21 juin 2019 | International, Naval

Navy Looking for Better Ways to Share Data

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Navy is grappling with how to securely share the vast amounts of data ship designers, operators and sustainers collect, a panel of engineers said Wednesday.

Shipyards have the design systems they use to transmit plans from engineers to the shipbuilders. Once delivered, modern ships, submarines and even aircraft generate tremendous amounts of data gauging their performance. The Navy has more data than it knows what to do with, but Rear Adm. Lorin Selby wants to change this.

“The problem we have is we don't do a great job of linking those together,” Selby said of the various data points. “That's what I'm driving for trying to link those together.”

Selby, the chief engineer and deputy commander for ship design, integration and naval engineer at the Naval Sea Systems Command, was speaking as part of a panel discussing how the Navy and shipbuilding industry can use digital plans at the American Society of Naval Engineering's annual Technology, Systems & Ship symposium.

Selby was joined by Rear Adm. Eric Ver Hage, the commander of the Naval Surface Warfare Center and Naval Undersea Warfare Center, and Zac Staples, a retired commander and current chief executive of Austin, Texas,-based maritime analytics firm FATHOM5. Staples' final tour in the Navy was the director of the Center for Cyber Warfare at the Naval Postgraduate School.

“Today, we know the liability of many of our systems. We know the ship loadout. We know the type of baseline the ships have. We know the performance of tactical action officers and other key watchstanders when they're in the basic training cycle. We know the proficiency of the strike group when they go to sea,” Ver Hage said. “You have all this data; the problem is, we put missiles on ships, but the combat systems can't unlock all the capability that missile has in some instances,” he said, referring the possibility communications between ships and missiles could improve targeting.

When quantum computing is developed, the ability to process this massive amount of data will become much easier, Selby said. Quantum computing is still being researched, with several nations trying to develop a way to tackle large data sets quickly, Selby explained. Within a year or two of mastering quantum computing, he predicts everyone will be able to use quantum computing. For the U.S. to have a decisive quantum computing edge, Selby said requires being ready now.

“The key to being the one who can actually lever that technology and really take a huge leap forward in this century is going to be the nation that lays the foundation to be able to lever the capabilities of quantum with a software delivery mechanism,” Selby said.

However, as the ability to analyze data speeds up, the importance of protecting this data also grows.

“If we're going to build capabilities in the era of great power competition, we have to assume our adversaries are trying to steal them – because they're trying to steal them,” Staples said. “The exact copy Chinese joint strike fighter is a good indication that whatever our shipboard capabilities might go for will be equally targeted.”

The current secure method of transferring data classified up to the secret level is over the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet). However, SIPRNet has limitations, such as the expense of operating the network and creating secure terminals so everyone has access to a SIPRNet terminal to send and receive classified secret information.

A cloud-based data vault could prove to be a good solution. Under such a program, access can be restricted, Staples said. Vault monitors will also know which adversaries are denied access to the valuable data being stored.

“When you think about encrypting data, there's probably a more efficient way to do that than on SIPRNet,” Staples said.

https://news.usni.org/2019/06/20/navy-looking-for-better-ways-to-share-data

Sur le même sujet

23 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial

Le numéro deux de Thales favori pour diriger Naval Group
EXCLUSIF Pierre-Eric Pommellet, directeur général de Thales, a été choisi par l'APE pour succéder à Hervé Guillou à la direction de Naval Group. Son nom doit encore être avalisé par l'Elysée. D'autres noms ont circulé, comme celui du directeur général adjoint de Naval Group Alain Guillou, celui du directeur des programmes Olivier de la Bourdonnaye ou celui de Marie-Pierre de Bailliencourt, ancienne DG du groupe, qui avait été un des grands artisans du contrat du siècle des sous-marins australiens. Le nom de Benoît Ribadeau-Dumas, directeur de cabinet d'Edouard Philippe et ancien de Thales et Zodiac, avait aussi été cité, au grand agacement de l'intéressé. Le scénario d'une prolongation d'Hervé Guillou a aussi été évoqué : celui-ci étant touché par la limité d''ge de 65 ans le 24 mars prochain, un tel projet nécessiterait un changement des statuts du groupe. Pierre-Eric Pommellet est tout sauf un inconnu pour le petit milieu de la défense. Né à Brest, ce polytechnicien affable, surnommé « PEP », a débuté à la Direction générale de l'armement en 1990, avant de passer deux ans à la DCN (Direction des constructions navales), l'ancêtre de Naval Group. Un passage en cabinet ministériel plus tard, chez Jean-Pierre Raffarin au ministère de l'artisanat, du commerce et des PME, il entre chez Thales dont il gravit peu à peu les échelons : directeur de l'usine du Haillan (Gironde), directeur des équipements militaires, directeur de la division aérospatiale, puis de celle des systèmes de mission de défense. Lors du départ du patron de Thales Jean-Bernard Lévy vers EDF fin 2014, Pierre-Eric Pommellet est un des favoris pour le fauteuil de PDG. Il peut même se prévaloir du soutien de Dassault Aviation, actionnaire à 25% du groupe. Mais le conseil lui préfère finalement Patrice Caine. Cette déception n'empêchera pas les deux hommes de bien travailler ensemble : Patrice Caine nommera même Pierre-Eric Pommellet directeur général en charge des opérations, en clair numéro deux du groupe. « L'entente entre les deux hommes est très bonne », assure un connaisseur de la maison Thales. https://www.challenges.fr/entreprise/defense/le-numero-deux-de-thales-favori-pour-diriger-naval-group_695054
19 novembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR

