space Force thinks it
has an answer. By leveraging the in-
creasingly popular low-Earth orbit ar-
chitecture demonstrated by SpaceX’s
Starlink constellation and other ex-
periments, the military believes it can
lower the cost of individual satellites,
increase the resiliency of the systems
and attract new partnerships.
In a recent interview with Space-
28 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
News, Space and Missile Systems Cen-
ter Portfolio Architect Col. Russell Tee-
han explained the thinking behind the
new approach. The Air Force previous-
ly struggled to attract partners due to
the sheer cost of the systems, he said.
After all, when a single satellite costs
more than $700 million, it’s difficult to
find an organization to share the cost.
That price point forced the Air Force
to build exquisite systems, comprised
of just a handful of satellites operating
in higher orbits. As the Pentagon has
come to understand, in wartime this
leaves the military’s space-based capa-
bilities dependent on just a few satel-
lites that are difficult to defend.
A proliferated low-Earth orbit, or
P-LEO, constellation may solve both of
those problems. Smaller LEO satellites
can deliver the same capabilities at a
fraction of the cost per satellite, while
the sheer number of targets in the con-
stellation means that the loss of a sin-
gle satellite isn’t crippling. The Space
Force is targeting satellites in the
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket
lifts Jan. 29, 2020, at
Cape Canaveral Air Force
Station, Fla. By leveraging
these low-Earth orbit
architectures, the U.S.
military believes it
can lower the cost of
individual satellites.
$30-50 million range, Treehan said.
The Space Force issued a trio of pro-
totype contracts this summer for new
space-based sensors that can collect
cloud characterization and theater
weather imagery from low Earth or-
bit. Raytheon Technologies, General
Atomics and Astra are leading sepa-
rate prototyping efforts after receiving
contracts from the Space Enterprise
Consortium.
The Space Force is asking for
$131 million to continue these efforts
in fiscal 2021.
The decision to settle on LEO for
this critical weather data follows
years of disarray as the Pentagon has
worked to find a replacement for the
DMSP. For decades, the military has
relied almost entirely on that program
for weather data. The first satellite
was launched in the 1960s, with the
constellation being replenished with
updated generations of weather sat-
ellites over the years. Today, there are
just four DMSP satellites in operation.
‘SPACEPOWER’
US SPACE FORCE RELEASES
CAPSTONE DOCTRINE
c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space
But no satellite is built to last forev-
er, and there are no new DMSP satel-
lites coming. As those satellites reach
the end of their service life, they leave
the two vital gaps of cloud character-
ization and theater weather imagery.
Predicting this problem, Congress in
2015 directed the Air Force to launch
a new weather satellite program to
replace DMSP. The Air Force began
working on a new constellation to
launch in 2024, but there was a prob-
lem: a four-year gap between the pro-
jected end of DMSP’s service life in
2020 and the launch of the new satel-
lites.
To fill that gap, the Air Force collab-
orated with NASA on ORS-8, a satellite
to be launched just before DMSP ex-
pired. While a contract was awarded
to Sierra Nevada Corp. to build that
gap-filling satellite, it was protested,
rescinded and ultimately canceled by
the Air Force after the service deter-
mined DMSP’s end-of-life date would
extend beyond 2024.
In 2019, the Air Force proposed
a new solution: a free-flying space
vehicle that would operate in low
Earth orbit. The Pentagon asked for
$101 million to begin the effort in
FY20, with plans to launch it in 2024.
But that plan didn’t last the year.
In September, the Air Force told Con-
gress it wanted to scrap the free-flying
space vehicle in favor of a new ap-
proach. Based on a review completed
in April 2019, the Air Force found it
best to switch to an LEO architecture
for scalability and increased resilience.
Though skeptical, Congress ultimately
swapped the funding for the free-flyer
space vehicle to the new program.
“Across the board in our weather
strategies ... we’re looking at multi-
layers of an architecture, how to most
cost-effectively move forward in capa-
bility. They can be incrementally deliv- AIRMAN 1ST CLASS ZOE THACKER/U.S. AIR FORCE
ered over time. So that becomes a mix
of large satellites that do missions and
smaller satellites that we can launch
in order to grow capability over time,”
Col. Dennis Bythewood, who leads
space development at the Air Force’s
Space and Missile Systems Center,
said in September 2019. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM
 SUBSCRIBE NOW
PRINT + DIGITAL ACCESS

Defense News is the authoritative and

independent news source for top
decision-makers. In print and online, we
provide the global defense community with
the latest news and analysis on programs,
policy, business and technology.

UK DEFENSE
STRATEGY
Special Report
—page 10
DEFENSENEWS.COM

JUNE 25, 2018 / VOL. 33 NO. 12

NAVY PUSHBACK
ON BALLISTIC
MISSILE
DEFENSE
BY DAVID B. LARTER
dlarter@defensenews.com

WASHINGTON — North Korea was

Equipment gets loaded onto a
C-17 heading to Leeuwarden Air
Base, Netherlands.
preparing to launch seven ballistic mis-
siles. The Japanese government was fu- UNDERGROUND
IRON DOME
rious and intelligence was warning that
the rogue Kim regime was preparing a
nuclear test. War, it seemed, was a dis-
tinct possibility.
TUNNEL-DETECTION
SYSTEM GOES BEYOND

US AIR FORCE
And war it might have been if the
U.S. hadn’t already been bogged down MILITARY APPLICATIONS
with 140,000 troops deployed to Iraq in see page 9
a war that was spinning out of control

BUILDS IN RUSSIA’S
in the wake of the bombing of a holy
Shia mosque in Samarra at the hands PORTUGUESE
of Sunni militants. With the Bush ad-
DEFENSE CHIEF

BACKYARD
ministration staring a massive policy
disaster in the face, the country wasn’t
going to stomach a major conflict with
TARGETS SPENDING
North Korea.
So instead, the Bush administration 'FRANKENTANK'
BY JOE GOULD
turned to the Navy. During the July
2006 crisis, a budding capability in the PITCHED AS BEST OF
jgould@defensenews.com fleet’s surface force was brought to
bear in a real-world threat environment
BOTH WORLDS
VALERIE INSINNA for everyone to see. Ballistic Missile
vinsinna@defensenews.com Defense was still in its infancy — the
destroyer Curtis Wilbur had performed
WASHINGTON — As the U.S. Defense Department expands its presence in Eu- the world’s first BMD patrol in 2004 —
rope, the Air Force has quietly ramped up investments that would enable it to de- but with North Korea’s tests looming,
ploy to allied bases in Eastern Europe and operate close to Russia’s western flank. newly upgraded destroyers were dis-
The Trump administration is seeking to spend $828 million in 2019 to build up patched to patrol the waters of the Sea
military infrastructure in Europe as part of an ongoing initiative to deter Russian of Japan, waiting for dictator Kim Jong-
aggression and reinforce allies. Almost half of that construction funding would go Il to make his move.
toward Air Force projects. It seemed, at the time, like a major vic-
The request would more than double military construction funding under the Eu- tory for the surface fleet. In the Nation’s
ropean Deterrence Initiative, or EDI, from the 2018 request — when not so long time of need, with ground forces bogged
ago, the U.S. military was shrinking its Cold War-era footprint in Europe. down in Iraq and Afghanistan, AEGIS

See RUSSIA Page 24 See BALLISTIC Page 25

Converged Digital Processing

enables platforms to shrink and become more
adaptable for mission autonomy.
Visit mrcy.com/convergence to download our
“The Military Digital Convergence” whitepaper
Copyright © 2018 Mercury Systems is a trademarks of Mercury Systems, Inc. - 3428

