MOSA momentum, DoD acquisition, and engineering talent
StoryJanuary 23, 2025

Leveraging open architecture designs for EW [electronic warfare], PNT [position, navigation, and timing], and other applications, Pacific Defense is pushing innovation and adding to the momentum of the U.S. Defense Department’s (DoD's) MOSA [modular open systems approach] mandate. In this Q&A with Travis Slocumb, co-founder and CEO of Pacific Defense, he elaborates on the benefits of MOSA and how 2025 will be a pivotal year for MOSA. Slocumb also covers the impact MOSA initiatives like CMOSS [C5ISR Modular Open Suite of Standards] and CMMF [CMOSS Mounted Form Factor] will have on military technology shares while also sharing Pacific Defense’s origin story. We also discuss how to speed up the DoD’s acquisition process and recruit engineering talent to the U.S. defense industry.
McHALE: Please provide a brief description of your responsibility within Pacific Defense and your experience in the defense industry.
SLOCUMB: My responsibility is to create and lead a company strategy that meets, preferably exceeds, the needs of our customers and their ongoing missions in a dynamic geopolitical environment today, and for decades to come. The critical element is building a team and a culture that is aligned to these missions in a real sense, where every engineer in the company understands the “why” associated with the requirements we design and build to, and is empowered to seek faster and better with the process discipline required to successfully field new products and capabilities. We have spent about five years building what I believe to be “best-in-class” teams in engineering, manufacturing, program management, finance, etc., and now we are able to double down on our MOSA [modular open systems approach] technology base and drive much harder and faster than any traditional [U.S.] DoD [Department of Defense] program I have ever worked on. All of that said, my primary daily responsibility is to make decisions with the speed that our team needs and deserves without getting in their way, and to know and care about our people who are committed to our shared success and work very hard.
I have been fortunate over the past 40 years in the industry to get to know many very accomplished professionals and learned all I know from watching and listening to how they solved problems. In the early days it was technology development with the original radar innovators, like Fred Nathanson, Lamont Blake, etc. In the 1990s I worked as a contractor on a series of DARPA programs that were focused on a very real and problematic emerging global threat. Under the right circumstances – including PEO [Program Executive Office] and program engagement, focused FFRDC [Federally Funded Research and Development Center] performance, industry playing to their strengths and collaborating – this can be a very rewarding experience for an early- to mid-career engineer. A lot of learning across multiple disciplines. Finally, Raytheon was a step up to a C-level role in what was, at the time, Space and Airborne Systems based in El Segundo. I somehow landed in the middle of a great team with a strong technology base that was on the precipice of having to compete on several new, large programs. That was serious fun, and we won a few of them, culminating in the Next Generation Jammer Mid-band program. I had the unique experience of being the BD [business development] executive for the segment through the competitive process, then converting to the product line VP post-award on point for negotiating the EMD [engineering and manufacturing development] contract with a great Navy team, then saw it thru CDR [critical design review] before moving on. Lots of exposure to lots of great people, like Bill Swanson, over the years, and for that I am grateful.
McHALE: How has your Raytheon experience helped you now lead a supplier to companies such as Raytheon?
SLOCUMB: With the exception of a couple of programs, we aren’t really selling much to the large traditional primes currently. Most of our product sales volume is from smaller nontraditional direct suppliers, and most of our anticipated growth will likely derive from other sources over the next few years. We sell modular products to everyone, so it is certainly possible that these relationships could grow in the future. We put a high premium on technical support, getting our products to perform to customer expectations in their environment. We seek and generally get balanced terms on our contracts and purchase orders. At any larger company, you learn to hire the smartest, most experienced, and respectfully communicative contracts professionals you can find, and I believe at Pacific Defense we have done exactly that.
McHALE: Please describe how Pacific Defense came to be; how Spectranetix, Spear Research, Perceptronics fit together; and the company’s mission within defense electronics.
