U.S. Air National Guard recommend fielding Leonardo’s BriteCloud 218 decoy after successfully completing an extensive US Defense Department test programme

On the same subject

• 

  December 30, 2022 | International, Aerospace

  New in 2023: Welcoming new airframes to the fleet

  The Air Force hopes to show off the B-21 Raider bomber's first flight in 2023 — though that target has been pushed back multiple times.

• 

  September 22, 2020 | International, Land, C4ISR

  Laying the groundwork: US Army unveils rough plan to formalize robotic combat vehicles effort

  Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is preparing to enter into programs of record for light- and medium-class robotic combat vehicles in a few years, with plans to award separate contracts for a lead systems integrator for each program, according to the service's robotic combat vehicles product manager. The service wants to field a light, medium and heavy robotic combat vehicle, and it is experimenting with technology and how the vehicles might fit into future formations through the Army's Next-Generation Combat Vehicle modernization office. Developing NGCV capability is the second-highest priority for the Army. The plan is to make a decision to move the Army's RCV-Light out of technical maturation and into the engineering and manufacturing development phase in the second quarter of fiscal 2023. The service would do the same with the RCV-Medium program in FY24, Lt. Col. Chris Orlowski said Sept. 10 during a conference hosted by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International. Orlowski noted that the potential RCV-Heavy program of record would fall behind the start of the medium and light programs by “a pretty significant margin.” At the same conference during a separate keynote presentation, Bruce Jette, the Army's acquisition chief, said decisions were made that “put pieces in place that will establish a formal program for robotic systems with the [program manager], not just following the tech base but in fact being the centerpiece for building light and medium systems inside of an architecture that fits within the entire operational vehicle architecture. In fact, it will leap over into the aircraft as well. It will be everything from driving to operations of the vehicle to visual sensing to probably a broader array of technical capabilities that you may not have even thought possible.” The Army plans to award a contract to a lead systems integrator that will combine the RCV's control station, network, platform, software and payloads, Orlowski said. Anticipated government-furnished equipment for the programs would include autonomy software, radios, war-fighter machine interface software, aided target recognition software and lethality payloads “minus the turret,” according to Orlowski. Other potential government-furnished equipment could be a tethered drone; assured position, navigation and timing technology; hostile fire detection; and other vehicle protection systems, he said. As the Army ventures into developing robotic vehicles that don't just do the dull, dirty and dangerous work, “the biggest thing is going to be software development, improving autonomous and automation software,” he added. “Teleoperation is nice; it works OK if you've got the right radios and the right environments, but long term, when those environments become tested, I think teleoperation will be less viable and we will have to really push the automation and autonomy on these platforms. But also, that being said, there is always going to have to be some soldier interaction with the platforms. How do we improve that interaction for the soldiers, reducing that cognitive burden?" he said. “I know everybody likes cool, big, awesome robots, but it's really a software thing that is going to make these things go, so anything that is kind of tied to software I think is a critical technology in my view,” he added. The Army's rough acquisition strategy for the robots calls for a first unit to receive RCV-Light vehicles in FY28 and a first unit to receive RCV-Medium in FY30, according to a slide from Orlowski's conference presentation. The Army recently wrapped up its first phase of experimentation with RCV-Heavy surrogates fashioned out of M113 armored personnel carriers at Camp Red Devil on Fort Carson, Colorado, which added complexity to an ongoing evaluation of the government-developed platforms. The Army also awarded contracts to a Textron and Howe & Howe team to build an RCV-Medium prototype, and to a QinetiQ North America and Pratt & Miller team to build the lighter version late last year and early this year. Those are being built now. Orlowski stressed those prototypes are being built “primarily to support future planned experimentation” in FY22 and FY24 and “in support of defining and informing requirements for the RCV program of record.” He added there is no plan to transition any of those systems into any type of limited fielding. “They are not designed for that. They are designed for a campaign of learning,” he said. Now that the first major experiment is done, the Army plans to build up to a company-level operation in the first quarter of FY22 at Fort Hood, Texas, with four RCV-Medium and four RCV-Light prototypes. While the experimentation at Fort Carson with RCV-Heavy was focused on cavalry operations where the robots served more in a scout mission and proved they could be effective in a reconnaissance and security role, the experiment in FY22 will move the robots into more of an attack-and-defend role. While the Army has to officially complete a critical technology assessment from the Fort Carson experimentation, Orlowski said the autonomy software “needs to improve.” The experimentation in FY22 will focus on improvements and the Army will work with industry partners to “improve that tether,” he said. “It needs to be robust in contested environments, which we haven't fully explored yet.” The service will also need to look at some alternate communications pathways between the control vehicle and the robots. Aided target recognition needs more maturity, Orlowski explained, “especially on the move to support the platforms.” Anything that reduces the soldier interaction with the platforms will also be incorporated, “and there are other things that soldiers asked for, which when we are ready to release we will. [The ideas from the feedback] were pretty perceptive," he said. "So how critical that becomes, we will see.” https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/09/21/laying-the-groundwork-us-army-unveils-rough-plan-to-formalize-robotic-combat-vehicles-effort/

