The Interview: Dr David Galligan
Defence Science & Technology Director Dr David Galligan talks with Nicholas Dynon on contributing to science in the national interest.
The Underwater Research Laboratory was established in 1950 under the then Department of Scientific and Industrial Research to research underwater acoustics for the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN).
In 1955, renamed the Naval Research Laboratory, the lab was transferred to RNZN control. With its terms of reference, including prosecuting “research into underwater detection” and keeping “abreast of overseas developments in other scientific fields of interest to Navy”, its maritime remit was cemented.
Fast-forward half a century, and under a new name, the Defence Technology Agency designed the Kahu hand-launched drone, creating history in 2006 by conducting New Zealand’s first autonomous Uncrewed Aerial Vehicle (UAV) flight. By 2012, Kahu would see operational deployment, providing vital ISR capabilities for New Zealand Provincial Reconstruction Team patrols in Bamiyan province, Afghanistan.
In February of this year, the now renamed Defence Science & Technology (DST) reached new altitudes, partnering with Dawn Aerospace to test how well naval radar can track high-speed, high-altitude vehicles. Capable of speeds of up to Mach 1.1 and altitudes of 25 kilometres, Dawn Aerospace’s suborbital spaceplane put HMNZS Te Kaha’s surveillance radar systems through its paces along the Canterbury coast.
“It is important to engage through the mechanisms that we define, rather than expecting bespoke pathways. We will be wanting people to stay on the routes that we have outlined rather than try and come in from all sorts of different directions. We need to be disciplined on both sides. “
By conducting that testing domestically, the NZDF gained real-world performance data without relying on overseas test capabilities. Dr Galligan said the tests demonstrated “the value of New Zealand industry, defence capability and national infrastructure working together with purpose.”
From underwater beginnings to its current activities at the fringes of the Earth’s atmosphere and beyond, DST now pursues specialist programmes across areas including data analytics and artificial intelligence, cyber and electromagnetic warfare, sensing, human performance, autonomous systems, space, and future operating concepts.
Dr Galligan’s role places him at the intersection of defence policy, innovation ecosystems, emerging science, operational capability, and strategic foresight. As DST Director, he is responsible not only for advancing the NZDF’s scientific and technological edge, but also for ensuring that innovation is aligned with strategic priorities and delivers on-the-ground outcomes.
Dr Galligan joined DST as an Operations Analyst in 2002 and led DST’s Operations Analysis team from 2007 to 2020. He was promoted to Group Director for Electronic Warfare Systems at DST in 2020, and two years later he was appointed as the agency’s Director.
Since taking over as Director, Dr Galligan has led a change programme aiming for clearer paths to impact for DST’s scientific portfolio, and emphasising increased partnering with the wider science and technology ecosystem, both locally and internationally. These changes were designed to ensure that DST can deliver the levels of S&T support required within what’s been widely characterised as an increasingly uncertain strategic environment.
In this interview, Dr Galligan outlines how DST is positioning the NZDF for that future.
ND: Drones and counter-drone technologies are evolving rapidly. What role does DST play in exploring these capabilities, and how do you ensure that insights from experimentation translate into deployable operational capability?
DG: DST has around a quarter of a century of experience with UAVs back to the Kahu drone. When I joined DST (DTA) in 2002, Kahu development was already well underway, so you are looking at quite a bit of history there in terms of knowledge base.
Uncrewed and counter-drone systems are highlighted within the Defence Capability Plan and the Defence Industry Strategy. This provides a clear prioritisation signal for DST to support wider Defence to deliver on those systems.
DST has a strong focus on applied experimentation in realistic military environments. We endeavour to get out in the field with technology, such as uncrewed systems, as much as we can. Much of our S&T work is aimed primarily at experimenting at the technology prototype stages, but we work right through to production level technology in support of military capability integration objectives.
We are strongly dependent on our collaborations with local and international partners, and there’ are a number of industrial, academic, and science system partners within New Zealand and internationally that we work with closely.