SUBSCRIBE.DEFENSENEWS.COM

RESEARCH PROJECT MAKES
INROADS ON SCALING
QUANTUM PROCESSORS
BY ANDREW EVERSDEN
aeversden@c4isrnet.com
WASHINGTON — A research project
funded by the U.S. Army has devel-
oped a new approach to manufacturing
quantum computer chips, representing
a significant step forward toward mak-
ing quantum processors at the scale
needed to deliver rapid processing ca-
pabilities to the battlefield.
The new approach could improve
how the service builds quantum net-
works and distributed sensing capabil-
ities.
Quantum processors use a qubit to
store information. The researchers
were looking to increase the amount of
qubits placed onto a photonic chip. Pri-
or to the experiment, researchers were
only able to get two or three qubits into
one photonic chip, said Sarah Gamble,
a program manager in quantum infor-
mation science at the Army Research
Office, an element of the Army Re-
search Laboratory at Combat Capabil-
ities Development Command.
30 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
“Currently we can exert control and
successfully manipulate handfuls of
qubits, like very countable numbers
of them. But when it comes to the mil-
lions or billions of qubits that we need
for applications of actual interest, how
to get to those millions or billions of
qubits is a major research challenge,”
Gamble said in an interview with
C4ISRNET.
In this study, researchers succeeded
in integrating 128 qubits onto a photon-
ic chip by making small quantum “chip-
lets” and placing them onto a larger
circuit. The chiplets were able to carry
quantum information through artificial
atoms created by scientists by exploit-
ing defects in diamonds.
The increase to 128 is a large jump,
but well short of the thousands, mil-
lions or billions of qubits needed to
successfully complete the applications
the service sees as useful in the future.
For example, qubits could be used for
INFORMATION WARFARE ACTIVITIES
c4isrnet.com/smr/information-warfare
distributed sensing through networks
of quantum systems on the battlefield
to allow for greater situational aware-
ness, though Gamble noted that quan-
tum information science research is
still in the early stage.
“We know that a lot of these qubit
types are also excellent sensors. So for
things like electric and magnetic fields,
these quantum sensors can sense those
fields ... with a higher sensitivity than
you can get out of classical sensor,”
Gamble said. “And then if you network
those quantum sensor systems togeth-
er, that increase you can get in your sig-
nal goes up even more.
“So we need those isolated qubit sen-
sors. But then we also need a way for
those qubit sensors to talk to each oth-
er over a quantum network.”
Being able to process data at quantum
speeds would benefit the military as it
seeks to make decisions based on large
sets of data coming in from the battle-
DIVIDE ET IMPERA
READ A POLISH VIEW ON RUSSIA’S
field in near-real time, and as it moves
toward multidomain operations.
“It’s a fundamentally different way
to gather, process and share informa-
tion,” Gamble said.
The research was completed by sci-
entists at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology and Sandia National
Laboratories.
The new technology still needs to un-
dergo tests to ensure the qubits in the
chip can be controlled in a way that
would help the Army. Gamble said the
research team is also considering how
to automate parts of the production
process.
“Thinking about how we can auto-
mate these processes to make them
even more repeatable is going to be ex-
SOLARSEVEN/GETTY IMAGES
citing,” Gamble said, “and something
that’s going to be necessary if you
really want to do this for, you know,
millions to billions of cubits instead
of 128.” DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM
IT’S TIME TO
CUT OUT THE
INTERFERENCE
iDirect Government
introduces CSIR™
(Communications
Signal Interference
Removal) NOW embedded
in our 9-Series Satellite
Modems, protecting your
critical communications from
jamming with INTERFERENCE
MITIGATION.

www.idirectgov.com

PENTAGON UPDATES HANDBOOK
FOR ELECTRONIC WARFARE
BY MARK POMERLEAU
mpomerleau@c4isrnet.com
WASHINGTON — The U.S. military
has updated its handbook on electron-
ic warfare, changing it to a more all-
encompassing, cross-branch approach
for planning, executing and assessing
operations on the electromagnetic
spectrum.
The document, which is dated
May 2020 but was not made public
until late July, eliminates and replac-
es the previous joint publication for
electronic warfare and provides prin-
ciples and guidance related to joint
electromagnetic spectrum operations,
or JEMSO.
The Department of Defense has un-
dergone a renaissance of sorts in elec-
tronic warfare over the past several
years. By and large, the department
divested much of its electronic warfare
capabilities after the Cold War.
During counterinsurgency efforts
in the last 20 years, the military used
blunt jamming tools to thwart impro-
vised explosive devices, which, in turn,
inadvertently jammed friendly sys-
tems.
In that time, some U.S. adversaries
invested in advanced jamming capabil-
32 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
ities and geolocation systems that can
target forces based upon their electro-
magnetic spectrum emissions, which
makes large command posts in the
counterinsurgency world vulnerable.
Congress in recent years has also
sought to right the DoD’s ship in
electronic warfare. Last year, among
other related moves, lawmakers cre-
ated the Electromagnetic Spectrum
Cross-Functional Team to help devise
a new superiority strategy in this area,
which is due to be released later this
summer.
This year’s defense policy bill, which
still must be reconciled between the
two legislative chambers, seeks several
other changes such as transferring the
responsibilities of the electromagnetic
spectrum from the commander of Stra-
tegic Command to the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, and requiring the vice chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to become
the senior designated official for elec-
tronic warfare.
The change to the handbook is a sign
officials are coming to grips with how
critical the electromagnetic spectrum
is.
“Just as in the physical domains and
in cyberspace, military forces maneu-
ver and conduct operations within the
EMS to achieve tactical, operational,
and strategic advantage. Freedom of
maneuver and action within the EMS
Meanwhile, at the Air Force ...
The Air Force has concluded a two-day,
$1.4 million exercise that evaluated the
F-35 fighter jet’s ability to provide its elec-
tronic warfare capabilities to other stealthy
reconnaissance and bombing platforms.
The event, which took place Aug. 4-6 at
Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, tested the
ability for the F-35 to provide Suppression
of Enemy Air Defense, or SEAD, support
for other stealthy platforms such as the
B-2 and the RQ-170 reconnaissance drone,
according to an Aug. 6 news release from
the Air Force.
Chief of
53rd Wing
Weapons,
Maj. Theodore
Ellis, said the
HEAD GEAR
PILOTS TRY OUT NEW HELMET
DISPLAY IN F-16V FLIGHT TESTS
c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech
Rein Haas, 16th Electronic
Warfare Squadron test engineer,
directs a horn antenna during a
July 2017 exercise. The antenna
transmits radio frequencies that
are received and analyzed by the
electronic warfare officer inside
an aircraft.
are essential to US and multinational
operations,” the new document stated.
JEMSO is thought to be a more
overarching approach to the electro-
magnetic spectrum as opposed to just
electronic warfare. The new joint pub-
lication describes JEMSO on a contin-
uum from “peacetime” to armed con-
flict.
One of the critical differences the
document seeks to inject into the way
the DoD conducts these operations
is increased coordinated among the
armed services.
“Instead of these mission areas being
planned and executed in a minimally
coordinated and stovepiped fashion,
JEMSO guidance and processes pri-
oritize, integrate, synchronize, and
deconflict all joint force operations in
the EMOE, enhancing unity of effort.
The result is a fully integrated scheme
of maneuver in the EMOE to achieve
EMS superiority and joint force com-
mander (JFC) objectives,” it stated. DN
exercise focused on demonstrating stealth
platform effectiveness against advanced
threats using emerging technology and
capitalizing on joint capabilities.
Other platforms that participated
included the F-22, the F-15 and the Navy’s
SENIOR AIRMAN J.T. ARMSTRONG/U.S. AIR FORCE; MASTER SGT. BEN
E/A-18G aircraft.
U.S. adversaries over the past several
years have developed advanced radars to
detect incoming aircraft, pairing them with
long-range missiles that in many cases
outgun U.S. military weapons.
The event allowed the Air Force to
explore the integration
of tactics, techniques
MOTA/U.S. AIR FORCE
and procedures that
have never been tested
together.
DEFENSENEWS.COM
 UNPARALLELED PERFORMANCE.
MILITARY ENGINES

UNMATCHED SUSTAINMENT.
By setting new standards in power, reliability, and fuel efficiency, the revolutionary PW800 will
change the game for long range strike. And its robust commercial sustainment infrastructure
will allow the Air Force to keep the B-52 dependable through 2050 and beyond.

