This panel discussion brought together leading defense experts to address the urgent challenges facing modern air and missile defense, particularly in the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and evolving threats such as drone swarms and hypersonic missiles. The panelists emphasized the need for integrated, interoperable, and AI-enabled defense systems, as well as rapid data sharing and organizational innovation. Key takeaways include the importance of affordable, scalable, and redundant solutions, the foundational role of interoperability among NATO allies, and the necessity of policy and acquisition reforms to keep pace with adversaries. Seanna Senior advocates for unified, AI-driven responses; BG Curtis King emphasizes rapid adaptation and collaboration; MG(R) George highlights industry-government partnerships and risk-taking; Dr. Alexey Boyarsky supports distributed, automated defenses; and Riki Ellison stresses the importance of trust, open data, and coalition efforts.
Introduction
Seanna Senior: Seanna Senior is the Senior Vice President of Product at Govini, a defense software company focused on modernizing the defense acquisition system. She has held leadership roles at Amazon and Vanderbilt Labs, holds a BA in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics from the University of Pennsylvania, and an MBA from Harvard University. She is a term member of the Council on Foreign Affairs. Seanna is moderating the panel at Land Euro, a premier gathering for land power in Europe, focusing on the urgent challenges in air and missile defense, particularly in the context of evolving threats and the need for integrated, scalable, and AI-enabled defense systems.
Brigadier General Curtis King: BG Curtis King serves as the Commanding General of the 10th Army Air and Missile Defense Command, assigned to USARAP, with a role in supporting and advising Ukrainian partners. He brings operational experience from working closely with Ukraine and NATO allies, focusing on countering massed aerial threats and integrating ground and air defense capabilities. BG King discussed the US Army’s approach to addressing mass and precision threats from Russia, focusing on unmanned systems and sensors in security areas to blunt attacks, particularly from UAVs. He described collaboration with Ukraine, V Corps, and industry partners, emphasizing the rapid adaptation, risk acceptance, and leveraging of real-time data for targeting and repositioning capabilities.
Retired Major General John George: MG(R) John George is Vice President and Army Strategic Account Executive at Leidos. He previously commanded the Combat Capabilities Development Command, responsible for delivering new technologies to address Army capability gaps. He brings expertise in technology development, AI-enabled command and control, and multi-domain operations. In his remarks, he discussed how the defense industry can expedite the development and delivery of advanced air and missile defense systems. He highlighted the importance of aligning funding with requirements, leveraging industry IRAD investments (approximately $6 billion annually among top contractors), rapid prototyping, digital engineering, and close partnership with users to adapt solutions quickly, even if they are not fully mature.
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky: Dr. Alexey Boyarsky serves as Special Advisor to Ukraine’s Minister of Digital Transformation, bringing expertise in digital innovation and the integration of defense technology. A physicist with 30 years of experience in particle physics and cosmology, he shifted to military applications after the war began. He led the development of a passive acoustic sensor network to detect low-flying cruise missiles, deploying 14,000 sensors in Ukraine and planning further expansion. His work highlighted the need for a new, distributed, and cost-effective air defense architecture, focusing on density and automation, and leveraging ground-based and AI-enabled systems to counter evolving threats.
Mr. Riki Ellison: Mr. Riki Ellison is the Founder and Chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, providing policy and advocacy leadership in missile defense. Mr. Ellison emphasized the necessity of integrating offensive and defensive capabilities, as well as policy changes, and the importance of coalition efforts. He stressed the importance of trust, open data sharing, and adapting acquisition authorities to address current and future threats, particularly those posed by Russia and China. He highlighted recent shifts in deterrence, referencing Ukraine’s actions against Russia and the need for Europe to improve its counterattack defense capabilities. Ellison discussed the Eastern Flank Deterrent Line (EFDL), the role of open data, and the integration of acoustic sensors, with plans to start implementation in Estonia and the Baltic states, aiming for initial operational capability within two months.
