US Army’s interim short-range air defense solution crystallizes

Sur le même sujet

• 

  18 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR

  Virtual reality training — for pilots, maintainers and more — expands in 2020

  By: Stephen Losey One of the top priorities of Lt. Gen. Brad Webb, the newly minted head of Air Education and Training Command, will be expanding the Air Force's experiment with virtual reality training. So far, the Air Force has had success with Pilot Training Next, which uses VR, biometrics and artificial intelligence to better teach aspiring pilots how to fly. Webb is eyeing similar technologies, under the name Learning Next, to improve other forms of technical training. This could include teaching airmen how to maintain aircraft, fly remotely piloted aircraft or perform other technical tasks. These programs allow students' education to proceed more at their own pace, since they are based on competency and are not tied to a timetable, Wright said. A student who already has the fundamentals down can skip the basics and go right to what he or she needs to learn. AETC is now in the process of broadening Pilot Training Next, which has been a demonstration, to the next phase of wider experimentation, Webb said. He and Maj. Gen. Craig Wills, commander of the 19th Air Force, are working on plans to expand Pilot Training Next. By next summer, Webb wants to have set up Pilot Training Next elements at several squadrons, though it wouldn't be across all undergraduate pilot training bases. A few classes after that, Webb expects, Pilot Training Next will be expanded to all UPT bases. The Pilot Training Next expansion will likely be done methodically, at one base first, Webb said, though he would not say which base AETC is looking at. “What has happened in our last couple of years with Pilot Training Next has been an explosion, out of the box, of innovation,” Webb said. “Make no mistake, the Air Force wants this inculcated as fast as we can go,” he said. AETC is already in the “nascent stages” of testing VR and other technology-enhanced training for maintenance and other technical training as part of Learning Next, Webb said. Maintenance Next is a particular priority and is happening on an experimental basis at Kelly Field at Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland in Texas, he said, and using VR for RPA training is also proceeding. As the VR pilot training shows, such programs can accelerate in a hurry, he said. Ethics Webb also wants to cultivate an “environment of excellence, professionalism, ethics and character development” during his time at AETC. Webb, who was previously commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, pointed to the ethical clouds that have fallen over parts of the special operations community in recent years. For example, the Navy relieved the entire senior leadership team of SEAL Team 7 earlier this month over what it described as leadership failures that resulted in a breakdown of good order and discipline while deployed. AFSOC took a hard look at itself, Webb said, to make sure it doesn't allow similar lapses to fester. “For a leader, you can never ... talk about core values enough,” Webb said. “If I had to look myself in the mirror from my last command, I can tell you my team knew our mission and vision of priorities backwards and forwards.” But while airmen at AFSOC understood Air Force core values, he acknowledged he didn't always articulate those values in his everyday “walk-around, talk-around” encounters. That can create problems if leaders assume airmen already know about the core values, he said. When a unit starts to feel the pressure from high operations tempos and a lack of resources, Webb said, that “get-'er-done” mentality can lead to bad decisions if airmen don't have a firm foundation of the Air Force core values. “If you don't have a firm foundation, you can go to a dark place with that ... ‘find a way to yes' mentality,” Webb said. “We've got to always talk about professionalism and ethics, and also always talk about our core values. That will be a capstone” of his time at AETC. Webb said he plans to continue with AETC's recent improvements in how special warfare airmen are recruited and trained, which included standing up the new Special Warfare Training Wing and the special warfare-focused 330th Recruiting Squadron. More work needs to be done to “normalize” and fine-tune those units, and more firmly fold them into AETC's everyday culture, he said. https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/09/16/virtual-reality-training-for-pilots-maintainers-and-more-expands-in-2020/

• 

  13 mai 2022 | International, C4ISR

  Thales finalizes acquisition of RUAG training and simulation unit

  The acquisition aligns with armed forces modernization programs across the globe, and a move toward digitalization across land forces.