LEARN MORE AT PRATTWHITNEY.COM/B52

Page Topic Hed
through the window on my right, the
dome of the Capitol building glistened
in white light beyond the blurred,
dark space of the Potomac River.
Playing at background volume over
the front speakers, a National Public
Radio newscaster was describing a
3-mile-wide asteroid named Florence.
Streaking past our planet that morn-
ing, the massive rock would be little
more than 4 million miles away at its
closest point — tremendously far by
human standards, but breathtakingly

‘T-MINUS AI’: A LOOK AT THE

near by the infinite scales of space. It
was the largest object NASA had ever
tracked to pass so closely by our plan-
et. On only a slightly different trajecto-

INTERSECTION OF GEOPOLITICS
ry, it would have altered Earth’s entire
landscape. And, like for the dinosaurs
before us, it would have changed ev-

AND AUTONOMY
erything. It would have changed life.
“A perfect metaphor,” I thought, “im-
peccably timed to coincide with Pu-
tin’s comments about AI.”
I looked back at his words. The mes-
China has a national plan for it. Russia says it will determine the “ruler was becoming critical that Americans sage they carried rang like an alarm I
of the world.” The United States is investing heavily to develop it. do so, if not entirely in harmony, then didn’t need to hear, but the motivation
at least to the sounds of the same beat. behind them wasn’t so clear. Former
The race is on to create, control and weaponize artificial intelligence. My apartment was only a short ride KGB officers speak carefully and only
In Michael Kanaan’s book “T-Minus AI: Humanity’s Countdown to away. I was looking forward to a hot for calculated reasons. Putin is no
Artificial Intelligence and the New Pursuit of Global Power,” set for re- shower and strong coffee. But as the exception. His words matter, always.
lease Aug. 25, the realities of AI from a human-oriented perspective are SUV pulled out of the terminal and And so does his purpose. But what
into the morning darkness, a message was it here? Just to offer a commen-
laid out for the reader. Such technology, often shrouded in mystery and alert pinged from my phone. It was a tary or forecast? No. Not his style. A
misunderstood, is made easy to comprehend through a discussion on the text from the general. Short and to the call to action, then, to energize his
global implications of developing AI. Kanaan is one of the Air Force’s AI point, as usual. “See Putin comments own population? Perhaps. But, more
leaders. re AI.” than that, this was a statement to oth-
A quick web search pulled up a er statesmen, a confirmation that he
The following excerpt, edited for length and clarity, introduces how, in quote already posting to news feeds and his government were awake and
late 2017, the conversation about artificial intelligence changed forever. everywhere. At a televised symposium aware that a sophisticatedly deep ef-
broadcast throughout Russia only an fort was underway to accomplish a
It was a Friday morning, Sept. 1, 2017, cial intelligence and machine learning, hour earlier, President Vladimir Pu- new world order.
and not yet dawn when I stepped out I’d been reporting directly to Jamieson tin had crafted a sound bite making Only a month earlier, China had
of Reagan National Airport and fol- for over two years. The briefing that headlines around the globe. His unam- released a massive three-part strat-
lowed my bag into the back of a wait- morning was to discuss the commit- biguous three sentences translated to: egy aimed at achieving very clear
ing SUV. After flying east all night from ments we’d just received from two “Artificial intelligence is the future, not benchmarks of advances in AI. First,
San Francisco to D.C., I still had two of Silicon Valley’s most prominent only for Russia, but for all humankind. by 2020, China planned to match the
hours before a Pentagon briefing with AI companies. After months of collec- It comes with colossal opportunities, highest levels of AI technology and
Lt. Gen. VeraLinn “Dash” Jamieson. tive effort, the new agreements were but also threats that are difficult to application capabilities in the U.S. or
She was the deputy chief of staff for significant steps forward. They were predict. Whoever becomes the leader anywhere else in the world. Second,
U.S. Air Force intelligence and the also crucial proof that the long history in this sphere will become the ruler of by 2025, they intend to capture a ver-
country’s most senior Air Force in- of cooperation between the American the world.” ifiable lead over all countries in the
DKOSIG/GETTY IMAGES

telligence officer, a three-star officer public and private sectors could rea- As the driver accelerated up the In- development and production of core
responsible for a staff of 30,000 and sonably be expected to continue. With terstate 395 ramp toward the city, a AI technologies, including voice- and
an overall budget of $55 billion. the world marching steadfastly into the heavy rain started to fall, hitting hard visual-recognition systems. Last, by
As the Air Force lead officer for artifi- promising but unsettled fields of AI, it against the car’s metal surfaces. Far off, 2030, China intends to dominantly lead

34 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM

 ELECTION INTERFERENCE
WHY IS US CYBER COMMAND USING
UNCLASSIFIED NETWORKS?
c4isrnet.com/cyber

all countries in all aspects and related

fields of AI. To be the sole leader, the
world’s unquestioned and controlling
epicenter of AI. Period. That is China’s
declared national plan.
With the Chinese government’s new-
ly published AI agenda available for the
world to see, Putin’s words resolved
any ambiguity about its implication.
True to his style, his message was clear
and concise. “Whoever becomes the
leader … will become the ruler of the
world.”
“Straightforward,” I thought. “And
he’s right.” But focused administrations
around the globe already know the
profound potential of AI. The Chinese
clearly do — it’s driving their domestic
and foreign agendas. And the Saudis,
the European Union nations, the U.K.,
and the Canadians — they know it,
too. And private enterprise is certain-
ly focused in, from Google, Facebook,
Amazon, Apple and Microsoft to their
Chinese state-controlled counterparts
— Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent and the tele-
com giant Huawei.
AI technologies have been methodi-
cally evolving since the 1960s, but over
most of those years, the advances were
sporadic and relatively slow. From the
earliest days, private funding and gov-
ernment support for AI research ebbed
and flowed in direct relation to the suc-
cesses and failures of the latest predic-
tions and promises.
At the lowest points of progress,
when little was being accomplished,
investment capital dried up. And when
it did, efforts slowed. It was the usu-
al interdependent circle of cause and
effect. Twice, during the late ’70s and
then again during the late ’80s and
early ’90s, the pace of progress all but
stopped. Those years became known
as the AI winters.
But, in the last 10 to 15 years, a
number of major breakthroughs, in
machine learning in particular, again
propelled AI out of the dark and into
another invigorated stage. A new mo-
mentum emerged, and an unmistakable
race started to take shape. Insightful
governments and industry leaders be-
gan doing everything possible to stay
within reach of the lead, positioning

