cots journal march 2013

The Journal of Military Electronics & Computing

An RTC Group Publication

Rugged Ethernet Switch Board Roundup

PLUS:

14th Annual End-of-Life DirectoryVolume 15 Number 3 March 2013 cotsjournalonline.com

Tech Focus:

DoD Budget Report: Program and Technology Impacts of Sequestration

AS9100 and ISO 9001 Certifi edGSA Contract Holderwww.rtd.com [email protected]

Design, Engineering, Manufacturing & Tech Support

The products below are a sampling of RTDs PCIe/104 and PCI/104-Express offering. All of RTDs board-level solutions are available in ruggedized packaging with advanced heat sinking, internal raceways, and a variety of I/O configurations. Visit www.rtd.com to see our complete product listing.

HiDANpluswith removable SATA drawer.

70W Filtered Avionics Power

Intel Core 2 Duo cpuModuleDual GigE and HD Audio

190W Synchronous Power Supply

Intel Core 2 Duo cpuModule4 PCIe x4 Links & 4 USB 3.0 Ports

Isolated Octal Serial Port

Auto-Calibrating 12-bit16-Channel Analog I/O

Dual Fiber Gigabit Ethernet SATA Drive Carrier

3-Channel FireWire

1.6 MHz 18-bit A/Dwith Simultaneous Sampling

Dual-Slot Mini PCIe

4-Port USB 3.0 Controller

24-bit Delta-Sigma A/Dwith Simultaneous Sampling

Xilinx Spartan-6 FPGA5-Port Ethernet Switch

RTD Embedded Technologies, Inc.

AS9100 and ISO 9001 Certifi ed

Cop

yright 2013 RTD Embe

dded

Tec

hnolog

ies, In

c. A

ll rig

hts rese

rved

.RTD is a co-foun

der of th

e PC/104

Con

sortium and

an AS91

00 and

ISO 900

1 Certified Com

pany.

All trad

emarks or registered

trad

emarks are th

e prop

erty of the

ir resp

ective co

mpa

nies

.

Untitled-3 1 1/29/13 5:22 PM

CONTENTS

COTS (kots), n. 1. Commercial off-the-shelf. Ter-minology popularized in 1994 within U.S. DoD by SECDEF Wm. Perrys Perry Memo that changed military industry purchasing and design guidelines, making Mil-Specs acceptable only by waiver. COTS is generally defined for technology, goods and services as: a) using commercial business practices and specifi-cations, b) not developed under government funding, c) offered for sale to the general market, d) still must meet the program ORD. 2. Commercial business practices include the accepted practice of customer-paid minor modification to standard COTS products to meet the customers unique requirements.

Ant. When applied to the procurement of electronics for the U.S. Military, COTS is a pro-curement philosophy and does not imply commer-cial, office environment or any other durability grade. E.g., rad-hard components designed and offered for sale to the general market are COTS if they were developed by the company and not under government funding.

The Journal of Military Electronics & ComputingThe Journal of Military Electronics & ComputingThe Journal of Military Electronics & Computing

Departments

Digital subscriptions available: cotsjournalonline.com

March 2013 Volume 15 Number 3

On The Cover: VME enjoys a rich history as an upgradable, rugged embedded computing form factor. For example, the VME-based advanced mission computer (AMC) for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft performs general purpose, input/output, video, voice and graphics processing. For 12 years the unit has served as a reliable center for the aircraft. This open architecture approach lets users upgrade with the latest capability without the expense of changing the aircraft or its support systems. (U.S. Navy photo by MC 2nd Class James R. Evans)

Coming in AprilSee Page 56

6 Publishers Notebook Positioning for Success

8 The Inside Track

48 COTS Products

58 Editorial Army Regroups and Redirects

TECHNOLOGY FOCUSRugged Ethernet Switch Boards

42 Ethernet Switch Board Choices Span a Range of Form Factors Jeff Child

44 Ethernet Switch Boards Roundup

SYSTEM DEVELOPMENTAnnual EOL and Component Obsolescence Directory

32 Resources Abound to Mitigate the Growing Obsolescence Challenge Jeff Child

38 Annual EOL and Component Obsolescence Directory

TECH RECONDoD Budget Report: Major Programs

24 DoD Leaders Weigh in on Effects of Budget Uncertainties Jeff Child

SPECIAL FEATUREWhere OpenVPX and VME Overlap and Diverge

10 OpenVPX and VME Contend with Overlaps and Differences Clarence Peckham

18 System Requirements Drive OpenVPX and VME Choices RJ McLaren, Kontron

Where OpenVPX and VME Overlap and Diverge10

COTS Journal | March 20134

PublisherPRESIDENT John Reardon, [email protected]

PUBLISHER Pete Yeatman, [email protected]

EditorialEDITOR-IN-CHIEF Jeff Child, [email protected]

SENIOR EDITOR Clarence Peckham, [email protected]

MANAGING EDITOR/ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER Sandra Sillion, [email protected]

COPY EDITOR Rochelle Cohn

Art/Production ART DIRECTOR Kirsten Wyatt, [email protected]

GRAPHIC DESIGNER Michael Farina, [email protected]

LEAD WEB DEVELOPER Justin Herter, [email protected]

Advertising WESTERN REGIONAL SALES MANAGER Stacy Mannik, [email protected] (949) 226-2024

MIDWEST REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL SALES MANAGER Mark Dunaway, [email protected] (949) 226-2023

EASTERN REGIONAL SALES MANAGER Shandi Ricciotti, [email protected] (949) 573-7660

BILLING Cindy Muir, [email protected] (949) 226-2000

COTS Journal

HOME OFFICE

The RTC Group, 905 Calle Amanecer, Suite 250, San Clemente, CA 92673 Phone: (949) 226-2000 Fax: (949) 226-2050, www.rtcgroup.com

EDITORIAL OFFICE

Jeff Child, Editor-in-Chief 20A Northwest Blvd., PMB#137, Nashua, NH 03063 Phone: (603) 429-8301

Published by THE RTC GROUPCopyright 2013, The RTC Group. Printed in the United States. All rights reserved. All related graphics are trademarks of The RTC Group. All other brand and product names are the property of their holders.


SUBSCRIBEFREE ONLINE

www.cotsjournalonline.com

THE JOURNAL OF MILITARY ELECTRONICS

& COMPUTING

COTS_Subscribev1.indd 1 1/9/13 11:06 AM

VERY COOL PRODUCTS

t4PMJE4UBUFPS)BSE%JTL%SJWFT in only 2U of panel heightt5XP2VJDLMZ3FNPWBCMF4UPSBHF.BHB[JOF each containing up to 12 HDDs or SSDs eacht'BVMU5PMFSBOU)PU4XBQ$PNQPOFOUT - no single point of failuret4VTUBJOFE3FBEBOE8SJUF%BUB5SBOTGFS3BUFT - of over 5000 MB/sec and 3000 MB/sec respectivelyt.*-45%(.*-45%&$FSUJFE

introducing RPC24Rugged, Deployable, Mission Oriented Data Storage

AS9100 Rev C/ISO 9001: 2008 Certied

Drive Magazine Based High Performance Multi-Protocol RAID System

w w w.phenxint.com 714-283-4800 h i

Untitled-1 1 2/28/13 9:53 AM


Embedded Computing | Power Supplies | Instruments

631-567-1100 Fax: 631-567-1823 www.naii.com

Visit www.naii.com/switch or call us at 631-567-1100 today.

Proudly made in the USA.

Excellence in ALL we do

Ultra Low Power and High Performance?Now Thats a Switch.

Ultra Low Power and High Performance?Now Thats a Switch.

Introducing the 75D4-H2... the onlylow-power, high performance 3U,cPCI 10/100/1000Base-T Ethernet Switch. 12-port Layer 2+ Gigabit Ethernet Switch 11W total power at 5V Features Broadcom 53312S Non-blocking Gig-E fully integrated switch fabric w/4Mb packet buffer memory Integrated MACs (IEEE 802.x compliant) with support for 9600-byte jumbo frames IPv4 and IPv6 traffic class support Port segregation/partition options available Four integrated RS232/422/423/485 serial ports (optional) Also available in 6U VME The Single Source for Intelligent COTS Solutions

Untitled-1 1 2/28/13 9:35 AM


NOTEBOOKPublishers

Pete Yeatman, PublisherCOTS Journal

Whether youre a user or a supplier, we cant stick our heads in the sand waiting for Congress to act on the military budget and tackle sequestration. We have to react to whatever gets thrown at us and do it in the most cost-effective way possible. History and common sense tell us that problems caused by the current lack of decisiveness regarding funding for the military have to end in the near future. So now is the best time to ensure that we are prepared.

Knowledge is power, and having the best and most current information will place the more knowledgeable users and sup-pliers in preeminent positions. As budgets and programs open up, it will be essential to provide sound justifiable solutions. And persons or companies that can do that quickly will have a great advantage. As has been said before, the best time to move ahead of the pack is in a down time when everyone else is crawling into a hole. COTS Journal is practicing what it has been preach-ing. We are expanding, and with that were providing features in both our print and electronic solutions to assist our readers and suppliers in getting through this period.

