US, Japan announce expansion of defense ties - Japan - Stripes: The United States and Japan will expand defense ties over cyberspace and regional security threats as they finalize the first revision of security guidelines between the two allies since 1997, defense chiefs from both nations said Wednesday.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani also reaffirmed opposition to the use of coercion and force in the East and South China seas, where several nations hold competing claims on island territories.
“It’s one of the kinds of conduct that is contrary to everything our system of alliances stands for,” Carter said.
China maintains an ambiguous claim to about 90 percent of the South China Sea and its many islands and rocks. Although the defense chiefs did not call out China specifically, its forces have had low-level skirmishes with Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam in recent years.
The new guidelines would give the allies more flexibility to address regional threats, such as North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programs and tensions over territorial integrity; however,
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Center shows glimpse of next-generation synthetic training | Article | The United States Army
Center shows glimpse of next-generation synthetic training | Article | The United States Army
Army training will likely always involve Soldiers going to the field and firing their weapons. But in the near future, it will also involve a lot more training in "synthetic" environments to make time in the field more productive and meaningful.
"The next capability will be a leader-focused, Soldier-centric capability that immerses a Soldier, wherever they are at the point of training, in a synthetic environment, that allows us to tailor that environment to the demands of the leader," said Col. David S. Cannon of the Combined Arms Center, or CAC, on Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
Experts at the CAC and U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Cannon said, believe the next evolution in Army training will be introduced between 2023 and 2031, and will involve synthetic training environments connected together by a global network that allows Soldiers all over the world to train together, wherever they are, using training regimens that were designed by experts for not just specific mission types, but for missions in specific parts of the world.
"A Soldier in Korea can be trained with a Soldier at Fort Hood," Cannon said. "A Soldier preparing to deploy in support of a global operation can train his task in that immersive environment and the culture, at home station. And not just one time, like at one of our combat training centers, but numerous times."
Cannon attended the Association of the United States Army, or AUSA, Institute of Land Warfare Global Force Symposium, March 31-April 2, in Huntsville, Alabama. There, he manned a display that highlighted the evolution of "training the basics" from World War II, to Bosnia to Iraq and Afghanistan.
In World War II, Cannon said, it was clear who the enemy was - they wore a uniform - and there was little interaction on the part of Soldiers with the civilian population. In Afghanistan and Iraq, he said, it became more unclear who the enemy was, and there was much more interaction with the civilian population, demonstrating an increase in both "ambiguity" and "chaos" in the operating environment.
Cannon said future operating environments will be different than they are today, but ambiguity and chaos on the battlefield will continue to increase. Solders must be trained for such environments, even when it is unclear what exactly those environments will look like.
"The trick is to fight the unknown, to determine the unknown before we know it," Cannon said.
He said the expectation is to develop training tools that are adaptable to whatever capability a commander needs to train on, and to make it possible for a commander to train his Soldiers wherever they are.
"It'll be cloud-based, network-delivered, device-oriented capability that is borne on the mission command information network," he said. "It'll be wherever the Soldier is located."
Training courses will be developed centrally, by academics and military experts, and will be constantly updated and upgraded to match the needs of the commanders that request them and to meet the demands of any environment or situation that needs to be trained, Cannon said.
Soldiers will interface with that information and those scenarios through gear that is not-yet developed, but which help simulate various types of military equipment that a Soldier would need to train for an operation, skill or technique.
"Our Soldiers can relate to this: it's not necessarily a rifle, but a device that replicates a rifle," Cannon said. "Not a tank, but a device that replicates being inside a tank. Do you need a tank to train a tank? Our answer is no.
"Our answer is you have to have the haptic and tactile and immersive environment wherever you need. You will have an immersive environment, some kind of device, and maybe a projector that maps the room that provides you with what the inside of the tank looks like. And more important, what the environment looks like."
Units, Cannon said, will have the necessary gear as part of their training equipment, and the information that provides the scenarios and training courses will be available anywhere via the global network.
"So we are building a synthetic training environment which allows us to improve the immersion of our Soldiers - training our units, our larger formations, and our senior echelon leaders in the environment they will encounter in a complex environment."
The Army already uses simulated training, Cannon said. One example was on display at AUSA. Cannon had a copy of the 3D video trainer "Virtual Battle Space," or VBS, on a computer there running a scenario that would be familiar to those who conducted operations in Iraq.
But Cannon had a set of 3D goggles attached to the game that allowed conference attendees to immerse themselves in the scenario in 360 degrees - something that is not done in the Army. Putting on the 3D goggles and a pair of noise-cancelling headphones, a "player" stood in as gunner on a Stryker combat vehicle and went along on the mission.
