A Plus Up for the Royal Australian Navy: Six New Patrol Boats from Austal

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on A Plus Up for the Royal Australian Navy: Six New Patrol Boats from Austal
05/09/2020

By Australian Defence Business Review

The Commonwealth has announced it will acquire six more Cape class patrol boats from Austal for the RAN as it seeks to support Australian industry during the Covid-19 pandemic crisis.

The six vessels will be built at Austal’s Henderson yard in Western Australia, and will add to the two Cape class vessels the RAN currently leases from Australian Border Force and eight Armidale class patrol boats. They will be joined in service by 10 larger Arafura class offshore patrol vessels from 2023.

“These vessels will not only enhance national security, but will provide important economic stimulus and employment continuity during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Defence Minister Senator Linda Reynolds said in a May 1 statement. “The ability to build more of these vessels in Australia will deliver Australian Industry Content of more than 65 per cent, providing significant opportunities for Australian industry and Defence, as well as more than 1,200 workers in the broader Australian supply chain.”

Minister for Defence Industry Melissa Price MP added, “This will help to ensure continued employment opportunities for 400 of Austal’s commercial shipbuilders in WA, with flow down benefits to Austal’s supply chain. Austal is an Australian industry success story with the company already building variants of the Cape Class Patrol Boat for international customers including the government of Trinidad and Tobago, …(and the) Guardian Class patrol boats in support of the…Pacific Patrol Boat program.”

The Armidale class has suffered in recent years with poor availability and greater maintenance requirements, reportedly due to overuse in the border security mission. While no timeframe for the Cape class to enter service was announced, its likely some of the Armidales will be decommissioned early as the Cape class vessels enter service.

This article was published by ADBR on May 1, 2020.

This article is published with permission of ADBR and all copyright remains with ADBR.

Featured Photo: Australian Defence Vessel Cape Fourcroy. (ADF)

 

When a Black Swan Comes

Posted on | by Robbin Laird
05/08/2020

We first published this article on January 8, 2012 and given the COVID-19 events, it seems prudent to republish the article, which focuses on the challenge of building resilient organizations.

The article as published in 2012 follows:

The Second Line of Defense team have been involved in crises management situations throughout their careers.  And crises management is a key issue in which the team is both interested and has published several inputs.

During a trip to Europe in November 2011, SLD’s Robbin Laird sat down with Paul Theron of the Thales Group to discuss his work on the challenge of crafting resilient organizations.  Theron is head of a working group within Thales, which addressed the key challenges surrounding collapse and response in crisis situations.  The group has focused on the challenge, in general, and within telecommunications infrastructures in particular.

Shaping resilient organizations as societies face Black Swan events. Credit Image: Bigstock

Black Swans and Gray Swans are a regular occurrence in the 21st century.  Building organizations which can deal with their dynamics are crucial.  At the heart of coping and recovering is the core capability of resilience.

The briefing, which anchored the conversation, can be seen below at the conclusion of the article.

The Theron briefing provides an overview to the approach being developed at Thales.  The brief provides seven findings on critical infrastructures resilience and we encourage our readers to go through the brief itself to get a sense of the core foundational work, which Theron and his team are doing with regard to this crucial challenge facing 21st century organizations and societies.

In this piece, we are going to provide an overview of some of the key dynamics of change associated with the need to provide flexible and agility capabilities to manage 21st century complexity.  In other words, we are going to harvest some of the findings and points during the discussion and craft a narrative regarding the challenge of crafting a resilient organization.

The brief is based on several real world events from which some core propositions about resiliency were developed.  Among these events are the impact and response to Katrina, the challenge of trauma faced by Paris firemen, and the Mann Gulch incident in Montana in August 1949.

At the heart of the challenge is recognizing that 21st century societies and organizations have an inherent complexity within which system or sub-system collapse can be expected.  The need is to prepare for the unexpected because that is the expected.

A Theron noted: “we live in such complex world, that we cannot forecast what’s going to happen next.”

Crises are largely started by incidents but as an incident unfolds there are multiple dynamics in which simply responding to the initial incident will not be sufficient.  Indeed, by focusing simply on a single incident and following the procedures for “normal” response to a single incident will lead to system or sub-system failure.

Theron underscored that “events which started in relatively limited way start impacting the whole world because the phenomenon propagates to other spheres which themselves are going to affect other spheres and from one sphere to the next, the phenomenon amplifies, becomes bigger, but in a way that you can hardly predict because in fact you’re going to have so many interactions between those spheres that the way each interaction will work is completely unpredictable.”

This means that as collapse is generated by events, the response team and its leaders needs to not only multi-task but also look for a core thread around which recovery can be built.  To do so will require not simply mobilizing internal resources but seeking outside resources as well.

A key element is to NOT focus on the proximate cause of the collapse but to weave together a more comprehensive response and narrative which would allow recovery.

Theron cautioned that you can’t plan for everything for every single disaster and the more so as you move up to the stage where phenomenon are going to combine with each other into something completely new and so you have to have that capability to create solutions to react dynamically to whatever emerges in the time of crisis.

