Shaping a 21st Century C2/ISR Infrastructure: The Emergence of C3

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Shaping a 21st Century C2/ISR Infrastructure: The Emergence of C3
12/22/2019

By Robbin Laird

At the recent International Fighter Conference 2019, there was much discussion of the growing salience of the combat cloud to the “next” generation of air combat power.

This discussion was subsumed within a growing emphasis on multi-domain operations, and the need for the kind of C2 which can leverage the right information at the right time to make the right decisions within a multi-domain environment with the right package of combat force.

In effect, this capability is what precedes any discussion of what a 6th generation fighter aircraft might be.

What clearly the F-35 has generated is the “renorming of airpower” which we predicted some years ago.

But what it is also generating is a significant rethink of how to fight at the speed of light in terms of high confidence data to deliver capabilities to for decisive decision making at the tactical edge.

In effect, C3 is emerging as a key driver of change Command, Control and Confidence in the most relevant ISR data is required at the tactical edge to make the decisions necessary to prevail in the evolving battlespace.

At the International Fighter Conference 2019, Lt. General David Nahom, Director of Strategic Plans and Programs, for the USAF, underscored that a core focus in shaping the evolution of USAF airpower was upon joint all-domain command and control.

He argued that “we are building the high-speed highway on which to put the trucks.”

The focus in his perspective needs to be upon building the C2/ISR infrastructure where “we can all work together.”

The approach to shaping an advanced battle “manger” is no longer focused on a specific air platform, AWACS, Joint Starts or the like.

It is now focused on crafting, leveraging and evolving a distributed system which draw upon the “high-speed data highway.”

Obviously, in such an approach, machine-to-machine interactions and artificial intelligence enabled decision making are foundational elements. And with a “high speed data highway” focus enabled by the fifth-generation transition; the next generation fighter is not likely to be a single “truck” but a family of systems.

Clearly, a key component of the new high build out is already here and key element of the F-35 global fleet, namely, the CNI.

The significant impact of an INTEGRATED CNI solution simply is not part of the strategic discourse about the evolution of the U.S. and allied combat forces in a way that gets out of a fifth-generation marketing pitch, qua fifth gen.

It is not about fifth generation, it is about shaping the “high speed data highway” which the F-35 global enterprise can provide support to task forces engaged in an area of interest and enabling a key aspect of a targeted “combat cloud.”

By DoD putting in motion the effort to build the F-35, the program has forced DoD to integrate its core combat fighter in ways that would not otherwise have occurred.

The CNI is to combat air as the smartphone is to the original Nokia mobile phone.

And it would NOT have happened without the F-35 program driving the need and the requirement.

Sensor fusion enabled by machine to machine operations and expanded by integratability across an F-35 fleet is a significant driver of air superiority now and lays down the way to the future being hypothesized at conferences like IFC 2019.

As the cards within the CNI are updated, modernized or transformed, along with the capabilities contained on those cards, and any accompanying hardware changes made, not only can an F-35 as a combat asset itself improve.

But the technology upgraded on that aircraft can reshape the combat elements on the air, sea or land which can benefit directly to F-35 connectivity and those demonstrated capabilities can inform decisions with regard to modernization or transformation of other combat assets which can employ similar variants of the new systems contained within the CNI.

Put in blunt terms, the integrated capability delivered by the CNI within the F-35 fleet is a key driver of change for the C2/ISR “highway” able to empower the integrated distributed force and deliver C3.

After the IFC 2019, I had a chance to discuss with Scott Rosebush of Cubic Mission Solutions, a company focused on enhancing capabilities for C2 and ISR at the tactical edge, including with regard to the F-35 and CNI.

We discussed how such a highway might be built out leveraging where we are today, and how emergent capabilities today can provide a way ahead with regard to this C2/ISR “highway” building effort.

Rosebush started the discussion by describing the vision of a High Capacity Backbone or HCB.

“The idea is to equip a select set of nodes with high throughput data links that could encapsulate data and pass it amongst themselves in a reliable way.

“Any node on the network to which the HCB nodes subscribes would then be able to access the date on the HCB.”

He argued that this would bring the power of the cloud into multi-domain operations.

We discussed the combat cloud at length comparing the viability of network architectures that feature an enterprise network like a commercial WAN as compared a numerous set of smaller networks optimized for a particular task force that could potential be connected by a backbone.

The HCB could be built to facilitate this approach.

According to Rosebush: “By connecting multiple combat clouds, fusion applications could be generated to empower the combat force.”

Rather than simply networking data, information and domain knowledge would be available to the tailored combat force through fusion applications including those empowered by artificial intelligence.

He underscored that the underlying HCB technology needed to realize the 21st century vision is ready for fielding now. 

Advancements in phased array antennas paired with sophisticated digital beam forming technology enables the ability to produce and maintain numerous simultaneous high bandwidth directional communications links.

