Back to news

October 9, 2018 | International, Land

Army looks to a future of integrated fire

By:

WASHINGTON — Even as Army leadership points to the great progress made toward interoperability of missile systems, the future could take that vision one step further.

During a Monday panel hosted by Defense News at the Association of the United States Army annual meeting, Col. John Rafferty, director of the Long-Range Precision Fires Cross-Functional Team, said the Army aspires to have “an integrated network, rather than interoperability, which is the work around" in the meantime.

"When we get into operational strategic fires we want to extend the systems approach across the fires warfighting function, offensive and defense,” Rafferty added.

Tom Karako, director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Missile Defense Project, stressed that a more aggressive approach to integrating offensive and defense fires is required to defeat current and future near-peer threats. One area Karako has his eye on “is the degree of integration between Maneuver SHORAD, and frankly the whole rest of ARMY AMD, as well as offensive fires. Making sure that interoperability or integration is common as opposed to being another stovepipe of excellence.”

The Integrated Air and Missile Battle Command System (IBCS) is one Army program that will be key to achieving integrated fires. The brains behind the Army's future air and missile defense command-and-control system, IBCS will improve the operational capabilities of current AMD systems like THAAD and Patriot by connecting the former disparate systems. When integrated, the Army can leverage THAAD's AN/TYP-2 radar to extend Patriot's effective range and provide a clearer picture of incoming threats.

Discussing the importance of integrated air and missile defenses, Karako said, “just as there is that full spectrum of air and missile threats, we're going to need to have a full spectrum and integration of air and missile defense.”

Rafferty and his team have not overlooked the significant investment being made in long-range precision fires.

“I definitely feel like we are the number one modernization priority for the Army,” Rafferty said. “I also realize that with the investment comes a sense of cost consciousness because we know that hard choices were made ... across the Army to resource this number one priority.”

And while Rafferty's cross functional team is receiving significant funding, the Army knows it has to work as a team to achieve its goals. As explained by Brig. Gen. Alfred Abramson, the program executive officer with PEO Ammunition, the Army has to put their heads together to figure out “where's the juice worth the squeeze in terms of investment."

"Can we build a better mouse trap so to speak with some limited dollars, because you can't spread it across everything,” said Abramson, adding that his organization has seen a significant spike of about $2.5 billion for fiscal years 2017 to 2022 funding for ammunition and armament systems products. "At the same time we have a conversation with Col Rafferty's organization about what direction should we be heading. So it really is a discussion across these organizations to make sure everybody is focused on the same thing.”

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/08/army-looks-to-a-future-of-integrated-fire

On the same subject

  • On the new battlefield, the Navy has to get software updates to the fleet within days, acquisition boss says

    September 26, 2018 | International, Naval, C4ISR

    On the new battlefield, the Navy has to get software updates to the fleet within days, acquisition boss says

    By: David B. Larter The Navy has to get software updates and patches to the fleet within days if it's going to win in the future, the Department of the Navy's acquisition boss said Sept. 25 at Modern Day Marine. James Geurts, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, acquisition and development, said the fleet has been working on the rapid development of software to get needed upgrades to the ships ahead of pier-side availabilities, a pace he said was too slow for the modern battlefield. “We recently did one of our proof-of-principles to say: ‘How do you take ... software, get it system certified, get it cyber certified then get it out over the airwaves, uploaded on to a ship and into the combat system in 24 hours,” Geurts said. “My view is unless we get to the point where I can identify a software requirement, whether it's an [artificial intelligence] algorithm or something, find the solution, get it checked out on the network, give it whatever cyber-proofing it needs and get it into the fight in less than a week, we are not going to be successful in the long run.” The Navy has increasingly found that its current systems are capable of adjusting to new threats through software upgrades rather than buying new systems and installing them, a time-consuming and cripplingly expensive process that has been the norm in years past. Geurts said the Navy had to have a software architecture that was amenable to rapid upgrades so that developers would not need to re-test the underlying architecture each time a patch or fix is uploaded. Furthermore, the service also has to develop cyber security standards that don't just weigh whether or not something can be compromised but begin to think of it more in terms of risks associated. “The answer isn't yes or no, it's ‘Commander here is your risk.' And then weigh the risk of doing that [upgrade] versus a potential cyber impact so that commanders can make reasonable command decisions. Because there is always a risk to not doing something. We often talk about the risk of doing something, we don't often talk about the risk of not doing it.” Geurts told a gaggle with reporters after the talk that he was not talking about uploading whole new programs that sailors might be unfamiliar with but more iterative upgrades. "Don't take that to an extreme to where we will load on something that nobody has ever seen before, but it could be that there is a particular issue or new need, and you can envision us testing and training that shore-side, making sure it's right – we don't want to wait for the ship to come home we could potentially blast that out [to the fleet.]" The Navy is also working more with having digital doppelgangers of its combat system on board its ships so that new technologies can be tested by the crew and commanders before its uploaded into the main combat system, a hedge against reaping unintended consequences by uploading a feature or patch without knowing exactly how it will fit into the ship's systems. "The other thing we are doing a lot with is digital twins, where [the ship] might have the combat system that it's fighting with as well as a digital twin,” Geurts explained. “So you might be able to upload that new feature in the digital twin so you could have both, then it's up to the commander whether it's something you adopt or not.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/digital-show-dailies/modern-day-marine/2018/09/25/on-the-new-battlefield-the-navy-has-to-get-software-updates-to-the-fleet-within-days-acquisition-boss-says

