Back to news

November 21, 2018 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

DARPA: CODE Demonstrates Autonomy and Collaboration with Minimal Human Commands

Ground and flight tests highlight CODE-equipped UASs' ability to collaboratively sense and adapt to locate and respond to unexpected threats and new targets

In a recent test series at Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona, DARPA's Collaborative Operations in Denied Environment (CODE) program demonstrated the ability of CODE-equipped Unmanned Aerial Systems (UASs) to adapt and respond to unexpected threats in an anti-access area denial (A2AD) environment. The UASs efficiently shared information, cooperatively planned and allocated mission objectives, made coordinated tactical decisions, and collaboratively reacted to a dynamic, high-threat environment with minimal communication.

The air vehicles initially operated with supervisory mission commander interaction. When communications were degraded or denied, CODE vehicles retained mission plan intent to accomplish mission objectives without live human direction. The ability for CODE-enabled vehicles to interact when communications are degraded is an important step toward the program goal to conduct dynamic, long-distance engagements of highly mobile ground and maritime targets in contested or denied battlespace.

“The test series expanded on previously demonstrated approaches to low bandwidth collaborative sensing and on-board planning. It demonstrated the ability to operate in more challenging scenarios, where both communications and GPS navigation were denied for extended periods,” said Scott Wierzbanowski, DARPA program manager for CODE.

During the three-week ground and flight test series in a live/virtual/constructive (LVC) environment, up to six live and 24 virtual UASs served as surrogate strike assets, receiving mission objectives from a human mission commander. The systems then autonomously collaborated to navigate, search, localize, and engage both pre-planned and pop-up targets protected by a simulated Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) in communications- and GPS-denied scenarios.

“The demonstrated behaviors are the building blocks for an autonomous team that can collaborate and adjust to mission requirements and a changing environment,” said Wierzbanowski.

The DARPA team also has advanced the infrastructure necessary to support further development, integration, and testing of CODE as it transitions to future autonomous systems.

Achievements include incorporation of third-party autonomy algorithms into the current software build, the creation of a government repository and lab test environment for the CODE algorithms, and the successful demonstration of the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory White Force Network capability to provide constructive threats and effects in an LVC test environment.

CODE's scalable capabilities could greatly enhance the survivability, flexibility, and effectiveness of existing air platforms, as well as reduce the development times and costs of future systems.

Further development of CODE and associated infrastructure will continue under DARPA until the conclusion of the program in spring 2019, followed by full transition of the CODE software repository to Naval Air Systems Command.