These solutions facilitate opportunities for data relays, networking bridging, and data format conversions leading to resilient and robust multi-domain networks.

The HCB highway can also be used to pass data that would traditionally be sent over congested time division multiple access networks like Link 16 freeing up capacity on those legacy networks.

Cybersecurity is a necessary focus area for the future of networked C2 and ISR objectives as well. 

“The flip side to connectivity and interoperability is vulnerability to cyber-attack” said Rosebush.

He believes there isn’t a silver bullet to ensure cybersecurity for the combat cloud, but instead thinks that “a mindful application of defense-in-depth principles and solutions while taking advantage of factors like the use of cryptography and directionality of the links can lead to an ultimately agreeable resultant security posture for the warfighter.”

Rosebush argued that HCB technology is ready to field – with mass adoption feasible in the one to three year timeframe.

He then focused on the next round of capability – the three to six-year time horizon — which he argued was in the domain of free space optical communications (aka laser-comm).

“Historically, the challenges associated with the precise pointing and tracking required to acquire and maintain FSOC links between dynamic platforms have been too problematic to overcome for mature solutions.

But with recent technology advances in these fields as well, the ability to point, acquire, and hold FSOC links on moving platforms is increasingly feasible.

A realistic long-term goal is to combine the laser communication options with a smart RF node to provide for hybrid data links.”

In short, creating and enabling a cluster of data transportation solution sets or the data highway system is the “next” platform.

And in the course of doing so the redesign of platforms and what is expected from new platforms will be a work in progress.

The featured graphic is from the briefing of Lt. General David Nahom given at the International Fighter Conference 2019.

 

HMAS Hobart Task Force Returns from Initial Deployment in North Asia

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on HMAS Hobart Task Force Returns from Initial Deployment in North Asia

By Andrew McLaughlin

This was the first operational deployment of a Hobart class DDG.

“This deployment has been a real test of our preparation for and readiness to deliver Destroyer capability and is the culmination of two years of hard work,” Hobart’s CO, CMDR Ryan Gaskin said in a statement.

“The success of Hobart’s mission is a credit to the ship’s company, embarked staff and those working in support of the ship from ashore. They’ve all worked superbly together as an integrated team.

“We’ve proven the Hobart Class Destroyer is not only ready to perform on the multinational stage in a high-end warfare exercise context but has also proven a highly effective command platform for Task Groups at sea.”

Task group commander CAPT Andrew Quinn added, “HMAS Hobart served as the host ship for the embarked Maritime Task Group Command team at sea, demonstrating the new RAN destroyers capability to fulfil this role.

“Over the past several months our Navy people have generated presence in the East Asian region and conducted complex exercises with our partners,” he added. “This has built on our respective operational skillsets and furthered our ability to work together to help keep the region secure.”

This article was published on December 12, 2019 by ADBR.

The featured photo shows Royal Australian Navy ship, HMAS Hobart, sailing in formation with participants of exercise Annualex.

Eleven vessels, four maritime combat helicopters and more than 1,000 personnel across two groups visited regional partner in the Northern and Southern Asia for multinational exercises and regional engagement activities.

This is the Royal Australian Navy’s second multiple task group activity in the region this year and comprises HMA Ships Sirius, Hobart, Stuart, Parramatta, Arunta, Leeuwin, Ararat, Gascoyne and Diamantina as well as two submarines.

Task group ships visited Guam, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, the Philippines and Vietnam.

Ships in the different task group elements participated in Exercises Nichi Gou Trident, Haedoli Wallaby, Annualex, Pacific Vanguard, Bersama Lima, MASTEX, New Horizon, Multinational Mine Warfare and Hyuga Nada.

They also took part in a Mine Counter Measure Symposium and the South Korean International Maritime Defence Industry Exposition as the ADF participated in Commemorations to mark the 75th anniversary of the Battle of Leyte Gulf and the Battle of Surigao Strait.

Projecting Power with the F-35: The Case of the F-35B

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Projecting Power with the F-35: The Case of the F-35B

By Marcus Hellyer

In my series looking at the future of Australian power projection and the role of the F-35, I looked at how deploying from offshore airbases would allow the F-35A to operate relatively far away from Australia in areas that are strategically important to us.

However, this is not a straightforward exercise. Even putting aside the issue of finding an amenable host country, the F-35A needs substantial infrastructure to operate. It’s not just the 8,000-foot runway, but fuel, munitions, maintenance facilities, apron space and so on. There aren’t a lot of candidates for bases that could quickly be put into service, particularly in the South Pacific.

This leads to another problem: it would be obvious to adversaries where our air force was operating from, which would dramatically simplify their early warning challenge. It would also simplify their targeting problem, and modern long-range missiles are sufficiently precise to target runways and even aircraft on the ground.

Addressing these challenges is part of the evolving concept of distributed long-range fires, which seeks to complicate an adversary’s targeting problem by moving away from a small number of fixed bases and increasing the options for striking the adversary. One element of this is deployable land-based missiles (more on those in future posts).

