International Conference on Military Communications and ... · Sources: 6 Jan 2016 Fortune; Rentz...

International Conference onMilitary Communications andInformation Systems (ICMCIS)

A Key Enabler

Mr. Alan R. ShafferDirector

Collaboration Support Office15 May 2017

Slide 115 May 2017

Science & Technology in NATO

“Scientific results cannot be used efficientlyby soldiers who have no understanding ofthem, and scientists cannot produce resultsuseful for warfare without an understandingof the operations.”

Theodore von Kármán (1881-1963)

Slide 2

NATO has had a persistent Science presence since 1952and delivered superior collective capability

15 May 2017

The Science and Technology Organisation1 Board: Science and Technology Board

2 Business Models3 Executive Bodies

15 May 2017 Slide 3

Science and TechnologyBoard

Science and TechnologyBoard

Office of theChief

Scientist

Centre forMaritimeResearch

Manages the NATOS&T CollaborativeProgram of Work

(CPoW)

Provides NATO HQScientific Advice

Conducts theNATO “In-House”

S&T Program

MilitaryCommittee

Conference ofNational Armaments

Directors

CollaborationSupportOffice

• Maintain Active Network of >5,000(+) Scientists

• Support 7 Technical Panels &Group

• Manage > 250 CollaborativeS&T Activities per year

• Manage Outreach to >500,000 Scientists

The CSO“The Collaborative Production Engine of the STO”

Slide 415 May 2017

• Applied Vehicle Technology (AVT)

• Human Factors and Medicine (HFM)

• Information Sciences Technology (IST)

• Modeling and Simulation Group (MSG)

• System Analysis and Studies (SAS)

• System Concepts and Integration (SCI)

• Sensors and Electronics Technology (SET)

Technical Panels and Group

Slide 515 May 2017

• Erosion of Technologically Based Capability Overmatch– Western Strategy Relies on Fragile Systems—Space, GPS,

Freedom of Motion Through the EM Spectrum, etc.

• Funding for Defense in the Largest European NATONations has been in long term decline since the end ofthe cold war

• Russia Reemerging– Russia (and others) Building Counters to Western Advanced

Systems

Challenges For NATO NationsWhat has Changed Since 1991

Slide 615 May 2017

Let’s Take A Look at Each

• West had 25-year unmatched superiority• Current Foreign Systems Stressing this• Much Built Around A2/AD

– Air:• China / Russia Fielding Fifth Gen Fighters• EW Systems Challenge West• Foreign IADs out of Band to Lower Value of LO• Foreign IADs with SAMs threaten Airborne Air Surveillance

– Sea:• Doctrine of combined Missile Employment Challenges Surface Fleet• Advanced Submarines becoming ultra-quiet

– Land:• Not Much Conventional Challenge; IEDs Still Present• GPS/ Gallileo /Comms Susceptible to Jamming

Loss of Technology Based Superiority

Slide 715 May 2017

• 21st Century—Growth of the Commons

– Modern Electronic Warfare

• Digital Jammers

• Spoofing at the Speed of Computers

– Optical Systems Vulnerable to Jamming

– Cyber

• Extensive Use in Crimea—we don’t know Extent

– Internet of Things / Ubiquitous Surveillance

Loss of Technology Based Superiority (2)

Slide 815 May 2017

Trends of GDP, Military Investment Over Time

Slide 915 May 2017

Source: Economist 22-28 October 2016

China Ascending,US, Europe in Decline

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

100000

199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014

Russia

Germany

UK

France

Defense Budget Funding for theThree largest European NATO Nations($K, CY 2014 Dollars)

Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

Since 1998.RussiaIncrease 4X(China 7X),EU -25%

• European Nations in Long-TermFunding Decline Since End ofCold War

• Russia Has Rebounded• Flat Defense Budgets Tend to

Maintain the Current Programof Record

• Increasing Budgets– Force Size Increases, or– Buying New Systems

• Russia Force Size NotIncreasing, so Rearming– Europe Not so Much

Comparative Defense Funding

Slide 1015 May 2017

• NATO Nations have pledged to invest 2% of GDP intoDefense, and 20% of Defense into Modernization

NATO 2% Pledge

Slide 1115 May 2017

Meeting the Pledge Would Add 148B Euro to Collective Defense Budgets

Graph Below Shows 2014-2016 Investment as aPercent of GDP of 27 NATO Nation5 Meet Pledge, 3 More above 1.5%, 14 Below 1.25%

“The buildup of the military potential ofthe North Atlantic Treaty Organization(NATO) and vesting it with globalfunctions implemented in violations ofnorms of international law, boostingmilitary activity of the bloc’s countries,further expansion of the alliance, theapproach of its military infrastructureto Russian borders create a threat tothe national security.”