And that’s, that’s a big change that most companies think they are going to resolve all issues.  But that way of thinking is wrong because we are not talking about a basic flood or a basic fire that ruins your computer department, we are talking about something that is going to be complex, which is going to mix, maybe a fire ruining your computer department combined with the financial crisis plus the arrest of your manager because he committed financial fraud and so on.  And these incidents create an event of such a magnitude and complexity that your business continuity plans are useless.  You have to re-think, re-position, and re-focus in shaping a recovery strategy.

Collapse is about system recovery and re-direction.  The two elements are highly correlated.  Indeed, Theron emphasized that crisis is an experience of collapse.  To navigate through a collapse is the attribute of resilience.  Resilience is the aptitude of a socio-technical system to surmount a crisis.

Resilience is demonstrated by several behavioral elements: getting by, resisting, resuming and rebounding from a crisis.A number of key elements can be highlighted about the nature of the challenge of dealing with crises and ways to shape resilient organizations.

  • Crises are an inherent part of interdependent and complex 21st century societies.
  • Crises are multifunctional and interactive.
  • If you prepare for single incident crises, you are putting yourself in harm’s way
  • Complex crisis management requires robust and resilient solutions.
  • Resilience is based on tactical and strategic agility.
  • Leadership and response teams can operate beyond the near term focal point.
  • Leveraging outside resources towards a clear end is crucial in situations of collapse and recovery.
  • Agility requires bundling internal and external resources to create a growth after a disaster outcome.
  • Resilience for organizations and societies is agile robustness.

According to Theron:  Resilience is the aptitude to face a crisis and to surmount a crisis.  To do that you need four aptitudes, three of which are drawn upon in the dynamics of dealing with collapse.

The first is the capability to get by.  You have a core mission, e.g., it is to rescue people in buildings and fire if you are a fireman, if you are a telecommunication provider it’s to deliver a communication service, if you are an army in the battlefield, it is to fight according to the plans set for you and you are not supposed to give up your mission just because you are facing even death.

The second is resisting the destructive pressure of the circumstances.  That means that you don’t allow yourself to be drawn down to the point you’re going to die.

Three, you have to find ways to resume your normal activity.

And four, you have to rebound.  That means that once the crisis is over, when you are finally in the past crisis stage, you have to think about what happened, to draw the lessons from what happened. 

You have to look at how at the world around you, maybe it has changed to a point significant enough to imply that you should adapt to that new world around you and get rid the old structures, the old plans, and the old ways of life.

And that’s rebounding.  And if the first three help you through the collapse stage, the fourth one is going to make you more robust, but probably more resilient because you will have learned that in certain extreme situations, what matters is the way you manage to navigate through the circumstances at hand.

Resilience is generated in part by tactical and strategic agility.  The ability to re-combine elements and to introduce new ones in shaping a post collapse system is central.  As Theron put it: You have to have that capability to break boundaries, to go beyond your boundaries and think completely differently.

We ended the conversation with Theron emphasizing the centrality of understanding where your organization fit within its matrix of interdependencies.

And he highlighted the need to spend time understanding those interdependencies PRIOR to crises in order to understand how to shape an agile response once a crisis hit.

For example, telecommunication depends on energy, electricity, but any electricity depends on telecommunication and electricity serves also gas and water distribution and so and water helps the telecommunication sector because you have to cool down big computer centers and so on.

So if you really want to assure the resiliency of a sector like telecommunications, and only focus narrowly on your facility, you will miss the point.  Because you are in that network of interdependencies and you can’t achieve resilience on your own. 

Your sector is analogous to a social group, which depends on the social groups around it. And therefore that means that you have to can have resiliency not only at your own level, but at a higher level, at a coordinated, collaborative level that is going to help you discuss the problems and prepare upstream for possible unknown devastating events.

And if you don’t have this collaboration upstream, in times of crisis, you won’t even know who’s the guy at the electricity company whom you should know and who could solve your problem.  You won’t have that possibility.  You won’t have coordinated plans.  You won’t have coordinated systems or alternative means to resolve situations.

COVID-19 Crisis: Geopolitical Implications for Australia

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on COVID-19 Crisis: Geopolitical Implications for Australia

By Paul Dibb

The coronavirus pandemic will affect the power of countries in different ways. The biggest impact will be reductions in the economic, and therefore military, strength and relative power of competing major states.

The American historian Walter Russell Mead says that ‘the balance of world power could change significantly as some nations recover with relative speed, while others face longer and deeper social and political crises’.

Henry Kissinger’s view is that ‘the world will never be the same after the coronavirus’. He stresses the need for the democracies to defend and sustain the liberal world order. A retreat from ‘balancing power with legitimacy’ will cause the social contract to disintegrate both domestically and internationally. The challenge for world leaders is to manage this crisis while building the future, he says, and ‘failure to do so could set the world on fire’.

Most importantly, the pandemic has widened the confrontation between the US and China, with uncertain results for Australia.