Our uncrewed research areas include detection, tracking and interception concepts for countering drones, navigation resilience, command and control integration and moving into mission level autonomy. We have a clear forward focus with our work, seeking to anticipate what the NZDF requires to succeed in contemporary and predicted realistic operating environments. In the case of navigation resilience, for example, this means being able to operate where GPS cannot be relied upon.
We work very closely with military stakeholders here and with our defence S&T partners overseas in order to experiment with technologies in realistic settings, and from that to directly shape capability requirements. Working on experimentation directly with stakeholders allows the development of new concepts and to co-determine capability gaps. Such close collaboration really helps when it comes to integrating a new technology.
The drone and counter drone space is evolving very quickly, as is being demonstrated in Ukraine. It is a very tight cycle. So, I wouldn’t say when I talk about concept development prototypes that we’re always working far off the edge in terms of what needs to be delivered quite soon. What we are doing is relevant for the medium to long term – but also for the relatively short term as well.
ND: I like your mention of the future being, perhaps, more imminent than we may have thought. In any organisation, particularly defence organisations there are institutional norms and so on. So how do you ensure that there does remain a strong appetite for innovation?
DG: One of the things we do is develop safe “sandbox” approaches for testing out innovation concepts, structured trials, analysis, and experimentation. We show how new systems, whatever they might be, can actually work and need to work within operationally realistic, but carefully controlled environments.
As we see things shape up around the world, there’s a real need to innovate, and keep up with the rate of change. Defence realises that, and the safe and definite process of testing new technology concepts that we provide is an essential one for the organisation.
You will have seen mention of the new Defence Technology Accelerator, which was announced by the minister last month. That, as it stands up, will become a focussed mechanism to engage innovative technologies from the local ecosystem into the NZDF sphere. I am really enthusiastic about this new entity and the role it will play. DST will be a key technical partner of the Accelerator.
Experimentation and trials enable the NZDF to better understand technological options and considerations before major commitments are made. This technical de-risking is particularly important when considering new technologies, especially those that are changing at a rapid rate and which the NZDF may have limited past experience with.
Our S&T experimentation work is often conducted with our international partners, including through “Five Eyes” arrangements, as well as locally. In this way, some of the work of interoperability and integration with military partners is already done – or at least prefaced – in the early stage. Within DST, we also have a “will do, will not do” set of boundaries, so that we don’t spread ourselves too thinly trying to do every innovative thing that could be done. It’s about looking at those areas that are most useful to the future of the NZDF and are not duplicative of what is being done elsewhere.
ND: You’ve mentioned drone and counter drone, a couple of times already. There are also other technologies out there that DST is researching and experimenting with and that defence forces are interested in. How does DST assess, prioritise, and select which initiatives to pursue?
DG: We constantly re-evaluate our priorities over time. Our priority foci ultimately derive from guidance such as in the Defence Capability Plan and the Defence Industry Strategy, and we look for opportunities within the ecosystem in New Zealand and internationally. Our Five Eyes and other international partnerships are a really good source of collaborative opportunity and inspiration, but we are always also mindful of our sovereign needs and limitations whenever we consider such engagements.
We have two main governance groups that ensure we remain aligned and engaged with the larger system. The Defence Science Steering Group is made up of “one-star” leaders from across the organisation. This group guides our S&T programmes, helping us to understand what the NZDF-wide research priorities and gaps are. Meanwhile, the Defence Science & Technology Advisory Board sits at the “two-star” level and it includes external members. That board covers the long-term direction of the NZDF’s S&T capability, including how it engages with the wider science and technology ecosystem.
We anchor the work we are doing in a set of S&T research capabilities that we possess in the lab. We don’t try to cover everything. We just can’t. It’s always going to be a prioritisation trade-off.
