6 juillet 2018 | International, Aérospatial

Study finds these gaps in Army’s small unit counter-drone capabilities

Army units at and below the battalion level are unprepared to defeat aerial drones and current plans can't keep up with rapidly evolving technology, according to a recent study.

Back in 2016, the Army Research Office asked an outside organization, The National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, to evaluate their counter drone capabilities for battalion and below operations.

The report they published earlier this year notes some significant gaps and threats to soldiers with this technology.

“Contrary to the past, when U.S. warfighters may have found (improvised explosive devices), now the IEDs will find our warfighters,” according to the report.

While the Army and Marine Corps, which also included representatives in the study, are throwing resources at the small drone problem, they are not keeping pace with the threat.

“Army time frames are significantly out of sync with the rapidly advancing performance capabilities of individual (small Unmanned Aerial Systems) and teams of sUASs,” according to the report.

The report noted that most of the service's counter drone asset work was focused on heavy vehicle platforms or on fixed sites, which leaves smaller units most likely to first encounter the threat more exposed.

“Significant quantities of man-portable” counter-drone systems have been fielded, Army spokesman Maj. Chris Ophardt told Army Times in an email. The Army will continue to pursue those capabilities based on emerging threats.

Based on his response, which did not include details of capabilities, the Army is pursuing other ways to defeat drones. A large portion of the study was classified, due to operational security concerns.

“Future Army C-UAS systems will encompass a variety of potential platforms to include fixed, mobile, and Soldier-portable capabilities,” Ophardt wrote.

But beyond the types of systems employed, what they're targeting or attacking also came under fire in the report.

The Army and other branches have invested significantly in counter-drone technology, “often focusing on detecting radio frequency transmissions and GPS signals of individual sUASs. However, today's consumer and customized sUASs can increasingly operate without radio frequency (command and control) links.”

Drones now available can use automated target recognition, tracking, obstacle avoidance and other software-enabled activities instead of traditional RF and GPS.

Ophardt did not divulge specifics of how the Army is addressing this, but responded that the service's counter drone capabilities, “include multiple methods in order to detect, identify and defeat enemy UAS.”

A new school began last month at Fort Benning, Georgia to give basic trainees familiarity with small drones. The drone school gives infantry and scouts the ability to fill out a seven-line report when they encounter a drone then relay that info to their headquarters.

The students use both fixed-wing and helicopter small drones. They also learn defensive tactics such as how to use dispersal and hiding tactics to minimize casualties from drone-coordinated fires, according to an Army release.

Those introductory tactics can help even brand-new soldiers start thinking about how to deal with drone threats.

But, at the same time, the low-level tactics currently used for counter drone work have tried to use “kinetic effects,” basically shooting down the drone by interfering with its signals or overheating its circuits.

The report noted that method isn't practical on a wide scale for large numbers of troops, especially dismounted units.

That path only adds more gear from the equipment to the batteries, to an already overloaded soldier, not to mention the “cognitive load” of training and using another piece of equipment, according to the report.

Ophardt responded that the Army's counter-drone strategy included “multiple methods” to detect, identify and defeat” enemy drones.

The major provided a similar response when asked about Army efforts at counter-drone tactics, capabilities against swarming drones and collaboratively acting drone groups, which the report remarks will be more prevalent and sophisticated as soon as 2025.

Report authors urge Army leaders to adjust their timelines for matching tech development, which are woefully inadequate for the exponential changes in software, hardware and drone capabilities.

Current Army time frames consider near-term planning to run from now until 2025; mid-term planning in the 2026 to 2035 window and far-term at the 2036 to 2050.

Those efforts mirror vehicle acquisition strategy timelines, not the drone arena.

The report pushes for a near-term planning of one to two years, mid-term at the three- to five-year level and far term in drone tech at the six- to eight-year range.

The advances are happening so quickly, authors point out, that it is “impossible to predict performance capabilities beyond eight years.”