Unlike playing the game on a laptop or desktop computer - which is how Soldiers use the game now - with the 3D headset, the player was immersed in the game. A sensor in front of the player rotated field of vision in the headset as he rotated his head - as though he were actually in the game.
Cannon said the 3D goggles are not yet part of the Army's VBS program, but he said the experience offers a glimpse of what the Army is hoping for with its synthetic training environment.
The VBS simulator is not the only training capability the Army uses now, Cannon said.
"In the games for training portfolio, we have 92 training support packages that allow a squad leader to actually train his Soldiers on a variety of tasks from home station and in a classroom," he said. "They don't have to go out to the range or field - they can do it in the dayroom using a military gaming computer."
Cannon said there are applications to assemble, disassemble, or clear a weapons system, for instance. And doing it on a simulator is an inexpensive way to get in practice before doing it for real.
"They will get the repetitions they need," he said. "And we make it fun for them. We make it so they compete against their buddies. So by the time they get to the range, they enter at a higher skill level than we would have if we had put them on a bus and took them to the range and started firing."
There is great cost in taking Soldiers to the range or to the field to practice tasks for the first time that could have been honed in garrison, Cannon said.
"We do see cost savings here. By being in an immersive, synthetic environment, I'll get more repetitions. So when I go to the live environment, I'm better. I'm more trained. I'm more capable of doing what the mission calls for. A completely synthetic environment reduces the amount of overhead. The contractors and the people you need to run these large, complex 20th-century technologies - we won't need them anymore."
The complexity of the current operating environment, and the expectation of an even more complex future operating environment, means Soldiers need repetition in training, and a lot of it. Time spent training in the field is better spent learning to adapt to changing situations and scenarios than to learning basics which could be taught back home.
"The last 12 years of conflict really showed us what we really need are those rich repetitions," Cannon said. "And how you achieve that richness in repetitions - you can't wait to a live environment anymore. We have to provide a synthetic environment that immerses that Soldier and that leader into the complexities that he or she will face.
"We are continuing to build the architecture, leverage the technology, leverage industry, and get the requirement right, to get the capability we want right," Cannon said. "What we are trying to do is develop a future capability that outpaces technology, our adversaries and the environment."
Army training will likely always involve Soldiers going to the field and firing their weapons. But in the near future, it will also involve a lot more training in "synthetic" environments to make time in the field more productive and meaningful.
"The next capability will be a leader-focused, Soldier-centric capability that immerses a Soldier, wherever they are at the point of training, in a synthetic environment, that allows us to tailor that environment to the demands of the leader," said Col. David S. Cannon of the Combined Arms Center, or CAC, on Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
Experts at the CAC and U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Cannon said, believe the next evolution in Army training will be introduced between 2023 and 2031, and will involve synthetic training environments connected together by a global network that allows Soldiers all over the world to train together, wherever they are, using training regimens that were designed by experts for not just specific mission types, but for missions in specific parts of the world.
"A Soldier in Korea can be trained with a Soldier at Fort Hood," Cannon said. "A Soldier preparing to deploy in support of a global operation can train his task in that immersive environment and the culture, at home station. And not just one time, like at one of our combat training centers, but numerous times."
Cannon attended the Association of the United States Army, or AUSA, Institute of Land Warfare Global Force Symposium, March 31-April 2, in Huntsville, Alabama. There, he manned a display that highlighted the evolution of "training the basics" from World War II, to Bosnia to Iraq and Afghanistan.
In World War II, Cannon said, it was clear who the enemy was - they wore a uniform - and there was little interaction on the part of Soldiers with the civilian population. In Afghanistan and Iraq, he said, it became more unclear who the enemy was, and there was much more interaction with the civilian population, demonstrating an increase in both "ambiguity" and "chaos" in the operating environment.
Cannon said future operating environments will be different than they are today, but ambiguity and chaos on the battlefield will continue to increase. Solders must be trained for such environments, even when it is unclear what exactly those environments will look like.
"The trick is to fight the unknown, to determine the unknown before we know it," Cannon said.
He said the expectation is to develop training tools that are adaptable to whatever capability a commander needs to train on, and to make it possible for a commander to train his Soldiers wherever they are.
"It'll be cloud-based, network-delivered, device-oriented capability that is borne on the mission command information network," he said. "It'll be wherever the Soldier is located."
Training courses will be developed centrally, by academics and military experts, and will be constantly updated and upgraded to match the needs of the commanders that request them and to meet the demands of any environment or situation that needs to be trained, Cannon said.
