December 16, 2024 | International, C4ISR, Security
Ukrainian Minors Recruited for Cyber Ops and Reconnaissance in Russian Airstrikes
Ukrainian security exposes Russian FSB's use of teens in espionage. Detained minors aided airstrikes.
July 27, 2020 | International, Land
Two Men & A Bot: Can AI Help Command A Tank?
Instead of a traditional three-man crew, Brig. Gen. Coffman told Breaking Defense, “you have two humans with a virtual crew member, [sharing] the functions of gunning, driving, and commanding.”
By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on July 27, 2020 at 7:00 AM
WASHINGTON: Field tests and computer models have convinced the Army that future armored vehicles can fight with just two human crew, assisted by automation, instead of the traditional three or more, the service's armor modernization chief told me.
That confidence drove the Army, in its draft Request For Proposals released on the 17th, to require a two-soldier crew for its future Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle. The OMFV is scheduled to enter service in 2028 to replace the Reagan-era M2 Bradley, which has the traditional trio of commander, gunner, and driver. (Both vehicles can also carry infantry as passengers, and the Army envisions the OMFV being operated by remote control in some situations).
The Army has already field-tested Bradleys modified to operate with a two-soldier crew instead of the usual three, said Brig. Gen. Richard Ross Coffman, the director of Army Futures Command's Cross Functional Team for Next Generation Combat Vehicles. “As we speak,” he told me in an interview last week, “we've got those Mission-Enabling Technology Demonstrators, or MET-D, actually maneuvering at Fort Carson, Colorado, as part of the Robotic Combat Vehicle test.”
With the benefit of modern automation, Coffman said, those two-soldier crews have proven able to maneuver around obstacles, look out for threats, and engage targets — without being overwhelmed by too many simultaneous demands. “They're doing that both in simulation and real world at Carson right now,” Coffman told me.
“You have two humans with a virtual crewmember that will remove cognitive load from the humans and allow the functions of gunning, and driving, and commanding the vehicle to be shared between humans and machines,” Coffman said. “We think that the technology has matured to the point where ...this third virtual crewmember will provide the situational awareness to allow our soldiers to fight effectively.”
The defense contractors who would have to build the vehicle – even if a government team designs it – aren't so sure. “A two-man crew will be overwhelmed with decision making, no matter how much AI is added,” one industry source told me.
A Persistent Dilemma
For at least eight decades, combat vehicle designers have faced a dilemma. A smaller crew allows a smaller vehicle, one that's cheaper, lighter, and harder to hit – and if it is hit, puts fewer lives at risk. But battlefield experience since 1940 has shown that smaller crews are easily overwhelmed by the chaos of combat. Historically, an effective fighting vehicle required a driver solely focused on the path ahead, a gunner solely focused on hitting the current target, and a commander looking in all directions for the next target to attack, threat to avoid, or path to take. (Many vehicles added a dedicated ammunition handler and/or radio operator as well).
A “virtual crewmember” could solve this dilemma — but will the technology truly be ready by the late 2020s?
The Army actually tackled this question just last year and came to the opposite conclusion. You see, the draft Request For Proposals released last week is the Army's second attempt to launch the OMFV program. In March 2019, the Army issued its original RFP for an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle. In most respects, the 2019 RFP was much more demanding than last week's draft: It wanted the vehicle in service two years earlier, in 2026 instead of 2028, and it had such stringent requirements for weight and amor protection that no company managed to meet them, leading the Army to start over. But for all its ambition in other aspects, the 2019 RFP did not mandate a two-person crew; that's a new addition for the 2020 version.
It's worth noting that just one company managed to deliver a prototype by the Army's original deadline in 2019: General Dynamics. They built their vehicle to operate with a crew of three – but with the option to go down to two as automation improved.
At the same time, the Army started experimenting with Robotic Combat Vehicles that had no human crew aboard at all. The long-term goal is to have a single soldier oversee a whole wolfpack of RCVs, but the current proto-prototypes are operated by remote control, with a crew of two: a gunner/sensor operator and a driver. The Army has been impressed by how well these teleoperated RCVs have performed in field trials. If two soldiers can effectively operate a vehicle they're not even in, might two be enough to operate a manned vehicle as well?