DEFENSENEWS.COM 08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 35


Page Topic Hed
Russian President Vladimir Putin
(on screen) speaks during a panel
discussion as part of the Artificial
Intelligence Journey forum in
Moscow on Nov. 9, 2019.
themselves for any possible path to the
front.
Now, for all to hear, Putin had just de-
clared everything at stake. Without any
room for misunderstanding, he equat-
ed AI superiority to global supremacy,
to a strength akin to economic or even
nuclear domination. He said it for pub-
lic consumption, but it was rife with
political purpose. “Whoever becomes
the leader in this sphere will become
the ruler of the world.”
Those words would undoubtedly
add another level of urgency to the
day’s meetings. That was certain. I re-
directed the driver to the Pentagon and
looked down at my phone to answer
the general’s text. “Landed. Saw quote.
On my way in.”
The shower would have to wait.
***
In the months that followed, Putin’s
now infamous few sentences proved
impactful across continents, indus-
tries and governments. His comments
provided the additional, final push that
accelerated the planet’s sense of seri-
ousness about AI and propelled most
everyone into a higher gear forward.
Public and private enterprises around
the globe reassessed their focuses and
levels of commitment. Governments
and industries that had previously
dedicated only minimal percentages
of their research and defense budgets
to the new technology suddenly saw
things differently. It quickly became
unacceptable to slow-walk AI efforts
36 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
and protocols, and no longer defensi-
ble to incubate AI innovations for lon-
ger than the shortest time necessary.
Now, not long after, the pace of the
race has quickened to a full sprint. Na-
tional strategies and demonstratable
use have become the measurements
that matter. Rollouts have become req-
uisite. To accomplish them, agendas
are more focused, aggressive and well
funded. Sooner than many expected,
AI is proving itself a dominant force of
economic, political and cultural influ-
ence, and is poised to transform much
of what we know and much of what
we do. China, Russia and others are
utilizing AI in ways the world needs to
recognize. That’s not to say all efforts
and iterations in the West are without
criticism. They’re not. But if this new
technology causes or contributes to
a shift in power from the West to the
East, everyone will be affected. Every-
thing will change.
The future is here, and the world
ahead looks far different than ever be-
fore.
No longer just science fiction or fan-
tastic speculation, artificial intelligence
is real. It’s here, all around us, and it
has already become an integral and
influential part of our lives. Although
we’ve taken only our first few steps
into this new frontier of technological
innovation, AI is providing us pow-
erful new methods of conducting our
affairs and accomplishing our goals.
We use these new tools every day, usu-
ally without choice and often without
even realizing it — from applications
FRAMEWORK FOR ETHICALLY USING AI
that streamline our personal lives and
social activities to business programs
and practices that enable new ways
of acquiring a competitive advantage.
I’ve learned a lot about the common
misperceptions and misgivings people
have when trying to understand AI.
Most conversations about artificial in-
telligence either begin or end with one
or more of the following questions:
1. What exactly is AI?
2. What aspects of our lives will
be changed by it?
3. Which of those changes will be
beneficial and which of them
harmful?
4. Where do the nations of the
world stand in relation to one
another, especially China and
Russia?
5. What can we do to ensure that
AI is only used in legal, moral
and ethical ways?
Although the answers to those ques-
tions merit long discussions and are
open to differing opinions, they should
at least be manageable and factually
accurate. The topics shouldn’t be too
difficult to discuss or debate — not
conversationally or even at policymak-
ing or political levels. Unfortunately,
they generally are.
AI is an extremely powerful tool, and
it has immense implications we must
consider and evaluate carefully. It’s a
very sharp instrument that shouldn’t be
callously wielded or casually accepted,
especially when it’s in the wrong hands
PRINCIPLES
INTEL COMMUNITY RELEASES
c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence
or when it’s used for intentionally in-
trusive or oppressive purposes. These
are serious issues, and there are signif-
icant steps we must take to ensure AI
is properly designed and implement-
ed. Fortunately, and contrary to what
many people think, it’s not necessary
to have a background in computer sci-
ence, mathematics or engineering in
order to very meaningfully understand
AI and its technological implications.
With just a basic comprehension of a
few fundamental concepts behind to-
day’s computers and related sciences,
it’s entirely possible to connect the rel-
evant dots and understand the overall
picture.
Creating tools to facilitate our lives
is the strength of humankind. It’s what
we do. Given enough time, it was argu-
able, perhaps even inevitable, that we
would create the ultimate tool — arti-
ficial intelligence itself. But what ex-
actly does it mean that we’ve accom-
plished that task? And how is AI even
possible? In large part, the answers lie
in the history of ourselves and of our
own biological intelligence. It turns
out that artificially replicating what we
know about the human thought pro-
cess, at least as best we can, is a highly
effective blueprint for creating some-
thing similar in a machine. It’s our own
evolution and our own history that
teach us the fundamentals that make
it all possible. DN
DKOSIG/GETTY IMAGES; COURTESY OF BENBELLA BOOKS, INC.
DEFENSENEWS.COM
7-10 DECEMBER 2020
EGYPT INTERNATIONAL EXHIBITION CENTRE
On the Move
US SPACE FORCE TO GET AN
OFFICIAL SECOND IN COMMAND
The No. 2 official assigned to the U.S. Space
Force is getting his chance to officially join
the new service.
Air Force Lt. Gen.
David “DT” Thompson
was tapped as the Space
Force’s vice chief of space
operations and for promo-
tion to the rank of general,
the Pentagon announced
Aug. 7.
Thompson previously held the position of
vice commander of Air Force Space Com-
mand, which was dissolved in December and
redesignated as the U.S. Space Force.
Although he became a de facto deputy to
Chief of Space Operations Gen. John “Jay”
Raymond in recent months — with Thomp-
son involved in standing up the new service
as well as explaining its role to the public—
he worked for Space Force headquarters
without technically being a member.
A graduate of the Air Force Academy and
lifelong space operator, Thompson has held
command positions as head of the 45th Op-
erations Group at Cape Canaveral Air Force
Station, Florida, from 2005 to 2007, and he
led the Aerospace Data Facility at Buckley Air
Force Base, Colorado, from 2007 to 2009. He
served as director of space forces at U.S. Air
Forces Central Command from 2009 to 2010,
and was vice commander of the Air Force
Warfare Center from 2010 to 2011.
Before becoming the vice commander of
Air Force Space Command in June 2015, he
held positions at U.S. Strategic Command as
the deputy director of global operations from
2011 to 2014, and then the director of plans
and policy.
TRUMP FILLS POWERFUL
PENTAGON POLICY JOB
The Defense Department announced Aug. 2
that controversial nominee Anthony Tata
has been appointed to
fill the Pentagon’s No. 2
policy job, in a move that
some members of Con-
gress see as circumvent-
ing the Senate’s confirma-
tion process.
The move came just
days after the Senate Armed Services
38 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
Committee scrapped a confirmation hearing
for Tata, a retired Army brigadier general and
Fox News guest who has been a vocal sup-
porter of President Donald Trump, after there
was not enough support among Republican
senators to push his nomination through.
Tata was originally nominated as under-
secretary of defense for policy, the top for-
eign relations and policy job in the building.
Now, he will be performing the duties of the
deputy undersecretary for policy.
“Mr. Tata withdrew from consideration be-
fore the Senate Armed Services Committee
his nomination to be the undersecretary of
defense for policy,” according to a depart-
ment spokesman. “He has been designated
as the official performing the duties of the
deputy undersecretary of defense for policy,
reporting to the Acting Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy Dr. James Anderson.
He looks forward to continuing to help
implement the president’s national security
agenda.”
Anderson is the officially confirmed deputy
undersecretary of defense for policy, having
been cleared by the Senate in early June.
However, as there is no current undersec-
retary for policy, Anderson is serving as the
acting in that capacity — meaning that the
deputy role is open for Tata to slide into.
AMERICAN TROOPS HEAD EAST
FROM GERMANY
The American military’s presence in Europe is
shifting eastward, the Defense Department
has confirmed, as a new agreement with
Poland sets up a host of construction projects
designed to support more U.S. troops in that
country.
In addition to the 4,500 troops that current-
ly rotate from the U.S., “Poland has agreed
to fund infrastructure and logistical support
to U.S. forces,” Pentagon spokesman
Lt. Col. Tom Campbell told Defense News
sister publication Military Times
An increase of 1,000 rotational troops is
also planned.
When Defense Secretary Mark Esper
announced a plan July 29 to withdraw just
under 12,000 troops from Germany and
partially redistribute them around Europe, he
alluded to co-locating some of those troops in
existing European countries’ facilities, includ-
ing in Belgium and Italy. That would include
these new projects in Poland. DN
Calendar
SEPTEMBER
SEPTEMBER 9-10
The Defense News Conference
Register at: conference.defensenews.com
Join us for the most sought-after defense
event of the year.
Military, government and industry leaders
come together to discuss the future of
defense.
SEPTEMBER 14-16
Air Force Association Virtual Air
Space Cyber Conference
AFA’s virtual Air, Space & Cyber Conference
(vASC) will continue AFA’s long tradition of
hosting the premier event for defense and
aerospace professionals around the world.
The conference will offer an exceptional
line-up of speakers, world-class (virtual)
exhibits, professional development opportu-
nities, and important interaction between
and among industry, government, the me-
dia, academia, and the public. Register at:
www.afa.org/events/calendar/2020-09-14/
air-space-cyber-conference
OCTOBER
OCTOBER 13-16
AUSA Now - 2020 Annual Meeting
and Exposition
AUSA Now, the Association of the U.S.
Army’s 2020 Annual Meeting, will include
three days of virtual speeches, forums and
professional development events followed
by a fourth day dedicated to association
events. “The Time is Now” is the theme for
this year’s event, an emphasis that applies
to people, modernization, readiness and
partnerships.
Registration is required and will open in
early September. For more information and
updates, visit https://meetings.ausa.org/
annual/
OCTOBER 20-23
Euronaval
Paris Le Bourget Aeroport, 3 Rue De
Londres 93440 Le Bourget, France
www.euronaval.fr/18/visitCEMBER
DECEMBER
7-10 DECEMBER 2020
EDEX 2020
Egypt International Exhibition Centre
Address Al Hay Al Asher, Nasr City, Cairo
Governorate, Egypt
www.egyptdefenceexpo.com/
defense-news
The second edition of Egypt’s leading
defence & security event - Egypt Defence
Expo (EDEX) - is taking place 7-10
December 2020. The award-winning show
presents a unique opportunity for exhib-
itors to showcase the latest technology,
equipment and systems across land, sea,
and air. EDEX is the only tri-service de-
fence exhibition in North Africa and is fully
supported by Egyptian Armed Forces.
DEFENSENEWS.COM
 CHILDREN OF FALLEN PATRIOTS FOUNDATION
provides college scholarships and educational counseling to military
children who have lost a parent in the line of duty.

