Back to news

July 15, 2019 | International, Other Defence

With Squad X, Dismounted Units Partner with AI to Dominate Battlespace

DARPA's Squad X Experimentation program aims to demonstrate a warfighting force with artificial intelligence as a true partner. In a recent field test, the program worked with U.S. Marines at the Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, California, to track progress on two complementary systems that allow infantry squads to collaborate with AI and autonomous systems to make better decisions in complex, time-critical combat situations.

“We are in a race with potential adversaries to operationalize autonomy, and we have the opportunity to demonstrate autonomy in a way that we don't believe any nation in the world has demonstrated to date,” said Lt. Col. Phil Root (USA), the Squad X program manager in DARPA's Tactical Technology Office. “Developing hardware and tactics that allow us to operate seamlessly within a close combat ground environment is extremely challenging, but provides incredible value.”

The exercises in early 2019 in Twentynine Palms followed experiments in 2018 with CACI's BITS Electronic Attack Module (BEAM) Squad System (BSS) and Lockheed Martin's Augmented Spectral Situational Awareness and Unaided Localization for Transformative Squads (ASSAULTS) system. The two systems, though discrete, focus on manned-unmanned teaming to enhance capabilities for ground units, giving small squads battalion-level insights and intelligence.

In the most recent experiment, squads testing the Lockheed Martin system wore vests fitted with sensors and a distributed common world model moved through scenarios transiting between natural desert and mock city blocks. Autonomous ground and aerial systems equipped with combinations of live and simulated electronic surveillance tools, ground radar, and camera-based sensing provided reconnaissance of areas ahead of the unit as well as flank security, surveying the perimeter and reporting to squad members' handheld Android Tactical Assault Kits (ATAKs). Within a few screen taps, squad members accessed options to act on the systems' findings or adjust the search areas.

Between Lockheed Martin's two experiments to date, Root says the program-performer team identified a “steady evolution of tactics” made possible with the addition of an autonomous squad member. They also are focused on ensuring the ground, air, and cyber assets are always exploring and making the most of the current situation, exhibiting the same bias toward action required of the people they are supporting in the field.

CACI's BEAM-based BSS comprises a network of warfighter and unmanned nodes. In the team's third experiment, the Super Node, a sensor-laden optionally-manned, lightweight tactical all-terrain vehicle known as the powerhouse of the BEAM system, communicated with backpack nodes distributed around the experiment battlespace – mimicking the placement of dismounted squad members – along with an airborne BEAM on a Puma unmanned aerial system (UAS). The BSS provides situational awareness, detects of electronic emissions, and collaborates to geolocate signals of interest. AI synthesizes the information, eliminating the noise before providing the optimized information to the squad members via the handheld ATAK.

“A human would be involved in any lethal action,” Root said. “But we're establishing superior situational awareness through sufficient input and AI, and then the ability to do something about it at fast time scales.”

The Squad X program has moved quickly through development and is already well along the transition path, due in large part to the program's focus on partnering with the services to ensure real-world efficacy. For the CACI system, that included an opportunity to test the technology downrange to get real-world information, not simulation. At the most recent experiment with the BSS, service representatives used the system to locate and identify objectives in real time.

For both systems, feedback has included a desire for a user interface so intuitive that training takes an hour or less and any available action is accessible in two screen taps.

Staff Sergeant Andrew Hall with the Marine Corps Tactics and Operations Group (MCTOG), an advisory teammate to DARPA's Squad X Experimentation program, says the ability to provide early input will guard against developing a product that either isn't used or is used improperly.

“The feedback process, in conjunction with the actual experimentation, gives the Marines the ability to use the technology and start seeing what it can do and, more specifically, what it can't do,” Hall said.

With the conclusion of third experiment, the CACI system is moving into Phase 2, which includes an updated system that can remain continuously operational for five or more hours. Lockheed Martin will conduct its next experiment in the fall of 2019.