The other piece of the experimental RCV unit is the mothership, an M2 Bradley with its passenger cabin converted to hold the teleoperators and their workstations. These modified M2s, called MET-Ds, also operate with just two crewmembers, a gunner and a driver – without a separate commander – and, says Coffman, they've done so successfully in combat scenarios.
The Army is not just adding automation to individual vehicles. It's seeking to create combined units of manned and unmanned war machines that share data on threats and targets over a battlefield network, allowing them to work together as a seamless tactical unit that's far more than the sum of its parts. “This [vehicle] will not fight alone, but as part of a platoon, a company, a battalion,” Coffman said. “The shared situational awareness across that formation will transform the way we fight.”<
What Has Changed?
These ongoing experiments are the latest in a long series. “As far back as 1991, the Army was looking at reducing the number of crew members,” Coffman told me. “Back then, when I was just coming in the Army, the tech had not matured to the point that it would allow a two-person crew.”
But that was then, Coffman said. Three decades later, with the rise of the iPhone, Google Maps, and a booming business in artificial intelligence, the times and the technology have changed.
“Since then, our 360-degree situational awareness has vastly improved,” Coffman said. Instead of peering through periscopes, gunsights, and slit-like bulletproof windows – or just sticking their head out the hatch and hoping there're no snipers around – crews can look at wide-screen displays fed by multiple cameras and other sensors mounted all around their vehicle. Automated target recognition systems can analyze the sensor feeds in real time, identify potential threats and targets, alert the crew to their presence, and even automatically bring the main gun to bear. (The Army still requires a human decision to fire). Waypoint navigation algorithms, obstacle sensors, and automated collision avoidance routines can ease the task of maneuvering 40-plus-tons of metal around the battlefield.
Could all this technology unburden the human crew, allowing just two soldiers to operate a combat vehicle, instead of needing one solely focused on driving, a second solely focused on shooting, and a third giving direction to the other two? The Army now thinks so.
That said, the newly released Request for Proposal is a draft, being circulated specifically to get feedback on what's feasible. If too many companies say the two-person crew won't work, the Army can still change that requirement before the final RFP comes out next April.
“I think they are learning, through their experimentation, that it's a high-risk requirement,” one industry source told me. “However, I think it's like anything else involving technology: Given time — and money — it's achievable.”
https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/two-men-a-bot-can-ai-help-command-a-tank
On the same subject
-
-
June 18, 2019 | International, Aerospace
Army Buys 9,000 Mini-Drones, Rethinks Ground Robots
By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: This summer, Army soldiers will deploy to Afghanistan with air support literally in the palm of their hands: the 1.16-ounce Black Hornetmini-drone. New ground robots are entering service too, next year — not to fight but to haul supplies, at least at first — but field tests have convinced the Army to issue these often-cumbersome mechanical mules to specialists and only loan them to frontline troops as needed. By contrast, soldiers are so consistently and unequivocally enthused about the mini-drones that the Army is buying 9,000 systems — each with two drones — over three years to issue to its smallest and historically most vulnerable units, nine-man infantry squads. The mini-drone and larger robots are all part of a wider revolution in the long-suffering infantry, a revolution sparked in large measure by former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. The Marines, Mattis's old service, have issued upgraded 5.56 mm rifles and are adding a specialized drone operator to every rifle squad. The Army is going much farther, developing new 6.8 mm rifles, high-tech targeting goggles, virtual-reality training, and, of course, robots. Now, none of these unmanned systems is truly autonomous, so they require a human to run them by remote control, which in turn requires a functioning battlefield network that hasn't been shut down by enemy jamming. The FLIR Black Hornet has a lot of automated functions and only flies short missions, so you don't need a soldier babysitting it all the time. Ground robots, however, require much more oversight, because they have to avoid rocks, bogs, tree stumps, and other obstacles that no unmanned air vehicle has to worry about and that artificial-vision software still struggles to spot. The Army is eager to improve the technology so that, instead of one soldier remote-controlling one robot, they can have one soldier overseeing a largely autonomous swarm. But even today's limited autonomy allows for big changes on the battlefield. The palmtop Black Hornet — dubbed Soldier-Borne Sensor (SBS) by the Army — is already in the hands (literally) of a brigade of the elite 82nd Airborne that's about