 Awesome. How's everybody doing? All right. We're going to talk real quickly about building Army 2030. It's really close to my heart because in AFC, this is one of our charges, right? But you can't build something that's going to be successful without experimentation and lots of it, right? What I'm going to explain to you is not only what PC is, but where we came from and why PC is important, not just to the Army, but for the entire Joint Force. So, if you would, go ahead and roll the video. Project Convergence. A campaign of learning, demonstration, and experimentation. It allows the Joint Force and multinational partners to collect data, evaluate effectiveness, reduce risk, and optimize warfighting capability. The multi-phase effort is helping the Joint Force to develop the transformational concepts and capabilities required to fight and win in future competition or conflict. We are developing breakthrough technologies and systems that work in tandem with our sister services and allies. This ensures unrivaled strength, inability, and unity. Project Convergence 22 increases the scope and complexity of the Joint Experimentation carried out in previous years by including multinational force elements, welcoming participants from Australia and the UK. Each year, with industry and research partners, we test hundreds of technologies in demanding and realistic scenarios, gaining a better understanding of how to operate together successfully on future battlefields. We are learning how advances in cutting-edge fields such as artificial intelligence and robotics improve our ability to maneuver across difficult terrain. Our activities stretch across all domains, air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace. They take place from multiple locations separated by thousands of miles, simulating the challenging distances often involved in distributed and large-scale combat operations. The sharpening of network, data, and integration of systems feature prominently in Project Convergence. The experimentation intent is to enable our commanders to make decisions faster than their adversaries and increase the lethality of our force. By optimizing speed, range, and convergence, we will achieve decision dominance and the overmatch we need to prevail in future competition and warfare. Project Convergence, because whoever can see, understand, and act first, will win. Tomorrow is worth protecting. Awesome. Well, that's just the quick little taste of what Project Convergence is going to do this year when you get a chance to get the slides up. While he's getting the slides up, let me quickly describe what Project Convergence is, right? It's an army-hosted, joint-and-combined experiment. It's not an exercise, it's an experiment. So we know, right now, going into any experiment, you've got to have your constants, and you're going to have, you know, both successes and failures. But from our failures, we learn. And that's the most important thing about Project Convergence. Besides the fact that, when I say joint-and-combined, we're really focused, right, not just from an army perspective, but from a joint perspective, how do we solve the problems that our combined joint commanders have and have expressed so we can solve them together and provide them capability in the near term, not seven to 10 years from now? Next slide. So as we build Army 2030, it's also about a campaign of learning, right? And that's just not verbiage that we use, right? We have to look backwards where it came from. So Project Convergence actually started in 2020, right? Very small scale, but the impetus was about how do we take it out of the laboratory, put it in the dirt, test it so that we know we have a better probability of success when we get it to the hands of the soldier? So in 21, we expanded that, right? But it was really a lot of technology focus. Can we do this? Can we take a Navy Aegis sensor and pull target quality data out of it and give it to a Patriot missile system? It's pretty simple, right? But it was challenging. We had to do that. And what we came out of that was, you know, there were four joint message systems that even though they were called joint and we had them, they didn't fit the technology that we had today. And so we had to go back through and update those. We'll test those again in Project Convergence 22. Additionally, if you see right there, the Core 7 things, as in any experiment, we can't just do a one and done. So you'll see as I walk you through what we're doing in 22, you'll see many of these reinstated, right? So joint, all domain, situational awareness. We have to continue to work on that because that's where the COCOM commander gets its cop, common operational pitcher. Same thing with JADC2. We're not there yet. So we'll continue to develop and probably PCNXT as well, right? Integrated Air Missile Defense. We made a lot of successes last year, especially in this realm, but we're not there. And I'll explain some of that as we get to 22. In 22, the Secretary of the Army was very clear with what she gave us as our objective. Go to scale. We have to determine where we may fail, right? Especially in Air Missile Defense. Can we handle 100, 200 missiles from different sources all at the same time? Today we can't. How do we enable AI to do that? That was one of our big challenges for this year, which caused the complexity also of the experiment to go up because now we're over 50% in simulation because I can't put 100-plus missiles in the air at one time during an experiment. The other piece is we've worked at three separate scenarios, right? We'll have a maritime one. We're going to have a land-focused, okay? We also have a brand new one, which is called Gateway. And my counterpart here will talk about it a little bit later, but that's how do we pull in industry partners early so we can understand their technology and how do we integrate it long-term for the benefit of the joint force. We see