Today’s weather: Highly charged electrons and protons traveling at about 1 million miles per hour, with a chance of ultraviolet light, x-rays and magnetic surges.

Good thing you’ve got an umbrella. Earth’s atmosphere and magnetic fields provide most of the “space weather” protection that’s needed for life to survive on the planet. But as humankind has ven-tured beyond the atmosphere with satel-lites and manned missions, the potentially devastating effects of space weather have taken on much greater significance.

Severe space weather events also can have impacts at or near Earth’s sur-face, where increasingly sophisticated communication, transportation and transmission systems can be disrupted, sometimes with serious consequences.

As space weather has become more important to human activity, so has the effort to understand and predict the solar activity that generates it. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) operates a Space Weather Prediction Center that gathers and packages data from a range

of Earth-orbiting science instruments, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), in addi-tion to supporting NOAA, conducts science missions to better understand the Sun’s dynamics.

In all of these activities, Lockheed Martin plays an important role, led by Lockheed Martin Space Systems’ Advanced Technology Center (ATC) in Palo Alto, Calif. The ATC’s Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory (LMSAL) has been a leading center of solar research and instrument design for four decades.

The team’s Soft X-Ray Telescope (SXT), launched aboard the Japanese Yohkoh satellite in 1991, observed the

January 2008

Volume 14, No. 1

2

Employees receive national recognition forachievements in leadership and technical excellence.

In The SpotlightMissiles and Fire Control sites celebrate delivery of 20,000th Hellfire II missile.

Hellfire Milestone

3

Advanced Technology Laboratories succeeds as collaborative, advanced computing research center.

Organization Profile

5

Adaptive Information Technology programhelps employees overcome impairments.

Adaptive Technologies

3

This image taken by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory shows a large solar flare on the Sun’s surface. The effects of solar flares can result in storms, the disruption of global positioning systems, electrical currents in gas and oil pipelines, and more.See Space Weather p. 4

Flying the legendary “hump” route over the Himalaya Mountains in a cargo plane, carrying drums of 100-octane airplane fuel and a heavy load of wing ice, Alex Kaplan learned both the meaning of fear and the best way to overcome it.

“Each one of us had an impor-tant job to do,” says the former radio operator. “And we knew if we failed to do our jobs together, we would all go down together. Teamwork was what got us through.”

Like many Americans of his generation, Kaplan absorbed lessons during his service in World War II that shaped the rest of his life. And like many of those veterans who came to work for Lockheed Martin companies, Kaplan says the war

After nearly four years of “panning for gold” in dusty boxes and forgot-ten corners, a team of current and former Lockheed Martin employees has found more than 1,000 nuggets.

Now, having uncovered his-torical Lockheed Martin artifacts ranging from handwritten logs of famous flights to an L-1011 model so realistic it looks like it could fly, the Corporation’s Legacy Project is shifting to a new phase.

The project has been re-estab-lished under the Enterprise Records Management group, which is evalu-ating the artifacts and finding perma-nent homes for them. The project has hired The History Factory, a heritage

Lockheed Martin’s powerful legacy takes many forms. Its strength as a preeminent technology company is built on a foundation of innovations and accomplishments in fields ranging from rocket science and aeronautics to remote sensing and systems integration.

At the same time, the Corporation and its heritage companies have traditionally attracted the best and brightest individuals of their generations. Among these loyal and accomplished employees are a dedicated group of World War II veterans who continue to contribute to today’s Lockheed Martin.

This issue of Lockheed Martin Today looks at both facets of the Corporation’s heritage, featuring the Corporate Legacy program and the World War II generation’s ongoing impact on the Corporation’s work.

See Veterans p. 6 See Legacy p. 8

Role Call

Rich Heritage

World War II veterans draw on military experiences to continue contributing Entering new phase,

Legacy Project breathes life into historical artifacts

Historic Moments

Charged Up Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory is key partner in understanding ‘space weather’

“I was a wet-behind-the-ears kid and I grew up in a hurry,” says Allen Amgott, an attorney at Lockheed Martin Information Systems & Global Services in King of Prussia, Pa. “I became an adult in the military.” After the war, Amgott decided to pursue a law degree, which eventually led him to intellectual property law, which he still practices today.

G.I. Jobs magazine recently listed Lockheed Martin 13th on its annual list of the “Top 50 Military-Friendly Employers.” Last year, the Corporation ranked No. 20.

Ranking is based on responses to a survey distributed to 2,500 companies by G.I. Jobs magazine. Firms earning more than $1 billion in annual revenues were surveyed and those making the list demonstrated strong military recruiting efforts, a high percentage of new military hires and instituted policies for National Guard and Reservists. ■

Corporation Selected As A Leading Supporter Of Veterans Programs

2

IN THE SPOTLIGHT

At the Aviation Week awards ceremony are, from left, Glenn Brady, principal at PricewaterhouseCoopers and corporate sponsor of the Program Excellence initiative; and Lockheed Martin representatives Bill Rose, senior program manager of Program Operations on the F-22 program; Mike Joyce, vice president of Operating Excellence & Program Management; Tom McGrath, vice president and general manager of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense program; Rosemary Farrell, program manager of the MH-60 Multi-Year Common Cockpit program; Nicholas Cessario, vice president of Program Management for the F-22 Raptor; Nicholas Kuzemka, vice president of Program Management; and Richard Walker, program manager of the Theater Battle Management Core System program.

The following have recently received national recognition for achievements in leadership, and management and technical excellence.

Four Lockheed Martin programs were recently honored for management excellence by Aviation Week magazine.

The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Weapon System received the 2007 Program Excellence Award for Research and Systems Design and Development. The Common Cockpit™ avionics suite for MH-60R and MH-60S multimis-sion helicopters earned the 2007 Program Excellence

Award for Production Sustainment. The F-22 Raptor was a finalist in the Production Sustainment category. The Theater Battle Management Core Systems (TBMCS) was a finalist in the Research and Systems Design Development category.

Each program was selected based on set criteria that addressed technical, organizational and business complexity, highlighting the best ele-ments of program management excellence.

Tracy Yellorday, senior systems engineer for Lockheed Martin Space Systems and Lynette D. Franklin, U-2 deputy program director for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, were among the top honorees at the 2007 National Women of Color Technology Awards Conference.

The awards recognize the significant accomplishments of minority women in the digital world in an effort to attract talent to innovative, professional and technical positions.

Yellorday received the Community Service Award, earn-ing recognition for her work in science and engineering out-reach programs in Denver, Colo., such as the “Introduce a Girl to Engineering Program,” and representing Lockheed Martin at Girls Exploring Science and Technology, an annual event held to support National Engineers Week. Franklin received the Managerial Leadership Award for her demonstrated leader-ship and team-building skills on the company’s U-2 program.

In addition to Yellorday and Franklin’s recognition, nine other Lockheed Martin employees were honored for their technical achievements. Information Systems & Global Services (IS&GS) employees Shameka McCaskill, mission engineer; Ngina McLean, manager, systems engineering, inte-gration and test; and Thao Vo, systems engineer staff, were named “Technology Rising Stars.”

Four other IS&GS employees received recognition in the “Technology All-Stars” category: Mona Cannaday, software engineer staff; Sheila Somani, project engineer staff; Phuong Wilkerson, systems engineer senior staff; and Charmian Lee, lead test engineer, along with Aeronautics employees Karmyn Norwood, F-22 project management and planning operations senior staff, and Elisabeth Will, F-35 sys-tems engineer staff.

