Back to news

October 9, 2019 | International, C4ISR

How airmen can work together for persistent ISR

By: Brig. Gen. Gregory Gagnon and Lt. Col. Nishawn Smagh

There is always a next war. Great power competition is here. Now is the time, while the United States maintains a position of strength, to ensure we are not outmatched, out-thought, or out-witted. Rapidly and realistically positioning the Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance enterprise for first-mover advantage in today's data-driven environment is beginning with purposeful urgency.

The past paradigm: crew-to-aircraft model

During our careers, the Air Force ISR enterprise grew in both capability and capacity. In the late 1990s, the Air Force operated an ISR enterprise dominated by manned aircraft, each with their own specialized team operating unique systems that turned data into initial intelligence. Only a few organizations could turn raw airborne sensor data into intelligence in near-real time. We were only beginning to move data to the analyst, versus deploying the analyst to the data.

As battlefield demand of ISR grew, we scaled up. We were fortunate to help build and execute airborne intelligence operations on a global scale, connected via a global network — we called them “reachback” operations. Reachback operations were the first step in transmitting ISR sensor collection across the globe in seconds. Even today, few nations can conduct this type of ISR operational design. The enterprise has continued to advance, achieving fully distributed operations around the world. We also made it possible to remove humans from aircraft, allowing missions to fly nearly three times longer and expand the data available to exploit. Correspondingly, the Air Force increased the number of organizations that could accept data and create intelligence.

Following 9/11, our nation's needs changed; the fight necessitated the Air Force grow its capacity to deliver intelligence for expanded operations in the Middle East. We bought more unmanned vehicles, trained more ISR Airmen, and created more organizations to exploit data. Collection operations were happening 24/7 and most sorties required multiple crews to fly, control sensors and turn collection tasks into intelligence. As reachback operations grew, they became the Distributed Common Ground System and developed the ability to exploit aircraft sensor data. This growth was significant, but at the tactical level we employed the same crew model and simply grew at scale. This resulted in manpower growth, but also in disparate, distributed crews working similar tactical requirements with little unity of effort or larger purpose. This limited the ability of ISR airpower to have broader operational effects. While suitable for counter-terrorism, history tells us this approach is ill advised for great power conflict.

Observe and orient: the data explosion and sense-making

The traditional crew-to-aircraft model for exploitation must fast forward to today's information environment. The Pentagon has shifted its guidance to this new reality. The Defense Department recently declared information a seventh core function, and the Air Force's formal ISR flight plan maps a course for digital-age capabilities to turn information into intelligence. This “sense-making” must be able to handle both the complexity of a diverse information environment and scale to contend with an exploding volume of data. Access to expanded data sets, from diverse collection sources and phenomenology, is near and urgently needed. The Department's focus on artificial intelligence and machine learning in this realm remains stable and necessary. The next step is to retool how we task, organize, and equip both intelligence collection and analytic crews.

As the Pentagon focuses on open architectures, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and data standards, the field is rapidly moving out. Air Combat Command , the Air Force lead command for ISR, is attacking the crew-to-aircraft model to test a sensor-agnostic approach using multiple data sources to address intelligence requirements. Cross-functional teams of Airmen are now assigned broader operational problems to solve, rather than a specific sensor to exploit. This will change joint and service collection management processes.

ACC is tackling this future. We are supporting Air Force commanders in Europe and the Pacific with a pilot project that allows Airmen to explore these sensor-agnostic approaches. An additional element to our future success is partnering with our joint and allied partners, as well as national agencies, to bring resources, tools, and insights to bear. As we field the open architecture Distributed Common Ground System, we are shifting the focus from airmen operating specific sensors to airmen leveraging aggregate data for broader analysis.

Headquarters Air Force and ACC are installing technologies to ensure readiness for the future ISR enterprise. Cloud technology paired with artificial intelligence and machine learning promises to speed human-machine teaming in generating intelligence across warfighting domains at the speed and scale necessary to inform and guide commanders. Underpinning this effort is a new data strategy and agile capability development for rapid prototyping and fielding. The Defense Department and the Air Force must continue to prioritize this retooling. Our adversaries see the opportunities; this is a race to the future.

Situational awareness in the next war will require the development and fielding of AI/ML to replace the limited and manpower-intensive processes across the Air Force ISR enterprise. Employing AI/ML against repetitive data exploitation tasks will allow the service to refocus many of its ISR Airmen on AI/ML-assisted data analysis and problem solving.

ISR and multi domain command and control ... enabling decide and act

A headquarters-led initiative, with eyes toward a joint capability, is the creation of a collaborative sensing grid that operates seamlessly across the threat spectrum. Designs call for a data-centric network of multi domain platforms, sensors, and airmen that work together to provide persistent ISR. Equipped with manned and unmanned platform sensors capable of computing via AI/ML, these capabilities will link commanders to real-time information, plus tip and cue data from sensors-to-sensors, joint commanders, and weapons. This collaborative sensing grid is a foundational element for multi domain command and control . The vision of MDC2 is to outpace, outthink and outmaneuver adversaries.