Takeaways
The threat environment is characterized by daily, massed attacks using a mix of drones, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, and decoys, with Ukraine facing 400-700 threats per day between July 8 and July 14, 2025.
Rapid integration of data and software upgrades into weapon systems is essential, as waiting weeks or months for updates is no longer viable.
AI-enabled command and control is a linchpin for future multi-domain operations, enabling faster and more effective decision-making.
Interoperability among allied partners increases mass and effectiveness by leveraging more sensors and effectors in the fight.
The cost-per-kill metric is now more important than range for air defense, especially against cheap, mass-produced threats. Achieving affordable and scalable defense requires a shift toward short-range, ground-based, and highly automated systems.
Recent real-world exercises have proven that integrating new sensor data into multiple command and control systems can be achieved in approximately a week, thereby bypassing traditional bureaucratic delays.
Testing and adapting systems in real combat environments accelerates learning and improvement far more than controlled test ranges, especially in critical defense situations.
The US and European allies lack sufficient short-range air defense assets to counter mass attacks, highlighting the need for collective action and increased investment.
Rapid and open data sharing, combined with organizational innovation and integration of offensive and defensive capabilities, is key to countering complex and large-scale missile threats.
Policy and acquisition reforms, such as granting broader authorities and focusing on open data, are necessary to scale missile defense across NATO and adapt to new adversaries.
No single technology can address all air defense challenges; redundancy, adaptability, and scalable solutions using off-the-shelf components are essential for resilience.
Interoperability is foundational for effective coalition defense, requiring open standards and industry solutions that enable seamless integration across multiple command and control systems.
Insights
Seanna Senior
Modern air and missile defense requires integrated, interoperable, and AI-enabled systems to counter a rapidly evolving and diverse threat environment.
Adversaries are employing massed, low-cost, high-impact systems such as drone swarms and advanced missiles, necessitating unified and scalable responses.
BG Curtis King
No single system can counter all threats; a mix of capabilities, including ground-based and air-based defenses, is essential.
Sustainment and rapid regeneration of combat power, including forward repair and agile logistics, are strategic deterrents.
Data analysis and rapid software upgrades, leveraging AI and machine learning, are crucial for adapting to rapidly changing enemy tactics.
Unmanned systems and forward-deployed sensors can blunt initial attack waves without risking personnel or expensive assets, and their data can be used for both defense and offensive targeting.
Collaboration across nations, industry, and the military is essential to address evolving threats. Rapid data analysis and open, software-based systems are critical for effective air and missile defense.
MG(R) George
Industry must accelerate the delivery of AI-enabled command and control solutions and facilitate interoperability among partners and allies.
Sustainable fires, positional advantage, and transitioning from defense to offense are key to deterring and defeating massed attacks.
The defense industry must take risks, invest in rapid prototyping, and work closely with military users in real-world environments to accelerate the delivery of capabilities, even if the solutions are not yet fully mature.
Strong partnerships and trust between industry and government, built on transparency and open communication, are essential for developing and delivering effective defense solutions.
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky
Distributed, dense, and automated air defense systems are essential to counter mass, low-cost threats like UAVs and cruise missiles, as traditional long-range, centralized systems are cost-ineffective against such attacks.
Quantity can sometimes outweigh quality in air defense. A balanced portfolio of technologies, including scalable and redundant solutions, is required to address diverse threats.
Riki Ellison
Open data sharing and rapid integration of sensors across coalition partners are critical for effective deterrence and defense, as demonstrated by recent exercises and the EFDL initiative.
Participation in the Eastern Flank and building trust among allies and partners is vital for collective security. The current momentum must be leveraged to achieve invincibility.
Discussion Points
Seanna Senior: How do we maintain our edge in air and missile defense against a constantly evolving threat environment?
Seanna Senior: Introduces the urgent need for integrated, scalable, and AI-enabled air and missile defense systems to address expanding threats, including small unmanned aerial systems, advanced missile platforms, and drone swarms. Emphasizes the importance of unified responses across domains, flexible architectures, and the role of logistics and sustainment.