CFP TOTAL IMPACT

$
$$

$39.6M 1,847
TOTAL STUDENTS
SUPPORT PROVIDED FOR
There are 500 students TO DATE NATIONALLY
in college today whose
future education is in
jeopardy. Please help us
support them. Donate today
at fallenpatriots.org.
732 752
COLLEGE SCHOOLS
GRADUATES ATTENDED

Fallen Patriots scholars at the

2019 Citi Career Symposium
PARTNER
HIGHLIGHT
Since 2016, Citi has provided nearly $4 million in
scholarships to Fallen Patriots through their e for
education campaign.

We are so grateful to Citi for their tremendous

support of military families and look forward to
partnering with them again in 2020.

CITI $
$$
TOTAL
$3.9M 156 624 2 44
IMPACT TOTAL FUNDING SCHOLARS FULL YEARS OF CAREER CAREER SYMPOSIUM
FROM CITI FOUR-YEAR EDUCATION COLLEGE SYMPOSIUMS HELD ATTENDEES
PROVIDED

FALLENPATRIOTS.ORG @ FALLENPATRIOTS
CFC #69859
Page page
From Topic1Hed
ANALYSIS page 1
the total defense revenue.
China this year had five firms in the
top 15 companies versus six last year.
Eight Chinese firms made the Top
100 list this year, with a combined
$95 billion in defense revenue for FY19
— which is $11.7 billion shy of the list’s
total for Europe and Turkey.
The Aviation Industry Corporation
of China, which appeared with oth-
er Chinese firms for the first time last
year, fell from No. 5 to No. 6, though
its defense revenue grew by a percent-
age point over last year. China South
Industries Group Corporation fell from
No. 11 to No. 18, as its revenue declined
26 percent, from about $12 billion to
around $9 billion.
China is unquestionably a defense
giant in the Asia-Pacific region, dwarf-
ing its nine neighbors (excluding
Russia) on the list. Their 2019 defense
revenues totaled $21 billion.
The combined revenues of the Chi-
nese firms marks the country as the
rising superpower it’s billed to be in po-
litical and strategic circles, said Daniel
Gouré, a senior vice president with the
Lexington Institute.
“For all the discussions we have been
having over the last weeks and months
about China as a potential threat and
challenges, they are building all kinds
of blue-water ship classes that mirror
the U.S. Navy,” he said. “For a country
that was once thought of as a continen-
tal or near-shore power, it’s amazing
the stuff they’re building, and its re-
flected in these companies.”
From Europe and Turkey, a NATO
ally, 35 firms were spread across the
list. The combined defense revenue
there comprised roughly 20 percent
of the Top 100 total. Seven Turkish
firms made the list, with FNSS Savun-
ma Sistemleri A.S., and Havelsan A.S.
making the cut at No. 98 and No. 99 re-
spectively.
For Russia, some past participants
declined to provide data this year for
unknown reasons. The two that partici-
pated made it into the list: Almaz-Antey
placed 17th, with $9.2 billion in defense
revenue for 2019, and Tactical Missiles
Corporation JSC placed 35th, with
40 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
$3.5 billion in defense revenue.
The annual Defense News Top 100
list relies for the most part on self-
reporting from companies, many of
whom provide estimates rather than
definitive data for their defense per-
centages. That means that while the list
is the industry standard, the numbers
come with some variance.
Heritage firms dominate
Lockheed Martin was a lock for No. 1,
for the 21st consecutive year, with de-
fense revenue that represents nearly
11 percent of the total. Its defense rev-
enue jumped 12 percent between FY18
and FY19, from $51 billion to $57 bil-
lion — with Boeing trailing at No. 2 at
$34 billion in defense revenue for FY19.
Within the top five, General Dynam-
ics climbed back from No. 6 last year,
passing both Raytheon and Northrop
Grumman.
Northrop fell from No. 3 to No. 4, like-
ly based on a full-year accounting of its
acquisition of Orbital ATK in 2017, said
analyst Roman Schweizer, managing
director of Cowen and Company.
The merger between L3 Technologies
(18th place last year) and Harris Corp.
(26th place last year) saw a new entry,
L3Harris Technologies, take the No. 9
spot, with $13.9 billion in defense rev-
enue — just ahead of United Technol-
ogies Corp., which acquired Rockwell
Collins in 2018 and whose merger with
Raytheon should be reflected in next
year’s list.
Despite the Pentagon’s push to work
with nontraditional suppliers, the top
of this year’s list, and the list overall, is
almost like the automotive sector, it’s
so dominated by familiar names, said
Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital
Alpha Partners.
“The interesting thing is just the rela-
tive stability of this,” Callan said. “For
all of DoD’s emphasis to get new en-
trants into the sector, and reach out to
innovative suppliers, you just don’t see
it. When you compare it to the technol-
ogy sector, we’re all using things made
by companies that weren’t even house-
hold names 10 years ago. ... Where is
the Tesla [of the defense sector]?”
It’s not out of the question that the
list changes over the next five years,
if the U.S. Department of Defense and
foreign militaries make good on their
promises to boost innovation, Callan
said.
For all the DoD’s discussion of the
“For an industry
generally regarded
as mature, revenue
growth that runs
at two times global
GDP is downright
sporty.”
Steven Grundman, senior fellow
at the Atlantic Council
growing role of software, artificial in-
telligence and machine learning, there’s
no company known for those things on
the list, Gouré observed.
Beyond General Dynamics, which
completed its acquisition of IT services
giant CSRA in 2018, “AI, software, IT
aren’t there because they’re still sub-
contractors,” Gouré said. “Microsoft
and Amazon Web Services, they aren’t
anywhere on the list.”
That’s not to say there isn’t massive
spending on all of the above, but it re-
mains a subcomponent within compa-
nies, and therefore not captured on the
list, Gouré said.
For now, the large, multiplatform
firms dominate and should continue
to do so, even if government defense
spending declines, Gouré said. “These
guys are showing it’s good to have a fin-
ger in many pies.”
Flat-budget future?
The consensus among analysts is that
government defense spending will lev-
el off amid the coronavirus pandemic,
and its effects as well as the result of
the upcoming U.S. presidential election
in November will be reflected in future
lists.
“Successful years of investment
spending growth appears to be ending,
but outlays are still growing due to the
surge in spending over the last three
years. But they are starting to taper
significantly after this year,” Schweizer
said.
He sees foreign spending softening,
at least in the short term due to the
COVID-19 pandemic, but he predicts
defense budgets, backlogs, outlays and
foreign military sales will hold together
for at least 12-18 months to help de-
fense firms weather the unprecedented
damage visiting the commercial aero-
space sector.
The biggest risk is the U.S. budget
trajectory, which is likely to be flat, at
best, or decline in mid-single digits, at
worst, over the next five years, Sch-
weizer added. He anticipates a drop
of 3-5 percent, but with the Pentagon’s
eye on Russia and China, the depart-
ment will likely make trade-offs to pro-
tect core modernization areas.
Other notable moves in the list in-
cluded U.S.-based engineering and
construction company Bechtel, which
fell to No. 47 from No. 31 last year;
the firm’s defense revenue declined
39 percent, from $3.7 billion to
$2.3 billion.
In France, Safran’s defense revenue
jumped from $1.6 billion in FY18 to
$4.4 billion in FY19, bumping it from
No. 56 to No. 28. However, the compa-
ny told Defense News that it attributes
the large rise to a difference in calcula-
tion for this year’s list.
Since 2015, the data from Safran
were made up of Safran Electronics &
Defense activities. This year, the firm
changed its approach by adding the
military activities of the group’s other
subsidiaries.
Also in France, Dassault nearly dou-
bled its revenue from $2.9 billion in
FY18 to $5.7 billion in FY19 — jumping
from No. 38 to No. 22.
Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
vaulted back onto the list to No. 21,
with $6.6 billion in defense revenue.
However, it’s worth noting that defense
revenue numbers reflect awards made
by the Japanese Ministry of Defense,
which leads to more year-over-year
volatility among the country’s firms. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM
 Enabling the Extraordinary
To Fly To Power To Live

EXTREME
Advanced thermal Around the globe, military and aerospace
systems designers have turned to Meggitt to
management for extreme help them meet thermal and power management
challenges with compact, lightweight, and
efficient vapor cycle systems, liquid cooling
military environments systems and components including fans, pumps
and compressors.

