Back to news

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/

On the same subject

  • Air Force Eyes Drones For Adversary And Light Attack Roles As It Mulls Buying New F-16s

    January 25, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Air Force Eyes Drones For Adversary And Light Attack Roles As It Mulls Buying New F-16s

    The future of the U.S. Air Force's tactical aircraft fleet is under review, with some radical ideas under discussion. BY THE WAR ZONE STAFF JANUARY 22, 2021 The U.S. Air Force is in the midst of a major review of its tactical aircraft fleets. This includes investigating the possibility of using drones equipped with the artificial intelligence-driven systems being developed under the Skyborg program as red air adversaries during training, and potentially in the light attack role. The service is also exploring a potential purchase of new F-16 fighter jets, likely based on the Block 70/72 variant, two decades after the service ordered its last Vipers as it shifted focus to the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter. In an interview with Steve Trimble, Aviation Week's Defense Editor and good friend of The War Zone, earlier this month, which you can find here, now-former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, Will Roper, provided insight into the ongoing tactical aircraft review, including particularly intriguing comments about forthcoming unmanned aircraft system programs and buying additional F-16s. These and other ideas are being scrutinized as the service looks toward its Fiscal Year 2023 budget request, which, barring any complications, would be unveiled in the spring of 2022. Roper had been the chief architect and advocate of the Air Force's Skyborg program, which the service revealed in 2019, and is developing a suite of new autonomous capabilities for unmanned aircraft with a heavy focus on artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. The service has said that the goal is to first integrate these technologies into lower-cost loyal wingman type drones designed to work together with manned aircraft, but that this new “computer brain” might eventually control fully-autonomous unmanned combat air vehicles, or UCAVs. The Skyborg effort has been heavily linked to other Air Force programs that are exploring unmanned aircraft designs that are “attritable.” This means that they would be cheap enough for commanders to be more willing to operate these drones in riskier scenarios where there might be a higher than average probability of them not coming back. With this in mind, Skyborg technology has previously been seen as ideal for unmanned aircraft operating in higher-threat combat environments. However, in the interview with Aviation Week, Roper suggested that they might also first serve in an adversary role. In this way, these unmanned aggressors would test combat aircrew, either standing in for swarms of enemy drones or conducting the kinds of mission profiles for which an autonomous control system would be better suited. As the proliferation of advanced drone capabilities continues, adversary drone training systems will become a pressing capability. Even using drones to stand in for or augment manned adversary platforms is one of the potential solutions to the problem of needing far more targets in the air at one time to stress fleet pilots. Operating huge fleets of manned adversaries is highly cost-prohibitive. For example, Air Combat Command shortlisted seven companies for a combined total of $6.4 billion of potential aggressor contract work in 2019; details of the first five bases to receive this support were revealed last year, as The War Zone reported at the time. Other solutions, including augmented reality, are being looked at to solve this problem, as well. You can read more about this issue in this past exclusive of ours. “I think, at a minimum, attritables ought to take on the adversary air mission as the first objective,” Roper said. “We pay a lot of money to have people and planes to train against that do not go into conflict with us. We can offload the adversary air mission to an artificially intelligent system that can learn and get better as it's doing its mission.” Roper's specific mention here of attritable drones is interesting and could perhaps hint that the manned aircraft they would battle with might, at least on some occasions, also shoot them down. If that were to become a reality, it would provide pilots with a highly realistic element to their training that would potentially be far more valuable than the relatively “canned” type of live-fire gunnery or missile firing that they are exposed to today. The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) is already in the midst of an effort, separate from Skyborg, to develop an autonomous unmanned aircraft that uses AI-driven systems with the goal of having it duel with a human pilot in an actual fighter jet by 2024. Roper also clearly sees the use of drones equipped with the Skyborg suite