Back to news

October 15, 2019 | International, Land

How Army IT modernization is reshaping this cadre of soldiers

By: Mark Pomerleau

The Army's efforts to modernize its tactical networks and information technology are expected to reshape its signal corps, according to service officials.

One of the Army's efforts includes creating what is known as “expeditionary signal battalion-enhanced," or ESB-E.

Expeditionary signal battalions support units that don't have organic communications capabilities. These groups could include military intelligence battalions, chemical battalions, engineering battalions or air defense artillery branches.

However, the Army realized it took too long to get equipment to theater, and the units said the gear performed too slowly on the battlefield, Sgt. Maj. Wendle Marshall, the head of 50th ESB-E, told C4ISRNET during a September trip to Fort Bragg, North Carolina. In response, the service adopted a more expeditionary approach, hence the “enhanced.”

The Army as a whole is working to be more expeditionary and mobile to stay ahead of potential future threats, which will require units to move rapidly. Mobility extends to the overall tactical network modernization effort, for which the ESB-E is part of the first iteration of development to the force in 2021.

The 50th ESB-E is the experimental unit, and three of its companies each received different equipment to test. When the Army receives feedback from those units and makes a decision on fielding, it will retrofit the entire battalion with the same gear. In 2021, the Army plans to outfit three ESB-Es out of 24 total ESBs.

The biggest difference between the enhanced version of these battalions? Advancements in technology allow them to be more mobile and use less equipment while proving more capable.

Soldiers described to C4ISRNET the difference in equipment between two sister battalions in the same signal brigade — one being an enhanced battalion. Based on the current configuration of a company in a typical battalion, six vehicles are needed to establish communications for a battalion or brigade — three vehicles and three trailers totaling six drivers — and three to seven C-17 planes to transport the vehicles.

The enhanced versions can deploy that same company in a single C-17 requiring just a four-seat Humvee and one trailer to house equipment and personal gear.

“If we had to get somewhere fast, we would not be able to provide the combat power as effective or fast as the ESB-E would,” Lt. Col. Trey Matchin, commander of 67th Expeditionary Signal Battalion, a sister battalion of the 50th located at Fort Gordon, Georgia, told C4ISRNET.

Marshall said the enhanced battalions also aren't constrained to just satellite communications.

“This kit's allowing us to change force structure to meet the needs of the Army,” Col. Matthew Foulk, commander of 35th Signal Brigade, which includes the 50th and 67th, told C4ISRNET in August.

Moreover, with less equipment, soldiers' loads are lighter, they are more multifunctional and they rely less on contractor support.

“ESB-Es being fielded is going to come to an apex at the perfect time. Which is creating a more multifunctional soldier instead of ‘I only do SATCOM [satellite communications] or I only do baseband, I only do radios.' We're getting away from that,” Foulk said.

Marshall demonstrated how the motor pool for the 50th is smaller and simplified compared to sister battalions. One prominent example is an operations cell in which soldiers work on their kits as opposed to contractors. This allows war fighters to become proficient on systems ahead of exercises.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/show-reporter/ausa/2019/10/15/how-army-it-modernization-is-reshaping-this-cadre-of-soldiers

On the same subject

  • Boeing’s new F-15X may replace an aging fleet of F-15C/D Eagles

    July 31, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Boeing’s new F-15X may replace an aging fleet of F-15C/D Eagles

