August 10, 2020 | International, Aerospace
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force has concluded a two-day, $1.4 million exercise that evaluated the F-35 fighter jet's ability to provide its electronic warfare capabilities to other stealthy reconnaissance and bombing platforms.
The event, which took place Aug. 4-6 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, tested the ability for the F-35 to provide Suppression of Enemy Air Defense, or SEAD, support for other stealthy platforms such as the B-2 and the RQ-170 reconnaissance drone, according to an Aug. 6 news release from the Air Force.
Maj. Theodore Ellis, chief of 53rd Wing Weapons, said the exercise focused on demonstrating stealth platform effectiveness against advanced threats using emerging technology and capitalizing on joint capabilities.
Other platforms that participated included the F-22, the F-15 and the Navy's E/A-18G aircraft. Some aspects of the scenario tested these fourth- and fifth-generation platforms' joint and coalition SEAD integration. Other scenarios focused on how the latest fourth-gen electronic capabilities could increase fifth-gen freedom of maneuver, and vice versa, in contested environments, the Air Force said.
U.S. adversaries over the past several years have developed advanced radars to detect incoming aircraft, pairing them with long-range missiles that in many cases outgun U.S. military weapons.
The event allowed the Air Force to explore the integration of tactics, techniques and procedures that have never been tested together.
“Through events like these, we continue to improve our joint 4th and 5th generation tactics, which enhances our abilities in an advanced threat environment,” Ellis said.
Events like this are the prime movers to test and evaluate emerging capabilities and technologies — as opposed to training and readiness — with an operationally realistic scenario.
“The investment and trust in our team allowed the 53 Wing to evaluate the interoperability of leading-edge capabilities and develop [tactics, techniques and procedures] that will ultimately strengthen our nation's air dominance,” said Col. Bill Creeden, commander of the 53rd Test and Evaluation Group.
“We fight as an integrated force which means we need to test and evaluate our latest capabilities as an integrated force. Put simply, our job is to inform, develop, and deliver, from idea to premeditated violence, an integrated tactical advantage to the Combat Air Force for both tonight, and tomorrow's potential fight. [Large Force Test Events] are a primary enabling effort to make this happen.”
March 17, 2021 | International, Aerospace
Lockheed Martin received its first F-16 from the U.S. Air Force as part of the $900 million IDIQ contract to provide sustainment support and depot-overflow services for F-16 aircraft.
July 8, 2024 | International, Security
Unpatched Gogs Git service flaws pose severe security risks, enabling attackers to breach and manipulate code.
January 8, 2019 | International, Land, C4ISR
by Kris Osborn The Army is engineering new AI-enabled Hostile Fire Detection sensors for its fleet of armored combat vehicles to identify, track and target incoming enemy small arms fire. This system, integrated onto Apache Attack helicopters, uses infrared sensors to ID a “muzzle flash” or heat signature from an enemy weapon. The location of enemy fire could then be determined by a gateway processor on board the helicopter able to quickly geolocate the attack. The Army is engineering new AI-enabled Hostile Fire Detection sensors for its fleet of armored combat vehicles to identify, track and target incoming enemy small arms fire. Even if the enemy rounds being fired are from small arms fire and not necessarily an urgent or immediate threat to heavily armored combat vehicles such as an Abrams, Stryker or Bradley, there is naturally great value in quickly finding the location of incoming enemy small arms attacks, Army weapons developers explain. There are a range of sensors now being explored by Army developers; infrared sensors, for example, are designed to identify the “heat” signature emerging from enemy fire and, over the years, the Army has also used focal plane array detection technology as well as acoustic sensors. “We are collecting threat signature data and assessing sensors and algorithm performance,” Gene Klager, Deputy Director, Ground Combat Systems Division, Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate, told Warrior Maven in an interview last year. Klager's unit, which works closely with Army acquisition to identify and at times fast-track technology to war, is part of the Army's Communications, Electronics, Research, Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC). Army senior leaders also told Warrior Maven the service will be further integrating HFD sensors this year, in preparation for more formals testing to follow in 2019. Enabling counterattack is a fundamental element of this, because being able to ID enemy fire would enable vehicle crews to attack targets from beneath the protection of an armored hatch. The Army currently deploys a targeting and attack system called Common Remotely Operated Weapons System, or CROWS; using a display screen, targeting sensors and controls operating externally mounted weapons, CROWS enables soldiers to attack from beneath the protection of armor. “If we get a hostile fire detection, the CROWS could be slued to that location to engage what we call slue to cue,” Klager said. Much of the emerging technology tied to these sensors can be understood in the context of artificial intelligence, or AI. Computer automation, using advanced algorithms and various forms of analytics, can quickly process incoming sensor data to ID a hostile fire signature. “AI also takes other information into account and helps reduce false alarms,” Klager explained. AI developers often explain that computer are able to much more efficiently organize information and perform key procedural functions such as performing checklists or identifying points of relevance; however, many of those same experts also add that human cognition, as something uniquely suited to solving dynamic problems and weighing multiple variables in real time, is nonetheless something still indispensable to most combat operations. Over the years, there have been a handful of small arms detection technologies tested and incorporated into helicopters; one of them, which first emerged as something the Army was evaluating in 2010 is called Ground Fire Acquisition System, or GFAS. This system, integrated onto Apache Attack helicopters, uses infrared sensors to ID a “muzzle flash” or heat signature from an enemy weapon. The location of enemy fire could then be determined by a gateway processor on board the helicopter able to quickly geolocate the attack. While Klager said there are, without question, similarities between air-combat HFD technologies and those emerging for ground combat vehicles, he did point to some distinct differences. “From ground to ground, you have a lot more moving objects,” he said. Potential integration between HFD and Active Protection Systems is also part of the calculus, Klager explained. APS technology, now being assessed on Army Abrams tanks, Bradleys and Strykers, uses sensors, fire control technology and interceptors to ID and knock out incoming RPGs and ATGMs, among other things. While APS, in concept and application, involves threats larger or more substantial than things like small arms fire, there is great combat utility in synching APS to HFD. Full article: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/armys-m1-abrams-tank-about-get-even-deadlier-40847