DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Info War » Watchdog Says Shape Up ISR Systems

Watchdog Says Shape Up ISR Systems

cyberfight.jpg

Congress’ watchdog agency, the Government Accountability Office, is warning that the Pentagon needs to improve how it plans for and manages development of critical intelligence and surveillance systems.

In a report released April 23, the GAO said the military has struggled “to improve integration across DOD and national intelligence agencies” hampered by the widely differing missions and bureaucratic cultures of the intelligence agencies.

This is not an academic exercise. The report notes that the military plans to spend $28 billion over the next seven years to field a wide array of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems. That’s just airborne systems and does not include spy satellites, with their traditionally hefty price tags.

The GAO report cites one example where the Pentagon “had difficulty obtaining complete information” on top secret “national” assets — usually a veiled reference to highly classified radar and electro-optical satellites — “because of security classifications of other agency documents.” Also, budget wars have hampered the effort to improve coordination across the intelligence enterprise, the GAO report says. In classic understated fashion, the report says that “disagreements about equitable funding from each budget have led to program delays.”

The Pentagon has drawn up an “ISR Integration Roadmap” but it does not appear to help much, if the report’s language is parsed carefully. The roadmap does not “provide a long-term view of what capabilities are required to achieve strategic goals or provide detailed information that would make it useful as a basis for deciding among alternative investments.”

The GAO reviewed 19 intelligence and reconnaissance systems proposals and found that 12 “sponsors” — this could be a combatant command, an intelligence agency or a service — “did not complete assessments, and the completeness of the remaining seven sponsors’ assessments varied.” Perhaps most worrying, was the office’s finding that the entity charged with overseeing these crucial decisions — the Battlespace Awareness Functional Capabilities Board — “lacks adequate numbers of dedicated, skilled personnel to engage in early coordination with sponsors and to review sponsors’ assessments.”

The report’s authors recommend that Defense Secretary Robert Gates tells Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and James Clapper, undersecretary of Defense for intelligence, to work together and develop “a comprehensive source of information on all ISR capabilities.” Also, Gates should also put in place a monitoring process to make sure the capabilities board and those it works with do a better job. Finally, the report’s authors say the capabilities board’s staffing levels and their expertise should be reviewed.

– Colin Clark

Share |

April 24th, 2008 | Info War | 28068 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/04/24/watchdog-says-shape-up-isr-systems/Watchdog+Says+Shape+Up+ISR+Systems2008-04-24+14%3A19%3A36Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Catch the “Buzz” with C-Double | Hugo Chavez is Gonna Love This One » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. DC2 Jennings says:
    April 24, 2008 at 11:31 am

    So the newbie posts his first article.
    I didn’t read it, I just wanted to be the first to congratulate you on your new job.
    Just do me a favor and don’t post anything about the JSF or F-22 (very heated topic).
    Welcome aboard.
    DC2

    Reply
  2. DC2 Jennings says:
    April 24, 2008 at 11:38 am

    OK, now I have read it and I just have one statement:
    CAN’T THE MILITARY GET ONE PROCUREMENT PROJECT CORRECT THESE DAYS?!?!?!
    Every week the GAO is ripping the DOD a new one over a program. This is getting rediculous and seems to be spread throughout all branches and departments.
    And ISR seems to be the most important part of the post 9/11 world. After all, I think we would like to know about the next attack before it happens.
    No wonder Osama hasn’t been caught yet.
    DC2

    Reply
  3. crazy says:
    April 24, 2008 at 2:14 pm

    Boy it’s a good thing the DNI was established and given authority over procurement of intelligence programs so the Pentagon wouldn’t mismanage it. Before the DNI reforms this criticism of the Pentagon would have made a lot more sense. Now it sounds more like an unintended result.

    Reply
  4. reshtet says:
    September 7, 2008 at 6:56 pm

    How are the missions any different?
    They both need the same intel(INGTELEO),Greek=
    “within a goal.“Therefore don’t mismatch intel with endings and beginings it’s very foul…Since
    no human can cover it up!Just like hackers…

    Reply
  5. reshtet says:
    September 7, 2008 at 6:59 pm

    DC2!This isn’t a work site,therefore please don’t
    expose peoples postions of work or knowledge please…A plane is only a plane also…If I’m correct you would an alien creator…

    Reply
  6. reshtet says:
    September 15, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    DNI,is no better than the Pentagon!They live in the same country,under the same ideas and laws!!!
    We need to hunt the enemy more,instead of scanning with computers…Look at Israel,they hunt
    more than anything…Whom do terrorists fear more,
    us or Israel??? That should help with system choices asap…And it’s real-time(et)info…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
    • Rise of the Cyber Arms Dealers
    • Author Steven Pressfield Blogs Afghan Visit With Gen. Mattis
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
    • That Elephant’s Going To Do What? Where?
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
    • More Vehicle Digital Camouflage
    • Chinese Digi-Camo
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
    Recent Comments
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      The US has been selling Taiwan 6 Patriot...
      Benjamin
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      The US has been selling Taiwan 6 Patriot...
      Benjamin
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      Why? Taiwan's military needs to...
      Benjamin
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      If we're going to help them, I...
      Jeff Fraser
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      Logistics: If you only have to hump 1/10 the number of...
      toad
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      Exactly what committment have we made to...
      TMB
    • F-16 Sale to Taiwan, Would It Make A Difference?
      "This analysis does not take into...
      Steve B.
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
      For all the budget grips about entitlement programs, they...
      ohwilleke
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
      "[G]ive the military full control over their...
      ohwilleke
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      "The Chinese military buildup aims to threaten key...
      ohwilleke
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage