Army Lab Seeks To Save Systems From Technology Boneyard
Some new technologies deserve to die. For those that don’t, the U.S. Army Applications Laboratory (AAL) in Austin, Texas, acts as a 21st Century cavalry riding to the rescue and escorting systems across the so-called “Valley of Death” and into soldiers’ hands.
The Valley of Death is a metaphorical purgatory for newly developed technologies that never get adopted for widespread use. The inability to transition cutting-edge capabilities from the lab to the battlefield has plagued the military for decades.
Casey Perley, who on May 8 was promoted from AAL deputy director to director, lists three primary reasons some systems meet the grim reaper at an early age. First, some technologies simply need to wither on the vine. In some cases, for example, a new system that seems promising at first is overtaken by newer capabilities offering greater benefits. Those are the systems no one seeks to save. “Maybe the technology development is too slow, and by the time it’s ready to transition from that advanced development to true prototyping, there’s been a leap ahead. Those are the technologies that can fall in that valley, but at the end of the day, maybe should remain there,” she offered.
The technologies that AAL personnel and others hope to save are those that meet all requirements and milestone objectives and still somehow fail to make it into true prototyping, testing and ultimately fielding. In those cases, she suggests, the government’s multiyear, carved-in-granite budget process is partially to blame. “The government’s budget cycle is locked. We’ve already had to tell the Army what we’re doing in 2029. But say there’s a technology that emerges in the next two years that’s not in the budget, and we can’t get it in there for a couple of years. That’s one challenge.”
The second challenge is that program managers and program executive officers have to make difficult decisions. “Sometimes they have to make trade space decisions in their portfolio. Maybe the technology that’s being developed is doing great, but other things are not and they need to reallocate money. Or maybe Congress has cut their budget and they have to make some difficult decisions on what parts of a program they keep and what parts they don’t. All of that can lead to a technology failing to cross the Valley of Death through no fault of its own,” she explained.
The AAL was created specifically to assist technologies across the valley and accelerate their adoption into the force. The lab has about 20 ongoing projects, and the focus areas include power and energy, human performance, robotics and tactical artificial intelligence, and contested logistics. Additionally, the lab searches for “emerging opportunities,” which Perley describes as technologies that could change the face of warfare by virtue of their existence. “We want to give ourselves the space to go after those truly disruptive technologies even if it doesn’t fit in the areas that we tend to be working in.”
The organization’s website explains that it is not a laboratory in the traditional sense. Instead, it tests and refines improved business models that can be adopted across the Army. “Through that work, we help challenge the Army’s conventional approach to capability development and provide new ways for industry and the military to work together,” the website says.
The lab operates under the same authorities and with the same tools as the rest of the military, but the personnel there seek creative solutions to help the Army, industry and academia work together more effectively. “Some of what we do just sounds like really good commercial business tactics. And if that’s the case, it’s because we borrowed it from really good commercial companies,” Perley said. “I think so many times when people come talk to us about a problem, they’re looking for really novel or exquisite, special solutions that only AAL can provide, and a lot of what we’re doing is just common sense.”
Part of the AAL approach is working closely with contracting officers, who are widely referred to in the military as KOs, despite the lack of a “K” in the title. Before the contracting process begins, the KOs are made aware of the best contracting methods, required documents and other central processes, saving time and effort. “The first thing is that we work with our contracting officers, our KOs, upfront and early. That can shave off 50%, 60% of the contracting time,” Perley reports.
Additionally, before the contracting process begins, the organization builds robust “supporter teams” with organizations that will adopt the solutions, such as the office of Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology; Army Training and Doctrine Command and Army Installation Management Command. That helps ensure funding in the budget planning document known as the program objective memorandum, or POM.
“We have those guys involved right from the start. They help us craft the solicitation. They help us do the down select,” Perley said. “They’re involved at every touch point so that when we’re done with a project in one, two years, they haven’t forgotten about it, and the money is still there in the POM to be able to transition the technology.”
It also helps that the AAL is a part of the Army Futures Command, and Gen. James Rainey, who leads the command, can sign off on requirements documents, streamlining that process. Perley reports that the lab was able to place 15 companies on contract within 30 days after solicitations closed, some within 10 days.
“One of the really great things about Army Applications Lab is that because we directly report to Army Futures Command, General Rainey has the authority to sign requirements documents. He’s one of like three people in the Army that can do that. It’s all in-house at Army Futures Command and that’s a very valuable tool at our disposal.”
Like a lot of military organizations, the AAL aims to attract small, nontraditional businesses that can innovate much more rapidly than larger companies. But those businesses can also suffer if the military takes too long to deliver checks.
