Ukraine, Mideast conflicts place renewed pressure on Patriot units

On the same subject

• 

  August 6, 2020 | International, C4ISR

  Israel increases training via virtual battlefield center amid Hezbollah tensions

  By: Seth J. Frantzman Israeli Defense Forces have completed several exercises with a new Brigade and Battlegroup Mission Training Center. Tensions with Hezbollah in Lebanon have grown this month and the IDF officials say they face a constant threat of attacks and need to be prepared to respond. Virtual exercises enable a brigade's officers to train while not taking away resources from the field. The center is also part of a growing digitization effort to give more tools to the IDF during its multi-year Momentum plan that includes new networked technology. Lt. Col. Netanel Shamaka, commander of the Special Forces battalion of the Givati brigade, said the latest exercise used this new virtual combat system and it “enabled us to get an in-depth understanding of battlefield scenarios.” Two brigades have gone through the training in June and July, and up to eight more will go through by the end of the year. “The IDF's ability to improve and develop creates an atmosphere of initiative and innovation among the various combat ranks - which improves combat capability. The Givati Brigade is the first brigade to begin training in this way,” Shamaka said. Training took place at the Training Command Headquarters at the Julis base near Ashkelon. The B2MTC was developed by Elbit Systems. Upgraded twice with new capabilities, databases and after-action reports, the virtual simulator provides better coordination on the battlefield, according to Tal Cohen, senior director of land training and simulation at Elbit Systems. Virtual training centers, like the one the IDF uses, have been increasingly popular worldwide. Elbit points to its work with the Royal Netherland Army simulation center (SimCen). “Military operations are becoming increasingly complex, while large-scale exercise opportunities occur less frequently due to cost, logistics and environmental constraints. Elbit Systems' new trainer provides Armed Forces with a flexible and scalable solution to train commanders,” according to Elbit Systems. The Givati brigade is usually deployed in southern Israel opposite the Gaza frontier. “The training prepared us for battle from a different angle. we will implement this on the battlefield on the day of command,” Shamaka said. Israel has faced tensions with Hamas in Gaza over the last years, including more than 1,500 rockets fired and clashes along the border, incidents at sea and involving drones. In addition, on July 23 Israel boosted ground forces along the Lebanese border over concerns about escalation with Hezbollah. Israel is also involved in a multi-year campaign to confront Iranian elements in Syria and around the region. This complex battlefield, using 5th generation F-35s and the latest air defense, with more concentration on special forces is suited to virtual training because modern commanders have more technology at their fingertips and face larger challenges dealing with systems that involve artificial intelligence and algorithms to aid in battle management. During the recent training soldiers experienced fighting in simulated urban terrain fortified by Hezbollah. The simulators are divided along the lines of a brigade, with command rooms and platoon leaders and company commanders and exercises continuing for several days. Replicas of Lebanese villages appear on screens with the threatsthat the soldiers would encounter, such as Hezbollah bunkers. The system documents failures in the field and virtual casualties inflicted to help units learn from mistakes. Because the IDF's Momentum plan foresees bringing as many capabilities to the front as quickly as possible during a conflict, this digital battlefield aids in improving coordination. It is supposed to close gaps between battalion and company levels as well without eliminating traditional field exercises. Cohen says recent upgrades mean the simulator gives more than 100 officers from company to brigade level access to peripheral units, logistics, UAVs, helicopters, artillery, aircraft and all the other combined arms and elements that may be present on the battlefield. That means that pilots have the opportunity to sit in the same room on the virtual trainer behind a screen and then meet with their company commander counterparts for after action discussions that wouldn't necessarily take place in a field exercise. With Hezbollah tensions overshadowing training this July, the virtual exercise mimicked real-world challenges. “The virtual exercise was designed and generated to take place on the Lebanese border, in the Northern region of Israel. Facing the constant threat of attacks from Hezbollah, the IDF needs to be prepared to respond accordingly,” Shamaka said. “Should there be a need to destroy Hezbollah's infrastructure in Lebanon, we must be able to maneuver in a populated and complex environment. This virtual simulation system provides personnel with experience and familiarizes them with the hostile environment they would need to face in the case of conflict.” In the past Israel faced challenges in the 2006 war because of communications problems between units and dealing with Hezbollah fighters dug-in to the rural terrain and rocket fire near villages. Maj. Gen. Yoel Strick, ground forces commander of the IDF since 2019 and a key part of the Momentum multi-year changes, has been pushing for increased use of the virtual simulators, Cohen said. Elbit expects an expansion of training next year. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/27/israel-increases-training-via-virtual-battlefield-center-amid-hezbollah-tensions

• 

  March 2, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  Musk Tells USAF Fighter Era Is Over

  Lee Hudson ORLANDO, Florida—Billionaire entrepreneur and SpaceX founder Elon Musk has told the U.S. Air Force the fighter era is over. “The really dangerous future” is autonomous drone warfare, Musk said Feb. 28 during the annual Air Warfare Symposium here. Musk said he does not necessarily like this idea but it will become reality. Another controversial opinion he offered is that the Lockheed Martin F-35 should have a competitor. A few hours after his presentation, Musk elaborated on Twitter: “The competitor should be a drone fighter plane that's remote controlled by a human, but with its maneuvers augemented by autonomy. The F-35 would have no chance against it.” Over the next five years, artificial intelligence will be the most transformative technology to shape the space industry, Musk says. Accordingly, he encourages young people to study physics and computer science. The Pentagon continues to invest in this technology and is proposing that a substantial amount of its research and development dollars go toward artificial intelligence. Musk warns if the U.S. does not invest heavily in space it will fall behind adversaries, but said establishing a Space Force is a step in the right direction. The nation must rapidly innovate and instill the idea that failure is acceptable, he added. If the U.S. military does not let its people innovate and fail, Musk cautions, the nation may fall behind when developing future technology. For example, when SpaceX developed its Starlink constellation it started manufacturing satellites while still evolving the design. This helped the team discover what parts were difficult to build and redesign those sections for easier production. https://aviationweek.com/shows-events/air-warfare-symposium/musk-tells-usaf-fighter-era-over

• 

  June 27, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

  ‘We need to be impatient’: Estonia’s No. 2 defense official dives into NATO priorities

