December 9, 2019 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR
By: Valerie Insinna
ORLANDO, Fla. — The U.S. Air Force wants to tap into the augmented and virtual reality technologies that are proliferating in the commercial market, but the service has run into a problem: Many have parts from China, limiting their ability to be used by the U.S. military in operational environments.
“Can we not have an AR [augmented reality] solution that's made in China? I don't think that's good for us,” Col. Gerard Ryan, chief of the Air Force's operational training infrastructure division, said during a panel discussion Tuesday at the Interservice/Industry, Training, Simulation and Education Conference.
“I don't think the security policy is going to pass. And I say that sarcastically, but it's true. If we're going to use a gaming engine, let's make sure it's not made by a foreign country that we don't like,” he added.
The Air Force is dipping its toes into using virtual reality through its Pilot Training Next program, which seeks to get airmen through basic pilot training more quickly and cheaply. While the PTN program is currently considered an experiment, with only a handful of airmen participating at any given time, the Air Force has already shown it may be able to shave months off the existing training timeline by supplementing live flights spent in the T-6 trainer with virtual ones using Vive virtual reality headsets and flight simulation software.
An unclassified environment like basic pilot training is a perfect place for the Air Force to use the augmented and virtual reality devices currently on the market. But for such products to ever see use by fighter and bomber pilots — or any operator that deals with secure information — the service must be sure that no part of the device is made by China, or any other foreign entity that could insert technology that allows for data collection.
The Air Force has begun talking to companies about its concerns, Ryan said. The hope is those firms can examine their supply chains and shift away from buying Chinese components.
“I've talked to some people in industry. A smaller company has said they've found a set of goggles that's American-made. I'm like: ‘Great, you're the first person to tell me that. The only one so far, too,' ” Ryan said.
Another challenge is connecting commercial devices in a classified environment, where Bluetooth and Wi-Fi use may be restricted.
“I've talked to one company that has figured [it] out. They have a system where it's a backpack laptop. So it's a direct connect to the goggles,” Ryan said. “Unfortunately it's more expensive, probably, to do that. It's probably more challenging to find the parts.”
When augmented or virtual reality systems can be brought into classified environments, they may not be flexible enough for quick reconfiguration to complement different training scenarios, said Col. David Nyikos, Air Combat Command's deputy director of operations.
“AR/VR is super cool,” he said during the panel. “But now you need it to evolve, you need it to reprogram to adapt to whatever mission rehearsal you're coming up with. Maybe tonight you're going to go out with guys from AFSOC [Air Force Special Operations Command] working with some Norwegian SOF [special operations forces], working with some Afghans. You've got to be able to train together to rehearse that. We don't have that right now.”
September 12, 2024 | International, Aerospace
A new report from RAND Corp. argues that space-enabled insights could elevate the importance of human security issues for military decision-makers.
June 30, 2020 | International, Aerospace
Nathan Strout Following an Army-led assessment, the Defense Department will be narrowing the number of different counter-small unmanned aircraft system solutions deployed by the joint force from about 40 to eight. In November, the defense secretary delegated the Army to lead an effort to reduce redundancy in the development and fielding of various C-sUAS solutions by the services. The Army subsequently set up the Joint C-sUAS Office to conduct that assessment, and over the last few months the office has worked to narrow down the dozens of counter-drone systems fielded by the services. “Our goal is to align existing and future Counter-UAS technology solutions to best address operational needs while applying resources more efficiently,” Maj. Gen. Sean Gainey, the JCO's first director, said during a media call June 26, one day after the assessment results were announced. “This is really why the organization was stood up — to eliminate the redundancy that was being fielded.” That assessment, which Defense Department leadership have approved, looked at approximately 40 systems, about 30 of which were primarily used for the C-sUAS mission, said the director. The assessment concluded that the joint force should move forward with fielding just eight different systems — a variety of fixed, mounted and dismounted solutions. “So essentially moving forward, we will focus our investments,” Gainey said. “The services have each been assigned sponsor of each one of those systems, so as we move this forward as a joint approach, it will coordinate the future upgrades to these systems and the contracting of these systems across the joint force.” C-sUAS systems that were not included in the final selection will be replaced by the approved systems, although JCO could not provide a timeline for how quickly this will take place, how much it will cost or how many units will need to be replaced across the services. Gainley noted that the services are currently conducting an analysis of how many systems will need to be replaced. Of the eight approved solutions, three are fixed, one is mounted and three are dismounted. The approved C-sUAS systems are as follows: 1) Fixed/Semi-Fixed Systems Fixed Site-Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aircraft System Integrated Defeat System (FS-LIDS), sponsored by the Army Negation of Improvised Non-State Joint Aerial-Threats (NINJA), sponsored by the Air Force Counter-Remote Control Model Aircraft Integrated Air Defense Network (CORIAN), sponsored by the Navy 2) Mounted/Mobile System Light-Mobile Air Defense Integrated System (L-MADIS), sponsored by the Marine Corps 3) Dismounted/Handheld Systems Bal Chatri, sponsored by Special Operations Command Dronebuster, no sponsor, commercial off-the-shelf capability Smart Shooter, no sponsor, commercial off-the-shelf capability 4) Command and Control Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control (FAAD-C2), sponsored by the Army (includes FAAD-C2 interoperable systems like the Air Force's Air Defense System Integrator (ADSI) and the Marine Corps' Multi-Environmental Domain Unmanned Systems Application Command and Control (MEDUSA C2)) https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/06/26/army-selects-eight-counter-drone-systems-for-the-joint-force/
December 20, 2023 | International, Naval
Seabed warfare has become a hot topic for European nations ever since last year’s attack on the Nord Stream gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea.