Soldier systems focus on infantry technology to achieve the mission and get the fighters home alive

Posted by John Keller

Soldier systems -- wearable computers, networked sensors, pocket-sized navigation and guidance systems, and other soldier electronics -- have been on my mind lately. I often wonder what the American infantryman about the storm the beaches at Normandy would think of the wearable electronics on today's soldiers on patrol in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On the Normandy beaches, the average infantry technology consisted of a rifle, ammunition, water, food, rudimentary first-aid gear, helmet, extra socks, and really not a lot else besides the soldier's uniform and boots. some carried radios, but not many. Don't get me wrong, he had a back-breaking load to carry, but fundamentally not a lot different from the soldier in the ranks during the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, and before.

Today's soldier technology is a whole lot different. There is amazing capability, ranging from night-vision goggles and rifle sights, networked radios not much larger than a deck of cards, global positioning system (GPS) receivers and computers the sizes of cell phones, and more. The choices today's soldier faces also are much more complex than the fighting man of decades past.

All that new capability means extra weight to carry, not only in terms of the electronic and electro-optic devices available, but also for the batteries to power these devices. Depending on the mission, the soldier today and his commanders must decide if they want to carry sensors or a second canteen of water, radios or more food, handheld computers or extra ammunition.

The point is, today's soldier must strike the right balance between capability, firepower, and survival equipment that will enable him to perform his mission and then get back home alive.

One of the primary goals of those specifying and designing soldier systems technology is to keep these critical choices to a minimum, or more to the point, help soldiers make choices of ammunition, water, food, AND sensors, communications, and computers, rather than the other way around.

Soldier systems today, however, are not just about piling on capability to the warfighter in the field. Soldier technology also is about helping infantrymen fight smarter, and to give them new ways not only to help them fight, but also to survive and thrive long after returning home to their homes and families.

Soldiers in the field take a beating, from the elements, from stress and fatigue, and of course from bullets and explosives during battle. Explosions -- especially those from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) planted along roadsides, have the potential to create far more serious injuries than meets the eye.

A soldier might get caught in an IED explosion, and simply get up and dust himself off after waiting for the stars and spider webs to clear from his head. Yet head injuries from concussive forces like roadside bombs can cause lingering injuries that might take days or weeks to make themselves known.

Now picture this. What if a soldier had a motion sensor embedded in his helmet able to measure the concussive force of an explosion on the soldier wearing it? What if a little red LED in this helmet sensor started flashing if the force of the explosion were more than a human being should be able to withstand safely over the long term?

No need to speculate anymore; that technology's here, and is being deployed in the field. It's just one of the aspects of soldier systems that are making the modern soldier ever-more effective, deadly, and survivable.

F-15 Silent Eagle stealth fighter could be considered as alternative to F-35 joint strike fighter amid tight budgets

Posted by John Keller

The Boeing Co. may be stealing a march on rival defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. with the radar-evading F-15 Silent Eagle stealth fighter, designs for which made a demonstrator flight last week in St. Louis. As a stealth aircraft, the 1970s-vintage F-15 jet fighter may be a viable near-term alternative to the Lockheed Martin F-35 joint strike fighter in some applications.

The stealthy version of the F-15 uses special surface coatings, conformal internal weapons bays, and other advanced technologies that enable the F-15 Silent Eagle to evade some kinds of air-to-air radar systems, although experts say the stealth version of the F-15 may not be able to avoid sophisticated ground-based air-defense radars. Conformal weapons bays also may enable the aircraft to function as a stealth bomber.

Israel is watching the F-15 Silent Eagle closely, and may consider the Boeing aircraft to be a more affordable and more available combat aircraft than the F-35. Some in the Israeli defense ministry favor buying the F-15 Silent Eagle in the face of expected additional delays in the F-35 development. The Silent Eagle also reportedly is one-third less expensive than the F-35.