Recently, we added Clarence Peckham to the editorial team, adding another experienced editor in the industry to our staff. Clarence has a long history in the embedded marketplace, in-cluding being president of a major technology supplier to the military. His engineering and market expertise brings even greater insight to our editorial team, as well as enabling COTS Journal to expand into new key technology areas.

Until this period of uncertainty subsides, we will add a new section within COTS Journal that will enable decision makers to make quick, yet essential choices on suppliers and products. It will provide the latest essential information on companies and their products targeting military applications. Our goal with this section is to ensure that military system designers are fully aware of the latest and best solutions available. Such knowledge is a prerequisite to meeting the new mandates and program needs that will be part of the fallout from the new mili-tary budget. COTS Journal will also continue to urge suppliers to take full advantage of the many free or low-cost opportunities to billboard their company information or products. These op-portunities take a variety of forms including our standard sec-tions, New Product Press Releases, Tech Focus product listings, Product Gallery ads and company news within the Inside Track, right next to Military Watch analysts market insight.

Gone are the days when electronics and computing tech-nologies were just a part of military deliverables functionality. Today they are fundamentally tied to capabilities and require-

ments of everything from radar systems to fire control systems to advanced communications gear. The result is that high-level technical decision makersfrom DoD execs, to program man-agers (both uniformed and non-uniformed), to engineering managersneed to keep pace with the system-level technology issues along with the many global, big-picture trends that are driving technology decision making. Those are areas above the realm of focused engineering-level publications such as COTS Journal. To address those needs, we are producing Military Intel-ligent Systems Journal as a COTS Journal supplement to focus on this expanding technology, its unique requirements and needs of interconnecting these systems. To assist with this project, we have engaged Johnny Keggler, renowned military program and systems editor, further expanding the depth of COTS Journals staff and capability.

We are also increasing our presence at key military confer-ences such as AUVSI and MILCOM as well as industry generic electronics conferences like Design West and Design East. Most notably, COTS Journal will again host a large booth at MILCOM 2013 that will serve as an incubator enabling smaller military systems suppliers to participate and have a presence at this key military conference. Providing cost-effective access for new sup-pliers to key military electronics system developers is an essen-tial endeavor in order to bring new ideas and technologies into the military arena.

Maintaining our position as the military electronics and computing industrys leading platform for the exchange of criti-cal technology information between users and suppliers is our primary mission. Adding key personnel to our staff, and cre-ating new sections and supplements to the publication, is only a small part of the complete information resources and tools COTS Journal provides its readers. Improving and intensifying efforts at this time is key not only for COTS Journal but for inte-grators, designers and suppliers. We need to use every tool and opportunity available to us to ensure that when this temporary budget situation resolves, we can be in a position to take advan-tage of the turnaround.

Positioning for Success

2013 GE Intelligent Platforms, Inc. All rights reserved.All other brands or names are property of their respective holders.

GE Intelligent Platforms

incoming roundsensor array

auxiliarysight

hull/turretcomputers

primary sight

sensor

360situationalawareness

ip camera

dvr/das

10g switch

video processingsystem

ip camera

sensor

sensornetwork

node

ethernetswitch

ip camera

active protectionsystem

gigabit ethernet (copper)

10 gigabit ethernet (fiber)

win-tjc4isrsensor

router/firewall

dataradio

sensor

dataradio rf antenna

datarecorder

Enabling and securingthe connected warfighter

Todays armed forces are embracing an everything over Ethernet approach in building a network-enabled battlefield. Modern military vehicles have become the leading edge of that tactical network. GE has the products and experience to digitize sensors, standardize vehicle networks, and exploit data within harsh, space-constrained environments. Our COTS products reduce complexity, risk and cost, and enable rapid deployment of your modernized platform. We have the full portfolio of solutions to turn disparate systems into a seamlessly connected network to connect warfighters like never before.

For whitepapers and application details, visit:

defense.ge-ip.com/milcom

Untitled-1 1 2/28/13 10:04 AM

8 COTS Journal | March 20138

INSIDE TRACKThe

in a far distant location. The MUOS waveform, based on the communications interface found in commercial cellular networks, will deliver high-speed voice and data com-munications and ten times greater capacity than the militarys current Ultra High Frequency (UHF) satellite communications system. With a smartphone-like f low of in-formation, the upgraded PRC-155 radios will allow soldiers to access the MUOS com-munications system wherever they are deployed, on foot or from land vehicles, ships, submarines and aircraft.

General Dynamics C4 Systems Scottsdale, AZ. (480) 441-3033. [www.gdc4s.com].

Mercury Systems Digi-tal Receivers Tapped by Naval Research Lab

Mercury Systems has been awarded a 3-year indefinite quantity/indefinite delivery (IDIQ) contract by the U.S. Na-val Research Laboratory (NRL) Tactical Electronic Warfare Division (TEWD). Worth up to $16.7 million, the contract calls for Mercury to supply advanced mixed signal digital receivers for prototype electronic warfare applications on airborne and surface shipboard platforms.

Mercurys array of mixed-signal offerings delivers ultra-fast tuning, high dynamic range and extreme data processing. The Naval Research Laboratory, com-missioned in 1923 by Congress for the Department of Navy, serves as the Navys corporate

Army Orders MUOS Up-grade for AN/PRC-155 Manpack Radios

The U.S. Army ordered kits to upgrade 100 Handheld, Manpack, Small Form Fit (HMS) AN/PRC-155 two-channel radios to enable them to communicate with the militarys Mobile User Objec-tive System (MUOS) satel-lite communications system. This MUOS channel upgrade, comprising a field-replaceable power amplifier and support-ing software, will allow secure voice and data communication with the MUOS system. The order is valued at $5 million; the kits will be delivered in the fall of 2013.

The two-channel PRC-155 Manpack radio (Figure 2) also runs the essential waveforms

from the defense depart-ment library. With the MUOS capability in the PRC-155, a network of soldiers can be interconnected with others

Figure 2

AN/PRC-155 Manpack radios in production at the General Dynamics radio factory in Scottsdale, Arizona. One hundred of the AN/PRC-155 radios built by General Dynamics will be upgraded with the MUOS satellite communications kit.

A UAV crew with the 82nd Airborne Divisions 1st Brigade Combat Team wheels out a Shadow 200 UAV for a flight in Afghanistan.

Figure 1

Analytic Systems has announced its largest order ever for a power system for AAIs Shadow Tactical Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Figure 1), which are in service with customers including the U.S. Army and Marine Corps. For this project, Analytic Systems made use of its recently pur-chased Aegis Manufacturing Operations Software, which is designed to improve efficiencies and quality by streamlining and controlling process planning and launch, process tracking and control, and quality and test management. It improves reliability, flexibility and traceability in the pro-duction of important projects like this.

Working with AAIs Engineering team, Analytic Systems has modi-fied their LIAC600 (US Army/USMC AC Lithium-Ion Battery Charger), their LIDC600 (US Army DC Lithium-Ion Battery Charger), and their PWS1510MS ruggedized power supply to work as a complete power system for AAIs next-generation Universal Ground Control Station. AAIs UGCS is the next generation of AAIs proven One System Ground Control Station (GCS) technology, which is in service today with the U.S. Army, Army National Guard and Marine Corps unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) units. It provides information exchange capabilities for command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and re-connaissance, or C4ISR.

Analytic Systems, Delta, British Columbia, Canada. (604) 946-9981. [www.analyticsystems.com].

Analytic Systems to Supply Power Products for Shadow UAV Ground Control Stations

9INSIDE TRACK

March 2013 | COTS Journal 9

laboratory. NRL conducts a broad program of scientific research and advanced technological development directed toward maritime applications of new improved materials, techniques and equipment. TEWD provides new and advanced concepts and systems in electronic warfare that improve the ability of the Navy to perform its vital mission.

Mercury Systems Chelmsford, MA. (866) 627-6951. [www.mrcy.com].

Stiletto Maritime Demo Program Hosts Capabil-ity Demonstration

The Stiletto Maritime Dem-onstration Program conducted its first Capability Demonstra-tion in late January. The initial demonstration was hosted for the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) off the Virginia coast near the Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek, Fort Story in Virginia Beach, VA. The Capability Demonstration provided NECC Sailors an op-portunity to observe new tech-nologies developed by industry in a realistic military maritime environment. The program also provided the 15 participating in-dustry partners an opportunity to receive immediate end-user feedback toward increasing tech-

nology readiness levels.The Stiletto Maritime Dem-

onstration Program (Figure 3) is funded by the Assistant Secre-tary of Defense for Research and Engineerings Rapid Reaction Technology Office, Emerging Capabilities Division to help accelerate the delivery of in-

novative maritime technologies across all of the armed services. Engineers and technicians with specialized expertise in mari-time technology from Naval Sur-face Warfare Center Carderock Divisions (NSWCCD) Norfolk Detachment maintain and oper-ate the program.

Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division Bethesda, MD (301) 227-4465 [www.navsea.navy.mil/nswc/carderock/].

