July 14, 2020 | International, Naval
By PAUL MCLEARYon July 13, 2020 at 5:37 PM
WASHINGTON: Despite deep and bipartisan skepticism from Capitol Hill over its plans to build three new classes of unmanned warships, the Navy went ahead today with its plans to begin building as many as 40 Medium Unmanned Surface Vessels.
The service awarded L3 Technologies Inc. a $34.9 million contract for a prototype MUSV, along with an option for up to eight additional ships. If the company builds those eight unmanned ships, the contract will be worth $281 million through June 2027.
Overall, the Navy wants to build about 40 MUSVs in coming years, which will clock in at between 45 to 190 feet long, with displacements of roughly 500 tons. The medium ships are thought to skew more toward mission modules revolving around intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance payloads and electronic warfare systems.
In their versions of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, however, both the House and Senate told the Navy to slow down on its acquisition of some unmanned ships, specifically the Large Unmanned Surface Vessel. Both documents boost Congressional oversight over the LUSV, an ambitious new ship the Navy hoped to begin building in 2023.
While the MUSV will focus on gathering intelligence, the LUSV will act as a forward-deployed missile launcher, bristling with missile tubes and other weapons, Navy planners have said.
Lawmakers are looking to ensure the Navy finalizes its design and operational plans before building the larger ship, something the service has struggled with as it built other classes such as the Littoral Combat Ship, the Ford class of aircraft carriers, and the Zumwalt destroyers, all of which fell behind schedule, went over budget and struggled with new technologies.
“USVs are one of the centerpieces of distributed maritime operations,” Rear Adm. Casey Moton, head of the Unmanned and Small Combatants office, said last month at a U.S. Naval Institute event. The ships will act as platforms to enable the fleet to spread out and counter China's ambitions in the Pacific either as a forward screen for a carrier strike group or as vessels pressed forward with an acceptable risk of attrition.
The Navy hasn't yet fully prepared to deploy or sustain a new fleet of unmanned vessels, Capt. Pete Small, program manager for unmanned maritime systems said in May. “Our infrastructure right now is optimized around manned warships,” Small said. “We're gonna have to shift that infrastructure for how we prepare, deploy, and transit” over large bodies of water before the navy begins churning out unmanned ships in greater numbers, he added.
https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/navy-inks-deal-for-new-unmanned-fleet
February 29, 2024 | International, Land
The goal of the FORGE C2 effort is to evolve the current ground architecture, leveraging newer technologies and architecture approaches.
September 16, 2019 | International, Aerospace
Steve Trimble Raytheon has unveiled an internally funded program to develop a new air-to-air missile called Peregrine that combines the reach of the medium-range AIM-120 and the maneuverability of the short-range AIM-9X, but in a smaller form factor to increase the magazine depth of tactical aircraft. The unveiling of a Peregrine mockup on Sept. 16 at the Air Force Association's annual National Convention in Washington comes just three months after U.S. Air Force officials confirmed the ongoing development of the Lockheed Martin AIM-260, which is intended to replace the AIM-120 with a longer-range missile of the same length. The Peregrine missile is being pitched to U.S. and international customers that want AIM-120 performance in a smaller package to double missile loads in the internal weapon bays of stealth fighters or triple the magazine depth on the external weapon stations of nonstealth aircraft, says Mark Noyes, vice president of business development and strategy for Raytheon Missile Systems. “What we see it as is a complement to our [AIM-120] Amraam and AIM-9X,” Noyes says Raytheon's internal development project follows the introduction of multiple weapons boasting longer range than the nearly three-decade-old AIM-120 design. In addition to the MBDA Meteor, the PL-15 is being developed by China and the Vympel K-77M has been ordered by the Russian government. The Peregrine also fits into a new category typified by the 2013 unveiling of Lockheed Martin's Cuda concept, which offered the Air Force a missile with AIM-120-like range—or slightly better—in a package half the size and weight. The Cuda received support from an Air Force Research Laboratory project called Small Advanced Capabilities Missile. Raytheon lists the Peregrine with a length of 6 ft. (1.8 m) and a total weight of about 150 lb. (68 kg), or roughly half the length and mass of the 12-ft., 335-lb. AIM-120. Although Peregrine shares a common stature with Lockheed's Cuda concept, there are distinct differences. Lockheed designed the Cuda as a hit-to-kill weapon, but the Peregrine destroys the target with a blast-fragmentation warhead. The missile is guided to the target with a “multimode autonomous seeker,” says Noyes, but he declined to elaborate. A multimode guidance system places the Peregrine in a different category than the radar-guided AIM-120 and infrared homing AIM-9X. It could more closely reflect the multimode guidance system installed in the Raytheon/Rafael Stunner surface-to-air missile, which combines radar and infrared sensors into a dolphin nose-shaped radome. A “new, high-performance propulsion section” will accelerate the Peregrine to supersonic speed to achieve potentially slightly better range than the AIM-120, but Noyes declined to describe the specific type of propulsion technology selected for the new missile. Several options are available to modern missile designers. The Stunner uses a multipulse rocket motor, while the MBDA powers the Meteor missile with a ramjet-augmented rocket. Missile developers also have been experimenting with new propellant technologies, including exotic gels. Even at a range equivalent to that of the AIM-120, the Peregrine should provide similar endgame maneuverability as the super agile AIM-9X, Noyes says. “It will go supersonic and that's attributable to that new lightweight airframe and high-performance modular control system,” he says. “That permits it [to] go and do incredible maneuvers, especially at the endgame where it's needed most.” How long Raytheon has been developing the Peregrine is not clear. In a blow to Raytheon's hopes to deliver the successor of the AIM-120, the Air Force awarded the AIM-160 development contract to Lockheed in 2017. Raytheon filed a trademark application for a new guided missile called Peregrine on Aug. 14, 2018. The company is testing components and is “seeing tremendous progress,” Noyes adds. “We are making a commitment to mature this so our service customers will resonate with its capabilities and demonstrated performance,” he says. https://aviationweek.com/defense/raytheon-unveils-medium-range-air-air-missile-project
