11 mai 2020 | International, C4ISR

Where the next iteration of the Army’s network capabilities is heading

The Army is finishing up a list of requirements for technologies it needs for the next round of its network modernization capabilities, known as Capability Set 23, one of the service's network leaders said May 6.

The Army wants to have research and development contracts for prototypes signed no later than July, according to Maj. Gen. Peter Gallagher, director of the network cross-functional team for Army Futures Command. He added that the ongoing coronavirus pandemic has slowed the timeline.

Capability set 23 is a follow-on effort to capability set 21, which is addressing current capability gaps in the Army's network with technology currently available, such as improved network transport capabilities. The service plans to deploy new network tools every two years starting in 2021 as part of a continuous network modernization plan.

“We realized we weren't going to be multi-domain dominant with what we fielded in Cap Set '21,” said Gallagher, speaking May 6 at the C4ISRNET conference.

For Capability Set '23, the service plans to take advantage of emerging technology, with developments from either commercial industry or internal researchers that are part of the Command, Control, Communications, Commuters, Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Center at Aberdeen Proving Ground.

“The next steps for Cap Set '23 — it's about enhanced capacity in our network backbone,” said Gallagher. “High capacity, low latency communications that are not readily available today, but they're emerging in technology."

The key piece for is medium-Earth and low-Earth orbit satellite constellations, which will provide the Army with significantly more bandwidth and reduced latency.

“In some cases, it's kind of like having a fiber optic cable through a space-based satellite link,” Gallagher said.

Gallagher added that Army plans to prototype the technology over the next year and added that around spring next year the Army plans to be working on the preliminary design review for Capability Set '23.

Capability Set '23 will also expand on tools from Capability Set '21 to increase the resiliency of the Army's network. Gallagher said that the service is looking at advanced networking waveforms that can be effective in a contested environment.

For Capability Set '23, the Army reviewed more than 140 white papers on capabilities and narrowed its selection to 12 papers that they thought would be ready for the second capability set iteration and will help “prototype and make some network design choices," Gallagher said.

The Army then held a “shark tank” style event in March and is now “actively in discussions with vendors,” said Justine Ruggio, director of communications for the Network Cross Functional Team at Army Futures Command.

Meanwhile, the Army is collecting feedback from soldiers on Capability Set '21 pilots and will procure those technologies this year. Initial delivery of the new capabilities to units is scheduled for second quarter of fiscal 2021, Gallagher said.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/c2-comms/2020/05/07/where-the-next-iteration-of-the-armys-network-capabilities-is-heading/

Sur le même sujet

  • The Army's M1 Abrams Tank Is About To Get Even Deadlier

    8 janvier 2019 | International, Terrestre, C4ISR

    The Army's M1 Abrams Tank Is About To Get Even Deadlier

    by Kris Osborn The Army is engineering new AI-enabled Hostile Fire Detection sensors for its fleet of armored combat vehicles to identify, track and target incoming enemy small arms fire. This system, integrated onto Apache Attack helicopters, uses infrared sensors to ID a “muzzle flash” or heat signature from an enemy weapon. The location of enemy fire could then be determined by a gateway processor on board the helicopter able to quickly geolocate the attack. The Army is engineering new AI-enabled Hostile Fire Detection sensors for its fleet of armored combat vehicles to identify, track and target incoming enemy small arms fire. Even if the enemy rounds being fired are from small arms fire and not necessarily an urgent or immediate threat to heavily armored combat vehicles such as an Abrams, Stryker or Bradley, there is naturally great value in quickly finding the location of incoming enemy small arms attacks, Army weapons developers explain. There are a range of sensors now being explored by Army developers; infrared sensors, for example, are designed to identify the “heat” signature emerging from enemy fire and, over the years, the Army has also used focal plane array detection technology as well as acoustic sensors. “We are collecting threat signature data and assessing sensors and algorithm performance,” Gene Klager, Deputy Director, Ground Combat Systems Division, Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate, told Warrior Maven in an interview last year. Klager's unit, which works closely with Army acquisition to identify and at times fast-track technology to war, is part of the Army's Communications, Electronics, Research, Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC). Army senior leaders also told Warrior Maven the service will be further integrating HFD sensors this year, in preparation for more formals testing to follow in 2019. Enabling counterattack is a fundamental element of this, because being able to ID enemy fire would enable vehicle crews to attack targets from beneath the protection of an armored hatch. The Army currently deploys a targeting and attack system called Common Remotely Operated Weapons System, or CROWS; using a display screen, targeting sensors and controls operating externally mounted weapons, CROWS enables soldiers to attack from beneath the protection of armor. “If we get a hostile fire detection, the CROWS could be slued to that location to engage what we call slue to cue,” Klager said. Much of the emerging technology tied to these sensors can be understood in the context of artificial intelligence, or AI. Computer automation, using advanced algorithms and various forms of analytics, can quickly process incoming sensor data to ID a hostile fire signature. “AI also takes other information into account and helps reduce false alarms,” Klager explained. AI developers often explain that computer are able to much more efficiently organize information and perform key procedural functions such as performing checklists or identifying points of relevance; however, many of those same experts also add that human cognition, as something uniquely suited to solving dynamic problems and weighing multiple variables in real time, is nonetheless something still indispensable to most combat operations. Over the years, there have been a handful of small arms detection technologies tested and incorporated into helicopters; one of them, which first emerged as something the Army was evaluating in 2010 is called Ground Fire Acquisition System, or GFAS. This system, integrated onto Apache Attack helicopters, uses infrared sensors to ID a “muzzle flash” or heat signature from an enemy weapon. The location of enemy fire could then be determined by a gateway processor on board the helicopter able to quickly geolocate the attack. While Klager said there are, without question, similarities between air-combat HFD technologies and those emerging for ground combat vehicles, he did point to some distinct differences. “From ground to ground, you have a lot more moving objects,” he said. Potential integration between HFD and Active Protection Systems is also part of the calculus, Klager explained. APS technology, now being assessed on Army Abrams tanks, Bradleys and Strykers, uses sensors, fire control technology and interceptors to ID and knock out incoming RPGs and ATGMs, among other things. While APS, in concept and application, involves threats larger or more substantial than things like small arms fire, there is great combat utility in synching APS to HFD. Full article: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/armys-m1-abrams-tank-about-get-even-deadlier-40847

