Experimental defense unit funds new technology but faces skeptics – Seattle Times

The Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, a 2-year-old effort thats investing in private companies, face questions from Republican leaders in Congress and others who view it as a still-unproven and possibly unnecessary venture.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. President Donald Trumps administration is throwing its support to a Barack Obama-era effort enlisting startup companies to come up with solutions to the militarys toughest technological challenges.

Secretary of Defense James Mattis made his first visit Thursday to the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, a 2-year-old effort thats investing in private companies building experimental drones, new cybersecurity technology and advanced communications systems for soldiers.

Mattis said he expects the initiative, known as DIUx, will grow in its influence and its impact under the Republican administration. In recent weeks, his office has taken steps to secure DIUxs place in the agency, including granting it greater authority to hire staff, negotiate contracts and promote its efforts.

Big admirer of what they do out there, about the way they germinate ideas, the way they harvest ideas, from one breakthrough, rapidly, to another, Mattis said before meeting with staff and local industry leaders at DIUxs office in Mountain View, California, the hometown of Google.

The program also has offices in Cambridge; Austin, Texas; and at the Pentagon.

But DIUx continues to face questions from Republican leaders in Congress and others who view it as a still-unproven and possibly unnecessary venture.

U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry, a Texas Republican who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, which oversees military spending, agrees the military needs to better keep abreast of the innovation happening in the commercial sector. But hes unconvinced DIUx is the long-term solution and wont overlap with other advanced technology offices, like the Pentagons Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which dates to the 1950s and the space race.

This question is: What is this office doing thats different from what others are doing? Thornberry said this month.

The proof that DIUx is working is the significant number of projects it has undertaken in a relatively short amount of time and with minimal taxpayer investment, said Col. Michael McGinley, who heads DIUxs office in Cambridge, near the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Since opening its first office in Californias Silicon Valley, DIUx has awarded $100 million in government contracts to 45 pilot projects.

The investments are modest since much of the heavy lifting has come from private investors, who have collectively pumped roughly $2 billion into the companies DIUx is working with, according to McGinley.

Most of the contracts have gone to startups and smaller firms that arent among the big, traditional military suppliers, such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing or Raytheon. Thats a major objective of the initiative, which McGinley described as complementary to other military-research organizations but with a distinctly different mission.

And, under the militarys traditional purchasing process, the contracts likely would have taken years longer to reach this point, by which time the technology would have become obsolete, he added. DIUx, by simplifying the bidding process, is awarding contracts within four months.

This is changing the game in the way (the Department of Defense) operates and acquires new technology to support the warfighter, McGinley said. Were not vaporware. Were producing tangible results.

While DIUx may not be going away anytime soon, Congress has been reluctant to go all-in on the effort. After receiving $20 million to launch in 2016, DIUx was given just $10 million for the current budget year, which ends Sept.30, according to a DIUx spokeswoman.

The Trump administration has sought roughly $30 million for it next year, but a key House committee has proposed slashing that request in half.

DIUx deserves more time and resources, considering its made substantial progress after initial confusion over its mission and pushback from traditional defense contractors prompted an overhaul less than a year in, said Andrew Hunter, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a research organization.