Figure 3

The Stiletto Maritime Demonstration Program team launches an 11-meter rigid-hull inflatable boat from the high-speed experimental boat Stiletto. (U.S. Navy photo)

Military Market WatchSubdued Growth in Force Protection Offset by Emerging Markets

The need for force protection systems increased significantly during the Iraq and Afghanistan war. With operations in Afghanistan now winding down, the demand for such systems, especially among NATO countries, is set to stabilize. In contrast, strong strategic intent and economic prowess are mak-ing Asia-Pacific (APAC) and the Middle East the hotspots for future market growth. New analysis from Frost & Sullivan, Global Force Protection Market Assessment, finds the market generated $6.1 billion (U.S dollars) in 2012 and is estimated to reach $7.55 billion in 2021. The research covers vehicle, soldier and base protection segments. All three segments present multiple, large-scale opportunities, with base protection expected to gross the highest revenues.

According to the research, the economic downturn is expected to minimally impact the global force protection market; force protection considerations are set to be the core of all future procurements. De-creasing troop strength and falling vehicle procurement volumes will change force structures, creating greater demand for advanced force protection systems during 2012-2021 (Figure 4). Sub-dued growth is projected in the more traditional mar-kets of Europe and North America. In contrast, the emerging markets in APAC and the Middle East offer brighter growth prospects.

The APAC market is expected to register the highest growth10.2 percentover the forecast period. By 2015, revenues from the APAC market will surpass that of its European counterpart. The Middle East will rack up a solid compound annual growth rate of 10 percent over 2012-2021, followed by Latin America and Africa.

Global Force Protection Market Assessment (M840-16) is part of the Defence Growth Partnership Service program. Frost & Sullivans related research services include: Global Military Support in Service Market Assessment, European Defence Support in Service Market Assessment, and Global Military Train-ing & Simulation Market Assessment. All research services included in subscriptions provide detailed market opportunities and industry trends evaluated following extensive interviews with market partici-pants. For further information about Frost & Sullivans report Global Force Protection Market Assess-ment, contact Joanna Lewandowska, Corporate Communications, at [email protected].

Frost & Sullivan, San Antonio, TX. (210) 348-1000. [www.frost.com].

A variety of drivers and restraints will affect the Force Protection market over the next ten years.

Figure 4

Mar

ket D

river

sM

arke

t Res

train

ts

Ongoing Combat Operations

Source: Frost & Sullivan analysis

Force Modernization

Decreasing Vehicle Procurement numbersand Troop Strength

Recapitalizing equipment due tobudget constraints

Withdrawl from Afghanistan

Budget Constraints

High Medium-High Medium Low

1-2 years 3-5 years 6-10 years

Force Protection Market: Key Market Drivers and Restraints, 2012-2021


Where OpenVPX and VME Overlap and Diverge

SPECIAL FEATURE


Since its beginning in the early 1980s, VME has evolved and even mutated in later years. The evolution was driven by the desire to support faster and newer technologies such as faster processors and faster interconnect methods. Mutation was controlled for many years. The original 6U and 3U board formats have been maintained and the original three-row DIN connectors were kept for over a decade. Has the evolution been managed and the mutations allowed only as required?

As technology increased it became apparent that a parallel bus that only allowed 10 MHz transactions (limit of 40 Mbytes/s bus transfers for a 32-bit bus) was a stumbling block for future VME systems. Systems would be I/O bound as the compute power increased. So the DIN connector was redefined in the early 1990s to allow for a five-row DIN connector that would allow for more power and ground pins on the outer rows but keeping the inner three rows the same for backward compatibil-ity. This new connector allowed the bus performance to increase to 80 Mbytes per second for 32-bit transfers. This performance was increased again for synchronous block transfers until 320 Mbytes per second was achieved. But the bus was still a master/slave parallel bus architecture.

Time for the MutationAt this point the rise of serial bus architectures, or fab-

rics if you will, was beginning with promised speeds into the

Clarence PeckhamSenior Editor

OpenVPX is on the rise as a system architecture for building military systems. Will VME-based systems coexist with OpenVPX, or be relegated to a limited number of applications?

OpenVPX and VME Contend with Overlaps and Differences


SPECIAL FEATURE

multi-Gbit range. The DIN connector was not a viable candidate for such fab-rics and in fact, since all of the pins were defined, it was an issue for backward compatibility. So a new connector was defined specifically for the performance of the new and future serial fabrics. This new connector fit in the space between the P1 and P2 connectors and was la-beled the P0 connector. The first such fabric used was PCI followed quickly by InfiniBand and RapidIO. A new version of the VME spec released as VITA 41the VXS specification.

To build a VXS system, all that is re-quired is a new backplane with the new

P0 connector and the five-row DINs for P1 and P2. In addition, the routing of the P0 connector on the backplane was implemented according to the version of the VXS spec that was to be used in the system. Choices were 1 Gbit Ethernet, In-finiBand or RapidIO.

Robust Set of SpecsAt this point in time there was a

very robust system of VME specifications in place that provided for a traditional VME-based system with performance up to 320 Mbytes per second on a paral-lel bus, plus the addition of serial fabric for high-speed data transfers between

cards in the system. This was an excellent platform for testing the new technologies emerging for embedded systems. Instead of building a traditional VME system with one or more processor cards and I/O, systems were being developed us-ing processor cards, DSP engines, FPGA boards, high-performance video/graph-ics and traditional I/O.

Unfortunately technology does not stand still and processing power in-creasedPCI expanded to PCI E Gen 1, 2 and 3, and both InfiniBand and Serial Rapid I/O speeds increased tenfold. On top of these changes, the P0 connector was limited in pins and size due to its lo-cation between P1 and P2 on a 6U VME board. Worst of all, since the P0 connec-tor cannot be used on a 3U VME board small form factor, VME systems built on 3U cards were limited to only the P1 con-nector and limited bus performance.

At this point, around 2006, it was determined that a major change was re-quired and a new version of VME was required; one that would not be ham-pered by backward compatibility or rely on a parallel bus architecture. The only true carryover was the use of 6U and 3U board form factors. Every other feature of the specification was up for debate. Over a period of two years the VITA standards organization (VSO) worked to develop a new specification that emerged as VITA 46VPX. As a follow on, the VSO real-ized that the VPX specification was very complex. So to make sure there was in-teroperability between vendors products and clear guidelines to develop a system, a VSO subcommittee developed VITA 65, the OpenVPX specification, to define profiles for VPX features that would allow boards to work together in a system.

Is VME Obsolete?At this point the temptation is to

pronounce the VME specification obso-lete and of no further use, and declare OpenVPX as the solution for future sys-tem applications. However this is far from the truth. A review of the differ-ences between OpenVPX and VME pro-vides some interesting conclusions. First and foremost, OpenVPX is a data driven

SBC I/OI/O

SBCSBC I/O

VME Bus

Traditional VME bus single board computer and I/O

OpenVPX dual SBC with I/O full mesh connection using serial fabric

Figure 1

Compared here are a traditional VME SBC and I/O (top) versus a system with dual OpenVPX SBCs with an I/O full mesh connection using serial fabric (bottom).


SPECIAL FEATURE

architecture, one that was defined to move the most data as rapidly as possible between the most numbers of boards. Al-though VME is an event driven architec-ture, it is driven by interrupts and by I/O transfers that consist of one or two bytes of information. As shown in Figure 1, both systems have places in todays appli-cation needs. In the system at the top of the diagram is a typical VME system with one single board computer (SBC) and several I/O boards. Data is transferred over the VME data bus in a master slave configuration with one owner of the bus at a time. Generally this is a configuration that is sufficient for a lot of military con-trol applications.

The bottom of the diagram shows an OpenVPX system defined as a multipro-cessor system, in this case two SBCs and an I/O board that are connected in a full mesh system. In this example each of the boards can be transferring data between the other two boards simultaneously. This example requires that the I/O card have the intelligence to participate in the data transfers.

Co-Existing in Same SystemDoes this mean that systems that

require high-performance data through-put must exclude event driven needs? Fortunately this is not the case. The VSO OpenVPX task force realized that there is a need for both to co-exist in the same system. So the OpenVPX specification includes a profile definition that allows a single backplane to provide both an VPX section with serial fabrics and a section of the backplane that allows for standard VME cards to be fitted. This is an inter-esting concept that goes back to the time of large mainframes. The hybrid VPX/VME chassis can be compared to the mainframe of old that had a processing element and the concept of intelligent I/O channels that handled all of the periph-eral devices. The difference is the VPX/VME implementation requires 1000th of the physical space and power require-ments and provides more than 1000 times the performance capability.

The diagram in Figure 2 shows the evolution of VME into VPX by

standard. The VME specification also evolved over the years to include differ-ent cooling methods to meet different application markets. The introduction of conduction-cooling helped VME gain acceptance in military applications. As the VPX specification was developed, changes were made to allow for more power, better cooling and better use of board space. The changes incorporated a board spacing of 1.0 vs. 0.8 used for VME. The extra spacing means better use of components on both sides of a board as well as better air-cooling, the addition of flow-through board cooling and better conduction-cooling.

