Germany's Bundeswehr 'lacks basic equipment' for NATO mission

On the same subject

• 

  May 14, 2020 | International, C4ISR

  The Army network plan to ‘compete everything’

  Andrew Eversden The Army recently conducted a critical design review for technologies it plans to deploy for Capability Set '21, one of the first pieces of its battlefield network modernization. In the review, the Army tested various elements of Cap Set '21, such as tactical radios and satellite terminals. Now, the service is making a series of capability trade offs — assessing affordability, technical maturity and density across formation. For example, the Army is weighing trade-offs between how many of its two-channel Leader radios and more affordable single channel radios will ultimately end up in an infantry brigade. Col. Garth Winterle, project manager for tactical radios at the Army's Program Executive Officer for Command Control Communication - Tactical, and Lt. Col. Brandon Baer, program manager for helicopter and multi-mission radios (HAMMR), talked with C4ISRNET about the decisions made during the critical design review and what these choices mean for the next batch of equipment known as Capability Set '23. This transcript has been edited for clarity and brevity. C4ISRNET: What decisions were made during the critical design review (CDR)? COL. GARTH WINTERLE: We went from a 100 percent classified network, hard to get people security clearances, very expensive, NSA-certification required for everything as part of the network architecture, to 75 percent secure but [with an] unclassified architecture at battalion and below. That really adds a lot of flexibility — not only in the addition of affordable commercial technologies that really add capability rapidly because that shaves about 24 months off potential fielding timeline if you don't have to go to NSA — but it keeps a very strong encryption using some of the same algorithms you use for NSA certified radios. It's secure. It's not unsafe. While it's unclassified, it's still very well encrypted. It's just a different way of doing business. So it really opens the door for a lot of different things. Plus, it really improves the ability to share data with coalition and multinational partners, who are also operating at that security level. C4ISRNET: Can you explain the Terrestrial Transmission Line of Sight (TRILOS) radio and the capability trade off you made? WINTERLE: The quantities were adjusted in order to afford more flexible, more expedient and pretty much more affordable options at the brigade level and below. There's a system called TRILOS. Think of a big dish on a portable tower. If you can line it up with another big dish on a portable tower over pretty long distances, you can get very high data throughput very quickly ... It's purpose is to connect large command nodes together and enable them to share data much, much better. So one of the things we looked at as part of the CDR, and we experimented with, is a new smaller expeditionary version. I talked about a giant dish on a portable tower. We went to the company we worked with called Silvus. They have a smaller, little four antenna radio, it's about the size of your home WiFi router [and] does the same thing in slightly less bandwidth. It's not as capable, but it performs that same function. And it's much, much lighter, much easier to pack out and we're actually putting those under quadcopters, like a drone, that are tethered [so] they operate off a line. So you can raise that up in the air and hold that radio up in the air and get really good range to connect two of those radios together to share data. By trading out one system of those large dishes on the tower, we're able to buy a significant quantity of the smaller systems. TRILOS, those dishes on towers, still remain in the architecture. But just by reducing the quantity marginally, we're able to really add a much more expeditionary much, much lighter, easier to set up. And we can buy it in larger quantities to increase the quantity out in the architecture to increase that capability. C4ISRNET: Can you describe how the Army intends to procure some of the Integrated Tactical Network components? WINTERLE: The intent is to compete everything. Single channel radios are a prime example. We're getting ready to invite vendors that have conforming radios to an industry day to basically have a radio run off. [We want them to] provide us enough radios so we can get them integrated and start assessing them against each other and against the current offering from the vendor that actually went through the experiment. It's going to be a fully competitive action. It is important to note though that I can't just go out and buy a new radio and, boom, I can field it. There is an amount of time where we are going to have to procure a limited quantity of the systems that went through the experiment until I can get those other radios through enough lab-based experimentation and integration, so that I know they work on the network. So even though they might be very similar [to] what we experimented with, there will be a delay so I can actually start fielding those to operational units. But [our] intent is to start that as soon as possible as part of the procurement fielding next year — this competitive run off of single channel radios. Anywhere else where there was a stand-in capability where we know from market research that there's other vendors, we'll perform the same sort of competitive actions. C4ISRNET: What are some of the lessons learned from Capability Set '21 that can be applied to Capability Set '23? WINTERLE: We're going to have a design review every year. The year prior to the preliminary design review, which is the year we're in right now for Cap Set '23, focuses on small-scale experimentation and a kind of assessment of ‘what are those technologies that going to compete to be added to the architecture as part of the preliminary design review' in April of next year. So we picked April. We just did this CDR in April. So the preliminary design review for Cap Set '23 is next April. We've partnered with the network cross functional team to help conduct research and development funded activities of certain key technology that they want to see added to the architecture in Cap Set '23. C4ISRNET: How has the Army's capability set testing structure been suited for COVID-19? LT. COL. BRANDON BAER: Traditionally, we do a large operational type test, where our approach has been lab-based testing, [cyber]-based testing, and then doing what we're calling soldier touchpoints. They're smaller experiments, but we're doing more of them. It gives us an opportunity to capture data, soldier feedback at different points of time. We call it developmental operations or DevOps. We can go back and tweak the stuff, fix any problems, get it back out there and continue to collect feedback. But I think it's extremely important due to current conditions with COVID-19, and everything else. Because everything has kind of gone into a large pause. And if we would have had a large pause during operational tests, it could be six months or a year before we have another opportunity to do that, where when you're doing multiple events ... we're capturing data at different times and different soldier feedback, you're not reliant upon one event. As we move forward, I see continuous benefits through that. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/c2-comms/2020/05/13/the-army-network-plan-to-compete-everything/