Russian drones can jam cellphones 60 miles away
By: Kelsey D. Atherton Russia's Defense Ministry announced Nov. 6 that the nation had extended the range on its drone-carried jammers to 100 km, or over 60 miles. Drones as a platform for, and not just the target of, electronic warfare means that the sight of a flying robot overhead could signal incoming strikes as well as a sudden inability to call for help. “Russia has been using a UAV-mounted cellphone jammer for a number of years now,” said Samuel Bendett, a research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses. The drones operate in a two- or three-vehicle pod with a ground station, collectively grouped as a “Leer-3” system. “When these UAVs fly in teams, one acts as a signal-and-comms relay while another acts as a jammer,” Bendett said. “These Leer-3 systems have been around for about two years at this point.” What is changed is the range of the jammer. The Orlan-10 drones already have a range of 75 miles, which means that, with the latest update on the jammer, the drone pod can interfere with signals up to 135 miles away from where the drone was launched. TASS reports that the 60-mile range is a 3.5 times increase in distance from the initial range. In addition, Bendett said there's a chance this capability, or an earlier version of it, has already been witnessed in conflict. “Ukrainian forces claim to spot Leer-3 systems in eastern Ukraine, while there is potential evidence that Leer-3 was used in Syria as well,” Bendett said. “Russian forces are constantly training with Leer-3 UAVs as they practice adversary signal and cell comms suppression, identification and eventual destruction of the enemy force. In fact, this kind of training is part of the official [tactics, techniques and procedures] in electronic warfare and other forces across the Russian military.” Advancements in electronic warfare are one of the key components guiding the development of autonomous systems for the military. For now, drones are conducting electronic warfare against cellular communications, but it's not hard to imagine the same doctrines applied with new technology. In that scenario, it easy to picture other vehicles transforming into jamming machines on future battlefields ... and maybe even present ones. https://www.c4isrnet.com/newsletters/unmanned-systems/2018/11/16/russian-drones-can-jam-cell-phones-60-miles-away
8 octobre 2020 | International, Terrestre, C4ISR

