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.
15 May 2017 Slide 25
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
15 May 2017 Slide 26
• 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
Deliverables:Technical Report
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 28
• 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,
Deliverables:Technical Report
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 34
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.
Deliverables:Technical Report
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 36
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 Slide 37
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 39
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 40
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.
.
15 May 2017 Slide 41
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”
15 May 2017 Slide 42
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 43
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
15 May 2017 Slide 44
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
15 May 2017 Slide 45
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
15 May 2017 Slide 46
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.
15 May 2017 Slide 47
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
15 May 2017 Slide 50
• 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
15 May 2017 Slide 53
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