SLOCUMB: The creation of Pacific Defense was inspired by lessons learned throughout my career, and particularly from the experience of running a sizable EW [electronic warfare] business at a first-tier supplier/integrator. This afforded a comprehensive view of the future threat environment and, as a supplier to both domestic and international 4th-gen fighters, provided lessons learned in rapidly evolving global operations, where legacy kit was steadily falling behind. There was, in 2019, a growing base of MOSA-based software-defined radio (SDR) and utility card technologies that, with additional investment and engineering leadership, could form the basis of a new generation of EW capability better suited to what has become a software-based fight. Spectranetix stood out as a clear leader in the field, and I was very fortunate to convince Rick Lu and team to jump on the bandwagon. To their credit, the Spectranetix engineers were thought leaders who had already spent several years working with Army C5ISR [command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] to bring high performance CMOSS [C5ISR Modular Open Suite of Standards] technologies to the EW portfolio.
Spear Research is our EW system center of excellence. We have had a lot of success integrating third-party applications like SCEPTRE and various government-owned frameworks, but [we] still see a need to design, rapidly implement, and verify organically created algorithms/techniques. We have a long-term capability roadmap maintained by the team in Nashua (New Hampshire) and El Segundo (California), and provide quarterly software drops to all of our customers who want them.
Perceptronics, our partner, is an innovative, pure-play AI/ML [artificial intelligence/machine learning] research company with capabilities ranging from embedded applications like signal classification and RF signal anomaly detection to novel data-fusion algorithms and advanced mission planning and support frameworks enabling trusted autonomous operations. We realized early on that bringing our EW subject-matter experts and our data scientists together on one integrated team focused on system level performance on a sustained basis was the only way to credibly bring AI to the EW fight. For example, Perceptronics has delivered AI-based radio type recognition software that allows our EW systems to identify enemy and friendly radios quickly and accurately, a key requirement for modern spectrum warfare. In addition, we have integrated AI/ML techniques that include machine-learning classifiers and Bayesian algorithms to improve detection performance, minimize false alarms, and reduce operator workload in our EW systems.
Though EW was a primary motivator to start the company, we rapidly realized that integrated communications and networking, A-PNT [assured position, navigation, and timing], cyber, and a variety of mission command applications were easily integrated and synergistic with the EW mission. Now we spend a lot of time bringing these capabilities together in a single chassis to support a variety of use cases, like networked EW in a dense UAS [uncrewed aerial system] threat environment. Our company motto is “if it does not work in the field, it does not really work.” We participated in well over 100 live exercises over the past couple of years, and always bring back lessons learned that end up in our MOSA baseline.
Lastly, I cannot say enough about how powerful MOSA is once you fully embrace it with rigorous adherence to CMOSS, FACE [Future Airborne Capability Environment], and SOSA [Sensor Open Systems Architecture] standards, and stick to it as an engineering discipline and a business model. I view it as a significant departure from the world I grew up in, and a game-changer for national security, especially winning the nonkinetic fight. People often ask me, “what if the department backs away and does not require it?” My answer is that we still have, as a company, all of the benefits that matter in any competitive procurement … speed, maturity, affordability … and will never turn back.
(Graphic courtesy Pacific Defense)
McHALE: Pacific Defense is particularly focused on producing technologies based on MOSA strategies such as SOSA, CMOSS, and CMFF [CMOSS Mounted Form Factor]. Why does MOSA have so much momentum in the defense community right now and how does it benefit the warfighter?
SLOCUMB: I see increased momentum in senior leadership in the services, especially over the last year. Budgets are very tight, and we are spending a fortune to maintain an installed base that is aging out and is frankly not very capable. Our adversaries are putting technologies in place rapidly that are impactful globally, and our leadership knows that we have to radically change the way we do business. The open model is very intuitive – a dollar spent to mature the base benefits all customers. Once the base reaches an adequate level of technical maturity in industry, the ability to rapidly pivot to field new capability is unlimited, if we can collectively get out of our own way. I am proud to have started a company that absolutely has proven, in a relatively short amount of time, that the model is viable and needs to be the way of the future, starting now. Frankly, I think some customers struggle to believe what we show them, but we will keep going to every live event we can and keep pounding the drum. I think 2025 will be a pivotal year for MOSA. (Figure 1.)