“We now work really diligently with our KOs to think through whether there’s travel on this contract, or if companies may need to bring on additional technical support, or purchase capital equipment early on,” Perley said, indicating that AAL may be able to frontload some of the payment and minimize a company’s out-of-pocket payments. “All of those are best practices that we use now that are the result of some very hard-won lessons learned. Everything we’ve done well, sir, is the result of having fallen on our face at least once.”
The applications lab also takes a creative approach to funding, providing a mix of traditional defense funds, Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) funding and private investments. Among other benefits, that mix can allow lab personnel to find a different finance path for a project if a company encounters a funding blip.
For private funds, the lab has cultivated a network of venture capitalists interested in investing in purely military technologies or dual-use technologies that serve both military and commercial purposes, including power and energy-related products.
If a small business is interested in working with a venture capitalist, AAL personnel can provide a “warm introduction,” but then backs off and leaves it to the two companies to decide whether they can work together. Also, if a business already has an angel investor or is spending its own internal research and development dollars on a project, AAL can sometimes match that funding up to $500,000.
The lab also takes a different approach to SBIR contracts with a program known as Special Program Awards for Required Technology Needs, or SPARTN. SBIR solicitations are put out three times a year, Perley notes. “But if you have an emergent problem and you really want to get to industry quickly, you end up having to wait for these artificial cycles. SPARTN automatically launches out of cycle.”
SPARTN also uses the three-phase model but allows companies to conduct some of the foundational work between SBIR cycles. Phase one, for example, allows businesses to speak with experts and end users and culminates in a concept demonstration with Army stakeholders. During phase two, companies can improve and enhance their technologies, and for phase three, they prepare to transition the technology to the Army.
“We reduced application requirements as well so that companies weren’t filling up 20-plus-page white papers just to get $100,000. Once companies have submitted their proposal, in addition to leveraging ourselves, our transition partners, stakeholders, Army experts and actual soldiers in the review process as well—which is pretty unique to what we do—then we get to those rapid contracts,” Perley added.
For a phase one SBIR award of less than $200,000, the lab’s average is about 45 days. For phase two, which can be $1 million or more, it takes less than 90 days. “Prior to us creating SPARTN, SBIR was really being used to do great science work for our labs and centers. But even Congress—or especially Congress, I think—was getting concerned at its inability to transition technologies into the Defense Department. SPARTN just kind of coincidentally began to get after a lot of those concerns and is really taking SBIR and rapidly transitioning what’s developed under it either directly to the units or to whoever that buyer or the acquirer is.”
It’s possible the military may never fully overcome the Valley of Death challenge, Perley indicates. “We’re never going to solve it. We’re never going to completely fill it in, but we can help build some bridges on top of it.”
Part of the AAL approach is working closely with contracting officers, who are widely referred to in the military as KOs, despite the lack of a “K” in the title. Before the contracting process begins, the KOs are made aware of the best contracting methods, required documents and other central processes, saving time and effort. “The first thing is that we work with our contracting officers, our KOs, upfront and early. That can shave off 50%, 60% of the contracting time,” Perley reports.
Additionally, before the contracting process begins, the organization builds robust “supporter teams” with organizations that will adopt the solutions, such as the office of Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology; Army Training and Doctrine Command and Army Installation Management Command. That helps ensure funding in the budget planning document known as the program objective memorandum, or POM.
“We have those guys involved right from the start. They help us craft the solicitation. They help us do the down select,” Perley said. “They’re involved at every touch point so that when we’re done with a project in one, two years, they haven’t forgotten about it, and the money is still there in the POM to be able to transition the technology.”
It also helps that the AAL is a part of the Army Futures Command, and Gen. James Rainey, who leads the command, can sign off on requirements documents, streamlining that process. Perley reports that the lab was able to place 15 companies on contract within 30 days after solicitations closed, some within 10 days.
“One of the really great things about Army Applications Lab is that because we directly report to Army Futures Command, General Rainey has the authority to sign requirements documents. He’s one of like three people in the Army that can do that. It’s all in-house at Army Futures Command and that’s a very valuable tool at our disposal.”
Like a lot of military organizations, the AAL aims to attract small, nontraditional businesses that can innovate much more rapidly than larger companies. But those businesses can also suffer if the military takes too long to deliver checks.
“We now work really diligently with our KOs to think through whether there’s travel on this contract, or if companies may need to bring on additional technical support, or purchase capital equipment early on,” Perley said, indicating that AAL may be able to frontload some of the payment and minimize a company’s out-of-pocket payments. “All of those are best practices that we use now that are the result of some very hard-won lessons learned. Everything we’ve done well, sir, is the result of having fallen on our face at least once.”
The applications lab also takes a creative approach to funding, providing a mix of traditional defense funds, Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) funding and private investments. Among other benefits, that mix can allow lab personnel to find a different finance path for a project if a company encounters a funding blip.
We want to give ourselves the space to go after those truly disruptive technologies even if it doesn’t fit in the areas that we tend to be working in.