It has also been argued that the short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the joint strike fighter, the F-35B, could contribute to this operating concept. Since the F-35B can take off from much shorter runways, it potentially opens up a greater number of airfields. Long, straight stretches of highway could possibly also serve as runways.

The US Marine Corps has been experimenting with operating its F-35B from ‘pop-up’ bases in the Pacific. Essentially, it would use the mobility provided by its amphibious forces to seize islands, establish improvised airfields, operate them for a short period, and then relocate before the adversary can respond.

The F-35B has a smaller range and carries fewer munitions than the conventional F-35A, but if this approach offers a way to get the F-35 and its fifth-generation suite of sensors into the fight, it should at least be considered. However, there are significant obstacles to implementing it, particularly for a force the size of Australia’s.

The key problem is that the F-35B still needs all the other inputs I’ve mentioned, in particular fuel. Depending on the kind and number of sorties flown, the requirement for fuel quickly becomes hundreds of tonnes per day. Flying that fuel into a pop-up base would require a huge logistics train. A US study that analysed this issue concluded that flying in the fuel for even one base would involve most of the Marine Corps’ 60 C-130s (the Australian Defence Force has 12). The larger C-17As could deliver more fuel but would quickly render an improvised airstrip unusable.

Alternatively, the fuel could be put into bladders and flown directly from amphibious ships to the improvised base. But that would require large numbers of heavy-lift helicopters—many more than the ADF’s 10 CH-47F Chinooks (assuming there was space for them on the ships). It would be very difficult to sustain high-tempo operations.

Another approach would be to relocate frequently between improvised airbases on a larger land mass. The same study argued that around 60 vehicles would be needed to move the operation, and there’s still the problem of sustaining fuel supplies that may still need to be flown in. Whichever way you look at it, there’s a big logistics tail.

So the bill for all the enablers necessary to support distributed STOVL operations could be much more than the cost of the F-35Bs themselves, which already have a higher unit cost than the F-35A.

Since ships are designed to carry bulk fuel and stores, it would be much simpler to operate the F-35Bs directly from a ship which can be resupplied with fuel and stores from other ships. ASPI and others have looked at this issue (here and here, for example). The benefit is that it gets the F-35 into a fight that it potentially couldn’t reach otherwise, so it can contribute its sensors and weapons to both enhance and protect other ADF systems around it.

Even with its reduced weapons carriage, the F-35B would provide a potent strike or close air support option in a range of scenarios. And a moving airbase certainly complicates the adversary’s targeting picture.

The disadvantages have also been enumerated. If the ADF didn’t want to reduce its current amphibious lift capability, a third or even fourth landing helicopter dock or a similar large, flat-topped vessel would be required (noting that the first two cost over $3 billion), preferably optimised to support air combat operations. It’s unlikely that a vessel of that size could maintain a sortie rate that could sustain a continuous combat air patrol, if that was the effect sought.

To get the F-35Bs up in time to provide air defence, their host ship would likely also need an airborne early warning capability (though perhaps this could be provided by an innovative drone). And much of the navy would need to be devoted to protecting the ships, reducing its ability to perform other tasks. Even then, their survival would not be assured in highly contested environments. Nevertheless, an amphibious taskforce with the F-35B would be more survivable than one without it.

It’s certainly possible to make a case for the utility of the capability. The benefits seem to outweigh the disadvantages for the US, Japan and (potentially) South Korea, which are putting F-35Bs on ships of a similar size to our LHDs—and operating in highly contested environments. But the question must always be, is it a more cost-effective way to deliver the effects sought than other options?

The assumption underlying this series is that in an age of strategic uncertainty, Australia’s defence organisation should enhance its options to project military power. We’ve seen that any option relying on the F-35 would require a huge investment in enabling capabilities to break through the aircraft’s inherent 1,000-kilometre range limitation.

All of those options must be subjected to the cost-effectiveness test, particularly when there are other possible solutions that don’t rely on the F-35. In coming pieces, I’ll examine some of those alternatives.

Marcus Hellyer is ASPI’s senior analyst for defence economics and capability.

This article was first published by ASPI on October 30, 2019.

The featured photo shows Capt. Frank Zastoupil with Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501 (VMFAT-501) flying the F-35B Lightning II during the Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort Air Show, April 27, 2019.(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Brittney Vella)

The Transformation of the Maritime Patrol “Aircraft” Enterprise: The Perspective of Rear Admiral Peter Garvin

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on The Transformation of the Maritime Patrol “Aircraft” Enterprise: The Perspective of Rear Admiral Peter Garvin
12/20/2019

By Robbin Laird

Recently, I had the opportunity to visit with Rear Admiral Pete Garvin in his office in Norfolk Virginia to discuss the way ahead with the US Navy’s Patrol and Reconnaissance Force (MPRF).

