Twitter Facebook Google RSS
National Defense > Blog > Posts > Defense industry “systems integrators” may be under political fire, but the military needs them more than ever
Defense industry “systems integrators” may be under political fire, but the military needs them more than ever
In the defense industry, “systems integrators” are both villains and saviors. As weapons systems became increasingly information-based and technically more complex in recent decades, companies that traditionally had focused on stand-alone products became systems integrators.

The Defense Department needs them to bring together components and subsystems and ensure that the pieces function together. But systems integrators also were blamed for the cost overruns and delays in major military programs such as the Army’s Future Combat Systems and the Coast Guard’s Deepwater. Congress went as far as to include language in the 2009 defense bill that restricts the use of “lead systems integrators” in the oversight of major programs.

Political theater aside, the demand for systems integrators is expected to rise. The Defense Department cannot function without them. The “network” is the coin of the realm in today’s weapons, and the military is hugely dependent on integrators to connect disparate systems and to enable the information-centric approach to warfare.

Officials have said that the military will no longer spend money on networks, radios, or other means of communications that can’t talk to each other. It is no surprise that, despite the backlash against integrators that following the cancellation of the Future Combat Systems, companies are seeking to expand or break into this sector.

“Everything points to more networked solutions,” says David Melcher, president of ITT Defense and Information Solutions. The company this week announced a major realignment of its $6.3 billion defense and aerospace businesses in order to position itself to compete more successfully in the information-technology and systems integration worlds. More interoperability, more integration, more intelligence fusion is “what our customers tell us they need,” Melcher says. “We’re trying to become a higher-level systems integrator.”

An often-heard complaint by military officials is that defense contractors build customized systems using proprietary technology. “I agree, that’s an issue,” says Melcher. But he adds that companies such as ITT are no longer interested in producing proprietary systems as the Defense Department now demands “open systems.”

There is also the larger problem of the Defense Department’s insular approach to building weapon systems. Many military programs tend to be conceived in “stovepipe” fashion, without taking into account how they will inter-operate with other systems. That, too, has to change if the military is to become a network-centric force. The Government Accountability Office criticized the Pentagon for its failure at developing “joint” requirements for weapons systems. GAO said almost 70 percent of programs are sponsored by individual services without input from others outside their organization.
For systems integrators, this only guarantees more business into the future.


Re: Defense industry “systems integrators” may be under political fire, but the military needs them more than ever

The reasion System Intergrators are under fire is becaus the way Army acquistion alines to the TRL process.  Or should I say is miss alined... The reasion for integration over-runs in because "Management" is making Mile Stone B decisions based on TRL 6 information... which is only "Half Baked"... Technoloy development is not finished... not technically demonstrated to meet operational requirments.  Read the opening of the new 5000.02... it says the same thing.  A TRL of 7 is requied for sound desicion making.  I have written a paper on this... but its... Simple.
Steve Baird at 1/9/2012 9:26 AM

Add Comment

Items on this list require content approval. Your submission will not appear in public views until approved by someone with proper rights. More information on content approval.

Name: *

eMail *

Comment *



Name: *

eMail *

Comment *


Please enter the text displayed in the image.
The picture contains 6 characters.

Characters *


Legal Notice *

NDIA is not responsible for screening, policing, editing, or monitoring your or another user's postings and encourages all of its users to use reasonable discretion and caution in evaluating or reviewing any posting. Moreover, and except as provided below with respect to NDIA's right and ability to delete or remove a posting (or any part thereof), NDIA does not endorse, oppose, or edit any opinion or information provided by you or another user and does not make any representation with respect to, nor does it endorse the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other material displayed, uploaded, or distributed by you or any other user. Nevertheless, NDIA reserves the right to delete or take other action with respect to postings (or parts thereof) that NDIA believes in good faith violate this Legal Notice and/or are potentially harmful or unlawful. If you violate this Legal Notice, NDIA may, in its sole discretion, delete the unacceptable content from your posting, remove or delete the posting in its entirety, issue you a warning, and/or terminate your use of the NDIA site. Moreover, it is a policy of NDIA to take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other applicable intellectual property laws. If you become aware of postings that violate these rules regarding acceptable behavior or content, you may contact NDIA at 703.522.1820.



Bookmark and Share