Soldiers will interface with that information and those scenarios through gear that is not-yet developed, but which help simulate various types of military equipment that a Soldier would need to train for an operation, skill or technique.
"Our Soldiers can relate to this: it's not necessarily a rifle, but a device that replicates a rifle," Cannon said. "Not a tank, but a device that replicates being inside a tank. Do you need a tank to train a tank? Our answer is no.
"Our answer is you have to have the haptic and tactile and immersive environment wherever you need. You will have an immersive environment, some kind of device, and maybe a projector that maps the room that provides you with what the inside of the tank looks like. And more important, what the environment looks like."
Units, Cannon said, will have the necessary gear as part of their training equipment, and the information that provides the scenarios and training courses will be available anywhere via the global network.
"So we are building a synthetic training environment which allows us to improve the immersion of our Soldiers - training our units, our larger formations, and our senior echelon leaders in the environment they will encounter in a complex environment."
The Army already uses simulated training, Cannon said. One example was on display at AUSA. Cannon had a copy of the 3D video trainer "Virtual Battle Space," or VBS, on a computer there running a scenario that would be familiar to those who conducted operations in Iraq.
But Cannon had a set of 3D goggles attached to the game that allowed conference attendees to immerse themselves in the scenario in 360 degrees - something that is not done in the Army. Putting on the 3D goggles and a pair of noise-cancelling headphones, a "player" stood in as gunner on a Stryker combat vehicle and went along on the mission.
Unlike playing the game on a laptop or desktop computer - which is how Soldiers use the game now - with the 3D headset, the player was immersed in the game. A sensor in front of the player rotated field of vision in the headset as he rotated his head - as though he were actually in the game.
Cannon said the 3D goggles are not yet part of the Army's VBS program, but he said the experience offers a glimpse of what the Army is hoping for with its synthetic training environment.
The VBS simulator is not the only training capability the Army uses now, Cannon said.
"In the games for training portfolio, we have 92 training support packages that allow a squad leader to actually train his Soldiers on a variety of tasks from home station and in a classroom," he said. "They don't have to go out to the range or field - they can do it in the dayroom using a military gaming computer."
Cannon said there are applications to assemble, disassemble, or clear a weapons system, for instance. And doing it on a simulator is an inexpensive way to get in practice before doing it for real.
"They will get the repetitions they need," he said. "And we make it fun for them. We make it so they compete against their buddies. So by the time they get to the range, they enter at a higher skill level than we would have if we had put them on a bus and took them to the range and started firing."
There is great cost in taking Soldiers to the range or to the field to practice tasks for the first time that could have been honed in garrison, Cannon said.
"We do see cost savings here. By being in an immersive, synthetic environment, I'll get more repetitions. So when I go to the live environment, I'm better. I'm more trained. I'm more capable of doing what the mission calls for. A completely synthetic environment reduces the amount of overhead. The contractors and the people you need to run these large, complex 20th-century technologies - we won't need them anymore."
The complexity of the current operating environment, and the expectation of an even more complex future operating environment, means Soldiers need repetition in training, and a lot of it. Time spent training in the field is better spent learning to adapt to changing situations and scenarios than to learning basics which could be taught back home.
"The last 12 years of conflict really showed us what we really need are those rich repetitions," Cannon said. "And how you achieve that richness in repetitions - you can't wait to a live environment anymore. We have to provide a synthetic environment that immerses that Soldier and that leader into the complexities that he or she will face.
"We are continuing to build the architecture, leverage the technology, leverage industry, and get the requirement right, to get the capability we want right," Cannon said. "What we are trying to do is develop a future capability that outpaces technology, our adversaries and the environment."
US aerospace command moving comms gear back to bunker
US aerospace command moving comms gear back to bunker: The US military command that scans North America's skies for enemy missiles and aircraft plans to move its communications gear to a Cold War-era mountain bunker, officers said Tuesday.
The shift to the Cheyenne Mountain base in Colorado is designed to safeguard the command's sensitive sensors and servers from a potential electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, military officers said.
The Pentagon last week announced a $700 million contract with Raytheon Corporation to oversee the work for North American Aerospace Command (NORAD) and US Northern Command.
Admiral William Gortney, head of NORAD and Northern Command, said that "because of the very nature of the way that Cheyenne Mountain's built, it's EMP-hardened."
The shift to the Cheyenne Mountain base in Colorado is designed to safeguard the command's sensitive sensors and servers from a potential electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, military officers said.
