30 novembre 2018 | International, C4ISR

What will forces need in complex EW environment?

Sophisticated adversaries have been leveraging the electromagnetic spectrum to create significant dilemmas for U.S. and allied forces, say officials, and transformative efforts are needed to deal with an increasing complicated threat.

“China is outspending us probably 10 to 1 on trying to figure out how to use and manipulate the electromagnetic spectrum. Russia showed us what they're going to do with it in their incursion into Ukraine ... Electromagnetic warfare, electronic warfare at the maneuver level,” Gen. Paul Selva, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at the annual Association of Old Crows symposium held Nov. 28 in Washington, D.C.

“We haven't designed ourselves to fight that fight. They have demonstrated that they are not only willing, but they're [also] capable of deploying and employing electronic countermeasures at the ground and maneuver level. It is a reality that we are going to have to adjust to.”

The capabilities forces need

For the Army, it's not going to be one thing, Col. Mark Dotson, the capabilities manager for electronic warfare at the Cyber Center of Excellence, said at the symposium Nov. 27. There have to be layered capabilities and effects, each increasing range and sensing capability.

“We're still sorting through that,” Dotson said, noting the need to develop from the current tactical focus all the way to the strategic level.

“We're trying to expand our scope and get into what are those other things we need. Do we need artillery delivered capability? Do we need loitering munitions? Is it going to manned or is it an unmanned aircraft?”

In addition, Dotson said, the Army needs systems integrating EW, cyber and signals intelligence, and the service has started generating requirements working with the Intelligence Center of Excellence and the Cyber Center of Excellence.

“I think SIGINT and EW go hand in hand, so us not sharing going forward and working like a team like we do now makes no sense,” Col. Jennifer McAfee, Dotson's counterpart for Terrestrial and Identity at the Army Intelligence Center of Excellence, told C4ISRNET in a November interview.

McAfee added that the team is also joining up with the other centers of excellence to ensure that when they are pursuing requirements for airborne or ground systems, the Intelligence and Cyber centers are plugged in to leverage EW expertise and not create duplicative efforts.

Geolocating solutions

Others across the joint force have expressed the desire for more decoys, physical or non-physical, to confuse or confound enemy systems.

“It's network electronic warfare from air, sea and land; it's smart warfare combined with advanced decoys, whether they're physical decoys or cyber decoys out there; drones, swarms and jamming drones,” Col. John Edwards, commander of the 28th Bomb Wing, said at the symposium.

“Things that go out there to where an air defense operator cannot distinguish between what is cyber and what is real out there.”

Such aerial systems can be used to either overwhelm or distract air defenses, allowing strike aircraft to penetrate, or take the point jamming the air defenses and thus assuming all the risk leaving the more expensive and manned systems in the rear.

On the ground side, officials have also discussed the need for more investments in decoys.

Lt. Gen. Stephen Fogarty, commander of Army Cyber Command, told reporters in August that big investments needed to be made in this area. He envisioned forces being able to drop a decoy emitting strong signals off a truck at a fork in the road, thus drawing enemy attention to it.

“Now we're presenting multiple dilemmas to the adversary,” he said.

One of the difficulties of modern warfare is all jammers and sensors emit some kind of a signal in the electromagnetic spectrum, meaning they can be geolocated and targeted. This means if an enemy wants to use it, they have to take into account a risk calculus in revealing their position.

“Jammers are emitters, emitters are targets. I think that's something we really ought to be thinking about,” Selva said. “If you're going to operate in an electronically dense environment ... the tools actually reveal their position."

Similarly, decoys can be used to throw adversaries off the trail of friendly forces or distract from other items forces might want to protect.

”If I have something like a counterfire radar, that's really important to me. Maybe what I want to do, again, is push an alternate threat to the adversary," Fogarty said.

In these complex environments, Selva said forces need to be able to identify, localize and characterize the jammer. If that's possible, then forces can decide what to do with it. If the answer is they want to kill it, they have to have a tool to kill it.