September 26, 2019 | International, C4ISR
By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: “You will find no stronger proponent of integration of AI capabilities writ large into the Department of Defense,” Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan said here, “but there is one area where I pause, and it has to do with nuclear command and control.” In movies like WarGames and Terminator, nuclear launch controls are the first thing fictional generals hand over to AI. In real life, the director of the Pentagon's Joint Artificial Intelligence Center says, that's the last thing he would integrate AI with. The military is beginning a massive multi-billion dollar modernization of its aging system for Nuclear Command, Control, & Communications (NC3), much of which dates to the Cold War. But the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center is not involved with it. A recent article on the iconoclastic website War on the Rocks argued “America Needs A ‘Dead Hand',” a reference to the Soviet system designed to automatically order a nuclear launch if the human leadership was wiped out. “I read that,” Shanahan told the Kalaris Intelligence Conference here this afternoon. “My immediate answer is ‘No. We do not.'” Instead, the JAIC is very deliberately starting with relatively low-risk, non-lethal projects — predicting breakdowns in helicopter engines and mapping natural disasters — before moving on to combat-related functions such as intelligence analysis and targeting next year. On the Pentagon's timeline, AI will be coming to command posts before it is embedded in actual weapons, and even then the final decision to use lethal force will always remain in human hands. The standard term in the Pentagon now for human involvement with AI and weapons now is “human on the loop,” a shift from human IN the loop. That reflects greater stress on the advisory function of humans with AI and a recognition that domains like cyber require almost instantaneous responses that can't wait for a human. Hawkish skeptics say slowing down to ask human permission could cripple US robots against their less-restrained Russian or Chinese counterparts. Dovish skeptics say this kind of human control would be too easily bypassed. Shanahan does see a role for AI in applying lethal force once that human decision is made. “I'm not going to go straight to ‘lethal autonomous weapons systems,'” he said, “but I do want to say we will use artificial intelligence in our weapons systems... to give us a competitive advantage. It's to save lives and help deter war from happening in the first place.” The term “lethal autonomous weapons systems” was popularized by the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, which seeks a global ban on all AI weapons. Shanahan made clear his discomfort with formal arms control measures, as opposed to policies and international norms, which don't bind the US in the same way. “I'll be honest with you,” Shanahan said. “I don't like the term, and I do not use the term, ‘arms control' when it comes to AI. I think that's unhelpful when it comes to artificial intelligence: It's largely a commercial technology,” albeit with military applications. “I'm much more interested, at least as a starting point, in international rules and norms and behavior,” he continued. (Aside from the space is governed almost exclusively “It's extremely important to have those discussions.” “This is the ultimate human decision that needs to be made....nuclear command and control,” he said. “We have to be very careful. Knowing ...the immaturity of technology today, give us a lot of time to test and evaluate.” “Can we use artificial intelligence to make better decisions, to make more informed judgments about what might be happening, to reduce the potential for civilian casualties or collateral damage?” Shanahan said. “I'm an optimist. I believe you can. It will not eliminate it, never. It's war; bad things are going to happen.” While Shanahan has no illusions about AI enabling some kind of cleanly surgical future conflict, he doesn't expect a robo-dystopia, either. “The hype is a little dangerous, because it's uninformed most of the time, and sometimes it's a Hollywood-driven killer robots/Terminator/SkyNet worst case scenario,” he said. “I don't see that worst case scenario any time in my immediate future.” “I'm very comfortable saying our approach — even though it is emerging technology, even though it unfolds very quickly before our eyes — it will still be done in a deliberate and rigorous way so we know what we get when we field it,” Shanahan said. “As the JAIC director, I'm focused on really getting to the fielding,” he said, moving AI out of the lab into the real world — but one step at a time. “We're always going to start with limited narrow use cases. Say, can we take some AI capability and put it in a small quadcopter drone that will make it easier to clear out a cave, [and] really prove that it works before we ever get it to a [large] scale production.” “We will have a very clear understanding of what it can do and what it can't do,” he said. “That will be through experimentation, that will be through modeling and simulation, and that will be in wargames. We've done that with every piece of technology we've ever used, and I don't expect this to be any different.” The JAIC is even looking to hire an in-house ethicist of sorts, a position Shanahan has mentioned earlier but sought to clarify today. “It'll be someone who's a technical standards [expert] / ethicist,” he said. “As we develop the models and algorithms... they can look at that make sure the process is abiding by our rules of the road.” “I'm also interested in, down the road, getting some help from the outside on sort of those deeper philosophical questions,” he continued. “I don't focus on them day to day, because of my charter to field now, but it's clear we have to be careful about this.” “I do not see that same approach in Russia or China,” Shanahan said. “What sets us apart is... our focus on real rigor in test and evaluation, validation and verification, before we field capability that could have lives at stake.” https://breakingdefense.com/2019/09/no-ai-for-nuclear-command-control-jaics-shanahan