VME/VPX Hybrid SolutionsThe VPX specification provided for

a hybrid system by defining a mapping of the VME bus onto the VPX J2 connec-tor. A backplane can be provided that includes VME slots and VPX slots, and a bridge card is used to interconnect the two bus systems. Figure 3 is an example

of a hybrid backplane developed by Elma that has two VME slots and five VPX slots. Two of the VPX slots on the back-plane are mapped to the VME bus, and all of the VPX slots are mapped as a full mesh system. Another method of inter-connecting VME cards and VPX cards in the same backplane is to utilize the P0 connector on the VME card to provide an Ethernet connection to the VPX back-plane. Both methods are used today in deployed systems. Hybrid systems pro-vide a convenient way to add legacy VME boards to a VPX system for those situa-tions where a comparable product is not available as a VPX solution. This hybrid solution is also useful for unique custom designed VME boards where the cost of a redesign is not feasible.

As previously mentioned, there is a distinct difference between the types of systems being developed for VPX vs. VME. The VPX systems are very data driven with a need to collect massive amounts of data, process it and output

Perform

ance

Back

war

d Co

mpa

tible

40 Mbyte/s

80 Mbyte/s

80 Mbyte/s

320Mbyte/s

320 Mbyte/s

VME 32

VME 64

VME 64x

VME 2eSST

Gb E

ther

net o

n P0

3-30

Gbi

t/s

VXS

3-10

0 Gb

it/s

VPXVME Evolution to VPX

Figure 2

Charted here is the evolution of VMEand its various milestonesinto todays OpenVPX technology.


SPECIAL FEATURE

the results as rapidly as possible. Tra-ditional VME-based systems are event driven and are used to monitor and con-trol processes. Typical applications in the military include fire control, flight control, vehicle instrumentation and maintenance management. I/O require-ments are lower performance such as MIL-STD-1553, CAN bus, Serial I/O and

parallel I/O. Both the data-driven appli-cations and the event-driven applications represent the universe of the modern mil-itary vehicle applications. Although both can reside in one system, such as a hybrid VME/VPX solution, more solutions are being implemented in separate systems and interconnected over a network in-stalled in the military vehicle.

Swan Song for Traditional VME?There have been many rumors sug-

gesting that traditional VME systems used in the military will be replaced by newer solutions such as VPX or CompactPCI. However, that does not appear to be the case based on market data. In a compari-son to the growth of VPX versus the de-cline of VME, as shown in Figure 4, VME continues to maintain a better than 50% share of the market. VPX does grow over the next four years, but VME does not show any major decline.

Why isnt VPX growing at a faster rate? There are a couple of reasons. First, OpenVPX-based systems in general are large multiprocessor heterogeneous sys-tems designed for large applications. The time from specification to deployment will be lengthy. Second, there are com-peting architectures for large systems. For applications that do not require extensive environmental specifications, an archi-tecture such an ATCA is a competitive so-lution. Another driving factor is that the

Figure 3

This example of a hybrid backplane developed by Elma has two VME slots and five VPX slots. Two of the VPX slots on the backplane are mapped to the VME bus, and all of the VPX slots are mapped as a full mesh system.

sie-cs.com

rugged & ready when you areOPEN VPX [ [configured and ready to ship

COMPUTING SOLUTIONS

SIE Computing Solutions | 10 Mupac Drive | Brockton, MA 02301 | 508-588-6110

enclosuresbackplanessystem integration & custom solutionsVMEVPXCompactPCIOpen VPX.. .

Untitled-1 1 3/1/13 10:47 AM


SPECIAL FEATURE

defense budget for the next several years is expected to be significantly reduced from past budgets, so the number of new starts will be limited.

System upgrades will continue. Theres certainly a large number of exist-ing VME systems deployed in all forms of military applications. Unless there is a major change of the function of the sys-tem, the tendency will be to upgrade the existing system. In some cases, however, the function specifications will change enough to require more performance than is available with an existing system. When it makes sense to combine systems into one, the door will be open for a new VPX system.

Users Decide SuccessThe overall winner is the customer.

In the case of the military, since the first release of the original VME specifica-tion and the first military systems based on Motorola 68000 processors, the VME specification has been developed at no cost to the customer. The infrastructure of vendors and users have worked to-gether to continuously develop the set of VME specifications over the past 20 years with the intent of providing the latest

technology with the least impact to the customer. Until the VPX and OpenVPX specification, customers could upgrade by replacing boards, or at most the back-plane and boards. Even with OpenVPX, a system can be upgraded at the box level without changing the footprint and space required in the vehicle.

Overall the future of VME and OpenVPX looks very bright. Both are still competitive solutions for military appli-cations, and the infrastructure of vendors remains strong with companies provid-ing system and board solutions for both VME and OpenVPX.

AcromagWixom, MI.(248) 295-0310.[www.acromag.com].

Aitech Defense SystemsChatsworth, CA.(888) 248-3248.[www.rugged.com].

BittWareConcord, NH.(603) 226-0404.[www.bittware.com].

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400VME VPX

Source: IMS Research

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Reve

nue

($M

)

VME and VPX Sales Growth

Figure 4

VME continues to maintain a better than 50 percent share of the market. VPX does grow over the next four years, but VME does not show any major decline.

PICO ELECTRONICS, Inc.143 Sparks Ave., Pelham, New York 10803

Call Toll Free 800-431-1064 FAX 914-738-8225

E Mail: [email protected]

Over 2,500 standard high and low voltage DC-DC converters and

AC-DC power suppliesIndustrial/Cots/Military

Isolated/Regulated/Proportional/Programmable

Also Thousands of Hi reliability, Ultra Miniature Transformers

and InductorsUS Manufactured

since 1969

800-431-1064

Military options availableExpanded operating temperature

-55 to +85 C Ambient

Military Standard 883 Selected testing available

VDC Outputs DC-DC CONVERTERS100 to 10,000

4 Watt to 10 Watt SeriesSurface Mount & Plug InOver 250 Standard Models!

Isolated Outputs/Proportional V in and V out

Miniature fully encpsulated modulesfor operation in rugged environment

Will review all Customer Specifications for custom design specifications

See PICOs full line catalog at

www.picoelectronics.com

Untitled-1 1 2/4/13 3:00 PM


SPECIAL FEATURE

Concurrent TechnologiesWoburn, MA.(781) 933-5900.[www.gocct.com].

Curtiss-Wright Controls Defense SolutionsAshburn, VA.(703) 779-7800.[www.cwcdefense.com].

Emerson Network Power, Embedded ComputingCarlsbad, CA. (407) 241-2751.[www.emersonnetworkpower.com/embeddedcomputing].

ELMAFremont, CA.(510) 490-7388[www.elma.com]

Extreme Engineering SolutionsMiddleton, WI.(608) 833-1155.[www.xes-inc.com].

GE Intelligent PlatformsCharlottesville, VA.(800) 368-2738.[www.ge-ip.com].

KontronPoway, CA.(858) 677-0877.[www.kontron.com].

Mercury SystemsChelmsford, MA.(866) 627-6951.[www.mrcy.com].

PentekUpper Saddle River, NJ.(201) 818-5900.[www.pentek.com].

Themis ComputerFremont, CA.(510) 252-0870.[www.themis.com].

MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL

Your Con guration.One Part Number.

Visit us at:www.chassis-plans.comCall us at:858-571-4330Email us at:[email protected]

COTS AND CUSTOM RUGGED, MILITARY AND

INDUSTRIAL GRADE COMPUTER PLATFORMS AND LCD MONITORS

Its our mission to make your life easier. Our Sales Engineers will help you select the right con guration for your project, making sure the details are analyzed and that the system meets your speci cations. One part number means easier procurement and less paperwork for you.

1U-5U Rackmount

Transit Case Integration

LCD Monitors & KVMs

Portables

Storage ArraysEngineering Services & Rapid Prototypes

RuggedComputer Systems

Untitled-3 1 2/20/13 4:34 PM

Windows Embedded Summit

What Is It?A half-day technical brie ng highlighting the Microsoft intelligent system strategy and how engineers and technology leaders can leverage existing WES7 and upcoming WES8 technology to increase embedded OEM business more effectively.

Who Is Invited?Business leaders and technology decision-makers will be invited to join Microsoft and key partners at over 30 global locations.

Questions Answered:What game-changing technology does Windows Embedded 8 bring to embedded design?

How to best select an embedded software platform for next generation intelligent systems?

How to get started today and prepare your business for the future?

Microsoft to Introduce Intelligent SystemStrategy With Windows Embedded 8

YOU ARE INVITED: 34 CITIESONE POWERFUL TECHNOLOGY

UPCOMING EVENTS:

MUNICH, GERMANYMarch 26

TEL AVIV, ISRAELApril 11

*Dates and locations are subject to change

evolve2012tour.com

microsoft ad v6.indd 1 3/4/13 9:45 AM


Military system designers have the tough task of continually developing the most techno-logically superior applications. All are looking to win in this highly competi-tive market, and the best design earns the contract. Determining the optimal embedded computing form factor ap-proach is many times a key element in design success. Whether the military sys-tem is a new design, a program add-on, or a tech refresh, the choice today is often between the stalwart VME and the newer powerhouse OpenVPX platforms. Overall system requirements take the lead in this important selection, and developers must carefully consider such needs as desired performance, Size, Weight and Power (SWaP), bandwidth, I/O, thermal, secu-rity, application longevity and more.

