Sending THAAD to Israel adds to strain on US Army, leaders say

Sur le même sujet

• 

  20 juin 2019 | International, C4ISR, Autre défense

  This mobile comms unit has people talking

  By: Mark Pomerleau The Army has a slew of ongoing efforts to modernize its tactical network, including a focus on a pilot unit that moves quickly through the world and spectrum to tailor critical communications systems support. The Expeditionary Signal Battalion-Enhanced (ESB-E) supports units that don't have organic comms capabilities. These could include military intelligence battalions, chemical battalions, engineering battalions or air defense artillery branches. The ESB-E can also augment regular Army units, as a renewed focus on great powers requires all units to be much more mobile and expeditionary. What that means for signal battalions is their gear will have to be easily carried and set up to enable them to maneuver with units in a rapid manner. “The Army's transitioned to focusing on data environment and near-peer threat. The need for those logistical tails and for the enablers to move rapidly has increased, which is part of the demand signal that has gotten us away from” the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical of the past, Maj. Jeff Forry, S-3 50th Expeditionary Signal Battalion, told C4ISRNET during a demo of Army network modernization efforts at Fort Myer June 18. Forry said they've provided much more modular and scalable capabilities than the Humvee-mounted, satellite transportable terminal-based capabilities of year's past. In March 2018, the Army authorized the beginning of the ESB-E pilot, which is intended to create more mobile and agile kits for signal brigades. As part of the pilot, three companies under the battalion have been outfitted with capabilities from three vendors. This includes basebands — made by DTech, PacStar and Klas — with accompanying Tampa Microwave or L3 satellite terminal dishes of varying diameter depending on the users the unit needs to accommodate. Overall, the battalion has packages to provide communications for a variety of users. “When I plan a mission, less than 20 users, I'd start looking at small [packages] ... when we start pulling 20 up to 48 I'm looking at medium, and then after that we'd either use multiple mediums or start looking at the [large] package,” Forry said. The modularity of the kits mean, in many cases, just adding more users merely involves just sliding a small router into the baseband and utilizing a slightly larger satellite terminal. This is easier than the old WIN-T way of doing things where teams needed to bring full transit cases to add more users and bandwidth. One user noted that the modularity of the kit allows teams to mix and match based on the requirement. For example, if they only need connectivity to the Pentagon's secret network, as opposed to the unclassified network, they only need to bring those services with them. During a recent event at Dugway Proving Grounds, members from the signal battalion supported a chemical brigade, which had to get in and out of affected areas very quickly. The team took a small package and was able to get communication up in less than 10 minutes. They were onsite for 20 minutes, packed up and moved to the next site. The Army is continuing to utilize training events, combat training center rotations and exercises such as Saber Guardian in Europe to evaluate systems within the pilot program and execute operational tests for the gear. “The different approach we took for this prototype that we're doing is we didn't go set off a dedicated unit to do an operational test,” Col. Greg Coile, project manager for tactical networks at Program Executive Office Command, Control, Communications-Tactical, said. “Their operational test is when they go to Saber Guardian, when they go do the operational support, that is how we're testing and ... we use that user feedback going forward.” Coile added that this ongoing experimentation also allows units to get more repetitions as opposed to the old way of doing things, where the unit would get the equipment two weeks ahead of an operational test at something like the Network Integration Evaluation. Now units get an entire year with the equipment, which means the value of feedback is much higher, Coile said. The capabilities for the ESB-E unit will be part of the Army's first delivery of capability in 2021 for its network modernization the service is calling capability set 2021. Coile said the pilot will run until September, after which the Army will begin to make decisions on down-selecting vendors and outfitting actual units with the kits. The plan is to have every unit have the same equipment, as opposed to three companies currently outfitted with different vendor equipment for the prototype. A battalion will be complete in 2019, Coile said, and they are funded for three more in 2020. Moreover, they'll buy more in late 2020 to early 2021 and field those three. In 2021 there is funding for another three units, but the Army leadership will have to make a decision on what units get that. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2019/06/19/this-mobile-comms-unit-has-people-talking/

