Back to news

April 26, 2023 | International, C4ISR

Space Force eyes ‘outernet’ for better data flow in orbit

A review of the satellite communications enterprise recommended a mix of commercial and government SATCOM networks.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2023/04/26/space-force-eyes-outernet-for-better-data-flow-in-orbit/

On the same subject

  • An ocean apart: Few naval vendors manage to pierce US and European protectionism

    January 15, 2019 | International, Naval

    An ocean apart: Few naval vendors manage to pierce US and European protectionism

    By: Tom Kington , Andrew Chuter , and Sebastian Sprenger ROME, LONDON and COLOGNE, Germany — The U.S. and European shipbuilding industries lead largely separate lives against the backdrop of a massive Asian naval buildup, but some trans-Atlantic projects still manage to thrive. The building of warships has always been a prime example of nations nurturing a highly specialized industry deemed so crucial that outside economic forces cannot be allowed to intervene. And while some European nations have begun to think about pooling shipbuilding forces on the continent, analysts and industry executives in Europe say the wall separating the U.S. and European naval markets remains high. Barring missile launchers and the Aegis combat management system, U.S. firms have not grabbed a large slice of naval work in Europe, and no change is on the horizon, according to Peter Roberts, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute in London. “Warships are historically linked to national power, and if you stop building them you are no longer seen as a great power — you are at the bidding of others,” Roberts said. “The Spanish, the British, the French — they haven't given up shipbuilding, even if they were better off buying off the shelf, and we are unlikely to see a reduction of yards in Europe,” he added. At the same time, the U.S. market has been relatively closed off to European shipbuilders, though there is a chance that could change somewhat with the Navy's Future Frigate program. “It's a bit like two different planets,” said Sebastian Bruns, head of the Institute for Security Policy at Kiel University in northern Germany. The reflex to buy only American-made warships is especially strong in the current political climate, he added. The sheer number of ships needed on each side of the Atlantic creates a natural differentiator, according to Bruns, who spent time working U.S. naval policy as a House staffer on Capitol Hill. He said the Navy tends to prefer no-frills designs made for maximum war-fighting power in a great powers competition, while Europeans have taken to building vessels with a kind of peace-maintenance role in mind, affording a greater level of automation and comfort for the crew, for example. One British naval executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the lack of trans-Atlantic industrial touch points wasn't limited to market access, arguing that cost-effectiveness was also an issue. “Despite the problems we have and the programs that don't go exactly according to plan ton for ton and capability for capability, the U.K. manages to build and deliver surface ships at a much lower cost than the United States,” he said. “The U.S. shipyards know they would have difficulty competing in the region, particularly if you are talking about yards that have built a good track record. Naval Group, Fincantieri, Damen Shipyards, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems — these are yards that have been competitive and build with export experience behind them. They are already ahead of the game and I do think it comes back to the cost base, I think it is difficult for the United States to build as cost-effectively as the Europeans,” the executive argued. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/01/14/an-ocean-apart-few-naval-vendors-manage-to-pierce-us-and-european-protectionism

  • USAF Picks Northrop Anti-Drone Defense System

    July 13, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    USAF Picks Northrop Anti-Drone Defense System

    The U.S. Defense Department has zeroed in on Northrop Grumman's anti-drone defense system for short-term use. The company's Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control (FAAD C2) system was chosen as the interim command and control system for future Counter-Small Unmanned Aerial System (C-sUAS) procurements, the company said in a statement Wednesday. The decision was taken by a board was comprised of representatives from the U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Special Operations Command, and senior representatives from the acquisition, technical, operational and other communities. FAAD C2 will serve as the current joint common C-sUAS C2 platform while a more permanent solution is developed. FAAD C2 system has also been selected as the C2 system for the Army's Initial Maneuver Short Range Air Defense (IM-SHORAD) platforms. FAAD-C2 is built on the open architecture common to the Northrop Grumman all-domain C4I solution ecosystem and will ultimately converge into the U.S. Army's Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS). https://www.defenseworld.net/news/27383#.XwyMMihKiUk

  • On the new battlefield, the Navy has to get software updates to the fleet within days, acquisition boss says

    September 26, 2018 | International, Naval, C4ISR

    On the new battlefield, the Navy has to get software updates to the fleet within days, acquisition boss says

    By: David B. Larter The Navy has to get software updates and patches to the fleet within days if it's going to win in the future, the Department of the Navy's acquisition boss said Sept. 25 at Modern Day Marine. James Geurts, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, acquisition and development, said the fleet has been working on the rapid development of software to get needed upgrades to the ships ahead of pier-side availabilities, a pace he said was too slow for the modern battlefield. “We recently did one of our proof-of-principles to say: ‘How do you take ... software, get it system certified, get it cyber certified then get it out over the airwaves, uploaded on to a ship and into the combat system in 24 hours,” Geurts said. “My view is unless we get to the point where I can identify a software requirement, whether it's an [artificial intelligence] algorithm or something, find the solution, get it checked out on the network, give it whatever cyber-proofing it needs and get it into the fight in less than a week, we are not going to be successful in the long run.” The Navy has increasingly found that its current systems are capable of adjusting to new threats through software upgrades rather than buying new systems and installing them, a time-consuming and cripplingly expensive process that has been the norm in years past. Geurts said the Navy had to have a software architecture that was amenable to rapid upgrades so that developers would not need to re-test the underlying architecture each time a patch or fix is uploaded. Furthermore, the service also has to develop cyber security standards that don't just weigh whether or not something can be compromised but begin to think of it more in terms of risks associated. “The answer isn't yes or no, it's ‘Commander here is your risk.' And then weigh the risk of doing that [upgrade] versus a potential cyber impact so that commanders can make reasonable command decisions. Because there is always a risk to not doing something. We often talk about the risk of doing something, we don't often talk about the risk of not doing it.” Geurts told a gaggle with reporters after the talk that he was not talking about uploading whole new programs that sailors might be unfamiliar with but more iterative upgrades. "Don't take that to an extreme to where we will load on something that nobody has ever seen before, but it could be that there is a particular issue or new need, and you can envision us testing and training that shore-side, making sure it's right – we don't want to wait for the ship to come home we could potentially blast that out [to the fleet.]" The Navy is also working more with having digital doppelgangers of its combat system on board its ships so that new technologies can be tested by the crew and commanders before its uploaded into the main combat system, a hedge against reaping unintended consequences by uploading a feature or patch without knowing exactly how it will fit into the ship's systems. "The other thing we are doing a lot with is digital twins, where [the ship] might have the combat system that it's fighting with as well as a digital twin,” Geurts explained. “So you might be able to upload that new feature in the digital twin so you could have both, then it's up to the commander whether it's something you adopt or not.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/digital-show-dailies/modern-day-marine/2018/09/25/on-the-new-battlefield-the-navy-has-to-get-software-updates-to-the-fleet-within-days-acquisition-boss-says

All news