[Figure 1 ǀ Shown: The “Ares” integrated system demonstration vehicle from Pacific Defense, equipped with Sensor Open System Architecture (SOSA)/C5ISR/EW Modular Open Suite of Standards (CMOSS) multifunction RF systems, antennas, and operator terminals.]
Our warfighters are amazingly resilient and adaptive, but they still spend a lot of time planning, configuring, fixing, fat-fingering, and dealing with uncertainty about the environments they work in. The model of having multiwaveform-resilient comms, A-PNT, EW, signals intelligence, cyber, and robust mission planning all living on cards in one box, on a single backplane, enabled by some level of autonomous decision aids, is a game-changer. The ability to focus on planning and managing the fight across many nodes on a battlefield with speed, certainty, and precision is the goal. There is still a lot of software to be written to meet this goal, but with a MOSA base [what is learned from] each use case, or deployment, are relatively easily feed forward into the next drop. We do this routinely, and work with industry partners to establish the tools and discipline to make the model supportable, for example, continuous ATO [authorization to operate].
McHALE: Some DoD leaders have called for more metrics on MOSA success to combat naysayers. How would one describe or measure the success of a MOSA initiative?
SLOCUMB: Well, you really can’t beat the “tried-and-true” schedule and cost to field a new capability, as well as mission-related performance metrics. Many of the traditional “off-the shelf” proprietary products out there are not architected to support change or rapid third-party capability integration, and typically are not attached to a software factory. Stick with fixed-price development, make schedule and cost your primary [evaluation] criteria, and you will likely get a MOSA-based approach. I like the “try before you buy model” where system level capability is evaluated by a government-sponsored third party, and the ability to [leverage] plug-and-play capability, hardware or software, is rigorously assessed. The only naysayers we see are those with long-standing equities that are threatened by the model, no need to elaborate here.
Success equals a satisfied user, and a system that gives our warfighters a sustainable advantage at a very reasonable cost. This is doable.
McHALE: Aside from MOSA, what are the types of design requirements are you seeing from your customers?
SLOCUMB: The usual performance-based specifications: environmental, SWaP [size, weight, and power], legacy interfaces, etc., most of which do not relate to MOSA. There are several positive trends that are synergistic with MOSA, including a renewed interest in model-based system engineering and new UX/UI [user experience/user interface] technologies that address intuitive system management and real-time optimization. The ability to give a young operator a new system that is intuitive to use, requiring a minimal amount of training to get up and running is highly valued. Our industry segment has traditionally struggled with putting sufficient emphasis on UX development and refinement. Rightly so – we put a lot of energy into system engineering and system-level validation. I am constantly pushing my team to put that level of energy into UX refinement as well. Candidly, we are not there yet, but this is a priority going into 2025.
McHALE: MOSA initiatives enable more commercial technology to get into military systems; that said, does the DoD acquisition process need to speed up to truly take advantage of commercial innovation? If yes, how so?
SLOCUMB: From a legal perspective, the DoD opened the door to speed several years ago with OTA [Other Transaction Authority] and MTA [Middle-Tier Acquisition] contracting. We view disciplined adoption of MOSA by DoD and industry as an excellent complement to the legal remedy to get to the commercial timelines desired. We are involved in a current competition where vendor solutions are undergoing environmental qualification prior to selection for contract award. This is unprecedented in the legacy model, and a great example of a government team that has absolutely found the recipe and done the disciplined work over the past year to succeed in breaking new ground.
In addition to our growing modular product portfolio, we are planning to launch several system-level products for commercial sale next year, where the customer can cut a purchase order for the product and solicit ongoing engineering support to evolve the product to user needs, including integration of emerging third-party capabilities to counter rapid changes in the threat environment. Additionally, this installed base will have access to quarterly capability drops already on our roadmap. A bit further out, but under consideration internally, is a service-based model for EW, comms, A-PNT, etc. More to come on the service-based model over the next year.
