the tipping point. and a roundtable featuring dave barry, stephen king. 8 p.m. eastern astrophysicist explains the search for life outside of earth in his book is or is exceptional? at 10 p.m. eastern on "after words," the icon at the idealist which looks at the lights of rivalry between two key figures in the early movement for berth control and reproductive rights. she's interviewed by uc davis school of law professor mary zigler. watch booktv at your weekend on c-span2 and find a a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org. >> army officials discuss modernization efforts including bridging the gap between industrialized processes and digital age problems. lockheed martin vice president for strategy and business discuss artificial intelligence and autonomous aircraft

missions. missions. the association of the united states army health is annual meeting in washington, d.c. it is an hour and ten minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning. good morning. i'm sebastian sprenger, on editor for defense news. thank you for joining us this morning. for the session army monetization. i can tell from the packed m it's very much a topic of

interest. this session is not about lockheed martin. it would be recorded and archived. during a discussion following ours we will have the microphone available for the audience to ask questions. if you're watching online, please click the ask the button to submit a question. my guess today's dan tenney, vice president strategy in this film and for lockheed martin. welcome. you may have heard of lockheed martin. dan, thank you for joining. >> pleasure to be here and great to be a with you to kick off this great event. so appreciate the full room here this morning and look forward to the discussion, sebastian. >> since one topic of modernization, , i want to pick your brain, what is your company working toward what comes to modernization at the moment? >> modernization is extremely important as all you in the room no and we're working on a lot of

together with military. if i can take a second and you say how great these events are, having spent 27 27 years of e in government and now being an industry we all know the billet for us to come together as a team and talk about how we stay ahead of threats around the world is extreme important, so want to thank all you taking time out of your busy schedule to join us here. it's a great form and a great time to interact.

we are not talked but a remote control, not talking program waypoints come were talked about putting a mission in the aircraft allowing it to perform. that becomes extreme important as you think about supplementing a pilot. if your pilot flying and the other objectives need to be working on, they cannot tolerably light aircraft notches on autopilot but just because of weather just because of geography or threats out there that are being detected through sensors and space capabilities. you can also send in other signals and help us in a different mission. that is enabled by our system architecture. we think it's important and were invested in open architecture. i say that because open systems architecture allows companies all around the world medium small new to integrate new applications and you technologies into the aircraft. we are committed to that. it's extreme important. it's a great machine.

we will demo with here. i think with six demos will do the next few days to show the ability of autonomy. we all know when you think about modernization the future fight, it will be a big part of it. the village of autonomous aircraft that operate together and that are linked across domains will enable us to engage in the fight. >> we just open systems that's been the holy grail of dod industry as long as i can remember. what's the status of making it happen in making it efficient? >> we have something we call -- our system where enabling and it is open system meaning we can integrate third-party apps. we can do software updates. we can have new providers the coming with new technologies that the army may want to integrate in the aircraft. it's not a problem. it's not proprietary. it truly is an open architecture we developed in such a way that multiple people can contribute in advance. we think that's extremely

important. it's a way of bringing innovation. we are committed, if with the best give the best product will bring that to our customer and if somebody else has it we will bring that. we think that's extremely important to enable that openness. >> one of the sticking points has always been data rights or creative rights. >> in this case because that's not proprietary, because a way designed it now it has controls obviously of what the army will want to do but enabling an open system allows us to of other providers come in and you don't have to just come back to lockheed martin to integrate new systems and technologies in the aircraft. that's extremely important. >> you mention ai and autonomy sort of in the balance of that time on the one hand, and full ai on the other. where is the technology currently?

