Fleet Forces building digital tools to improve repairs, sailor skills

On the same subject

• 

  March 5, 2024 | International, Land

  Thales posts higher profit, tackles weak telecom satellite market

• 

  December 4, 2019 | International, Land

  Raytheon Unveils Platoon-Sized Infantry Combat Simulator

  By Matthew Cox Defense contractor Raytheon has just unveiled a new virtual training simulator designed to immerse full platoons of soldiers at a time into realistic battlefield settings, where they can shoot enemy targets with individual weapons and even call in close-air support. Raytheon began showing off its new Synthetic Training Environment Soldier Virtual Trainer at the Interservice/ Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) in Orlando, Florida this week. The prototype system is Raytheon's attempt to satisfy the U.S. Army's need to create a synthetic training environment that dramatically increases the level of realism in training. "They need a way to get soldiers into the same virtual environments that they have had for tanks and helicopters for decades," Harry Buhl, lead investigator for synthetic training at Raytheon, told Military.com. "When you do that in an immersive, synthetic environment, you can go beyond the [live-fire] range -- you can put people soldiers into urban scenarios or into combat-type scenarios ... so you can stress them at a higher level and gain higher levels of proficiency." The Army recently told industry officials that it will begin seeking prototype solutions early next year designed to develop similar types of simulator training technologies. "We intend to compete for that opportunity," Buhl said. Currently, Raytheon is demonstrating its new soldier virtual trainer to simulate an observation post for two soldiers. But it can be configured for much larger units, Buhl said. "We can support up to a platoon ... that is something that the Army hasn't asked for. But the technology path that we have chosen allows us to actually do this for a platoon-sized unit over a large area. So we have the capability to do squad training or situational training exercises which we believe will be the next step as the Army goes down this path," Buhl said. The new trainer uses very high-quality graphics, similar to high-end games and relies on virtual-reality headsets and instrumented weapons, he said. "You can pick up a weapon, and the weapon is in that virtual environment," Buhl said. "When you put your cheek to the stock of that weapon, you have that same sight [picture] as you would in real life, but you are in a virtual environment." The trainer relies on commercially available tracking sensors, roughly two-inch cubes, that are spread out across any area, Buhl said. "The software package that we put behind them will link them together and make them smart enough to understand where you are in the environment so that you can be realistically replicated in the synthetic environment," Buhl said. "As you ... take a knee, go to the prone, you are doing the same things in that synthetic environment. "If you were training on a basketball court, you could put these things up in the rafters of the basketball court and just leave them there." Eventually, the sensor technology will be built into the headsets, so there will be no need for tracking sensors, Buhl added. One of the features the Army is looking for is the ability for soldiers to train for calling in artillery or close-air support, Buhl said, describing how Raytheon's simulator shows realistic training distances. "You are ... on a hilltop looking down the valley, you've got some threat vehicles few miles away," he said. "You have [Air Force] A-10s circling overhead; they come down and you control them and call in their attack, so that you can apply close-air support directly on those targets." The simulator also allows soldiers to engage enemy targets with individual weapons at realistic ranges, another feature on the Army's wish list, Buhl said. If soldiers are using a rifle with an effective range out to 500 meters "you can engage targets out to 500 meters," he said. The trainer will also allow units to train for scenarios involving checkpoints that could call for the need to escalate from using non-lethal devices to lethal force, Buhl said. The Army is now developing the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS), a Microsoft-based headset that uses augmented reality to equip soldiers with a heads-up display allowing them to sight their weapon and view key tactical data. Scheduled to be ready for fielding in fiscal 2021, IVAS will also allow soldiers to train in synthetic training scenarios such as mission rehearsals before going on a live operation. Buhl said Raytheon used virtual-reality headsets because it "provides an immediate capability" the Army could take advantage of, but the system will be adaptable to work with augmented-reality headsets used with IVAS. "All of this is ... able to be packed up in a Pelican case and taken anywhere in the world," Buhl said. "It's also cloud-enabled, so if you did want to link into a networked training exercise with soldiers in another location, with tanks or helicopters that are in synthetic simulators, you could do all of that." https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/12/03/raytheon-unveils-platoon-sized-infantry-combat-simulator.html

• 

  December 26, 2019 | International, Naval

  Pentagon proposes big cuts to US Navy destroyer construction, retiring 13 cruisers