Creatively and rapidly applying new technology to operational problems is a long-held characteristic of airmen. Our DCGS airmen are no different. Non-material solutions deserve as much attention as hardware. This pilot project is our vanguard initiative to prepare for rapidly changing future systems environments.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2019/10/08/how-airmen-can-work-together-for-persistent-isr/

On the same subject

  • Poll: Germans, Americans far apart on use of military, defense spending

    March 11, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Poll: Germans, Americans far apart on use of military, defense spending

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Germans and Americans remain far apart on defense issues, ranging from when to use the military, how much to spend on defense and which country poses a bigger challenge — Russia or China — according to a new study unveiled Monday. “Three years into a turbulent period of American-German relations, with Donald Trump at the helm of American foreign policy and Angela Merkel leading Germany, there continues to be a wide divergence in views of bilateral relations and security policy between the publics of both countries,” said a Pew Research Center study published in cooperation with Koerber Stiftung, a German think tank. The two organizations each polled about 1,000 adults in September 2019 in the United States and Germany. Also included in the data are results from Pew's “global attitudes” survey conducted in both countries during the spring and summer of 2019. The results are unlikely to surprise anyone following trans-Atlantic relations, but they put into perspective why deep-seated differences persist in crafting a more coherent political show of force between the two nations. While roughly 80 percent Americans believe that using military might is sometimes necessary to maintain order in the world, Germans were almost split evenly on the same question, with a slight majority disagreeing. On the question of defending a fellow NATO ally against Russia in the event of a conflict, 6 in 10 Americans said the United States should help, whereas 6 in 10 German respondents said their country should not get involved. At the same time, Germans saw the United States high up in the list of key foreign policy allies, much higher than Americans viewed Germany. Asked to name their most or second-most important partner, 42 percent of Germans mentioned the United Sates, surpassed only by the their top choice of France, at 60 percent. For Americans, the British ranked highest on the same question, at 36 percent, followed by China (23 percent), Canada (20 percent) and Israel (15 percent). “One area of convergence is the broad support in both the U.S. and Germany for more cooperation with France and Japan. And similar majorities in the U.S. and Germany want to cooperate more with China,” the study read. As for cooperation with Russia, “Germans are almost twice as likely as Americans to want greater collaboration,” it added. When it comes to defense spending, 35 percent of Americans felt that Europeans should up their military budget, with 50 percent saying it should stay the same and 9 percent saying it should decrease. In 2017, the share of Americans wanting an increase was 45 percent. In Germany, the acceptance for defense budget increases has grown since 2017, when only 32 percent of those polled voiced support and 50 percent wanted it to remain the same. In 2018, 43 percent of respondents supported an increase. At the mid-February Munich Security Conference, much was made about the European Union's need to “learn to use the language of power,” as Josep Borrell, the bloc's defense and foreign policy chief, put it. That, of course, would cost money. Germans have traditionally frowned upon that kind of talk, though there is an increasing awareness of geopolitical perils in the wake of Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, Jeffrey Rathke, president of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies at Johns Hopkins University, said in an interview last month. “Germany has been able to get by with its rhetorical response to the deteriorating security environment,” he said. “Now it's increasingly obvious that that is no longer enough.” While the country has significantly upped its defense spending, sensitizing the public for operational contributions to Europe's security will be a crucial next step for this government and the next, Rathke argued. The Pew and Koerber figures point to a generational change in the general attitudes of Germans and Americans about one another. “Despite these divergences in opinion, young people in both countries have more positive views of the U.S.-German relationship,” the study read. “In the U.S., for example, 82 percent of people ages 18 to 29 say the relationship is good, compared with 73 percent of those ages 65 and older. Similarly, in Germany, four-in-ten young people say relations with the U.S. are good, compared with only 31 percent of those 65 and older.” Notably, the two countries' militaries enjoy a much closer level of cooperation than the political discourse suggests, especially during the Trump administration, a fact that officials in both countries keep stressing when the tone between Berlin and Washington turns particularly icy. “There is an instinctive perception in the German public to defense matters anchored in Europe and the trans-Atlantic alliance,” Rathke said. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/09/poll-germans-americans-far-apart-on-use-of-military-defense-spending/

  • F-35 head warns future upgrades at risk, production shutdown possible

    December 17, 2023 | International, Aerospace

    F-35 head warns future upgrades at risk, production shutdown possible

    The Block 4 upgrades, which are intended to bring greater weapons capabilities and other features, are facing hardware maturity and software issues.

  • Entretien avec Florence Parly, ministre des Armées

    May 17, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Entretien avec Florence Parly, ministre des Armées

    La ministre des Armées, Florence Parly, accorde une interview à La Tribune. Elle aborde notamment le programme SCAF, soulignant : « les négociations qui sont aujourd'hui en phase finale concernent la réalisation de travaux qui se dérouleront sur la période 2021-2027 et qui visent à mettre en vol un démonstrateur commun à cet horizon. C'est un jalon majeur pour assurer une entrée en service d'un nouvel avion opérationnel en 2040 ». Au sujet du Rafale, la ministre se félicite du choix récent de l'avion de combat de Dassault Aviation par la Grèce et l'Egypte, rappelant que « d'autres compétitions sont encore en cours ». Ces contrats représentent « une bonne nouvelle en termes de visibilité pour la continuité de la chaîne industrielle de Dassault Aviation, Safran et Thales et les plus de 500 sous-traitants, PME et ETI, de l'écosystème Rafale. Nous pouvons placer nos commandes nationales dans un échéancier cohérent au plan opérationnel et par rapport à ce que nous avions budgété ». En matière d'exportations, « l'année 2021 sera exceptionnelle, elle l'est déjà avec 48 Rafale exportés. La dynamique est bonne », souligne la ministre. Florence Parly se félicite par ailleurs de l'attention croissante portée à la souveraineté européenne en matière de défense : l'Europe « commence à s'interroger sur la prise de participation et le rachat de groupes européens par les groupes chinois notamment », estime-t-elle. La Tribune du 14 mai

All news