• 

  January 9, 2020 | International, Land

  BAE Systems equips its CV90 fighting vehicle with Spike antitank missiles

  By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany – BAE Systems has outfitted its CV90 infantry fighting vehicle to fire the Israeli-designed Spike guided antitank missile, according to a company statement. Test shots with a launcher mounted on the vehicle resulted in a target being “defeated” over a distance of 2,000 meters by the LR variant of the weapon, which stands for “long range,” the company said. It is the first time that the CV90, made by the Swedish BAE Systems Hägglunds outfit, boasts an integrated antitank missile capability. According to BAE, the testing took place in northern Sweden last month in below-freezing temperatures during heavy snowfall and limited visibility, though the company declined to say exactly at which test range. “This integrated anti-tank capability confirms that the CV90 is a true benchmark when it comes to expanding a family of multi-mission armored fighting vehicles,” Dan Lindell, CV90 platform director at BAE Systems Hägglunds, is quoted as saying in the statement. The BAE vehicle is in the running for a multibillion-dollar Czech acquisition of new infantry fighting vehicles. The requirements for that vehicle include the ability to launch tank-breaking missiles, a feature that is becoming standard across many NATO land forces. Also competing for the Czech tender, worth upwards of $2 billion, are General Dynamics European Land Systems with the Ascod vehicle, and Rheinmetall's Lynx. The CV90 vehicle is used by the armed forces of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and the Netherlands, with more than 1,200 copies built, according to BAE. The Spike missile is used by several European nations, with integration possible on ground vehicles, helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft, as well as ships, according to manufacturer Rafael. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/01/08/bae-systems-equips-its-cv90-fighting-vehicle-with-spike-antitank-missiles/

• 

  July 28, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  We know why innovation is important. Here’s how to do it.