Commander Patrol and Reconnaissance Group / Commander Patrol and Reconnaissance Group Pacific (CPRG/CPRG-PAC) provides oversight to more than 7,000 men and women on both coasts operating the U.S. Navy’s maritime patrol aircraft including the P-8A “Poseidon”, P-3C “Orion”, EP-3 “Aries II” and MQ-4C “Triton” unmanned aircraft system.

The MPRF is organized into two Patrol and Reconnaissance Wings at NAS Jacksonville, Florida, and NAS Whidbey Island, Washington including 14 Patrol and Reconnaissance squadrons, one Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) and over 45 subordinate commands.  The MPRF is the Navy’s premier provider for airborne Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), Anti-Surface Warfare (ASuW), and maritime Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) operations.

We discussed the force transformation currently underway as the foundation for further innovation moving into the future for the maritime force in its global operations.  The P-8A and MQ-4C are not simply replacement platforms for the P-3 and EP-3.  The change is as dramatic as the Marines going from the CH-46 to an Osprey which could only be described as a process of transformation rather than a transition from older to newer platforms.

It is not simply that these are different platforms, but the question of how to title the article suggests the dynamics of change. These are not merely maritime patrol aircraft but rather a synergistic ‘Family of Systems’ empowering global maritime domain awareness and the joint strike enterprise.

Most importantly, while the P-8A is a capable engagement platform in its own right, the information generated by the P-8A/MQ-4C dyad empowers and enhances the organic ASW strike capability on the P-8.

Moreover, the entirety of Department of Defenses’ strike capability is enhanced against adversarial multi-domain forces.

We hear a lot about the coming of Artificial Intelligence and new sensors to the combat force, but the P-8A and MQ-4C are bringing these capabilities to the force today.  With pre-mission planning and post-mission product dissemination supported by a dedicated “TacMobile” ground element, these platforms comprise a solid foundation for the new MDA enterprise.  Working together, the weapon systems will deliver decisive information to the right place at the right time to empower the multi-domain combat force.  These systems are designed to be quickly software upgradeable and evolve over time as combat performance, and contact with the adversary, provide significant real-world feedback.

Although these are US Naval platforms, they are designed to connect with the larger C2/ISR infrastructure, changing the capabilities and operations of the entire U.S. and allied combat forces.  

With core allies buying P-8 and MQ-4C, this force is truly global.

My visits to Norway, the United Kingdom, and Australia have provided significant opportunities to discuss with those nations, how they are engaged with the United States in recrafting the MDA and strike enterprise.

These platforms provide significant situational awareness for a task force, and can operate in effect as combat clouds for a tailored task force operating across the spectrum of conflict.

At the recent International Fighter Conference 2019, there was significant discussion of the coming of manned and unmanned teaming.  There were no naval aviators at the conference but if they had been present, they would have told the conference that the U.S. Navy is already working and improving manned/unmanned teaming concepts and doctrine.

With the coming of Triton, a completely new approach is being shaped on how to operate, and leverage the data and systems onboard the manned and unmanned air systems joined at the hip, namely, the P-8 and the Triton.

There is an obvious return to the anti-submarine mission by the U.S. and allied navies with the growing capabilities of the 21st century authoritarian powers.

However, as adversary submarines evolve, and their impact on warfare becomes even more pronounced, ASW can no longer be considered as a narrow warfighting specialty.

This is reflected in Rear Admiral Garvin’s virtuous circle with regard to what he expects from his command, namely, professionalism, agility and lethality.

The professionalism which defines and underpins the force is, in part, about driving the force in new innovative directions.  To think and operate differently in the face of an evolving threat. Operational and tactical agility is critical to ensure that the force can deliver the significant combat effect expected from a 21st century maritime reconnaissance and strike force.  Finally, it is necessary but insufficient to be able to find and fix an adversary.

The ability to finish must be realized lest we resign ourselves to be mere observers of a problem.

The Australians consider the P-8/Triton force to be part of their fifth-generation transition in that the information being processed and worked by the machines in the dyad and the analysts onboard or ashore is informing assets across the enterprise with regard to threats and resolutions required by the entire combat force.

It is not simply about organic capabilities.

The P-3 flew alone and unafraid; the dyad is flying as part of a wider networked enterprise, and one which can be tailored to a threat, or an area of interest, and can operate as a combat cloud empowering a tailored force designed to achieve the desired combat effects.

The information generated by the ‘Family of Systems’ can be used with the gray zone forces such as the USCG cutters or the new Australian Offshore Patrol Vessels. The P-8/Triton dyad is a key enabler of full spectrum crisis management operations, which require the kind of force transformation which the P-8/Triton is a key part of delivering the U.S. and core allies.

A key consideration is the growing importance of what one might call “proactive ISR.”

It is crucial to study the operational environment and to map anomalies; this provides a powerful baseline from which to prepare future operations, which require force packages that can deliver the desired kinetic or non-kinetic effect.

