21 octobre 2020 | International, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR

U.S. Army Flexes New Land-Based, Anti-Ship Capabilities

Steve Trimble Lee Hudson

Finding ever new and efficient ways to sink enemy ships is usually assigned to the U.S. Navy and, to a lesser extent, the Air Force, but not anymore.

Though still focused on its primary role of maneuvering against land forces and shooting down air and missile threats, the Army is quietly developing an arsenal of long-range maritime strike options.

As the Army carves out an offensive role in the Pentagon's preparations for a mainly naval and air war with China, service officials now seek to develop a capacity for targeting and coordinating strikes on maritime targets with helicopter gunships in the near term and with long-range ballistic missiles by 2025.

The Project Convergence 2020 event in September focused the Army on learning how to solve the command and control challenge for a slew of new land-attack capabilities scheduled to enter service by fiscal 2023. The follow-on event next year will expand to include experiments with the Army's command and control tasks in the unfamiliar maritime domain.

“I think we have a long way to go in terms of partnering with the Navy for some of the maritime targeting [capabilities],” says Brig. Gen. John Rafferty, the Army's cross-functional team leader for Long-Range Precision Fires.

“And I think that'll be a natural evolution into Project Convergence 2021,” Rafferty says, speaking during the Association of the U.S. Army's virtual annual meeting on Oct. 15.

The Army operates a small, modest fleet of watercraft, including logistics support vessels and Runnymede-class large landing craft, but service officials have been content to respond to attacks on enemy ships at sea with the Navy's surface combatants and carrier-based fighter squadrons. Last year, the Air Force also revived a maritime strike role by activating the Lockheed Martin AGM-158C Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile on the B-1B fleet.

But the Army's position has changed. The AH-64E Capability Version 6, which Boeing started developing in 2018, includes a modernized radar frequency interferometer. The receiver can identify maritime radars, allowing the AH-64E to target watercraft at long range for the first time.

Meanwhile, the Defense Department's Strategic Capabilities Office started working in 2016 to integrate an existing seeker used for targeting ships into the Army Tactical Missile System (Atacms), which is currently the Army's longest-range surface-to-surface missile at 300 km (162 nm). Beginning in fiscal 2023, the Lockheed Martin Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) is scheduled to begin replacing the Atacms. The Increment 1 version will extend the range of the Army's missiles to 500 km. A follow-on Increment 2 version of PrSM is scheduled to enter service in fiscal 2025, featuring a new maritime seeker now in flight testing by the Army Research Laboratory.

“As we begin to develop the PrSM [Increment 2] with the cross-domain capability against maritime and emitting [integrated air defense system] targets, obviously we'll be partnering with the Navy on that,” Rafferty says.

Targeting ships from land-based artillery systems is not unique to the Army. The U.S. Marine Corps plans to introduce the Raytheon-Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile, firing the ground-based anti-ship cruise missile from a remotely operated Joint Light Tactical Vehicle.

To strike a moving target at ranges beyond the horizon, the Army needs more than an innovative new seeker. A targeting complex linking over-the-horizon sensors with the Atacms and PrSM batteries is necessary. Moreover, the Army will need to adapt command and control procedures to an unfamiliar maritime domain.

The annual Project Convergence events offer a laboratory for the Army to prepare the targeting and command and control complex before new weapons enter service. With the Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon, a medium-range ballistic missile and PrSM also set to enter service in the next three years, the Army is seeking to adapt quickly.

Last month, the Army used the first prototype of the Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node ground station. An artificial intelligence (AI) program named Prometheus sifted through intelligence information to identify targets. Another AI algorithm called SHOT matched those targets to particular weapons with the appropriate range and destructive power. An underlying fire-control network, called the Advanced Field Artillery Data System, provided SHOT with the location and magazine status of each friendly weapon system. A process that would otherwise take minutes or even hours dwindled—in an experimental setting—to a few seconds.

The first Project Convergence event last month focused on the Army's traditional mission against targets on land. The next event will seek to replicate that streamlined targeting process against ships possibly hundreds of miles away. These experiments are intended to help the Army familiarize itself with new tools in the command and control loop, such as automated target-recognition systems and targeting assignments. The event also helps the Army dramatically adapt, in a few years, institutional practices that had endured for decades.

“In order for a bureaucracy to change, [it has] to understand the need, and we have to create the use case in order for a bureaucracy to change,” says Gen. Mike Murray, the head of the Army Futures Command. “I think in Project Convergence, what we're able to demonstrate to the senior leaders in the army will further help drive that change.”