“If you can't do all three of those things, the jamming is very effective,” he said.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/electronic-warfare/2018/11/29/what-will-forces-need-in-complex-ew-environment

Sur le même sujet

25 juin 2019 | International, Terrestre

After delay, US Army clears Joint Light Tactical Vehicle for full-rate production
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army has approved the Oshkosh-built Joint Light Tactical Vehicle's transition to full-rate production after a roughly six-month delay, according to a June 21 announcement. Full-rate production for the JLTV was pushed from an original schedule of December 2018 out to May this year due to a number of changes to the Humvee replacement. The Army decided to make a series of alterations as the result of soldier feedback, including a larger back window and the addition of a muffler. The approach was designed to minimize the cost and quantity of the vehicles that would need to be retrofitted, the vehicle's program office told Defense News at the time. The decision to delay the full-rate production did not stop the service from beginning to field 300 of the new vehicles to the Army's 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Stewart, Georgia, making it the first unit equipped with the vehicle in April 2019. “We are also grateful for soldier feedback on new features and enhancements,” Jeffrey White, the Army acquisition chief's principal deputy said in the Army announcement. “The Soldiers of the 1st ABCT, 3rd Infantry Division provided valuable input on enhancements such as increased situational awareness, reduction of system noise, a troop seat kit, and a companion JLTV trailer. Their assessments helped bring us all to a successful Full-Rate Production decision.” Oshkosh beat out Humvee-maker AM General and Lockheed Martin in 2015 to build the replacement for the Humvee for both the Army and the Marine Corps. The low-rate initial production, or LRIP, contract was worth $6.7 billion, and the entire program is estimated to be worth $30 billion through 2024. “Important insights from manufacturing and rigorous developmental and operational test during LRIP contributed to shaping the vehicle's current configuration,” George Mansfield, vice president and general manager of joint programs for Oshkosh Defense, said in a statement sent to Defense News. “The program remains on schedule and on budget, and ensures our troops have the protection, connection, and extreme off-road mobility they need today for current and future battlefields. The JLTV is the only light tactical vehicle being fielded today that can maneuver within combat formations,” he said. At the time of the LRIP award, a total of 49,100 JLTVs were planned for the Army, not including what the Marine Corps is planning to buy as well as a small number for the Air Force and Navy. The service cut its procurement of the JLTV in its fiscal 2020 budget request by 863 vehicles. The Army procured 3,393 vehicles in FY19 in LRIP but only plans to buy 2,530 vehicles in FY20. The Army originally planned in its FY19 request to buy 3,035 vehicles in FY20. It is unclear if more cuts will come for the JLTV. Army Secretary Mark Esper said at the time the FY20 budget rolled out that the vehicle was designed and procured in “the context of Afghanistan and Iraq,” and hence was just not as relevant anymore when applied to the fresh National Defense Strategy now guiding Army investment. “We are certainly cutting the total number” of JLTV procurement, Esper said. “I know that much. But whether it settles out, finals out right here, today, I can't tell you. In five years, I could maybe have a different number for you.” While the JLTV was designed for the counterinsurgency fight — a light vehicle with the protection to endure the blast of an improvised explosive device much like mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles — Oshkosh has used the JLTV's highly configurable design to increase firepower options on board a JLTV and to protect it from missile and rocket attacks. Over the past three years, it integrated remote weapon systems, a lightweight 30mm cannon paired with a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun, a Javelin integration kit, several .50-caliber machine guns, and a lightweight automatic chain gun, among other weapon systems. The IMI Iron Fist Active Protection System and Rafael's Trophy Light APShave both been integrated onto JLTVs for evaluation. And the Boeing Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense launcher, which was not selected by the Army for its interim SHORAD solution, was also integrated onto the JLTV to include an M3P .50-caliber machine gun, M299 launcher with four Longbow Hellfire missiles, a sensor suite, and a communications suite with the Thales VRC-111. Now that the Army has approved full-rate production for the JLTV, it is anticipated Foreign Military Sales prospects could begin more rapid materialization. Slovenia has already placed an order for a small number of JLTVs, and it's likely the United Kingdom as well as Lithuania will be future customers. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/06/21/after-delay-army-clears-joint-light-tactical-vehicle-for-full-rate-production/
22 mai 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Autre défense