By comparing all the integrated com-puting requirements against the features of VME versus OpenVPX, designers get a better picture of how each standards ca-pabilities may overlap or where they totally diverge. The selection of the best em-bedded computing solution is definitely more difficult when the applications re-quirements and the features of VME and OpenVPX solutions lie in the gray areas where both overlap. Going through a

logical decision tree of relevant questions typically leads OEMs on the right course. Next generation VME-based embedded platforms offer a traditional approach

that makes perfect sense as a drop-in solution for some refresh programs. But other, more complex upgrades that need higher speed signaling, increased I/O and

RJ McLaren, Manager Military and Aerospace ProductsKontron

Deciding whether OpenVPX or VME is the optimum computing technology is not an easy task. A multi-faceted set of issues drives where they diverge and overlap.

System Requirements Drive OpenVPX and VME Choices

Where OpenVPX and VME Overlap and Diverge

SPECIAL FEATURE

Questions for Selecting System Architecture

Upgradability Will it need to be continually updated or will a static design be all that is required?

Physical Requirements

What are the size, height or footprint constraints, thermal and operational temperature requirements and level of ruggedness needed?

Bandwidth How much bandwidth or throughput speed will do the jobis 1 Gbit Ethernet (GbE) sufficient, or does this application call for faster 10 GbE or PCI Express (PCIe)?

Compute Power What processor architecture meets the systems performance demands? Does the system need to perform computationally intensive calculations in image or sensor-based applications?

Interface and I/O Requirements

What interface and I/O capabilities are necessary?

Net-Centric Interoperability

Where must the system fit into the breadth of military programs or meet interoperability or network-centric battlefield demands?

Cost and BOM Budget

What is the BOM budget or competitive cost constraints associated with this project?

Figure 1

Described here are the key questions system developers need to answer in order to guide them toward the correct technology choices.

Untitled-1 1 2/20/13 4:31 PM


SPECIAL FEATURE

more sophisticated interfaces, may require the additional capabilities and benefits of CompactPCI, VPX and now even inte-grated application-ready platforms.

Decision Tree: Questions to AskThe diverse set of military systems

forces developers to thoroughly evaluate each applications technology and work-load needs over the course of its deploy-ment. Figure 1 lists the key questions sys-tem developers need to answer in order to guide them toward the correct tech-nology choices. Satisfying application requirements is the primary task before developers, but attention must be given to evolving military system trends in order to be most competitive. Current trends call for ongoing and greater bandwidth improvements to satisfy defense initia-tives for highly reliable network-centric connectivity for everything from surveil-lance data and ballistic calculations to wearable soldier computers and handheld GPS-based radios. Sensors that generate an immense amount of data are playing an important role along with secure video imaging, which enable increased surveil-lance and situational awareness capabili-

ties. Making all applications more mobile is an ongoing trend that is being spurred on by the availability of advanced, highly integrated and low-power technologies.

Taking a Venn Diagram ApproachDetermining where and when Open-

VPX and VME may overlap and the ar-eas where they diverge can be a helpful resource and brings to mind the tried and true Venn diagram. Venn diagrams use overlapping circles to show elements of at least two different subjects. The area where the circles overlap or intersect represents the characteristics the sub-jects have in common or share. There are some common elements and qualities of OpenVPX and VME, but the differences are clear-cut, which allows designers to have a relatively distinct decision path to determining the best form factor stan-dard for a particular application. Figure 2 shows a simplified Venn diagram of VME and OpenVPX features.

Size and Footprint: Both VME and OpenVPX keep the Eurocard form factor board sizes of 6U and 3U. Due to SwaP re-quirements, many developers opt for the 3U form factor. If SwaP is a strict neces-

sity, this will push the design to 3U VPX, as 3U VME solutions are not seen as vi-able for most military applications due to the fact that it doesnt support 32-bit processors or higher. 3U CompactPCI has provided a viable solution as it does sup-port 64-bit processors, but I/O pins have been limited.

When the design consideration is a calculation between the number of daughter cards or the number of slots in a system, then the 6U form factor comes into play. For systems that can accommo-date a taller height and have a long list of application capability demands, design-ers must weigh the features or capability gains from 6U VME versus 6U VPX.

Rugged Thermal Capabilities: VME and OpenVPX boards offer efficient con-duction-cooled thermal methodology. Both board standards are well-suited for systems that demand increased process-ing density and I/O bandwidth within tight thermal envelopes. OpenVPX provides improved heat transfer of the conduction-cooled module along with options for different board pitches (0.8, 0.85 and 1.0). The larger pitch helps dissipate heat to the cold wall.

VME has held a successful position in facilitating the development of rugged COTS military systems for almost three decades. VMEs success is attributed to its open architecture, forward compatibility, proven conduction-cooled reliability and well-developed broad ecosystem. With continual bandwidth, connector and I/O enhancements to the VME standard, it has remained a viable solution for many military applications. However, there is a limit to the throughput performance of VME. It may be a crucial requirement to upgrade the performance of deployed VME systems and integrate new technol-ogies that allow for increased bandwidth, performance and flexibility. Figure 3 shows an example VME board based on a Core i7 processor.

OpenVPX is seen as the successor for military systems that must handle a mas-sive data increases from advanced sen-sors, as well as integrating enhanced ra-dio communication along with radar and other imaging systems powered by high performance processors and chip sets.

Features

VMEbusTechnology

VPX

OpenVPX

VPXRedi

VMEbus, parallel3U, 16-bit

User I/OPMC, FMC, XMC

64bit, multi-processor

6U IEEE 1101.1Air Cooled,Conduction0.8 pitch

Serial bus single/dual star,full mesh topologies

PCIe, GbE, SRIO InfiniBand

High Speed Diff pairs, Coax, Optical, SE

3U / 6U with 0.8, 0.85, 1.0 pitch

High power per slot capability

Figure 2

Using a Venn diagram makes it easier to visualize where the features of VME and OpenVPX boards overlap and where they diverge.


SPECIAL FEATURE

Where They DivergeCost: Upgrades can be costly, so

many military OEMs are choosing to stay with and develop new VME prod-ucts to meet tight budgets. By integrating the latest processing technology, taking a more conservative upgrade approach with VME can be the most cost-effective and efficient path that wins the contract. Costs can also be curtailed in develop-ment time and resources, and it is a logi-cal alternative to replacing the chassis, I/O cards and software of a VME-based system when it is not warranted in many large, existing programs.

If the project calls for a total technol-ogy refresh or a high-end system, then the OpenVPX backplane design can help reduce costs and development time. Re-ducing BOM costs, a specialized data transmission mezzanine that allows the exchange of data from board to board with front end cables is no longer needed.

Development of OpenVPX-based systems is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, development is shortened because the core chipset provides high-speed I/O on the backplane and doesnt require specific device driver development. On the other hand, VPX affects the back-plane and all system cards, which com-plicates the design much more than a simple CPU card upgrade. Development time is affected as additional design expertise is needed to understand the broad range of new interface standards and to replace the bus-based architec-ture with a network-based protocol, not to mention the need to upgrade applica-tion software.

Increased Throughput and I/O Sup-port: The VME64X standard proved VMEs adaptability through support for a 64-bit bus plus I/O features that in-cluded an additional backplane connec-tor and rear I/O capabilities. However, the connector technology changes are not enough for applications that push the throughput performance limits to the maximum levels available today. The VME backplane is limited to 1 Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) bandwidth.

The most important area where VME and VPX diverge is in the back-plane. VPX replaces all VME legacy con-

nectors to support a minimum of four x4 fabric ports per slot with the ability to support more should the applica-tion require. The OpenVPX connec-tor and backplane design allows access to higher-performance 10 GbE, Serial RapidIO and PCI Express technologies. VPX employs GbE to implement high-speed serial link point-to-point connec-tions between boards so full dataplane bandwidth is no longer shared between boards. Each VPX board can have one or

more dedicated high-speed connections via GbE, 10 GbE, or PCI Express.

Adding value to military systems designs, OpenVPX interconnects offer a backplane infrastructure that enables the development of scalable x86-based higher performance applications. For example, compute-intensive radar, so-nar and other sensor or imaging-based systems can readily use the increased I/O bandwidth that can be delivered by two independent Single Board Comput-

Figure 3

Helping military OEMs preserve their investment in legacy VME equipment, the VM6050 delivers the latest Intel Core i7 features, performance and support for PMC, XMC and FMC mezzanine cards.

Figure 4

A high-performance solution for radar, sonar and general image processing, the VX3905 is a 3U VPX PCI Express and Ethernet hybrid switch.


SPECIAL FEATURE

ers (SBCs) in a single 3U or 6U VPX slot. Further design flexibility is afforded with an I/O backplane that permits separate operating systems to run on each proces-sor. Plus, due to its higher connectivity per slot, VPX enables additional switch-ing capabilities to be integrated into ev-ery processing node. Figure 4 shows an example 3U VPX board.

Design Flexibility and Resources: With VPX-based boards, fabric proto-

col compatibility is no longer an issue. OpenVPX specifies that the signal allo-cation and voltage on the backplane are the same regardless of the final choice of fabric technology. This gives designers greater flexibility to add different types of I/O directly into the fabric.