three things coming out of it. My last slide here will go in a little bit more detail. But the first one is we have to provide that joint service commander a network so he can see what's going on, make his decisions, and communicate that across the joint services. And if you think that we can do that today, I would ask you to come see me afterwards, right? Because I don't think we can. Not at the scale and scope we're going to need to. The second one is we have to look at the authorities and permissions, and this is a perfect time to find that. We've already found right now, even before we're executing, multiple things that we have to do between the joint services. For example, we have to have non-separate agreements between services in order to just put things on the network. That's crazy if we're trying to get to convergence. That's one of the things we're trying to continue to push forward so we can win in the future. And the final one is this is why we brought on Gateway. We have to put a timeline to allow our industry partners to see where our gaps may be, use their technology and their understanding to develop potential solutions, and then bring them out. So we'll talk about that one as I go two slides for now. Next slide, please. Okay, for this year, what are we trying to do? All captured in six broad objectives, most of which exactly align with what the Secretary of the Army talked about this morning with all of her six, right? Air missile defense said that was a carryover from 21. We still have lessons to learn, and I'll show you how in a follow on slide here what makes a difference between what we did in 21 to 22. Same thing with the joint fires. Employing more joint fires in a collective manner so we can converge, not just, hey, it's an Army target, it's an Air Force target, it's a Marine Corps target like we do right now. Here's a target, how can we converge capabilities both non-lethal and lethal on a single target? Because it's that important. The next one is post operations. This is kind of new, right? We've seen it before, but it's just under a new venue. But how do we pulse our capabilities to allow us to defeat this A2AD bubble that most of our threats out there would have? We're going to experiment with that to figure out how from a combined way. Finally, this year we have two partners, both the UK and the Australians, right? We've got to make sure that we have a network that they can have and work with us collectively together to pass that same type of target quality data so we can leverage their capabilities along with the joint force to provide an overwhelming win. We've already talked about determining the authorities, right? But it's about winning. If we can't tell the COCOM commander where those gaps are right now as we experiment, then we're missing an opportunity. And then finally, predictive logistics. You heard the Secretary talk about it. It is a focus because if we can't sustain ourselves and sustain the joint force, we can't have the operational reach required to achieve the nation's objectives. Last year we used this, right? So I talked from an Army perspective, but from the end of the last year, right? Last December, when we finished the last project convergence, we started already from a joint and multinational perspective. So there's a board, right? 57 separate organizations, probably at least with 33-star generals that have provided input to help guide our objectives, what we need to do, and bring the force together that's already assembled out on the western part of the United States right now and have been out there for the last two weeks and will start in earnest tomorrow. Next slide. So the scenarios, right? I talked about three. First one, scenario A. That's the one we're preparing for right now. Second one is a Indo-Pacom focused scenario, right? We're using some islands off of California to do some operations. We have USERPAC out in Hawaii participating. We even have forces in Japan and other places around the Pacific that are actually physically participating in the exercise that'll be our experiment that'll be going on, okay? It's that integrated air missile defense is the focus, but we're also doing pulsed operations in a effective joint fires methodology in order to determine how much we can accept and defend as well as defeat in a counter perspective. The other piece is we're using space in a large way during both parts of the exercise, but it's really focused because the joint capability across the space domain, right, is significantly and has grown significantly in the last several years. And then finally, sustainment. Sustainment in a littoral environment is completely different than what the Army has been so used to for the longest period of time, and that is on ground. So in A, we're focused on how do we do sustainment, gain that operational reach in a littoral environment? And then B, we're also focused on logistics, but now how do we do this? Do we have the capability to do it in a distributed way that we haven't necessarily focused on previously? Also in B, right, is deep sensing. How do we as a joint force to include our soft brother and how do we put deep sensing, provide that target quality data back to allow us to defeat the A2AD network and then give us space for first cab this year as part of our experimental forces to then sense with both autonomy, right, different capabilities on the air platforms and different capabilities on the ground platforms to give them a distinct advantage, not only for the tactical commander, but for the operational commander. Gateway. Gateway is the new part of what we're doing with Project Converged this year, and I'll turn it over to Major General Miles Brown to talk real quickly about what we're doing at Gateway. Hey, good morning. My name's Miles. I'm just going to talk a little bit about Gateway. So as we looked at the Project Convergence landscape over the last three years, we