CACI's BEAM system is already operational, and the Army has committed to continue its development at the completion of Squad X Phase 2. The Army is set to begin concurrent development of the Lockheed Martin ASSAULTS system in fiscal years 2019 and 2020, and then, independent of DARPA, in fiscal year 2021.

https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2019-07-12

On the same subject

  • ‘You need two to tango’: Naval Group CEO Hervé Guillou on business in Europe and Down Under

    March 17, 2020 | International, Naval

    ‘You need two to tango’: Naval Group CEO Hervé Guillou on business in Europe and Down Under

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Hervé Guillou, who took the helm at France's shipbuilder Naval Group in 2014, will retire from the company later this month due to an age limit that comes with the job. He made consolidation in Europe's naval sector a key tenet of his tenure, though there has been little movement so far other than Naval Group's cooperation with Italian shipyard Fincantieri and the resulting Naviris joint venture. With fears of demand drying up at home, Naval Group made an aggressive sales push across the world, perhaps most notably with the multibillion-dollar Australian Attack-class submarine program. The project received some criticism in Australia in recent months, though Guillou brushed it aside and said the Australian government remains committed to the program. Guillou spoke to Defense News' European editor, Sebastian Sprenger, by phone on March 10 about the international marketplace and industrial cooperation. With talk of a need for the European naval industry to consolidate, to what extent do you view Naval Group as a European company? We are the European leader of naval defense and as a strategic pillar we are willing to contribute to the building of the Europe of defense. We could not deliver the value to our shareholders if we didn't have a reasonable balance between our national programs like Barracuda or FDI frigates, coupled with a number of significant programs for export. Like Dassault Aviation, we need about 40-60 percent of value added for export if we want to maintain competences and competitiveness on the full scope of our offer. In our effort for internationalization, we have two streams. One is direct sales; we have established 10 new companies outside France. We have seven new customers in seven new countries such as Belgium, Netherlands, Argentina and Romania. That completely changed our international base. The second aspect is Europe, starting with the joint venture with Fincantieri. We have always said other companies can join. The process is slow, but we are absolutely clear that consolidation is needed if we want European sovereignty to be preserved. We are on the way. Naviris is one step. I hope there will be others. But it's a slow move, particularly in the naval industry because of the political visibility and because of the huge differences between the operational concepts of the European navies. Today, the closest to the French Navy would be the British Navy. But the British are on another agenda after Brexit [Britain's exit from the European Union]. On the submarine side, our closest partner in terms of worldwide, expeditionary capacity for oceanic operations are the Netherlands. On surface ships, because we have done Horizon and FREMMs together, it is Fincantieri. Today, Italy and the Netherlands are the likely first steps in our European road map, but others are welcome to join. In late 2018, you said you would make an overture to Germany's ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems for some kind of cooperation agreement once the Australian submarine deal is settled. Did that happen? No. You need two to tango. I don't know yet what is the consensus — or not — between the ThyssenKrupp leadership, government policies and parliament. It's not for me to interfere in that. I have been sending clear and open messages, and [Fincantieri CEO] Giuseppe Bono did the same, publicly. But today, we have no real answer. Germany and France have a land project together, the European battle tank, and two air projects, the Eurodrone and the Future Combat Air System. Do you think a naval project besides those is feasible? I think you cannot copy the aircraft or the land model to the naval sphere. Again, there are no likely bilateral or trilateral programs with Germany in the naval business because Germany has very different operational needs for their Navy than France or Italy. Their submarines are more coastal submarines, geared toward the Baltic Sea. Their surface ships — for example, when you look at the MKS 180 — are of a total different specification than the FREMM or the FDI, which are heavy, weaponized, combat-focused frigates. The Germans have no need for anything like an aircraft carrier, and they are not going to build SSNs [attack submarines]. So today, in my view, if we do something with Germany, it would be more of an industry agenda, as we did first with Italy, to be able to add and find synergies in our international presence, rather than relying on a bilateral program. And the way our industry consolidates is very different. But we have a survival issue in industry, to be able to find volumes, procurement synergies, export opportunities among ourselves and being mindful that the real competitor is more China and Russia and not Germany, Italy or the Netherlands. We continue to explain that, but we need to be patient. I understand well where the Germans come from. With three German yards — TKMS, Lürssen, and Blohm