To compete effectively, OEMs must meet shorter deployment schedules, which make resources that simplify and streamline the integration of these new

technologies very compelling. Applica-tion Program Interfaces (APIs) offer such a resource to facilitate faster application development for IP-based transport over PCI Express. APIs provide the founda-tion to implement efficient inter-board communication at hardware processing speeds and eliminate code changes by allowing existing TCP/IP-based applica-tions to use PCI Express for higher band-width communication.

For example, the VXFabric API technology from Kontron is equivalent to an Ethernet network infrastructure mapped over a PCI Express switch fabric technology for efficient development of high-performance OpenVPX technolo-gies based on next-generation processor architectures. Software engineers can develop applications over a typical Ether-net network infrastructure using regular desktop PC-based hardware. When it is ready to be transferred onto the military system, the VXFabric offers fast PCI link plug-and-play capabilities so migration issues are minimized.

Viable COTS SolutionsOpenVPX is seen as the successor for

military systems that must handle mas-sive data increases from advanced sen-sors, as well as integrate enhanced radio communication along with radar and other imaging systems powered by high-performance processors and chip sets.

Depending upon the budgetary guidelines or technology needs, many mil-itary systems OEMs will opt to stay with VME if it meets the projects performance, I/O and footprint requirements. Military systems that have more integrated, com-plex requirements will need to migrate to VPX to take advantage of the performance breakthroughs, higher bandwidths and I/O flexibility. To give them a competi-tive edge, developers are wise to look for resources and standards-based tools such as APIs that simplify the integration of higher-performance communication to reduce deployment time.

KontronPoway, CA.(858) 677-0877.[www.kontron.com].

ISO 9001:2000 and AS9100 certified manufacturer

All trademarks are the property of their owners.

A C R O M A G E M B E D D E D I / O S O L U T I O N S

w w w . a c r o m a g . c o m s o l u t i o n s @ a c r o m a g . c o m 8 7 7 - 2 9 5 - 7 0 8 4

Acromag Embedded I/O Board Solutions

FPGAs Your Way.

Download FPGA Computingfor Speed and Flexibility atwww.acromag.com/fpga

PMC Modules 20+ models Analog, digital, serial, FPGA I/O

Carrier cards

Industry Packs 30+ models Analog, digital, serial, FPGA I/O

Carrier cards

Industrial PCs Fanless design Atom or Geode CPU versions

-40 to 75C

Configurable FPGA Solutions on VPX, PMC, XMC, or IP ModulesOnly Acromag gives you configurable FPGAs inso many formats with just the features you need for a quick and trouble-free implementation.

Virtex-5 FPGA for high-performance logic, DSP Spartan-6 FPGAs for cost-sensitive projects DDR2 SDRAM handles high volumes of data Dual-port SRAM optimizes bus DMA transfers Extension modules interface analog & digital I/O

load FPGA Comput

WhitePaper

NEW!

Virtex-6 FPGA XMC Modulewith GbE and PCIe x8

Untitled-1 1 2/28/13 10:10 AM

Streamline your Next-gen technology upgrades

Kontron uniquely suited for today's military tech refresh and upgrade programs

Next Gen Processing Technology Technology Migration Legacy Platforms Lifecycle & Obsolence Management Risk Management

The pulse of innovation

Call: 1-888-294-4558 [email protected] www.kontron.com/military

Gen3 PCIe & 10GbE

Maintain backwards compatibility with next gen higherI/O throughput and processor performance

Software usability across all product lines

PPC-to-x86 Seamless Migration

Pin compatible processor boards Matching I/O ports for plug and play

VX3042 & VX30443U VPX 3rd gen Intel Core i7 dual / quad core Single Board Computer

CP6004X-SA6U CompactPCI 3rd Gen Intel Core i7 Processor Blade

VM62506U VME Power PC with Altivec Computer

VM60506U VME Intel Core i7 Single Board Computer

100% pinout compatibilityOnly Kontron supports native Gen3 PCIe & 10GETH

Untitled-3 1 3/5/13 2:14 PM


Theres no doubt that this years season of DoD budget planning is the strangest in many years. In a normal year, the DoD Budget Request for the next fiscal year (2014) would have been made public in mid-February. Be-cause of the uncertainty regarding se-questration, the budget proposal has been kicked to March 25, according to the Pentagon Deputy Comptroller John Roth. At time of this printing of COTS Journal, its unclear whether the massive spending cuts due to sequestration will hit March 1, requiring $500 billion in defense spending cuts over the next 10 years. Theres a possibility of a deal be-ing made between Congress and the Ad-ministration to avoid sequestration, and the DoDs budget proposal will have to change drastically depending on which way things go. Complicating the plan-ning process further, the Pentagon is contending with a continuing resolution (CR) that is $11 billion under the DoDs 2013 spending request.

Whenor perhaps ifa level of budget certainty is reached, COTS Jour-nalin a subsequent issuewill report on the details of the major DoD Weapons Systems budgeted for, highlighting those that use the largest amounts of embedded

computing and electronics. For this issue, we will instead offer a view on where the top DoD decision makers see the chal-lenges ahead in the face of sequestration and its long-term impact.

Preparing for Severe CutsIn preparation for the looming pos-

sibility of the sequestration cuts, in Janu-ary Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter released a memo directing the service branches and defense agencies to begin planning for possible upcoming budget challenges. Since Congress did not approve an appropriations act for fiscal 2013, the Defense Department has been operating under a continuing reso-lution. Because most operating funding was planned to increase from fiscal 2012 to fiscal 2013, but instead is being held at fiscal 2012 levels under the continuing resolution, funds will run short at current rates of expenditure.

The memo allowed the various seg-ments of the DoD to review contracts and studies for possible cost savings, to cancel third- and fourth-quarter ship maintenance, and to examine ground and aviation depot-level maintenance. It also called on all research and devel-opment and production and contract

modifications that obligated more than $500 million to be cleared with the Un-der Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics before being awarded. For science and technology ac-counts, the DoD branches and agencies

Jeff ChildEditor-in-Chief

With sequestration looming and uncertainty casting a wide shadow, DoD leaders express their points of view as to what the impact on programs, technology and defense industry will be as they put together their 2014 fiscal budget plans.

DoD Leaders Weigh in on Effects of Budget Uncertainties

DoD Budget Report: Major Programs

TECH RECON

Figure 1

Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter says a technologically vibrant and financially successful defense industry is in the national interest.

Untitled-6 1 1/4/13 12:18 PM


TECH RECON

were tasked to provide the Under Secre-tary and the Assistant Secretary of De-fense for Research and Engineering with an assessment of the impacts that the budgetary uncertainty will cause to re-search priorities.

DoD Leaders Speak Before Congress

Providing perhaps the most com-prehensive view on where the DoD is at in terms of wrestling with the bud-get situation, Deputy Secretary of De-fense Ashton Carter, General Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and each of the leaders of the DoDs ser-vice branches spoke before the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing in mid-February. They outlined the effects of budget pressures and how they could require an alteration in the national de-fense strategy. Detailed below are the parts of those testimonies that relate to defense industry, technology and major defense programs.

Ashton Carter was the first to give testimony in the hearing. Within his pre-sentation was a focus on the defense in-

dustry itself. Just as sequestration and the reductions in the discretionary caps will have devastating effects on the na-tions defense force, said Carter, they will also be harmful to the defense indus-try upon which we depend. He cited the quality of the weapons systems produced by our defense industry, which is second only to the quality of our people in uni-form, making our military the greatest in the world. Carter also stated that a tech-nologically vibrant and financially suc-cessful defense industry is in the national interest (Figure 1).

Continuing along that vein, Carter pointed out that the act of sequestration and longer-term budget cuts, and even the prolongation of uncertainty, will limit capital market confidence in the defense industry. They could cause companies to be less willing to make internal invest-ments in their defense portfolio. The im-pact will be even greater on our subcon-tractors, who lack the capital structure to withstand turmoil and uncertainty. Its also significant that 60 to 70 percent of U.S. defense dollars are subcontractedand among those subcontractors are small businesses in the embedded com-puting industry. Sequestration could also cause a spike in program inefficiencystretching out programs and driving up unit costs.

Certainty Sought AfterNext up, Chairman of the Joint

Chiefs Dempsey kept his testimony somewhat global and general, in order to leave the details of the various branches to the individual branch chiefs. Dempsey pointed out the urgency to reset and re-fit, and in many cases replace, war-torn equipment that has returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. Dempsey also stressed that the uncertainty was making any kind of transition difficult. To do this, we need your help. First, we need budget cer-tainty, said Dempsey. That is, we need the antithesis of sequestrationnamely, a steady, predictable funding stream. We can manage the transitionthe mili-tary embraces change. One of Joint Force 2020s underlying assumptions is that we will need to get smaller but stay strong. And I am convinced that we can restore

the versatility of our force at an affordable cost (Figure 2).