Army Seeks Electric Scout By 2025
SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. The Light Reconnaissance Vehicle, an off-road truck to scout ahead of airborne and light infantry units, could lead the Army's move to electric motors. But electrifying heavy cargo trucks, let alone tanks, could take decades. WASHINGTON: The Army will brief interested companies Oct. 20 on an electric-drive version of the long-delayed Light Reconnaissance Vehicle and the service's emerging strategy to convert its gas-guzzling formations to electric power. The service is working with a non-profit consortium of more than 200 companies and universities developing clean transportation technologies, CALSTART. But the driving logic here is pure Army green, not eco-friendliness. Tactically, electric vehicles accelerate quicker, run cooler, and move quieter than internal combustion ones – advantages that are all especially valuable for stealthy scouts like LRV. They can also run power-hungry high-tech systems, from sensors to lasers, without needing a bulky auxiliary power unit. Logistically, even if the Army has to recharge its electric vehicles from diesel generators, that would actually get more miles per gallon than putting the same fuel directly into an internal combustion vehicle, because electric motors are much more efficient. So electric power could reduce dependence on long supply lines and vulnerable convoys of tanker trucks, which are prime targets for adversaries ranging from Taliban irregulars to Russian missiles. Army and NATO wargames have shown some alarming vulnerabilities in the fuel supply. What's the timeline? “We'd like to see an Electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle by FY25,” said Maj. Ryan Ressler, who's leading the effort for Army Futures Command. But electrifying the Army's whole fleet of wheeled vehicles – let alone its heavier tracked vehicles – may take decades, starting with light trucks and gradually working up to heavy armor. “You're not going to go straight to an all-electric [fleet]. The battery density is not there for your combat vehicles,” Ressler told me – at least, not yet. “We would like to see all electric vehicles by 2040,” he said. “There might be potential to have all electric vehicles in the near term, if industry can help.” The Oct. 20 industry day will be the first step toward finding out. From Light to Heavy Ressler hopes to have a formal Abbreviated Capabilities Development Document (ACDD) for ELRV approved “in a matter of months,” he told me. “We see this as the first electrified vehicle for the Army ground combat fleet.” Industry feedback on ELRV – and progress on development, if the program goes ahead – will then inform the long-term strategy for Tactical and Combat Vehicle Electrification across the wider fleet. Ressler's team is now drafting what's called an Initial Capabilities Document for TaCVE. To test those concepts out in practice, he added, “we're looking at other potential candidates for electrification right now.” High on that list is the Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV) being built by GM Defense, an air-droppable light truck designed to carry airborne troops from their drop sites to the objective. Electric vehicles' innate stealth and reduced dependence on fuel supply would be particularly valuable to paratroopers, who operate on the ragged end of long supply lines. There's already been work done on an electric Infantry Squad Vehicle. “An electric prototype representative of the ISV proved it could be whisper-quiet, achieve sprint speed immediately, and offered excess power for extended silent watch mode exceeding current objectives,” according to an Army Futures Command white paper. LRV and ISV are natural partners. The Light Reconnaissance Vehicle was intended to scout ahead of the vulnerable Infantry Squad Vehicles, helping the unarmored transports avoid a lethal ambush. But the Army decided to delay a purpose-built LRV and use the heavier Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) as a stopgap scout. So it looks like LRV may have a second chance at life. ISV and LRV are both ultralight vehicles, meant to support airborne troops and other light infantry units that can deploy rapidly by air but after that mostly maneuver on foot. But even light infantry brigades have a small fleet of heavy trucks to carry supplies and special equipment. Mechanized units have a host of armored vehicles – 8×8 wheeled Strykers for medium brigades; tracked tanks, howitzers, missile launchers, and troop carriers for heavy brigades – followed by an even larger number of trucks to carry fuel, spare parts, supplies, and other support. There's already been some progress with these heavier vehicles. BAE Systems is developing an experimental hybrid diesel-electric engine for the M2 Bradley troop carrier. BAE's experimented with hybrid-electric armored vehicles for decades, company exec Andrew Rosenfeld told me – they once built a hybrid as heavy as an M1 Abrams tank – but the company's recent boom in civilian hybrid-electric buses has advanced the state of the art. Their engine for the Bradley can move up to 45 tons, and the same basic design could scale larger or smaller to go in a wide range of other vehicles. The hybrid Bradley uses 10 to 20 percent less fuel during a normal mission, he told me, and it can generate 500 kilowatts of power, enough to run an Army field hospital. On the wheeled side, the Army's Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC, formerly TARDEC) converted an Oshkosh cargo truck, the four-axle M977 HEMTT, to hybrid electric drive for a 2019 demonstration. That Tactical Vehicle Electrification Kit cut the HEMTT's fuel consumption by 15-25 percent, according to the Army Futures Command white paper. TVEK also tripled the truck's capacity to generate power. Increased power generation not only allows an electrified vehicle to have more technology on board, like sensors and weapons. Such vehicles could also park, plug in, and power up soldiers' charging kits, field hospitals, command posts, or radar sites – potentially replacing traditional diesel generators. “The very concept of what constitutes a vehicle has changed,” the white paper argued. “Electrification has transformed vehicles into sensor platforms, communication nodes, and mobile computational hubs.” Just as the F-35 fighter is so full of electronics that a former Air Force Chief of Staff called it “a computer that happens to fly,” electrified ground vehicles could become computers that happen to drive – and not just computers, but mobile charging stations as well. Today's complex and vulnerable supply chain must move large amounts of fuel from refinery to tanker to forward depot to individual vehicles and generators. A future system could be much more decentralized, supplying smaller amounts of fuel to hybrid-electric vehicles, which could then generate power to share with all-electric ones. Such streamlined logistics could make a life-or-death difference in wartime. The Army's concept for future combat, Multi-Domain Operations, calls for individual brigades to operate up to seven days without stopping for resupply. That's unimaginable today. Improving fuel-efficiency of internal combustion engines would make for only “marginal” progress towards the goal, the white paper argued. Truly self-sufficient combat units will require largescale replacement of fossil fuel with electricity, potentially drawn from small, mobile nuclear reactors. “It's fundamental to Multi-Domain Operations,” argued retired Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley, who commissioned the white paper when he was Futures & Concepts Center chief for Army Futures Command. He just took on a private-sector job with Flyer Defense, a maker of lightweight off-road trucks that's now developing an electric-drive vehicle with a small, built-in diesel generator to recharge itself. (This isn't a hybrid-electric drive, since the diesel doesn't' drive the wheels; it just charges the batteries). “Moving energy on the battlefield is the biggest challenge commanders will have in the future,” Wesley told me. But if you electrify your vehicle, he argued, it can “become more than just a combat vehicle: It becomes an energy node [in] a distribution network, where every vehicle is part of your energy distribution plan.” Such a decentralized and flexible system, he argues, is much harder for a Russian missile strike to take out than a fuel depot. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/10/army-seeks-electric-scout-by-2025/

Toutes les nouvelles