Meggitt has developed cooling solutions for the

most challenging flight conditions, missions, and
extreme environments. From low supersonic
flight, to high hot wet hover, to desert and arctic
operations, our thermal management solutions
are proven and ready to meet the challenge of
the more electronic platform and battlefield.

Tel: +1 949 465 7700

E-mail: gerry.janicki@meggitt.com

www.meggittdefense.com
The Interview
ADM. MICHAEL GILDAY
Chief of Naval Operations, US Navy
You’ve talked about a “Manhattan
The U.S. Navy is on the brink of what could be a major shift in how it
Project” to get a reliable network
operates, but first the service’s top officer wants a plan to field technol- to deploy overseas that can bind
ogies that have been lagging for years and to develop a path to add new together all these new platforms.
unmanned technology to the mainstream fleet. Where are you with that?
That’s a critical piece of this, and a re-
Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday took on his latest role
ally important point of discussion with
in August 2019 and has since been vocal about not just the need to field respect to unmanned, whether that’s
new tech, but also figuring out how it all fits together. in the air, on the sea or under the sea,
In an exclusive July 16 interview with Defense News, the CNO talked is the Navy Tactical Grid. Coming into
the job, the projections for the Navy
about developing and executing his plans, as well as what it will take for
Tactical Grid was for delivery in about
the Navy to recover from a series of high-profile accidents and scandals. 2035. I knew that was way, way too
The interview has been edited for brevity and clarity. late.
We’re investing in netted weapons,
Congress has been asking how in meeting conditions and meeting netted platforms, netted headquarters
the Navy plans to integrate milestones that we can leverage in — but we don’t have a net.
unmanned surface vessels, and other experiments? At what point do So, on a handshake with [then-Air
whether the service prematurely I reach a decision point where I drop Force Chief of Staff] Gen. [David]
committing to them. a program and double down on a pro- Goldfein, I said: “Look, I am all in,
We’ve got a family of unmanned sys- gram that I can accelerate? and my vision is that the Navy Tacti- more iterative approach to fielding
tems we’re working on. Undersea, cal Grid would be the naval plug into technologies?
we’ve got extra-large, large and me- Observers have questioned JADC2 [Joint All-Domain Command First of all, I actually agree with Con-
dium unmanned underwater vehicles; whether the Navy has a con- and Control].” gress on this. It is frustrating when you
on the surface we have small, medium crete idea of what it wants these So the Navy Tactical Grid is a very get marks on “large unmanned surface
and large unmanned surface vessels; unmanned surface vessels to do. critical piece of the unmanned cam- vessel” because they are concerned
and in the air we have a number of What’s the progress on that front? paign plan because it becomes the with the command and control of the
programs. The concept of operations that the main artery for controlling all those missile systems that we could poten-
What I’ve asked the N9 [warfare fleet is working on right now will be unmanned platforms. Without it, I have tially put on those platforms or other
systems directorate] to do is come to delivered in the fall, and that talks a bunch of unmanned that I shouldn’t systems.
me with a campaign plan that ties all conceptually about how we intend to be building because I can’t control it I go back to the campaign plan: The
those together with objectives at the employ unmanned in distributed mar- very well. I need to put a team of the approach has to be deliberate. We
end. I’ve got a bunch of horses in the itime operations. The other piece of best subject matter experts that I have have to make sure that the systems
race, but at some point I have to put this is, what would a day-to-day lay- on the Navy Tactical Grid to deliver it that are on those unmanned systems
my money down on the thoroughbred down look like of unmanned forward? here within the next few years. with respect to the [hull, mechanical
that’s going to take me across the fin- The Navy has got to be forward: and electrical system], that they are
ish line so I can make an investment For obvious reasons we don’t want As part of its mark on the National designed to requirement, and perform
in a platform I have high confidence in the fight back here; the Navy exists Defense Authorization Act, both to requirement. And most importantly,
and that I can scale. to operate forward. That’s where we the House and the Senate made are those requirements sound?
What I’ve found is that we didn’t need to be in numbers. And with un- moves to slow down the develop- I go back to: Do I really need a litto-
necessarily have the rigor that’s re- manned, if you are not there at the ment of the large unmanned sur- ral combat ship to go 40 knots? That’s
quired across a number of programs right time, you are irrelevant. face vessel.They cited technical going to drive the entire design of the
MC3 MARIANNE GUEMO/U.S. NAVY

that would bring those together in a
way that’s driven toward objectives
with milestones. If you took a look
at [all the programs], where are there
similarities and where are there differ-
ences? Where am I making progress
There has to be a number of un-
manned [systems] forward. I can’t
just decide to rally unmanned out of
San Diego or in the Pacific northwest
at a time when they’ll be too late to
need.
glitches with the Littoral Combat
Ship program and the Ford class
that have resulted in delays. Do
you have concerns about slow-
ing down that development, or
is there merit to taking a slower,
ship, not just the engineering plant but
how it’s built. That becomes a critical
factor.
So if you take your eye off the ball
with respect to requirements, you can
find yourself drifting. That has to be