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/07/05/study-finds-these-gaps-in-armys-small-unit-counter-drone-capabilities

Sur le même sujet

  • Germany picks up two thorny defense and diplomacy assignments in 2019

    4 janvier 2019 | International, Terrestre

    Germany picks up two thorny defense and diplomacy assignments in 2019

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Germany begins the new year with two prominent defense and diplomacy assignments: leadership of NATO's highest-alert combat formation, and a two-year seat on the United Nations Security Council. The two new responsibilities follow recent pledges by Berlin to play a more active role in global affairs, offering German Chancellor Angela Merkel an instant test to make good on those proclamations during the final years of her tenure. As of Jan. 1, Germany is on the hook to provide 5,000 soldiers for NATO's Very High Readiness Joint Task Force, or VJTF. The formation must be ready to fight wherever it is needed within 48 to 72 hours. Partner nations for this year's rotation include the Netherlands, Norway, France, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Latvia and Lithuania, bringing the total package to about 8,000. A key rationale for the quick-reaction force is to display to Russia the ability to rapidly ferry combat power across Europe at a time when speed is believed to be a Russian advantage. European governments are still wary from the 2014 Russian annexation of Ukraine's Crimea, and more recently from a naval standoff between the two countries in the Sea of Asov. Both incidents fit into a pattern of Russia steering clear of outright war while trying to shake up the post-Soviet order around its borders, according to issue experts. The German Defence Ministry's logistics planning for the VJTF role takes into account the need to quickly move combat gear if needed. Its acquisition office last month announced a $110 million support contract to ensure rapid access to military rail transport from civilian providers during Germany's one-year tenure. The Bundeswehr, plagued by equipment shortfalls, management problems or both — depending on who is asked — has had to dig deep to assemble the needed equipment for the task force lead. In the end, funneling supplies from across the force to the tip of the spear appears to have worked, but it has depleted the readiness of many units, said Christian Mölling, an analyst with the Berlin-based German Council on Foreign Relations. “It means the rest of the Bundeswehr is no longer the kind of deterrent it is meant to be,” he said in an interview. With the task force now on high alert, Mölling said, the thing to watch will be Germany's national decision-making process in the event that it will be called up. Parliament and the government, he argues, lack a well-rehearsed process for assessing whether a given conflict warrants deploying the task force, potentially kicking off a comprehensive national debate that would negate any hope of a rapid reaction. That is especially the case because of Moscow's penchant to keep its activities just below the conflict threshold that would trigger Article 5, NATO's clause for collective defense when one member is attacked. Amid deepening global crises and a deteriorating relationship between Europe and the U.S., a German government debating the definition of a worthy VJTF deployment would probably lead to Russian President Vladimir Putin “grabbing a bag of popcorn,” Mölling quipped. “We just don't have the necessary routine for a case like that,” he said. As a nonpermanent member of the U.N. Security Council, it's easy to foresee the animosity between Germany and the Trump administration in Washington coming to a head in New York, said Ulrike Franke, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank. Many Germans are deeply wary of the U.S. president and his knocking of NATO and other multilateral institutions that have brought Berlin back from the devastation of World War II. That is even more the case since Jim Mattis, a vocal believer in America's global alliances, called it quits as defense secretary last month. Foreign Minister Heiko Maas on Jan. 1 tweeted a list of objectives for Germany during its Security Council tenure. They include countering climate change and related global security effects, and a commitment to arms control and disarmament — issues that the Trump administration has dismissed. When it comes to the voting pattern of Berlin and Washington, often aligned on the Security Council stage, things could get a little awkward, Franke predicts. In practical terms, however, “I'm pessimistic that a lot will change,” she said. But Germany's term holds the promise that government leaders here will get into the habit of developing truly global foreign policy positions and selling them to audiences foreign and domestic, she said. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/01/02/germany-picks-up-two-thorny-defense-and-diplomacy-assignments-in-2019/

  • Nato accepts delivery of fourth remotely piloted aircraft in Italy

    30 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Nato accepts delivery of fourth remotely piloted aircraft in Italy