Strategy of National Securityof Russian Federation

31 Dec 2015

Slide 1215 May 2017

• Fall 2015 Report from RandBased on a Series (18) ofWargames 2014-2015

• Finding: Russia OverrunsBaltics in 36-60 Hours

• Follow on Implications—Russian Air Defenses Key

• Conclusion: NATO notCurrently Postured toDefend its Eastern Territory

• Would Take Ground Forces– Current Thought 7Brigades

Rand Study

Slide 1315 May 2017

Source: Slapnick and Johnson (2016) Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank

• A2/AD Starts withSuppression of Air Freedomof Movement

• Airspace around BalticStates Heavily Defended byNetworked Air Defenses

• Extensive deployment of S-400 “Triumph” and S-300“Grumble” Systems

• Augmented Heavily with of“sophisticated Russian AirDefenses around Kaliningrad

• More Exercises Needed

Russian and Surrogate Air Defense

Slide 1415 May 2017

Air Defenses Around KaliningradClose Up

Slide 1515 May 2017

• Virtually no Unprotected Areas• S-400

– 400KM Surface to Air Missile– Active / Passive X, L, UHF Radar– Engage Multiple Targets– Claims to have 29 Battalions

• Russia Could Channelize WesternApproaches

• Air Could be Difficult– Military Action Would Require

Ground Component

Red, Blue S-400; Gold S-300

• Electronic Warfare Central to RussianWarfighting Doctrine

• Consolidated Industry to MajorDeveloper– Concern Radio Electronic Technologies– 48th on 2016 Defense News Top 100– Unranked in 2015

• Extensive Numbers of Systems– Capable Ground Based Jammers, Air Pods,

etc.– Specifically Target GPS, Comms, and Enemy

Radars– Doctrine Includes Space Assets

• Deployed and Tested in Syria and Crimea

Russian EW Suites

Slide 1615 May 2017

• Russia Successfully Disrupted WesternUAV’s in Crimea

• Defense News Claims Russia Deploying250,000 GPS Jammers in Country

• Western Systems Must be AffordablyAdapted to Deal with this Threat– LPI/LPD– Beam Shaping– Backup Point to Point– Expanded Frequency Hopping– Advanced Crypto– OTHERS????

Russia Communications Jamming

Slide 1715 May 2017

Sources: Mark Pomerleau, 20 Dec 2016 c4isrnet

• Russian Reported to Use Cyber Attack onUkraine Power Grid Dec 2015

• Multiple reports of increasing cyber-espionage by Russia and cyber-attackssuspected to come from Russia (GermanIntelligence)– Denial of Service

• Primary Targets– Command and Control Systems– Power Grids– Air Traffic Control Systems– Oil & Gas Distribution Centers

• Russia Doctrine includes Cyber Activities,they have created a military Cyber command

Cyber

Slide 1815 May 2017

Sources: 6 Jan 2016 Fortune; Rentz and Smith, Papers Alaksteri, Jan 2016; Franz-Stefan Gady, The Diplomat, 3 March 2015

“The Russian Cyber Threat is More Severe Than We Had Previously AssessedJim Clapper, Former US Director, National Intelligence

NATO CPoW Is Path to Access• Confluence of Events Enhances Need

to Collaborate; Simultaneously:• West Erosion of Technology Based

Military Superiority• Fiscal Austerity in Many Nations• Compression of Technology Development

Cycle• Increased Access to Commercial

Technology• Emergence of “New” Approaches (Cyber,

Social Media, etc.)• Nations Benefit by Enhancing their

Collaboration

15 May 2017

Total Number of Activities per YearAll Panels/Group Combined

Slide 2015 May 2017

Comms and Info Systems

Slide 2115 May 2017

InformationAssuranceAnd Cyber

Def

Concepts and Solutions ForDefense

Ad HocNetworks

ManageSpectrum

/ EW

Interoperability

• New cloud-based cryptographic services• Security and Integrity of Data and

communication using QuantumTechnology

• Cryptographic protection for autonomousand unmanned platforms/systems(integrity, authenticity, confidentiality forboth control information and userinformation)

• Way of establishing trust in systems usingOff the Shelf components (hardware andsoftware)

• Intelligent Autonomous Agents for Real-Time Cyber Defense and Resilience

Information Assurance and Cyber Defense(Trust, Integrity)

Slide 2215 May 2017

IST-ET-099Mission Assurance and Cyber Security Risk Assessment

for Multi-domain Unmanned/Autonomous Systems(UAxS)

Chair: Mr. James L. SIDORAN (USA) [CMRE POC: Robert BEEN]

Interested Nations / NATO Bodies:CAN, DEU, GBR, ITA, NLD, POR, USA; CMRE, MSCOE

Partners invited: PfP (SWE, FIN)