Dempseys second major point was that more time is needed to deliberately evaluate trade-offs in force structure, modernization, compensation and readi-ness. With two rounds of sequestration scheduled in March, totaling $46 billion in fiscal year 2013 reductions, it will be difficult for the force to absorb these cuts without long-term damage. We need flexibility to allocate our resources to our highest priorities, said Dempsey.

Cuts to Resets and ResearchGeneral Raymond T. Odierno,

Chief of Staff of the Army, was next to speak to the Congress. Using DoD planning assumptions for sequester, the General said he estimates that seques-tration will impose an additional $12 billion cut on the Armys budget in the remaining months of FY13, to include a $5 billion cut in OMA, and approxi-mately $1 billion in the Reserve Com-ponent operation and maintenance ac-counts. The remaining $6 billion will be taken across the board from our pro-curement; Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RTDE); and military construction accounts.

Depot maintenance would be among the area where Army cuts would be made. This includes reducing Army purchase orders with 3,000 companies, of which 37 percent or approximately 1,100 may consequently face moder-ate to high risk for bankruptcy. The reduction in maintenance will delay equipment readiness for six divisions. Odierno went on to say that these de-lays will halt the reset of 1,000 Tactical Wheeled vehicles, 14,000 communica-tion devices and 17,000 weapons in Ac-tive and Reserve units for three to four years following redeployment.

In an area directly affecting tech-nology suppliers, the General said that the Army would need to curtail Opera-tional Test and Evaluation operations affecting program of record develop-ment and fielding schedules. These are expected to add costly delays to critical acquisition programs and the field-ing of equipment to soldiers. This will

Figure 2

We need budget certainty, said General Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, That is, we need the antithesis of sequestrationnamely, a steady, predictable funding stream.


TECH RECON

particularly affect the areas of network-ing capability and precision munitions. Delays can be expected in key network programs such as the Warfighter Infor-mation Network-Tactical (WIN-T) and the Joint Battle Command-Platform (JBC-P) (Figure 3).

The Army is making plans to reduce its Science and Technology (S&T) pro-grams by approximately $300 million. The reductions will impact federal civil-ian employees and support contractors, and reduce programs with our academic and industry partners across all fifty states and the District of Columbia. The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Ac-quisition, Logistics, and Technology) provided an assessment to the Assistant

Secretary of Defense (Research and En-gineering) on 1 February 2013 detailing the impact to Department of Defense re-search priorities.

New Start Navy Programs Affected

Speaking for the Navy, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenerts testimony included a look at how the CR is precluding the start of new projects. If the CR is extended for the whole fiscal year, we will stop work on two aircraft carrier refu-eling overhauls (USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Theodore Roosevelt), one of which is within four months of completion, said Greenert. The prohibition on new starts under the CR also compels us to defer con-

struction of USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79), USS Somerset (LPD-25) and USS America (LHA-6), and cancel the planned procurement of an Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer, multiple P-8A Poseidon aircraft and hundreds of weap-ons. Similarly, the Navy will not begin about $675 million in new start military construction projects while under the CR.

On top of reductions in operations and maintenance funding, sequestration will reduce FY13 funding for each invest-ment program (about $7.2 billion over-all). In some programs, such as the F-35C Lightning II, P-8A Poseidon and E-2D Hawkeye, this reduction will compel the Navy to reduce the number of platforms procured in FY13 (Figure 4).

Figure 3

Chief of Staff of the Army, General Raymond T. Odierno, says budget cuts will particularly affect the areas of networking capability. Delays can be expected in key network programs such as the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T). Here, soldiers stand near a WIN-T Increment 2 Point of Presence platform.


TECH RECON

More on the Industrial BaseSpeaking to the issue of a damaged

industrial base, the Admiral said that delayed or cancelled ship and aircraft construction, cancelled maintenance and repair, and reduction of the civil-ian workforce will immediately im-pact private shipyards, aircraft and weapons manufacturers and our mili-tary industrial base. The loss of work in FY13 alone may cause some smaller suppliers and service providers to shut down.

As Greenert indicated last year to the Senate Armed Services Committee

(SASC), under a set of fiscal circum-stances in sequestration, the Navy may be a fleet of around 230 ships. That would be a loss of more than 50 ships, includ-ing the loss of at least two carrier strike groups. The Navy would be compelled to retire ships early and reduce procurement of new ships and aircraft.

Programs such as the F-35 Light-ning II, next-generation ballistic missile submarines and Littoral Combat Ships, might be reduced or terminated. Speak-ing again to the impact on the indus-trial base, he noted that these changes will severely damage our industrial

base. Some shipyards will not be able to sustain steady construction or mainte-nance operations and may close or be inactivated. Aircraft and weapons man-ufacturers will slow or stop their work entirely. In particular, the small firms that are often the sole source for par-ticular ship and aircraft components will quickly be forced to shut down. Once these companies and their engi-neers and craftspeople move on to other work, said Greenert, they are hard to reconstitute, sometimes impossible, at a later date when our national security demands it.

Figure 4

In some programs, such the F-35C Lightning II, P-8A Poseidon and E-2D Hawkeye, budget reductions will compel the Navy to reduce the number of platforms procured in FY13.


TECH RECON

U.S. Marine Corp Vehicles Representing the U.S. Marine

Corps, General James F. Amos, Com-mandant of the Marine Corps, said that they would need to reprioritize an en-tire year of military construction proj-ects into FY14 and beyond. Given the current fiscal limitations, some projects could be delayed or deferred, or can-celled. When reductions in facilities sustainment are compounded with the inability to execute our planned mili-tary construction program for FY13, said Amos, we are faced with a situa-tion where we have severely impacted planned aviation unit lay-downs associ-ated with the MV-22 and F- 35B, as well as other critical projects at home and in the Pacific.

Amos predicted a need to delay major procurement programs such as the Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, and Am-

phibious Combat Vehicle. Such delays could result in the possibility of Nunn-McCurdy breaches, Initial Operational Capability delays, and increased unit and total program cost (Figure 5). Budget pressures would mean cancel-ing major multi-year procurements such as the MV-22, and incur greater cost and program delay in future pro-gram buys.

Disruptions Add CostsWeighing in on the Air Forces situa-

tion, General Mark A. Welsh III, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, said that sequestra-tion cuts to Air Force modernization in-vestments, if applied at the program, proj-ect and activity level as planned, impact every one of the Air Forces investment programs. For example, the F-35A low rate initial production would see reductions of

Figure 5

General James F. Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, predicted a need to delay major procurement programs such as the Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar, Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, and Amphibious Combat Vehicle. Such delays could result in the possibility of Nunn-McCurdy breaches, Initial Operational Capability delays, and increased unit and total program cost.

Small Size Big Performance Perfect Fit

The Rugged AB3000 Avionics Computer

ballardtech.com/AB3000

The AB3000 from Ballard Technology is small, lightweight and loaded with capabilities for easy integration into todays modern aircraft, UAVs, and ground mobile platforms. With an efcient Intel E680T processor, MIL-STD-1553 and ARINC 429/708/717 interfaces, Ethernet, USB, video, audio, and PMC expansion, this rugged, conduction-cooled COTS device is ready to take on all of your toughest computing and interface problems.

Performance and versatility in less space ... thats the AB3000.

Visit www.ballardtech.com or call 425.339.0281

AS9100 / ISO 9001 Registered

AN ASTRONICS COMPANY

Key Features...

Optimal SWaPMinimal size, weight, and power

Next-Generation Intel ProcessorWith Hyper-Threading and virtualization

High I/O Density2D/3D video, audio, avionics databus interfaces, serial, discretes, and more

Reliable PowerConforming to vehicle and aircraft standards

Smooth Durable HousingEasy hose down; salt fog resistant

Models for horizontal or vertical mounting

Untitled-1 1 3/5/13 2:09 PM


TECH RECON

at least two aircraft from the requested 19 in FY13. Such potential reductions drive up unit costsresulting in FY14 produc-tion funding shortfalls. But they also delay follow-on software and flight testing (Fig-ure 6). Test and evaluation delays could increase total test costs three-fold across all programs, and delay delivery of criti-cal capability to the field. Sequestration also would put the Air Forces acquisition strategy on complex space systemseffi-cient space procurementat risk by jeop-ardizing cost-efficiencies. Welsh cited, for example, an estimated $1 billion in savings within this strategy for the Space Based In-frared Radar System (SBIRS) would be lost under sequestration.

Each of these long-term invest-ment account disruptions negate thou-sands of man-hours spent on planning, implementing and managing complex programs intended to best balance the efficiency of taxpayer dollar expendi-ture with the effectiveness of capability creation to fulfill the Defense Strategic Guidance, said Welsh. Over time, he

continued, more taxpayer dollars would be spent to address the contract re-struc-tures and time-delay inefficiencies that sequestration will induce.

Opportunities for Tech UpgradesNot included above in viewpoints

from the various DoD leaders are nu-merous other items that fall outside the purview of COTS Journals scopesuch as personnel cost and non-technical con-tract services, etc. Our focus was rather on the relevant aspects of technology, program and industry that influence our market. Whatever happens, the U.S. will remain the largest procurer of military hardware, and that hardware will con-tinue to have a greater electronics com-position. These shifts mean that major programs will be evaluated and modified in their mission requirements and their volume. In many cases this means a life extension rather than replacement, creat-ing opportunity for tech upgrades using boards and systems from the embedded computing market.

