SDR & CR: Strategic Portfolio Management

This research service provides an assessment of key component technology areas within the Software Defined Radio and Cognitive Radio space, and offers insights and recommendations for managing the R&D portfolio effectively. Incorporated analysis includes a strategic evaluation of R&D portfolio within this space using a multicriteria decision making tool, an assessment of research orientation among key focus areas in the industry, analysis of the challenging environment for R&D, and an overview of emerging market needs. Finally, a discussion of future R&D trends and insights on strategically managing the R&D pipeline is also included.

This Frost & Sullivan research service titled SDR & CR: Strategic Portfolio Management assesses the diverse factors influencing the developments in the SDR/CR space. The study provides an evaluation of key component technologies enabling the software defined radio (SDR) and cognitive radio (CR) paradigms, with the goal of aiding research institutions and corporate developers in managing their respective R&D portfolios in this sector.

Market Overview

SDR and CR Technologies Revolutionize Wireless Communications in both the Military and Commercial Market Segments

Against the background of escalating security concerns, homeland security has been catapulted to the top of the agenda for governments worldwide. R&D efforts on radio communications are being intensified as defense establishments have realized the need for empowering their personnel with the latest generation of tactical radios. SDR is expected to evolve into CR, which has the potential to transform the dynamics of communications in the future. In addition to driving defense and public safety infrastructure, SDR systems are expected to assume importance in driving commercial wireless communications. In the United States, SDR and CR technologies are poised to replace legacy hardware in the defense domain with the deployment of radio systems that support over-the-air (OTA) software. “SDRs can ideally implement any waveform, tune into any frequency band, transmit/receive with any modulation and support various systems, protocols and interfaces,” notes the analyst of this research service. “Furthermore, they support speeds of 100 Mbps, which is significantly higher than those supported by contemporary systems of 100 Mbps.”

Size, weight, and power (SWaP) reduction continues to be a key challenge in the defense arena as progress has been relatively limited compared to the advancements in the consumer electronic space. While manufacturers have been actively attempting to reduce the size and footprint of radio systems, power regulation and robustness remain serious concerns. This has forced the miniaturization of radio systems into a standstill. Fuel cells seemed the ideal solution for this issue; however, they are unable to match the performance levels attained by conventional high-density batteries. As a result, developers in this space have found it difficult to deal with thermal dissipation associated with the new breed of high-speed processor systems. Cost is another factor constraining market progression. Although the development cost of SDRs continues to remain high, there is likely to be a decline after the initial spate of testing is carried out. Cost efficiency and economy are the new guiding philosophies in the acquisition community. Increased packaging or bulk buys of equipment through indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts will be the norm for future procurements to ensure reduced unit costs. Products with demonstrable lower life cycle costs will score high with acquisition selection boards. “Nearly 80 percent of the development cost of any new radio application is in the underlying software powering it; hence, ensuring that the software is portable from one platform to another is vital for the new lineup of radios,” says the analyst. “To meet this goal, military SDRs must support a standards-based communications infrastructure with standards-based hardware interfaces.”

The obsolescence of communications electronics occurs at a faster rate than that allowed by the acquisition cycle, and therefore, war fighters are often left with outdated or outmoded devices in comparison with commercial developments. Delays in acquisition are often due to the rigorous standards and testing required to field new pieces of military hardware, especially items or programs deemed novel or with high risk, such as military SDR. Due to the inherent risk associated with the acquisition community, incumbent programs of record, such as SINCGARS, are relied upon to deliver solutions quickly and efficiently. Such incumbency distorts the markets against new product offerings by participants. SHOW LESS READ MORE >

1. Executive Summary

- 1.1 Research Overview

-- 1.1 a Research Snapshot

-- 1.1 b Key Findings

- 1.2 Scope and Methodology

-- 1.2 a Research Scope

-- 1.2 b Research Methodology

2. Strategic Assessment of the Industry Environment

- 2.1 Technology Snapshot

-- 2.1 a Software Defined Radios

-- 2.1 b Cognitive Radios

- 2.2 R&D Portfolio Analysis

-- 2.2 a Research Portfolio

-- 2.2 b Research Orientation

-- 2.2 c R&D Budgetary Analysis

- 2.3 Environmental Analysis

-- 2.3 a Key Technical Challenges

-- 2.3 b Key Business Challenges

-- 2.3 c Emerging Market Needs

3. Industry Best Practices and Strategic Insights

- 3.1 Industry Best Practices for Measuring R&D Success

-- 3.1 a Key Performance Indicators: Non-Technical

-- 3.1 b Key Performance Indicators: Technical

- 3.2 Assessment of Partnerships and Insights on the Road Ahead

-- 3.2 a Assessment of Key Partnerships and Strategic Alliances

-- 3.2 b Strategic R&D Pipeline--The Road Ahead

- 3.3 Strategic Evaluation of the R&D Portfolio

-- 3.3 a Sneak Preview of the AHP Tree

-- 3.3 b Insights from the AHP.....

4. Patents; Contacts; Glossary; and Appendix

- 4.1 Key Patents and Contacts

-- 4.1 a Key Patents

-- 4.1 b Key Contacts

- 4.2 Appendices and Glossary

-- 4.2 a Appendix A1: Analytical Hierarchy Process

-- 4.2 b Appendix A2: AHP Process and Computations--Level 0 and Level 1 Criteria

-- 4.2 c Appendix A3: AHP Process and Computation—Alternatives

-- 4.2 d Glossary of Abbreviations