  • Boeing Defense And Space’s Leanne Caret: ‘We’re Owning Our Mistakes’

    July 6, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Boeing Defense And Space’s Leanne Caret: ‘We’re Owning Our Mistakes’

    Jen DiMascio Joe Anselmo Michael Bruno Steve Trimble July 01, 2020 Leanne Caret, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space and Security, spoke via teleconference with Aviation Week editors in the run-up to what would have been the Farnborough Airshow. AW&ST: In addition to the turnover among Boeing executives, the company's stock and reputation have taken a beating in the past year. How is Boeing a different company today than it was 18 months ago? I am confident in the Boeing Co., and we have an enormously bright future. It's because of the incredible women and men who work for this company and bring their best every day. We have become a very introspective company, very pragmatic. We're owning our mistakes, and we're committing to address those. That is the centerpiece of what you have to do to have trust, especially in an industry as critically important as ours is, where people are flying and using our products every day, whether commercially or defending nations and allies. How has COVID-19 affected the goals that Boeing Defense set at the start of the year? The defense industry has been deemed mission-essential. We need to make certain we're continuing to deliver product to our customers, we keep our supply base healthy, and we all have an eye to the future. I really appreciate the partnership and conversations we've had with the Pentagon. You've heard [Boeing CEO/President] David Calhoun mention that, after what has happened in the commercial aerospace market, the defense business is important to the Boeing Co.—has been and always will be. After COVID-19, what does the future hold for defense spending? We have a very pragmatic view of the future. I don't anticipate significant budget increases. We have always planned that at some point we could see a regression in defense budgets. Wall Street is expecting about a 2% increase in revenue for Boeing over the next couple of years. That is on the lower end of where your peers are. They are in the mid-single digits. What rate of growth do you see? I think it's important to note where we are in the life cycle of many of the products in our portfolio. Where you will continue to see opportunity for us as we move into production on some of those key franchise programs that we won a few years ago is the [T-7 advanced trainer, MQ-25 unmanned carrier-based refueling aircraft and MH-139 helicopter]. We're all going to see the marketplace adjust as a result of COVID-19. Around the world, we've already seen some delays and some very large competitions that have been slighted because customers are having to assess where they are. I want our team to have as its centerpiece meeting our customers' needs and expectations, and I believe that the outcome of that will be growing the business and strong financial performance. Many big programs are coming down the line, such as the Low-Cost Attritable Aircraft, the Advanced Battle Management System, the Next--Generation Air Dominance or the Future Vertical Lift programs. The Pentagon is emphasizing procurement with more control over intellectual property, fewer hooks into the sustainment phase and more competition. How will Boeing adapt to that over time? Will it require fundamental changes? In the last decade, we were focused on redefining how we designed and built aircraft. We were anticipating that the customer was going to commoditize the type of product that we have traditionally built. We have a foundation in model-based systems engineering to bring the collective best from industry together, so that when a system is in the field, we have developed it with maintainers in mind. That's where our build process has really paid off. In 2016, we had not won the T-7 or MQ-25 contracts or certainly not had any thought of the F-15EX yet. All three of those used this concept, which is to use advanced engineering and design toolsets to address the customer's vision. We placed our bets on changing the way we did business, and we have positioned ourselves nicely. Please update us on the KC-46. Where do things stand with the foreign object debris (FOD) situation? I'm not going to be happy until we're perfect, and we're not perfect yet. My focus is to make sure we don't deliver any aircraft with FOD to the U.S. government. If that means I need to hold back a delivery because a member of our team identified an issue, we're going to do the right thing. The most important thing is to deliver a perfect product to the customer. I think it is a testament to the steps that we have taken that we will not pass a defect to our customer. It speaks to the culture change that we have instituted over the last 1.5 years. Quite frankly, we have used KC-46 as the bully pulpit to redefine what we want to do as a company, and I'm really proud of the team for leading the way. Is Boeing on track for fixing the KC-46's remote vision system (RVS) in fiscal 2023? We are looking to demonstrate RVS 1.5 later this summer. It is a building block to what we call RVS 2.0. We have put in place a standard and an agreement that we are all aligned around, that really transcends what the original contract anticipated in terms of RVS. What we are incorporating posi-tions this fleet for not only a leap forward in technology but for autonomous operations in the future. We are on track in this partnership with the U.S. Air Force and the Air Force Research Laboratory. And yes, the timeline is in 2023. What is the outlook for selling F-18s internationally, given the potential for pandemic-related budget reductions in the future? We've secured a number of orders with F-18s that have kept our production line hot. Coupled with that, we're doing the service life modernization program with the U.S. Navy, where we're bringing every one of the aircraft back through and increasing capabilities that eventually will include Block 3 capabilities. We have seen signs that campaigns in Canada, Finland, Germany, India and Switzerland are sliding a bit to the right. None of them have been, to my knowledge, canceled or stopped. One of the things that we've seen them dealing with is the impact of COVID. Many times, they have the budget, but the budget may go out a longer period of time. Or right now they are impacted by staff shortages. These are some big opportunities, and I think the F-18 is positioned nicely, both from the aspects of an acquisition cost and the cost per flying hour. What is the outlook for the F-15? We just did our F-15 Qatar flight a few weeks back. We have continued to demonstrate the ability of the F-15 with our Saudi and Qatari customers and the U.S. Air Force. We're really excited about that opportunity, and it won't be your grandma's F-15. Boeing is a bit late on delivering the Space Launch System (SLS), and it was left out of NASA's competition to build a lunar lander. What are you doing to turn those programs around? On Space Launch Systems, I am really proud of the team for the amazing capabilities they developed with the world's largest rocket. She's sitting on the stand at Stennis Space Center. After watching how this team has battled through the COVID crisis, I'm looking forward to having a hot-fire [test] later this year. Early on, we struggled on SLS from an execution phase. There were also different challenges from a funding perspective and other things. Over the course of the last 1.5-2 years, the team has been hitting its milestones and commitments. On the civil space side, SpaceX beat Boeing to the punch on the first Commercial Crew mission. Are you looking to change your approach? On Starliner, we did not execute the full mission profile, and the right thing to do is to refly. I think that's the right decision, and the teams are focused on that. Our partnership with NASA dates back more than 60 years, and we're incredibly proud of this heritage. But our future isn't defined by our past. It's about making certain that we can continue to innovate and deliver today. This year marks 20 years for the International Space Station. I just couldn't be more thrilled for the team as Doug [Hurley] and Bob [Behnken] were able to join the other astronauts aboard this station. Human space exploration is not for the faint of heart. It changes mankind. We are going to continue to be a great partner, and we're going to continue to advocate for everyone's success when it comes to human space exploration—because it is that important for all of us. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/boeing-defense-spaces-leanne-caret-were-owning-our-mistakes