Israeli purchases of the F-15 Silent Eagle would enhance the aircraft's credibility in the international market, which is precisely Boeing's target for the new aircraft. Boeing developed the Silent Eagle in response to international user requirements for a cost-effective, high-performance fighter aircraft to defend against future threats.

The F-15 Silent Eagle offers unique aerodynamic, avionics, and radar cross section reduction features that provide the user with maximum flexibility to dominate the ever-changing advanced threat environment. The aircraft's Conformal Weapons Bays can carry a variety of air-to-air missiles and air-to-ground weapons.

With the U.S. defense budget under increasing pressure to downsize, who knows? If the Silent Eagle catches on internationally, perhaps it could find a home in U.S. fighter squadrons.

Subscribe to Avionics Intelligence

DARPA wants electronic warfare systems that learn from their mistakes to keep pace with the latest communications technology

Posted by John Keller

Jamming RF signals in electronic warfare operations is getting a lot harder these days. It seems the ability of many military wireless communications devices like cell phones, battlefield radios, and command-and-control networks are developing the ability to adapt automatically to their environments to maintain the highest-quality signals possible.

This phenomenon is called adaptive communications -- or the notion of communications devices able to change quickly in response to conditions in the environment to make sure their signals get through. That presents a problem to the electronic warfare guys -- those whose job it is to jam the bad guy's signals to prevent them from getting through.

Unfortunately, today's adaptive communications technology seems to be outpacing electronic warfare. That means -- for the U.S., at least -- that the bad guys can change their communications faster to keep information flowing than the electronic warfare systems experts can tweak their electronic jammers to keep pace. Now DARPA is trying to change all that with the Behavioral Learning for Adaptive Electronic Warfare program.

This program -- BLADE, for short -- seeks to develop machine learning technology to enable future electronic warfare systems to adapt their jamming techniques just as quickly as the adversary adapts his communications.

Imagine that: an electronic warfare system that sniffs around for changes in the communications patterns of the enemy, learns his system, and sends out the appropriate jamming signals in response. In other words, fool me once, shame on you, but fool me twice, shame on me. Sounds like DARPA is on the right track.

It worries me, though, that commercial off-the-shelf communications technology seems to be able to turn inside developments in electronic warfare technology, but that's fodder for a future blog.

Subscribe to Avionics Intelligence

Subscribe

Follow me on Twitter

Join the PennWell Aerospace and Defense Media Group on Linkedin at http://bit.ly/9MXl9

Become a fan of Military & Aerospace Electronics on Facebook at http://bit.ly/1VGM0Q

Post your aerospace and defense-related material to the #milaero community on Twitter. Use the #milaero hashtag.

Join your industry colleagues in the Command Post community online at http://community.milaero.com

Embedded computing information for aerospace and military embedded systems all in one place

Posted by John Keller

If you're looking for information on embedded computing for aerospace and military embedded systems organized in one easy-to-find location, then you've come to the right place. Military & Aerospace Electronics is introducing its comprehensive embedded computing section for those interested in embedded computer technology, single-board computers, electronics chassis and enclosures, and everything else embedded computing on the Military & Aerospace Electronics Website at http://www.militaryaerospace.com/index/embedded-computing.html.

embedded computing for aerospace and defense applications has always been our forte, and now we are consolidating all our coverage on military embedded systems, embedded computing, single-board computers and everything else embedded computing in one easy-to-find place. Just surf on over Military & Aerospace Electronics, click on the Embedded Computing section in the navigation bar just beneath the M&AE logo, and see everything of interest to you with regards to embedded computing.

It's easy; just come on over. Everything we've written about embedded computing is here. Products, features, analyses, design-in case studies, and more is right at your fingertips, just one click away. Want to see for yourself? Just click here.

Come back often to see the latest developments in military embedded computing. If you'd like to see your latest products and other announcements related to military embedded computing go up in this section, just e-mail John Keller at jkeller@pennwell.com.

If embedded computing is your line of business, we'll see you there.