Where do special forces fit in the National Defense Strategy?
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The most valuable role for U.S. special operations forces within the National Defense Strategy is to build relationships with countries in hot spots around the globe to keep Russia and China at bay. But that effort can't be at the expense of its counterterrorism mission, which remains the No. 1 priority of special forces, according to leadership within U.S. Special Operations Command. SOCOM plans to issue a report to Congress on a comprehensive review of its roles and missions this month, according to Mark Mitchell, the principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, who was speaking during a recent hearing with the House Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee. One of the main priorities for SOCOM is to carry out counterterror missions, but the National Defense Strategy focuses on great power competition against near-peer adversaries Russia and China, so House lawmakers wanted to know how special forces fit in a strategy that focuses less on counterterrorism and more on powerful adversaries. “We've been the tip of the spear on the [counterterror] fight,” SOCOM Commander Gen. Richard Clarke said during the hearing. “However, moving forward, particularly in great power competition, our special operations forces are not necessarily going to be in that fight because the whole idea of the strategy is to avoid a kinetic” confrontation, he added. Clarke said he's examining SOCOM relationships with U.S. Cyber Command, U.S. Strategic Command and U.S. Transportation Command as well as the global combatant commanders to see “how we can best integrate our forces and provide support to those in other domains.” “I think the special operations community is uniquely suited to build networks of partners and allies around the globe to put us in a position, first of all, to compete for that influence and legitimacy in peacetime,” Clarke added. Special forces also have an important role to play within the military information support operations center in Tampa, Florida, which is aligned with the State Department's Global Engagement Center, which “allows us to compete in the space ahead of time and make sure that we're countering some of the vitriol that's coming out of Russia at this time and the falsehoods,” Clarke said. According to Clarke and Mitchell, it's unlikely the reach of special forces around the globe will wane. “A [counterterror] deployment to Africa is also a part of that great power competition against the Russians and Chinese,” Clarke noted as an example. “We are trying to look at our employment of the SOF force from a holistic view to ensure that we're maximizing the return on that investment to our counterterrorism mission and our great power competition.” The relationships that U.S. special forces develop with other countries is also unique, Clarke noted. “A small team, a small element of Special Operations forces, can bring a significant impact working with foreign forces.” “Remember,” Mitchell added, “Chinese and Russian threats are global, and that's part of the reason why we're in 80 countries.” For example, Mitchell added, SOCOM received recent congressional approval to move forward with an important counterterror effort in the Philippines, but that is also a critical component of building influence within the country and “keeping Chinese at arm's length.” While the NDS is focused on great power competition, the strategy still recognizes the need to combat violent extremist organizations, which “is not going away, and we've got to balance that,” Mitchell said. So some new concepts for employment of special forces will likely emerge, according to Mitchell. “We're working with the services to ensure that we are integrated with their development efforts,” he added. But there are a few tasks where, if given the chance, SOCOM would take off its plate, particularly to improve its deployment ratio with double the time spent at home compared to overseas. Clarke said special forces in Africa could be better optimized. “That's not necessarily ‘take away the mission,' but I see reduction internal to some of these missions,” he said. Additionally, the mission to counter weapons of mass destruction is also an increasing burden on the force, Clarke said: “I think it's a right-sizing in the mission internal to make sure we have the right force allocation against it.” And SOCOM is looking at how the Army's security force assistance brigades might be better suited for certain security force assistance-type missions. “SOF should be in places where it's a light footprint, it's politically sensitive, with a small team, that is training other special operations forces primarily,” Clarke said. https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2019/05/17/where-do-special-forces-fit-in-the-national-defense-strategy/
23 août 2021 | International, Aérospatial

Coalition Fighter Shoots Down UAS In Northeast Syria | Aviation Week Network
A Coalition aircraft shot down an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) with an air-to-air missile near a U.S. military base in eastern Syria on Aug. 21, U.S. Central Command told Aviation Week.

Toutes les nouvelles

What will forces need in complex EW environment?

Sur le même sujet

Coalition Fighter Shoots Down UAS In Northeast Syria | Aviation Week Network A Coalition aircraft shot down an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) with an air-to-air missile near a U.S. military base in eastern Syria on Aug. 21, U.S. Central Command told Aviation Week.

Coalition Fighter Shoots Down UAS In Northeast Syria | Aviation Week Network
A Coalition aircraft shot down an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) with an air-to-air missile near a U.S. military base in eastern Syria on Aug. 21, U.S. Central Command told Aviation Week.