China stands to be a loser, not because its economic power won’t bounce back, but because its ideology forced this pandemic on the rest of the world when it could have been contained at the very outset. By suppressing information about the outbreak in Wuhan, the authorities lost the world at least four to six vital weeks when Beijing could have contained what is now an unprecedented global disaster.

China had been warned about the origins of the 2003 SARS epidemic, which, like the coronavirus, started in a major Chinese city. In both instances, the virus appears to have been transmitted to humans from wild animals sold in China’s wet markets. The leaders from President Xi Jinping down will carry the legacy of their denial and repression as a millstone that will be long remembered outside China as causing large numbers of unnecessary deaths worldwide.

In one fell blow, China has fatally undermined the advantages of globalisation—not only in a health sense, but also in Western countries’ dependence on China for medical drugs and equipment. Countries such as the US will diversify away from such reliance on China, even if that increases costs.

America’s reputation has also been damaged, by its inability to provide leadership in arguably the worst crisis since the end of the World War II. Allan Gyngell, a former head of Australia’s Office of National Assessments, has said that the US ‘looks irrevocably weakened as a global leader’. While China is now belatedly ‘offering its resources and experience in handling the virus to build relationships with other countries’, including in Europe, he notes that the US is ‘absent from any international leadership’.

President Donald Trump has failed to provide consistent and credible responses as the crisis has unfolded.

Rather than prompting a multilateral response, the Covid-19 crisis has ramped up extreme nationalism and harsh border-protection measures as the virus spread rapidly from one country to another. Nations are becoming acutely introverted as they give absolute priority to staving off massive deaths and the threat of calamitous economic damage, and even collapse for some.

In the longer term, this pandemic will likely fade away and most, but not all, advanced economies will snap back into economic growth. But it will be the most damaging crisis by far that our populations have experienced. The remarkably sudden and abrupt onset of this calamity will lead to greater uncertainty, and even fear, about our futures.

Australia will find itself weaker in the post-pandemic world. Serious economic damage may well have a long-term impact on cohesion and trust in our society. The reputation of our American ally has been badly damaged. And it remains to be seen whether we should allow our trade with China to resume its previous predominance.

A major lesson we should learn is to diversify our economic relationships and become more self-reliant, including in terms of our national security. This will involve a radical rethinking of the credible circumstances in which we will have to take the lead during security crises in our region without American involvement.

We will need to re-examine our vulnerabilities in such key areas as fuel supplies, critical infrastructure, and protective and offensive cyber resources. We should rapidly develop a new strategic posture, giving high priority to long-range missile attack capabilities to deter any power from threatening our strategic space.

A further serious geopolitical issue should not be underrated. It’s highly likely that neighbouring countries, critically important to us strategically, will suffer severe structural damage to their societies and economies. The health systems of Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu may be overwhelmed, with very high death rates.

They will need our help to fight this virus and to restructure their economies. Australia and New Zealand should lead the way. If we don’t, China will probably step in and offer massive economic and medical assistance as it seeks to entrench a sphere of influence in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, which will directly threaten our own security.

The future of the democracies in Australia’s primary area of strategic interest to our north and east must deeply concern Australian policy planners. We should ensure that our natural focus on our own serious problems doesn’t lead us into the trap of isolationism.

Indonesia, with over 270 million people, and Papua New Guinea, with nearly 8 million, must be priorities. If the coronavirus overwhelms their potentially fragile societies, we should be prepared to contribute generously to a prolonged and expensive effort to rebuild their health systems and economies. It’s not in Australia’s interests to see such strategically crucial neighbours collapse.

Australia’s former ambassador to Indonesia John McCarthy believes that the Covid-19 crisis could fuel support for extremist groups in Indonesia and place the nation’s stability at risk. We need to think carefully about the geopolitical impact of the virus on countries in our immediate region and give it our highest priority.

The nation-state has decisively reasserted itself as a prime actor in the global fight against Covid-19. There will be much greater calls for self-reliance, but as the international community becomes more fractious and the liberal order recedes, we must not lurch into a new bout of introversion.

Paul Dibb is emeritus professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University.

Featured Image: Kevin Frayer/Getty Images.

This article was published by ASPI on April 21, 2020.

 

Operation Solania

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Operation Solania

Operation Solania is the Australian Defence Force (ADF) contribution to regional security in partnership with the Pacific Island nations.

It also supports Operations Kuru Kuru, Island Chief, Tui Moana and Rai Balang, which are coordinated maritime surveillance and patrol operations run by the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), to detect and deter illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing activities.

The ADF’s contribution consists of Royal Australian Air Force B300 King Air and C-27J Spartan aircraft and the Royal Australian Navy ship HMAS Maryborough.

Australian Department of Defence

April 1, 2020

Artificial Intelligence Enabled Airborne Search and Rescue

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Artificial Intelligence Enabled Airborne Search and Rescue
05/07/2020

By Ms Samara Kitchener

Airborne search and rescue is an expensive and demanding task, but what if there was a better way?

AI-Search, Defence’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) prototype to transform airborne search and rescue, is now in its second phase of development.