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON ― As a border state with Russia, Estonia is well aware it is ground zero for any potential conflict between Moscow and NATO. The country is hitting the target of spending 2 percent of gross domestic product on defense, as requested by the alliance, and it is trying to modernize and build up its military capabilities. But like many nations in Europe, Estonia faces tough budgetary realities. Jonatan Vseviov, the permanent secretary of the Estonian Ministry of Defence, serves as the point man in directing those investments ― and per local news reports, he is on the short list to be the next ambassador to the United States. He talked to Defense News about those issues, as well as cyber challenges, during a June visit to Washington. I want to start with the big picture. Estonia is going to the summit in a couple of weeks. What are some of the priorities you are looking at? NATO is the cornerstone of our security. We expect a lot, not only from this summit but from NATO in general. NATO has been doing a lot of good work on defense and deterrence, bolstering up its presence in the Baltic states as well as in other regions in the eastern part of the alliance. I think that work needs to continue, and we expect a good number of decisions from the summit regarding the readiness of alliance forces, regarding reinforcement, the ability of the alliance to reinforce different regions. Obviously burden-sharing is going to be a key topic for NATO. We, as you might know, are one of the nations that contribute more than 2 percent of our GDP towards national defense. That is going to be a topic that will be discussed, I'm sure at length, at the summit. We are obviously aware of the fact that output is as important as input. And what I mean by that is that what you actually get for your defense dollars or euros is what, at the end of the day, matters. But there is no output without sufficient input. So both input and output are important. We need to be impatient. We need to ask for more and faster results. And we've been doing that for the past few years, and I think we are on the right track. One of the things that is expected to come out of the summit is standing up a new Atlantic Command. There's been a lot of talk about something along those lines for the Baltic. Where is Estonia on the idea of a Baltic command? And can it happen, given how NATO resources are always constrained? When it comes to, for instance, reinforcement, there are several key elements to that. One is the readiness of all forces. Military mobility, which has become a very famous topic, which is obviously crucially important not only for the Baltic states but for the alliance in general. Discussion on pre-positioning, for instance, as part of the overall military mobility issue. Planning and exercise: It's something that we often talk about in the context of defense and deterrence and then obviously also command structure. The NATO command structure has been and will be adapted to make it more fit for the time we're in right now. There is also NATO force structure, which is crucially important. We do expect to see a divisional level or two-star HQ that would concentrate on the Baltic states. Discussions are underway between us and the Latvians and Danes to set up what is known as a Multinational Division North to complement what Multinational Division North East in Poland is already doing, to complement what the NATO force structure in general, as well as the command structure, is doing. So I think our command structure needs to evolve as the challenges evolve, and as the forces that we have available for our defense evolve. I think we're on the right path; and the Multinational Division North ― not only is it necessary, it is also a decision that will come at a very, very right time. There are no silver bullets when it comes to security in general ― no silver bullets in policy and no silver bullets and capability. It's a complex picture, so we need to concentrate on alliance relationships. Part of your job is to figure out investments for the money you're spending ― the best way to build Estonian forces. What are some of the key investments that Estonia is making in the next couple years? And what are the areas that you're hoping to start investing in the next couple of years? Most of our procurement, a good portion of procurement, is relatively small stuff, but more than 20 percent [of defense spending] is major equipment. Some of the examples: We're mechanizing one of our battalions, which is a lengthy process. It started back in 2013 [and] will continue for the next few years. We are investing heavily in infrastructure not only for our own purposes but for the purposes of hosting allies. We are investing in ammunition. All of our acquisitions are targeted at making sure that we are not creating a hollow force. And the most important element of making sure that you don't have a hollow force is ammunition, whether you have it or you don't. So we're spending a lot out of our procurement budget on making sure that we actually have the ammunition for the weapon systems that we have in the armed forces. Self-propelled howitzers, one of the latest developments that we are about to procure together with Finland, which is a good example of a joint procurement. We spent a lot of money on intelligence early warning both within the military as well as within the civilian sector, and we're setting up a cyber command within the armed forces. We've been talking about cyber for a long time, we've been working on cyber. We are a very internet-dependent society, but only now are we creating a separate cyber command within the armed forces, so that will require additional investments. These are probably some of the key areas where we intend to spend our money on in the next few years. Since you mentioned it, let's talk cyber. If Estonia is known for anything worldwide, it might well be cyber capabilities. You're also home to the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. Where is NATO on cyber? Is it getting where it needs to be or lagging behind? How concerned should the allies be about where they stand on cyber? I think we should always be concerned when it comes to cyber, and this is a very fast, developing domain. During the summit in Warsaw, for instance, the heads of state and government declared cyber to be one of the domains in security. I think that was a very important decision. In theory, it could trigger Article 5 now. Well, there is a good level of what I would call “constructive ambiguity“ built into the wording of the Washington Treaty and also Article 5. So Article 5 is what we decide to be Article 5, and that is very useful. We don't want to give anybody a list of attacks that would trigger Article 5 because that would obviously mean that we automatically also create a list of potential attacks that would not trigger Article 5. Cyber is certainly a new domain. We are, I think, still scratching the surface of what it all means. It took us several years, perhaps even several decades, to think through, for instance, the air domain after airplanes arrived on the horizon and were used in major conflicts. We still didn't have an air force until, in most cases, in the late 1940s or 1950s. So it will take us time to figure out how best to operate, how best to organize ourselves in the cyber domain. What is certain, though, is that the government alone cannot defend the cyber society, if you will. And will require not only a whole-of-government but really a whole-of-society approach. And secondly, obviously, the physical borders do not matter in cyber. So national initiatives are important, but they are nothing if there is no international component to our efforts. So figuring out all of this, thinking through the legal aspects, the policy aspects, is one of the things that the center of excellence in Tallinn does. We're certain that we are again on the right path, in both NATO and the European Union, but I think it will take time for us to fully comprehend the best way to operate in this new domain. But how well, in your estimation, are the NATO allies integrating with cyber? I think there's still a long way to go. Cyber tends to be a very sensitive area for obvious reasons, oftentimes also harnessed within intelligence organizations. But we're making progress. There is more sharing, information sharing in NATO as well as between allies bilaterally, than there was a few years ago. So I think people are realizing that we need international cooperation; and without international cooperation, we simply cannot succeed in this new domain. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-priorities/2018/06/26/we-need-to-be-impatient-estonias-no-2-defense-official-dives-into-nato-priorities/