https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2018-11-19

On the same subject

  • MPF: Light Tank Competitors BAE & GD Head For Soldier Tests

    October 21, 2020 | International, Land

    MPF: Light Tank Competitors BAE & GD Head For Soldier Tests

    BAE and General Dynamics are vying to build 504 Mobile Protected Firepower vehicles to support light infantry units, especially in places the massive M1 Abrams cannot go. SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: After 24 years without a light tank in Army service, soldiers will climb aboard brand-new Mobile Protected Firepower prototypes this January. “It's not just PowerPoint” anymore, Maj. Gen. Bryan Cummings, the Army's Program Executive Officer for Ground Combat Systems (PEO-GCS), told me in an interview. “On Jan. 4th, we will have ... vehicles arriving at Fort Bragg.” Army experts have already started safety testing on prototype MPF vehicles, officials told me. Actual combat soldiers will start training on two platoons of prototypes in January – four MPFs from BAE, four from rival General Dynamics – with field tests scheduled to begin in April. A formal Limited User Test will start in August or September, with the Army choosing the winning design in 2022 and the first operational unit of MPF entering active service in 2025. A General Dynamics spokesperson told me they've already delivered five MPF prototypes to the Army, with two more in final checkouts and another five being built for delivery by the end of the year. BAE Systems is also building 12 prototypes, but they declined to say whether they'd delivered vehicles yet or not. While the Army can't comment on either contractor while the competition is ongoing, Cummings said, “both are on track to meet the major milestones” – despite the disruptions of COVID-19. After three months of training, the troops will start what's being called the Soldier Vehicle Assessment (SVA): four to five months of intensive field testing, including force-on-force wargames. It's all part of the Army's new emphasis on getting real soldiers' feedback on new weapons early and often. “The soldiers actually get to drive the vehicles around, shoot them, train with them,” BAE business developer James Miller told me. “Their feedback [is] likely to be the most critical factor ... in the decision the Army's going to make about who wins this contract.” The soldier assessment isn't just testing out the vehicles, however, Cummings told me: It's also a test of the Army. Specifically, how can light infantry brigades, which today have few vehicles or mechanics, sustain and operate a 20-plus-ton tank? The crucial distinction: MPF is not going to the Army's heavy brigades, which have lots of support troops and specialized equipment to take care of tracked armored vehicles. Instead, 14 MPFs per brigade will go to airborne and other light infantry units, which haven't had tracked armor since the M551 Sheridan was retired and its replacement cancelled in 1990s. Now, MPF won't be as fuel-hungry or maintenance-intensive as the massive M1 Abrams, America's mainstay main battle tank. Even with add-on armor kits for high-threat deployments, it'll be less than half as heavy as the M1. That's because MPF isn't meant to take on enemy tanks, at least not modern ones. Instead, it's designed to be light enough to deploy rapidly by air, simple enough to sustain at the end of a long and tenuous supply line, but potent enough to take on enemy light armored vehicles, bunkers, dug-in machineguns, and the like. That's a tricky balance to strike. In fact, the Army has never found a light tank it really liked despite decades of trying. Only six M22 Locusts actually fought in World War II, the M41 Walker Bulldog was too heavy for airborne units, the M551 Sheridan was plagued by technical problems throughout its service from Vietnam to Panama, the M8 Armored Gun System and the Future Combat System were both cancelled. So how do BAE and General Dynamics plan to square this circle? General Dynamics emphasized lethality in their interview with me. Their Lima tank plant builds the M1 Abrams, and while the MPF is smaller – though the company didn't divulge details, GD's version reportedly has a 105mm cannon, compared to the Abrams' 120mm – it will have the same fire controls and electronics as the latest model of its big brother. “If you sat in a Mobile Protected Firepower turret, you would think you were sitting in a [M1] SEPV3 turret,” a GD spokesperson told me. “It's all the same displays, architectures, power distribution, etc.” GD's design evolved from their Griffin demonstrators, prominently displayed for several years at AUSA annual meetings. It's got automotive components derived from the ASCOD/Ajax family widely used in Europe and an 800 horsepower engine. GD didn't tell me how much their vehicle weighed, but, depending on the armor package installed, the demonstrators ranged from 28 tons to 50 tons. Those figures would give horsepower/weight ratios ranging from 28 hp/ton, better than any model of the Abrams, to 16, which would make MPF much more sluggish. BAE, by contrast, emphasized their design's compactness and ease of maintenance – considerations as critical as firepower for a light infantry unit. BAE actually built the M8 AGS cancelled in the '90s drawdown, and while they've thoroughly overhauled that design for MPS with a new engine, new electronics, and underbody blast-proofing against roadside bombs, they've tried to preserve its airborne-friendly qualities. “The old M8 fit inside a C-130; in fact, it was air droppable,” Miller told me. “There's no requirement for that in the current MPF program, but we decided to stick with that as a design constraint: [Our MPF can] fit inside a C-130; we can do three on a C-17.” BAE's engine is less potent than GD's, with only 550 horsepower. With the base configuration coming in at under 30 tons, that equates to over 18 hp/ton, with heavier armor packages reducing performance from there. But the big selling point of the engine is ease of access, Miller argued. Engine maintenance on a tank requires a crane and partially disassembling the armor, but a mechanic can slide the BAE MPF's engine in and out of the chassis with a hand crank. If the MPF breaks down or gets stuck, it can be towed away by a truck, without requiring a special heavy recovery vehicle as an M1 does. “The infantry brigades are light. They don't have long logistics tails. They don't have a ton of mechanics and recovery vehicles,” Miller emphasized. “The vehicle has to be as mobile as them and fit inside their organization.” The Army estimates the life-cycle cost of MPF, from development to procurement to maintenance and retirement, at $16 billion. Whichever vehicle wins the Army contract will have an edge in sales worldwide – including, potentially, to the Marine Corps, which is retiring its M1s as too heavy for modern amphibious warfare. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/10/mpf-light-tank-competitors-bae-gd-head-for-soldier-tests/

  • How Much Does It Cost To Insure A Russian-Made Stealth Drone?