In a way, the Army is seeking to achieve in the maritime domain a networked sensor and command and control system that the Navy introduced to its fleet nearly two decades ago. To improve the fleet air-defense mission substantially, the Navy's Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) generally develops a common, shared database of tracks from the multiple airborne, surface and subsurface sensors available to a carrier battle group.

But the Navy also is building on the CEC standard. In 2016, a Lockheed F-35B demonstrated the ability to develop a target track of an over-the-horizon enemy warship. The track information was sent via the CEC to a launcher for a Raytheon SM-6. Although primarily an air- and missile-defense interceptor, in this case the SM-6 demonstrated an anti-ship role. A follow-on development SM-6 Block 1B is expected to optimize the weapon system as a long-range, anti-ship ballistic missile with hypersonic speed.

More recently, the Navy has been quietly experimenting with its own series of Project Convergence-like experiments. Known as the Navy Tactical Grid experiments, the Navy and Marine Corps organized a series of demonstrations in fiscal 2019, according to the latest budget justification documents. Building on the common operating picture provided by the CEC, the Navy Tactical Grid is possibly experimenting with similar automation and machine-learning algorithms to streamline and amplify the targeting cycle dramatically.

A new initiative is now replacing the Navy Tactical Grid experiments. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday tapped Rear Adm. Douglas Small, the head of Naval Information Warfare Systems Command, to lead the effort known as Project Overmatch.

Small must provide a strategy, no later than early December, that outlines how the Navy will develop the networks, infrastructure, data architecture, tools and analytics to support the operational force. This includes linking hundreds of ships, submarines, unmanned systems and aircraft.

“Beyond recapitalizing our undersea nuclear deterrent, there is no higher developmental priority in the U.S. Navy,” Gilday wrote in an Oct. 1 memo that revealed the existence of Project Overmatch. Aviation Week obtained a copy of the document. “I am confident that closing this risk is dependent on enhancing Distributed Maritime Operations through a teamed manned-unmanned force that exploits artificial intelligence and machine learning.”

While Small is tasked with creating the “connective tissue,” Gilday directs Vice Adm. James Kilby, deputy chief of naval operations for warfighting requirements and capabilities (N9), with accelerating development of unmanned capabilities and long-range fires, Gilday wrote in a separate Oct. 1 memo outlining the details of Project Overmatch.

Kilby's assessment must include a metric for the Navy to measure progress and a strategy that appropriately funds each component. His initial plan is also due to Gilday in early December.

“Drive coherence to our plans with a long-term, sustainable [and] affordable view that extends far beyond the [future years defense plan],” Gilday wrote.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/missile-defense-weapons/us-army-flexes-new-land-based-anti-ship-capabilities

Sur le même sujet

  • Should the military treat the electromagnetic spectrum as its own domain?

    7 novembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Should the military treat the electromagnetic spectrum as its own domain?

    By: Nathan Strout Military leaders are reluctant to treat the electromagnetic spectrum as a separate domain of warfare as they do with air, land, sea, space and cyber, even as the service increasingly recognize the importance of superiority in this area. At the Association of Old Crows conference Oct. 30, representatives from the Army, Navy and Air Force weighed in on a lingering debate: whether the electromagnetic spectrum should be considered its own domain. In short, while the spectrum can legitimately be described as a physically distinct domain, it does not make sense logistically for the Department of Defense to declare it a separate domain of warfare, they said. “It's something that we've had a lot of discussion about ... In one way, you can argue that the physical nature of the electromagnetic spectrum, the physical nature of it being a domain. However, I understand the implications and those are different challenges for a large organization like the Department of Defense. So I think that there's a little bit of a different discussion when you talk about domain and what that implies for the Department of Defense and each of the departments in a different way,” said Brig. Gen. David Gaedecke, director of electromagnetic spectrum superiority for the Air Force's deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration and requirements. Regardless of whether it's an independent domain, military leaders made clear that leveraging the electromagnetic spectrum is a priority for every department and every platform. “We're going to operate from strategic down to tactical, and EMS ... is going to enable all of our forces to communicate and maneuver effectively, so we'll have a layered approach across all the domains that we operate in,” said Laurence Mixon from the Army's Program Executive Office for Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors. “EMS is definitely an aspect of the operational environment that every tactician has to be aware of, understand and leverage. And on the acquisition side we have to consider EMS when we are developing every one of our systems. I think since EMS crosses all of the domains that we currently have today that we identify and use in the joint parlance--I don't think the Army is ready to call it a domain." Similarly, while the Navy is working to understand how EMS works best within the maritime domain, Rear Adm. Steve Parode, director of the Navy's Warfare Integration Directorate, N2/N6F, indicated that there was no rush to declare EMS a separate domain. “For the Navy, we're pretty comfortable with the way we are into the maritime domain as our principal operational sphere. We are working through understanding the EMS and the way it relates to physical properties in that domain. We know where we're strong and we know where we're weak. And we understand principally why we're weak. We're making decisions about how to get better,” said Parode. https://www.c4isrnet.com/electronic-warfare/2019/11/06/should-the-military-treat-the-electromagnetic-spectrum-as-its-own-domain/