42 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM


deliberate.
With respect to the systems we are
putting on unmanned vessels, I’d say
we absolutely learned from LCS and
Ford; those have to be proven systems
that are prototyped and land-based
tested before we start doubling down
and going into production.
The littoral combat ships are
quickly coming off the lines. Is the
Navy prepared for them?
There are things in the near term that
I have to deliver, that I’m putting heat
on now, and one of them is LCS. One
part is sustainability and reliability. We
know enough about that platform and
the problems that we have that plague
us with regard to reliability and sus-
tainability, and I need them resolved.
That requires a campaign plan to get
after it and have it reviewed by me fre-
quently enough so that I can be sight-
ed on it. Those platforms have been
around since 2008 — we need to get
on with it.
We’ve done five deployments since
I’ve been on the job, we’re going to
DEFENSENEWS.COM
ramp that up two and a half times
over the next couple of years, but we
have got to get after it. LCS for me is
something, on my watch, I’ve got to get
right.
I also have to deliver both the mine
and anti-submarine warfare modules.
These ships are probably going to
[start going] away in the mid-2030s
if the [future frigate] FFG(X) build
goes as planned. But I need to wring
as much as I can out of those ships as
quickly as I can.
Have you seen any significant
successes with the ship?
I do think we have it about right with
manning. We were honest with our-
selves that the original design wasn’t
going to do it. I really like the blue-and-
gold construct because I get way more
[operational availability] than I would
with just the single crew.
So I can get these ships out there in
numbers doing the low-end stuff, let’s
say, 4th Fleet where I wouldn’t need a
DDG [destroyer]. The Navy deployed
the LCS Detroit to South America —
MORE INTERVIEWS ONLINE
AT A GLANCE
POSITION
U.S. Navy’s 32nd chief of naval
operations
EDUCATION
Graduate of the U.S. Naval
Academy and holds master’s de-
grees from the Harvard Kennedy
School and the National War
College
DID YOU KNOW?
Adm. Gilday’s father was also a
Navy sailor.
the 4th Fleet area of operations — last
year on a counternarcotics mission,
and it returned earlier this month.
Those are the kinds of missions for
which the LCS is perfectly suited. I
can deploy these things with a [law en-
forcement detachment] and a signals
intelligence capability, and I can do
that on LCS with carry-on gear. It’s the
right kind of platform for that.
Also in 5th Fleet, those maritime se-
curity missions that we were heavily
sighted on in the late 1990s and early
2000s: They still exist, I’d just prefer to
do them with an LCS instead of a DDG
if I can.
What other programs have caught
your attention?
In unmanned, whether it’s the MQ-4C
Triton [long-range surveillance drone]
or the MQ-25 Stingray [carrier-based
tanker drone], I’ve got to put heat on
those. We have to get them out there
in numbers, operating with a high lev-
el of confidence, so we can leverage
what we learn across the rest of the
unmanned build.
In the wake of the Fat Leonard
bribery scandal, the fatal acci-
dents in 2017 and now the most
recent fire onboard the amphib-
ious assault ship Bonhomme
Richard, there are questions about
systemic issues in the Navy. What
are your thoughts?
US WEAPON SALES BOSS TALKS
CHINA AND ARMS EXPORTS
defensenews.com/interviews
The Pentagon and Washington, D.C.,
drives you to focus on things. One of
things [the late Air Force Col.] John
Boyd talked about was that the prior-
ities, even in a highly technical world,
need to be on people, ideas and ma-
chines in that order. The issues we’ve
faced in the Navy over the past few
years all come back to people. They all
come back to culture.
If I draw it to Fat Leonard or to the
2017 Comprehensive Review or the
review we did with the SEALs, most
of that is cultural. Ninety-five percent
of it is people-focused. It really comes
down to leadership. That is not lost on
me. It is easy in this building not to pay
attention to it, but it is on my mind,
and at the fleet commander level those
are the things we talk most about: peo-
ple, training, attitude.
It’s premature to judge the out-
come of the investigation into
Bonhomme Richard, but what
questions do you have as you look
at the scale of that disaster?
This is a very, very serious incident
that I think will force the Navy to stand
back and reevaluate itself. We’ve got to
follow the facts. We’ve got to be hon-
est with ourselves and we’ve got to get
after it. My intention, once the investi-
gations are done, is to make this avail-
able for the public to debate, including
what we need to do to get after any
systemic problems that we might have.
But one of things I did on the Sunday
[after the fire broke out] was I read the
report of the Miami fire back in 2012.
That was the last mass conflagration
in a shipyard environment that we had.
There were a number of recommenda-
tions coming out of that incident.
One of the questions I have is: Did
we fully and adequately implement
those recommendations? Because that
fire was probably the most recent sim-
ilar mass conflagration we’ve had. We
learned from that. When we complet-
ed the investigation, did we just leave
it in the rearview mirror, or did we —
no kidding — take it seriously? DN
— David B. Larter
08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 43
Commentary
Executive Editor Mike Gruss
Managing Editor Chris Martin
Deputy Editor/Pentagon
Aaron Mehta
Editor, Europe Sebastian Sprenger
STAFF REPORTERS
Congress Joe Gould
Land Warfare Jen Judson
Air Warfare Valerie Insinna
Naval Warfare David Larter
Information Warfare
Mark Pomerleau
Defense Technology
Andrew Eversden
Space, Unmanned & Intelligence
Systems Nathan Strout
Asia Mike Yeo
Italy Tom Kington
United Kingdom Andrew Chuter
CORRESPONDENTS
Australia Nigel Pittaway
Belgium/EU/NATO Martin Banks
Canada David Pugliese
France Christina Mackenzie
India Vivek Raghuvanshi
Israel Seth Frantzman
Middle East Agnes Al-Helou
New Zealand Nick Lee-Frampton
Pakistan Usman Ansari
Poland Jaroslaw Adamowski
Scandinavia Gerard O’Dwyer
Turkey Burak Ege Bekdil
VIDEO & PHOTO
Video and Photo Editors
Ben Murray, Shaun Barrows
Multimedia Journalist
Daniel Woolfolk
DESIGN & PRODUCTION
Graphic Designer Jacki Belker
Production Director
Jamie Elliott
DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT
VP, Technology/Engineering
Will Alexander
WANT TO ADVERTISE
IN DEFENSE NEWS?
Contact us to discuss various
advertising opportunities.
defensenews.com/advertising
44 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20
ADVERTISING
Senior Vice President, Sales
Mort Greenberg
mgreenberg@defensenews.com
Vice President Global Sales &
Strategy
Jerry Foley
gfoley@defensenews.com
Team Lead, C4ISRNET
Erin Muro
emuro@defensenews.com
South East US
Jason Sickels
jsickels@defensenews.com
Western US & Canada
Drucie Devries
Drucie.Devries@mco.com
Director Business Development,
Network Solutions
Chris Bridgham
bridgham@sightlinemg.com
France, Spain, Austria, Germany,
Switzerland, Northern & Eastern
Europe, Scandinavia, Italy,
Israel, Turkey, Middle East,
South America & Asia Pacific
Diana Scogna
dscogna@defensenews.com
MARKETING
Marketing Director
Stephanie Gildea
sgildea@mco.com
SIGHTLINE MEDIA GROUP
Chairman Michael A. Reinstein
CEO David Steinhafel
Chief Revenue Officer
Doug Neiman
Vice President, Audience
Development & Circulation
Shawn Byers
Vice President of Revenue
Operations
Kelly Facer
Headquarters 1919 Gallows Road,
Suite 400
Vienna, Va. 22182
When the challenge of
coronavirus becomes
a catalyst to change
One way to understand how the
United States’ largest defense com-
panies are responding to the coro-
navirus pandemic is to listen to
what their leaders said on the most
recent round of earnings calls.
Consider this anecdote from
General Dynamics.
Phebe Novakovic, the compa-
ny’s chief executive, told analysts
in late July that when COVID-19
struck, “our classified custom-
ers closed their sites to all but
mission-essential employees. This
impacted revenue and earnings
and will continue to do so. Some
of IT services’ highest-margin
programs have come to a hard
stop because of COVID-19.”
Novakovic described the pan-
demic as a time of “significant un-
certainty.”
That story was not unusual.
David Calhoun, Boeing’s CEO,
described this as “a historically
dynamic and challenging time.”
Greg Hayes, Raytheon Technol-
ogies’ top executive, opened his
second-quarter call by stating: “As
everyone knows, these last sev-
eral months have been incredibly
challenging.” And Bill Brown, the
CEO of L3Harris, said: “The pan-
demic has challenged us all to find
new ways of working effectively.”
To be clear, defense contractors
have lost roughly 20 percent of
their value in the last six months,
by tracking exchange-traded
funds. That’s the worst run for
publicly traded companies in at
least a decade.
So what to make of this?
James Taiclet, Lockheed Martin’s
new leader, said his philosophy is
that there may be “an opportunity
for us if there is a downturn, we’re
going to look at the silver linings
that may be there.” He was talking
about mergers and acquisitions.
But defense companies of all siz-
es should look for another oppor-
tunity: a reason to operate differ-
ently, not an excuse to get back to
basics. Leaders should reexamine
how to embrace new talent, how
to effectively telework, and how
to add new equipment or partner-
ships with unexpected sources.
Military leaders for years have
said they value agility. Now they
will get to watch firsthand who
changes, who is prepared for the
long term, who adapts and who
merely talks about adapting.
These “challenges” can give acqui-
sition officials a reason to reward
agility.
But back to the earnings calls.
Officials hinted about what may
happen next, before we — fingers
crossed — enter a post-pandemic
world. Lockheed’s Kenneth Pos-
senriede, the company’s chief fi-
nancial officer, said that while so-
licitations may be slower getting
out the door, final deadlines have
not changed.
Brown at L3Harris said: “We be-
lieve that the heightened threat
environment will drive the trajec-
tory of U.S military spending re-
gardless of the election.”
Novakovic seconded that no-
tion. “There’s a general consensus
that the threat has not dissipated,”
she said. “In fact, arguably some
of our potential adversaries have
raised additional questions. …
We’ll see going forward, but [I’m]
not hearing a lot at the grassroots
level on ... any pending defense
cuts.”
The threat may not have
changed. Nor may the business of
defense. Yet.
But it’s impossible to ignore that
almost everything else has. DN
MIKE GRUSS
is the executive editor for Defense News.
UPDATES TO DEFENSE NEWS
I’d be remiss not to men-
tion our own changes here at
Defense News since our last print
issue.
To start, if this edition is in
your hands, you’re reading our
first issue back in an expanded
monthly format. We’ll contin-
ue to rely on print as one ele-
ment for displaying some of our
most dynamic features, such as
the Top 100 issue, exclusives,
enterprise and unparalleled
business intel. Our websites,
defensenews.com as well as c4is-
rnet.com, continue to be home to
breaking news and daily stories
on the defense industry.
Second, careful readers have
always noticed a close link be-
tween Defense News and C4IS-
RNET. While we will no longer
print C4ISRNET as a stand-alone
magazine, it is now home to an
expanded section in each of our
Defense News print issues. Rest
assured that all subscribers will
receive the full term of their sub-
scriptions.
And finally, I’m your new editor.
Hello. For those who don’t know
me, I’ve been editor at C4ISRNET
for the last three years, working
closely with Jill Aitoro. While
Jill decided to move on from the
STAFF SGT. JOSHUA KING/U.S. AIR FORCE
defense world for a new venture,
myself and the rest of the De-
fense News team plan to keep
doing the great work you expect.
I’m looking forward to bringing
you more fantastic journalism.
That won’t change. DN
DEFENSENEWS.COM