The prototype is a collaboration between the Royal Australian Air Force’s Plan Jericho, Warfare Innovation Navy Branch and Air Mobility Group’s 35 Squadron. The system, which combines a sensor and processor, is highly portable and has the potential to enable any aircraft, including Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), vehicles or vessels to become an improvised search and rescue platform.

A recent C-27J Spartan sortie from RAAF Base Amberley off the coast of Stradbroke Island, with the assistance of the Australian Volunteer Coast Guard, helped evaluate the AI-Search algorithm to recognise a life raft and other waterborne vessels. This sortie was the second of several phases to develop and evaluate this proof of concept.

The AI-Search algorithms are being developed by budding machine learning expert, Lieutenant Harry Hubbert from the Warfare Innovation Navy Branch.

“During the sortie, we had a few GoPro sensors rigged up to detect a life raft and two algorithmic approaches working together to increase accuracy and the likelihood of a detection,” Lieutenant Hubbert said.

“This sortie was pretty challenging as the life raft was upside down, making it harder to see for both the human eye and the AI-Search sensors.

“The sensors are trained to detect an orange top, rather than a black top, but the AI-Search still had a 70 per cent detection rate, compared to the human detection rate of around 50 per cent.

“The 30 per cent AI-Search non-detections happened when there was low contrast between dark water and the black underside of the life raft, and the good news is that we had no false positives.”

Flying Officer Katherine Mitchell, piloting the aircraft as part of a search and rescue training exercise said that it was hard to see the upside-down life raft.

“We barely saw it 50 per cent of the time,” Flying Officer Mitchell said.

“AI-Search is already picking up more than what we are seeing, it’s incredible and it doesn’t get fatigued.”

Wing Commander Michael Gan, Plan Jericho’s AI lead said that they are now taking their learnings, finding the strengths and weaknesses, and iterating the next version.”

“The next phase will involve testing different sensor and processor combinations in a range of environmental conditions, with the potential of testing on a range of aircraft, including UAS,” Wing Commander Gan said.

This article was published by the Royal Australian Navy on April 21, 2020.

 

No. 35 Squadron loadmaster, Flight Sergeant Christian Allison, observes through a C-27J Spartan window during an artificial intelligence search and rescue training mission conducted off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
Deputy Director of Artificial Intelligence, Wing Commander Michael Gan on board a C-27J Spartan during an artificial intelligence search and rescue training mission conducted off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
The equipment used to detect life rafts, life boats and safety equipment during a C-27J Spartan artificial intelligence search and rescue training mission conducted off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
Deputy Director of Artificial Intelligence, Wing Commander Michael Gan on board a C-27J Spartan during an artificial intelligence search and rescue training mission conducted off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
Warfare Innovation Navy project manager, Lieutenant Harry Hubbert, on board a C-27J Spartan during an artificial intelligence search and rescue training mission conducted off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
No. 35 Squadron C-27J Spartan loadmasters, Flight Sergeant Christian Allison (L) and Sergeant Sam Makins prepare to deploy search and rescue equipment during a training mission held off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
No. 35 Squadron C-27J Spartan loadmasters, Flight Sergeant Christian Allison (L) and Sergeant Sam Makins prepare search and rescue equipment during a training mission held off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
No. 35 Squadron C-27J Spartan loadmaster, Flight Sergeant Christian Allison prepares search and rescue equipment during a training mission held off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.
No. 35 Squadron C-27J Spartan loadmasters, Flight Sergeant Christian Allison (L) and Sergeant Sam Makins deploy search and rescue equipment during a training mission held off the coast of Stradbroke Island, Brisbane.

WestPac Exercise Tests ACE Approach: Highlights USAF Role in Maritime Operations

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on WestPac Exercise Tests ACE Approach: Highlights USAF Role in Maritime Operations
05/06/2020

The USAF led a joint exercise in January 2020 focused on WestPac. The exercise had the stated purpose of distributing airpower throughout the operational area and working integratability to shape the desired combat effect.

But not overtly noted in the official statements was the growing concern and focus which the USAF, working with the US Navy and the USMC, and where relevant the US Army, on dealing with a major threat to its operational basing — the maritime strike threat from Russia and China in the Pacific.

When the B-21 comes to the force, it will have a significant role in the reworking of the kill web approach to dealing with the air as well as maritime strike threats to USAF operational basing.

Notably, when we visited MAWTS-1, USAF officers had become regular visitors to work with the Marine Corps Aviation on best ways to do expeditionary basing and operations.

With the US Navy highlighting a distributed maritime operations approach along with the USAF highlighting its ACE approach, a key question is how these will dovetail and shape an effective kill web capability in the Indo-Pacific region?

With the two services clearly focused on ensuring their capabilities to work integrated distributed operations, how do they view the strategic direction they would most like to see from the USMC? What kind of mobile basing and expeditionary operations will be best aligned with where the USAF and the US Navy are shaping their strategic trajectories in their warfighting approaches?

Because the Indo-Pacific is not primarily a land theater of operations for the United States, what roles for the US Army are most supportive of the evolving air-maritime kill web approach?