  • Harris Corporation Awarded Contract to Support Boeing’s MQ-25 Unmanned Tanker for the US Navy

    7 mai 2019 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR

    Harris Corporation Awarded Contract to Support Boeing’s MQ-25 Unmanned Tanker for the US Navy

    Highlights: Onboard computer provides superior processing capacity and enhanced situational awareness Processor, based on advanced open systems and COTS, allows for faster and easier upgrades Reaffirms Harris' strategy to leverage open systems processors into new platforms Harris Corporation (NYSE:HRS) has been awarded a contract by The Boeing Company to partner with Boeing AvionX in supplying the mission management open systems processor for the MQ-25 unmanned aerial refueling program. “Harris and Boeing have invested substantial R&D to develop affordable, high-performance solutions that allow for faster and easier upgrades,” said Ed Zoiss, president, Harris Electronic Systems. “This contract reaffirms Harris' strategy to leverage open systems processors into new platforms.” The mission management processor is based on an advanced open systems architecture solution and commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) technology. The mission management processor manages sensor and communications functions on the MQ-25, providing the onboard processing capacity necessary to support advanced computing needs. Harris will provide hardware and firmware in conjunction with Boeing's open systems architecture solution. The MQ-25 is the U.S. Navy's first operational carrier-based unmanned aircraft and is designed to provide a much-needed refueling capability. The contract supports Boeing's engineering and manufacturing development program to provide four MQ-25 aircraft to the U.S. Navy for Initial Operational Capability by 2024. Harris has been a supplier to Boeing since the 1980s on a wide range of military aircraft, munition, and satellite programs. This latest contract will continue job growth for Harris in Florida, which is a supplier of mission management processors to Boeing and other major aircraft programs. “The MQ-25 program is vital because it will help the U.S. Navy extend the range of the carrier air wing, and Boeing and our industry team is all-in on delivering this capability,” said Dave Bujold, Boeing's MQ-25 program director. “The work we're doing is also foundational for the future of Boeing – where we're building autonomous systems from seabed to space.” https://www.harris.com/press-releases/2019/05/harris-corporation-awarded-contract-to-support-boeings-mq-25-unmanned-tanker

  • How Republicans might accept a smaller defense budget

    12 février 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    How Republicans might accept a smaller defense budget

