June 18, 2019 | International, Aerospace
WASHINGTON: This summer, Army soldiers will deploy to Afghanistan with air support literally in the palm of their hands: the 1.16-ounce Black Hornetmini-drone. New ground robots are entering service too, next year — not to fight but to haul supplies, at least at first — but field tests have convinced the Army to issue these often-cumbersome mechanical mules to specialists and only loan them to frontline troops as needed. By contrast, soldiers are so consistently and unequivocally enthused about the mini-drones that the Army is buying 9,000 systems — each with two drones — over three years to issue to its smallest and historically most vulnerable units, nine-man infantry squads.
The mini-drone and larger robots are all part of a wider revolution in the long-suffering infantry, a revolution sparked in large measure by former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. The Marines, Mattis's old service, have issued upgraded 5.56 mm rifles and are adding a specialized drone operator to every rifle squad. The Army is going much farther, developing new 6.8 mm rifles, high-tech targeting goggles, virtual-reality training, and, of course, robots.
Now, none of these unmanned systems is truly autonomous, so they require a human to run them by remote control, which in turn requires a functioning battlefield network that hasn't been shut down by enemy jamming. The FLIR Black Hornet has a lot of automated functions and only flies short missions, so you don't need a soldier babysitting it all the time. Ground robots, however, require much more oversight, because they have to avoid rocks, bogs, tree stumps, and other obstacles that no unmanned air vehicle has to worry about and that artificial-vision software still struggles to spot. The Army is eager to improve the technology so that, instead of one soldier remote-controlling one robot, they can have one soldier overseeing a largely autonomous swarm. But even today's limited autonomy allows for big changes on the battlefield.
The palmtop Black Hornet — dubbed Soldier-Borne Sensor (SBS) by the Army — is already in the hands (literally) of a brigade of the elite 82nd Airborne that's about to deploy to Afghanistan. The second unit scheduled to get the mini-drone, starting this fall, is the 1st Security Force Assistance Brigade, which has already served in Afghanistan.
For the first time, a squad leader will have the ability to scout ahead by air before exposing human soldiers on the ground. The SBS has sensor options for both night and day, and it can fly about 20 minutes before needing to recharge.
But the squad-level mini-drone is just the entry model. Larger units will get larger, more capable, but also more expensive and more maintenance-hungry drones.
“Our vision is every echelon has unmanned aerial systems,” said Don Sando, civilian deputy to the commander of the Army's infantry and armor centerat Fort Benning, Ga. “The question is, how many?”
While squads get the Black Hornet SBS, platoons will get the slightly larger Short-Range Reconnaissance (SRR) drone, Sando and other Army officials told reporters in a conference call last week. A series of tests this month, September, and January will whittle six SRR competitors down to one that will enter service in April 2020. The winner must weigh three pounds or less, fly for 30 minutes, and be able to “perch and stare,” landing in a vantage point overlooking a target area so it can keep watch without burning through its flight time.
Companies will stick with the current RQ-11 Raven, which is still small enough that soldiers launch it by picking it up and throwing it.
Battalions currently use the Raven as well, but the Army plans to develop a new Long-Range Reconnaissance drone for them to use. The LRR isn't an official program yet, however.
Brigades currently have the RQ-7 Shadow, but that aging system needs a catapult to launch and a runway to land. It will be replaced by the Future Tactical Unmanned Aerial System (FTUAS), which takes off and lands vertically like a mini-helicopter, starting in 2021.
Divisions currently use the Grey Eagle, a variant of the venerable Predator, but the Army is experimenting with potential Advanced UAS drones to replace it too.
Ground Bots For Some
The Army is also fielding ground robots, but these machines are still much clumsier and harder to work with than aerial drones, so they're being issued only to specialist units. That includes what was formerly called the SquadMultipurpose Equipment Transport but is now renamed the Small Multipurpose Equipment Transport, because it's not going to belong to an individual squad.
The SMET, by either name, is still a small unmanned ground vehicle, about the size of a golf cart, designed to trundle along with the foot troops, hauling supplies and gear like an old-fashioned pack mule. It must carry 1,000 pounds of supplies and gear over 60 miles in 72 hours, trundling along with foot troops, and provide three kilowatts of power to recharge batteries for night vision goggles, radios, and other electronics.
Four competitors remain in contention: the Polaris MRZR, Howe & Howe Grizzly, HDT Wolf, and General Dynamics MUTT. “They're all viable candidates. They all met the standards of range, offloading power, silent watch capability, payload carrying,” Sando said. “Soldier feedback on all of them was very comparable with regard to what missions they're good for — and what conditions they're not appropriate for.”
The Army plans to field the winner starting next year to selected training centers, combat brigades, and support companies — but not infantry squads. “We found out in the operational tech demonstration [that] it can best be supported now at the battalion level,” Sando said, which is the lowest echelon of an infantry unit to include technical specialists such as a heavy weapons company. The Army's objective is to incorporate the new technologies without adding personnel to take care of them.
The issue with SMET is not just the maintenance the robots require — though that can be a large burden for a squad of nine — but also their limited mobility. “There are places where we ask our soldiers to go where nothing else can go... jungle terrain, steep embankments, water, and dense urban environments,” Sando said. “There are areas soldiers can walk and crawl and climb that we just couldn't put a vehicle of this size with them.”
The SMET remains very useful for long marches with heavy loads, the bane of infantry soldiers increasingly overburdened by body armor, ammunition, and electronics. Being able to recharge gear from the robot instead of carrying several days' worth of batteries for every item of equipment is itself a significant reduction in weight. Future SMET variants, Sando said, might carry long-range sensors, communications relays, or even weapons.