    June 8, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    How Much Does It Cost To Insure A Russian-Made Stealth Drone?

    David Axe The Russian defense ministry has insured its new stealth drone and its control station for 1.4 billion rubles. That's $20 million. And it's probably worth every ruble. The S-70 Hunter-B, a jet-powered flying-wing drone, perhaps is the most significant new warplane to emerge in Russia since the Su-57 stealth fighter that first flew in 2010 and now is in low-rate production. The Hunter-B first appeared in January 2019 on the ground at an airfield in Novosibirsk in southern Russia. It flew for the first time on Aug. 3, 2019. The Sukhoi-designed drone zoomed over the airfield for more than 20 minutes at a maximum altitude of around 2,000 feet, according to TASS, the state news organization that also reported the value of the robot's insurance. It's easy to dismiss the Hunter-B as a developmental dead-end, owing to Russia's poor track record when it comes to fielding unmanned aerial vehicles and the satellite infrastructure that helps controllers on the ground direct a UAV's flight. But the likelihood of Hunter-B eventually entering front-line service with the Russian air force is "big," said Tom Cooper, an author and independent expert on Russian military. "The Russian military is running multiple UAV-related projects," Cooper said. "Thus the emergence of this project is perfectly normal." "At this point, it is going to be the heaviest and fastest UAV [in Russian service] if and when fielded,” said Samuel Bendett, an analyst with the Center for a New American Security in Washington, D.C. Bendett estimated the Hunter-B's weight at around 20 tons and its top speed at more than 600 miles per hour. The drone is in the same class as a manned lighter fighter. The Russian air force reportedly is considering assigning Hunter-Bs as robotic wingmen for Su-57 pilots, extending the coverage of an Su-57 flight's sensors and adding to the manned pilots' firepower. On Sept. 27, the sole Hunter-B prototype flew in formation with an Su-57. The U.S., Japanese and Australian air forces are developing their own wingman drones. But Sukhoi has its work cut out for it completing the Hunter-B. “A a host of aerodynamic, electronic and high-tech issues need to be worked out,” Bendett said. And to be stealthy, the drone needs a new engine layout. In its current configuration, the Hunter-B's AL-31F motor projects from the rear of the airframe, creating a major source of radar reflectivity. Sukhoi has tinkered with a new version of Hunter-B that buries that engine deep inside the airframe, in the same way that Western firms do with their own stealth drones. As the high-stakes development continues, Sukhoi at least can take comfort that its drone is fully insured. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/06/05/how-much-does-it-cost-to-insure-your-russian-made-stealth-drone/#5a88c68023aa

  • Austal USA awarded US$43M LCS contract modification

    June 25, 2020 | International, Naval

    Austal USA awarded US$43M LCS contract modification

    June 18, 2020 - Austal Limited (ASX:ASB) is pleased to announce that the United States Department of Defense has awarded Austal USA a modification to a previously awarded Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) contract. The modification provides Austal with a total potential additional value of US$43,362,000 (approx. A$62,700,000). Work is expected to be complete by June 2021. The contract modification exercises options for LCS Class design services, material to support LCS Class design services and the US Navy's Integrated Data Product Model Environment (IDPME). Austal will provide LCS Class design services to all LCS ships and services may include program management, fitting out services, change processing, software maintenance, engineering and lifecycle efforts. Austal will also maintain an IDPME that shall enable Navy access to enterprise LCS data management. This ASX announcement has been approved and authorised for release by David Singleton, Austal Limited's Chief Executive Officer. -ENDs- Media Contact: Cameron Morse +61 433 886 871 cameron.morse@fticonsulting.com FURTHER INFORMATION Contact: Austal Phone: 61 8 9410 1111 Fax: 61 8 9410 2564 Email: media@austal.com View source version on Austal Limited: https://www.austal.com/news/austal-usa-awarded-us43m-lcs-contract-modification

All news