Programs Recognized For Management Excellence By Aviation Week

National Women Of Color Technology Awards Honor Lockheed Martin Employees

From left, Lynette Franklin, U-2 deputy program director; Christine Neigh, director, Equal Employment Opportunity Programs; Tracy Yellorday, senior systems engineer, Space Systems; and Linda Brisnehan, vice president, Program Management, Space Systems, attend the 2007 National Women of Color Technology Awards Conference.

At December’s Army-Navy Game, Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors (MS2) President Fred Moosally, center, presents a $10,000 check on behalf of Lockheed Martin employees to the Wounded Warriors organization. Wounded Warriors supports the families of U.S. Army, Marine Corps, Navy or Air Force personnel who have been wounded, injured or killed during combat operations. At the annual college football game held at M&T Bank Stadium in Baltimore, Md., are, from left, Craig Pirtle, treasurer for the non-profit Wounded Warriors organization; Moosally; and Chris Myers, vice president for MS2 Business Development. Moosally is a 1966 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and a former starting lineman for the Navy team.

Wounded Warriors Recognized At Army-Navy Game

3

Bob Manich loves his job, but some-times it can be a pain. Literally.

A systems engineer at Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems in Sunnyvale, Calif., Manich spends a lot of time at his computer doing techni-cal writing. But because he has carpal tunnel syndrome, long periods of typing can cause significant discomfort in his hands.

Recently, he found a solution. Manich now uses a voice recognition system that allows him to create the documents his job requires by simply talking into a headset and allowing the software to do the typing for him.

“It’s been a big help,” he says. “It’s cut my typing load by 60 to 70 per-cent and really reduced the pain in my hands.”

Manich is one of a growing number of Lockheed Martin employ-ees who are getting help overcoming impairments through the Corporation’s Adaptive Information Technology (ADIT) and Employee Accommodation Program.

The ADIT program tests informa-tion technologies and adaptive tools that might help a variety of impairments — from hand pain to poor vision — and maintains an online database of those technologies for employees and ergo-nomics specialists to consult.

“ADIT directly supports Lockheed Martin’s diversity mission, and it’s an integral part of our Focus on Abilities initiative,” says Roxane MacGillivray, Focus on Abilities Team lead. The ADIT program is operated by Lockheed Martin Enterprise Information Systems and is integrated with EIS ergonomics programs.

Introduced in 2006, ADIT cur-rently has 12 adaptive technologies in its database and more are being tested.

Employees who believe they could benefit from an adaptive tool are able to search the database, read about the vari-ous tools’ attributes, and determine if a particular item would be beneficial.

A request for acquiring the tool is made at the employee’s work site, not through the ADIT program. However, if an employee cannot find an appropri-ate tool on the database, he or she can request that the program investigate whether anything is available in the commercial marketplace.

New tools that show potential are then tested at EIS’s Enterprise Testing Solutions Laboratory in Orlando, Fla. EIS has teamed with the nearby University of Central Florida, which provides student testers for the products being evaluated.

The technologies are tested to ensure they meet the accommodation needs of employees and are compatible with Lockheed Martin information tech-nology systems.

“An employee who has a need can take two courses of action,” says Kevin Dykema, ADIT program man-ager. “You can identify a tool in the database, which has descriptions of the tools and summaries of their advantages and shortcomings. If we don’t have what you’re looking for, we can identify some potential options and take them into the lab for testing. We then provide information back to the employee and also add it into the database.”

Tools can be as simple as a moni-tor screen magnifier or as sophisticated as speech synthesizer software that reads aloud on-screen information to sight-impaired individuals. Other examples of technologies in the ADIT database are an assistive mouse adapter that dampens the device’s response to hand tremors and a touchpad for individuals who have trouble using a mouse.

Dykema says the ADIT program is in the process of expanding into assistive telephones and other telecommunications tools, and prior product evaluations are being updated to reflect their compatibil-ity with the latest operating systems.

Meanwhile, the broader Focus on Abilities Team is preparing to release a new corporate policy statement on “pro-viding reasonable accommodations in the workplace and for applicants.”

“We are moving on several fronts,” MacGillivray says, “to ensure

that Lockheed Martin is creating an inclusive work environment that helps all employees contribute to the full extent of their abilities.” ■

Details about the Adaptive Information Technology and Employee Accommodation program can be

found online at http://esh.eis.lmco.com/esh/, under “Programs and Procedures.” For general information about the initiative, call Kevin Dykema at 303-971-6023.

Bob Manich, a systems engineer in Sunnyvale, Calif., uses a voice recognition system provided by the Corporation’s Adaptive Information Technology program. Manich, who has carpal tunnel syndrome, talks into the headset and the typing is done for him.

“We are moving on several fronts to ensure that Lockheed Martin is creating an inclusive work

environment that helps all employees contribute to the full extent of their abilities.”

— Roxane MacGillivray, Focus on Abilities Team lead

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (MFC) recently celebrated delivery of its 20,000th HELLFIRE II missile at the three locations where the weapon system is produced. Workforce recognition activities at MFC in Troy, Ala., Ocala, Fla., and Orlando, Fla., included fly-ins by the Apache and Cobra helicopters, displays, signed lithographs of a HELLFIRE painting by MFC Graphic Artist Rick Thompson, presentations by visiting U.S. Army officials and distribution of “command coins” for exceptional performance to HELLFIRE team members. HELLFIRE — a precision-strike, semiactive laser-guided missile — can be launched from multiple platforms, including ground vehicles, ships, and fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft such as the Cobra attack helicopter shown at the Orlando event in the photo at right. In Ocala, bottom left, U.S. Army Col. Mike Cantor, project manager for Joint Attack Munitions Systems (JAMS), presents a plaque commemorating delivery to HELLFIRE team member Diane Rodden. Bottom right, Col. Cantor sees the HELLFIRE missiles at the Troy facility with, from left, Rick Hulcher, plant manager, Pike County Production Facility; Scottie Lee, building supervisor, Air-to-Ground Missile System; and Marv Smith, deputy project manager, JAMS.

HELLFIRE Reaches 20,000th Missile Milestone

Helping HandsFrom typing relief to ergonomic input devices, adaptive technologies assist employees

4

solar atmosphere continuously for more than nine years and provided countless new insights into the Sun’s energetic phe-nomena. The SXT was followed by many other instruments that have performed exceptionally. (See accompanying list.)

“As a team, we probably average a new instrument launch every few years,” says Mons Morrison, who has managed several of the programs. “Our department has a lot of history in solar observation.”

Most recently, NASA has selected the LMSAL to design and build the Solar Ultraviolet Imager (SUVI), which is a series of extreme ultraviolet instru-ments, the first of which is scheduled for launch in 2014. The SUVI instru-ments will fly on the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES)-R Series, which provide data for NOAA alerts and forecasts.

“We’ve been working with NOAA’s space weather prediction group to develop requirements for SUVI,” says Jim Lemen, an ATC solar physicist. “SUVI will measure in six different wavelength bands and gather consistent cadences over a long period of time to determine whether energy in an active region will be released either as flare or as a coronal mass ejection. Through the correlation of the observed data, we can better anticipate and predict when con-ditions will give rise to a major event.”

That ability to predict Sun distur-bances with greater accuracy is NOAA’s primary objective, because doing so can be critical for protecting assets and pub-lic safety.

Solar flares and coronal mass ejections intensify in correlation with the 11-year sun spot cycle. During a coronal mass ejection, a huge bubble of matter (as much as a billion tons), bursts from the Sun’s magnetic fields and trav-els outward at speeds of several million miles per hour.

Solar flares are even more intense but less long-lived. They occur when the Sun’s magnetic fields tear and reconnect,

generating a million times more energy than a large earthquake. High-energy protons from a solar flare can bombard the Earth within two hours after an event, and perhaps in as little as 15 minutes.

The effects of these events on human activities can be widespread. A major space weather storm in the fall of 2003 caused an electrical system failure and power blackout in Northern Europe and forced airlines to reroute flights away from northern latitudes where the geomagnetic effects are most intense.

High radiation levels prompted NASA to direct astronauts on the International Space Station to take pre-

cautionary shelter, and nearly two-thirds of Earth and space science missions were impacted. One spacecraft was lost entirely and a few others sustained sig-nificant damage.

Among the other major impacts from space weather are the disruption of global positioning systems, making them inaccurate, and the creation of electrical currents in gas and oil pipe-lines, which increases the rate of corro-sion and can lead to dangerous leaks.

“As our society becomes more technologically sophisticated, there is a greater potential for disruption,” Lemen observes. The good news is that techno-logical sophistication is also helping sci-entists predict with ever-greater accuracy when a space weather storm will occur.

“Modeling the Sun to predict activity is very complex,” Lemen says. “But with the speed of computers con-tinuing to advance, we’re beginning to see models approaching the fidelity that will allow a much more realistic com-parison with what we’re observing.”

While instruments such as SUVI provide real-time data that improves the speed and accuracy of NOAA’s space weather alerts, research instruments are designed to better understand the Sun and thereby increase the quality of pre-dictive modeling.

LMSAL contributes to both the operational and research sides of solar missions. A major upcoming research mission is NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO), which is sched-uled to launch in 2008 carrying three

instruments, including the Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory’s Atmospheric Imaging Assembly. The AIA is designed to image the solar atmosphere in mul-tiple wavelengths and establish a link between interior changes and those tak-ing place on the surface.

LMSAL also built a second SDO instrument, the Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI). Designed in

collaboration with Stanford University, the primary goal of the HMI investiga-tion is to study the origin of solar vari-ability and to characterize and understand the Sun’s interior and magnetic activity.

LMSAL’s Alan Title — one of the world’s foremost solar physicists — is the principal investigator for AIA, as well as a co-investigator for HMI.

“Not only do we build solar tele-scopes, but we also use the data as solar researchers,” says Morrison, who points out that about one third of the lab’s staff consists of scientists and about two-thirds are engineers. “Other instrument builders don’t have the same scientific passion for using the data collected by their instru-ments. That’s what sets us apart.”

That combination of scientific and engineering expertise, Morrison adds, makes the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Lab “a unique national resource” and one that “will continue to contribute to our nation’s and the world’s understanding of the Sun.” ■

Space WeatherContinued from p. 1

For more information about the Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center’s solar programs,

contact communicator Buddy Nelson at 510-797-0349, and visit the Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory Web site at www.lmsal.com.

Jim Lemen, solar physicist at Lockheed Martin Space Systems’ Advanced Technology Center, is a member of the team working to predict Sun disturbances with greater accuracy.

Lockheed Martin Solar Observation InstrumentsThe Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory at Lockheed Martin Space Systems’Advanced Technology Center in Palo Alto, Calif., is a leading center for solar research and instrument design. Following are some of the solar observation instruments the lab has designed and built.

Soft X-Ray Telescope• — Launched aboard the Yohkoh Solar Observatory in 1991. In operation through 2001.Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope• — Launched aboard the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) in 1995. In operation.Michelson Doppler Imager• — Launched aboard the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) in 1995. In operation.Transition Region and Coronal Explorer (TRACE) • — Launched in 1998. In operation.Solar X-ray Imager (SXI)• on GOES-13, launched in 2006. Mission is in orbital storage waiting to be placed in opera-tion.Focal Plane Package on the Solar Optical Telescope• — Launched in 2006 aboard Solar-B (Hinode), a Japanese pro-gram. In operation.Extreme Ultraviolet Imager• — Launched in 2006 aboard each of the two NASA Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory (STEREO) spacecraft.Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA) • — Scheduled to launch in 2008 on the Solar Dynamics Observatory.Helioseismic and Magnectic Imager (HMI)• — Scheduled to launch in 2008 on the Solar Dynamics Observatory.Solar Ultraviolet Imager (SUVI)• — First launch scheduled for 2014 on the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES)-R Series.

“Not only do we build solar telescopes, but we also use the data as solar researchers. Other instrument builders don’t have the same

scientific passion for using the data collected by their instruments. That’s what sets us apart.”

—Mons Morrison

“Modeling the Sun to predict activity is very complex. But with the speed of computers continuing to advance, we’re beginning to see models approaching the fidelity

that will allow a much more realistic comparison with what we’re observing.”

—Jim Lemen, solar physicist, Lockheed Martin Space Systems’ Advanced Technology Center

5

As an example of a business that has forged multiple collaborative links across varied Lockheed Martin businesses, it’s hard to beat Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratories (ATL).

The Cherry Hill, N.J.-based enter-prise of six laboratories is involved in activities that support all of the Corporation’s business areas as well as corporate-level initiatives.

Once noted for its work in com-mercial sound and optics technologies, ATL today has evolved into an advanced and applied computing research center, specializing in the fields of artificial intelligence, human cognition, brain-inspired computing, robotic autonomy, collaboration technologies, advanced software development tools, distributed systems and real-time systems.

“Our business model consists primarily of competing for programs run by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and by the (U.S. military) service laboratories,” says Jim Marsh, ATL’s director. “Our

second biggest source of revenue is through contracts with other Lockheed Martin business units.”

While ATL is part of the Electronic Systems Business Area — and compa-nies in this area represent the largest por-tion of ATL’s Lockheed Martin program work — it also contracts routinely with units in other business areas.

ATL’s support of Lockheed Martin’s diverse lines of business occurs in many ways. Even on programs for which it contracts directly with DARPA and the service labs, ATL’s purpose is to acquire expertise that can be transitioned and applied to other areas of the Corporation.

“Ultimately, the technologies we develop on DARPA programs find their

way into Lockheed Martin products and programs,” Marsh says. “DARPA and the service labs are the technology lead-ers for the Department of Defense. If you follow them, you are pretty assured that at some point it will tie into a Lockheed Martin program.

“We try to develop technology that the rest of the Corporation doesn’t even know it needs yet.”

By competing in the recent DARPA Urban Challenge for autono-mous vehicles, for example, ATL gained expertise in designing autonomous deci-sion-making systems, which eventually could help several Lockheed Martin pro-grams. (See LM Today, Nov/Dec 2007.)

Another example of technology developed by ATL that will transition to a business unit is the Coalition Joint Spectrum Management and Planning Tool. Under contract to the U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Research and Development Engineering Center, ATL has delivered a system that opti-mizes use of the crowded wireless

spectrum, making it easer for troops to communicate while avoiding interference from jamming and blockage by competing signals.

The tool is already being used in Iraq, Marsh reports. Ultimately, the pro-gram contract for the tool will reside with the Information Systems & Global Services Business Area.

ATL’s work with other Lockheed Martin business units follows a variety of models, and often ATL serves as the central point for connecting busi-ness units to new technol-ogy systems.

For example, it is working under contract to Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control on a system that inte-grates multiple sensors across many platforms and networks. The “smart” technology solution allows systems to automatically discover resources and services when they plug into the architecture. As the technology is devel-oped further, ATL will approach other Lockheed Martin business units with products that could benefit from it.

Sometimes, ATL works simultane-ously with business units and corporate departments. It is collaborating with Information Systems & Global Services on the Software Technology Initiative, which also has corporate-wide application

that is managed through the Corporate Engineering and Technology office.

The Software Technology Initiative, Marsh explains, is designed to address “wicked systems,” those that are so complex that computer participation in systems design could dramatically lower cost and cycle time.

“We’re talking about systems with tens of millions of lines of code, portions of which are coming from many different places,” Marsh says. “It’s very difficult for a human being to grasp all of the design implications and spot the potential flaws in combining those pieces.”

But by developing modeling and trouble-shooting technologies, the Software Technology Initiative is help-ing in the development of large, reliable integrated systems in about one fifth the time and at about one fifth the cost of current production methods.

Yet another ATL development model is its collaboration with university research programs. One initiative using this approach is the development of software that “learns” in a way similar

to human learning, Marsh says. Nine uni-versities are participating in the research, which could save software developers having to program every action. Instead, software systems will be able to learn on their own what needs to be done.

There are dozens more examples of how ATL is exploring technology that can be applied across multiple Lockheed Martin programs and lines of business, and Marsh says they all support the same vision — to effectively transition new technologies from the laboratory to customer solutions.

“We coalesce and transition inno-vation and domain expertise into opera-tional applications,” Marsh says. “We do that in many different ways for many different customers, with some of the best science and technology minds in the world.” ■

Pervasive IntelligenceAdvanced Technology Laboratories’ influence can be found in many Lockheed Martin products

Working with the customer testing geolocation of radio frequency emitters are ATL engineers, from left, Albert Davis, Paul Tilghman and Jay Byron.

Jim Marsh, director of Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratories, addresses employees on one of the study areas. ATL has evolved into an advanced center that specializes in the fields of artificial intelligence, human cognition, brain-inspired computing, robotic autonomy, collaboration technologies, advanced software development tools, distributed systems and real-time systems.

ORGANIZATION PROFILE

For more information about Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratories, contact communicator

Steve O’Neill at 856-792-9815, or visit ATL’s Web site at http://www.atl.external.lmco.com/ index.php.

Laboratories Develop Customer SolutionsLockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratories consists of six laborato-ries. The most recently added is the ISX Laboratory, which was formed when Lockheed Martin acquired ISX Corporation in 2006.

Advanced Concepts Laboratory• — Defines, researches and develops basic and applied solutions with a strong emphasis on demonstrable proto-types that lead to the early deployment of new technology. This lab includes classified programs, which represent one of ATL’s fastest-growing business areas.Artificial Intelligence Laboratory• — Develops and applies artificial intel-ligence technology to distributed, real-time and autonomous systems for military platforms. The laboratory’s ability to embed artificial intelligence systems into larger software systems allows human decision-makers to increase efficiency and deal with complex, time-sensitive environments.Distributed Systems Laboratory• — Creates innovative, distributed, highly flexible, secure and trusted infrastructures for next-generation com-mand, control, communication, computer and intelligence systems. The lab applies domain-specific information, transforming technology into scalable and evolving frameworks, and enhancing the performance and capability requirements of decision-driven systems.Embedded Processing Laboratory• — Researches and develops embedded technologies and complex systems. These efforts are applied to secure, reli-able network issues; to improving wireless communications through digital radios and dynamic allocation of spectrum; and to advanced modeling and simulation.Contextual Systems Laboratory• — Develops system interfaces to be more intuitive, natural and cognitively capable of interacting with human decision-makers. Adaptive interfaces improve readiness and operational capabilities by monitoring the physiological states of human operators and adapting to maximize their output in stressful and varied situations.ISX Laboratory• — Applies the best of emerging information and knowl-edge systems technologies to high-value operational problems. The lab focuses on decision superiority, knowledge management, network-enabled command and unmanned airborne systems.

Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Laboratories engineers perform testing on a mapping handheld device. From left are Matt Wellmer and Tim Souder.

6

taught him that mission success requires many individual efforts, each of which is essential.

Today, the handful of WWII vets who are still working for Lockheed Martin have not forgotten the lessons of their military service, and they continue to lead by example in helping new gen-erations understand the importance of working toward a common goal.

One of those vets is Jack Houle, a part-time systems engineer with Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company. He’s currently working on writing systems engineering training programs, including management, concepts of operation and requirements development.

It’s no surprise that Houle would gravitate to such a role late in his career. It was education, after all, that launched him on his career in the first place.

“I was from Watertown, N.Y., and I figured I was going to go work for the Farm Bureau or something like that,” Houle says. “But when I got out of the Navy in 1946, I went to Clarkson College on the GI Bill and majored in engineering.”

From there he worked for a couple of different companies before landing with Lockheed in 1956, where he even-tually became chief engineer for the International Space Station programs.

“The war definitely changed my life path because the GI Bill paid for college,” Houle says. “That was the best thing to come out of the war for a lot of people. It converted a whole bunch of people into technologists, which was a great thing for the country. I remember classes that were so full that people were sitting on the window sills to get an education. The GI Bill gave us the opportunity, and the smart ones took advantage of it.”

Another of the “smart ones” was John Cladis, who’s now a senior staff physicist at Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center (ATC) in Palo Alto, Calif.

“Being in the military affected everything I did professionally,” says Cladis, who was majoring in chemi-cal engineering at Colorado University when the United States entered the war.

He enlisted in the Army Signal Corps and was preparing to ship out overseas when he was selected to attend classes at Harvard University and the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology in radar technology, after which he taught other recruits how to operate and repair radar systems.

He went on to earn a doctorate in nuclear physics at the University of California at Berkeley, where he studied with the soon-to-be famous J. Robert Oppenheimer. He also worked

with Oppenheimer and other renowned nuclear physicists at Los Alamos National Laboratory in developing the atomic bomb.

“Because of my involvement in the war, I was very aware of the con-cerns about the growing threats in the world, and I decided to go into defense work,” Cladis says.

He went to work for Lockheed after Los Alamos, and he continues to work on defense programs as a member of the ATC’s Space Physics Laboratory.

Like Cladis, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics employee Ben Carroll learned from his experiences as a soldier that you have to contribute in whatever way you can, even if it’s not what you originally envisioned.

A sports standout during his high school years in Illinois, Carroll wanted nothing more than to attend the West Point Military Academy and serve his country overseas. But a heart irregular-ity and a bad knee stood in the way. West Point turned him down, as did Air Force and Naval officers programs.

Instead, he was inducted into the Army infantry and became a techni-cal sergeant at Camp Wolters in Texas, the Army’s largest infantry training center. While there, Carroll won three camp boxing championships, an ironic accomplishment, he notes, for someone who wasn’t accepted for officer training because of physical problems.

“I never really forgave myself for not going overseas,” he says, even though that wasn’t for lack of trying. “I did learn that no matter where you have been or what you have done, you always have to do what you can to contribute.”

It’s precisely because he believes he is still making a contribution that Carroll continues to work in the office of the executive vice president at LM Aero in Forth Worth, Texas.

His no-nonsense approach to evaluating programs and his talent for

VeteransContinued from p. 1

“The war definitely changed my life path because the GI Bill paid for college. That was the best thing to come out of the war for a lot of people. It converted a whole bunch of people into technologists, which was a great thing for the country. I remember classes that were so full that people were sitting on the window sills to get an education.

The GI Bill gave us the opportunity, and the smart ones took advantage of it.”— Jack Houle, systems engineer, Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company

Alex Kaplan says his service in World War II taught him the lifelong lesson that mission success requires many individual efforts, each of which is essential. Kaplan is a part-time senior systems engineer at Information Systems & Global Services in King of Prussia, Pa.