and Voss — it's more fragmented and difficult for them. What about the argument that it would be hard to mix a former state-owned company like Naval Group with shipyards who don't share that kind of heritage? That is totally wrong, and it's totally badmouthing. We are a company with a private status and an independent board even if we have a French government shareholder. Governance guidelines apply to Naval Group like they apply to all French industry in the market. The government does not interfere with the social interests of the company, and my board would not accept it. The same applies to the false charge that we get government subsidies. It is totally untrue. If it was the case, everybody could file claims against us in the European courts. Some of your competitors have argued that Naval Group is too diversified to be compatible with firms that do nothing but shipbuilding. Again, this is not true. Diversification has been put under control. During my time at Naval Group, I closed two big projects in the nuclear area, which were losing money. I have restricted hugely the area of marine energy production, concentrating on offshore wind and geothermal. We are 98 percent focused on naval business. This is not a good subject for our competitors to argue about. What are your expectations of the new French aircraft carrier and Naval Group's role in the program? Naval Group's role is very clear: We shall be the prime contractor for such program. We are the only one capable of designing and integrating such a warship, which includes the concurrent engineering of the combat system and of the platform, including aircraft, drones, the new electromagnetic catapult from the U.S. — more than 200 functions in all. The hull will be built in St. Nazaire, at Chantiers de l'Atlantique, where the big dock for cruise ships will be used. We expect a decision on the future aircraft carrier program sometime this year. I cannot predict the exact timing, but I am optimistic that the decision will be made this year. We have delivered to DGA [the French defense procurement agency] our preliminary studies, our cost-capability tradeoffs; we have given a lot of details as well on the timing of the possible entry into service of such a new aircraft carrier. The government now has all the information they asked to make their decision. Naval Group has been criticized in Australia about the Attack submarine program recently. Did that catch you by surprise? I must say I'm more disappointed than surprised. We have very, very strong support from our customer and from the Australian government. We know where these attacks come from, and we know how it is used in Europe to damage our reputation for ongoing and upcoming competitions. The first crisis was about postponing by five weeks a design review for a 30-year program. The attacks around that are unfair. The other controversy was about including local industry. What is the official plan on workshare for Australian companies? There is no contractual obligation. But we are in a strategic partnership, and there is a clear commitment from Naval Group to reach 60 percent of local content, which is more than the Collins class. And based on our experience in Brazil or in India, we truly believe that at the end of the day we will reach it. It will take time. It is a long, long way to train new industries, to train people, to transfer technology. But we are absolutely committed to Australia, to this partnership to deliver sovereignty, and to deliver this very, very significant percentage of Australian contracts. Do you think the EU is on a good trajectory to foster defense cooperation? I don't know yet. There are two sides of the coin. On the defense side, I would say the progress made in the last three years is absolutely huge. The European Defence Fund and the European Defence Industrial Development Programme, for example, are significant achievements of the previous commission. Is it due to U.S. new policies? Is it due to Brexit? I don't know. It's probably a mix of a lot of things. With the new commission, my understanding is that there is a clear intention to continue in this direction. Nevertheless, there is the budget discussion, which is not completely finished, and where the budgets dedicated to defense are still under threat. We need time to see what the results will be. I'm rather optimistic. The second issue is more in the civilian-economic area, where we still have a significant issue with the rules for anti-trust in European rules. Those are currently preventing European industry to consolidate at a time when we see the Chinese, Korean and U.S. industries are consolidating. In that context, in the shipbuilding sector, we're not hearing good things about the Fincantieri/Chantiers de l'Atlantique case. This is a big worry for us, as this would prevent European players to turn into world players. How will the European Patrol Corvette become a truly European program? Of course, it cannot be a 27-country project. So Europe has to start with two, three or four. This is a Franco-Italian initiative, which is supported by our two navies and our two governments. It was initiated by Fincanteri and Naval Group, and is carried out by Naviris, our joint venture. Greece has declared their interest formally to join the program. Spain is starting to study the case, though they have not declared officially. If we are three, four countries, it's good enough to start. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/16/you-need-two-to-tango-naval-group-ceo-herve-guillou-on-business-in-europe-and-down-under/

