IrregularChat Q&A

# Crafting Effective Unmanned Systems Policy for Defense **What needs fixing in unmanned systems policy to better prepare the United States for future conflicts?** This is a critical moment to share your thoughts, ideas, and challenges. Let’s dig deep into the problems, identify their roots, and propose actionable solutions. Your perspective could make a difference. > For additional context, see the open letter from L3Harris Technologies Co-founder, Chair, and CEO Christopher E. Kubasik. > [Read the Letter Here](https://www.l3harris.com/newsroom/editorial/2025/01/letter-leaders-doge) > The letter highlights inefficiencies in the current acquisition system, emphasizes the need for modularity, and suggests policies to accelerate modernization. It also discusses the importance of balancing oversight with agility to meet emerging threats. --- ## **[1] Key Questions to Address** ### **[1.1] Requirements Generation** - How can policy enable faster and clearer requirements generation to reduce the current two-year timeline for new programs? - Can we balance ambition with practical outcomes, ensuring "minimum viable systems" are deployed while avoiding overengineering? - **[Update1] How do we implement the 80/20 principle in defining requirements, focusing on the critical 80% of functionality that meets operational needs while avoiding diminishing returns on the remaining 20%?** - **[Update2] How can policies incorporate iterative feedback loops during the requirements phase to ensure evolving needs are met without excessive delays or scope creep?** ### **[1.2] Empowering Units** - How can policy empower units to adapt and procure solutions directly without being mired in red tape? - Should there be mechanisms for units to report back on pricing, performance, and utility to refine procurement processes? - **[Update1] Could policies ensure that units focus on achieving operational goals with attainable solutions, rather than striving for perfection that delays deployment or inflates costs?** - **[Update2] How can training at the unit level ensure soldiers are not only equipped with tools but also prepared to adapt these systems in dynamic operational contexts?** ### **[1.3] Scaling Innovation** - How do we bridge the “valley of death,” where innovative projects falter after early development stages? - Can modularity and standardized architectures enable scalable solutions while allowing flexibility? - **[Update2] Could policies require early-stage field trials with operational units to identify and address scalability challenges before broader adoption?** ### **[1.4] SOCOM vs. Big Army Capabilities** - How can Big Army leverage SOCOM’s solutions (e.g., Spot Plot UAS Targeting Tool) without duplicating efforts or facing bureaucratic bottlenecks? - What policy changes are needed to make SOCOM advancements available across broader defense applications? - **[Update1] Should SOCOM-inspired solutions focus on adaptable frameworks that can be scaled and simplified for broader Army use without compromising functionality?** - **[Update2] Could a dedicated "transfer office" bridge the gap between SOCOM innovations and conventional forces, ensuring seamless integration and minimizing resistance from bureaucratic inertia?** ### **[1.5] Supply Chain & Onshoring** - How can supply chain vulnerabilities, especially in critical components like chipsets and PCBs, be mitigated? - What policies are needed to rebuild a U.S.-based industrial base for unmanned systems? - **[Update2] How can partnerships between commercial tech firms and defense contractors improve supply chain resilience and foster dual-use technologies?** ### **[1.6] Transparency and Accountability** (Expanded) - What mechanisms can improve transparency and accountability in acquisitions, balancing speed and oversight? - **[Update2] Challenges in Transparency:** Transparency is essential for refining systems and procurement processes. However, strict legal restrictions, such as prohibitions on soldiers directly providing feedback to vendors, present barriers. These restrictions aim to prevent the unauthorized sharing of vendor data and protect against breaches of classified information. - **Existing Limitations:** - Soldiers can currently share feedback through formal channels, such as the G8 chain, but this process is slow and often ineffective in capturing actionable insights from end users. - Feedback mechanisms like After Action Reviews (AARs) rarely influence procurement decisions meaningfully due to systemic inefficiencies. - **Proposed Solutions:** 1. **Quick-Fire Feedback Channels:** Mandate that Program Executive Offices (PEOs) establish secure systems to collect real-time feedback from soldiers, anonymized to ensure compliance with legal requirements. 2. **Structured Vendor Communication Interfaces:** Create controlled platforms where soldiers can communicate operational needs and experiences indirectly with vendors through mediated sessions led by PEOs. 3. **Centralized Feedback Platforms:** Develop a secure, classified platform for soldiers to rate and review equipment and services. 4. **Field Testing and Feedback Integration:** Policies should include mandates for iterative field testing with end-user involvement to refine systems during early deployment stages. 5. **Legal Considerations:** Ensure compliance with NDAs and implement safeguards to prevent vendor feedback from being misconstrued as contractual direction. ### **[1.7] Strategic and Tactical Balance** - How can policy address the tension between developing cutting-edge capabilities and fielding practical systems to meet current needs? - **[Update1] How can policies incentivize prioritizing immediate, mission-ready solutions over extensive R&D, which might delay deployments but aim for perfection?** - **[Update2] What best practices from Ukraine’s integration of unmanned systems during conflict can inform U.S. policy to strike this balance?** --- ## **[2] Key Ideas From the Discussion** ### **[2.1] Faster Policy Frameworks** - Policy must streamline acquisitions while maintaining accountability to respond to evolving threats. - Innovative solutions at the unit level should have clear pathways for funding and adoption. - **[Update2] Centralizing contracting for joint programs could streamline decision-making and ensure interoperability across domains.** ### **[2.2] Modularity and Flexibility** - Embrace modular systems (“build a truck chassis”) that allow swapping components like payloads, comms, and sensors to meet mission needs. - Push for standardization in software architectures (e.g., Lattice SDK) to enable rapid integration and reduce reliance on proprietary systems. - **[Update2] Policies should emphasize modularity not just in hardware but also in software to allow for continuous upgrades without replacing entire systems.** ### **[2.3] SOCOM-Driven Solutions** - Expand access to SOCOM solutions (e.g., Spot Plot UAS) across conventional forces to reduce redundancy and enhance operational capabilities. - Address political and bureaucratic barriers preventing cross-service utilization of existing tools. - **[Update2] Formalize a policy for SOCOM solutions to act as a testing ground, with successful projects transitioned directly to the broader force.** ### **[2.4] Onshoring Industrial Base** - Rebuilding a domestic supply chain for critical components is vital to reduce dependency on foreign suppliers like Taiwan. - Focus on policies that incentivize local manufacturing and secure logistics chains for unmanned systems. - **[Update2] Establish tax incentives for U.S. companies to create dual-use technologies that serve both commercial and defense needs.** ### **[2.5] Balancing Oversight and Speed** - Balance the need for rapid fielding of minimum viable systems with oversight to prevent waste and inefficiency. - Introduce iterative feedback loops from end users to refine systems during development and deployment. - **[Update2] Create expedited review pathways for critical unmanned systems to reduce delays caused by bureaucratic hurdles.** --- ## **[3] Agreements** - **[3.1] Empowering End Users:** End-user input is vital in shaping requirements and ensuring systems are practical and effective. - **[3.2] Leveraging SOCOM Agility:** SOCOM's acquisition speed and flexibility provide a model for broader implementation. - **[3.3] Modular Systems:** Modularity and standardization are crucial for future-proofing and adaptability in unmanned systems. - **[3.4] Bridging Innovation Gaps:** Streamlining the transition from R&D to operational use is a universal priority. - **[Update1] Pursuing 80% Solutions:** There was broad agreement that fielding “good enough” systems sooner, even if imperfect, can meet most operational needs while reducing delays. - **[Update2] Expanding iterative improvement policies allows fielded systems to evolve in response to operational feedback.** --- ## **[4] Disagreements** ### **[4.1] Centralization vs. Decentralization** - Some argued for centralizing procurement for consistency and better negotiation power. - Others favored decentralized processes to enable units to adapt quickly to battlefield needs. ### **[4.2] Hardware vs. Software Focus** - While some highlighted the importance of hardware modularity, others emphasized the need for standardized software architectures to enable rapid innovation. ### **[4.3] Oversight vs. Agility** - Concerns about the risks of rushing acquisitions without sufficient oversight were raised, though speed was universally desired. --- ## **[5] Takeaways and Policy Recommendations** 1. **Empower Units and End Users:** Allow end users to innovate and adapt, with structured mechanisms for reporting feedback to improve systems. 2. **Streamline Acquisitions:** Adopt faster acquisition processes inspired by SOCOM’s P-11 funding while maintaining necessary checks and balances. 3. **Standardize Modular Systems:** Build flexible platforms that allow for easy upgrades and mission-specific configurations. 4. **Rebuild Domestic Manufacturing:** Incentivize onshoring for critical components to secure supply chains and maintain technological leadership. 5. **Leverage SOCOM Innovations:** Expand SOCOM’s successful solutions to broader defense applications while addressing bureaucratic barriers. 6. **Enable Software Flexibility:** Focus on software architectures that allow rapid integration and upgrades to meet changing needs. 7. **Adopt Minimum Viable Thinking:** Deliver "good enough" solutions for immediate operational benefits and iterate improvements over time. 8. **Introduce Training and Doctrine Updates:** Reflect the evolving role of unmanned systems in training pipelines. 9. **Incorporate Feedback Mechanisms:** Create secure, user-friendly channels for feedback to ensure continuous improvement. --- **This is just the beginning.** What challenges, insights, or solutions have we missed? How can we better connect policy to operational needs? Share your experiences, build on these ideas, and help shape the future of unmanned systems policy.