For private funds, the lab has cultivated a network of venture capitalists interested in investing in purely military technologies or dual-use technologies that serve both military and commercial purposes, including power and energy-related products.
If a small business is interested in working with a venture capitalist, AAL personnel can provide a “warm introduction,” but then backs off and leaves it to the two companies to decide whether they can work together. Also, if a business already has an angel investor or is spending its own internal research and development dollars on a project, AAL can sometimes match that funding up to $500,000.
The lab also takes a different approach to SBIR contracts with a program known as Special Program Awards for Required Technology Needs, or SPARTN. SBIR solicitations are put out three times a year, Perley notes. “But if you have an emergent problem and you really want to get to industry quickly, you end up having to wait for these artificial cycles. SPARTN automatically launches out of cycle.”
SPARTN also uses the three-phase model but allows companies to conduct some of the foundational work between SBIR cycles. Phase one, for example, allows businesses to speak with experts and end users and culminates in a concept demonstration with Army stakeholders. During phase two, companies can improve and enhance their technologies, and for phase three, they prepare to transition the technology to the Army.
“We reduced application requirements as well so that companies weren’t filling up 20-plus-page white papers just to get $100,000. Once companies have submitted their proposal, in addition to leveraging ourselves, our transition partners, stakeholders, Army experts and actual soldiers in the review process as well—which is pretty unique to what we do—then we get to those rapid contracts,” Perley added.
For a phase one SBIR award of less than $200,000, the lab’s average is about 45 days. For phase two, which can be $1 million or more, it takes less than 90 days. “Prior to us creating SPARTN, SBIR was really being used to do great science work for our labs and centers. But even Congress—or especially Congress, I think—was getting concerned at its inability to transition technologies into the Defense Department. SPARTN just kind of coincidentally began to get after a lot of those concerns and is really taking SBIR and rapidly transitioning what’s developed under it either directly to the units or to whoever that buyer or the acquirer is.”
It’s possible the military may never fully overcome the Valley of Death challenge, Perley indicates. “We’re never going to solve it. We’re never going to completely fill it in, but we can help build some bridges on top of it.”
AAL Sample Solutions
Tactical Data Teams
Under a program called Tactical Data Teams, data scientists from the Army Applications Laboratory (AAL) deploy with operational units to develop solutions to theater data and intelligence challenges. This enables units to gain insights and take action far quicker than if the data scientists are back in the United States. AAL officials report the Tactical Data Teams program was effective in theater and has transitioned to contracts with U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Special Operations Command and the former Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, which was merged into the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office.
Field Artillery Autonomy Resupply
Six companies presented 14 interoperable solutions to enhance efficiency in firing munitions and ease the physical strain on soldiers caused by manually resupplying heavy munitions in the self-propelled howitzer.
In this case, one company with no artillery experience suggested a solution the Army didn’t realize it needed, reported Casey Perley, AAL’s new director. The six companies were taken to Fort Bliss to watch field artillery resupply in the field. It was the one day a year that it rained at Fort Bliss, according to Perley, and the industry personnel watched as paper forms got soaked and people kept brushing against the whiteboards and inadvertently erasing information.
One industry source leaned over and said, “You know, we can build you an app that automates all of that,” Perley recalled. “And the
Army leaders that we had kind of looked at each other. We’re like, ‘We didn’t even realize this was part of the problem.’”
The soldiers had spent their entire careers performing the processes by hand, so it took an outside observer to make them realize a better solution exists, she added. “That’s a really fun example of a project that transitioned to Program Executive Office-Armaments and Ammunition in November.”
STEED The Electric Cart
The AAL also has adopted the Silent Tactical Energy Enhanced Dismount (STEED) vehicle, an electric cart that carries up to 500 pounds of equipment up to 30 miles on one battery pack and can be used for medical evacuations.
The special operations community first used the system, built by Hendricks Motorsports, Charlotte, North Carolina, and the vehicle is preparing for wider deployment.
Anatomically Correct Female Mannequin
The lab was expected to end solicitations in early May for an anatomically correct female mannequin to be used for medical training.
Because most military medical training mannequins are male, medical training for females is lacking, which leads to higher mortality rates for women on the battlefield.
“Right now, all of our medics are trained on male trauma models. And we, along with our stakeholders, have this synthetic training environment. We’re looking at the data. We noticed that, especially for certain types of injuries, female soldiers were dying at disproportionately higher rates than their male counterparts,” Perley reported.
That is especially true for women suffering wounds to the gut area. “There are different physiological markers when a female is in distress versus a male, and women have different organs in that part of the body. That may change what a medic sees or how they need to treat that person,” Perley explained. “That’s a really great example of something that when people hear it, they’re like, ‘Of course the Army should have that. Why don’t we already have that?’”