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics employee Ben Carroll is shown here with a painting of himself in uniform circa 1945. It was created by famed Texas artist Emily Guthrie Smith. Carroll says he learned from his experiences as a soldier that you have to consistently contribute in whatever way you can, which he still does in his work at Aero in Fort Worth, Texas.

7

writing and structuring proposals has made him a valuable asset to the com-pany, where he has worked for more than 30 years.

Not every Lockheed Martin WWII vet’s experiences played heavily in his eventual career path. But even for Allen Amgott, who describes his Army experi-ence as “snafu,” military service had a powerful impact.

Amgott was studying electrical engineering at the City College of New York when he was sent to Greensboro, N.C., for basic training and, following that, aircrew navigator training. With the help of a group of 8th Air Force returnees who were there at the same time, Amgott quickly lost his youthful innocence.

“I was a wet-behind-the-ears kid and I grew up in a hurry,” says Amgott, an attorney at Lockheed Martin Information Systems & Global Services in King of Prussia, Pa. “I became an adult in the military.”

He never did become an active air crewman, however, because the Army decided it didn’t need more navigators. He completed radio operator and gun-nery schools for B17 service, but then was transferred from base to base across the United States through a series of improbable circumstances and unlikely twists. Eventually, he served as a control tower operator in Myrtle Beach, S.C.

The best outcome of his military service was his introduction to the many areas of the United States he might not have otherwise seen. After his discharge, he finished his engineering degree at the University of Oklahoma, where he met a young coed who would become his wife of 53 years.

Amgott returned to the New York area to work for the Navy as an engineer while attending law school. He became

a patent advisor with the Office of Naval Research, which led to employment as a patent counsel in private industry.

Not far from Amgott’s office in King of Prussia is the office of another Lockheed Martin WWII vet, none other

than Alex Kaplan, who took a much dif-ferent path to getting there.

After surviving 80 round-trip sup-ply runs over the hump from Burma to China — many of which delivered fuel for Lockheed P-38s operating in China — Kaplan finished his engineering degree and eventually went to work for a Lockheed Martin heritage company in Philadelphia.

“The whole world had completely changed after the war when I went back into engineering,” says Kaplan, a part-time senior systems engineer.

He says the war brought out the best in many people, but he doesn’t think that’s because his generation was more brave or noble than any other.

“I dislike the term ‘greatest gen-eration,’” he says, “because we all just looked at it as something we had to do. It wasn’t unusual. It just had to be done.” ■

“The whole world had completely changed after the war when I went back into engineering.

I dislike the term ‘greatest generation’ because we all just looked at it as something we had to do.

It wasn’t unusual. It just had to be done.”— Alex Kaplan, senior systems engineer

Lockheed Martin’s World War II VeteransThe following individuals are World War II veterans who are still actively employed by Lockheed Martin, either full time or part time, or as consul-tants. If you know of an actively employed World War II veteran not listed here, please contact the LM Today editorial staff, and his or her name will be included in the next issue.

Allen Amgott, Information Systems and Global Services, King of Prussia, Pa.Francis Ashford, Aeronautics Company, Marietta, Ga.Roy Bohner, Missiles and Fire Control, Dallas, TexasBen Carroll, Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, TexasJohn Cladis, Space Systems Company, Palo Alto, Calif.Aram Henesian, Space Systems Company, Sunnyvale, Calif.Ivan Herr, Maritime Systems and Sensors, Moorestown, N.J.Jack Houle, Space Systems Company, Sunnyvale, Calif.Alex Kaplan, Information Systems and Global Services, King of Prussia, Pa.Frank Morris (British Army), Missiles and Fire Control, DallasRichard Nodge, Aeronautics Company, Pinellas, Fla.Guy Redmond, Missiles and Fire Control, Dallas, TexasDuane Schaezler, Missiles and Fire Control, Dallas, Texas

Jack Houle, now a part-time systems engineer with Lockheed Martin Space Systems, went to college on the GI Bill after getting out of the Navy in 1946. Houle eventually became chief engineer for the International Space Station programs.

“Being in the military affected everything I did professionally,” says John Cladis, who among other things worked with J. Robert Oppenheimer and other renowned nuclear physicists in developing the atomic bomb. Cladis continues to work on defense programs at Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology Center in Palo Alto, Calif.

Roy Bohner was a 19-year-old rifleman in the infantry battalion of the 11th Armored Division of General George S. Patton’s Third Army. He’s now working as an electrical engineer at Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, Texas.

Frank Morris, left, electrical engineer at Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, was a radio maintenance officer serving in the British Army during World War II. Veteran Duane Schaezler is a systems engineer at the site.

Guy Redmond was on active duty in the U.S. Navy from 1943 through 1946. He’s now working as an electrical engineer at Missiles and Fire Control in Dallas, Texas.

8

management firm, to assess and cata-logue the collected artifacts, establish collection criteria and draft corporate archival procedures.

The most significant and interest-ing items, says Sharon Watts, Enterprise Records Management director, will be placed in rotating displays at central locations that receive the most traffic from employees across the Corporation as well as customers and the public.

Individual business areas, meanwhile, will manage their own displays and update the central inven-tory managed by Enterprise Records Management as items are moved or added.

“We think it’s important for busi-ness areas to keep the artifacts that tell their stories, and we want to help them do that by providing guidelines for how to handle and store the items,” Watts says.

Plus, Watts says, displaying items at multiple locations supports the over-arching goal of the project, which is to make Lockheed Martin history inspiring for current and future generations.

“The objectives of the Legacy Project are to preserve, share and create an inventory of documents and artifacts that illustrate Lockheed Martin’s many contributions — the things that make Lockheed Martin different from every other company,” Watts says.

The Legacy Project began in 2004 at the suggestion of Vince Marafino, a retired Lockheed Martin Board of Directors member. Since then, partici-pants, including Marafino, have focused primarily on combing through the reams of material packed in boxes stored on the West Coast, and at Corporate Headquarters on the East Coast. In some cases, retirees have contributed artifacts they had in their personal possession.

Some items continue to have a working relevance on current programs, Watts says. “There are certain engineer-ing documents, for example, that can be used as teaching tools to show how products were developed and why they are what they are today,” she says.

Other documents, meanwhile, will be donated to universities, where they can be used for educational purposes, Watts adds, and still others may be donated or loaned to museums.

The key objective of the program, however, is inspiring technological leader-ship and continued commitment to inno-vation and mission success among new and current Lockheed Martin employees.

Denise Stonecypher appreci-ates that mission as much as anyone. She’s a relatively new Lockheed Martin employee, and she’s also the Legacy Program’s project lead.

“It’s important for us to show how Lockheed Martin has been relevant to U.S. history,” she says, “and to gear the message toward a new generation of Lockheed Martin employees.” ■

LegacyContinued from p. 1

For more information about the Legacy Project, contact Sharon Watts at 301-214-3482, or Denise

Stonecypher at 301-214-3201.

Sharon Watts, corporate program director of Records Management, and Denise Stonecypher, a participant in the Advanced Technical Leadership Program, review some of the hundreds of artifacts that have been collected for the Lockheed Martin Legacy Project. The large model on the table is the L-10ll TriStar, Lockheed’s first and only wide-body commercial jet. Laying on the left side of the table is a bound log book of Howard Hughes’ flight around the world in a Lockheed Super Electra.

Early Lockheed items include publications and collectible playing cards from the 1930s.