• 

  February 6, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, C4ISR

  The Navy's Surprise Unmanned Fighter Is a Glimpse of War's Near Future

  In a surprise announcement, the U.S. Navy revealed on Tuesday that it had successfully flown tests involving unmanned versions of the EA-18G Growler electronic attack fighter. The tests involved a single manned EA-18G controlling two unmanned versions of the same aircraft, opening up the possibility that the U.S. Navy could fly armed unmanned aircraft sooner than originally thought. The test, conducted by the U.S. Navy and Boeing, was undertaken by the U.S. Navy's flight test wing at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. According to a C4ISRNET, a single EA-18G Growler controlled two unmanned Growlers in the air. The test is notable for several reasons. One, the Navy was not known to be working on unmanned systems other than the MQ-25 Stingray, a future drone tanker set to join the fleet in the mid-2020s. Second, the ability to convert a manned fighter such as the EA-18G Growler into an unmanned aircraft was also previously unknown. The EA-18G Growler is an electronic attack airplane. The EA-18 is based on the F/A-18F Super Hornet, has a crew of two, and is designed to escort Super Hornets on high risk air strikes. The Growler carries both a jamming pod designed to interfere with enemy radars and communications, preventing enemy air defenses from acquiring inbound aircraft and coordinating their attacks. The Growler also carries HARM anti-radar missiles, which detect the probing beams of enemy air defense radars and follow them to their source, destroying them. Without radars to guide them, many types of air defense missiles become unusable in combat. The Growler's electronic warfare mission is particularly high risk, placing the jet and its crew between the strike fighters it escorts and enemy missiles. That makes it a good candidate for the unmanned mission, where the loss of an aircraft won't result in the loss of a crew. The Growler and the Navy's main strike fighter, the Super Hornet, share 90 percent of their parts and systems. This makes it simpler to maintain both aircraft and allows the Growler to keep up with Super Hornets on missions. It also likely means that the Super Hornet can be unmanned, and possibly controlled by other Super Hornets. This test also reinforces the Navy's seriousness about unmanned aviation. The service caught considerable flak in the 2010s after testing the X-47B unmanned aerial vehicle—and then promptly shelved it. The service greenlighted the new MQ-25 Stingray carrier-based drone, but made it a tanker instead of a fighter or strike aircraft. Now we know that there's been an interest in unmanned aviation all along. But instead of building new unmanned aircraft, the Navy decided to leverage its fleet of hundreds of manned aircraft, devoting resources into converting them into unmanned platforms. Now it seems unmanned aircraft will almost certainly be an important weapon in the Navy's arsenal for future missions. Although drones can be controlled by crews on the ground on the other side of the planet, enemy electronic attack forces will be doing their best to interfere with U.S. forces, attempting to jam communications between a drone and its controllers. A manned aircraft could control multiple drones, providing instructions through unjammable short range communications. For now, it's still important to have a human around. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a30771030/growler-unmanned-navy/