Given the defense modernization trajectories of U.S. allies in the region, notably our most important ones in the air-maritime domain, Japan and Australia, how best to ensure synergy among national approaches?

An 18th Wing Public Affairs release on January 10, 2020 highlighted the exercise as follows:

KADENA AIR BASE, Japan — More than 60 aircraft and 300 personnel from the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Army, and Marine Corps participated in 18th Wing’s first WestPac Rumrunner exercise Jan. 10, 2020.

With the evolving security environment in the Indo-Pacific and to further support a safe and secure region, the 18th Wing spent months designing WestPac Rumrunner as an exercise to train counter air capabilities and strengthen joint interoperability. In addition to air tactics and joint interoperability, Airmen were charged with ensuring continuous airpower by using tactics derived from Pacific Air Force’s agile combat employment concept of operations, or ACE.

“As we executed this first iteration of Rumrunner, the exercise development team monitored how well our distributed joint forces came together and applied elements of ACE to disperse, recover, and rapidly resume operations,” said Capt. Brian Davis, 67th Fighter Squadron F-15C evaluator pilot and exercise director for WestPac Rumrunner. “The Rumrunner team looks forward to how we will continue to evolve and hone our procedures in the future.”

As the largest combat wing in the U.S. Air Force, Kadena Air Base was able to deploy a wide array of aircraft to simulate a realistic training scenario along with support from joint forces. The adversary air force primarily consisted of the Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and Air Force’s F-15C Eagles, but the home team brought overwhelming joint capabilities to deny the adversarial advance.

F-15Cs defended the airspace and the KC-135 Stratotanker provided aerial refueling, while the 353rd Special Operations Group’s MC-130 Commando II dramatically extended the range and combat capabilities within the battlespace.

But, most unique to this exercise was the air-to-air and air-to-ground command and control provided by the Air Force’s E-3 Sentry, Navy’s E-2 Hawkeye, and 18th Wing’s 623rd Air Control Squadron, all of whom worked seamlessly to ensure battlespace situational awareness while expertly handing-off key targeting information to the U.S. Army’s 1-1 Air Defense Artillery’s Patriot surface-to-air missile battery. Marine Air Control Squadron-4 helped track the operations and were able to test integration capabilities for their systems at Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Japan.

“My unit and I were excited to be participating in a joint large force mission of this type. We had the unique opportunity to work with the Army ADA through the 623rd ACS to integrate as a cohesive air defense team,” said Capt. Shawn Storey, 961st Airborne Air Control Squadron. “This exercise delivered a great opportunity to plan, execute and debrief in person to develop relationships and hone our joint integration, communications and execution skills face-to-face.”

As part of the ACE strategy, to extend and improve the availability of aircraft during a contingency, Air Force maintenance Airmen were positioned on the ground at MCAS Futenma to provide a quick refuel so the aircraft could swiftly be launched and returned to the fight.

“The ACE concepts being developed are not confined by current maintenance doctrine or tactics,” explained Lt. Col. Johnny West, 18th Maintenance Group deputy commander. “Our senior leaders are encouraging maintainers and logisticians to be more creative and assertive at lower levels to overcome generation and re-generation limitations that could occur in a highly-contested environment,” he said. “Today’s Rumrunner exercise allowed us to practice operating in a simulated austere environment, which is fundamental to the ACE concept, and our maintainers successfully refueled F-15s and launched them back into the air.”

Overall, Brig. Gen. Joel L. Carey, 18th Wing commander, described WestPac Rumrunner as a success and a valuable learning tool for the U.S. Pacific Air Forces and joint services.

“I couldn’t be more proud of our efforts today,” said Gen. Carey. “This event was a big win for us in the Pacific. Being able to test our ACE capabilities with our joint partners highlights the importance of interoperability and the capabilities of our Airmen and sister services. Working in conjunction with the Navy, Army and Marine Corps was crucial to the success of Rumrunner and its ability to be a powerful learning tool moving forward.”