of systems as a potential way to bring down the cost of the entire red air training enterprise, reducing the requirement to procure more expensive manned aircraft and teach the instructors required to fly them. Beyond cost-saving, however, there is still a demand for higher-end red air capabilities, especially stealthy ones, that contractors can't really provide. This is one of the reasons why early-model F-35s have been chosen to equip a future aggressor squadron. While this will go some way to meeting the demand for advanced threat simulation, it is likely to be a limited and costly fleet. Stealthy, but attritable drones, such as the XQ-58 Valkyrie, would certainly be a possibility for adding additional capacity here at a lower cost. As well as training the human elements, introducing Skyborg-enabled drones into large-force exercises would also help train them, enhancing their own AI algorithms, and building up their capabilities before going into battle for real. Essentially, algorithms need to be tested repeatedly to make sure they are functioning as intended, as well as for the system itself to build up a library of sorts of known responses to inputs. Furthermore, “training” Skyborg-equipped drones in this way in red air engagements inherently points to training them for real air-to-air combat. Air-to-air combat isn't the only frontline role the Air Force is eying for drones carrying the Skyborg suite. “I think there are low-end missions that can be done against violent extremists that should be explored,” Roper said. This opens up the possibility that lower-cost unmanned aircraft using AI-driven systems could help the Air Force finally adopt a light attack platform after more than a decade of abortive efforts in this regard. Despite initial plans to buy hundreds of aircraft, the service dramatically scaled back its most recent attempt, known as the Light Attack Aircraft program, in 2019. U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) subsequently tried to revive the project, but Congress blocked that effort in its annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2021 Fiscal Year. So, there remains a requirement for a light attack platform that could potentially be filled by an advanced unmanned alternative. In the meantime, the Air Force had also attempted to cease buying MQ-9 Reaper drones, which currently undertake many of these types of lower-end combat missions, but this was ultimately blocked by Congress, too. Still, close air support (CAS) is a mission that still benefits hugely from a human in the cockpit. As such, the exact capability set of a semi-autonomous drone, in this regard, may be limited. One could imagine giving the targeting control directly to those the drone is tasked with supporting on the ground though. This could compress the kill-chain and help with providing CAS in contested environments where a stealthy and attritable airframe may be overtly beneficial. Just such a concept was floated by the then Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh, who described it as “a flying Coke machine.” You can read all about that in this past article of ours. Roper had also indicated in his interview that perhaps the cost-savings from using drones in the adversary role might free up funds to otherwise address the light attack issue, as well as other needs the Air Force might have. Replacing “adversary air [with attritable unmanned aircraft] would save us money up front,” Roper explained. With regards to manned tactical aircraft, Roper also revealed in the interview that the Air Force is looking at new purchases of F-16s. “As you look at the new F-16 production line in South Carolina, that system has some wonderful upgraded capabilities that are worth thinking about as part of our capacity solution,” he said. Roper was almost certainly referring to the latest Block 70/72 variants of the F-16C/D that Lockheed Martin has been successfully selling on the export market in recent years. The company also offers an upgrade package to bring existing Vipers up to a similar configuration, known as the F-16V. In September 2020, the defense giant announced plans to standardize its F-16 offerings around a base model derived from the Block 70/72 configuration, which you can read about more in this past War Zone piece. New Vipers based on this standardized model are what the Air Force would likely be looking to buy in Fiscal Year 2023 or beyond. The latest Block 70/72 jets are already highly capable, featuring sophisticated avionics, mission systems, active electronically scanned array radar, extended range, and a digital electronic warfare suite. In the meantime, the Air Force is working hard to wring the most out of existing F-16 inventory, updating many with the Scalable Agile Beam Radar (SABR) and the new electronic warfare package from the Block 70/72. Full article : https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38847/air-force-eyes-drones-for-adversary-and-light-attack-roles-as-it-mulls-buying-new-f-16s