Figure 6

General Mark A. Welsh, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, points out that potential reductions drive up unit costsresulting in FY14 production funding shortfalls. But they also delay follow-on software and flight testing.

Designed per MIL-STD-810, MIL-STD-901, MIL-STD-167 and MIL-STD-461 to perform in the harshest environments

Conduction, convection or liquid cooled ATR enclosures in standard or custom sizes

VME, VME64x, VPX and CPCI architectures to the latest VITA and PICMG specifications

Backplanes sizes 3U and 6U, various slot configurations per functionality and payload

LCRs integrated system designs are born rugged...not recycled commercial products

Perfect for airborne, ground mobile and UAV applications

LCRs complete line of integrated military systems, from off-the-shelf to fully customized, are ideal for all aspects of mission-critical computingsuch as weapons control, navigation, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. To learn more about what we can do for you and yourapplication, contact us today.

9 South Forest Avenue Norristown, PA 19401 (800) 527-4362 sales email: [email protected]

www.lcr- inc .com

Untitled-1 1 2/28/13 9:39 AM

Untitled-5 1 1/7/13 3:50 PM


With the military being such a small part of the overall elec-tronics market, it has long been at the mercy of the major drivers of computing and semiconductor technol-ogy. Those driving markets such as PCsand now consumer devices like phones and tabletshave system lifecycles even less than a year. To keep pace, the compo-nents used in those broader markets are facing ever shorter life spans, creating an ever worsening problem for the military where platform lifecycles are still at least a decade long if not longer. The problem of obsolescencealso dubbed Diminish-ing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) in military par-lanceis therefore not getting any less severe. On the bright side, theres a well established cadre of companies and orga-nizations armed to battle this problem. COTS Journal s 14th Annual End-of-Life Supplier Directory, displayed on the fol-lowing three pages, lists those organiza-tions and the services they provide.

Many Resources to HelpThere is actually a variety of ways

to attack the problem of an IC or sub-system thats no long available. There

are packaging firms who do custom assembly of obsolete integrated cir-cuits using existing wafer and die. Be-yond that, there are even some firms

that will remanufacture the obsolete dieoften at a more current process size. And on the more straightforward side, there are many aftermarket chip

Jeff ChildEditor-in-Chief

Especially in this era of constrained budgets, the costs and problems stemming from component obsolescence are more dire than ever. Fortunately a cadre of government groups, distributors and specialty engineering firms provides services to ease such problems.

Resources Abound to Mitigate the Growing Obsolescence Challenge

Annual EOL and Component Obsolescence Directory

SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

Figure 1

Designed to launch satellites for military, intelligence, civil and commercial customers, the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program faced component obsolescence issues in its development.

Untitled-1 1 2/28/13 9:57 AM


SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

suppliers who stock inventories of de-vices that have gone obsolete. These range from small firms specializing in aftermarket business to large distribu-tors who include aftermarket products in their portfolio.

In terms of embedded computing, the emergence of standards-based slot card systems has been one defense against the problem. Instead of replacing a whole military computing platform when its processors and memories are obsolete, a new single board computer can be

swapped in to refresh the systems tech-nology as long as theres a standard back-plane architecture in place such as VME or CompactPCI.

Obsolescence ImpactsThe problem of component obso-

lescence affects almost every military program in a large or small way. Nu-merous stories crop up of whole pro-grams that are stalled because of the obsolescence problem. An example is the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle

(EELV) program designed to launch satellites for military, intelligence, civil and commercial customers (Figure 1). In June 2011, the EELV program pro-vided a sustainment plan to Congress that identified required technology and investments to maintain the programs current capability. The plan called for special emphasis to be placed on design-ing and qualifying new designs to miti-gate obsolescence issues. Many of the parts across the system have designs that have become obsolete or are no longer

The Importance of Technology ManagementBecause obsolescence and technology advances are two sides of

the same coin, its important for system developers to have a technol-ogy management strategy in mind. The latest version of the guidebook, SD-22, Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages: A Guidebook of Best Practices for Implementing a Robust DMSMS Manage-ment Program, emphasizes that technical performance and supportability objectives should be defined in explicit, quantitative and testable terms. This is important to facilitate trade-offs, as well as to support the selection and assessment of the product and process technologies. This process includes having an understanding of the supplier base and its ability to develop, produce, maintain and support the system.

From a DMSMS perspective, technology management is one of the most important aspects of supply chain management throughout the lifecycle. Beyond the Technology Development phase, this approach is also referred to as modernization through spares, continuous modernization, or technology insertion/refreshment. Effective technology management enables a design acquisition strategy and lifecycle sustainment strategy that minimizes the cost of resolving future obsolescence issues, while incorporating state-of-the-art technologies to increase reliability, lower sustainment requirement costs, and increase warfighting capability to meet evolving requirements throughout an indefinite service life.

According to the guidebook, Robust DMSMS management by itself will, of course, lower the costs associated with obsolescence issues. However, even in the best of programs, DMSMS resolutions are often suboptimal. Life-of-need procurements are problematic because of limited contractual horizons and uncertainties in estimating the total requirement over the remainder of the lifecycle. Finding or qualifying alternative items may work for a time, but such approaches rarely take advantage of new technologies and capabilities. Unplanned redesigns are costly. Therefore, incorporating a technology management strategy into design, acquisition and sustainment activities is a best practice to further reduce DMSMS cost and readiness impacts throughout the lifecycle. Designers should consider potential seamless upgrade paths for technologies and components, and should provide a timetable for replacing items even if they are not obsolete.

Effective technology management begins with a strategic understand-

ing of the market and its trends. Market research entails collecting informa-tion about existing and emerging technologies, products, manufacturers and suppliers. It has two components:

Market surveillancea continuous canvassing of the commer-cial market to identify existing and future technologies, vendors products and market trends that can potentially meet existing and emergent requirements from a strategic perspective. Market surveillance methods include searching the Internet, attending trade shows, reading technology publications, hiring consultants, issuing requests for information from prospective manufacturers/suppliers, visiting manufacturer/supplier facilities and viewing product demonstrations.

Market investigationa focused process of identifying and determining if specific technology products can meet particular functional requirements. Market investigation also includes system obsolescence profiling to proactively plan for the continued support or replacement of soon-to-be obsolete products. This product-level information and the associated budget requirements form the basis for sustaining the operation or functionality of a system. Market investigation methods can include beta testing; prototyping; testing for compliance, conformance and compatibility; and query-ing manufacturers/suppliers about product obsolescence status. The following are important steps to consider when monitoring a military systems lifecycle phases.

Anticipate obsolescence situations due to rapid and asynchro-nous product changes.

Plan and budget using a broader range of product obsoles-cence management options.

Maintain insight into technology trends, as well as internal product changes by the manufacturer, and test the effects of those changes on the system.

Assess the quality of a manufacturer and the impact on a sys-tem of a products change, including its suitability for the user, information security characteristics and supportability.

Determine the manufacturers support period and inventories for a particular product.


SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

produced. For example, to sustain some EELV mission-critical components, the Air Force drafted a plan to identify ob-solescence issues and identify opportu-nities to insert new technology and de-sign common systems.

Another program where obsoles-cence was a disruption is the Air Forces Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) High program. The SBIRS High satel-lite system is being developed to per-form a range of missile warning, mis-sile defense, technical intelligence and battlespace awareness missions. SBIRS High will consist of four satellites in geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO), two sensors on host satellites in highly el-liptical orbit (HEO), two replenishment satellites and sensors, and fixed and mo-bile ground stations.

Functional testing on the first satel-lite in 2009 revealed solder fractures on some hardware components, and testing on the second satellite in 2011 uncovered anomalies and erratic performance on similar components. In both cases, some rework has been required to the satellites. The SBIRS program plans to make slight changes to the design of its two HEO re-

plenishment sensors, addressing parts obsolescence and electromagnetic inter-ference issues that affected the operation of its first two sensors. The follow-on production contract for SBIRS High is delivering flight hardware, but it is expe-riencing cost and schedule pressure due to parts obsolescence and technical is-sues. Officials attribute this to an 8-year production gap between the first two sat-ellites and the third and fourth.

Three Pronged SolutionThree government groups that are

important when any large military pro-gram gets underway are the Defense Microelectronics Activity (DMEA), the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP), and the Defense Sup-ply Center, Columbus (DSCC) Sourc-ing and Qualifications Unit. Usually a Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (DMS) team is set up, comprised of members from the program office it-self as well as from the various depots, acquisition logistic centers (ALCs) and OEMS involved.

An obsolescence program usually goes in one of two directions. One is

Figure 2

The DMSMS management team (DMT) for the Virginia-class submarine resolved over 1,090 obsolescence issues and reaped over $124 million of documented cost avoidance since inception.

ocean-server.com(508)-678-0550

OceanServer Digital Compass Products:

Low Cost Family of Electronic Compasses

Solid State Package

High Accuracy Offered in Serial, USB or TTL

Under $200.00 in Low Volume

Hard & Soft Iron Calibration

Fully Engineered Solution For Embedded Applications

cots journal march 2013

Documents