>> it's in place. through a series of sensors and algorithms and technology that we have, today when we find the black hawk, the demonstration were going to today, lack of will be located in stratford connecticut. we're going to fly from here, use space capability and other things to connect to the aircraft which is showing the black hawk. the economy comes in of truly saying finish want to form and would aircraft goes to algorithms assess this is the best way to perform that mission, and adjust. when you have isr and other capabilities interlinked across platforms and domains with a very intelligent aircraft. the ai comes in when it's not a remote control. there's not somebody behind the door controlling this. it's using something we call matrix which is the software application that is enabling it. matrix can use all sorts of aircraft and also to other domains. we're enabling autonomy on undersea vehicles come back in a thing. but it truly is a machine going

through thousands of algorithms to perform her mission. >> give me an example of what commission might look like, what sort sits at the hub of the control. >> but say of the black hawk flying in the theater and your troops on the ground that need emergency medevac or invent like that. they could send a message to the black hawk and the black hawk would reroute. they have done the right parameters to do that but they would send it to the black hawk would accept that mission, turn around, find the best place to land and perform it. we have shown this. we did one where we medevac some blood to show the capability to do that. that would be an example where it has a mission it is performing but a new mission has been sent to the aircraft. the aircraft would analyze it, determine the best parameters and how to perform and then change course to go perform that mission. >> is as part of the, i just learned this, launched effects that the army, part of the.

>> was launched effects is part of what were going to modernize. talking to the army the priority and it's an area where working on. it's one of our number one priority is when we think of modernization. it will be integrated but it's a different system. this ai autonomy are describing is in place right now. we have it available in we will show it in the next couple of days. >> when you think of modernization what other areas are you gaveling in? >> working across the main a cross-platform is a future, how we think about the future flight. we're doing a lot of work in that area. software is really becoming, a lot of the kurds yesterday when we see, potentially can see the hardware may stay the same but if you think about radars, gpt-3, these are software defined radars which means we cannot push software updates to

the radar themselves make the more intelligent, make the sensing better, come to work ot maybe false alarms that are occurring. that's occurring in the theater. we've been able to show even in the aegis system on chips just another example of pushing software. we did that in theater what it was in theater. what that does is we're now reducing the cycle time to update systems for months and weeks to literally hours. the software is what were putting a lot of time and effort into to modernize. many times as you said the hardware is going to be enabled but software makes it smarter, more intelligent and it is what allows us to connect across domains and platform. >> when you say there, they're as is or does it need to be a receptive to that? >> both. many times if you think about it aircraft, the aircraft itself can remain but if you think about black hawk, part of the modernization is to enable, 12 a

lot of linkages come out of the aircraft. that gives us the ability to go with software. we take at many mechanical linkages we can have crew on crew, a time into the but you don't have to change the entire structure for example, or if we think about radars. we can make radars better for accurate just by pushing software as roosevelt was happening in the theater, also lots of those sorts of things. >> final question. we talked about software. anything you're getting from the european theater from the u.s. army in terms of pressing? >> our military has been extremely helpful of enabling new partnerships with allied nations. we learned a lot from ukraine as you all know what is happening there and i think we are seeing a great awakening across europe, right, partnerships wanted to advance the modernize their capabilities.

we think that's extremely important, and allied nations working together to to deter threats we see in a modern theater. we've seen the government especially u.s. government move quicker and faster to want to enable these kind of capabilities for these countries swiss extremely important. i cannot think our partners are enough for helping us do that. it's important to our military to have strong allies across europe. we are seeing europe invest. we're seeing a lot of opportunities across europe to create a more robust supply chain across a a global allien the think that's important. we all think, under covid the fragility of the supply chain. one of the waste help with that is create multiple suppliers across world and that's part of it. when we say it's not just having different weapons and systems in the theater within different country but savvy and a database within the carriages and that's what think about it the assessments are happening in europe. >> okay. that's all the time we have. >> thank you very much, sebastian.