A maintainer from the 18th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron prepares to fuel an F-15 Eagle during Exercise Rumrunner at Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Japan, Jan. 10, 2020. Airmen from the 18th Wing operate in a safe and e3nvironmentally conscious manner and adhere to strict standards set by Department of Defense and host-governments at all times. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Raughton)
A U.S. Air Force F-15C Eagle from the 44th Fighter Squadron takes off during exercise WestPac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020, at Kadena Air Base, Japan. The 18th Wing stands ready to cooperate with regional partners to compete against peer adversaries. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Mandy Foster)
The 18th Wing and its joint partners executed the first WestPac Rumrunner exercise today, which focused on defensive counter air capabilities and joint interoperability using agile combat employment concepts. (U.S. Air Force Photo by Airman 1st Class Rebeckah Medeiros)
U.S. Air Force Airman 1st Class Bradley Smith, 18th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron crew chief, performs post-flight inspections during Exercise WestPac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020 at Kadena Air Base, Japan. Airmen are trained and empowered to make disciplined decisions at subordinate levels, ensuring the air component commander’s intent is met and the initiative is taken in a contested environment. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Rhett Isbell)
Three U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornets fly in formation during exercise WestPac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020, out of Iwakuni, Japan. The WestPac Rumrunner exercise brought Airmen and joint partners together to train and execute innovative ways to deploy forces in a conteted environment. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Cynthia Belío)
U.S. Navy F/A-18E Super Hornets fly alongside a 909th Air Refueling Squadron KC-135 Stratotanker after aerial refueling during Exercise WestPac Rumrunner at Kadena Air Base, Japan, Jan. 10, 2020. The exercise provides an opportunity to Kadena Airmen to practice a diverse array of capabilities in addition to working alongside our joint partners in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Matthew B. Fredericks)
An HH-60G Pave Hawk assigned to the 33rd Rescue Squadron performs helicopter air-to-air refueling with an MC-130J Commando II from the 17th Special Operations Squadron above the Pacific Ocean during Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020. Westpac Rumrunner represents an evolution of 18th Wing assets and capability to work with joint partners in defense of American allies and to ensure a free and open Indo‐Pacific. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)
Airmen of the 18th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron arm a 44th Fighter Squadron F-15C Eagle during Exercise WestPac Rumrunner at Kadena Air Base, Japan, Jan. 10, 2020. The Airmen demonstrated their speed and precision at launching aircraft. The U.S. Pacific Air Forces validated new ways to deploy and maneuver assets in order to operate in contested environments through exercises, engagements and operations like WestPac Rumrunner. (U.S. Air Force Photo by 2nd Lt. Ryan Simpson)
Two F-15C Eagles from the 44th Fighter Squadron refuel with a KC-135 Stratotanker from the 909th Air Refueling Squadron Jan. 10, 2020, during exercise WestPac Rumrunner out of Kadena Air Base, Japan. Rumrunner represents an evolution in the capabilities of 18th Wing assets to work with joint partners to defend American allies and ensures a free-and open Indo-Pacific region. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Matthew Seefeldt)
An MC-130J Commando II assigned to the 17th Special Operations Squadron, 353rd Special Operations Group, is prepped for flight before participating in Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020, at Kadena Air base, Japan. The 18th Wing and its joint partners executed the first WestPac Rumrunner exercise, which focused on counter air capabilities and joint interoperability using agile combat employment concepts. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)
U.S. Air Force Airmen assigned to the 17th Special Operations Squadron, 353rd Special Operations Group, prep an MC-130J Commando II for flight before participating in Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020, at Kadena Air base, Japan. WestPac Rumrunner is an 18th Wing-led exercise dedicated to implementing agile combat employment concepts to ensure readiness in order to defend partners, allies and U.S. interests in the region. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)
U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Thomas Parris, 17th Special Operations Squadron loadmaster, performs preflight checks on an MC-130J Commando II in preparation for participating in Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020, at Kadena Air base, Japan. The exercise provided opportunities to hone critical expeditionary skillsets and increase interoperability in support of a free and open Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)
U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Thomas Parris, 17th Special Operations Squadron loadmaster, performs preflight checks on an MC-130J Commando II in preparation for participating in Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020, at Kadena Air base, Japan. Exercise WestPac Rumrunner provides the 18th Wing with opportunities to hone critical expeditionary skillsets with joint partners across the Indo-Pacific area of responsibility. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)
An HH-60G Pave Hawk assigned to the 33rd Rescue Squadron performs helicopter air-to-air refueling with an MC-130J Commando II from the 17th Special Operations Squadron above the Pacific Ocean during Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020. Units from the 18th Wing routinely conduct training with regional allies and partners to secure a free and open Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)
An HH-60G Pave Hawk assigned to the 33rd Rescue Squadron moves in to perform helicopter air-to-air refueling with an MC-130J Commando II from the 17th Special Operations Squadron above the Pacific Ocean during Exercise Westpac Rumrunner Jan. 10, 2020. WestPac Rumrunner provides 18th Wing assets opportunities to hone critical expeditionary skillsets with joint partners across the Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Sutton)

Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Red Flag 20-1

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Red Flag 20-1

Growler aircraft assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, takes off during Red Flag 20-1 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 27, 2020.

The Growler is a derivative of the F/A-18 Hornet, the US Navy’s maritime strike aircraft.

Its mission is mainly electronic attack and suppression of enemy air defenses.

Red Flag is the U.S. Air Force’s premier air-to-air combat training exercise, which provides aircrews the experiences of multiple, intensive air combat sorties in the safety of a training environment.

Known as the Lancers, VAQ 131 is a U.S. Navy tactical jet aircraft squadron specializing in kinetic and non-kinetic Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses.