  Tommy Sowers This month, thousands of units across all branches of the U.S. military will execute a change of command. New commanders will seek to set priorities for their command and leave their mark. However, commanders are asked to do something new: innovate. From the National Defense Strategy to the Army Operating Concept that states innovation “is critical” and defined as “the result of critical and creative thinking and the conversion of new ideas into valued outcomes,” why the military must innovate is doctrine. Yet, there is no playbook for how to innovate. Until now. For the past two years, an Air Force wing built an innovation playbook — leadership, buy-in, experimentation and speed. Leadership In July 2018, Col. Donn Yates took command of the 4th Fighter Wing. An intellectual and warrior, he wanted, and was directed, to be more innovative. He knew that the challenges he and the Air Force would face in the future — from fighting when satellite communications capabilities were down, to using data to predict parts failure, to using social media to communicate during a hurricane — were new, with no available checklist and playbook. He set out to develop one and make innovation a priority. A few weeks after taking command, he hosted me to discuss innovation. As the southeast regional director for the Defense Department's National Security Innovation Network, I helped lead the department's innovation efforts across the region. NSIN's mission is to help commanders innovate by tapping into new networks of innovators in the venture technology and academic space to deliver solutions. As a former Green Beret, venture-backed startup CEO and professor at Duke University, I speak the languages of these three different communities. Buy-in He immediately requested one of our programs — a Design Bootcamp — bringing professors from University of California, Berkley to train his innovation team in design thinking. The concepts are different than military thinking — talk with end users to understand their problems; create minimal viable products, or MVP, to solve their problems; test those MVPs and collect data; and use that data to develop better solutions quickly. Col. Yates had the teams work a problem that bedevils commanders across Air Force bases — the long wait times at the pharmacy. The trainers broke the 28 trainees into four-person teams, who camped out at the pharmacy interviewing pharmacists, staff, airmen and retirees. At the end of the week, the teams proposed solutions, from self-serve kiosks to mobile clinics to text notifications. Six months later, pharmacy wait times were down more than 50 percent and those trained teams could apply the same thinking to other problems. Experimentation with new problem solvers New ways of thinking are just the start. Moving from idea to an actual product that the military can use is difficult. While our military hardware remains the best in the world, the software running our military is woefully inadequate. As the chair of the Defense Innovation Board and former Google CEO Eric Schmidt stated: “The DoD violates pretty much every rule in modern product development.” And with virtually no positions for app developers and data scientists within any Department of Defense operational unit, getting solutions means tapping into new communities of problem solvers. Seymour Johnson Air Force Base sits 35 miles from the Research Triangle, one of the leading startup centers in the nation and host to 50,000 students. Could we tap into these problem solvers for a limited tour of duty to build solutions and serve their country? One of NSIN's programs is a university course called Hacking for Defense, or H4D. Delivered at Duke and universities across the nation, H4D teaches teams of students to build a startup to solve a DoD problem. Col. Yates' wing sponsored multiple H4D problems — from using data to predict F-15 part failure to developing new procedures to allow distributed forces to communicate in a SATCOM-denied environment, to an app for optimizing Reserve drill weekends. Working with new problem solvers takes tolerance and openness to new ideas. These teams, beginning with little knowledge of the military, ask first-principle questions. Yet, after 100-plus end-user interviews and working through multiple prototypes, these students become world experts on the specific problems and the likely solutions. Many go on to join the DoD. NSIN is now putting problems in H4D, tech fellowships called X-Force and courses at universities around the nation. These programs use product teams to craft better social media strategies, data dashboards and apps to fill critical needs. (If you are military and need solutions now, you can submit your problem here.) Speed The most important attribute in a venture-backed startup is speed. So, too, for the modern military. In testimony, a former undersecretary of defense stated: “Innovation will remain important always, but speed becomes the differentiating factor.” Two years of command can fly by. Unless new commanders make innovation not only a priority but also commit to do something now, the deployments, requirements and taskings of running any military unit will subsume any desire to innovate. A month after our first meet, Col. Yates brought 30 airmen to Duke to hear from entrepreneurs and academics. The next month, he sent a half-dozen leaders to learn how to work with university teams and carved out the training time for the Design Bootcamp. The following year, he sponsored two H4D teams and an X-Force fellow. This year, we've seen four H4D teams, more X-Force product teams and another boot camp. None were perfect. All could have been delayed. But the 4th Fighter Wing prioritized speed and innovation. The innovation playbook The military knows why it must innovate. The next conflicts will require not only the best hardware, but also a force that rapidly converts new thinking to outcomes; a force that can tap into the wealth of talent in America that will never wear a uniform but want to apply their entrepreneurial and technical skills to solve national security problems. The how — the things new commanders must do to innovate — has been opaque. Now, with the leadership, buy-in, experimentation and speed of the 4th Fighter Wing as an example, there is an innovation playbook. https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/commentary/2020/07/27/we-know-why-innovation-is-important-heres-how-to-do-it/