Detailed handwritten records of the legendary Clarence “Kelly” Johnson, the first leader of the Skunk Works, were discovered during the course of the Legacy Project.

“It’s important for us to show how Lockheed Martin has been relevant to U.S. history, and to gear the message toward a new

generation of Lockheed Martin employees.”— Denise Stonecypher, project lead, Legacy Program

9

A collection of rare photographs of early Martin aircraft includes the Martin 2-0-2, one of the first modern airliners, at top, and the famed “China Clipper” Martin M130 flying boat, above.

Another project discovery includes a letter from aviation pioneer Amelia Earhart to Lockheed Aircraft requesting an Electra airplane, along with a purchase order for it, dated 1936.

So far, the Lockheed Martin Legacy Project has compiled well over 1,000 artifacts that are being evaluated for historical significance and preservation.

On the West Coast, valuable items were discovered as the group searched hundreds of boxes of heritage Lockheed items.

“It’s grubby work,” says Trudy Sibley, retired public affairs employee. “Tedious, boring and dirty.” And, she’s quick to add, a true labor of love for the “West Coast committee,” which consists of an impressive group of for-mer company presidents.

They found a large log book of Howard Hughes’ flight around the

world in a Lockheed Super Electra. “It’s a beautifully bound booklet that gives a detailed history of that flight, including the signatures of Hughes and the crew. It’s the only formal original record of the flight,” says treasure hunter Sherm Mullin, former president of Lockheed Advanced Development Company, the “Skunk Works.”

The group also found the original ledgers that set up Lockheed Corporation; records of Amelia Earhart’s purchases and signed con-tracts; detailed hand-written records of the legendary Clarence “Kelly” Johnson, the first leader of the Skunk Works; and the flight log from the

record-breaking non-stop flight of a Lockheed Constellation from Burbank to Washington in 1944.

Among corporate records back on the East Coast, the Legacy Project turned up a trove of drawing packages from early Martin aircraft from the 1930s and 1940s, including the famed “China Clipper.” Each package contains all of the associated legal patent documents, design drawings, and signatures of the designers.

A collection of rare photographs of early Martin aircraft, including a B-10 bomber photo from 1932, is also among the discoveries.

While much of the material has consisted of documents, there have been some “hardware” items. The most spec-tacular, perhaps, is a large scale model,

meticulously detailed, of an L-1011 TriStar, Lockheed’s first and only wide-body commercial jet. The crate that contains the model bears a sticker from the Farnborough International Air Show, where the model was undoubtedly a centerpiece of the Lockheed exhibit.

Mullin, Sibley and the other project participants are looking for-ward to the day when some of their findings will be displayed around the Corporation.

“I’ve been writing Lockheed Martin history articles for about 10 years,” Mullin says, “and I’ve found that a lot of new employees and current employees have an interest in the his-tory of the Corporation. They believe it has an underpinning to their work.” ■

Legacy Project Unearths Many Treasures

An early photo shows Martin flight test engineering offices in Baltimore, Md.

10

Like a driver on a crowded freeway who notices a missed exit in the rearview mir-ror, today’s complex, fast-moving pro-grams can sometimes miss warning signs that could avert problems down the road.

To help program managers identify potential issues before they degrade performance and increase costs, Lockheed Martin has developed a set of 12 Program Management Leading Indicators.

“We’re trying to raise program performance to a new level, and to do that we need to see where we’re going in addition to where we’ve been,” says Mike Joyce, corporate vice president of Operating Excellence and Program Management. “We have got to bring more focus to the front end of the pro-cess, so we know immediately when we are not performing to plan.”

He explains further, “We have a lot of metrics that will show us outcomes — and it’s important that we continue to measure things like earned value, a mea-

sure of money spent and tasks completed according to plan — but by the time we have those metrics it’s much more diffi-cult to make corrections. The ‘headlight’ version of this metric looks at start and stop targets for each task and suggests addressing any misses immediately. By getting the team into problem-solving mode faster, we can avoid big misses.”

Developed by a working group chartered by the Corporate Program Management Council, the leading indicators, also known as “headlight metrics,” were piloted on 19 programs starting in May 2007, and all corporate focus and priority programs had adopted them by the end of the year.

The goal for 2008, says working group leader Steve Stern, director of Strategic Planning at Lockheed Martin Information Systems & Global Services, is for all development programs with a total contract value of more than $250 million to be using the leading indica-tors by the end of the year. Additionally,

business units have already established policies to include more programs.

“Within each business area there’s a point of contact to roll them out,” Stern says. “There aren’t any require-ments for the business areas to accumu-late leading indicator data for reporting at the corporate level, but they should be prepared to report on how their pro-grams are using them.”

The metrics, he adds, are not “a not a set of algorithms that you plug numbers into and get an indicator of where a program is heading.” Rather, Stern says, they provide signals and insights into areas that may require course corrections to head off problems.

He adds that the indicators are most effective when program manag-ers look at them not in isolation, but as a set. The forward-looking metrics fall into the general areas of schedule and cost, technical performance, quality requirements and subcontractor perfor-mance, Stern says.

Because Lockheed Martin programs are widely diverse, the Corporation isn’t dictating how each program should integrate the indicators into their operations. How they respond to what they’re seeing illuminated by the headlight metrics is also up to each individual program.

But every program is required to use the indicators, Joyce says. “With the leading indicators, we’re saying I don’t know your day-to-day challenges, but I do know this stuff works,” he says. “You can’t ignore the science, but as far as how to apply the science, that’s why we have program managers.”

Joyce also emphasizes that the development and implementation of the leading indicators is not meant to suggest that Lockheed Martin program managers are not doing an excellent job. In fact, it’s the opposite.

“Program management is a long-term sustainable competitive advantage for Lockheed Martin,” he says. “But in order to maintain our advantage, we have to continuously challenge our-selves to perform better. We have to set the bar at perfect.”

To help spread the use of the lead-ing indicators, the Program Management Leading Indicator Working Group has overseen the development of a one-hour online overview that’s available on the Corporate Learning Management System available through the LMPeople site.

Also, the Center for Performance Excellence, online at http://www.ssrc.lmco.com, is developing an eight-hour module for live training that should be available in the first quarter of this year. In addition to offering the leading indi-cator material as a standalone course, some of the elements will be integrated into existing courses.

Stern points out that the leading indicator pilot programs last year produced many positive comments, as program man-agers saw the value of the metrics.

“These are tools that are helping programs head off problems and achieve a higher level of performance,” he notes. “That’s something that every program wants, and that’s why these leading indi-cators are being well received.” ■

Eyes On The RoadProgram Management Leading Indicators turn headlights on potential problems

Steve Stern, director of Strategic Planning at Information Systems & Global Services (IS&GS), left, and Pete McLoone, IS&GS project engineer, review the Program Management Leading Indicators, which have been developed to help program managers identify potential issues that could negatively affect program performance.

For more information about the Program Management Leading Indicators, contact Steve Stern at

856-486-5725, and visit the intranet site at https://sharepoint.global.lmco.com/sites/pm/pmli/default.aspx.

More than 100 employees of Lockheed Martin Space Systems Michoud Operations in New Orleans, La., prepared 10,000 USO Care Packages to be sent to U.S. troops in December. The packs contain such small personal items as pre-paid phone cards, CDs, flavored drinks, snacks, lip balm, a toiletry kit and personalized messages from employees. Lockheed Martin partnered with the USO in 2004 to support U.S. military service members and has since raised $1.6 million in support of Operation USO Care Package, with two-thirds coming directly from employee donations. Nearly 500 veterans

comprise the Michoud Operations workforce of 2,650 employees. In the photo at left, employees fill Care Packages at the “stuffing party.” In the inset, from left, are Thelma Andrews, Finance analyst, Glinda Caston, Material Sourcing representative, and Sheila Pedesclaux, Production Operations processor, preparing packages.