BG Curtis King: Describes the current threat landscape, referencing Russia’s daily launch of 500-700 one-way attack drones and increased cruise and ballistic missile capabilities. Stresses that Ukraine’s defense efforts are addressing today’s threats, which are expected to grow. Highlights the need for a mix of capabilities, not relying on a single system, and the importance of both air and ground-based defenses. Emphasizes the necessity for low-cost, attributable sensors and effectors, and the integration of these systems for sustained defense. Explains the critical role of sustainment and rapid regeneration of combat power, including forward repair of advanced systems like Patriot, to quickly return assets to the fight. Notes successful collaboration with NATO allies (Germany, Netherlands, Romania, Sweden) in repairing and returning systems to Ukraine. Highlights the importance of data as the currency of the fight. Stresses the need for rapid data analysis and integration of software upgrades into weapon systems using AI and machine learning, as the enemy adapts quickly and traditional upgrade timelines are insufficient.
MG(R) George: Provides context on the sophistication and frequency of threats faced by Ukraine, citing 400-600 threats per day between July 8 and July 14, 2025, including drones, hypersonics, missiles, and decoys. Predicts increasing sophistication of threats in the future. Emphasizes the need for sustainable fires, better intelligence, and positional advantage to provide required protection. Highlights the importance of transitioning from defense to offense and converging capabilities across all domains, including space and cyber, using data from all sensors. Calls for industry to accelerate delivery of AI-enabled command and control solutions and facilitate interoperability among partners and allies to increase mass and effectiveness.
Seanna Senior: What is the 10th AAMDC doing to address the mass and precision threat posed by Russia?
BG Curtis King: The 10th is focusing on lessons from Ukraine, emphasizing defense in depth and affordable solutions to counter mass attacks. Efforts include deploying unmanned systems with sensors and effectors in security areas to blunt initial waves, especially UAVs, without risking personnel or expensive assets. These systems can be repositioned and their data used for targeting enemy launchers and control stations.
Seanna Senior: How do you think the defense industry can accelerate the delivery of advanced air missile and UAS defense systems to meet the needs of the Army formations, especially in light of these emerging threats like hypersonic missiles and drone swarms?
MG(R) George: The industry can accelerate delivery by aligning funding with requirements, leveraging significant IRAD investments (about $6 billion annually among top contractors), and prioritizing rapid prototyping and field testing, especially in real combat environments like Ukraine. Digital engineering and close user partnership enable quick adaptation, even if solutions are not fully mature. Transparency and willingness to accept 80% solutions are key.
BG Curtis King: Transformation in contact and exercises like FLYTRAP show that rapid, iterative development with soldiers and industry working together enables overnight improvements and faster learning. Accepting more risk and developing solutions in stride is essential to keep pace with evolving threats.
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky: Testing in real-life combat environments provides far more valuable feedback than controlled test ranges. Ukraine has infrastructure and units ready to work with industry partners, offering qualified feedback and rapid advancement for new systems.
Seanna Senior: How do you think the EFDL relates to President Trump’s vision for the” Golden Dome,” and could they work together?
Riki Ellison: The US is investing $175 billion over three years to build a global, space-based detection and data-sharing architecture for both offensive and defensive operations. The Golden Dome and EFDL can be connected through open data exchange, with NATO able to tap into US data and vice versa. The approach will involve a consortium of companies and is designed to deter adversaries like China and Russia. The EFDL is positioned to demonstrate and advance this integration, with upcoming exercises open to contributors.
Seanna Senior: What is the 10th AAMDC doing to address the increased transparency and legality on today’s battlefields?
BG Curtis King: The 10th AAMDC has reorganized and established an innovation cell working with PEO Missiles and Space, RICTO, and NATO partners to improve data transparency and sharing. The focus is on delivering data quickly to relevant organizations and weapons platforms, ensuring both high-end and low-cost effectors can engage threats efficiently. There is a need to scale up these efforts and integrate data for both offensive and defensive fires, enabling rapid and sustainable strike capabilities.