[applause] >> are right. good morning. i'm jen judson, , reporter for defensive news. thank you for joining us here at

a first session on army modernization. hope regular is all set with our coffee. feel free to get over there and grab any if you haven't. i know it's early. this session will be recorded and archived on the fence news.com. we have a available for audience questions. if you're watching online click to ask a question button and will get as many as possible. my guess to the army chief information officer leonel garciga, lieutenant general john morrison, deputy chief of staff cyber, lieutenant general maria barrett, , commanding general u. army cyber command. welcome and thank you for sitting down with me on day one of ausa. this panel on army modernization, i think it's very telling that based on two is up. that the network and operating in cyber domain is central to a modernize force. the army will not be doing anything effectively on tomorrow's battlefield without a robust, hardened, efficient, accessible, usable network.

i probably left out some important descriptions of there, but you get the idea. there are a few short years before you hit 2027 which is a timeline goal you have for establishing unified network. the army is making headways in streamlining networks. general morrison united sat down and talked about this about a month ago. we discussed what this has entailed in which are working toward. kick it off, mr. garciga. >> what what you can start? i think we spent a lot of time talking about what we refer to as a kid? i think a lot of the focus over the last year not just as idea of converging the networks right and simply find the network. i guess he of the peace is hyperfocus on rethinking the way we do business, right? we often talk about we're going to change policy. i think it's more than that. how do we reengineer how we

deliver capabilities? three areas with an hyperfocus on the space joliet. whatever you consider the policy foundation that lets us get to that 2027 2027 space. one is rethinking cybersecurity. how do we think about operationalizing cybersecurity in today's world, especially when were looking at it from a frame of this new technology that is, our policy, how to upgrade that really quickly and let the force deliver cybersecurity in a much better way? and xp peace has been really this idea how do we lay the foundation for ai and ml and data, right? for those who been watching we spent a lot of time rethinking who owned data in the army, pushing a lot more work to the functions, having them focus on the problem set to really shape technology works going. as a look at some of the work we're doing to enable the army, what is a remain mean from a

policy perspective desha policy perspective? security, data protection what does it look like? a lot of work. the last piece has been interesting, you have a lot more in our warriors corner this week but his idea of moving towards continuous ato. we did that if they push on software modernization. how do we get policy around that allows programs to move a lot faster? and actually operationalize that. we sabal operationalize agile but we haven't built a framework to get that done. the big focus event manga foundation to then turn around and operationalize it as a move to 2027. >> i would add a couple of thoughts. when we started this notion of unified network four years ago, is hardly it's been that long, it was leaked to get the army moving in a common direction. i would say that we're blowing past that at a very, very good clip because it's now becoming a

realized operational capability. we can talk more about how we're crushing the artificial barriers between the theaters that allow us to rapidly deploy folks and organizations around the world seamlessly, how we are crushing the false divide between our enterprise network and are tactical networks. because it almost worked in a united fashion, excuse the pun there but i would tell you the most important thing we're going to do and we are doing is we're changing the institution. i'll leave you with the thought that institutional change is lasting change. we had changed the way that we govern and prioritize requirements at the headquarters department department of the army. we have changed the way that we online resources to those requirements, all being told that by the cio in my office. we have established one peo to deliver network.

and then under that unified governance, now we've got unified requirements. we got unified delivery of those capabilities based off prioritize requirements. most of poorly we now have a single operational commander who is responsible for operating, maintaining, securing and i would submit to you maneuvering the network on behalf of our army. a completely different approach from how we have tried to before where we were very, very bifurcated, we were very, very siloed and the reality of it is we could not achieve any network modernization base off as you trust principles by 2027 if we're trying to do to get 69 different networks. you do it against one, you have a fighting chance. you do it against 69, apsley no chance at all. how are we dealing with network

modernization? i would turn over to the commander responsible. >> perfect. so there is so much going on and i'm going to actually say from an offensive cyber standpoint, shall meet network that is in transition, i will show you one at risk. so everything we are doing in support of the network modernization is a deliberate transition. so everything from a when the transforming contact elements are going out next month -- this month, happening now, you know, we will have teams on the ground looking to see and try to penetrate them and testing what it is that we are laying in every step of the way. as we execute this modernization and we employ zero trust

principles for every aspect of that that we are laying income it's been red teamed. or think about our business processes and organizations, too. netcom, because some of the services, not racially provided, they're not provided by units, they are centrally provided, we have transitioned conus into the global cyber center to really operationalize so as issues come up or we see things in the network that need to be addressed, now this is the synchronizing body behind it. it almost goes to the point this is not just about the materials being employed. there's organizational change, process change. and then throughout all echelons, getting to the operational level as well. >> okay. i would love to dive a little deeper on that in terms of the

organizational changes that are required to get after this. can you highlight a few ways that you are changing the organization to be able to accommodate this type of unified network and to ensure that it is functional on the battlefield? what are some of the things you have to do organizationally, specifically, to get after all that? >> i will let general morrison talk about raising complexity up on the battlefield, but this idea of the central delivery of services, the one thing, the global cyber center, to orchestrate all of that and to see across the global span of what is happening on the network. both from a performance standpoint and also from a security standpoint. some of the other things we are doing is the convergence is really big thing. that allows us to see ourselves so much more clearly. it's not just more efficient in terms of how we acquire

services, but that collapsing of the networks and being able to provide central come centrally provided services. some of the things were employed are smarter, too. army unified directory services, allow that global plug and play, so no longer do you have to reimage a computer when you go somewhere else or pcs or deploy. and so those type of more globally provided services, and i think this is really going to be underpinned furthermore on the battlefield was our talk about that integrated data layer. it has to extend throughout the enterprise all the way down into the tactical space, and operating this way really does make sense. you want to elaborate on that? >> this notion of central

delivery answers and raising complexity in our formations are not exclusive. they are mutually supporting i would submit to you. when we talk about central delivery of services, think about army 365. one location from a cloud environment providing the vast majority of, quite frankly, even on our mission over, the vast majority of our business operational support and our day-to-day collaboration. as we are fielding capability sets we were doing it for all the right reasons. we were supporting a very rigorous deployment schedule. we were not to point as divisions there we were deploying as brigades. they had to be self-contained relations. but when we did that we inadvertently pushed all the complexity to include the organizational structure down into the d.c. that caused a lot of problems, especially when we started to transition back to large crowd scale combat operations.

i grew up in division. i can imagine maneuvering one of our division formations today with the network we had because it was so silent. as we have embarked on the fix and soon to be next, it's all about . i complexity up to give it to the folks at the appropriate echelon who have the time to deal with the problem. think about this. we had our highest in cybersecurity operators pushed into bct. what a bct is maneuver. he had no time to conduct that very critical task. but if you placed that capability, that organizational structure at the division or even inside some of the regional cyber centers for downward reinforcing, now you're able to take that complexity out but still provide that critical capability that we will need against fake think he ever circuit making it as simple as i

possibly can in putting the right people at the right location to do with the more complex task is absolutely a central part of our journey. >> i think the next couple of years will be interesting to watch. we're watching in real-time kind of organizational transformation. some services are getting centralized really fast so we're moving on those. some of them have matured to a place where it makes sense to kind of put the lego block in the right lego sets. we had clout at the headquarters. probably the worst possible idea on the planet. let's go run operations out of headquarters. we would cloud operations to our cyber. it just makes sense, it was mature enough, it's time. other things like thinking through this process of we removed complex city at echelon and moved things up, that was also done two things which are really interesting, kind of democratize the ability to build capability at the edge, and as shown with a bunch of low code and no code platforms of the

computer platforms we said go to town if they're available to you. and then we empowered folks at echelon of the data side and said you own your data, you need operationalize it. those are really forming what i will call michael organizations out there within command. and at echelon, which are now driving that bigger change. that's what you'll see over the next couple of years as a whole kind of all echelons in translation happening more heavy dated and figuring that out. all bit more heavy on the cyber sigar design but may not so much of the network of more about software. it's also created this opportunity to build these smaller teams which may or may not be episodic. i feel like we did this cloud think any army as an episodic, get it scale and move operations to the right place. to do same thing on software, both small team triage teams legal help commenced with the software piece right. probably looks different in five years, a little more streamlined. maybe we don't need that and

more. use a lot of flex like that will be get some pop up stuff to triage and then shape it into how we operate on a day to day basis. i wouldn't don't think when it comes to organizational design and attaining of our leaders and our people, i don't think it's ever a done deal. i think it's going to continue to evolve over the course of time. would you think about what transforming contact is, folks get hung up on the capabilities that are being fielded. transfer the context is about transforming the way that we fight and away we are organized to fight, and not waiting for some modernization cycle. i think it's going to be continuous and is not just about the bright shiny kit. it's not being able to think our way through adaptive organizations and, quite frankly, the skill sets we're going to need over time. >> you talk about how policy needs to change.