Moreover, an unambiguous understanding of the environment, including pattern of life and timely recognition of changes in those patterns, serves to inform decision makers earlier and perhaps seek solutions short of kinetic.

This is not about collecting more data for the intelligence community back in the United States; it is about generating operational domain knowledge that can be leveraged rapidly in a crisis and to shape the kind of C2 capabilities which are required in combat at the speed of light.

Historically, a presence force is about what is organically included within that presence force; today we are looking at combat reach or scalability of force.

Faced with limited resources, it is necessary for planners to exercise economy of force by tailoring distributed forces to a specific area of interest for as long as required.

The presence force however small needs to be integrated not just in terms of itself but also in its ability to operate via common C2 or ISR connectors with both allied and U.S. forces.  This enhanced capability needs to be forward deployed in order to provide enhanced MDA,  lethality and effectiveness appropriate to achieve the desired political/military outcome.

Success rests on a significant rework of C2 networks to allow a distributed force the flexibility to operate not just within a limited geographical area, but reach beyond the geographical boundaries of what the organic presence force is capable of doing by itself. 

This is about shaping force domain knowledge well in advance of and in anticipation of events.

This is not classic deterrence – it is pre-crisis and crisis engagement.

This new approach can be expressed in terms of a kill web, that is a U.S. and allied force so scalable and responsive that if an ally executes a presence mission and is threatened by a ramp up of force from a Russia or China, that that presence force can reach back to relevant allies as well as their own force structure in a timely and effective manner.

For this approach to work, there is a clear need for a different kind of C2 and ISR infrastructure to enable the shift in concepts of operations. Indeed, when describing C2 and ISR or various mutations like C4ISR, the early notions of C2 and ISR seen in both air-land battle and in joint support to the land wars, tend to be extended into the discussions of the C2 and ISR infrastructure for the kill web or for force building of the integrated distributed force.

The P-8/Triton dyad lays a solid foundation for the wide range of innovations we can expect as the integrated distributed force evolves: expanded use of artificial intelligence, acceleration of the speed for software upgradeability, achieving transient combat advantage from more rapid rewriting of software code, an enhanced ability to leverage the weapons enterprise operating from a wide variety of air, ground, and naval platforms (off-boarding), and an ability to expand the capabilities of manned-unmanned teaming as autonomous maritime systems become key elements of the maritime force in the years to come.

In short, the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Force is not simply transitioning, it is transforming.  

It is delivering significant new capabilities now, and laying a solid foundation for the future. It is empowering what the Aussies would call a fifth-generation multi-domain combat force.

You can either live in the past and lose ground; or you can lean forward and build out the foundation for the integrated distributed force.

Rear Admiral Peter Garvin Biography

Rear Adm. Pete Garvin graduated with merit from the United States Naval Academy in 1989 with a Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering (Astronautics). He is also a 2005 graduate of the National War College, with a Master of Science in National Security Strategy and a 2015 alumnus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Seminar XXI.

His operational assignments include service with the “Pelicans” of Patrol Squadron (VP) 45, where he was the 1995 Association of Naval Aviation Pilot of the Year; department head with the “Mad Foxes” of VP-5; navigator aboard USS Kearsarge (LHD 3), where he served as flag navigator for the embarked Amphibious Squadron (PHIBRON) 6; executive and 59th commanding officer of the “Fighting Tigers” of VP-8; and commander of Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing (CPRW) 10.

His shore assignments include flag lieutenant to Commander, Patrol Wings Atlantic (CPWL), Commander, Task Force (CTF) 84; instructor pilot at the P-3 fleet replacement squadron, VP-30; Washington placement officer at the Bureau of Naval Personnel (PERS 441); executive officer for the director, Operational Plans and Joint Force Development Directorate (J-7), Joint Staff; federal executive fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR); undersea warfare branch head in the assessments division (N81) and deputy director, unmanned warfare systems (N99) on the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations staff; and executive assistant to the vice chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Most recently, he served as the 22nd commander of Navy Recruiting Command. Garvin assumed the duties of Commander, Patrol and Reconnaissance Group July 23, 2018.

His decorations include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit (three awards), Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal (two awards), Air Medal (two strike/flight) and various personal, unit and campaign decorations.

The featured photo shows Rear Adm. Peter Garvin, commander, Patrol Reconnaissance Group, posing for a picture with Sailors of the Patrol Squadron (VP) 46 administration department during a tour of the squadron’s spaces.

VP-46 has recently returned from deployment in the U.S. 5th Fleet and U.S. 7th Fleet areas of operations and is making preparations to transition from the P-3C platform to the P-8A Poseidon.

