27 juillet 2018 | International, Terrestre

From shelters to vehicles to rucks, here’s how the Army is changing its command posts

By: 

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. — As the Army looks to shrink its battlefield footprint, its researchers and engineers are finding ways to make the nerve center of the battle — command posts — lighter, more capable and easier to set up and tear down.

A recently concluded three-year program aimed to do just that, with everything from the shelter devices used to house a command post’s gear, to refitting old and new vehicles, to moving an entirely vehicle-mounted communications system off the truck and into the ruck, cutting its weight by two-thirds in the process.

These are some of the ways that experts with the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command’s Communications–Electronics Center are finding to make command posts more mobile, resilient and effective against enemies that can quickly target and destroy massed formations.

Some of the advancements include the Expeditionary Command Post shelter, a 20-foot box with integrated power outlets, air conditioning, network cabling and video distribution system. It’s containerized so that it can be hauled on a truck or sling loaded under a helicopter.

A four-soldier team can set up the structure within 30 minutes as the remaining command personnel hook up the computers, radios and other devices inside of the structure.

Jim Bell, operations expert with RDECOM, told Army Times that soldiers with the 1st Armored Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team set up the shelter in those time frames during field exercises. And during an experiment at Fort Hood, Texas, soldiers moved the shelter with a CH-47 Chinook helicopter.

An even more mobile option that researchers have put together is the Light-Mobile Command Post, a pull-out table and tent combination that is installed in the back of a Humvee. It includes fixed TV monitors, built-in radio networks, cabling and computers.

The system was designed primarily for light infantry units, but a similar configuration has also been installed on tracked command vehicles for armor units.

This post can be voice comm and position location tracking operational within 15 minutes and fully operational in 30 minutes.

Another Humvee-based answer to mobile command is a reconfigured command and control vehicle dubbed the Command Post Platform–Improved. It has a built-in power and cooling system and spots for two cases containing the capacity for six computer servers, enough to run a brigade’s worth of data.

The setup includes seven radio nets, HF, UHF, VHF and SATCOM, and links for fiber optic, standard and secret lines of communication.

A small but important feature allows the user to power the systems from either vehicle or external power. The system also has a 15-minute power backup so that the servers can continue to run as power is switched.

Beyond a structure or tent solution, researchers have also outfitted small and mid-size all-terrain vehicles, specifically the Polaris MRZR. The focus of these is to provide airborne or air assault operations with a full-fledged command post in a smaller package.

The smaller MRZR uses a modular system that can be pulled and reinstalled quickly into another vehicle, should the ATV be disabled.

And it has an extra-powerful alternator that can produce 120 amps, double the amperage of a Humvee alternator.

It also includes a first-ever all-around handset that can plug in and communicate whether the speaker is using radio, Voice over Internet Protocol or VOIP, and other computer-based voice applications.

On top of all these advancements, the Army also is working on reducing what was 60 pounds worth of gear that previously was only used during mounted operations into a much lighter, man-portable package.

“They were ripping stuff off of vehicles and coming up with a power source,” said Brad McNeilly-Anta, command post consultant for RDECOM. “That wound up with a 60-pound item, and they were jumping with it at the 82nd Airborne.”

Not the most convenient package to haul to the ground.

The expeditionary Joint Battle Command Platform is a line of sight, two-way transmission that includes a tablet, battery, peripherals and a new fueled power source that allows it to run for more than 24 hours of continuous operations.

Adjustments and replacements to the ruggedized computer, power source, transceiver and encryption device have trimmed the weight down to 23 pounds.

Experimenters adapted a 1 L methanol power source to run the system but have also successfully experimented with windshield wiper fluid to run the system, McNeilly-Anta said.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/07/26/from-shelters-to-vehicles-to-rucks-heres-how-the-army-is-changing-its-command-posts

Sur le même sujet

  • Solicitation for Bradley replacement offers flexibility for foreign participation

    21 décembre 2020 | International, Terrestre

    Solicitation for Bradley replacement offers flexibility for foreign participation