in order what we need to. what policy gaps, big ones that remain, i'm sure there are plenty that you have yet to discover, but what policy needs to be amended generally in order to enable the army's goals to establish network? >> so hard not to be limpet. there's a lot. i will tell you -- flip it. i've been at this a buddy and i have looked at stuff that was written and army is using before i was born, which is terrifying by the way. when it comes to the network. here's hoping doing. we taken a bit of a different approach. it's been like one policy to rule them all. we've been working hard to segment that and focus on policies that shape capabilities. a couple areas critical right now. on the data side we continue to mature that space. it's been spaced that historically has been an all or nothing anything. it's been like you can't release

any of this data, kind of refocus that space right to there. almost everything we're doing in the army whether it be name your buzzword, ai, cybercom it doesn't matter, they dated what if you want to call it, all depend on the data. we focus a lot on empowering functional to own their data and shape, not just the problems are kind trying to solve with that data but have accountability for making them available to other folks. when we talk about big challenges, right, is how do we get it so it's not, it's in the system and the system owner says i can't show a data but the folks with the problem of the was making a decision. we made a lot of headway as a look at some of us that were doing. we are fighting the new fight. it's been everywhere we have been shaping the gap and are still a lot of work to do. the next piece has been around kind of balancing this space

between acquisition and non-acquisition. what i mean by that is theirs capabilities out there, what you're talking no code, low code. soldiers come some point in some of our vendors are operating in those platforms. is that an acquisition? i don't know. right? those are areas where folks are making really quick dynamic perishable software. does that count as an acquisition? does that meet -- spending time putting some boundaries and definitions around that so we can still keep forward momentum and not get stuck in the bureaucracy of old and give you some space. when i think about the challenges that probably one of the biggest ones we have. it's stopping folks are delivered because where living back here. same thing for requirements. it's this whole plethora of this traditional way of the living capability a lot of work is going there. we done initial cut. the memo cyber to myself and the acquisition executive.

we're going to expand that moving forward. we did it for this preference why do we do for all our platforms? lets of democratize that a lot more work and then the last space is probably the place where we need the most work right now where we are kind of putting out micro-guidance o get folks move in the right direction but we have dirty old cybersecurity policy. today's army from a pulse perspective, it's all about compliance, 100%. you've got kind of i know general morrison and i've been talking for months about operationalizing cybersecurity and moving folks from this complaint-based environment to that. that's the big muscle movement that we will see over the next probably 24 months is a reimagining of that entire process and the policies around that. going to take some time, going to take a lot of cultural us to get there but to be those are the three areas where a kind of we got some hole in our swing or

against industrial process a digital age problem. kind of bridge that gap. >> you want to weigh in? sensor talk about policy, obviously you making the software policy a few times and that's a big push for the on the right now to get software policy right to help across the enterprise. much is dependent on software upgrades to add capability whether that's combat vehicles, missile-defense rater, ct system or the network. so from your vantage point what is software policy enable your work, how does enable your work and why is it important and what does it do and what does and not do? >> the big thing it does which is by the most important part is, love being buzzword compliant, everybody has come under little pamphlet is this

what my program is doing but when you go down look, nobody is really doing that. we are playing at it still. not one big thing it does is it sets the foundation to actually be able to do those things. build software at scale in a secure fashion. we could talk about doing it all day long but if none of the policy frameworks supports that enables a company that is hard to get it done. the first real true like oh, myy godmother will be here shortly, we're about to release a couple things. one, here's how the army will approve the pipeline. this is what it takes. here are the tools come does metairie get them, her you love it from, that you can use as long as it's within this framework. the last piece which is a critical pieces ages with that means for you if you want to be in a continuous ato in a secure fashion. really big. the other pieces, this idea of where do we help where folks need help, i what i mean by that