Other Coordination: SCI-296 (Autonomy from a SystemPerspective), ACT (CUAxS), CMRE (Persistent AutonomousReconfigurable Capability (PARC)), NHQC3S, NIAG (SG-157&202),STANAG 4586, NCIA, MSCOE (MSaaS and MESAS++), MSG-145(Operationalization of Standardized C2-Simulation Interoperability)

Tentative meeting dates/locations: CMRE/La Spezia(Fall/winter 2016), CSO/Paris (Spring 2017), and 3rd location TBD(Fall/winter 2017)

Objective:• Consider existing/emerging methods and frameworks in

mission assurance, cyber security and risk assessment,such as Mission-Aware Framework (MAF), ACT’s CounterUnmanned and Autonomous Systems (CUAxS) Project,NLD’s Cyber Security Risk Assessment approach

• Using methods and frameworks, develop an initial(abstract systems) model of a synchronized, multi-domain(air and maritime) mission conducted by UAxSs and CPS,and conduct preliminary cyber security risk assessment.

• Consider how other disciplines, such as SA, C2, visualanalytics, communications, networks, architectures,M&S, etc., would engage

Outputs and Deliverables:• Position paper (for STO cross-panel distribution), with follow-on

RTG TAP (i.e., 3-year plan and deliverables)Military Relevance / Exploitation:• The critical role Multi-domain Unmanned and Autonomous C4ISR

Systems (UAxS) will play in future NATO synchronized operationswill only increase. NATO recognizes this by supporting a numberof projects and programs, including ACT’s CUAxS, CMRE’s PARC,NIAG SG-157 (Unmanned Systems Multi-Domain ControlArchitecture) and NIAG SG-202 (Conceptual data model for multi-domain unmanned platform control systems), to name a few.

• Increased attention to autonomy, and cyber security andresilience

• A coalition perspective and consensus on the treatment ofmission assurance and cyber security risk assessment for UAxSconducting multi-domain missions is essential for futureinteroperability

15 May 2017 23

Ad Hoc Networks• Smart, self-managing tactical

networks and radios• Autonomous adaptive services and

applications for ad hoc networks• Near real-time self healing, agile

repurposing networks andcomponent

• Next gen wireless networks• Airborne nodes (fully airborne

networks as well as the integration ofairborne nodes in "traditional" adhoc networks (interoperabilityaspects included)

• Efficient communications protocolsfor networks of autonomous vehicles(interoperability aspects included)

15 May 2017 Slide 24

IST-140-RTGCognitive Radio Networks - Efficient Solutions forRouting, Topology Control, Data Transport, and

Network Management

Chair : Mr. Stefan COUTURIER, DEU

Members: BEL, DEU, NOR, POL, TUR

Partners: FIN and SWE only

Duration: JAN 2015 – DEC 2017First Meeting @ CSO on 16-17 March 2015. Second Meeting potentially@ NCIA on 15-17 September 2015 (to be coordinated with NCIA) -alternative solution could be the RMA in Brussels at the same dates

Cooperation: NCIA? NC3HQS, ACT? ACO? NAAG LCGLand Engagement? SCI

Related Activities:

Objectives:To investigate topics relevant for military use of cognitiveradio networks in both NATO nations and NATO-ledoperations; focusing on cognitive systems that are ableto communicate with each other, either over-the-air orthrough a backbone network.

Deliverables:Technical Report

Exploitation:This RTG should provide solutions to the issue ofinsufficient bandwidth to support future militaryoperations. In particular the concept of realizing ad hocnetworks (CRAHNs) should provide on the long run thepossibility of fast deployment, self-forming, and self-healing features, along with the additional capabilities ofthe CR devices; all that being expected to revolutionizethe next generation military networks.


Spectrum Management and EW• Study on (or evaluation of)

relevant off-the-shelfcommunications equipment(NOTS, GOTS, COTS) withrespect to their vulnerability todetection and electronicattacks.

• Wireless communicationsnetwork in degraded/deniedenvironment (urban contestedenvironment…)

• Intelligent AutonomousSpectrum Management

• Integrated Spectrum, Cyber,Physical Battlespace C4I


• Interoperable cryptographic solutions that providesupport for multiple coalitions

• Common architectural frameworks and interfaces• Scalable architecture

Interoperability

Slide 2715 May 2017

IST-147-RTG“Military Applications of Internet of Things”

Chair: Zbigneiv Zielinski POL

Members: BEL, DEU, POL, ROM, TUR?, GBR, USA

Partners: FIN

Duration: 2016-2018

Cooperation: NCIA

Related Activities: IST-ET-076

Objectives:• Description of overall scenarios that will examine applicability of

IoT in military domain• Define an IoT architecture or architectures that might be used in

selected scenarios/vignettes• Evaluate the risk of applying IoT technologies in the selected

scenarios• Identify communications requirements needed to support IoT

within selected scenarios• Propose models for security and trust management that address

the most significant risks and mitigation measures• Build technically advanced demonstrators• Execute and analyse challenges related to reliability and

dependability, especially when IoT becomes mission critical


Exploitation:A scenario will be selected that will examine applicability of IoT tomilitary topics (base operations, situational awareness, boundarysurveillance including harbour, energy management, and etc.The risk of applying IoT technologies in the scenario will be assessed.And models for security and trust management that address the mostsignificant risks will be proposed.Proposals for communications architectures.Technologies required to exploit IoT, such as data fusion, big data orother techniques will be considered as required to support the othertopics.