Subscribe to Avionics Intelligence

Aviation safety story questioning Boeing 787 Dreamliner crashworthiness takes unfair jabs at Boeing, FAA

Posted by John Keller

4 July 2010. I'm taking a skeptical look at an aviation safety investigative report appearing in today's editions of the Chicago Tribune that call into question the survivability of the future Boeing 787 Dreamliner in a crash. Here's the problem: the headline of the story reads "Composite material used in Boeing 787 raises safety questions," yet the text of the story -- far down in the story -- points out that these questions have largely been answered.

It doesn't look to me that this story is being fair to Boeing, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), or to the engineers that initially uncovered potential weaknesses in the fuselage of the 787 in crash scenarios, and then went on to deal with these issues after rigorous testing. The fuselage of the 787 Dreamliner is made of lightweight, yet tough, composite materials, while most commercial jetliners are made from lightweight metals.

Based on information in the story, it looks like Boeing and the FAA have done a pretty good job of designing the Boeing 787 to be a safe commercial aircraft. While defendable, the story's headline strongly and unfairly suggests otherwise. For good or ill, no one is going to know exactly how safe the aircraft will be until -- God forbid -- one experiences a serious runway crash.

This story goes on for 26 paragraphs -- extensively citing five-year-old data -- before first mentioning that concerns about the 787's composite structure in a crash have been addressed with structural modifications that have satisfied experts at the FAA.

After 26 paragraphs, the story does give detailed treatment of how the 787 has been structurally improved since 2005, yet leaves readers with nagging doubts by quoting a "composite-materials expert" who hasn't worked for Boeing for 10 years, and left the company at least five years before Boeing experts started making modifications to improve the aircraft's crashworthiness.

I think I can see why the Tribune held this story for a slow holiday Sunday.

Subscribe to Avionics Intelligence

The junkyard space satellite

Posted by John Keller

The U.S. Air Force is getting ready to launch a surveillance satellite that, much like a junkyard dog, will keep watch over the castoff debris orbiting the Earth from space missions past.

If all goes according to plan, the Air Force will launch the Space-Based Space Surveillance (SBSS) satellite Thursday from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., that will keep watch on everything in orbit, from the most sophisticated and important satellites to the countless pieces of space junk that menace manned and unmanned space missions alike.

It's like air traffic control surveillance for all the stuff in orbit. While it's easy to giggle about a high-tech orbiting junkyard dog, space junk is no laughing matter. Chunks of old spacecraft such as fuel tanks and pieces of dead satellites often pose threats to the International Space Station, the space shuttle, and vital communications, navigation, and surveillance satellites.

For the first time, the SBSS satellite will be a full-time monitor of where satellites and space junk are, and where these objects are headed.

This spacecraft also could be the first piece of an important space surveillance network that much like the future NextGen air traffic management system for commercial aircraft, could make it safe to increase the density of spacecraft orbiting the Earth and pave the way to make communications, navigation, and cable television programming even better than it is today.

Subscribe to Avionics Intelligence

Iranian early warning radar in Syria: is this a real threat, or just more posturing from Iran?

Posted by John Keller

I'm wondering about reports of an Iranian surveillance radar system being installed in Syria
, ostensibly to give Iran early warning if Israel attempts to bomb Iran's nuclear weapons research sites. If true, this development represents an even more severe escalation of tensions in this already-tense region that we've seen in recent months.

The Iranian early warning radar alleged to have been installed in Syria -- located on the Mediterranean coast just to the North of Israel and Lebanon -- is supposed to be a sophisticated system able not only to give Iran early warning of any Israeli air attack, but also able to help with Syrian anti-air missile defenses.

It's not clear, however, just how sophisticated the radar system might be, or if Israel could circumvent it simply by flying south over Saudi Arabia and over the Persian Gulf on the way to Iranian targets.

If this sincerely is a sophisticated long-range radar system, then it could add a new dimension to the complicated military and diplomatic situation in the Middle East. If it isn't however, it might just be another example of Iranian blustering and propaganda.

Subscribe to Avionics Intelligence