Riki Ellison: Should we be combining our defensive fires with our offensive fires, and when will maneuvering regiments or corps get missile defense?
BG Curtis King: The U.S. Army is working on a common launcher initiative to enable firing both offensive and defensive interceptors from the same platform, increasing flexibility and magazine depth. Through IBCS, data from defensive sensors can be digitally passed to offensive systems like HIMARS and ATACMS, enabling near-instantaneous fire commands. Integration of offensive and defensive fires is progressing, but further development is needed.
Riki Ellison: What about integrating training for defense personnel with maneuvering units?
BG Curtis King: Complete integration at the battalion level is not yet feasible due to differing skill sets and technology training. However, at higher command levels, integrating targeting and defensive fire cells is essential. Technology and electronic warfare capabilities should be leveraged for better integration, and space-based assets must be used for both targeting and protection.
Riki Ellison: Are we changing roles and responsibilities so the Air Force defends its runways, given the Army’s limited capacity?
BG Curtis King: USAFE is developing and deploying capabilities to defend their own air bases, coordinating closely with the Army’s 10th Air Missile Defense. Both services are developing similar systems, and ongoing discussions are needed as neither has the capacity to counter threats alone.
Seanna Senior: What have we learned from the April 2024 stoppage of 297 of 300 Iranian missiles and drones, and is any of that applicable to Ukraine?
BG Curtis King: The large-scale interception provided valuable data on optimizing air and missile defense systems. Rapid data reduction and immediate feedback are needed to improve firing doctrine. Integration of offensive and defensive actions, as demonstrated by the coalition effort, is crucial.
Riki Ellison: The event showcased maximum integration between U.S. and Israeli forces, with ships, aircraft, and ground systems working together. This level of interoperability is unmatched and should be extended to other countries.
Seanna Senior: Which technology evolution—AI, directed energy, electronic warfare—will have the most significant impact on air and missile defense in the coming decade?
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky: No single technology will dominate; redundancy and a mix of solutions are necessary. Electronic warfare, directed energy, and mobile fire teams each have strengths and limitations. Adversaries adapt, so a multi-layered, adaptable, and redundant system is essential.
Seanna Senior: What role does interoperability play in ensuring NATO’s air and missile defense, and what role should the defense industry and commercial tech play?
MG(R) George: Interoperability is foundational for massing forces and achieving a unified threat picture. Industry must build to open standards like IBCS, enabling connectivity across multiple C2 systems. Coalition partners must decide on risk tolerance regarding multiple C2 structures versus unified systems.
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky: Interoperability is more a matter of policy and business strategy than technical feasibility. If end users demand open systems, manufacturers can deliver interoperable products.
Seanna Senior: What changes to policy, acquisition, or industry are most needed to scale missile defense across NATO more affordably?
Riki Ellison: Centralizing acquisition authority, as with Mike Goodwine, and shifting to open data sharing are key. Trust and starting with unclassified data sharing are foundational. The approach must change from past practices to address threats from Russia and China.
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky: Scalable solutions require products made from off-the-shelf components, not exclusive parts. MODs should issue tenders for such products to ensure scalability and rapid deployment.
Riki Ellison: Recent U.S. executive orders now allow tracking, sensing, and intercepting in space, marking a major policy shift. NATO must also reorient systems to face Russia, not just Iran, and invest in missile defense for European security.
Seanna Senior: If there was one thing you wanted the audience to take away from today’s panel, what would it be?
BG Curtis King: Collective effort and willingness to accept risk are necessary. Rapid integration and data analysis, supported by open, software-based systems, are critical for success.
MG(R) George: Building trust and partnerships through transparency and communication between industry and government is essential to uncover and deliver effective solutions.
Dr. Alexey Boyarsky: Air defense requires both quality and quantity. A balanced, adaptable portfolio of technologies is needed to address diverse threats.
Riki Ellison: Engagement and trust-building on the Eastern Flank are vital. Contributing to joint efforts is the path to collective invincibility.
Winners Associate With Winners!
