AIR FORCE SOFTWARE
SUSTAINMENT AND
MAINTENANCE OF
WEAPONS SYSTEMS
Committee on Software Sustainment and
Maintenance of Weapons Systems
Air Force Studies Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract FA8650-18-F-9304 between the United States Air Force and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-67812-4
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-67812-9
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25817
Limited copies of this report may be available through the Air Force Studies Board, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001; (202) 334-3111.
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2020 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Air Force Software Sustainment and Maintenance of Weapons Systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25817.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON SOFTWARE SUSTAINMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF WEAPONS SYSTEMS
PAUL D. NIELSEN, NAE,1 Software Engineering Institute, Chair
MATTHEW ALEXANDER, MIT Lincoln Laboratories (through May 2019)
TED BOWLDS, IAI North America
JOHN GROSH, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
KEVIN MARTIN, HRL Laboratories
HEATHER PENNEY, Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies
STEPHEN WELBY, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
REBECCA WINSTON, Winston Strategic Management Consulting
Staff
RYAN MURPHY, Program Officer, Study Director
ADRIANNA HARGROVE, Finance Business Partner
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
CATHERINE PUMA, Research Associate
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
AIR FORCE STUDIES BOARD
DOUGLAS M. FRASER, Douglas Fraser, LLC, Chair
KEVIN G. BOWCUTT, NAE,1 The Boeing Company
TED F. BOWLDS, U.S. Air Force (retired)
CLAUDE R. CANIZARES, NAS,2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MARK COSTELLO, Georgia Institute of Technology
BRENDAN B. GODFREY, University of Maryland, College Park
MICHAEL A. HAMEL, U.S. Air Force (retired)
WESLEY HARRIS, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JAMES E. HUBBARD JR., NAE, Texas A&M University
LESTER L. LYLES, U.S. Air Force (retired)
WENDY M. MASIELLO, U.S. Air Force (retired)
ALEX MILLER, University of Tennessee
LESLIE ANN MOMODA, HRL Laboratories, LLC
OZDEN OCHOA, Texas A&M University
HON F. WHITTEN PETERS, Williams & Connolly, LLP
HENDRICK RUCK, Edaptive Computing, Inc.
JULIE J.C.H. RYAN, Wyndrose Technical Group
MICHAEL D. SCHNEIDER, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
GRANT H. STOKES, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
ZACHARY TUDOR, Idaho National Laboratory
DEBORAH WESTPHAL, Toffler Associates
MICHAEL YARYMOVYCH, NAE, Sarasota Space Associates
Staff
ELLEN CHOU, Director
GEORGE COYLE, Senior Program Officer
RYAN MURPHY, Program Officer
ADRIANNA HARGROVE, Finance Business Partner
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
CATHERINE PUMA, Research Associate
STEVEN DARBES, Research Associate (through October 2019)
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
Preface
Software has become a critical component of almost all systems—commercial and military. In 2011, Marc Andreessen’s article in the Wall Street Journal, “Why Software Is Eating the World,”1 highlighted this fundamental trend. Now, in 2020, this is even more evident. The largest companies based on capitalization are Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon—all software-centric companies. Similarly, defense systems increasingly depend on software for their functionality, inter-connectivity, and evolution. The U.S. Air Force (USAF) recognizes that to continue to be a world-class fighting force, it needs to be a world-class software developer. Recent studies by the Defense Innovation Board (DIB) and the Defense Science Board (DSB) have pointed out that software is always in development, even in what has classically been called the sustainment phase. This new understanding changes the character of the current software maintenance groups, raises the importance of their men and women to the future of the Air Force, and demands enhanced attention.
The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition Technology and Logistics (SAF/AQ), requested the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (the National Academies) to conduct a workshop and consensus study to evaluate the current state of software sustainment within the USAF and to recommend changes to the software sustainment enterprise. The statement of task for the study is given in Appendix A.
