Tag Archives: digital battlefield

Electronic Warfare: Algorithm Dominance

US Army Secretary Eric Fanning announced [in August 2016] a new Rapid Capabilities Office to accelerate the development of cyber, electronic warfare…That rapid technological progression is on full display, for example, in eastern Ukraine, where Ukrainian soldiers have been battling Russian-backed forces since 2014. For example, Russian-backed separatists have used EW and GPS-spoofing to jam and misdirect the drones that Ukrainian troops use to scope out enemy positions. “Over the past several years we’ve learned from what we’ve seen from Russia and Ukraine, and later in Syria, and from the different capabilities they’ve brought to the battlefield. We’ve seen the combination of unmanned aerial systems and offensive cyber and advanced electronic warfare capabilities and how they provided Russian forces a new degree of sophistication,” said Fanning…

“My guess is … that after 15 years of doing largely counter-insurgency operations in the Middle East, the Army is now taking a look at how it would do large force-on-force conflict in a place like Europe. ”

The pace of innovation in EW — in the form of novel new waveforms that can disrupt an adversary’s electronics, paint enemy stealth aircraft* etc. — has surprised many in the military. That’s because EW innovation has become less and less a hardware challenge and more of a software challenge. You can make a new weapon as quickly as your algorithm can pull together a new waveform from the spectrum. But the military, too often, still procures EW assets the same way it buys jets and boats. Slowly.

Excerpts from To Counter Russia’s Cyber Prowess, US Army Launches Rapid-Tech Office, DefenseOne, Aug. 31, 2016

*Radar-absorbent material (RAM), often paints used on aircraft,: absorb radiated energy from a ground or air based radar station into the coating and convert it to heat rather than reflect it back thus avoiding detection by the radar.

US Technology Firms and War

[N]imbler Silicon Valley outfits are beginning to invade the defence industry’s territory. “Warfare is going digital,” observes Tom Captain of Deloitte, a consulting firm. Tech firms have shown that they can supply robots, drones and intelligence software. SpaceX, founded by Elon Musk, a tech entrepreneur, is taking America’s air force to court to reopen bidding for a satellite-launch contract awarded to Boeing and Lockheed.

Excerpt, Weapons-makers: The case for defence, Economist, July 19, 2014, at 55

Digital Bombs: Plan X

The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DARPA has chosen six companies so far to define ways of understanding, planning, and managing military cyber warfare operations in real-time, large-scale, and dynamic networks.  DARPA has awarded six contracts collectively worth nearly $74 million for the Foundational Cyberwarfare (Plan X) project to conduct research into the nature of cyber warfare, and to develop strategies to seize and maintain U.S. cyber security and cyber attack dominance.

The contracts awarded are to Data Tactics, Intific, Raytheon SI Government Solutions,  Aptima, Apogee Research,  and the Northrop Grumman…

Today’s understanding of the cyber domain poses integration challenges with existing military capabilities, and connects computers using traceroute, packet analysis, and other techniques. In fact, current research is just beginning to answer questions about the cyber domain, DARPA officials say.

The Plan X program contractors will define a cyber battlespace as three main concepts: network map, operational units, and capability set.  The network map is a collection of nodes and edges, and shows how computers are connected; the network map is where military planners and operators interact. Operational units are platforms such as ships, aircraft, and armored combat vehicles that are part of the network topology. There are two primary types of operational units: entry nodes and support platforms.  An entry node gives direct physical access into a network, while support platforms control different aspects of an operation — similarly to how military fighters, bombers, and unmanned aircraft control different aspects of air campaigns.

The capability set involves technologies the military uses to control the cyber battlespace, and are divided into three categories: access, functional, and communication.  Access enables a user to run programs or payloads. Functional involves other types of technology that affect computers and networks, such as network scanners, denial-of-service, defense evasion, network and host reconnaissance, and operating system control. Communication helps entry nodes, support platforms, and system capabilities to exchange information.

The Plan X program seeks to integrate the cyber battlespace concepts of the network map, operational unit, and capability set in military cyber operations, and will be developed as an open platform architecture for integration with government and industry technologies.

The Plan X program is structured around an on-site collaborative research space (CRS) in Arlington, Va., where the program contractors will be organized as a virtual technology startup. Several contract awards are expected, and the program will run in four one-year phases.

Excerpt, John Keller, DARPA picks six companies to define enabling technologies for U.S. cyber warfare strategy, Military and Aerospace,  July 11, 2013