The pace of technological change presents opportunities and challenges for every organization today. And no industry is poised to be more transformed by the latest innovations than aerospace and defense.
The lifecycle of a defense system varies greatly but can be as long as 50 years. For example, the F-15C, the U.S. Air Force’s primary air fighter, is, on average, nearly 40 years old. Technology has come a long way since the mid-1980s, and the F-15C has had several technology upgrades to keep its radar, displays, radio and other systems. Eventually, however, long-lived defense systems like the F-15C accumulate so many layers of upgrades to sustain capabilities that, at some point, underlying limitations require more transformational modernization.
The Case For Updating Existing Systems
On one hand, new capabilities like artificial intelligence (AI), fresh development frameworks and cloud computing offer the potential for revolutionary improvements in areas like information security, logistics and decision-making. Integrating these new technologies into legacy defense platforms and systems builds up over decades and then carries risks and costs that must be carefully managed. As leaders in this industry, we continually grapple with when and how to upgrade aging systems versus developing entirely new platforms. As a data point, certifying a single line of source code to the most stringent level (DO-178C DAL A) can take three to four hours. Today’s planes have tens of millions of lines of software—a volume that is set to jump at least tenfold with the inclusion of AI, edge computing capabilities and required cybersecurity measures. The cost argument to reuse proven software when possible couldn’t be clearer.
Upgrading existing systems has some clear benefits in the near term. The most obvious is lower costs compared to developing a full replacement since integration and testing needs are minimized. There also is less disruption to ongoing operations since upgraded systems can be fielded via incremental enhancements, and retraining is needed only for new or refreshed functionality.
This type of iterative approach allows an organization to introduce new capabilities over time as technology matures. Upgrades also avoid some of the platform integration challenges of new development and leverage existing expertise to support these systems. Upgrades, however, are limited by old architectures that eventually hinder performance advances. Sustaining outdated systems also incurs technical debt, including:
• An inability to run new system functionality
• An inability to achieve required performance levels
• Presence of known cyber vulnerabilities for which no core fix is planned
These combine to make long-term maintenance more expensive.
The Case For Starting Anew
New platform development, on the other hand, offers an opportunity to optimize systems around emerging technology like AI, open architectures and the latest in network security. This creates a more flexible system and avoids the impediments of legacy designs. The downside is that new platforms require a greater investment upfront and pose additional risk as they are brought online. There also are challenges in transitioning from legacy systems, which often remain critical even as replacements are fielded.
To balance these tradeoffs, we often pursue hybrid strategies. One is conducting incremental upgrades to supplement legacy platforms, adding new sensors, communications or payloads without a complete redesign. Another is developing new systems that are designed to integrate with existing infrastructure for a phased transition. Open and modular architectures allow us to update select components of a platform while retaining others. With deployment cycles measured in decades, the shift to modular hardware and software components helps mitigate changes in the supply chain, including those caused by geopolitical influences and those by other business dynamics (acquisition, pricing changes, product availability, etc). These approaches can deliver significantly enhanced capabilities while at the same time managing disruption.
Determining the right balance between upgrade and new development requires assessing factors like needed capabilities, technology maturity and, of course, the cost of each option. The more revolutionary the desired improvement, the more likely that a new platform is needed. If existing systems remain viable with modest upgrades, this path may be preferable. Analyzing total lifecycle costs, not just development and procurement, should inform these decisions. And choices should align with modernization roadmaps for full capability areas, not just individual platforms.
Building The Business Case
Beyond technical factors, we also must consider the business case for each approach. The high costs and long timelines for major defense programs mean upgrades have inherent advantages in the near term. But the long life cycles of our systems make new development critical for long-term innovation.
As the U.S. Department of Defense’s Software Modernization Strategy highlights, “upgrading existing systems can deliver near-term improvements while new platforms drive change over time.” The DoD’s Third Offset Strategy and new National Defense Science & Technology Strategy also emphasize integrating sustained innovation while pursuing game-changing technologies via new starts. The mission is to provide the advanced capabilities the warfighter needs both through disciplined upgrades and cutting-edge new development. This is driving the push toward using open standards, challenging multiple vendors to innovate to win contracts, as opposed to locking customers into proprietary technology.
With deployment cycles measured in decades, to maintain leadership over our rivals, we’ll need to deliver new system functionality via controlled updates as simply as we update our smartphones today. As one U.S. Air Force chief recently stated, the AI model being used to drive any war initiative will change the second the enemy is engaged.
Employing a mix of disciplined updates alongside cutting-edge new technology can optimize near-term performance while shaping future capabilities. Guided by strategic roadmaps and in partnership with warfighters and mission experts, aerospace and defense innovators can deliver the continuous improvements that game-changing platforms need to address evolving threats. With sound strategies and prudent investments in people, research and collaboration, this essential industry can cost-effectively modernize American defense agencies for the challenges of today and tomorrow.
Source: Forbes