to deploy to Afghanistan. The second unit scheduled to get the mini-drone, starting this fall, is the 1st Security Force Assistance Brigade, which has already served in Afghanistan. For the first time, a squad leader will have the ability to scout ahead by air before exposing human soldiers on the ground. The SBS has sensor options for both night and day, and it can fly about 20 minutes before needing to recharge. But the squad-level mini-drone is just the entry model. Larger units will get larger, more capable, but also more expensive and more maintenance-hungry drones. “Our vision is every echelon has unmanned aerial systems,” said Don Sando, civilian deputy to the commander of the Army's infantry and armor centerat Fort Benning, Ga. “The question is, how many?” While squads get the Black Hornet SBS, platoons will get the slightly larger Short-Range Reconnaissance (SRR) drone, Sando and other Army officials told reporters in a conference call last week. A series of tests this month, September, and January will whittle six SRR competitors down to one that will enter service in April 2020. The winner must weigh three pounds or less, fly for 30 minutes, and be able to “perch and stare,” landing in a vantage point overlooking a target area so it can keep watch without burning through its flight time. Companies will stick with the current RQ-11 Raven, which is still small enough that soldiers launch it by picking it up and throwing it. Battalions currently use the Raven as well, but the Army plans to develop a new Long-Range Reconnaissance drone for them to use. The LRR isn't an official program yet, however. Brigades currently have the RQ-7 Shadow, but that aging system needs a catapult to launch and a runway to land. It will be replaced by the Future Tactical Unmanned Aerial System (FTUAS), which takes off and lands vertically like a mini-helicopter, starting in 2021. Divisions currently use the Grey Eagle, a variant of the venerable Predator, but the Army is experimenting with potential Advanced UAS drones to replace it too. Ground Bots For Some The Army is also fielding ground robots, but these machines are still much clumsier and harder to work with than aerial drones, so they're being issued only to specialist units. That includes what was formerly called the SquadMultipurpose Equipment Transport but is now renamed the Small Multipurpose Equipment Transport, because it's not going to belong to an individual squad. The SMET, by either name, is still a small unmanned ground vehicle, about the size of a golf cart, designed to trundle along with the foot troops, hauling supplies and gear like an old-fashioned pack mule. It must carry 1,000 pounds of supplies and gear over 60 miles in 72 hours, trundling along with foot troops, and provide three kilowatts of power to recharge batteries for night vision goggles, radios, and other electronics. Four competitors remain in contention: the Polaris MRZR, Howe & Howe Grizzly, HDT Wolf, and General Dynamics MUTT. “They're all viable candidates. They all met the standards of range, offloading power, silent watch capability, payload carrying,” Sando said. “Soldier feedback on all of them was very comparable with regard to what missions they're good for — and what conditions they're not appropriate for.” The Army plans to field the winner starting next year to selected training centers, combat brigades, and support companies — but not infantry squads. “We found out in the operational tech demonstration [that] it can best be supported now at the battalion level,” Sando said, which is the lowest echelon of an infantry unit to include technical specialists such as a heavy weapons company. The Army's objective is to incorporate the new technologies without adding personnel to take care of them. The issue with SMET is not just the maintenance the robots require — though that can be a large burden for a squad of nine — but also their limited mobility. “There are places where we ask our soldiers to go where nothing else can go... jungle terrain, steep embankments, water, and dense urban environments,” Sando said. “There are areas soldiers can walk and crawl and climb that we just couldn't put a vehicle of this size with them.” The SMET remains very useful for long marches with heavy loads, the bane of infantry soldiers increasingly overburdened by body armor, ammunition, and electronics. Being able to recharge gear from the robot instead of carrying several days' worth of batteries for every item of equipment is itself a significant reduction in weight. Future SMET variants, Sando said, might carry long-range sensors, communications relays, or even weapons. But when foot troops have to go places you can only go on foot, they need to be able to leave the robot vehicles behind and let someone else take care of them. By contrast, Sando said, “the Soldier-Borne Sensor is smaller than a pack of cigarettes, [so] I can use it when I need it, I can put it back.” https://breakingdefense.com/2019/06/army-buys-9000-mini-drones-for-squads-rethinks-ground-robots-for-2020/
-
October 21, 2024 | International, C4ISR, Security
THN Cybersecurity Recap: Top Threats, Tools and News (Oct 14 - Oct 20)
This week in cybersecurity: Hackers are getting smarter, but so are we! From macOS flaws to TrickMo Android trojans, here's what you need to know to s