acquisition, ash carter, Technology, Innovation and Modern War, department of defense, dod, hacking for defense, intlpol 340, joe felter, kill chain, max boot, military innovation, ms&e296, raj shah, requirements, stanford, Steve blank, China
2. “The problem is not lack of money, lack of technology,
and certainly not lack of capable and committed people
in the US government, military and private industry.
No, the real problem is a lack of imagination.”
Christian Brose, Kill Chain 2020
3. Agenda
• Teaching Team
• Class Logistics
• The Course at A Glance
• Ash Carter
• Lesson 2 - coming attractions
6. Steve Blank
Co-creator Lean Startup
Co-author Hacking for Defense
Member Defense Business Board
Created I-Corps and I-Corps @ NSA
Air Force Veteran
8 startups
● Semiconductors
● Supercomputers
Details at www.steveblank.com
● Enterprise software
● Military intelligence
7. Joe Felter
● William J. Perry Fellow, CISAC/FSI
● Hoover Institution, National Security Task Force
● Fmr US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
● Coauthor Hacking for Defense
● Senior Advisor, Defense Innovation Unit
● US Army Ranger and Special Forces (ret)
8. Raj Shah
● Visiting Fellow at Hoover / CISAC
● Hoover Institution, National Security
Task Force
● Startup CEO and investor
● Former Managing Partner, Defense
Innovation Unit
● F-16 pilot w/multiple combat tours
9. Class Designer
Andrew Powell
● Stanford GSB Alum (Class of 2020)
● EdTech Startup Founder and CEO
● Hacking4Defense 2019 - Team Learn
to Win
● Leading AFWERX SBIR Direct to Phase
II contract to deploy L2W in USAF and
Navy operational environments
10. Class TAs
Nikita Demir
● BS / MS in Computer
Science, focus in AI/ML
● Hacking4Defense class of
2019
● Interned this summer at
Catapult Ventures advising
on AI/Robotics
● BS in Science, Technology,
and Society
● Hacking4Defense class of
2019
● Experience in Cybersecurity
and Investment Banking
Foster Karmon
11. Civilian and Military Liaisons
Lt Col Denny R. Davies
U.S. Air Force (Hoover
NSAF)
LtCol Kenneth J. Del
Mazo
U.S. Marine Corps
(Hoover NSAF)
Mr. Chase Beamer
U.S. Department of
State (Hoover NSAF)
LTC Edward Cuevas
U.S. Army (Freeman
Spogli Institute CISAC)
LTC Eldridge R.
Singleton
U.S. Army (Hoover
NSAF)
Lt Col Steven Skipper
U.S. Air Force (Hoover
NSAF)
CDR John “Jack”
Souders
U.S. Coast Guard
(Hoover NSAF)
CDR Jeffrey Vanak
U.S. Navy (Hoover
NSAF)
LTC Jim Wiese
U.S. Army (Hoover
NSAF)
13. Recording/Guests
This Zoom Class will be recorded
Guests
• All potential virtual guests require prior approval. Please an
email to Joe Felter with the guest’s name, affiliation and
visit purpose
• If you’re online now and not a student please use the chat
room to introduce yourself now: Name, affiliation and who
invited you.
14. Class Facts
• Tuesdays and Thursday 4:30 - 5:50 pm Pacific
• Sept 15 – Nov 19th
• Office hours by appointment
• 4 credits
15. Class Schedule
Part I: History, Strategy and Challenges
Sep 15: Course Introduction
Sep 17: History of Defense Innovation
Sep 22: DoD 101
Sep 24: US Defense Strategies and Plan
Sep 29: Technology, Ethics and War
Oct 1: Congress & the power of the purse
Part II: Military Applications, Operational
Concepts, Organization and Strategy
AI and Machine Learning
Oct 6 & 8: Introduction and Applications
Autonomy
Oct 13 & 15 Introduction and Applications
Cyber
Oct 20: Introduction and Applications
Space
Oct 27: Introduction and Applications
Part III: Building a plan (Group project)
How to build a plan for future war
Nov 3: Conops planning
Nov 5: Budget and Innovation
Nov 10: Team working with DoD Mentors
Group Presentations and Critiques
Nov 12: Groups 1-2
Nov 17: Groups 2-4
Course Reflections
Nov 19: Defending Our Vision for the Future
19. Definition of a Weapons System
• In the 20th century it typically meant a gun, tank, plane, ship,
missile, bomb, spacecraft
• Most often something designed to have a kinetic affect
• In the 21st century – and in this class – weapons systems will
often be non-kinetic – cyber, disinformation, AI & machine
learning, autonomy, space
• All which can win wars without killing people
• How will they be used to sustain the other parts of DIME?
20. National Dominance Is Transient
• 1945 -1991 Bipolar world – U.S. and Soviet Union
• 1992 -2018 25+ years U.S. as the dominant global power
• 2018 - National Defense Strategy 2+3
21. How Is Dominance Lost?
• Lose a War
• Miss a technology transition
• Miss new operational concepts
• Lose Allies
• Declining economic power
• Declining interest in global affairs
• Internal/civil conflicts
22. How Is Dominance Lost?
• Lose a War
• Miss a technology transition
• Miss new operational concepts
• Lose Allies
• Declining economic power
• Declining interest in global affairs
• Internal/civil conflicts
This class
24. Why Do We Care?
Crimea, Eastern Ukraine, Tibet, Hong Kong
or ask the Uyghurs
25. 2018 National Defense Strategy “The 2+3”
• Wakeup call to the Dept of Defense
• U.S. was focused on counterterrorism since 9/11/2001
• Meanwhile 2 Global threats emerged
• A rearmed Russia, and China now a peer competitor
• And 3 other threats
• North Korea and Iran as regional threats and non-nation states
• Compounded by rapid technological change
• AI/ML, Autonomy, Cyber, Space, Hypersonics, Directed energy…
27. This Class Has Three Parts
1. How does technology turn into weapons?
• How do they get acquired, deployed and used to win wars?