(U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)

A U.S. Navy EA-18G Growler aircraft assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, takes off during Red Flag 20-1 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 27, 2020. The Growler is a derivative of the F/A-18 Hornet, the US Navy’s maritime strike aircraft. Its mission is mainly electronic attack and suppression of enemy air defenses, particularly at the start and on-going early stages of hostilities. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
A U.S. Navy EA-18G Growler aircraft assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, takes off during Red Flag 20-1 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 27, 2020. Red Flag is the U.S. Air Force’s premier air-to-air combat training exercise, which provides aircrews the experiences of multiple, intensive air combat sorties in the safety of a training environment. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
Two U.S. Navy Sailors assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station (NAS) Whidbey Island, Washington, perform preflight checks on an EA-18G Growler aircraft on the flightline at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 29, 2020. The first production Growler was delivered June 3, 2008 to VAQ 129, at NAS Whidbey Island. Initial operational capability and full rate production followed in the fall of 2009. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
U.S. Navy Lt. Brianna Bilunas, avionics armament division officer assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, grabs her oxygen mask during preflight checks on the flightline at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 29, 2020. Oxygen masks supply breathable air (a mixture of oxygen and nitrogen, the ratio between the two depending on altitude). (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
U.S. Navy Lt. Brianna Bilunas, avionics armament division officer assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, performs preflight checks in an EA-18G Growler aircraft on the flightline at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 29, 2020. Known as the Lancers, VAQ 131 is a U.S. Navy tactical jet aircraft squadron specializing in kinetic and non-kinetic Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
A U.S. Navy EA-18G Growler aircraft assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station (NAS) Whidbey Island, Washington, taxis on the flightline during Red Flag 20-1 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 27, 2020. NAS Whidbey Island is the premier naval aviation installation in the Pacific Northwest and home of all Navy tactical electronic attack squadrons flying the EA-6B Prowler and EA-18G Growler. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
U.S. Navy Airman, Alexus Tesi, a plane captain assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, checks a fuel line attached to an EA-18G Growler aircraft at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 29, 2020. Plane Captains perform daily checks on all aircraft and additional checks before and after each flight. Checks include looking for cracks on the plane, missing fasteners (which could allow foreign objects to damage an engine), emergency oxygen levels, and canopy cleanliness. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)
A U.S. Navy EA-18G Growler aircraft assigned to Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 131 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington, taxis on the flightline during Red Flag 20-1 at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, Jan. 27, 2020. Nellis AFB is one of the largest fighter bases in the world. Aircraft from Nellis operate on the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), which offers more than 15,000 square miles of airspace and 4,700 square miles of restricted land. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Dwane R. Young)

Shaping A Way Ahead for the Hawkeye/ Stingray Cluster in the Integratable Carrier Air Wing

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Shaping A Way Ahead for the Hawkeye/ Stingray Cluster in the Integratable Carrier Air Wing

By Robbin Laird

In my discussions earlier this year in San Diego with Vice Admiral Miller, we focused on the dynamics of change within and beyond the carrier air wing.

In that discussion, what was highlighted was a way to look at the shift from a legacy approach to the kill web approach, namely, the shift from the integrated to the integratable air wing.

That discussion highlighted that what is underway is a shift from integrating the air wing around relatively modest and sequential modernization efforts for the core platforms to a robust transformation process in which new assets enter the force and create a swirl of transformation opportunities, challenges, and pressures.

We discussed what might be called clusters of innovation, such as would be introduced as the MQ-25A Stingray comes onboard the carrier. In effect, the MQ-25 will be a stakeholder in the evolving C2/ISR capabilities empowering the entire combat force, part of what, in my view, is really 6th generation capabilities, namely enhancing the power to distribute and integrate a force as well as to operate more effectively at the tactical edge.

From this point of view, the MQ-25 will entail changes to the legacy air fleet, changes in the con-ops of the entire CVW and trigger further changes with regard to how the C2/ISR dynamic shapes the evolution of the CVW and the joint force.

The systems to be put onto the MQ-25 will be driven by overall changes in the C2/ISR force.

The cluster of innovation with the coming of the MQ-25A is being led by the transition from the legacy Hawkeye to the Aerial Refueling modified E-2D (AR) Advanced Hawkeye, which provides a game changing capability to a carrier air wing through advanced sensors & C2 networking capabilities, persistent presence, and greater operational reach.

That point was driven home to me in a discussion with CDR Christopher “Mullet” Hulitt, head of “CAEWWS,” the Navy’s airborne command & control weapons school located at Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center (NAWDC) at Naval Air Station Fallon.

As the cluster evolves, the notion of a platform-centric functional delivery of airborne early warning and battle management shifts to a wider notion of providing support to the distributed integrated combat force which flew off of the carrier and adjacent capabilities working with the air maritime deployed kill web.

We discussed a number of issues, and while I will not quote the CDR directly, I will highlight a number of takeaways from our conversation which provide insights into shaping a way ahead in the crafting, training and further developing of the integratable air wing.

The first takeaway is precisely the emergence of a different approach from the legacy Hawkeye to a new operational and training configuration.

With the coming of the MQ-25A Stingray and emerging integrated sensor and command & control capabilities, the “Airborne Early Warning” community has transitioned its role and title to reflect emerging roles and functions within a maritime kill web, with an Airborne Command & Control and Logistics Wing under the leadership of a Commodore, currently CAPT Matthew “Duff” Duffy.  

The second takeaway is that with the coming of the F-35 to the carrier wing, there is a broader shift in working diverse sensor networks to deliver the combat effect which extended reach sensor networks can empower.