Holiday Package

11

The following ethics case represents the process used by the ethics office in a typical investigation. The issues included in the narrative are based on an actual case handled by the ethics office. Certain details have been modified for privacy and to illustrate more fully the various aspects of an investigation.

In an average year, the ethics office handles over 1,000 cases requir-ing investigation of alleged wrongdoing. Of these cases, approximately 40 per-cent are substantiated and require dis-ciplinary or corrective action (or both). Many employees are unfamiliar with the steps followed to resolve an ethics case.

Week 1

Monday 7:30 a.m.The ethics officer (EO) retrieves the following message from the confiden-tial ethics HelpLine: “We have some bad things going on here. This is John, department 2298, and I need to talk to someone about what’s happening in our department. Please call me on my cell phone – 203-555-6282. Thank you.”

Monday 7:35 a.m.The EO calls John, who claims that a co-worker is mischarging his labor by taking long lunches. The EO asks if John has discussed the alleged mischarging with his management. John says that he was not comfortable talking to his supervi-sor about the situation because John had previously complained about a different issue and his supervisor was not happy about it. The supervisor also had done nothing to resolve the prior issue.

The EO asks for additional infor-mation. John claims that Bill, a co-worker, is allowed a half hour for lunch, but that about once or twice a week, the lunch period extends to an hour or longer. John and Bill, both hourly non-represented employees, work on second shift, beginning at 3 p.m. and ending at midnight. John requests that he not be identified as the reporting party. The EO tells John that his identity will be pro-tected to the extent possible.

The EO thanks John for coming forward, and says he will follow up on the allegation. The EO explains to John that at the conclusion of the investigation, the EO likely will not be able to tell John much more than whether or not his alle-gations were substantiated. To protect the privacy of others, John would not be told about any disciplinary action that would be taken and may or may not be told about corrective actions. As the conversa-tion wraps up, the EO also asks John not to discuss the case with others.

Monday 8:30 a.m.The EO enters the allegation details into the Corporate Ethics Reporting and Tracking System (CERTS), a confiden-tial database used to track all allegations and requests for guidance.

Monday 9 a.m.After entering the information into CERTS, the EO searches the database to determine if there are any prior cases involving Bill, the subject of the current investigation. No prior ethics cases are noted.

Monday 2 p.m.The EO meets with the department man-ager and informs her of the allegation of mischarging by one of her employees. The manager says that she is aware of a similar allegation in the past, but has heard nothing recently. In the prior instance, she held a meeting with all of the second shift employees and deliv-ered a strong message for them not to mischarge labor hours, and that anyone caught mischarging would be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment. Since the manager works first shift, her interac-tion with the second shift employees is limited to shift overlap from 3 p.m. until 5 p.m. She adds that she had a discus-sion with the shift supervisor at the time of the prior allegation of mischarging and counseled the supervisor that he is responsible for ensuring the second shift employees are working the hours charged and recording time worked accurately at the end of each day. She

expresses disappointment that the issue has resurfaced, and promises her support in the ongoing ethics investigation. The EO requests that the manager not dis-cuss the allegation with anyone else, and states that she would be briefed at the conclusion of the investigation.

Monday 4 p.m.Based on his discussion with the man-ager, the EO decides to request facil-ity ingress and egress records for Bill covering the prior month, along with the labor charging records for the same period.

Wednesday 9:30 a.m.Ingress and egress records for Bill are reviewed and compared to the cor-responding timekeeping records. The review indicates that Bill had charged an average of two or three hours per week when he was absent from the facility during regular working hours. Total unaccounted for time was 11 hours for the month under review.

Wednesday 11:15 a.m.A call to the department manager verifies that Bill, the subject, would not have a reason to be away from the facility dur-ing normal working hours. The manager adds that the employees are entitled to two 15-minute breaks during their shift, and a half hour for a lunch break.

Wednesday 3 p.m.The EO meets with company counsel and Human Resources (HR) to discuss the allegation, preliminary findings, and how the investigation should proceed. The next step will be for the EO and HR to interview Bill.

Thursday 6 p.m.Bill is interviewed by HR and EO. The EO explains to Bill that the ethics office is reviewing an allegation that he has over-stated the number of hours worked. After reviewing the records, Bill says that any time discrepancy must be an unintentional error, that he knows mischarging is wrong

and a serious infraction. The EO asks if Bill can explain the discrepancy. Initially, Bill claims not to know how the errors occurred, then admits that perhaps he has taken a long lunch on several occasions, but always makes up the time. The EO states that the records do not support the time being made up and that there are 11 hours unaccounted for over the past month. Bill is suspended with pay pending completion of the investigation.

Friday 9:20 a.m.The EO reviews compliance training completion records, noting that Bill has completed all required courses, including the Labor Charging course.

Friday 1:05 p.m.Bill calls the EO and states he wants to clarify his answers from yesterday’s interview. Bill reiterates that any mis-charging was unintentional, and that there are far worse offenders in the department than him. The EO asks who else has been mischarging. Bill identifies three other second shift employees who regularly take long lunches and leave the facil-ity, sometimes for up to four hours at a time. The EO thanks Bill for calling and informs him that the investigation will be completed as soon as possible.

Friday 2:45 p.m.The EO calls the department manager, HR, and company counsel to inform them of the additional mischarging allegations and that time records for the other employees named will be reviewed.

Week 2

Monday 11:30 a.m.The EO requests ingress/egress records for the employees named by Bill along with corresponding labor charging records for the previous three months.

Tuesday 8:25 a.m.In reviewing the timekeeping records for the three employees, the EO notes that each had a pattern of leaving the facility several times per week in the middle of their shift (between 8-8:30 p.m.) and not returning until between 10:30-11 p.m. For the three months reviewed, approxi-mately 50 hours per employee appear to be mischarged.

Tuesday 2 p.m.The EO calls John, the confidential reporting party, and informs him that the investigation is continuing and that he will be briefed at its conclusion.

Wednesday 3 – 4 p.m.At the beginning of their shift, each employee is interviewed separately by the EO and HR. Each employee denies mischarging any labor hours, but cannot explain the discrepancy in the records. The three employees are suspended with pay pending completion of the investigation.

Thursday 3:30 p.m.The second shift supervisor is interviewed by the EO and HR. The supervisor states he is unaware of any timekeeping discrep-ancies, and cannot explain the shortage of hours worked for the subject employees. He adds “I didn’t even know they left the facility at those times.” He admits that he has trouble keeping track of every employee during the entire shift, since as supervisor he moves throughout several buildings to monitor various tasks. The supervisor is told not to discuss the inves-tigation with others.

Anatomy Of An Ethics CaseETHICS AND BUSINESS CONDUCT

In an average year, the ethics office handles over 1,000 cases requiring

investigation of alleged wrongdoing. Of these cases, approximately

40 percent are substantiated and require disciplinary or corrective

action (or both).

See Ethics p. 12

Friday 8:30 a.m.The EO and HR meet with the depart-ment manager to discuss the case. The EO states that in similar cases with substantiated mischarging the subjects of the case were discharged from employment.

Friday 9:30 a.m.The EO requests that the security orga-nization perform an analysis of labor charging records for Bill and the other three employees covering an additional three months.