is build smaller teams that can go out and help commands or programs that are child in a software space,, psp really quick, right? give the agile piece into the program and get the tools they need to deliver software. and the most important piece is, this is a gap of gaps can make sure your cybersecurity people are sitting in a room and adjusting the stats for all these capabilities. that's the big piece on the software modernization we've been focused on. still a lot of work to do on the contract is second to senate vaccines will be a big help to get folks to help anybody needed. a lot of the work looking at requirements, especially, has been really big. the other piece of this is rethinking, test and evaluation, right? this idea of we can build software fast. we got folks realize their security componentry. the next piece is can we build software fast with a security component and test in a way that makes sense? that's the next piece we use a

hyper push is what this testing look like and had a week reimagine that in the army moving forward? >> it's a foundation for us. i would ask from our industry partners i would ask for some tactical patience. because much like we're talking before about our organizations are going to continuously more as technology and give those mature, the network is going to continue. boy, think about in the software space. that is really going to start taking off on us but at least now we have a foundation mr. garciga was saying, from which we can pivot. that is really, really, really important because sometimes you just need to get started and to learn by doing and then make the smart things you need to mature supper i don't think this is one where we'll hit a home run since we are in baseball playoff season, but it think we are on base and think we will continue to move people around those bases. >> well played.

>> thank you. >> i did want to ask, how are you working through, you know, is test and evaluation set up now to allow for cybersecurity testing, other cyber testing? or this test and evaluation need to be revamped in some ways that will enable you to better evaluate capability? >> i think, you know, mr. garciga and i worked very closely, our organizations working closely on the policy and on the other piece of this in order to develop a process that makes sense, that actually can end up with product at the end, but in a secure manner. this partnership gets us to that end up making smart changes in the way we do business in order

to achieve both security. i think as we think about we are embedded in each one of the project convergence experiments, doing overwatch of the experiment to, looking at also i think providing to the test and evaluation and to the acquisition community, here's what we're saying from a threat standpoint, here's how the threat is changing, this is what they're take advantage of, , toe able to share those insights also beyond the borders of army cyber is super important. so that they can be integrated into the work that is being done, and a special on software side of the house. everything is going to be driven by software. as i take a look at some of the trends in the threat environment, while the number is zero days have necessarily increased, the particular areas

that they are focused on,, security appliances and software, that has absolutely increased, and that keeps me awake at night. so being able to receive products that not only are secure but have the wherewithal to respond rapidly to a particular threat and issue a patch, that's critical. so when we look at who we want to do business with from the standpoint of defending the networks, this is what we are asking is, how effective can what is your process for moving quickly to change something, you know, in your operating system should you find out there is a critical flaw? that has to part of the conversation. the other piece as we move to

more as a service type models, which look, there is a lot of benefit to taking advantage of industry deliver capabilities, in the cloud type service is out there, having this conversation, you now are an operational partner. so if something happens within your environment, whether it's nation state actor or natural causes, we have to have this operational linkage where you are calling me or i'm calling you and saying, where are we, how do we move forward on this? that's a big change that we will see the ball over the next couple of years. >> so three years ago we did the first program of record that was really in the cloud, and i happen to be part of that effort and saw wow, we are delighted

what we were doing, right? like when we taught cyber survivability can we think it's a this, that's everybody, that's purple team, red team, the testers. we are today is so different right now over the last couple of events i've seen and we're talking they programs. the idea that cyber is in the conversation, that the red team and the purple team everyone is talking together. we are rethinking the skills we need in the space to make sure we are testing against right thing. like what are today come like 180 degrees for morgue over three years ago. it is a moving target. think to get you into mature. as we move up the sack which i keep seeing a lot of the cubicles moving up the stack it's changing what we look at. that's going to be the big piece is how do we manage and equip to support this purpose is a two-part question that you really asked. there's the institutional component of how we build and is

