JED - March 2015 - (Page 6)

the view f rom he re ANTICIPATING SURPRISE The Electronic Warfare Publication The Journal of Electronic Defense March 2015 * Vol. 38, No. 3 EDITORIAL STAFF Editor: John Knowles Managing Editor: Elaine Richardson Senior Editor: John Haystead Technical Editor: Ollie Holt Contributing Writers: Dave Adamy, Kernan Chaisson, Barry Manz, Richard Scott Marketing & Research Coordinator: Kent Agramonte Proofreader: Shauna Keedian Sales Administration: Candice Blair B The Journal of Electronic Defense | March 2015 6 ack in January, the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) released a Broad Agency Announcement from its Office for Anticipating Surprise. I had never heard of this office before, but the more I thought about it, the more it intrigued me. Of course, can you call something a "surprise" if you anticipate it? Still, I began thinking about the concept of "anticipating surprise" in the context of electronic warfare. How does the EW community anticipate surprise, and how could we do a better job of matching threat technology when it evolves so quickly? Historically, the DOD has been pretty poor at anticipating surprise in EW. There are some threats that DOD can focus on very well, such as air defense radars and antiship missiles that are developed in Russian military design bureaus. However, when a commercial technology (such as a wireless doorbell or a mobile phone used to trigger an IED) is "weaponized," the DOD is surprised. DOD intelligence agencies focus on conventional threat technology, and their ability to track and recognize commercial technology as a potential source of threats is weak. The DOD's EW labs understand the threat potential of commercial technology very well. But the labs don't get to set many of the threat priorities for DOD. The requirements community does that, and they focus on the validated threats instead of the potential threats. So, how can the DOD begin to anticipate surprise in EW? The DOD could begin by shifting from a "reactive" posture to a more aggressive "active" posture with regard to R&D. Why wait for the threat to be fielded, if the potential threat's technology is already being developed in the commercial sector? Empowering the DOD's EW labs to act with more initiative and giving them a specific pot of EW funding to address commercial technologies that are being developed today would be a good start. These labs would, in turn, distribute this S&T funding to EW companies that would study commercial technologies and, in some cases, develop countermeasures to defeat these "threats." This would be different than the present system in the sense that the objective is to anticipate threat technology rather than react to commercial technology once it is weaponized. The companies who receive these awards must put up a matching amount of internal R&D funding focused on the same objective. And, the companies would be given a fairly free hand to spend that S&T money on long-range, forward-looking EW R&D that addresses commercial threat technology. Many years ago, Maj Gen John Corder USAF (Ret.) (the EW architect of the air war in Operation Desert Storm) told me it was ridiculous that so many in the DOD thought EW always had to lag behind the threat. There's no reason (other than a lack of imagination) why this has to be so. What if the DOD could spend a small amount of money getting ahead of a particular threat rather than spending a lot more money reacting to it? Now, that would be a surprise. - J. Knowles EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Mr. Micael Johansson Senior Vice President and Head of Business Area, Electronic Defence Systems, Saab Mr. Edgar Maimon General Manager, Elbit Systems EW and SIGINT - Elisra Mr. Jeffrey Palombo Senior VP and GM, Land and Self-Protection Systems Division, Electronic Systems, Northrop Grumman Corp. Mr. Steve Roberts Vice President, Strategy, Selex Galileo Mr. Travis Slocumb VP, Electronic Warfare Systems, Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems Mr. Rich Sorelle President, Electronic Systems Division, Exelis Gp Capt P.J. Wallace Assistant Head Targeting, Military Strategic Effects, UK MOD Dr. Richard Wittstruck Acting Deputy Program Executive Officer, PEO Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors, USA PRODUCTION STAFF Layout & Design: Barry Senyk Advertising Art: Elaine Connell Contact the Editor: (978) 509-1450, Contact the Sales Manager: (800) 369-6220 or Subscription Information: Please contact Glorianne O'Neilin at (703) 549-1600 or e-mail The Journal of Electronic Defense is published for the AOC by 5950 NW 1st Place Gainesville, FL 32607 Phone: (800) 369-6220 * Fax: (352) 331-3525 ©2015 Association of Old Crows/Naylor, LLC. All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may not be reproduced by any means, in whole or in part, without the prior written authorization of the publisher. Editorial: The articles and editorials appearing in this magazine do not represent an official AOC position, except for the official notices printed in the "Association News" section or unless specifically identified as an AOC position. PUBLISHED MARCH 2015/JED-M0315/8949

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of JED - March 2015

The View From Here
Conferences Calendar
Courses Calendar
From the President
The Monitor
World Report
Charting the Future for DIRCM
How Far Can We Take GaN Technology?
Book Reviews
EW 101
AOC News
2015 AOC Industry Member Guide
Index of Advertisers
JED Quick Look

JED - March 2015