• Intelligent Decision SupportSystems capable of dealingwith large amounts ofheterogeneous data (e.g.video and text from trustedand untrusted sources)

• ImprovedHuman/Computer Interfaces– (including information

presentation & visualanalytics, seamless presence,etc.)

Information Age C4I

Slide 2915 May 2017

• The EM Domain Has Become Contested Once Again

• Military Communications Must Work Architecture– Cost vs Capability Trades– Mix High End and Low End Systems

• Can Not Assume Systems Will Work; Train in MultipleScenarios

Take Away

Slide 3015 May 2017

Questions?

Slide 3115 May 2017

Some Examples of NATO Work

Slide 3315 May 2017

IST-124-RTGHeterogeneous Tactical Networks - Improving

Connectivity and NetworkEfficiency

Chair : Pr. Mariann Hauge, NOR

Members: EST, FIN, DEU, ITA, NLD, NOR, POL, SWE.TUR, USA

Duration: JUN 2014 – JUN 2017

Cooperation: SET

Related Activities: IST-ET-069

Objectives:Provide architecture and design guidance for tacticalheterogeneous networks (including the mobiletactical edge)o More reliable and predictable network performancethrough adaptive and efficient control schemeso Enhanced network manageability- Contribute to performance evaluation criteria forheterogeneous networks- Explore disruptive technologies for further enhancements(e.g., content centric networking, software definenetworking,


Exploitation: Efficient information sharing and provisionof consistent, accurate and reliable mission data are keyissues in the NATONetwork Enabled Capabilities (NNEC). A robustly networkedforce improves information sharing; enhances the quality ofinformation and shared situational awareness.


IST-132-RTGMulti-Level Fusion of Hard and Soft Information

Chair : Dr. Wolfgang KOCH, DEU

Members: FRA, DEU, ITA, POL, ESP, TUR

Partners: all PfP invited

Duration: JAN 2015 – DEC 2017First Meeting in conjunction with the 18th International Conference onInformation Fusion, July 6-9 2015, Washington, D.C., USA

Cooperation: NCIA, HFM, SAS, MSG, CMRE

Related Activities: IST-106

Objectives:To conduct research on data and information fusionincorporating structured and unstructured humangenerated information (soft data) facing the complexrelevant information context and heterogeneous datastructures from various civilian and militaryorganizations and sources.To demonstrate the usefulness of a Controlled Language(BML) as a mechanism to facilitate integratedexploitation of data and information from different typeof sources and on different levels of fusion, and toimprove threat detection and modelling.


Exploitation:This RTG should contribute to a future smooth andintegrated data and information processing within theoverall ISTAR chain. Situation awareness on device-based data, mainly built from the products ofalgorithmic sensor data fusion and used in near real-time applications will be better connected to high levelinformation fusion providing the military leader with abetter situation awareness.

15 May 2017 35

IST-142-RTGSoftware Defined Network Architectures for the

Federated Mission Networks

Chair : Dr. Risto LUOMA, FIN

Members: CAN, FRA, GER, NOR, ROM, GBR

Partners: FIN, SWE

Duration: JAN 2016 – DEC 2018

Cooperation: NCIA

Related Activities:

Objectives:1. How suitable SDN is to the military communications in differentlevels of ORBAT2. What is the difference between military DNA and commercial DNAon SDN aspects of networking3. What requirements should be put to the military SDN controller –taking account wide-area networking4. What kind of new networking opportunities SDN would open for themilitary communication5. What kind of potential SDN has for solving intrinsic issues in multi-security domain networking6. How does SDN change the industrialization and commercial valuechain of military communication systems7. What new challenges in the area of security need to be taken intoaccount when embedding SDN into military networks

Deliverables:Technical ReportExploitation:• Impact of SDN concepts for total cost of ownership intactical communication infrastructure taking account changeof the roles in industrialization process• Impact of SDN and CCN concept for the capability oftactical networks, especially when SDN is not onlyconsidered as implementation technology but a platform ontop of which new networking capabilities are designed• Impact of security policies on implementation of SDN andCCN concept in tactical networking. The aim of this topic isto analyze security aspects from different levels of SDN.