Around three years ago, for example, we ceased a long-standing set of platform sustainment activities. This included the likes of keeping the then ageing P3-K2 and C130 airframes flying from an S&T point of view. We recognised there would be less need for such S&T inputs because of the introduction of new aircraft (P8-A and C130-J). We pivoted staff onto other activities, and that’s obviously what any sensible organisation should do.
Uncrewed systems and counter drone are key areas of focus. A number of other areas also require growing emphasis, include research related to space and navigation warfare, electromagnetic warfare and underwater sensing. Meanwhile, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning pervades at least half of our research programmes. And, at the other end of the spectrum, we have a stack of ‘watching briefs’ for areas like materials science. Such areas are still important but are not so urgent and there may be other ways of achieving research outcomes when they arise. Our local and international partnerships play an important role in filling such internal gaps.
The new Defence Technology Accelerator will have a welcome place alongside DST in terms of helping cover priority technology requirements based particularly upon local ecosystem opportunity.
ND: How does DST monitor the commercial market and international defence community to identify whether there exist available solutions to emerging problems?
DG: We are constantly on the lookout with our international partners to understand the dynamic requirements of realistic military operating environments and the ‘state of the art’ to address those.
We act as a connector and sense maker across the wider ecosystem internationally, and we look – from a science and technology point of view – at not reinventing solutions that exist but rather integrating or enhancing them — advising Defence on what solutions are out there and where things are going. Locally, the new technology accelerator is going to play a key role in this as well.
For example, being involved in some of the major acquisition projects as we are, we may be able to see that a specific class of sensor is about to undergo massive transformation. If we are looking to procure new sensors for a platform, it may be that if we wait another year we will benefit from having access to the newer sensing technology. We can advise and support the Defence team on how to stage their acquisition to get the best bang for buck at the right time.
We did this in the context of the Anzac frigate upgrade. There was a range of sensors and effectors that were part of the build of the system, and we were able to advise on what was available, what might be available, what was sufficient, and what was optimal, so the project team could understand what the best package of systems would be for that purchase.
Internationally, our priority defence S&T partnership is with Australia. This relationship is of growing importance to us. Locally, as the technology accelerator comes online, we will be working very closely with them too, to ensure we are delivering on combined purpose – not duplicating, but enhancing.
ND: The Defence Capability Plan and defence industry strategy include indicative funding of 100 to 300 million for the new tech accelerator. What is the current status of that program?
DG: Commencing with the pilot phase that begins in the new financial year, is an investment across four years of $16 million operating funding and $1.5 million in capital, allocated for activities. That’s a good start.
The Accelerator is expected to build over time, with a review of the pilot to be conducted after a year. Starting small and scaling up, we will learn from experience and gain feedback from others about what works.
We have talked to a number of similar accelerators around the world, and we are looking to hit the ground running with some initiatives. We are not looking to boil the ocean here, but rather do something tangible and keep moving things forward in a way that’s credible.
It is going to be industry facing and it will build into the development pipeline to address NZDF and, where relevant, global military problems. It will have an NZDF-first mind set, but at the same time be mindful of what partners might be interested in overseas as well.
ND: what do you mean by “industry facing”?
DG: We will see how this plays out as the accelerator comes into operation but there is certainly an intention that it will maintain a habitual awareness of local industry opportunities including through direct engagement.
While we wait for the formal start of the Defence Technology Accelerator I would point out that the NZDF has already been conducting some really effective technology acceleration with industry such as the DARTE experiment [discussed below]. This benefited from close engagement with industry partners, and I expect this kind of example to be enhanced by the Defence Technology Accelerator commencing operation.
ND: Which delivered operational capabilities has DST had the greatest impact on, and which are you most proud of?
DG: In the acquisition and operational delivery space, I’ve mentioned the Anzac frigate upgrade. We were highly involved with that, and specifically in terms of assessing the best mix of systems to meet the requirements. We were involved right from the start of the process of understanding how we might use the frigate at various stages in the future. We provided advice on practical integration considerations to optimise overall system performance, and we are now involved in supporting the continuing performance level of the systems, for example, underpinning the Sea Ceptor firings in 2023.