  • Researchers Uncover PyPI Packages Stealing Keystrokes and Hijacking Social Accounts

    December 25, 2024 | International, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Researchers Uncover PyPI Packages Stealing Keystrokes and Hijacking Social Accounts

    PyPI packages "Zebo" and "Cometlogger" downloaded 280+ times, exfiltrate data with obfuscation and anti-detection.

  • ‘Major Milestone’ As Allies Join SPACECOM’s War Plan

    May 22, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval

    ‘Major Milestone’ As Allies Join SPACECOM’s War Plan

    "The hesitation to include allies in Olympic Defender was on our end as well," says Secure World Foundation's Brian Weeden. "National security space is sort of the last bastion of America's 'crown jewels'." By THERESA HITCHENSon May 21, 2020 at 5:50 PM WASHINGTON: A number of US allies may now join Space Command in the US military's baseline plan for protecting and defending satellites during war, Operation Olympic Defender, we hear, following in the footsteps of the first country to sign up, the United Kingdom. SPACECOM today announced its leader, Gen. Jay Raymond, has signed the first order under OOD in his capacity as head of the combatant command. OOD is the US military's operational plan for protecting and defending US and allied satellites in conflict. “This is a major milestone for the newly established command,” Raymond said. “As the threats in the space domain continue to evolve, it is important we leverage and synchronize capabilities with our allies not only to understand each other's national perspectives, but to work seamlessly together to optimize our multinational space efforts.” Strategic Command created OOD in 2013 as the foundational plan for how the military will protect and defend US and allied satellites in a conflict. As Breaking D readers know, OOD was updated in 2018 to open up allied participation. “The purpose of OOD is to strengthen allies' abilities to deter hostile acts in space, strengthen deterrence against hostile actors, and reduce the spread of debris orbiting the earth,” the SPACECOM release explains. OOD is only one of a number of operational plans for space war Raymond has been working on since SPACECOM was established as a geographic command with an area of responsibility (AOR) 100 kilometers above sea level and up to infinity. He told reporters yesterday that he last week inked the new “campaign plan” for SPACECOM's day-to-day operations; every Combatant Command has such a campaign plan; this will be SPACECOM's first. “That's our foundational plan, if you will,” Raymond explained, “that drives our day-to-day activities across the command of SPACECOM.” In addition, SPACECOM now has responsibility for developing, updating and enacting when the ball drops specialized contingency plans for space war, mapped to specific adversary countries. Former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter back in 2016 set the precedent, naming Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as the key strategic challengers to the US military. SPACECOM's announcement today also noted that the United Kingdom was the first ally to publicly acknowledge this past July its participation in OOD. London subsequently sent additional personnel to Combined Space Operations Center (CSpOC) and the 18th Space Control Squadron at Vandenberg AFB to support its decision, SPACECOM added. CSpOC is responsible for command and control of day-to-day space operations and includes allies representation. The 18th Space Control Squadron is responsible for space domain awareness operations. Up to now, many allies were leery of signing up due to the fact that space operations were being commanded by STRATCOM, which also oversees US nuclear war planning. Public opinion in many US allies, such as Germany and Italy, traditionally has been strongly anti-nuclear. It is not by chance that even the UK, which had joined OOD under STRATCOM's control, kept its participation silent until now. “Some of those same concerns were initially raised about having USSTRATCOM be the lead agency for signing SSA data sharing agreements with other countries,” noted Brian Weeden, head of program planning at Secure World Foundation and a former Air Force officer who worked on space situational awareness operations at STRATCOM. “But the hesitation to include allies in Olympic Defender was on our end as well,” Weeden added. “National security space is sort of the last bastion of America's “crown jewels” and there are a lot of people in that community who are very reluctant to open the kimono to our allies, even the allies who we've been deeply collaborating on intelligence sharing for decades.” DoD and expert sources say interest in participation in space war planning has increased not just because of SPACECOM's standup, but also because concerns about Russian and Chinese efforts to build up their military space capabilities. Indeed, NATO in December declared space an operational domain of joint allied action — albeit insisted that this does not mean NATO endorses space weaponization. France last summer adopted an aggressive space strategy, including pursuit of offensive anti-satellite weapons. Japan on May 19 announced its new Space Operations Squadron, under the Japanese Air-Self Defense Force, to monitor and protect Japanese satellites. For example, the number of countries signing SSA agreements with DoD has jumped to 25, with Peru signing a memorandum of understanding with SPACECOM just last week to gain access to data about space objects collected by the military's Space Surveillance Network of radar and optical telescopes, as well as data to help the country's satellites avoid on-orbit collisions. “This agreement will give Peru access to the highest quality satellite tracking data available to assist them with PerúSat-1 and its eventual follow-on and will provide a linkage to the experts at the 18th Space Control Squadron. In addition, the SSA Agreement enables Peru to request seven advanced services available only to agreement holders,” SPACECOM said in a May 12 announcement. Spain, France and Italy — all of which operate military satellites — have expressed interest in participating in OOD, we are told. Besides the UK, the other members of the so-called “Five Eyes” — Australia, Canada and New Zealand — who already shared intelligence with the US are expected to join in. Although Germany has been hesitant to be seen as pro-space weapons, Berlin has a sophisticated military space program and is unlikely to stay outside of operational planning if rival France joins in. Japan too can be expected to sign on, as it has been seeking myriad ways to be more active in partnering with the US military on space protection — including agreeing to host US military payloads on Japanese satellites. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/major-milestone-as-allies-join-spacecoms-war-plan

All news