  • Lockheed Martin receives USD1.4 billion for FMS C-130J work

    2 décembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Lockheed Martin receives USD1.4 billion for FMS C-130J work

    by Gareth Jennings Lockheed Martin has been awarded USD1.4 billion to support future Foreign Military Sales (FMS) work on the C-130J Hercules through to 30 November 2030. The indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract, which was announced by the US Department of Defense (DoD) on 30 November, covers FMS sustainment and support work related to the four-engined airlifter built at the company's Marietta facility in Georgia. “Services include programme management support, spares, supply support services, support equipment, diminishing manufacturing sources, sustaining engineering services, sustaining engineering/technical services, field services representatives, logistics service representatives, technical order updates, technical order print and distribution, country standard time compliance technical orders and depot maintenance,” the DoD said. The DoD added that the sole-source acquisition involves 100% FMS funding, but that no funds have yet been obligated. This award follows an IDIQ agreement for USD15 billion signed earlier in 2020 to support all remaining domestic and FMS C-130J Hercules work through to 16 July 2030, which itself followed an earlier USD10 billion deal from 2016. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/lockheed-martin-receive-usd14-billion-for-fms-c-130j-work

  • IAI names Boaz Levy as new chief exec

    23 novembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    IAI names Boaz Levy as new chief exec

    By: Seth J. Frantzman JERUSALEM — Israel Aerospace Industries has named Boaz Levy, its former vice president for the Systems Missiles and Space Group, as its new CEO. Levy's group oversaw major contracts for IAI over the years, including billion-dollar deals in India in 2018. He was also central to the Arrow 3 program, which was developed with U.S. support to intercept high-altitude targets in space, such as ballistic missiles. In his new position, Levy said he plans to lead the company through the challenges of the future. “IAI has transformed in recent years, but we still have a considerable way to achieve the company's potential and strengthen our position in existing and new markets,” he said. Levy's appointment was approved by the Board of Directors, according to a statement from the company. The search committee chose Levy to replace Nimrod Sheffer after announcing in July he would step down. Sheffer had replaced Joseph Weiss as CEO in 2018, who had been at the helm of the company for six years. Sheffer came from the strategic planning area of the company and had drafted a new growth strategy for IAI. In March the company said its annual revenue surpassed $4 billion for the first time. That was an increase from $3.6 billion in 2018 and $3.5 billion in 2017. IAI's chairman of the board, Harel Locker, praised the unanimous decision to nominate Levy. “Levy has successfully managed the Systems Missiles and Space Group — IAI's most profitable group that in recent years has made technological and financial groundbreaking achievements. Boaz knows the domestic and international defense market and understands our customer's needs,” Locker said. Sheffer officially stepped down on Oct. 31, and Levy's nomination has been submitted to Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz and Minister for Cyber and National Digital Matters Dudi Amsalem, who supervise the government's authority over IAI. IAI is one of Israel's three large defense companies along with Elbit Systems and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. Many of the companies' capabilities are integrated into key Israeli weapon systems, such as the Iron Dome air defense system, which uses radar made by IAI subsidiary Elta Systems. Similarly, the new Sa'ar-class corvette will combine capabilities from IAI, including a new sea-to-sea missile the company recently tested. Levy was previously head of IAI's air defense division between 2010 and 2013. A graduate of Israel's Technion, he came to IAI in 1990 as an engineer and worked on the Arrow program in the 1990s and 2000s. According to IAI, he “headed the induction of the Arrow-2 into operational service.” He also headed the Barak-8 program, which IAI claims is one of the world's most advanced air defense systems. The Barak-8 is also a major revenue source for the company. In 2017, Levy indicated Israel aimed to build future interceptors beyond Arrow 2 and Arrow 3. The Arrow 3 is currently Israel's top tier in a multilayered air defense system that includes the Iron Dome and David's Sling, all programs supported by the U.S. More than 20 American states are involved in the production of Arrow 3. Israel faces increasing threats from Iran and also challenges at sea, which is partly why it has shifted its naval doctrine amid adoption of the new Sa'ar 6 corvettes, and also why it rolled out a new multiyear defense strategy called Momentum. The country has aso begun modernizing training, creating new military units and upgrading communications systems for its armed forces. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/11/20/iai-names-boaz-levy-as-new-chief-exec

Toutes les nouvelles