At Fallon, they are working the relationship between the F-35 and the E-2D and sorting through how to make optimal use of both air systems in the extended battlespace. Commander, Airborne Command & Control and Logistics Wing and Carrier Air Wing Two and are moving forward with a new initiative, the First Integrated Training Evolution (FITE), which will provide basic, tailored integrated training incorporating E-2D(AR) and F-35 paired with fourth generation platforms.

It is about deploying an extended trusted sensor network, which can be tapped through various wave forms, and then being able to shape how the decision-making arc can best deliver the desired combat effect.

The third takeaway is that the foundation is clearly being laid for the decade ahead for a fully operational maritime kill web.

The strategic objective is to be able to operate extended reach, integratable, and interconnected sensor networks that provide the reach of the air wing beyond where physically its flies to deliver an extended reach combat effect.

The fourth takeaway, one which I have spent a lot of time working on before, is that the radar on the advanced Hawkeye is not in any way a traditional radar.

The problem of terminology in discussing the new combat capabilities is certainly highlighted when discussing radars, built around modules which have a variety of combat capabilities built in, and in the case of the E-2D (AR) the traditional line between what airborne command & control, sensors, and electronic warfare systems do is clearly being subsumed into new integrative capabilities which can do more than the sum of the parts.

The fifth takeaway is that with the arrival of software upgradeable aircraft like the E-2D (AR), integrated with the MQ-25A, the entire process of evolving combat capabilities onboard an aircraft, and its ability to operate as an integratable of a kill web is changing significantly.

The goal is to get to the point where the core platforms are flexible enough to evolve software rapidly and interactively.

And rather than having to ensure that each platform is maximized for what it can do with organic systems, the approach would to determine which platforms with which capabilities can be a tasked for different functions and through integratability be able to contribute to a wider array of tasks as well.

For example, with the coming of the MQ-25A working with the E-2D(AR) , evolving the sensor loadout on the MQ-25A along with reach back to Triton can allow the E-2D (AR)to do core functions differently but also adjust how it can provide support for evolving C2 tasking as well.

Rather than following a classic AWACS like target identification and strike tasking function, the manned aircraft function will be to support the dynamic force packing function in the extended battlespace.

With regard to the E-2D (AR), the Navy is designing interfaces to manage the airborne MQ-25A.

And with the advanced Hawkeye, there is a shift to operating two aircraft at the same time, replicating to some extent the 4-ship formation approach of an F-35 whereby the four ships operate as one combat brain within the airspace in which they are operating.

This is a shift from the legacy Hawkeye where one aircraft operated off of the carrier to a seamless integration of a 2-ship formation of Advanced Hawkeyes.

The sixth takeaway is with the coming of the subsurface and surface weapons schools as participants in NAWDC the focus of operations for the E-2D(AR)/MQ-25A Stingray cluster will be open 360-degree domain knowledge and combat support to leverage assets through the maritime kill web.

The seventh takeaway is that the process of change we saw when visiting NAWDC a few years ago is accelerating.

What we saw then was shaping a way ahead to open the aperture of training to prepare for the coming of the F-35 and the focus on continuous development associated with the integratable air wing. In the case of CAEWWS, they will shortly have direct access to an integrated test configured aircraft.

This allows CAEWWS to operate an aircraft which is a baseline above the capability of what Navy operational test squadrons are flying.

This is especially crucial in an era of software block upgradeable aircraft.

NAWDC is in a position to release their recommendations concurrent with initial operational capability of a particular aircraft.

This means that when a new capability rolls out, they are able concurrently to provide vetted employment recommendations from NAWDC and its weapon school partners.

In short, the transition from core function platforms to working as enablers and nodes in a kill web is underway at NAWDC.

And the coming of the Advanced Hawkeye along with the Stingray in the same innovation cluster is a case in point.

ATLANTIC OCEAN (Jan. 16, 2020) An E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20, flies over USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 78) flight deck during flight operations. Ford is currently conducting Aircraft Compatibility Testing to further test its Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Indra Beaufort)
ATLANTIC OCEAN (Jan. 16, 2020) Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Handling) 1st Class Sidney Gutierrez, from Miami, assigned to USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 78) air department, signals while directing an E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20, during flight operations. Ford is currently conducting Aircraft Compatibility Testing to further test its Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Sean Elliott)
ATLANTIC OCEAN (Jan. 16, 2020) Sailors assigned to USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 78) air department observe the landing of an E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20, during flight operations. Ford is currently conducting Aircraft Compatibility Testing to further test its Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Sean Elliott)
ATLANTIC OCEAN (Jan. 16, 2020) Sailors assigned to USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 78) air department chock and chain an E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20, on Ford's flight deck during flight operations. Ford is currently conducting Aircraft Compatibility Testing to further test its Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jesus O. Aguiar)
ATLANTIC OCEAN (Jan. 16, 2020) Sailors assigned to USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 78) air department direct an E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20, on Ford's flight deck during flight operations. Ford is currently conducting Aircraft Compatibility Testing to further test its Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Jesus O. Aguiar)