  • Thales launches a new integrated 24/7 NOC-SOC in the Netherlands

    July 24, 2020 | International, C4ISR, Security

    Thales launches a new integrated 24/7 NOC-SOC in the Netherlands

    July 21, 2020 - Thales has expanded managed services for its customers with the launch of a new integrated Network Operations Center (NOC)/ Cybersecurity Operations Center (SOC) in the Netherlands. With trained experts present 24/7, the integrated NOC-SOC can provide organisations with premium services for IS-IT asset management and cybersecurity supervision, a critical necessity following the explosion of remote working during the Covid-19 crisis. With more than 40 years of expertise, Thales already serves more than 40 clients around the world through its five existing Cybersecurity Operations Centres (Canada, France, Hong Kong, Netherlands, United-Kingdom). Forming part of Thales's international network of premium Cybersecurity Operations Centres, the Group's first integrated Network Operations Centre (NOC) and Security Operations Centre (SOC) will simultaneously monitor customers' IT and OT infrastructure 24/7. Since IT/OT assets in the new NOC/SOC are monitored from the Netherlands, data remain in the country and sensitive information is viewed only by screened personnel. Being able to deliver these secure integrated managed services in the Netherlands is a first for Thales. As a rule, organisations outsource night-time monitoring to SOCs in other countries. From now on, Thales will be able to offer this service for and from the Netherlands. The NOC currently analyses anonymised transaction data from public transport companies 24/7 in order to rectify faults, and the SOC focuses on monitoring the computer and network activities of critical infrastructure companies, while keeping the networks physically separate. The NOC monitors mainly systems availability, while the SOC monitors cyber security. This enables both services to intervene quickly in the event of an incident, shortening any downtime and reducing damage. Now the two centres have been merged so that the teams have everything at their disposal to further optimise service levels and meet the highest standards of security. SOC and NOC employees are screened and trained to meet far-reaching Dutch quality standards and SOC services fully comply with Dutch legislation and regulations (ISO 27001 and NEN 7510). Thales has more than 15 years' experience in managed cybersecurity services worldwide. The Group is positioned as the trusted partner of choice for the most demanding organisations worldwide in terms of cybersecurity, operating five premium Cybersecurity Operations Centers around the world, in France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada and Hong Kong. "I am proud of this next step in our provision of services, as a result of which we are the first to offer 24/7 monitoring of assets and IT on Dutch soil," said Mark Donderwinkel, VP Thales Secure Communications and Information Systems."As a result of Covid-19, much more use is being made of remote collaboration tools. This is making organisations more vulnerable, and the number of cyber attacks is rising sharply. Now that we are in a phase of opening up our infrastructure and networks, it is crucial that downtime is kept to the absolute minimum. In order to achieve this, better monitoring is necessary, both of assets and of computer and network activities. We can now provide our customers with the highest and continuous level of service for both asset management and cyber security." View source version on Thales: https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/group/press-release/thales-launches-new-integrated-247-noc-soc-netherlands-0

  • Estonia’s new law opens door for weapons export, defense industry growth

    June 15, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

    Estonia’s new law opens door for weapons export, defense industry growth

    By: Jaroslaw Adamowski WARSAW, Poland — Estonia's Parliament has amended legislation to allow Estonian companies to make and handle military weapons and gear. The law paves the way for the development of the country's defense industry and the export of weapons and equipment by local players. Estonian Defence Minister Jüri Luik said in a statement that, to date, the Estonian military has acquired its gear almost exclusively abroad, but now the situation is expected to change, and export opportunities for the country's defense industry will also increase. “The absence of a right to handle weapons and ammunition has long been a serious concern for Estonia's defense industry, one that hinders the development of the defense sector,” Luik said. The legislation's summary states it “provides a legal framework for Estonian companies to begin to manufacture, maintain, import and export military weapons, ammunition, munitions and combat vehicles. The existing legislation does not allow this.” The ministry expects between five and six local companies to apply for the required licenses in the first year. The move comes as Estonia is planning a defense spending hike, with military expenditure to total €2.4 billion (U.S. $2.8 billion) in the next four years, according to Luik. Last April, the ministry unveiled the country's updated investment program for the years 2018-2022. Among others, Estonia aims to purchase munitions for about €100 million. Owing to the amended legislation, Estonian defense companies could also become suppliers to neighboring Lithuania and Latvia. Lithuania has allocated €873 million to its defense budget this year, up 20.6 percent compared with 2017. Latvia's military expenditure for 2018 is to reach €576.34 million, up €126.8 million compared with a year earlier. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/06/14/estonias-new-law-opens-door-for-weapons-export-defense-industry-growth/

All news