    By: Kyle Rempfer The Air Force's fleet of F-15 C and D Eagle fighters are aging faster than F-35 joint strike fighters are being fielded, a gap in the transition that some think needs to be filled. And even when more F-35s have been fielded, F-15s could still fill a tactical role to help the Air Force carry out its mission. Boeing's new, single-seat F-15X design may be the Air Force's answer to that issue. Very little has been made known about the F-15X initiative, which was first reported by Defense One, and the Air Force's Pentagon officials could not provide comment on it, only telling Air Force Times that “there is no acquisition program” with respect to the new platform. But multiple media outlets still reported this week that the F-15X was being pitched to the Air Force by Boeing. Alternatively, some reports state that the Air Force first solicited Boeing for the new fighter. Regardless, the possibility of a new platform to replace aging the fourth-generation F-15 fighters could alleviate the strain put on F-22 Raptors and make up for the F-35s slow roll-out. Created during the Cold War, the more than 40-year-old F-15 has been the U.S. Air Force's primary air-to-air fighter jet for decades. The aircraft has been known for its range of operational roles, however, to include close-air support in the Global War on Terrorism. Dan Grazier, the Jack Shanahan Military Fellow at the Project On Government Oversight, writes extensively on military procurement, to include the F-35 acquisition. He said that while he can't comment on the specific designs of the F-15X, it is generally better to develop weapon systems from “an evolutionary approach.” “Whenever the military possesses a proven basic design like the F-15, the Pentagon should focus its efforts on maintaining and improving it until the state of technology changes to the point where the basic design is no longer viable,” Grazier told Air Force Times. “Until that happens, there is no reason to continually reinvent the wheel. If it is possible to incorporate improved technology into a design that has already been bought and paid for, then it only makes financial and common sense to do so.” “There will doubtless be arguments made that the unit flyaway costs of the F-15X and F-35 will be roughly comparable," he said. "When you factor in the development costs of both into the program unit average cost, I bet the F-15X will be much less expensive.” While the F-35 is a supposed to be a multi-role aircraft — capable of a stealth mode, as well as an air-to-ground combat mode once air dominance is achieved — it has been questioned whether the F-35 can outperform an F-15 in an air-to-air dogfight, or an A-10 Warthog in close-air support missions. As to what the F-15X includes that separates it from older F-15s, not too much is definitively known. Citing sources close to the initiative, The War Zone reported the most extensive breakdown so far. The F-15X reportedly came out of an Air Force inquiry to Boeing and Lockheed Martin about fielding an aircraft that could easily transition into the service's existing air combat infrastructure, specifically to help counter the Air Force's shrinking force. There were some caveats to the solicitation: it needs to be cost-effective, low-risk and not considered an alternative to the larger F-35 procurement program, The War Zone reported. It seems those requirements were met, based on the reported features. The F-15X armament would be designed for a mixed air-to-air and air-ground-role, including “eight air-to-air missiles and 28 Small Diameter Bombs (SDBs), or up to seven 2,000-pound bombs and eight air-to-air missiles," according to The War Zone. The F-15X would allegedly be very affordable, as well. The aircraft reportedly costs roughly $27,000 per hour to fly. Meanwhile, the F-35A costs more than $40,000 an hour to fly, according to The War Zone. Finally, The War Zone said the F-15X will have a 20,000-hour service life, meaning it could be flying for several more decades. Still, Boeing officials have not outright confirmed they were pitching the F-15X. “We see the marketplace expanding internationally and it's creating opportunities then to go back and talk to the U.S. Air Force about what might be future upgrades or even potentially future acquisitions of the F-15 aircraft,” Gene Cunningham, vice president of global sales of Defense, Space & Security, told DefenseOne. The Air Force has been considering retiring its F-15 Eagles for some time. In March 2016, service officials said they were considering a retirement for the more than 230 F-15 C and D fighters, and replacing them with F-16 Fighting Falcons. Speaking before the Senate Armed Services air land forces subcommittee in April, Lt. Gen. Jerry Harris, the Air Force's deputy chief of staff for strategic plans and requirements, said the service was still looking at options for the F-15 fleet. “There's nothing off the table,” Harris said. “We're looking at, as we bring F-35s in, can we grow our capacity rather than just replace one-for-one? If we can't do that, what's our least-capable asset to retire, based on the value that it would provide for us?” https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/07/30/boeings-new-f-15x-may-replace-an-aging-fleet-of-f-15cd-eagles/

  • Boeing, Nammo Ramjet 155 Test Sets Distance Record

    October 11, 2023 | International, Aerospace

    Boeing, Nammo Ramjet 155 Test Sets Distance Record

    The Boeing-Nammo solution is being developed under the Army’s XM1155 program

  • Les Européens achètent de plus en plus d’avions de chasse américains

    January 28, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Les Européens achètent de plus en plus d’avions de chasse américains