(U.S. Navy photo by Naval Aircrewman (Operator) 3rd Class Victoria Ruzzo /Released)

OAK HARBOR, Wash. (Oct. 17, 2019)

2016 Visit to Jacksonville Naval Air Station

07/11/2016

On May 23 and 24, 2016, during a Jacksonville Naval Air Station visit, we spent time with the P-8 and Triton community which is shaping a common culture guiding the transformation of the ASW and ISR side of Naval Air. The acquisition term for the effort is a “family of systems” whereby the P-3 is being “replaced” by the P-8 and the Triton Remotely Piloted Aircraft.

But clearly the combined capability is a replacement of the P-3 in only one sense – executing the anti-submarine warfare function. But the additional ISR and C2 enterprise being put in place to operate the combined P-8 and Triton capability is a much broader capability than the classic P-3. Much like the Osprey transformed the USMC prior to flying the F-35, the P-8/Triton team is doing the same for the US Navy prior to incorporating the F-35 within the carrier air wing.

In addition to the Wing Commander and his Deputy Commander, who were vey generous with their time and sharing of important insights, we had the opportunity to interviews with various members of the VP-16 P-8 squadron from CO and XO to Pilots, NFOs and Air Crew members, along with the wing weapons and training officer, the Triton FIT team, and key members of the Integrated Training Center. Those interviews will be published over the next few weeks.

The P-8/Triton capability is part of what we have described as 21st century air combat systems: software upgradeable, fleet deployed, currently with a multinational coalition emerging peer partnership.   Already the Indians, the Aussies and the British are or will be flying the P-8s and all are in discussions to build commonality from the stand-up of the P-8 Forward.

Software upgradeability provides for a lifetime of combat learning to be reflected in the rewriting of the software code and continually modernizing existing combat systems, while adding new capabilities over the operational life of the aircraft. Over time, fleet knowledge will allow the US Navy and its partners to understand how best to maintain and support the aircraft while operating the missions effectively in support of global operations.

Reflecting on the visit there are five key takeaways from our discussions with Navy Jax.

A key point is how the USN is approaching the P-8/Triton combat partnership, which is the integration of manned, and unmanned systems, or what are now commonly called “remotes”. The Navy looked at the USAF experience and intentionally decided to not build a the Triton “remote” operational combat team that is stovepiped away from their P-8 Squadrons.

The team at Navy Jax is building a common Maritime Domain Awareness and Maritime Combat Culture and treats the platforms as partner applications of the evolving combat theory. The partnership is both technology synergistic and also aircrew moving between the Triton and P-8

The P-8 pilot and mission crews, after deploying with the fleet globally can volunteer to do shore duty flying Tritons. The number of personnel to fly initially the Tritons is more than 500 navy personnel so this is hardly an unmanned aircraft. Hence, inside a technological family of systems there is also an interchangeable family of combat crews.

With the P-8 crews operating at different altitudes from the Triton, around 50K, and having operational experience with each platform, they will be able to gain mastery of both a wide scale ocean ISR and focused ASW in direct partnership with the surface navy from Carrier Strike Groups, ARG/MEUs to independent operations for both undersea and sea surface rather than simply mastering a single platform.

This is a visionary foundation for the evolution of the software upgradeable platforms they are flying as well as responding to technological advances to work the proper balance by manned crews and remotes.

The second key point is that the Commanders of both P-8 aviator and the soon to be operational Triton community understand that for transformation to occur the surface fleet has to understand what they can do. This dynamic “cross-deck” actually air to ship exchange can totally reshape surface fleet operations. To accelerate this process, officers from the P-8 community are right now being assigned to surface ships to rework their joint concepts of operations.

Exercises are now in demonstration and operational con-ops to explain and real world demonstrate what the capabilities this new and exciting aspect of Naval Air can bring to the fleet. One example was a recent exercise with an ARG-MEU where the P-8 recently exercised with the amphibious fleet off of the Virginia Capes.

The third key point is that the software upgradeability aspect of the airplane has driven a very strong partnership with industry to be able to have an open-ended approach to modernization. On the aircraft maintenance and supply elements of having successful mission ready aircraft it is an important and focused work in progress both inside the Navy (including Supply Corps) and continuing an important relationship with industry, especially at the Tech Rep Squadron/Wing level.

The fourth point is how important P-8 and Triton software upgradeability is, including concurrent modification to trainer/simulators and rigorous quality assurance for the fidelity of the information in shaping the future of the enterprise. The P-8s is part of a cluster of airplanes which have emerged defining the way ahead for combat airpower which are software upgradeable: the Australian Wedgetail, the global F-35, and the Advanced Hawkeye, all have the same dynamic modernization potential to which will be involved in all combat challenges of maritime operations.

It is about shaping a combat learning cycle in which software can be upgraded as the user groups shape real time what core needs they see to rapidly deal with the reactive enemy. All military technology is relative to a reactive enemy. It is about the arsenal of democracy shifting from an industrial production line to a clean room and a computer lab as key shapers of competitive advantage.