realized there was a need to maintain an entry point, really a nexus for industry to enter, and not just PROMs, but also our small business partners. And that's really what Gateway is about. We started off with about 53 technologies, over 300 that we did science and technology evaluation on. When we started off with about 53, it was pushed into scenario A and in scenario B, but we've been, since the 19th of September, pushing very hard doing system and technical experimentation at Yuma Proving Ground. And the way this experiment, it's really system and technical experimentation. The way I would describe that is con-ops, concepts of operation, not con-imps. This is not about concepts of employment, which is what we're doing in scenario A and scenario B. Can you hear me? Yeah, there you go. This is more about how something works. So what we've done very, very heavily, and I've already done a couple of one-on-one engagements with our industry partners, with the leaders of those industry partners, to determine what is the success criteria of your technology. What is it that you want it to do, or you think it can do? And what we found out since the 19th of September already is that there are some places with these technologies, and some of them are micro, some of them have more of a macro effect. But what we found out is there are things that have worked very, very well, and there are some things that haven't worked. But when you put things in an austere environment and you do system and technical experimentation, you really feel like you really walk away with a real sense of what it is. The takeaway from this is we now will work. We have a pilot going for a Sprint Crata that will be able to push cratas with our eight centers and lab inside Combat Capabilities Development Command. And so we'll push those cratas. We'll also push them into other technical experimentation and system experiments like NetMod X and other things that we do throughout the year that will continue to inform in terms of data collection analysis. One last thing that we are piloting here is we developed a rubric that puts sufficient rigor against each one of the technologies because we're looking at what we need to do for the Army of 2030 and we're pointing toward the Army of 2040. And in a lot of our technologies that we actually field in the Army today were started many, many years ago. So we have to get the azimuth correct on the technology, whether it's cyber vulnerability or other things, to make sure that we are protecting the force, that we're getting extended ranges like the Secretary talked about today to be able to achieve the speed and range to have overmatch. So I'll pass it back to General Jones. Thanks, sir. Thanks, sir. Appreciate it. Next slide, please. Okay. This is not to be taken as the exact way, but this is to use as an exemplar about what we're trying to do. When I talk about the joint force and data is going to be critical not only today, but especially as we move into 2030 and even more important in 2040. So what I want to describe real quickly, of course, you see the services along the top down the left-hand side. I know everybody here has heard about sensor to shooter. Well, one of the things that we've learned, especially over the last year, right 21, is you can't just go directly from a sensor to a shooter in all cases because there's other indicators and data that may be required to be integrated into that decision, right? If it's all automatic, you may lose all of your ammunition in a single set of targets, and that was not the commander's desired intent, right? So we've determined it says you've got to have those processors in there. We have them, but we didn't call them out as a flowchart type thing. You've got to have the C2 note, especially in the joint environment, right? If we're going to fight converged, you have to have that commander and it's got to flow through his. What he's allocating resources toward. And then finally, the shooters. Don't be confused. That's not just lethal. When we talk about shooters, that's lethal, non-lethal. How do I influence the threat? Because oftentimes it takes multiple feces. Okay, so in project converges in all parts, we will take different sensors from space and the Marines or whoever will take them. We'll try to put them through a Navy processor. I'm sorry, Air Force or an Army processor. Does it work? If it doesn't work, what do we have to adjust to make that flow with target quality data that'll come out? It all is going to go to the JTF commander who then, through an automated way based off his priorities where he's positioned his forces will be able to then pass through subordinate C2 nodes to their access of their air force. Shooters is not necessarily what we want to do. It's effectors. But we're not going to just try with one. It says, okay, we got this sensing from, we're going to process through the Air Force and we're going to try to get the Army to shoot it. What we want to get to is, we're going to try each one of them, but what we want to get to is, when he gets the JTF commander through an automated process, he can figure out that says, hey, I'm going to give these four targets to the Air Force. These nine targets to the Marines and these five to the Army at the speed of machine. That is the success that we need on the 2030 battlefield and beyond to enable the JTF commander and the COCOM commanders to do what the nation has asked them to do. Next slide. So our takeaways. I talked a little bit about this, right? The first and most important one is to provide back, right? So the JADC2 already has a framework. So we've taken that framework and now we're going to give a practical application at the operational level, right? So we're focused on the 3-star JTF level, operational level C2 nodes as a starting point. It won't be where we end, but that's a starting point. So we can at least provide back a means. It won't be the means, but an