    Nato's Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) Force has received the fourth RQ-4D Phoenix remotely piloted aircraft at the Italian Air Force Base (AFB) in Sigonella. After taking off from Edwards AFB in California, US, the aircraft landed at Sigonella following a 22-hour journey. The arrival marks another step towards the completion of Nato AGS Force's fleet of five total aircraft. The third RQ-4D Phoenix remotely piloted aircraft was delivered less than two weeks ago. Nato AGS Force Commander Brigadier General Houston Cantwell said: “The arrival of the fourth aircraft enhances our capabilities with greater redundancy and flexibility. “The Nato AGS Force continues our advance in becoming Nato's key provider of regional ‘indications and warning' information to members of the Nato Alliance.” The AGS System was procured by the Nato AGS Management Agency (NAGSMA). Movement of the aircraft from California to Italy was controlled by industry pilots at the AGS Force's Main Operating Base in Sigonella. The first three aircraft were transported similarly. Following arrival, the remotely piloted system will be handed over to the force after the NAGSMA and the Italian Airworthiness Authorities finalise the required documentation. The Agency general manager Brigadier General Volker Samanns said: “Having now four out of five Nato AGS aircraft in SIGONELLA demonstrates the commitment and ability of the AGS procuring nations and of NAGSMA to deliver the Nato AGS system while increasing our flexibility in testing the system. “It also provides the Nato AGS Force additional equipment for familiarisation and training.” https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/nato-accepts-delivery-of-fourth-remotely-piloted-aircraft-in-italy/

  • Cyber Command’s acquisition authority still in its infancy

    10 septembre 2018 | International, C4ISR

    Cyber Command’s acquisition authority still in its infancy

    By: Mark Pomerleau U.S. Cyber Command is still in the beginning stages of building out an acquisition capability. Eight years after its launch and about two years after being granted limited acquisition authority from Congress, the command is still working to demonstrate that its wares and abilities make good use of funds and that it is capable of managing contracts, its acquisition executive said. “I will say we are in our infancy from an acquisition perspective. We are putting the foundation of the personnel and the skills,” Stephen Schanberger said Sept. 6 at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit. “We're in the beginning stages right now.” In the fiscal 2016 defense authorization bill, Congress gave Cyber Command limited acquisition authority capped at $75 million with a sunsetting in 2021. Congressional aides have equated this authority to that of Special Operations Command, noting that they wanted to employ a crawl, walk, run mentality to make sure Cyber Command can execute it. Schanberger said the command is asking for more on both fronts, with a ceiling of $250 million and a sunset of 2025 — the timeline being the most important element as it makes it easier to work with vendors who know contracts might not be in doubt three years from now. For Congress's part, Schanberger said they want the command to show it can use the authority in the way it's supposed to and start to stand up the backbone of a contracting organization. This includes being able to put together solicitation packages, plan contracting strategy for years ahead and be able to effectively implement and put out proposals and award them without making a mess, he said. Schanberger said the command currently has one contracting officer and one specialist and a couple of contractors aside from himself in the contracting shop, though he expects those numbers to double in the next three months. Cyber Command issued its first contract under this limited authority in October 2017. Schanberger said the command awarded only one contract in fiscal 2017, due in part to the fact they lacked a contract writing system, which is now in place. In fiscal 2018, the command is on track to award roughly $40 million in contracts and in fiscal 2019 is on a path to get close to its cap, Schanberger said. Congress has also asked what the delineation lines are between the acquisition efforts of Cyber Command and those of the services, Schanberger said. “Right now what we really look at are what are the gaps between us and our service partners and how do we help fill those gaps,” he said. “Typically, there are a couple of programs where we did the prototyping efforts and we transitioned that to the services. That's where we see our most value ... things that can benefit all our service cyber components.” Some within Congress have expressed that Cyber Command has approached acquisition cautiously and are concerned the services aren't budgeting and providing the tools and capabilities that the cyber mission force needs. Schanberger said he thinks that command has demonstrated that it can issue contracts effectively, efficiently and quickly. However, he noted, he still does not think the command has the wherewithal internally to run something as big as the Unified Platform, one of DoD's most critical cyber programs, from a resource perspective. https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/cybercom/2018/09/07/cyber-commands-acquisition-authority-still-in-its-infancy

Toutes les nouvelles