• 

  31 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Guam’s air defense should learn lessons from Japan’s Aegis Ashore

  By: Timothy A. Walton and Bryan Clark The head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said last week his top priority is establishing an Aegis Ashore system on Guam by 2026. New air defenses will help protect U.S. citizens and forces in Guam; but as Japan's government found, Aegis Ashore may not be the best option to protect military and civilian targets from growing and improving Chinese and North Korean missile threats. Guam is pivotal to U.S. and allied military posture in the Western Pacific. Home to Andersen Air Force Base and Apra Harbor, it is far enough from adversaries like China and North Korea to negate the threat from more numerous short-range missiles but close enough to support air and naval operations throughout the Philippine Sea and South and East China seas. Although the current Terminal High Altitude Area Defense battery on Guam can defend against some ballistic missiles, its single AN/TPY-2 radar is vulnerable and cannot provide 360-degree coverage. Moreover, THAAD's focus on high altitudes makes it a poor fit to defeat lower-flying aircraft or cruise missiles that would likely be used by China's military against Guam. The island needs a new air defense architecture. Aegis Ashore is highly capable, but has its own limitations. Designed primarily to counter small numbers of ballistic missiles, its fixed missile magazine and radar would be vulnerable to attack and would fall short against the bombardment possible from China. Instead of installing one or more Aegis Ashore systems on Guam, a more effective air and missile defense architecture would combine the latest version of the Aegis Combat System with a disaggregated system of existing sensors, effectors, and command-and-control nodes. A distributed architecture would also be scalable, allowing air and missile defenses to also protect U.S. citizens and forces operating in the Northern Marianas. Guam's geography enables longer-range sensing than would be possible from a ship or a single Aegis Ashore radar. Fixed, relocatable and mobile radio frequency sensors should be positioned around the island's perimeter, such as compact versions of SPY-6 or Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor radars and the passive Army Long-Range Persistent Surveillance system. During periods of heightened tension, passive and active radio frequency and electro-optical/infrared sensors could also be deployed on unmanned aircraft and stratospheric balloons to monitor over-the-horizon threats. This mixed architecture would provide better collective coverage and be more difficult to defeat compared to one or two fixed Aegis Ashore deckhouses. To shoot down enemy missiles and aircraft, the architecture should field mobile, containerized launchers for long-range interceptors like the SM-6 and SM-3 rather than Aegis Ashore's finite and targetable in-ground vertical launch magazines. They should be complemented by medium- to short-range engagement systems to protect high-value targets such as the Patriot, the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System or the Army's planned Indirect Fire Protection Capability, as well as non-kinetic defenses such as high-powered microwave weapons and electronic warfare systems that could damage or confuse the guidance systems on incoming missiles. Today, destroyers patrol the waters around Guam to provide ballistic missile defense capacity beyond that available with THAAD. A new distributed architecture would place more capacity ashore to free surface combatants from missile defense duty. In a crisis or conflict, the architecture could add capacity with surface action groups and combat air patrols capable of intercepting threats at longer ranges. Instead of Aegis Ashore's large, single C2 node, a distributed architecture would virtualize the Aegis Combat System to allow multiple facilities or mobile vehicles to serve as miniature air operations centers. The mobility of sensors, effectors and C2 nodes in this architecture would enable the employment of camouflage, concealment and deception, including decoys, to complicate enemy targeting and increase the number of weapons needed to ensure a successful attack. INDOPACOM's plan for implementing new Guam air defenses should also apply lessons from Japan's aborted Aegis Ashore program, whose accelerated timeline contributed to the selection of the least expensive and technically risky option — two fixed Aegis Ashore systems — and the discounting of alternatives. Adm. Phil Davidson's 2026 goal of improving Guam's defenses faces a similar risk. Bound by an iron triangle, Guam's air and missile defenses can be good, fast or cheap — but not all three. If 2026 is held as a rigid constraint, the only solution able to meet the schedule and requirements may be the familiar, and ineffective, fixed Aegis Ashore architecture. Compared to one or two Aegis Ashore sites, a distributed architecture may require slightly more time to develop or funds to field. But a phased approach could introduce new systems as funding becomes available and allow expanding the system's capability to meet the evolving threat. For example, SPY-6 radars, C2 bunkers and composite THAAD-Patriot-NASAMS batteries could be fielded before 2026, quickly followed by the introduction of mobile assets. Guam and the Northern Marianas are essential to U.S. strategy and operations in the Western Pacific. Their defenses have long been ignored, and Adm. Davidson should be lauded for charting a path forward. A disaggregated architecture, however, will be more likely to realize INDOPACOM's vision of resilient and scalable air and missile defense. Timothy A. Walton is a fellow at the Hudson Institute's Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, where Bryan Clark is a senior fellow. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/07/30/guams-air-defense-should-learn-lessons-from-japans-aegis-ashore/