a means. The second one is, I already talked about our partners. We've got to take our partners with us. And in order to do that, we have to have a partnered network that can accept different partners and process the same data in the same way with our own systems at the speed of machine learning. Finally, those policies that I already talked about, we've already found some. We'll continue to identify those. And that's really for our senior leaders, the secretary, senior leaders as well as joint. That's what we'll provide to them that says, okay, if you want to take this, here's some options or some things that we can look at to make our convergence and warfighting capability a little sharper. And then finally, General Brown already talked about it. It's about investment. What are the big investments, right? The under secretary always talks about it. What are the big bets? If we can determine those big bets, we'll have time and energy as it goes forward. So, that ends what I had to tell you about project convergence. I hope many of you out there have already signed up to come out and see it for yourself. So that way you understand that what I'm talking about is just not PowerPoint deep. We do this in the dirt. This year's PC will inform next year's. So, I'll open up to questions. Oh, I know I didn't do that good a job. Yes, sir. General, to what degree does project convergence take lessons learned from Ukraine, et cetera, external lessons to test it out? Great, great question. So, just make sure everybody heard, right? So, how do we take lessons from other places and how does it get inculcated? Well, first of all, as I said, this is a joint. So, I'm going to start there, right? So, for the Air Force, the ABMS, right, that they do during the year. We take those same pieces together, right? Same thing with project overmatch from the Navy, right? We integrate those with Ukraine. There's already a few that we are looking at, especially how does the threat operate? So, both in a simulation and our live threat, we've adjusted now over the last three months on some of the TTPs that we've seen. But, especially with Ukraine, we also are, since it's a 2035, our 2035, 2030 battlefield, we're very cautious not to get the wrong lessons because I think there's still a lot to be learned from that piece. But, how the threat operates, absolutely, is already integrated in there. So, great question. Thank you. Hey, Guy, if I could... So, the other part is, is that over the last year, as we built the gateway, we're constantly pulling in objectives from downrange. So, those objectives are getting in. So, if I have technology that can be applicable, it's not going to be on a five-ten-year delivery cycle. It's something that can get either advanced technology demonstration or prototype with our ASOL partners that gets pushed out. Yes, sir? Sir, so a question for General Brown. How does a small business contact the gateway and let you become aware of our technologies? Yeah, great. So, we have had an industry portal. It's the first time we did that. AFC put together an industry portal last year. We're going to release the next one, probably in the next 60 days. But we've already had our industry day for the next PC and talked about what's moving forward. But what will happen is there will be an industry portal that will be accessible and then you nominate inside there. And then what we do is we assign really Wranglers inside each one of those technologies, really a primary and an alternate, to work with in a coaching way to make sure that where is the right place. Because in some cases, based on the maturation of the technology, project convergence or gateway, the way activity might not be the best place. We want to put it in a place where it can be the most successful so we can find out how it can be used, how it can be employed. The other thing I would say on that is, often times, you know, especially with small businesses, it's about not necessarily new technology, but envisioning technology that we already have in different ways. Because I would tell you at least 25% of some of the things we were looking at is just the same technology we've had before, but we're applying it now because it's integrated, we have a greater networked capability and machine learning. How do we apply that to solve some of the problems that we have? Other questions? Oh, there we go. Sir, absolutely. Gentlemen, you alluded to it in your brief discussion of shooter descensor and targeting, but is there a thread where you look at the integration of intelligence from a strategic to tactical level into your C2 component? Yes, sir. General Brown just hit it. So in that processor, that's exactly what we're looking at because it's not just the collection of the sensors that are out there and at the strategic level, so if I would have looked at the right hand side, also soft. So physical people on the ground also sensors, especially with scenario bravo, it's kind of like the reverse. So what are the ground sensors and the tactical sensors doing that are going to be then processed in the same way to get target level data and then pass back up to the JTF to be either confirmed or targeted based on what's going on out there. So all both, but most of the pieces with Titan and other things in the processing aspect are also probably more than we can talk about in here. But yes, full sense suite. One thing too though is this was built on vignettes. So this is not an immature mission architecture. This is based on a use case thread. So we didn't just pull something. This is something that we know we will need to do today. We will need to do it in 2030. We will need to do this in 2040. Now obviously that will mature in scale, but the intelligence driver inside that is built into those mission threads for scenario A and scenario B. Other questions? Okay, not seeing any. Thank you very much for the first time out for the warrior corner. Cool.