McHALE: Pacific Defense recently announced the team for the CMFF program, which includes Thales Defense & Security Inc., BAE Systems, as well as Regal Technology Partners, Palantir, and STC. What makes this team ideal for CMFF and how is Pacific Defense leading it?
SLOCUMB: Teaming, partnering, collaborating with industry and government partners is the heart and soul of our company. Between plug-in cards and software applications we have integrated with well over 30 partner companies, mostly in public settings. We are already working closely with our CMFF partners on related development efforts and have great relationships at the working level; this team is already fully functioning. Our partners are very good at what they do and are well-established, and they clearly see the transformational potential of a MOSA-based approach to rapidly deploying new capabilities like CMFF. I don’t really need to explain why this group is ideal … their reputations speak for themselves.
How do we lead it? We put a thoughtful, compliant, affordable plan on the table, solicit feedback, and manage to the plan. Fun fact: We have a very experienced program-management team in the company, perform quarterly EACs [estimates at completion] on all programs, and generally hold across the portfolio, quarter after quarter. We are fair, communicative, and respectful … which goes a long way.
McHALE: What other disruptive technology or innovation do you see being a game-changer in the defense electronics arena? Predict the future.
SLOCUMB: Once programs like CMFF, HMIF [human-machine integrated formation], and CCA [collaborative combat aircraft] are fully configured and in the hands of our soldiers we will likely see very powerful ways to leverage the network that we can currently only imagine. These architectures will enable automated decision support across domains and give our team the speed needed to stay way ahead of our adversaries. Clearly the addition of large numbers of low-cost un-manned network nodes – like UAS, HAB [high-altitude balloon], and HMIF – will change the game as well. We will always see a trend towards lower SWaP-plus-cost systems, especially on platforms that attrit at some rate.
We also observe that successful use of AI in the commercial market relies on powerful, centralized processing to train and update models. Defense missions, however, must adapt quickly in environments without access to such computational power. Working with Carnegie Mellon University, we are developing innovative approaches to use AI directly at the edge of conflict.
McHALE: The defense industry is embracing new technologies and methods, but some corners wonder if the same is being done with new engineering talent. There seems to be a lot more gray hair at military shows like AUSA and Sea Air Space than at non-defense trade shows. Does the military-electronics industry have a talent recruitment challenge on its hands? If so, how can it be solved? How does Pacific Defense recruit engineering talent?
SLOCUMB: Maybe, but we certainly do not see this trend. We seek energy, passion, and commitment, and we see this at all ages from our interns to our octogenarians who frankly are still kicking it. Our team runs fast and hard, and we have had had to “grow up” very rapidly, which creates a fair amount of natural attrition, but we see no age trends relating to this. I’m guessing we are a young team compared to peer companies … our lead engineer is in his early 40s, and we have key engineering leadership roles filled by very talented individuals in their 20s and 30s.
I am the “recruiter-in-chief,” probably the most important aspect of the role. It’s all about the network. I have worked with some people in this company for decades. We also have seven locations across the country, each with a fully functioning networked Software Integration Lab, and we seek the top talent in each area. We have a robust summer intern program (my favorite by far). These “kids” are amazing, and we hire many of them. We had one intern that we could not place, but he kept coming to work at intern wages, learning and doing a great job. You cannot beat that kind of commitment, and, yes, we ultimately hired him.
Travis Slocumb is CEO of Pacific Defense and worked with Emerald Lake Capital to found the company in 2020. At Pacific Defense, Travis leads a proven team of highly skilled engineering talent that solves complex customer challenges with integrated electromagnetic hardware and software solutions. He has experience as a product-line general manager, strategist, business development leader, and chief technology officer. Prior to his role as CEO of Pacific Defense, Travis launched and led the Electronic Warfare Systems (EWS) business unit at Raytheon Technologies, including programs like Next Generation Jammer, ALR-69A, ALR-67-V3, towed decoys, EWPMT, and several strategic classified efforts. He also served as VP of Business Development and Strategy for Raytheon’s Space and Airborne Systems segment. Travis earned a bachelor’s degree in mathematics from the College of William and Mary in Virginia.
Pacific Defense · https://www.pacific-defense.com/