at foundations at the way we want it? its turn in the right direction. we still have more work to do. quite frankly, as the threat changes are testing will have to change. but i take it back to the actions we've been doing with the fix. our cyber red teams attacking the architecture that we we'e deployed with the 101st, now out in the pacific with the 25th doing the same thing, and it's not just doing an assessment of the network from a cyber perspective. it's also wrapping and how are we doing the electromagnetic spectrum as well. quite frankly on today's battlefield that's probably a greater threat than what were facing on the cyber sides. we are that play out in conflicts around the world. and so having that operational red team actively trying to do something to the network, it's making sure that against the pros from dover we're fielding

particular that we can operate, maintain come sicker, defend and maneuver in support of combat operations. >> could you elaborate more on what the army is learning from the red teaming you're doing at experience and exercises through real-world examples on approaching hardening the network capability against very capable enemies? >> i will share three really big thoughts about what we are starting to see. so first off we can raise complexity. we don't need to push up all the way down and we can make things very simple for our operators who really just need to figure out how they are maneuvering and fighting. the quote we got when we went down to the joint readiness training center undeserved and control was where not fighting the network anymore, , the units now fighting the enemy. that is a completely different shifts than any conversation we would've had about the army

tactical network anytime in the past. so that's one. when we are able to do it. two, we do do not have the echelon of who is responsible for doing what from a cyber defense perspective nailed down yet. we are getting straight inside our tactical formations but the big idea is we're going to be hooked back to the broader our cyber enterprise i'll call it, where that layered defense so that the regional cyber centers and eventually the global syverson and all the way back to our cyber headquarters itself, a common view across the entire continuum. because again we don't want at the tactical level folks trying to do counter block on our cyber actors. we what that done someplace else for folks have time to see what's happening and then take the appropriate measures. so we have a look at more work to do on that component of it. i will also tell you that this

notion of putting simple and intuitive kit in the hands of our soldiers, it is also working. we used to take up words of the day or even longer to install and get to an operational capability, we have units that are now doing in less than 30 minutes. 45 minutes at night with night vision goggles on. i see change and we've been operating and it's because the network is simple and it is able to be delivered to formations as opposed to them trying to establish their own network by themselves. >> i will amplify the contested nature of the battlefield. i think commanders at echelon are more cognizant of the fact they will be operating in a contested electromagnetic spectrum. so what does that mean? it is the morbidly piece, the appreciation for the fact that they can move their c2 with

little or no disruption. the idea that they have to keep moving, the idea that they have to be aware of what their signature looks like and also be able to see the adversaries as well as in the electromagnetic spectrum. giving them the tools to do that and then make decisions about how they array themselves to reduce their signature, i think there was also some of the feedback from jrotc was about that was probably the best signature reduction of command post that they had seen in a while. and so i think that also -- we're seeing reflected in the commanders on the ground and how they think about how to employ the forces and the think that's really, that's a really good news story but is also because they are watching what is happening in southwest asia or what is happening in ukraine,

the transparency of the battlefield cannot be overstated. so i think that's one of the other big things that i would underscore. >> okay, okay. going smaller and more agile versus a huge command post that we've seen in the past, sounds great, tablets in the back of a tank for commanders to create a mission there what are some of the trade-offs to consider when reducing that footprint? the great benefits of course but what are some the downsizing your discovering as you go through some of these experimentation and evaluation in the past year or so? >> i will take a step and then throw it over to general morrison, but whatever it is we are deployed, whatever application or service it is it's got to work at the edge first and then bring it back into the enterprise. if you're doing this and trying to reengineer an enterprise capability to work at the edge, it's generally, which has been our normal approach to that it

doesn't work. if we can get that at the edge i think the other thing is really having truly robust conversation with command about how to want operate, how do you maneuver,, make decisions? that informs really where does the data need to be, where does the processing, the computing and processing need to be at echelon on the battlefield? doesn't really need to be all the way down to the platoon? and what classification are operating at? i think that conversation is really helpful to come up with this integrated data layer that's going to be vital for not only operating the network and enabling c2 but actually all of those mission command systems that commanders are employing. ..