  By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON – The Department of Defense has sent a plan to the White House that would cut the construction of more than 40 percent of its planed Flight III Arleigh Burke destroyers in in fiscal years 2021 through 2025. In total, the proposal would cut five of the 12 DDGs planned through the so-called future years defense program, or FYDP. In total, the plan would cut about $9.4 billion, or 8 percent, out of the total shipbuilding budget, according to a memo from the White House's Office of Management and Budget to the Defense Department obtained by Defense News. The memo also outlined plans to accelerate the decommissioning cruisers, cutting the total number of Ticonderoga-class cruisers in the fleet down to nine by 2025, from a planned 13 in last year's budget. The Pentagon's plan would actually shrink the size of the fleet from today's fleet of 293 ships to 287 ships, the memo said, which stands in contrast to the Navy's goal of 355 ships. The 355 ship goal was also made national policy in the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act. The memo comes on the heels of a wave of rhetoric from the Navy and the highest levels of the Trump Administration that the goal remains 350-plus ships, and the memo directs the Pentagon to submit a “resource-informed” plan to get to 355 ships, though its unclear how that direction might affect the Navy's calculus with regards to destroyer construction. The document gives the Navy a degree of wiggle-room to try and redefine what counts as a ship. “OMB directs DOD to submit a resource-informed plan to achieve a 355-ship combined fleet, including manned and unmanned ships, by 2030,” the memo reads. “In addition to a programmatic plan through the FYDP and projected ship counts through 2030, DOD shall submit a legislative proposal to redefine a battleforce ship to include unmanned ships, complete with clearly defined capability and performance thresholds to define a ship's inclusion in the overall battleforce ship count.” Destroyers are built by General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Maine and by Huntington Ingalls in Pascagoula, Mississippi. Each destroyer costs an average of $1.82 billion based on the Navy's 2020 budget submission, according to the Congressional Research Service. A Trump Administration official who spoke on background said the Navy's proposed plan to shrink the fleet is being driven primary from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and that OMB is strongly behind the President's goal of 355 ship. “OMB strongly supports 355 [ships] and is working with the Navy on it,” the official said. “OSD seems to be the most opposed to it.” A Navy spokesman declined to comment on the contents of the memo, saying it was related to a budget still in development and was “pre-decisional.” The military has a policy of refusing to comment on budget matters before they've been submitted to congress. The fate of the cruisers has been a nearly annual fight on Capitol Hill, as the Navy has tried desperately to divest themselves of the troublesome class, though this year's proposed cancellation of six cruiser modernization plans did not make a stir on the Hill. The cruisers themselves are the largest surface combatants in the Navy's inventory but have become increasingly difficult to maintain. Cruisers have 26 more vertical launch system, or VLS, cells per hull than their Arleigh Burke Flight IIA destroyer counterparts, and 32 more than the Flight I Burkes. Cruisers act as the lead air defense ship in a carrier strike group but as they have aged, the fleet has managed everything from cracking hulls to aging pipes and mechanical systems. The ships' SPY-1 radars have also been difficult to maintain, as components age and need constant attention from technicians. Last year, the Navy proposed canceling the modernization of Bunker Hill, Mobile Bay, Antietam, Leyte Gulf, San Jacinto and Lake Champlain in 2021 and 2022. The new proposal would accelerate the decommissioning of the Monterey. Vella Gulf and Port Royal to 2022, which would cut between three and seven years off each of their planned lives. The plan would also advance the decommissioning of the Shiloh to 2024, three years earlier that previously planned. The service's past efforts to shed the cruisers to save money repeatedly drew the ire of former House Armed Services Committee sea power subcommittee Chairman Randy Forbes, R-Va., who didn't trust the Navy to keep the ships in service and therefore wrote clear language into several National Defense Authorization Act bills prohibiting the move. The Navy ultimately agreed to the so-called 2-4-6 plan in 2015, which allowed the service to lay up to two cruisers a year, for no more than four years and allow no more than six of the ships to undergo modernization at any one time. 'Making a Case' The 2030 deadline for 355 ships as mentioned in the OMB memo was first laid out earlier this month by acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly in a speech at USNI's Defense Forum. “[Three hundred and fifty-five ships] is stated as national policy,” Modly told an audience on Dec. 5. “It was also the president's goal during the election. We have a goal of 355, we don't have a plan for 355. We need to have a plan, and if it's not 355, what's it going to be and what's it going to look like? “We ought to be lobbying for that and making a case for it and arguing in the halls of the Pentagon for a bigger share of the budget if that's what is required,” The speech was followed by the President's National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien at the Reagan National Defense Forum saying that Trump was serious when he committed to a 350-ship Navy. “When President Trump says a 350-ship Navy, he means a 350-ship Navy, and not decades from now,” O'Brien said. Bryan McGrath, a retired destroyer captain and analyst with the defense consultancy The Ferrybridge Group, said the plan to reduce the size of the fleet is a sign that the Defense Department isn't willing to put the resources required toward growing the fleet. “If what you are reporting is true, this is a sign of the tension between the grand desires for a much larger fleet and the modest resources being applied to the problem,” McGrath said. “There simply is no way to grow the fleet as it is currently architected while maintaining the current fleet at a high state of readiness with the given resources." McGrath said if 355 is still the goal, the Pentagon has to either dramatically restructure the fleet to switch out large surface combatants such as cruisers and destroyers with smaller, less expensive ships, or it has to change what's counted as a ship – both moves that have been signaled by the Navy in recent years. “This is why it's so hard to grow a Navy,” McGrath said. “You have to decide it's a national priority, you have to devote a lot of resources and you have to do it over a period of years. None of that has happened.” Dan Gouré , an analyst with the Arlington-based think tank The Lexington Institute and former Bush Administration Pentagon official, said trading existing force structure for unproven technologies such as unmanned ships that may pan out down the road is a classic Pentagon trap that rarely pans out. “It sends a bit of a chill up my spine to hear that the Navy may be considering cutting a bird in the hand for a theoretical eagle down the road,” Goure said. “That almost never works. I've been doing this long enough, 40 years of this, tell me when that's ever really worked.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/12/24/pentagon-proposes-big-cuts-to-us-navy-destroyer-construction-retiring-13-cruisers/