Monday 10:45 a.m.Security completes its review and informs HR and the EO that discrepan-cies in labor charging for the four subject employees appeared to begin approxi-mately four months ago, with no irregu-larities prior to that time. Security also determines if any of the employees have security clearances that would require Lockheed Martin to file an adverse infor-mation report with the government.

Friday 11:45 a.m.HR provides the Finance organization with details of the labor charging analy-sis so that Finance can calculate the amount that will be needed to reimburse the customer for the mischarged labor.

Friday 4:20 p.m.The EO calls John, the reporting party, and informs him that the investigation is nearly complete.

Week 3

Tuesday 3 p.m.The EO completes an investigation report, concluding that the allegations of mischarging are substantiated for all four subject employees. The CERTS database is updated.

Wednesday 1 p.m.The EO convenes a discipline review meeting, with HR, Legal and Operations. The group reviews the investigation report and concurs that the allegations of mis-charging are substantiated. A recommenda-tion is made to terminate the employment of all four subject employees. Also, the group recommends a verbal reprimand for the second shift supervisor for not effec-tively monitoring his employees’ activities.

Friday 8 a.m.HR informs the four employees sepa-rately that their employment has been terminated and provides information on their final paycheck and benefits.

Friday 10:15 a.m.Legal confirms that the customer has been briefed on the facts of the case. The EO verifies with Finance that the cus-tomer has been credited for the amount of the mischarged labor. Security reports

that none of the four subjects held a secu-rity clearance. CERTS is updated.

Friday 2:30 p.m.The EO calls John, the reporting party, and informs him that the investigation is complete, the allegation of mischarg-ing is substantiated, and that appropriate corrective action has been taken. John

thanks the EO for looking into the issue and states he is satisfied with the pro-cess used to investigate his concern.

Week 4

Monday 2:40 p.m.The EO makes a final entry in CERTS and closes the case. ■

1212

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Volume 14, Number 1Published for employees by Lockheed Martin Corporate Communications. Lockheed Martin Today archives are available on the Lockheed Martin Intranet at http://pageone.global.lmco.com/pageone/. The award-winning Lockheed Martin Today is printed on recycled paper using soy-based inks and is recyclable. For permission to reprint or excerpt material, contact mona.coan@lmco.com.

To subscribe, change your mailing address or obtain additional copies of this publica-tion, e-mail your request to: today@lmdistribute.com.

Corporate Communications Dennis Boxx, senior vice president, Corporate Communications

Editorial Board Mona Coan, senior editor, Corporate Communications; Tom Greer, director, Communications, Corporate Engineering & Technology; Brian Sears, director, Ethics Outreach & Training; Ginny Vasan, vice president, Executive and Internal Communications; Dave Waller, director, Human Resources Communications

Editor: Mona Coan

Design/Art Direction Spark Design – Silver Spring, MD

Special Reporter: Rick Sauder

Contributors Cheryl Amerine, Leighan Burrell, Denni Cravins, Buddy Nelson, Steve O’Neill, Dana Schmitz, Barbara Smith, Harry Wadsworth, Chris Williams

Photography Randy Crites, Jim Dowdle, Steve Griffin, Kevin Moore, Paul Nagata, NASA, Eric Schulzinger, Samantha Swanson, Russ Underwood

Web Editorial Assistant: Elizabeth Matthews

Lockheed Martin Today may contain forward-looking statements relating to projected future financial performance that are considered forward-looking statements under the federal securities laws. These statements are not guarantees of the Corporation's future per-formance as actual results may vary depending on a multitude of factors. Investors should review the Corporation’s filings regarding risks and uncertainties associated with Lockheed Martin's business. Refer to the Corporation’s SEC filings, including the "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition," "Risk Factors and Forward-Looking Statements" and “Legal Proceedings” sections of the Corporation’s 2005 annual report on Form 10-K and 2006 quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, copies of which may be obtained at the Corporation's Web site http://www.lockheedmartin.com or the SEC’s site at www.sec.gov. The Corporation expressly disclaims a duty to provide updates to forward-looking statements, and the estimates and assumptions associated with them, after the date of this Lockheed Martin Today to reflect the occurrence of subsequent events, changed circum-

stances or changes in the Corporation's expectations. In addition, some or all of the following factors could affect the Corporation's forward-looking statements: the ability to obtain or the timing of obtaining future government awards; the availability of government funding and customer requirements both domestically and internationally; changes in government or customer priorities due to program reviews or revisions to strategic objectives; difficulties in developing and producing operationally advanced technology systems; the competitive environment; economic, business and political conditions domestically and internationally; program perfor-mance; the timing and customer acceptance of product deliveries; performance issues with key suppliers and subcontractors; and the Corporation's ability to achieve or realize savings for its customers or itself through its cost-cutting program and other financial management programs. These are only some of the numerous factors that may affect the forward-looking statements contained in Lockheed Martin Today.

EthicsContinued from p. 11

All employees are invited to partici-pate in the 2008 Arts & Film Festival, which uses the creative arts to celebrate the shared culture of diversity, ethics and leadership at Lockheed Martin. Previously known as the Ethics Film Festival, the Arts & Film Festival is expanded this year to include entries relating to diversity and Full Spectrum Leadership, as well as ethics. Deadline for entries is Feb. 15, 2008.

“For the 2007 Arts & Film Festival, we had a record 33 entries with over 90 participants representing all four business areas and Enterprise Operations,” said Alice Eldridge, the Corporation’s vice president, Ethics and Business Conduct. “Many of the entries were from groups of employ-ees, making it an excellent team build-ing opportunity.”

Participants may enter using any creative medium, including videos, photographs, poems, stories, posters or animation. Entries will be judged on creativity and relevance to the themes of ethics, diversity or Full Spectrum Leadership. Prizes will be awarded to the top five entries. New in 2008 is a special international prize for the

top entry received from outside of the United States.

“We want to reach out to our international employees and encour-age them to enter this year’s contest,” said Sonya Stewart, vice president, Diversity and Equal Opportunity Programs. “Part of our global inclu-sion strategy is to recognize and to involve our more than 10,000 employ-ees based outside of the U.S.”

Entries must be produced using the employees’ own time and resources, and away from company or customer facilities.

“We hope to increase participation in 2008,” added Marilyn Figlar, vice president, Leadership and Organizational Development. “A key element of Full Spectrum Leadership is driving innova-tion, and the Arts & Film Festival is a great opportunity to foster and express imagination and creativity.” ■

Help Shape The CultureEntries being accepted for 2008 Arts & Film Festival

2008Arts

Film

For complete rules and an entry form, contact yourlocal ethics officer or visit the ethics website at:

Feb. 15, 2008DEADLINE:

http://ethics.corp.lmco.com/ethics/filmfestival.html

&

You are invited...... to participate in a celebration of the creative arts, an opportunity for employ-ees to help promote a positive, inclusive, and ethical work environment.

Produce a video, create a poster design, write a poem or story, take a photograph – use any creative medium – in support of Ethics, Diversity, or Full Spectrum Leadership.

Prizes will be awarded to the Top 5 entries. A special prize will be awarded to the Top non-US entry.

SPECIAL

PRIZE!INTERNATIONAL

Through Ethics, Diversity, and Full Spectrum Leadership

CALL FOR ENTRIES!

GS-07137

For more information on the 2008 Arts & Film Festival, including the official rules, an entry form and

prior top entries, visit the Web site at http://ethics.corp.lmco.com/ethics/filmfestival.html.

If you observe misconduct, report the situation to your management, Human Resources or local Ethics officer. You may also call the Corporate HelpLine at 800-LM-ETHIC.