  • Updating software in flight? The Air Force may be close.

    September 17, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Updating software in flight? The Air Force may be close.

    Andrew Eversden WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force will soon announce that the service can update an aircraft's software while in flight, the Air Force's chief software officer said Tuesday. Nicolas Chaillan, the service's software czar, hinted at the announcement during a wide-ranging interview on a webcast hosted by C4ISRNET, but he declined to share which aircraft could handle the upgrade before the formal announcement is made. The update is part of a larger push by the Air Force to modernize its software practices. However, Chaillan described the news as a “gamechanger” and offered insight into the challenges associated with updating software during flights. “We need to decouple the flight controls, the [open mission systems], all the air worthiness piece of the software from the rest of the mission [and] capability of [that] software so we can update those more frequently without disrupting or putting lives at risk when it comes to the flying piece of the jet or the system,” Chaillan said. A formal announcement could follow in coming days. The Air Force is embracing agile development and DevSecOps in several of its programs to accelerate development time and deploy tools faster. Critical to this effort has been two Air Force environments — Cloud One and Platform One. Platform One, which was recently deemed an enterprise solution by the Department of Defense, is a software development platform that hosts a broad range of DoD components, including the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center. The JAIC moved to the Air Force platform as it awaits the results of an ongoing court battle between Amazon Web Services and Microsoft over the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI cloud. Chaillan said the F-35 program is also planning to move to Platform One soon. He added that he wants the platform to serve as a “software factory as a service.” In the next 12 to 18 months, Chaillan said that he sees the service continuing to add artificial intelligence and machine learning into its systems at scale. Both Cloud One and Platform One will be critical to the development of those systems. Cloud One, a multi-cloud environment with Microsoft and AWS, will also be looking to add new vendors “down the road,” Chaillan said. The Air Force's decision to go the multi-award route over the single award structure like JEDI made sense because of the advancement of cloud technology taken by the Air Force, Chaillan said. “When JEDI started, it did make sense to have a single award because cloud is very hard and very complex and it did makes sense to start there. Would I do that now? Probably not. I think technology changed,” Chaillan said. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/2020/09/15/updating-software-in-flight-the-air-force-may-be-close/

All news