IST-146-RTGElectromagnetic Environment Situational

Awareness

Chair : Y. LIVRAN, FRA

Members: BEL, FRA, GBR, USA

Partners:

Duration: Jan 2016 – Dec 2016

Cooperation: NCIA

Related Activities: SAS IST 102

Objectives:• Define a first model of REM and demonstrate the REM

feasibility even if the REM model studied anddemonstrated has not the objective to be fullycomplete.

• Demonstrate the REM benefits for NATO C4ISRoperations and systems

• Evaluate the gap between the existing legacy system andthe future REM

Deliverables:Technical ReportExploitation:Electromagnetic Environment Situational Awareness canbe used for:• Detection and management of white spaces to assist radiosystems using dynamic spectrum access,• Transmitter localization and transmit power estimation,• C2IS in order to conduct operations on the battlefield inorder to avoid, interference, jamming within Allied forces.• EW systems in order to support real time establishment ofthe Electronic Order of Battle


15 May 2017 38

IST-149 RTGCapability Concept Demonstrator for Interoperability

within Unmanned Ground Systems and C2

Chair: F.E. SCHNEIDER (GER)

Members: DEU, NOR, SPE, GBR, USA

Partners: FIN, SWZ

Duration: Aug 201 – August 2019

Cooperation: SCI

Related Activities:

Objectives:1. Plan and implement a capability concept demonstrator

(CCD) that will use these standards and validate thecompatibility chain from the acquisition of ISR data onthe UGV up to the end user terminal of a C2 system.Every participating nation will do that for their particularUGV and C2 system but based on the agreed set ofstandards.

2. The RTG will also continue to introduce thosestandards into the ELROB.

Deliverables:• Plan and concept of implementation and overall

structure as well as a list of the used standards.• Single and coalition tests of the implemented systems.• A synopsis detailing the degree of success achieved at

the tests.• A report summarizing the limitations imposed by the

standards (if applicable) and proposed changes and /orenhancements that would improve interoperability.

Exploitation:A «Concept Capability Demonstrator» that show theinteroperability between the involved systems.

IST-150-RTGNATO Core services profiling for Hybrid tactical

networks

Chair : Norman JANSEN, DEU

Members: FIN, DEU, NOR, SPE, USA

Duration: November 2016 – Nov 2019

Cooperation: NCIA

Related Activities: IST-090, IST-118

Objectives:Set of profiles to help deployment of services.Encompasses complete profiles for some services and partialprofiles for others.Focus on NATO Core Services deployed on Hybrid TacticalNetworks.Align results with the FMN concept and extend support forservices outside the scope of FMN to Hybrid TacticalNetworks

Deliverables:• Test report(s);

• NATO Core Services profiles for a sub-set of the services;

• Demonstrations

Exploitation: Efficient information sharing and provisionof consistent, accurate and reliable mission data are keyissues in the NATONetwork Enabled Capabilities (NNEC). A robustly networkedforce improves information sharing; enhances the quality ofinformation and shared situational awareness.


IST-ET-096Expeditionary 5G Technology

Chair : Amjad SOOMRO, USA

Members: DEU, NLD, TUR, USA

Duration: Jan 2017 – Dec 2017

Cooperation: NCIA

Related Activities: IST-090, IST-118

Objectives:This ET will identify potential uses and dangers of theemergence of 5G technologies in NATO and NATO nations.One impact that requires watching is the encroachment of5G on military spectrum use. Some of the higher frequencybandsbeing explored for 5G are currently used for radar, satelliteand other military purposes

Deliverables:• TAP for RTG

Exploitation: 5G is expected to enable a quantum leap inperformance.5G standard is expected to be adopted by 2018, with initialdeployments around 2020.


IST-ET-098“C2 of the spectrum”

Chair: tbd, USA

Members: DEU?, POL, ROM?, GBR

Partners:

Duration: January to December 2017

Cooperation: NCIA?

Related Activities:

Objectives:This ET will identify strategies and technologiesto maintain effective command and control ofthe electromagnetic spectrum across NATOand NATO nations.

Deliverables:TAP

Exploitation:A technical report describing the challengesand opportunities for management of thespectrum in crowded, complex, contested, anddynamic environments.

.


Team Leaders: Mr. Lionel KHIMECHE (FRA)Mr. Bharatkumar PATEL (GBR)

Active: CAN, FRA, GER, ITA, NDL, NOR, TUR, GBR,USA

Desired: NCIA, NATO M&S CoE, SISO, MIP, SET

Duration: Feb 2016 – Feb 2019

Related activities: MSG-135, MSG-136, MSG-141Objective(s):- Exploit C2SIM through an operational, conceptual and

executable scenario development process;- Develop extensions to the unified C2SIM core Data Model;- Inform the standards development process;- Educate the community of practice on C2SIM technology;- Make recommendations for ”covering” the C2SIM standard

with a STANAG.Topics:- Outreach to military stakeholders;- Development process, products and tools for implementation;- NATO Architecture Framework (NAF) and other methods to

describe scenarios and interoperability requirements;- Automation of M&S initialization;- Services to enable persistent C2SIM interoperability;- STANAG development;

Impact and Exploitation:Standardizing the exchange of digitized military information forC2SIM interoperation is a solution and will lead to realizing anumber of benefits that include:- Enhanced realism and overall effectiveness by faster, more

consistent information exchange among systems.- Decreased cost and risk by reducing manual input (the swivel

chair effect), reduced number of supporting personnel andequipment.