The Pentagon last week announced a $700 million contract with Raytheon Corporation to oversee the work for North American Aerospace Command (NORAD) and US Northern Command.
Admiral William Gortney, head of NORAD and Northern Command, said that "because of the very nature of the way that Cheyenne Mountain's built, it's EMP-hardened."
Monday, April 6, 2015
New US Navy Fleet Goal: 308 Ships
New US Navy Fleet Goal: 308 Ships: The US Navy is now building towards a fleet goal of 308 ships, according to the latest 30-year shipbuilding plan — a small evolution from the previously-cited 306-ship target. The two ships added to the fleet total are a 12th LPD 17-class amphibious transport dock and a third Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB).
The addition of the LPD and AFSB to the fleet objectives mean the number of amphibious warfare ships has grown from 33 to 34 ships, along with the same growth in the number of support vessels — 33 to 34 ships.
The changes are detailed in the annual 30-year shipbuilding report — formally called the "annual long-range plan for construction of naval vessels" — that was sent to Congress April 2. Prepared by the Navy, the report was signed out to Congress by Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work.
In the report, the Navy continues to take issue with Congress' prohibition in the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of counting deployed patrol coastal (PC) ships as part of the battle force. "The Navy does not agree with the current NDAA language," the report says, noting that the PCs fulfill specific Congressional requirements for what constitutes a combatant vessel. The prohibition to counting the PCs, the Navy said, is a contradiction to Congress' own language.
The addition of the LPD and AFSB to the fleet objectives mean the number of amphibious warfare ships has grown from 33 to 34 ships, along with the same growth in the number of support vessels — 33 to 34 ships.
The changes are detailed in the annual 30-year shipbuilding report — formally called the "annual long-range plan for construction of naval vessels" — that was sent to Congress April 2. Prepared by the Navy, the report was signed out to Congress by Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work.
In the report, the Navy continues to take issue with Congress' prohibition in the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of counting deployed patrol coastal (PC) ships as part of the battle force. "The Navy does not agree with the current NDAA language," the report says, noting that the PCs fulfill specific Congressional requirements for what constitutes a combatant vessel. The prohibition to counting the PCs, the Navy said, is a contradiction to Congress' own language.
Joint exercises put U.S. Navy at Russia's doorstep
Joint exercises put U.S. Navy at Russia's doorstep: The Pacific may be a priority, but the Navy is waving a pretty big flag at Russia's front door.
The destroyer Jason Dunham entered the Black Sea on April 3 in support of Operation Atlantic Resolve, a series of NATO drills launched more than a year ago. Designed to strengthen security in response to conflict in Ukraine, a number of other ships have participated in the operation, to include the amphibious command ship Mount Whitney, frigate Taylor, cruiser Vella Gulf, and destroyers Truxtun, Donald Cook, Ross, and Cole.
The Army also deployed 750 tanks and thousands of troops to Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia "to deter Russian aggression." Moscow is none too happy with what a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman called "an unprecedentedly dangerous step."
Meanwhile, the destroyer Porter and cruiser Anzio are running final divisional tactics maneuvers as they draw near Scotland, where they will participate in Joint Warrior, Europe's largest military exercise — again, designed to deter Russian aggression.
The exercise features 12,000 war fighters from 15 NATO countries and partners, to include roughly 60 warships and submarines, more than 100 aircraft, and nearly 3,000 ground forces. The cruiser Vicksburg, destroyer Donald Cook, dry cargo ship Medgar Evers, and elements from Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing 11 and Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 48 will also participate.
The destroyer Jason Dunham entered the Black Sea on April 3 in support of Operation Atlantic Resolve, a series of NATO drills launched more than a year ago. Designed to strengthen security in response to conflict in Ukraine, a number of other ships have participated in the operation, to include the amphibious command ship Mount Whitney, frigate Taylor, cruiser Vella Gulf, and destroyers Truxtun, Donald Cook, Ross, and Cole.
The Army also deployed 750 tanks and thousands of troops to Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia "to deter Russian aggression." Moscow is none too happy with what a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman called "an unprecedentedly dangerous step."
Meanwhile, the destroyer Porter and cruiser Anzio are running final divisional tactics maneuvers as they draw near Scotland, where they will participate in Joint Warrior, Europe's largest military exercise — again, designed to deter Russian aggression.
The exercise features 12,000 war fighters from 15 NATO countries and partners, to include roughly 60 warships and submarines, more than 100 aircraft, and nearly 3,000 ground forces. The cruiser Vicksburg, destroyer Donald Cook, dry cargo ship Medgar Evers, and elements from Patrol and Reconnaissance Wing 11 and Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 48 will also participate.