___________________
1 See M. Andreessen, 2011, Why software is eating the world, Wall Street Journal, August 20, 2011, https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111903480904576512250915629460.
Between November 2018 and August 2019, the study committee held a three-day workshop and four meetings to gather information about the state of software sustainment efforts in the USAF and to hear expert testimony on best practices from industry and other services. Experts consulted included current and former software, acquisition, engineering, and logistics professionals from the Department of Defense, subject matter experts from the Government Accountability Office, the National Defense Industry Association, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, and Carnegie Mellon’s Software Engineering Institute. Members of the study committee conducted site visits to the 309th Software Engineering Group at Hill Air Force Base in Ogden, Utah, and the 402nd Software Engineering Group at Robins Air Force Base in Warner-Robins, Georgia. Meeting agendas are available in Appendix D.
The study committee developed a set of findings, conclusions, and recommendations that, if fully implemented, will help the USAF software sustainment enterprise transition into a modern workforce that is continuously developing capabilities to improve weapons systems and assist warfighters. These recommendations address modern software engineering practices such as agile development2; Development, Security, and Operations (DevSecOps)3; software factories; and System Integration Laboratories (SILs).4 Improving information technology infrastructure and bringing software engineers into closer interaction with warfighters will allow software development groups to function more efficiently and have greater knowledge about the value their products bring to the USAF mission. In addition, software sustainment involves continuously updating weapons systems, so having data rights written into acquisition and sustainment contracts and access to modern open software architecture tools will facilitate better sustainment in the long term. Furthermore, tracking an inventory of all the software the USAF handles in its programs will allow leadership to plan for the future. These recommendations combine to allow the USAF to better foster an efficient software sustainment
___________________
2 See C. Poland, 2019, “The Air Force Is Becoming More Agile—One Project at a Time,” Wright-Patterson AFB, April 24, 2019, https://www.wpafb.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1823609/the-air-force-is-becoming-more-agile-one-project-at-a-time/.
3 See S. Lietz, “What Is DevSecOps?” DevSecOps blog, June 1, 2015, https://www.devsecops.org/blog/2015/2/15/what-is-devsecops, accessed June 2, 2020.
4 See V. Siddapureddy, N. Fountain, D. Sanders, and S. Budzik, 2011, “System Integration Laboratory (SIL) Is a Key Tool for Establishing and Testing Systems Engineering Discipline,” 2011 NDIA Ground Vehicle Systems Engineering and Technology Symposium, Systems Engineering and Integration (Se) Mini-Symposium, August 9-11, Dearborn, Michigan, https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a548299.pdf, accessed June 2, 2020.
strategy that integrates workforce, technology, and program management on the enterprise level.
Paul Nielsen, Chair
Committee on Software Sustainment and Maintenance of Weapons Systems
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Philip Antón, RAND Corporation,
Claude Canizares, NAS,1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Alan Estevez, Deloitte Consulting,
Henry McDonald, NAE,2 University of Tennessee, Chattanooga,
Ozden Ochoa, Texas A&M University,
Fred Schneider, NAE, Cornell University, and
Kevin Sullivan, University of Virginia.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommenda-
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
tions of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John P. Stenbit, NAE, TRW Inc. (Retired). He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Contents
2 CURRENT STATE OF USAF SOFTWARE SUSTAINMENT
Organizational Structure Not Aligned for Software Sustainment
Lack of an Enterprise Strategy
Systems Acquisition/Sustainment Gap
Contractor/Government Teams Ranging from Good to Near-Dysfunctional
Data Rights Ownership and Usage Agreements
Cyber Security and Software Assurance
Infrastructure Representing Challenges for USAF Software Sustainment
Software Engineering Personnel Not Treated As a Strategic Asset
Ensuring Access to Modern Software Tooling and Infrastructure
Tightening the Loop Between Users and Software Developers
The Importance of Modular and Open Software Architecture
Maintaining and Managing USAF Software Inventories
Negotiating Ownership of Data Rights and SILs
B Committee Member Biographical Information