- Reduced preparation and response time with rapidconfiguration, initialization of systems and validation ofscenario.

MSG-145 “Operationalization of StandardizedC2-Simulation Interoperability”


SAS–104 RTG-046 on C2 Agility: Next Steps Co-Chairs: Micheline Bélanger (CAN)Björn Johansson (SWE)

Members: CAN, DEN, DEU, GBR, NOR, PRT, TUR,USA

Partners: SWE

Duration: June 2014 – December 2017

Cooperation: IST-118, NCIA, ACT, C2COE

Related Activities: SAS-085

Objectives:The goal of this activity is to improve NATO, member nationand coalition partner C2 Agility thereby improving theirability to be successful in the face of increasing missionuncertainty and complexity.

Building upon the work of SAS-085, SAS-104 is developingapproaches and material to explain and disseminate C2Agility concepts, findings and conclusions as well assupporting member nations and NATO organizations in theirefforts related to C2 Agility. SAS-104 is documenting C2Agility efforts, gathering additional evidences to furthervalidate C2 Agility concepts and findings; and, performingresearch on selected C2 Agility-related topics.

Deliverables:Final Technical Report that documents its activities andfindings as well as dissemination material related to C2Agility training, assessment and case studies.

Exploitation:SAS-104 is the exploitation of work conducted during SAS-085. Ultimately, the goal will be to partner with a variety ofmilitary organizations to develop the capability to employmore than one approach to C2 and to provide evidence-based advice on how to adopt the most appropriateapproach as a function of the mission and circumstances.


Outputs and Deliverables:• Educational notes are published in the following areas:

• Good Practice in Systems of Systems Engineering(SoSE)

• Systems of Systems Characterization and Types• The Role of Architecting in Systems of Systems• System Interfaces and System Interoperability in a

System-of-Systems Context• Systems of Systems Engineering Life Cycle• Socio-Technical Perspective on SoSE• Systems of Systems Considerations for the

Engineering of Systems• Enterprise and the Technology Environment• Architecting of Systems for Participation in System-of-

Systems

Objectives:• This Lecture Series aims to spread good practice in

Systems Engineering through presentation of casestudy-based examples of systems of systemsengineering application.

Topics/themes:- Interoperability- Differences between Systems of Systems and Systems

of Systems Engineering- System of System Challenges, architectures, M&S,

defence case studies and good practice.

SCI-276 RLSSystems of Systems Engineering for NATO

Defence Applications

Team Leader Prof Michael Henshaw (GBR)

Active BUL, DEU, FRA, GBR, PRT, USA

Willing

Desired

Duration Mar 2014 – Apr 2017

RelatedActivity


SCI-281-RTG on“Solutions Advancing Next Generation Radar

Electronic Attack”

Team leader(s):

Active:

Willing:

Desired:

Duration:

Cooperation:

Mr. Dietmar MATTHES (DEU)

DNK, FRA, DEU, ITA, NLD, NOR, POL,TUR, USA

SET

JAN 2015 - DEC 2017

SCI-252

Objectives:The objective of the RTG is to develop EA techniques againstHRR, SAR/ISAR by investigating and improving jammingtechniques against target classification capable radars.Topics:• Development of advanced EA techniques against

imaging radar and non-cooperative classificationalgorithms

• EA techniques against LPI Systems• EA techniques against passive and multi-static radar

systems• General aspects of cognitive, cooperative or coordinated

EA techniques against adaptive radar threats

Impact and Exploitation:• This report will allow NATO forces to understand

potential Electromagnetic Spectrum Denial threats andconsider countermeasure to thwart these threats

• Broaden the body of knowledge within NATO nationsconcerning EA techniques

• Use body of knowledge to adapt operational proceduresat the National level

• Establish countermeasure integration strategy amongNATO nations against EA


SCI-297 RTG onDistributed EW Operations in the Modern

Congested RF Environment

Team leader(s):

Active:

Willing:

Duration:

Cooperation:

Related activities:

David Farmer (GBR)

CAN,DEU, FRA, ITA, NLD, NOR,TUR,USA, GBR/SWE

AUS

Jan 2017 – Jan 2020

NATO SIGINT, EW, SET and IST WorkingGroupsSCI-289 and SEI-SCI-230

Objectives:The objective of the RTG is to investigate and assess5G/MIMO technologies (potential threats) and their impactto current and future EW/Cyber systems and operations.Topics:• Assess technical challenges/issues of 5G communications to EW and