    By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― California Republican Rep. Ken Calvert is willing to meet Democratic lawmakers partway in their reported plans to trim the defense budget: cut back on civilian employees, not equipment and modernization. “Like everything else in government, personnel is your biggest cost, and the civilian-to-uniform ratio ... is at an all-time high,” Calvert, the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee's defense subpanel, said in an interview Wednesday. “Our inability to correct that trend is eating away at our military, our procurement, our readiness, all the above, and so we need to do this.” President Joe Biden is expected to release his federal budget plan in April, but battle lines are being drawn on Capitol Hill ahead of what is expected to be a tighter military budget than in recent years. While some key Republicans want to protect the military budget increases that came under then-President Donald Trump, or even build upon them, Calvert said he is open to “responsible reductions.” He is offering civilian cuts as an alternative to cutting end strength and weapons platforms. “Rather than reducing [personnel in] uniforms ― and I think there's some talk about doing that, especially in the Army ― we need to look at the civilian workforce, which is at the highest ratio to uniformed service members than it has ever been,” Calvert said. “If you're going to cut defense, are you going to cut procurement? People are arguing we need to build the Columbia-class submarine and Virginia-class submarine ― and I agree ― that we [keep the] Space Force, and [that] our satellite program is woefully behind ― and I agree. Where do you make your reductions when your overwhelming cost is personnel?” Under Calvert's bill, the Rebalance for an Effective Defense Uniform and Civilian Employees Act, or Reduce Act, a 15 percent cut to the civilian workforce overall and a cap for the Defense Department's Senior Executive Service at 1,000 employees would have to be in place by fiscal 2025 and remain through 2029. The defense secretary would be empowered to use voluntary-separation and early-retirement incentives toward the reduction. The legislation, which has been introduced several times before, was inspired by a 2015 study by the Defense Business Board that illustrated how the Department of Defense could save $125 billion over five years by slashing overhead. Still, the proposal to cut civilians would face new optics this year. As civilian voices were muted in favor of uniformed leaders under the Trump administration, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, a former general, committed under bipartisan pressure to “rebalance” Pentagon decision- and policy-making in favor of civilian leaders. It's also a different tact than that of the House Armed Services Committee's new top Republican, Rep. Mike Rogers, who plans to guard against cuts and would prefer a 3-5 percent increase in defense spending ― which Pentagon leaders say is required to carry out the 2018 National Defense Strategy. It's still early in the budgeting cycle, and the two may align. But in meantime, Calvert's approach offers something to fiscal conservatives, and it tracks with past efforts from Rogers' predecessor, former Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. Even if Republicans can fend off a top-line cut or win an adjustment for inflation to keep shipbuilding and aircraft procurement on track, Calvert said he supports cutting the Defense Department's civilian workforce. “Hey, I hope Mike's right. I mean, he is a good friend, but I think he's a realist too,” Calvert said. “I worked with his predecessor on procurement reform, I'm trying to do some personnel reform, and we need those reforms on both sides.” For their part, Democrats swiftly rejected Calvert's legislation, making it one of the first skirmishes of the annual battle over the defense budget. The defense subpanel's new chairwoman, Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., said she discussed the matter with Calvert and disagrees with him. “His proposal could lead to some of the most talented and committed DOD public servants losing their jobs,” McCollum said in a statement. “While we agree there is excess defense spending, my focus is on making smart investments that yield demonstrable outcomes by cutting waste and ending subsidies for outdated and unnecessary programs and facilities. In my view, the existing Department of Defense civilian workforce is mission critical to ensuring our national security.” The American Federation of Government Employees has historically opposed the bill, and a spokesman said funding and defense policy legislation passed last year prohibit civilian workforce cuts “without regard to impacts on readiness, lethality, military force structure, stress of the force, operational effectiveness and fully burdened costs.” With 768,000 federal employees working across all Defense Department components, the proposed cut amounts to 100,000 employees. Between 2015 and 2019, an average of just under 82,000 employees left DoD jobs each year. Calvert contends his 15 percent cut could be accomplished through attrition, not firings, and target “growth in middle management,” not the supply depots scattered around the country that have political backing. Previous cuts of civilian personnel have fueled increases in contracting costs ― and Calvert said he is open to cutting those too, in partnership with McCollum. “There would be discretion on the part of the people running the Pentagon; there are people you don't want to lose, they're in a special category, I get it,” Calvert said. “There are probably a lot of people you wouldn't miss, people up for retirement.” Democrats are more apt to take on nuclear modernization, which is projected to cost the Pentagon more than $240 billion in taxpayer dollars through 2028. In the balance is the contract for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, awarded to Northrop Grumman last year, to replace aging, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. Politico reports that progressive lawmakers and disarmament advocates are lobbying allies in the Biden administration for a pause in the GBSD program, while the Air Force and its allies in Congress, think tanks, and defense contractors are sharpening their arguments to preserve the program. Calvert acknowledged criticism of nuclear spending from House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., but said big cuts to the nuclear triad lack the backing to succeed. (The panel rejected a funding cut for GBSD last year.) “I know Adam has been critical of that, but there's absolute support for redundancy of the deterrent within the Republican ranks, and so I don't see that going away. What I'm hearing so far out of the administration is that they feel the same way, so I don't think that's going to happen,” Calvert said. Austin and Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks have voiced support for nuclear modernization broadly but stopped short of pledging to uphold the current nuclear modernization strategy in its entirety. Nuclear modernization cutbacks would “weaken the United States,” Calvert argued. “We're not just thinking about Russia; we've got China, who's rapidly militarizing space, and their missile capability is improving. Obviously we've got countries like North Korea or Iran that are building their own missile capability, so we have to have a strong deterrent to make sure we are ready for any contingency.” Jessie Bur of Federal Times and Leo Shane III of Military Times contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/02/11/how-republicans-might-accept-a-smaller-defense-budget/

Toutes les nouvelles