The fifth point is about weaponization and its impact. We have focused for years on the need for a weapons revolution since the U.S. forces, and as core allies are building common platforms with the growth potential to operate new weapons as they come on line. The P-8 is flying with a weapon load out from the past, but as we move forward, the ability of the P-8 to manage off board weapons or organic weapons will be enabled.

For example, there is no reason a high speed cruise or hypersonic missile on the hard points of the P-8 could not be loaded and able to strike a significant enemy combat asset at great distance and speed. We can look forward to the day when P-8s crews will receive a Navy Cross for sinking a significant enemy surface combatant.

In short, the P-8/Triton is at the cutting edge of naval air transformation within the entire maritime combat enterprise. And the US Navy is not doing this alone, as core allies are part of the transformation from the ground up.

MDA-Strike-Capability

BIDEC 19 Presentation Regarding the Integrated Distributed Force

Interview at Seapower 19 in Sydney Australia, October 2019 With Regard to the Integrated Distributed Force

Australian Army Drone Racing Team

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Australian Army Drone Racing Team

Drone Racers from the Australian Army Drone Racing Team competed in the Drone Racing National Championships at Phillip Oval, Canberra, over a three-day event from 18 to 20 November 2019.

The national event is in its fourth year and is continually growing in popularity and attendance by both competitors and spectators. Nearly one hundred drone racers from Australia and New Zealand battled it out for the title of Australian National Champion as well as various freestyle and team events.

In addition to the competition, the Army Drone Racing Team participated in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) School Day Out for local Canberra students to see and experience the fun and excitement of drone racing, virtual reality and unmanned aerial technologies.

Drone racing is an authorized and encouraged adaptive sport in the Australian Army.

The Army Drone Racing Team continues to be involved in activities both within and outside of Defence to promote and encourage involvement in the sport.

Australian Department of Defence

October 24, 2019

Indian Navy Looks Ahead to Networking Manned and Unmanned Assets

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Indian Navy Looks Ahead to Networking Manned and Unmanned Assets
12/18/2019

By Gulshan Luthra

New Delhi. The Indian Navy is looking at futuristic, manned and unmanned ships, submarines and aircraft, says Admiral KB Singh.

In an interview with India Strategic, the Navy Chief said that acquisition order for US General Atomics SeaGuardians with high Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) capability is on the anvil and that the Navy as well as the Army and Air Force are coordinating on inducting their required Predator variants. “We are progressing a joint case for procurement of 30 armed SeaGuardian HALE RPAs (10 each for the three Services) under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route of the US Government.”

According to diplomatic sources, the US Government had acceded to India’s request, made at the highest levels, for arming these High Altitude Long Endurance Remotely Piloted Aircraft, and the Ministry of Defence is now working towards finalising the process by mid next year.

In another significant observation, Admiral Singh told his customary Navy Day press conference that the Navy has decided to go in for electric propulsion for its next aircraft carrier, dubbed IAC II, and that means another win for General Atomics, whose electric propulsion systems, EMALS catapult or Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System) and AAG (Advanced Arresting Gear) to stop the landing aircraft are the new standards for US Navy aircraft carriers.

The IAC II, or Indian Aircraft Carrier 2, will be non-nuclear, and of 65,000 tonnes.

“The Navy’s long term capability plan envisages induction of three aircraft carriers, so that two CBGs (Carrier Battle Groups) are available for dispersed deployment in the Indian Ocean region at all times. The broad contours of IAC 2, to be constructed in India as a 65,000-tonne CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Takeoff But Arrested Recovery) carrier with electric propulsion, have been formulated and the case will be processed for accord of AON (Acceptance of Necessity). The AON is the final determinant for the MoD (Ministry of Defence) to consider allocation of funds and move the files towards acquisition of a system.

Notably, the USN carriers, all CATOBAR, are generally of 100,000 tonnes. But they are deployed globally, and have unmatched escort, and resulting expenses, much beyond Indian requirements and expenses.

Admiral Singh also told India Strategic (www.indiastrategic.in) that the Navy is already “extensively using RPAs for coastal surveillance, and that three RPA Squadrons have been commissioned at Kochi, Porbandar and Ramnad with an aim of achieving enhanced surveillance ranges.”
Augmentation of existing RPA control stations onboard ships is also in progress.

The RPAs, or UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) or also UCAVs (Unmanned Combat Aircraft Vehicles if armed), are integral to modern warfare, and the Indian armed forces started inducting them from the late 1990s, from Israel, thanks to Pakistan’s intrusion in Kargil heights, leading to the 1999 Kargil War to evict its troops.

The success of GA Predators, with endurance up to nearly 50 hours in air, has interested the Indian forces, particularly as they have successfully been used to neutralise hostile elements in Afghanistan, even while being controlled from California on the other side of the world through satellites. A video of one operation by USAF in Afghanistan, shown at one of India Strategic seminars, demonstrated how, and with patience, a Predator neutralised four terrorists and their vehicle one by one.

