Issue link: https://iconnect007.uberflip.com/i/1460418
74 PCB007 MAGAZINE I MARCH 2022 have a workforce that is trained and producing it in America. Johnson: e pioneering members of PCBAA are generally very large, tier one industry. And as we look more closely at the pillars—STEM and the like—it starts to hint that PCBAA sees pure R&D, and disruptive technologies, as an area to nurture. Is that, indeed, an area that the PCBAA wants to encourage? Marsh: In terms of disruptive capabilities? Johnson: For example, there is a lot going on right now with the heterogeneous integration roadmap and how that's going to change pack- aging. ere's also other tech that isn't in the mainstream yet. Is there room to really grow our industry as a leader in technology develop- ment again? Marsh: I think so. ere's a demand signal; there are policies; there are programs that put money on contracts for people to work with DoD, to ensure that there's a supply for the Department of Defense. You'd have to have an early adopter or a lead executive agent to do these things. Now, commercially, I think we're already doing that as an industry. ere are people on our membership page who are already thinking about and acting on some of the things you've mentioned. Since April, our goal has been to make deci- sion-makers aware that there's a problem, and to identify solutions. What is the problem? ere is a gap. We are in the infant stages of helping the government understand solutions. We've made enormous strides legislatively of making sure that an organization like the Printed Circuit Board Association of America was in a seat when people were having micro- electronics ecosystem discussions. Johnson: A lot of defense electronics is very tried-and-true, old school by intent. In the supply chain, many of those legacy compo- nents are going away. How do we protect that part of the defense industry? Marsh: ere are two ways to answer that. We know from an OEM perspective, from a big defense prime contractor's perspective, that should we have disruptive and/or next-gen capabilities research-engineered and manufac- tured here; it increases their ability to engineer systems better. ose advanced capabilities allowing us to do things differently domestically only enhances the product. ere are limitations to what can be engineered right now because, as you said, they're working with old, tried- and-true packages. But if you add in a capability that has been approved, demonstrated, and val- idated within a customer base, now you're giv- ing those engineers at those major primes and major commercial companies the ability to start to engineer a product differently. Keep in mind that there are so many leg- acy systems, not just within the federal gov- ernment, but within the commercial sector. You're always going to have people punch- ing out all their products. e Department of Defense, under the Printed Circuit Board and Interconnection Executive Agent, has a door in the Pentagon for the executive agent for our industry; they have a facility that produces leg- acy boards for extreme legacy weapon systems that industry is no longer producing. e DoD is producing printed circuit boards for really, really old weapon systems that have not been modernized. Johnson: ey take their own responsibility for that. Marsh: ey rely on industry to help them with engineering and certain manufacturing pro- cesses. But there's a manufacturing capability within the Department of Defense itself. And that's a good thing because sometimes what they're trying to produce are one-off, two-off boards for a system that might be coming to the end of its life expectancy.