Cyber operations in congested and contested EMSO (Electro-MagneticSpectrum Operations)

• Maintain “tech watch” on evolving 5G/MIMO networks attributes• Provide recommendations and technical solutions to NATO nations• Assist in filling technology gaps and solve operational shortfalls in EW• Investigate opportunities and/or benefits by leveraging 5G technologies

to improve EW/Cyber capabilities and generate new concepts andsystems for current and future EW missions

Impact and Exploitation:• Workshop proceeding reports• Recommendation for RTG activity if deemed appropriate• Joint demonstration reports• Final report• Technical publications• Military EW/Cyber operations in a robust 5G/MIMO

network environment


SET-SCI-230/RSM “Reconfigurable and ScalableMulti-Function RF Systems in a Congested

EM Spectrum”

Chair: Dr R. SCHLEIJPEN (NLD)

Members: DNK, DEU, ITA, NLD, NOR, SVK, TUR, GBR,USA

Partners: FIN, SWE, AUS, NZL

Duration: 07-2015 – 06/2016

Cooperation: SCI, IST

Related Activities: SCI-ET-019

Objectives:This special session aims at bringing together specialists inthe fields of EW and radar/communications. A two-dayspecialist meeting is proposed to assess the state of the artof the relevant research activities among the NATO nations.

KeywordsReconfigurable and scalable RF systems, Congested andcontested EM spectrum, spectrum management, sensormanagement, cognitive systems, resource management,waveform diversity, testing of multifunction RF systems.

Deliverables:Meeting Proceeding containing the Technical EvaluationReport with recommendations for future activities.

Exploitation:The Community of expert will seek for future long-lastingcollaboration in the field of Reconfigurable and ScalableMulti-Function RF Systems . This will allow SET and SCIPanels to identify potential gaps in their research portfolioand to harmonize them.


The Strategic Context -- Complex

Slide 48

Source: Liberty Unyielding March 2016

Without ActiveIntervention, NATO

Nations Are At Risk ofLoosing the Information

Advantage!!!!

15 May 2017

• Modern Electronic Warfare

• Ubiquitous Communications

• Ballistic and Cruise Missile Defense• Precision Navigation and Timing (PNT) / Communications /

Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)

• Modern Integrated Air Defense

• Cyber

• Internet of Things / Ubiquitous Surveillance

Rise of the Commons

Not Platforms and Large Acquisitions Like Industry Used to Receive15 May 2017 Slide 49

Technology Offset• Historical Term – Focus on “Asymmetric” Approach

When Faced With a Daunting Challenge

o Late 50’s - Davey Crockett

o Air Land Battle – 1980

• Precision, Navigation and Timing• Stealth• Precision Munitions• Night Vision

Current Challenge: “A2/AD”*, Cyber, etc*Anti Access / Area Denial


• Taken together, the AirPicture over Eastern Europeis Stressing to NATO,

• Options: Heavy Air WithLosses, or Ground and AirFight

• Both Hard—and Would beStressing

• Same Things As Falling UnderThird Offset are Needed forRussia– Greater Autonomy, Human

Machining Teaming,Advanced ASW, EnhancedEW, etc

Third Offset Applies to NATO Needs Also

Slide 5115 May 2017

• GDP / Military Evolution• European Defense

Funding• Defense Industrial Base• NATO 2% Defense

Pledge

Just the Facts

Slide 5215 May 2017

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

1990199219941996199820002002200420062008201020122014

Germany

UK

France

Germany – 53% of 1990UK Maintained, back to 0, but were at 80%France 72% of 1990

• Funding for Defense in theLargest European NATO Nationshas been in long term declinesince the end of the cold war

• Other European Nations Showsimilar trends

• Cost of troops has increased byabout a factor of two over thisperiod in the US• Expect the same basic ration in

Europe• Therefore, funding for systems,

readiness down substantially

Defense Budget Funding for theThree Largest European NATO Nations($K, CY 2014 Dollars)

Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

European Defense Funding


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2000 2015 2016

Europe Russia Asia US

Number of Firms in theTop 50 Defense IndustrialFirms from Defense News

Comparative Defense Funding AffectsIndustrial Base

Slide 5415 May 2017

• European Nations

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1990 2000 2010 2016

Force Size

France Germany UK

Spain Italy Poland

KFo

rces 55% of the

Size in 2016 asWas in 199051% if Italy Removed

Funding Affects Force Size

Slide 55

• Russia, US and China

0500

10001500200025003000350040004500

1990 2000 2010 2016

Force Size

Russia US ChinaK

Forc

es China 85%Russia 64%

US 63%

Source:World BankRussia, China Peace Dividend Smaller than the West

15 May 2017

• “The buildup of the militarypotential of the North AtlanticTreaty Organization (NATO) andvesting it with global functionsimplemented in violations ofnorms of international law,boosting military activity of thebloc’s countries, furtherexpansion of the alliance, theapproach of its militaryinfrastructure to Russianborders create a threat to thenational security.”