The Naval Chief observed that the Navy was very much keeping track of rapid changes in defence technologies, and that the effort was to put on the best possible sensors and weapons on board various ships and other assets.

Asked about the Boeing P-8I, which is perhaps the single most advanced piece of technology with the Indian armed forces, Admiral KB Singh said: The induction of P8-I was one such step and (it is) a force multiplier in the Indian Ocean Region.”

Also, he pointed out: “The Indian Navy has a dedicated multiband satellite for communication, which has enhanced our connectivity footprint, enabling our platforms to operate seamlessly at extended ranges.”

The Navy plans to use the Boeing P-8Is and GA SeaGuardians to observe and neutralise hostile elements at extended ranges. Both these are armed, and the P-8, which the Indian Navy is second to induct after the US Navy, has formidable onboard capabilities to detect and destroy hidden submarines. The Indian P-8Is have 360 degree radar coverage, and all of them are networked with other aircraft, shore facilities, various Commands, and the Navy’s main 24 x 7 control centre IMAC (Information Management and Analysis Centre), located in Gurgaon, south of New Delhi.

At IMAC, officers keep a watch all over and along the Indian coasts, island territories and inputs from the P-8Is and other assets wherever they are. The Navy has already enhanced its presence and mission readiness across “our areas of maritime interests in the Indian Ocean Region.”

“The recalibration of our operational deployment has resulted in increasing our footprint and strategic domain awareness of the vast expanse of IOR, enabling rapid deployment of our units to address emerging security challenges.”

Admiral Singh said that the Navy has approval for six more P-8Is in addition to the eight operating and four on order, and to be delivered from next year.

Notably, the allocation for funds for the Navy is however down from 18 per cent to 13 over the past five years, and that is why the modernisation of various assets with newer technologies like sensors and EW systems is the key to get the best out of them.

The number of ships planned has also come down from 200 to 175, and again, that is why, the Navy is looking at newer technologies on board its assets, and that too, through the indigenous route, he said.

He pointed out that the best of the EW (Electronic Warfare) systems were not easily available, while the Navy is also importing Marine Diesel Engines, Power generators and Shafting and Propellers. These need to be made in India by public or private companies. “Our aim is to reduce the import dependency and progressively increase indigenous content in our shipbuilding projects.”

So, “the Navy has commenced the process of indigenising complex and high end technology equipment, which are presently being imported.”

The key player in this effort will be DRDO (Defence Research and Development Organisation), and the future is clearly towards Networked Manned and Unmanned assets, the Naval Chief observed.

This article was published by India Strategic in December 2019.

https://www.indiastrategic.in/2019/12/04/indian-navy-for-networked-manned-and-unmanned-assets-admiral-kb-singh/

 

 

HIMRS Exercise

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on HIMRS Exercise

3rd Battalion 12th Marines and U.S. Army 10th Support Group, loaded and transported HIMARS launchers during an Army Landing Craft Utility, exercise, at Kin Red, October 31, 2019.

The Joint Operation was to test the effectiveness of the branches to work together to complete the mission.

OKINAWA, JAPAN

10.31.2019

Video by Lance Cpl. Moises Rodriguez

Denmark Participates in European Led Task Force in the Strait of Hormuz

Posted on | by Robbin Laird | Leave a Comment on Denmark Participates in European Led Task Force in the Strait of Hormuz
12/17/2019

According to an article published by the Danish Ministry of Defence on December 12, 2019:

Today, the Danish Government has consulted the Danish Foreign Policy Committee about military contributions to a European-led maritime surveillance mission in the Strait of Hormuz.

The Danish contributions will include a staff officer contribution from the beginning of 2020 and – subject to parliamentary approval in 2020 – a naval contribution beginning in the fall of 2020.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Jeppe Kofod:

“As the fifth largest seafaring nation in the world, Denmark has a special interest in – and responsibility to – ensure maritime security and freedom of navigation – also in the Strait of Hormuz.The Danish government will therefore continue its active efforts to reduce tensions in the region. Now also with a concrete contribution in the form of staff officers and a frigate.

“Our contribution will complement other efforts in the region, including the US-led maritime security effort IMSC. The European-led mission is also expected to be supplemented by diplomatic efforts aimed at enhancing regional dialogue on maritime security.”

Minister of Defence Trine Bramsen:

“It is important that Denmark as a significant sea-faring nation with a capable navy takes responsibility, and stands up for the principles we believe in. I am proud of the fact that allies look in our direction, when looking for partners for a task like this one. It is a testimony to the respect shown to our capable soldiers and our robust capacities. “

Facts about the contributions to the Strait of Hormuz

The new Danish contributions to the Strait of Hormuz will consist of a staff officer contribution for 12 months from the beginning of 2020 as well as – pending parliamentary approval – a naval contribution incl. helicopter and up to 155 personnel for 4 months from the autumn 2020.