• 

  22 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval

  US Navy to develop drone deployment strategy

  By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy's top officer has ordered his staff to develop a comprehensive strategy to field unmanned systems in the air, on the water and under the sea over the coming years. Dubbed “unmanned campaign plan,” it looks to tie together all the disparate programs into a coherent way forward, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday told Defense News in a July 16 interview. “We've got ... a family of unmanned systems we're working on,” Gilday said. “Undersea we've got extra-large, large and medium [unmanned underwater vehicles]; on the surface we have small, medium and large [unmanned surface vessels]; and in the air we have a number of programs. “What I've asked the N9 to do is come to me with a campaign plan that ties all those together with objectives at the end. I've got a bunch of horses in the race, but at some point I have to put my money down on the thoroughbred that's going to take me across the finish line so I can make an investment in a platform I have high confidence in and that I can scale.” Gilday's drive toward an unmanned campaign plan comes after two consecutive years of congressional criticism that the Navy is forging ahead too quickly on unmanned systems without first having designed or developed critical new technologies and mechanical systems. The criticisms have resulted in marks in legislation that deliberately slows down the development of the systems that both the Navy and the Office of Secretary of Defense have said are necessary to offset a rising China without breaking the bank. In the interview, Gilday acknowledged the Navy hadn't adequately mapped out its unmanned future in a way that would inspire confidence. “What I've found is that we didn't necessarily have the rigor that's required across a number of programs that would bring those together in a way that's driven toward objectives with milestones,” Gilday said. “If you took a look at [all the programs], where are there similarities and where are there differences? Where am I making progress in meeting conditions and meeting milestones that we can leverage in other experiments? At what point do I reach a decision point where I drop a program and double down on a program that I can accelerate?” In the most recent National Defense Authorization Act, currently working its way through Congress, lawmakers appear poised to restrict funding for procurement of any large unmanned surface vessels, or LUSV, until the Navy can certify it has worked out an appropriate hull as well as mechanical and electrical system, and that the design can autonomously operate for 30 consecutive days. Furthermore, the Navy must demonstrate a reliable operating system and ensure any systems integrated into the platform — sonars, radars, etc. — are likewise functioning and reliable, according the text of the subcommittee's markup of the fiscal 2021 NDAA, Congress's annual defense policy bill, which was obtained by Defense News. In short, the language would mean the Navy could not spend procurement dollars on a large unmanned surface vessel until it has a working model, and it may not try to develop those technologies on the fly. In a June interview with Defense News, Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., head of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, said the panel supports unmanned system development but doesn't want the Navy repeat mistakes. “The message I want people to understand is that we fully support the move toward unmanned, whether that's on the surface or undersea,” Courtney said. “But we want to make sure that some of the real nuts and bolts issues ... are worked out before we start building large unmanned platforms. “We want to make sure that, again, we don't end up with situations like LCS [the littoral combat ship] where we're trying to figure out what the mission is at the same time we're building them.” Conceptualize and control That's a criticism the CNO hears and is working to address. Gilday is pushing on two major efforts to get better answers on what the Navy is trying to accomplish with unmanned systems: a concept of operations, and a network to control them with. “The concept of operations that the fleet is working on right now will be delivered in the fall, and that talks conceptually about how we intend to employ unmanned in distributed maritime operations,” Gilday said, referencing a Navy plan to physically expand its maneuvers to complicate enemy targeting rather than aggregate around an aircraft carrier. But beyond how unmanned tech will fit into a distributed fleet, the Navy is looking at where those systems should be located and how they will be supported. That's leading the Navy to consider stationing the systems and support elements overseas. “What would a day-to-day laydown look like of unmanned forward?” Gilday asked. “The Navy has got to be forward: For obvious reasons we don't want the fight back here; the Navy exists to operate forward. That's where we need to be in numbers. And with unmanned, if you are not there at the right time, you are irrelevant. “There also has to be a number of unmanned [systems] forward. I can't just decide to rally unmanned out of San Diego or in the Pacific northwest at a time when they'll be too late to need.” The other big piece of the puzzle is something Gilday has previously referred to as akin to a new “Manhattan Project,” a rapid, well-funded project to field a network that can control all the various unmanned and networked systems, sensors and weapons. And to do that, he's linking in with the Air Force's Joint All Domain Command and Control, or JADC2, effort. “The other piece of this is the Navy Tactical Grid,” Gilday explained. “Coming into the job, the projections for the Navy Tactical Grid was for delivery in about 2035. I knew that was way, way too late. “So, on a handshake with [Air Force Chief of Staff] Gen. [David] Goldfein, I said: ‘Look, I am all in, and my vision is that the Navy Tactical Grid would be the naval plug into JADC2.' So the Navy Tactical Grid ends up being a very critical element of the unmanned campaign plan because it becomes the main artery to operate those platforms. “Without it, I have a bunch of unmanned that I shouldn't be building because I can't control it very well.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/07/21/the-us-navy-is-trying-to-get-its-act-together-on-unmanned-systems/

• 

  25 août 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  Here's who the US Army has tapped to build an enduring capability to counter drones and cruise missiles

  After a shoot-off in the New Mexico desert, the Army has made its choice on who will build prototypes for its enduring Indirect Fires Protection Capability.