    By: Jen Judson  WASHINGTON — The request for proposals from industry for the U.S. Army’s optionally manned fighting vehicle, or OMFV, intended to replace the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, has hit the street and allows for greater flexibility for foreign companies to compete. In the service’s second stab at holding a competition for OMFV, the Army is driving as much flexibility as it can across the board, from avoiding stringent requirements in favor of loose characteristics and creating a phase for industry to design concepts without much company investment that will form requirements along the way. The Army’s previous attempt required the delivery of physical bid samples, which hamstrung foreign competitor Rheinmetall of Germany and drove Bradley-maker BAE Systems to avoid the competition. Ultimately, the service received just one bid sample from General Dynamics Land Systems, which forced the Army to rethink the effort and come back with a new approach. The OMFV competition has foreign industry jumping to join in with new and modernized platforms, and the Army appears to be ditching much of the restrictions that would typically keep them out. Rheinmetall has already partnered with American firms Raytheon and Textron to solidify its participation in the competition, but many other companies are poised to submit bids to design concepts. The pool needs to be deep because the Army anticipates awarding up to five contracts to design platforms. “The challenges we’ve typically had in getting foreign participation is we often have a lot of classified material that we release up front, and we have some detailed specification that has very detailed performance requirements that’s classified,” Brig. Gen. Glenn Dean, the new Army program executive officer for ground combat systems, said in a Dec. 18 press briefing. Foreign competitors “have to have clearances in place to be able to take that information,” Dean said. This means foreign companies must either be partnered with a prime contractor in the United States, have a subsidiary stateside, or have other clearances that take time to get through the approval process in order to exchange the classified information. Working through consortiums, which the Army regularly does, also makes it hard for foreign contractors to come through the door, Dean said. This time, the Army isn’t working with a consortium and is using a more traditional federal acquisition regulation-based contract, according to Dean. Furthermore, he said, classified reports will not be required in order to submit a bid or receive an initial design contract award. “We’ve eliminated the limitation on primes and, because we don’t have classified information we are providing at the front end, that allows us to share more broadly and gives those companies time if they’re going to continue to play as lead, to establish their facilities, clearances and have the necessary structures in place to receive classified information when we get to that point,” he said. Dean expects more classified requirements to kick in toward the end of the concept design phase where requirements begin to take shape, which translates to specifications. “Obviously, every company is going to make their own determination about what strengths and partners may bring to the table, whether they want to come in as a sub, whether they want to be prime with a bunch of U.S. subs,” Dean said, “but the response has been very promising.” He also said there is strong interest from abroad. “I would say that we at least heard from or have participation … from all the major companies in the West capable of doing a full combat vehicle. Companies from Israel, South Korea, Singapore, Germany, in addition to companies both you’re familiar with in the U.S. who’ve [supplied] combat vehicles, but also some companies that operate in the defense space but haven’t traditionally been combat vehicle suppliers,” he said. “We will see how many of them ultimately decide they want to throw their hat in the ring and participate. I think we’ve done what we need to do to make it as open at an initial point.” Sources following the competition are expecting to see participation from South Korea’s Hanwha, which is in a head-to-head competition in Australia with Rheinmetall to produce a new infantry fighting vehicle. Germany-based Krauss-Maffei Wegmann has also touted an infantry fighting vehicle option, most recently at the last in-person Association of the U.S. Army’s annual conference in Washington, D.C., in 2019. Belgium’s CMI Defense is also rumored to be forging a partnership with a U.S. prime to participate in the competition. Now that the solicitation has been posted to Beta.Sam.Gov, companies have until April 16, 2021, to submit a conceptual bid. The Army will award contracts in July, according to Dean, which will kick off 15 months of funded work. During the phase, industry will work on designs without bending metal that will inform an abbreviated capabilities development document — or an initial set of requirements. Once the design phase ends, the Army will take a pause and then open the competition back up for a more detailed design effort ahead of prototyping, where up to three bids will be selected to proceed. The detailed design phase will be executed over the course of fiscal 2023 and fiscal 2024. The prototyping phase will begin in FY25, according to slides presented at the OMFV industry day. Vehicle testing will begin in FY26 and wrap up in FY27, with a production decision planned for the fourth quarter of FY27. Full-rate production is expected to begin in the second quarter of FY30. In parallel to the concept design phase, the Army will develop an open architecture for OMFV. An open architecture has risen to the top of the OMFV planner’s list of required capability, particularly after seeing the need to be networked with other capabilities across the battlefield and at the forward edge at Project Convergence at Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona, over the summer. The Army will establish a voluntary consortium beginning in January 2021 that will represent industry, government and academia in order to develop such an open architecture, according to the statement. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/12/18/bradley-replacement-request-for-proposals-hits-street-with-flexibility-for-foreign-participation/

  • China may use Japan’s aircraft carrier plan to push through more military spending

    20 décembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial, Naval

    China may use Japan’s aircraft carrier plan to push through more military spending

    Minnie Chan Tokyo’s plan to develop an aircraft carrier capable of launching fighter jets is driven by Beijing’s military rise, but the move could embolden hawkish generals in China to press ahead with their own expansion programmes, observers said. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party and its junior coalition partner Komeito Party this week approved a new defence guideline that will effectively allow the Japanese military to convert naval vessels currently capable of carrying only helicopters into fully operational aircraft carriers able to launch fighter jets like the F-35. The plan is controversial as under its pacifist constitution, Japan has never before owned such advanced naval hardware. Full article: https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2178102/china-may-use-japans-aircraft-carrier-plan-push-through-more

  • US Navy to buy two Ford-class aircraft carriers

    3 janvier 2019 | International, Naval

    US Navy to buy two Ford-class aircraft carriers

    The US Navy has announced its intention to block-buy two Ford-class aircraft carriers, US Senate Armed Services Committee member Tim Kaine has confirmed. The Ford-class warships are equipped with electromagnetic-powered aircraft launch system (EMALS) and are expected to replace Nimitz-class carriers, which have served the US Navy for more than 40 years. Welcoming the announcement, Kaine said: “I’m thrilled the navy has decided to pursue a block-buy for aircraft carriers, something I’ve been advocating to save billions in taxpayer dollars and offer more certainty to the Hampton Roads defence community. “This smart move will save taxpayer dollars and help ensure the shipyards can maintain a skilled workforce to get the job done. Newport News builds the finest carriers in the world, and I know they are ready to handle this increase in work as we make progress toward the navy’s goal of a 355-ship fleet.” In June 2017, Huntington Ingalls Industries’ (HII) Newport News Shipbuilding division delivered the first Ford-class aircraft carrier, Gerald R Ford (CVN 78), to the US Navy following completion of acceptance trials in May. The USS Gerald R Ford was built at a cost of $13bn and commissioned in July 2017. According to HII, the Ford-class carriers have a nuclear power plant, a redesigned island, electromagnetic catapults, and improved weapons movement, as well as an enhanced flight deck capable of increased aircraft sortie rates. The navy expects to spend around $43bn to build the first three ships in the class. Deployment of the ship is estimated to result in $4bn in total ownership cost savings for the navy. Last year, the navy asked HII for detailed pricing on the cost of two aircraft carriers. https://www.naval-technology.com/news/us-navy-ford-class-aircraft-carriers/

Toutes les nouvelles