    Par : Nicolas Gros-Verheyde | EURACTIV France La Slovaquie, la Roumanie, et bientôt la Bulgarie et la Croatie : les avions de chasse américains séduisent toute l'Europe. Pour les armées européennes, voler non américain se fait rare. Seuls six pays n'ont pas équipé leur flotte aérienne de chasse avec du matériel américain. La Suède et la France s'équipent uniquement en national (respectivement le Gripen et le Rafale), et l'Allemagne avec du matériel européen certes (Eurofigther), mais fabriqué sur son sol. Tandis que l'Autriche, la République tchèque et la Hongrie se sont équipées, le premier, en Eurofighter, les deux autres, en Gripen suédois. Un équipement made in US ou panaché Plusieurs pays, notamment dans le sud de l'Europe (Espagne, Grèce, Italie) ont choisi de panacher, prenant un produit européen (Eurofighter ou Mirage) et un produit américain (F-16 ou/et F-35). Un exemple suivi par le Royaume-Uni. Bien que fervente défenseure du lien transatlantique, la Royal Air Force équilibre ses achats entre le made in USA (F-35) et le made in Europa (l'Eurofighter renommé Typhoon outre-Manche). Un pragmatisme qui a un fondement très industriel. Une partie de ces avions sont fabriqués dans les usines britanniques. Les pays d'Europe centrale ou orientale, proches de la Russie sont plus monogames. Sauf les trois exceptions mentionnées (Autriche, Hongrie, Tchéquie), ils s'équipent exclusivement en matériel américain, en général avec des avions F-16 (Lockheed Martin). Il en est de même des pays du nord de l'Europe (Norvège, Danemark, Pays-Bas, Belgique) tous équipés en matériel américain. La tendance ne s'inverse pas Aucun signe ne montre une inversion de tendance. Au contraire ! Les derniers pays qui viennent de s'équiper (Belgique, Roumanie, Slovaquie) l'ont fait avec du matériel américain. Et les Bulgares et Croates s'apprêtent à suivre ce chemin. Tandis que les Grecs qui vont devoir renouveler leur flotte se t'tent pour déterminer leur choix, qui sera largement guidé par le poids économique de l'investissement. Même les Suisses, équipés actuellement de F-18 de chez Boeing,, se demandent s'ils ne vont pas reprendre américain à nouveau. Cette prééminence américaine pose un défi à l'industrie européenne, et à la velléité d'autonomie stratégique et industrielle des « 27 ». L'équipement en avion de chasse est, en effet, un investissement lourd. Le renouvellement n'intervient que tous les 20 ans en cas d'achat d'occasion, et à 40 ans en cas d'achat en neuf. Autant dire que les acquisitions prévues aujourd'hui vont réduire d'autant les capacités de l'industrie européenne jusqu'à 2060 minimum ! D'autant que l'arrivée de l'avion américain de nouvelle génération F-35 dans la flotte de plusieurs États (Belgique, Danemark, Italie, Pays-Bas, Royaume-Uni) risque de « siphonner » durablement les budgets de ces pays. Le futur avion franco-allemand-espagnol prévu pour 2035-2040 risque d'avoir un marché « bouché » et réduit à l'espace de ses pays constructeurs. Cette inconséquence européenne est troublante. Mais plutôt que d'accuser les États-Unis d'interventionnisme industriel, les Européens devraient se regarder dans le miroir. L'industrie aéronautique européenne est aujourd'hui éclatée entre trois constructeurs (Airbus, Dassault, Saab). Ce qui l'empêche d'avoir un modèle unique et donc de faire des économies d'échelle. Elle ne dispose pas d'une offre de « second choix », les fameux F-16 d'occasion, qui permet de s'équiper à moindre coût. Et les pays européens sont incapables de proposer une offre complète, politique, économique, académique et opérationnelle, comme le font les Américains. Offre qui va de l'accueil des stagiaires officiers dans les écoles militaires aux facilités financières pour l'équipement, à la présence militaire, parfois permanente, dans le pays, à titre de réassurance politique. Or, acheter un avion de chasse est une décision éminemment stratégique. Il ne s'agit pas seulement d'acquérir un véhicule aérien avec des capacités. On achète une « assurance-vie » et une protection militaire. Et on assure ainsi à cet allié un « retour » sur l'investissement politique et militaire. On bénéficie d'une culture stratégique et d'un réseau académique puissant. Tant que les Européens ne pourront offrir l'équivalent, l'avion de chasse, made in US, a de beaux jours devant lui. https://www.euractiv.fr/section/commerce-industrie/news/les-europeens-achetent-de-plus-en-plus-davions-de-chasse-americains/

All news