But when foot troops have to go places you can only go on foot, they need to be able to leave the robot vehicles behind and let someone else take care of them. By contrast, Sando said, “the Soldier-Borne Sensor is smaller than a pack of cigarettes, [so] I can use it when I need it, I can put it back.”
May 5, 2023 | International, Naval
GA-EMS will prepare manufacturing and quality systems, and will build, test and ship two VPTs for use by Electric Boat and HII?s Newport News Shipbuilding in their construction of the...
May 4, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
BY REBECCA KHEEL - 05/03/20 01:30 PM EDT Defense budget cuts are looming as the coronavirus pandemic places pressure on the federal budget across various agencies. The Pentagon had already been expecting relatively flat budgets for the next few years due to economic constraints caused by the widening deficits in the country. But with the pandemic, the deficit is projected to explode after Congress passed trillions of dollars in coronavirus relief packages, with more aid bills expected. Defense budget analysts are predicting that will mean cuts to defense spending down the line. Meanwhile, Democrats say the crisis should result in a rethinking of national security that gives less money to the Pentagon and more to areas like public health. The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said this past week it's hard to predict where the defense budget will head after the crisis abates, but suggested the entire federal budget will need to be re-examined. “The economics of this get much more complicated than they were before this, and it's logical to assume that we are going to have to reevaluate our entire budget, both revenue and expenditures,” Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said on a teleconference in response to a question from The Hill. “Beyond that, it would be pure speculation as to what's gonna happen.” Smith, a long time opponent of the nuclear budget, specifically highlighted nuclear modernization as an area for potential cuts, but said defense portfolios are “all on the table to figure out how to spend the money more wisely.” In the meantime, defense hawks, progressives and deficit hawks alike are honing their arguments as they brace for defense cuts. The defense budget battles are already starting to play out as Congress debates further coronavirus relief bills. The Pentagon has said it expects to request “billions” of dollars in the next bill to help contractors hit by the virus. That funding would follow the $10.5 billion the Pentagon got in the third coronavirus stimulus package for the Defense Production Act, defense health programs, and military deployments related to the crisis and other areas. Smith, though, said this past week he would not support more Pentagon funding in further coronavirus bills, saying the department can find unused funding in its existing $738 billion-plus budget. Smith's comments came about a week after dozens of progressive organizations led by Win Without War argued in a letter to Congress that “any arguments that the Pentagon cannot use existing resources to respond to the crisis should be met with considerable skepticism.” But the Pentagon maintained after Smith's comments it cannot dip into its existing budget for coronavirus relief. Ellen Lord, the Pentagon's top weapons buyer, said the department may be able to use some operations and maintenance funds for coronavirus needs, but added money still has to be available for “pretty significant needs” in readiness and modernization. “I am not sure that we have the fiscal flexibility to encompass all of the new demands we have and the inefficiencies that we are seeing and perhaps may see in the future,” Lord said at a briefing. “But I respect what Chairman Smith is saying, and we will obviously do our best.” Looking further ahead, Pentagon officials have indicated they are preparing to tighten their belts at the other end of the crisis. In a webinar with the Brookings Institution this past week, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy recalled “compressed budgets” in the wake of recovery bills for the 2008 financial crisis, culminating in the 2011 Budget Control Act that Pentagon officials now blame for readiness shortfalls. The law set budget caps that resulted in sequestration, continuing resolutions or government shutdowns in several years. “These are challenges we're thinking about now as we look at the [Future Years Defense Program] and whether or not this will pressurize Army budgets in the [fiscal year] 23, 24 timeframe, which are very critical to us and our modernization efforts and increasing our talent management within the force," he said. “We are watching that very closely, and we know that is a challenge that is out in front of us.” Late last month, the Congressional Budget Office projected that Congress' rescue and stimulus efforts will cause the federal deficit to quadruple to $3.7 trillion, the largest by far in U.S. history. Defense budget experts say the ballooning deficit likely spells defense cuts in the future, citing trends after previous rising deficits and economic downturns such after the 2008 financial crisis. “What has historically happened is, when Congress and fiscal conservatives come out and get serious about reducing the debt and reducing spending, defense is almost always part of what they come up with for a solution,” Todd Harrison, director of defense budget analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in a webinar. “So, we could be looking at a deficit-driven defense drawdown coming in the next two or three years. At least history would suggest that that is a real possibility.” In the same webinar, American Enterprise Institute resident fellow Mackenzie Eaglen predicted the “budget comes down sooner rather than later.” “There probably will be a total relook even at the [National Defense Strategy] fundamentals and what mission is going to have to go in response to this,” she added. But defense hawks are arguing the Pentagon should not be used to pay other bills,, saying the country still faces threats from Russia and China. Fred Bartels, a senior policy analyst for defense budgeting at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said the defense budget needs to match the National Defense Strategy, which has not changed despite the pandemic. The strategy calls for the military to be ready for so-called great power competition with China and Russia. “What you're going to have is likely empty promises, and that's the worst possible outcome for the military,” Bartels said of a budget cut without a strategy change. “If your national strategy tells the world that you're going to do that but you don't follow through, it's going to be harder and harder to operate.” But the pandemic has intensified calls from progressive lawmakers to rethink what constitutes national security. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told The Hill the crisis shows the definition of national security needs be expanded. “Lawmakers must view issues like climate change, biosecurity, cybersecurity and this pandemic as serious and real national security threats facing our nation,” Khanna said in a statement to The Hill. “For too long, we were myopically focused and spending trillions on traditional national security issues like terrorism and ‘great power' politics. These new threats impact our health, safety, and economy, requiring new funds to address them.” https://thehill.com/policy/defense/495762-defense-budget-brawl-looms-after-pandemic
March 3, 2024 | International, Aerospace