Let’s responsibly and deliberately spend US funds
In the second quarter of 2020, the
U.S. economy fell at an annual rate of
33 percent. As the largest annualized
drop in our history, this staggering
statistic underscores the breadth
and depth of the coronavirus’ effect
across all industries, including the
defense industrial base.
As Congress considers competing
proposals for COVID-19 relief, we
must ensure that any additional
funds provided to the Department
of Defense are targeted to pro-
tecting jobs and strengthening our
industrial base. But we owe it to
taxpayers to apply oversight and
negotiate on their behalf. We cannot
panic and hand out blank checks to
defense contractors. To do so would
set an irresponsible precedent for
years to come.
Congress has acknowledged that
our industrial base needs help
Multidomain capabilities are key to Arctic security
Major changes are taking place in
the Arctic. Climate change brings not
only better accessibility, but also an
increased attention to the extraction
of natural resources and commercial
activity. The changes in the Arctic have
also led to a need for increased focus
on the security dimension in the region
— with the goal of keeping the Arctic a
secure and stable region.
The kingdom of Denmark consists
of Denmark proper, Greenland and the
Faroe Islands, and hence covers a con-
siderable area in the Arctic. The Arctic
mission of the Danish defense forces
includes the exercise of sovereignty,
search and rescue operations, maritime
environmental protection, and support
to civilian authorities. The current
Danish Defence Agreement (2018-2023)
strengthens the Danish efforts in the
Arctic. In addition to this, the Danish
Arctic Agreement of 2016 increased the
funding and development of surveil-
lance, command, control and commu-
DEFENSENEWS.COM
SEN. DICK
DURBIN, D-ILL.,
is the ranking member
on the Senate
Appropriations
Defense
Subcommittee.
during this pandeic. In March,
the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security Act included a
provision, Section 3610, to allow
employees of federal contractors
with critical skills to remain paid
if the federal facilities where they
work closed due to the pandemic.
This additional flexibility would
keep workers ready to return as
soon as conditions allowed.
Since then, Section 3610 has taken
on a life of its own, with senior ad-
ministration officials estimating that
agencies across the federal gov-
ernment could be on the hook for
nication, and other operational efforts
in the area, including several security
infrastructure projects. The Defence
Agreement and the Arctic Agreement
underline the geopolitical importance
of the Arctic, which is expected to
become increasingly significant in the
coming years.
The Danish armed forces, including
the Royal Danish Air Force, have a long
tradition of operating in the Arctic. Pri-
or to the establishment of the RDAF in
1950, the Naval Air Service conducted
several missions in the Arctic area in
the 1930s and 1940s supporting Arctic
expeditions and scientists — mainly in
Greenland.
Military operations in the Arctic
are multidomain by nature, as they
are commanded and controlled by
the Joint Arctic Command in Nuuk,
Greenland, and supported by the three
services. The air power characteristics
— speed, reach and height — make air
power a very useful tool in the Arctic
OPINION AND ANALYSIS
BY DEFENSE AND INDUSTRY LEADERS
REP. ADAM
SMITH,
D-WASH.,
is the chairman of
the House Armed
Services Committee.
billions of dollars to carry out this
law. The calls for new funding are
growing louder. We must explain to
American taxpayers and workers
what is, and is not, at stake.
Americans should know that the
CARES Act appropriated
$10.5 billion for defense needs,
with nearly unlimited flexibility for
the DoD to reprogram these funds
to address urgent priorities. In
addition to that infusion of money,
the department has numerous other
ways to support defense contrac-
tors. At the outset of the coro-
navirus, the department worked
MAJ. GEN.
ANDERS REX
is the commander
of Air Command
Denmark for
the Royal Danish
Air Force.
region, which is characterized by large
geographical areas and challenging
weather.
It is not difficult to envision the
benefit of a multitude of capabilities
to Joint Arctic Command’s mission:
complete radar coverage, drones,
maritime patrol aircraft, airborne early
warning technology, air-to-air refueling
capabilities, more satellites — and the
list goes on.
What is more difficult is to fund it all.
Until that happens, two tasks lie ahead
of us. One is to have a clear prioriti-
zation of these future capabilities to
match the operational environment and
budget. The other is to make the abso-
lute most of the data already gathered.
defensenews.com/opinion
with states and localities to deem
defense contractors as essential
and therefore able to continue
working. In April, the department
issued a regulatory change on
progress payments for existing
contracts, increasing the cash flow
to the defense industrial base and
encouraging major contractors to
advance cash to the supply chain,
infusing billions of dollars in cash
to companies that needed near-term
cash flow.
Before Congress provides many
billions of dollars to make up for
the work that has been lost due to
coronavirus closures, we should
know which programs have been
impacted, how much each program
may need to recover and whether
taxpayers will be on the hook for
more money if the disruptions
continue. DN
We must work diligently to get data
from all domains, from across the
government as well as from other
nations. This underlines the multi-do-
main character and the key to success
in the Arctic. In the future it should
be second nature for all with data per-
taining to the Arctic to ask themselves:
“Have I shared this with Joint Arctic
Command?”
To use the data for the common
operating picture in the Arctic, the
data infrastructure must be in place. A
part of this is link connectivity and the
ability to share data.
Air power is of vital importance in
the Arctic, given the core air power
characteristics, but it must be in a joint
and combined framework, enabling
future multidomain and network-based
operations in the Arctic region. The
Royal Danish Air Force will work
toward that objective. The Royal
Danish Air Force will work toward that
objective. DN
08.17.20 DEFENSE NEWS 45
Last Word
MARKET Diving deeper into the top five firms in this year’s Top 100 list (see page 11) shows
a focus on the Middle East. According to data from Avascent Analytics, the top

FOOTHOLD
customer for these American firms in 2019 was, unsurprisingly, their home coun-
try of the United States. But who was the second largest, and in what markets
were these companies most successful? Let’s break it down by percentage.

LOCKHEED MARTIN 23.51 Weapons BOEING 16.55 Weapons

5.98 Sensors 3.72 Sensors

TOP PROGRAM:
TOP PROGRAM: 61.77 Platforms F/A-18 FIGHTER 66.24 Platforms

F-35 JOINT 0.10 Other

JET SERIES 0.79 Other
STRIKE FIGHTER
Electronic
1.75
Warfare #2 CUSTOMER: 2.85 EW

#2 CUSTOMER: 0.22 Cyber SAUDI ARABIA 0.12 Cyber

SAUDI ARABIA
6.18 C4I 7.46 C4I

0.49 Avionics 2.28 Avionics

GENERAL RAYTHEON NORTHROP

DYNAMICS COMPANY GRUMMAN
TOP PROGRAM: TOP PROGRAM: TOP PROGRAM:
DDG-51 ARLEIGH BURKE-CLASS PATRIOT AIR DEFENSE B-21 RAIDER BOMBER AIRCRAFT
DESTROYER SYSTEM

#2 CUSTOMER: #2 CUSTOMER: #2 CUSTOMER:

IRAQ SAUDI ARABIA JAPAN
9.30 Weapons 43.76 Weapons 20.24 Weapons

1.44 Sensors 20.90 Sensors 19.07 Sensors

80.03 Platforms 13.78 Platforms 27.19 Platforms

2.11 Other 0.11 Other 0.11 Other

0.40 EW 2.93 EW 12.3

43.76 EW

0.002.11Cyber 0.07 Cyber 0.75 Cyber

6.63 C4I 17.64 C4I 18.04 C4I

0.09 Avionics 0.82 Avionics 2.25 Avionics

Due to rounding, pie charts may not add up to exactly 100 percent.

46 DEFENSE NEWS 08.17.20 DEFENSENEWS.COM

The Courage to Meet Tomorrow's Challenges Today
IAI draws on innovative solutions and proven technologies to meet today and tomorrow's challenges.
We've been creating exceptional solutions since 1953.
IAI offers tailored interconnected and interoperable solutions within and across domains.
Leap into the future together with us.

www.iai.co.il • corpmkg@iai.co.il
 Made in the USA.
Ready to Serve.

Leonardo technology is mission-proven with over 50 years’ experience

delivering capability to the US military, government, law enforcement and
Emergency Medical Services operators, nationwide.
More than 7,000 domestic employees are dedicated to providing American-
made, leading-edge aerospace, defense and security solutions in production,
maintenance, support and training facilities.
Inspired by the vision, curiosity and creativity of the great master inventor -
Leonardo is designing the technology of tomorrow.

leonardocompany.com

Helicopters | Aeronautics | Electronics, Defence & Security Systems | Space