We helped set up the optimal plan for the execution and analysis of those firings, and we’ve had a habitual role within the combat mission support side of things, including supporting encoding tactical responses in the combat management system.
DST orchestrated the Dawn Aerospace Radar Tracking Experiment (DARTE) in Canterbury, which involved flying a Dawn Aerospace plane from the Tāwhaki National Aerospace Centre against an RNZN frigate as a tracking target. This is an example of the NZDF developing our local advanced technologies ecosystem to support an important defence use case. It stands as a clear example of the NZDF delivering on the intent of the Defence Industry Strategy.
We have the DST-built payloads, Korimako and Tūī, on orbit, supporting our space operations research and development. This internationally partnered work develops our understanding in a research context, which can be called upon to support any future policy or capability considerations.
Through research and development, we’ve also developed an electro-optic solution for space domain awareness, and we have now partnered with 62 Squadron to transition that technology into an operating capability. This is a really good example of pulling together the scientific nous, the expertise, and the operators, and developing something that’s top notch pretty much from scratch.
ND: Obviously, we’ve only had a ministerial portfolio for space for the last couple of years. For DST, is space a recent thing or is it something that perhaps goes back further?
DG: It goes back further. We set up an effective space research programme some time ago. It was an early foray for an NZDF that was then still developing its position on space. We pushed ahead, working with international partners, we developed our research space payloads and our space domain awareness telescope system.
It is worth noting that our research will not always lead to a transition to capability. We need to balance such path finding missions with the fact that sometimes things will get to a conclusion, but not capability. We need to be brave enough and ready enough to close out research activities at the right time. Our future-focussed development programmes require strong and disciplined prioritisation to achieve this.
ND: You’ve led a change programme at DST aimed at a greater focus on impact for DST’s scientific portfolio. How do you measure the success of DST in this regard?
DG: Success is not measured by quantity, first of all. It is measured by what Defence outcomes we can achieve. It is worth noting that a valid outcome can be to explore a new area and to determine that that area is not worth pursuing further. Our change programme has been seeking to develop more focus and clarity in what will and what won’t be pursued and to take timely actions in support of that.
We are looking at where we can deliver timely and decision-quality evidence, supporting DCP priorities, and ultimately where we can reduce integration and operational risk, and risk in general. The DST uplift that is indicated in the DCP, when it comes through, will aim to support that, by investing more in our priority science capability areas and the partnerships that are relevant to those. More funding doesn’t mean that we don’t need to prioritise. Quite the opposite. We will seek to be ever more disciplined with our internal resourcing allocations so that we can adequately cover the most pressing S&T requirements for the NZDF.
ND: What is your advice to New Zealand industry innovators looking for opportunities to contribute to the emerging text supply chain in the national interest?
DG: make sure they are looking to develop Defence relevant outcomes. They need to understand that we are not interested in just another interesting technology project. We are interested in specific outcomes. So, thinking about how can they address Defence’s specific requirements is key.
Align with defence priorities. You’ve got signals, clear signals from the DCP, the Defence Industry Strategy, and from DST’s research portfolio foci. We recently held a research forum at Devonport Naval Base with a range of academic leaders present. We provided them “lightning” briefs on what our S&T research programmes do and need in the future – an example of DST sharing our priorities so that they can choose how they align. For industry, there are the various workshops that have been held post DCP, there are continued areas of interest to DST and the new Defence Technology Accelerator will be promoting its priorities as its operations commence.
It is important to engage through the mechanisms that we define, rather than expecting bespoke pathways. We will be wanting people to stay on the routes that we have outlined rather than try and come in from all sorts of different directions. We need to be disciplined on both sides.
Those who understand Defence’s needs, are prepared to collaborate, and can contribute deployable outcomes, will find there is genuine opportunity contribute to New Zealand’s national interests.