About the Strategy of National Securityof Russian Federation

31 Dec 2015

Slide 5615 May 2017

Source:Federation of American Scientistsfas.org/spp/eprint/snf03221.htm

• First Russian Fifth GenerationFighter

• Expected IOC – By 2017• Low Observable (~.01msq), Super

cruise, Composite, Long Range(1500-3500km)

• Advanced Avionics (AESA Radar,IRST)

• Extensive EW Capability• Beyond Visual Range Air to Air

Missiles (Expect R77M).

Added Complexity PAK-FA

Slide 5715 May 2017

Russia Enhancing Air Defenses inKaliningrad

Slide 58

S-400

• Kaliningrad have both short andlong range SAMs networked inKaliningrad Oblast

• S-400 Most Formidable– Surface to Air Missiles to 400KM– Fielded in 2007– Reported to Have X, L, UHF Radar,

Active and Passive Modes– Semi Active Terminal Seeker– Can Engage Multiple Simultaneous

Targets– Russia Claims to Have 29 Battalions– Being Sold to China and India

S-400

Source: Rogoway, 1/14/16 Russia Buildup of S-400 Missile Batteries in Kaliningrad

15 May 2017

Russia Also Enhancing Other Defensesin Kaliningrad

Slide 59

S-400

S-400

• Oct-2016—Moved NuclearCapable Iskander-M toKaliningrad– Road Mobile– 500 Km Range– 5m Accuracy– Ranges Berlin, Copenhagen,

Prague, Poland, and theBaltics

• Reports of More Groundand Air Forces BeingMoved to Kaliningrad

15 May 2017

Exercises

Slide 6015 May 2017

French-US-UK Air Exercises

Slide 61

• Conducted April 2016• Included Simulation of

“Sophisticated Russian AirDefenses aroundKaliningrad”

• More Exercises Needed

Source Julia Barnes, NATO 22 April 2016

15 May 2017

Slide 6215 May 2017

• Display card text reads (I think) as:• Jamming Transmitter for GPS/GLONASS

Satellite Navigation Receivers Function -Disrupts correct measurement ofgeographic coordinates by satellitenavigation receivers TechnicalCharacteristics Operating Range - 150-200 km

• Output Power - 4 W• Antenna Gain Factor - 3-5• Transmitter Weight (without power

supply) - 8-10 kg• Power Consumption - <25 W• Electrical Requirements - +15V 1.5A; -6V

1.5A• Text for the left knob: Freq Dev (0-6

MHz)• Text for the right knob: FM Mod (44-270

Hz

• Severodvinsk and ImprovedAkula Radiated Noise StressWestern Ability to Detect

• Russia Aggressively ExercisingSubmarines (Source NATO JointAir Power Competence Center)– Included Undetected

Approaches to US EasternSeaboard, UK (Scotland), France(Bay of Biscay), and through theMediterranean

– Again Exercising MissileLaunches

• Potential Undetected Presenceof Russian Subs ComplicatesDefense Planning

Advanced Russian Systems -- Submarines

Slide 6315 May 2017

Source:https://zbigniewmazurak.wordpress.com/

RangeRings ForKilos withKaliburCruiseMissile

• Russia thought to bedeveloping a boost-glidehypersonic missile (YU-71)

• Flight tested in April 2016• Jane’s projects up to 24

missiles by 2020-2025

Russia also Developing High-EndStrategic Systems

Slide 6415 May 2017

... Future: Russia plans to deploy 24 hypersonic Yu-71 missiles by 2025640 x 337 · jpegnextbigfuture.com

• “Position the Nations’ and NATO S&T Investments as astrategic enabler…technology advantage for defence

– Conducting and Promoting S&T activities

• Augmenting and leveraging S&T capabilitiesand programmes of the nations

– Enabling and influencing security- and defence-relatedcapability development and threat mitigation

– Supporting decision-making in the NATO Nations and NATO

STO Mission (Charter)

Slide 6515 May 2017

NationalInterests

KnowledgeGeneration

Partnerships

Exploitation

NATOSuccess Collaboration

• Task Group(study group, 3 years max.)

• Specialists’ Team(quick reaction)

• Workshop(selected participation, 2-3 days)

• Symposia(>100 people, 3-4 days)

• Specialists’ Meeting(<100 people, 2-3 days )

• Lecture Series(junior and mid-level scientists)

• Technical Course• Exploratory Team

Activities

Collaborative S&T Tools

Slide 6615 May 2017

Date post:	06-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

International Conference on Military Communications and ... · Sources: 6 Jan 2016 Fortune; Rentz...

Documents