Paladin PIM: The Little Cannon That Could & The Future Of The Armored Brigade « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary
Paladin PIM: The Little Cannon That Could & The Future Of The Armored Brigade « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary: After 20 years and two costly cancelled programs, the US Army finally has a new artillery vehicle. While the ceremonial rollout isn’t till Thursday, contractor BAE Systems has already delivered the first pair of self-propelled howitzers. Oft-overlooked and blandly named, this Paladin Integrated Management program is a modest but much-needed success for the beleaguered Army acquisition system.
“So far, it has moved along without drama or significant problems,” one Hill staffer told me. “It is not a truly new vehicle in that it borrows from others, but still a success.”
Small though it may seem from the Hill, PIM is a harbinger of three bigger things to come:
a revival of the field artillery, the “king of battle” against conventional threats but a neglected “dead branch walking” during counterinsurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq;
an overhaul of the armored brigade, which will lead to 72 percent of the brigade’s heavy vehicles having the same BAE-built automotive systems;
a new approach to acquisition, in which expensive, ambitious, all-new designs give way to incremental but still substantial changes to existing platforms.
“So far, it has moved along without drama or significant problems,” one Hill staffer told me. “It is not a truly new vehicle in that it borrows from others, but still a success.”
Small though it may seem from the Hill, PIM is a harbinger of three bigger things to come:
a revival of the field artillery, the “king of battle” against conventional threats but a neglected “dead branch walking” during counterinsurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq;
Friday, April 3, 2015
CNO Stresses Versatility of Independence Class LCS
CNO Stresses Versatility of Independence Class LCS
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Jonathan Greenert and Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Fla.) stressed the versatility of the Independence-Class Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) April 1 at a press conference on board Naval Air Station (NAS) Pensacola.
After touring the USS Independence (LCS 2) with the congressman, the CNO highlighted the value of the LCS's ability to be repackaged for multiple missions.
"The thing that is of value about the LCS is that she has great volume, high speed, and is modular," said Greenert. "What that means is you can change out packages to perform different missions."
"Currently the Independence is configured for mine countermeasures operations, but she can be reconfigured for other missions including maritime security or anti-submarine warfare. These packages could be forward-deployed around the world in hot spots, where in a matter of a few days, the ship could be changed as necessary to meet the demand."
The ship has been testing its new anti-mine warfare technology in the Gulf of Mexico since Feb. 20, and will be docking between sorties at NAS Pensacola throughout its training operation.
Greenert praised the experience of the crew testing the new LCS saying it allows the Navy to be more efficient with crew management.
"These Sailors on board the ship are more senior than the average Sailor," he said. "They've been in the Navy for four-to-six years. This enables us to keep the crew to half of what it would normally be on a conventional ship."
The CNO also addressed the pace of construction for these new ships.
"In the future I expect to see continued construction of the LCS platform. We took a pause and decided we need 52 of these ships," said Greenert. "The Secretary of Defense asked us to take a look at this and see if we could make these more survivable and more lethal. We've done that and we are all guns ahead."
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Jonathan Greenert and Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Fla.) stressed the versatility of the Independence-Class Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) April 1 at a press conference on board Naval Air Station (NAS) Pensacola.
After touring the USS Independence (LCS 2) with the congressman, the CNO highlighted the value of the LCS's ability to be repackaged for multiple missions.
"The thing that is of value about the LCS is that she has great volume, high speed, and is modular," said Greenert. "What that means is you can change out packages to perform different missions."
"Currently the Independence is configured for mine countermeasures operations, but she can be reconfigured for other missions including maritime security or anti-submarine warfare. These packages could be forward-deployed around the world in hot spots, where in a matter of a few days, the ship could be changed as necessary to meet the demand."
The ship has been testing its new anti-mine warfare technology in the Gulf of Mexico since Feb. 20, and will be docking between sorties at NAS Pensacola throughout its training operation.
Greenert praised the experience of the crew testing the new LCS saying it allows the Navy to be more efficient with crew management.
"These Sailors on board the ship are more senior than the average Sailor," he said. "They've been in the Navy for four-to-six years. This enables us to keep the crew to half of what it would normally be on a conventional ship."
The CNO also addressed the pace of construction for these new ships.
"In the future I expect to see continued construction of the LCS platform. We took a pause and decided we need 52 of these ships," said Greenert. "The Secretary of Defense asked us to take a look at this and see if we could make these more survivable and more lethal. We've done that and we are all guns ahead."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)