2. What impact will AI/Machine Learning, Autonomy, Cyber
and Space have on war?
• How will they be used?
3. How would you acquire, deploy and use a new technology
• in a real scenario
28. New Weapons: the Path to Deployment
Budget 3
Can we afford it?
1 Requirements Process is called the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)
2 Defense Acquisition System (DAS)
3 Budget Process is called the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System (PPBE)
Requirements 1
What do we need?
Acquisition 2
How do we buy it?
F-35
Ford Carrier
Columbia Sub
29. New Weapons: the Path to Deployment
Budget 3
Can we afford it?
1 Requirements Process is called the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)
2 Defense Acquisition System (DAS)
3 Budget Process is called the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System (PPBE)
Requirements 1
What do we need?
Acquisition 2
How do we buy it?Theory
32. Requirements & Acquisition
Top-down Central Planning
,
• Weapons Requirements
• Years to get defined, detailed to an excruciating level
• Service and contractor-driven/ Negligible impact of commercial tech
• Acquisition process:
• Waterfall process, assuming status quo for needs decades ahead
• Focus on political risk reduction (fraud prevention, jobs in every state,
lobbyist driven, etc.)
• Oversight agencies GAO, DoDIG, the audit agencies
• part of the problem assuring compliance with bad strategy
33. Requirements & Acquisition
Top-down Central Planning
,
• Weapons Requirements
• Years to get defined, detailed to an excruciating level
• Service and contractor-driven/ Negligible impact of commercial tech
• Acquisition process:
• Waterfall process, assuming status quo for needs decades ahead
• Focus on political risk reduction (fraud prevention, jobs in every state,
lobbyist driven, etc.)
• Oversight agencies GAO, DoDIG, the audit agencies
• part of the problem assuring compliance with bad strategy
Required us to predict the future -
for decades
34. Doctrine and Operational Concepts
• Having an existing weapon doesn’t describe how they are used to fight
or win a war
• How weapons are used are described in Doctrine
• Doctrine provides the basis of operationalizing the use of a weapon. Not just
how, but who mans it, how do you sustain it, etc..
• Operational concepts are the Minimum Viable Products of the practical
application of a doctrine against a specific enemy in a specific environment.
• New adversaries can create the need for a new doctrine
• ie. 2006 Counterinsurgency doctrine
• New classes of disruptive tech/weapons can create the need for new
doctrine
• We can’t create doctrine against new technology fast enough
35. Monopoly on Power + War on Terror =
Strategic Complacency
• 1992 -2001 Unipower
• 2001- 2018 War on Terror
• Our adversaries had less capable weapons
• Existing Strategic Doctrine/Operational Concepts
• New tactical doctrine – Counterinsurgency
• No national economic sacrifice
• Incremental strategic weapons Improvements
• F-35/Ford-class carriers/B-21/Columbia SSBN
• Innovative tactical improvements
• Reaper/Predator, etc.
36. Incremental Improvement Along
Traditional S-Curves
Debugging
Shakedown
Forrestal-Class
Carriers
Nimitz-Class
Carriers
Ford-Class
Carriers
Shakedown
…
S-Curves Insufficient to understand impact to doctrine
37. Result - Incremental Changes In Doctrine
Doctrine
Incremental weapons
improvements
Refine existing doctrine
38. Result - Existing Contractors Favored
Doctrine
Sam
e
Contractors
Incremental weapons
improvements
Contractor
s
39. New Tech Creates New Doctrine
Disruption in tech forces changes in doctrine
New
Doctrine
Disruptive tech/weapons
40. New Tech Creates New Contractors
New
Doctrine
New
Contractors
Disruptive tech/weapons
42. Visionaries See Over the Horizon
• They can see technology that looks like a toy and imagine it fully
formed a decade out
• Able to form new operating concepts against new
threats/opportunities
• Andrew Marshall ONA, Admiral Rickover, Elon Musk- Tesla/SpaceX
• Blitzkrieg (Von Manstein), AirLand Battle (Creighton Abrams)
• Then rapidly build backwards to get there
• Executors dismiss them
• Because most visionaries are hallucinating
• But the few that are right, change the world or win wars
43. The Course At A Glance
Part 2: What Impact will AI/Machine Learning,
Autonomy, Cyber and Space have on war?
And where do we find and acquire that tech?
53. Change is happening, but still early and fragile
Source: Govini, Evaluating the Innovative Potential of Other Transaction Authority Investments
https://www.govini.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Govini-OTA-Innovation-Potential.pdf
DoD OTA contract growth ($ & quantity)
54. The Course At A Glance
Part 3: New Operational Concepts
55. New Technologies and Applications
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
Autonomy
Cyber
Space
Commercial Applications
Military Applications