CSBA "Third Offset" paper

[bobbymike]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/08/stop-wasting-time-so-we-can-beat-china-dod-rd-boss-griffin/

SPACE & MISSILE DEFENSE SYMPOSIUM: How much of a military-industrial rock star is Mike Griffin? Well, the former NASA director turned Pentagon R&D chief can call tell a room full of defense contractors and officials they’re wasting everyone’s money and time AND get a standing ovation.

“It is a good thing that we are a rich country, because poorer countries just could not afford to waste this kind of money,” the undersecretary of Defense for research and engineering said here last night. “For the two-and-a-half years I have remaining as a political appointee in this job, I will be asking you, at every chance I get, to look at what we’re doing and find ways to either eliminate it or shortcut it, because most of what you’re doing, by definition, is not value added

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018-08/ai-will-change-balance-power

We live in the cognitive age—an era when we will begin replicating, and exceeding, the prowess of the human mind in specific domains of expertise. While the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) are broad, as we head deeper into this new era, we will find that AI combined with myriad exponential technologies will carry us inexorably toward a different form of warfare that will unfold at speeds we cannot fully anticipate—a form of warfare we call hyperwar.

Historically, the balance of power between belligerents has been dictated in great measure by the relative size of their armies. Knowledge of terrain, skill, and technology all have been multipliers for smaller forces, but quantity has had a quality all its own. If one sets aside consideration of nuclear weapons, which allow small states such as Israel and North Korea to hold their opponents at bay, the outcomes of conventional conflicts are determined primarily by a country’s ability to field a larger force, sustained over a longer period of time—the costs of which are enormous.

The arrival of artificial intelligence on the battlefield promises to change this. Autonomous systems soon will be able to perform many of the functions historically done by soldiers, whether for intelligence analysis, decision support, or the delivery of lethal effects. In fact, if developers of these technologies are to be believed, their systems may even outperform their human competition. As a consequence, the age-old calculation that measures a country’s basic military potential by estimating the number of able-bodied individuals capable of serving no longer may be reliable in determining the potency with which a country can project power.

 

[jsport]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/08/stop-wasting-time-so-we-can-beat-china-dod-rd-boss-griffin/

SPACE & MISSILE DEFENSE SYMPOSIUM: How much of a military-industrial rock star is Mike Griffin? Well, the former NASA director turned Pentagon R&D chief can call tell a room full of defense contractors and officials they’re wasting everyone’s money and time AND get a standing ovation.

“It is a good thing that we are a rich country, because poorer countries just could not afford to waste this kind of money,” the undersecretary of Defense for research and engineering said here last night. “For the two-and-a-half years I have remaining as a political appointee in this job, I will be asking you, at every chance I get, to look at what we’re doing and find ways to either eliminate it or shortcut it, because most of what you’re doing, by definition, is not value added

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018-08/ai-will-change-balance-power

We live in the cognitive age—an era when we will begin replicating, and exceeding, the prowess of the human mind in specific domains of expertise. While the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) are broad, as we head deeper into this new era, we will find that AI combined with myriad exponential technologies will carry us inexorably toward a different form of warfare that will unfold at speeds we cannot fully anticipate—a form of warfare we call hyperwar.

Historically, the balance of power between belligerents has been dictated in great measure by the relative size of their armies. Knowledge of terrain, skill, and technology all have been multipliers for smaller forces, but quantity has had a quality all its own. If one sets aside consideration of nuclear weapons, which allow small states such as Israel and North Korea to hold their opponents at bay, the outcomes of conventional conflicts are determined primarily by a country’s ability to field a larger force, sustained over a longer period of time—the costs of which are enormous.

The arrival of artificial intelligence on the battlefield promises to change this. Autonomous systems soon will be able to perform many of the functions historically done by soldiers, whether for intelligence analysis, decision support, or the delivery of lethal effects. In fact, if developers of these technologies are to be believed, their systems may even outperform their human competition. As a consequence, the age-old calculation that measures a country’s basic military potential by estimating the number of able-bodied individuals capable of serving no longer may be reliable in determining the potency with which a country can project power.

Depending on AI/computers over able bodied individuals is dangerous slippery slope. Computers, much like myself are seldom correct and always sure ;D That is when they (computers) are not off doing random, wrong calculations based on incomplete information. AI may simply be to fast to be practical in many military decision situations. Conventional engagements w/ full sitawarn maybe best. Winning in long term Hybrid Conflict.. likely too hasty.

 

[Arjen]

Depending on AI/computers over able bodied individuals is dangerous slippery slope. Computers, much like myself are seldom correct and always sure ;D

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018-08/emerging-disruptive-technologies-game-changers

New technologies have brought about new opportunities and threats to military strategy. Historically, the United States has been able to outpace its adversaries by providing elegant and expensive solutions to address the most severe threats while allowing the capabilities to maintain an advantage in likely employment scenarios. In the past 20 years, the United States has moved from highly specialized weapon systems to multi-mission weapon systems to reduce the number of assets required to perform similar tasks and to reduce manning requirements. As new technologies have emerged, however, U.S. adversaries have used high numbers of low-cost solutions—such as improvised explosive devices—that require inordinate resources to defeat. There are three advancements in technology that, when combined, are game changers for U.S. military effectiveness.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/09/17/air-force-wants-surge-growth-more-70-new-squadrons.html

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. -- The U.S. Air Force says it needs 386 operational squadrons to maintain current operations and to train and prepare for growing future threats from adversaries such as Russia and China, its top civilian official announced Monday.

Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said the service intends to grow by a total of more than 70 squadrons, as follows:

5 additional bomber squadrons
7 more fighter squadrons
7 additional space squadrons
14 more tanker squadrons
7 special operations squadrons
9 nine combat search-and-rescue squadrons
22 squadrons that conduct command and control, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
2 remotely piloted aircraft squadrons
1 more airlift squadron

"We aren't naive about how long it will take us to build the support and budget required for the force we need. It is a choice," Wilson told audiences here at during the annual Air Force Association Air, Space and Cyber Conference outside Washington, D.C.

 

[bring_it_on]

Given the budget outlook, the National debt, the changing nature of discretionary spending and the political polarization, in 2020-2035 barring a significant elevation in the threat that can bring the two political parties together, I really do not see this happening together with the expansion in the Navy, Space Force and other potential investments.

 

[bobbymike]

Given the budget outlook, the National debt, the changing nature of discretionary spending and the political polarization, in 2020-2035 barring a significant elevation in the threat that can bring the two political parties together, I really do not see this happening together with the expansion in the Navy, Space Force and other potential investments.

Your post should read "the unchanging nature of non-discretionary spending" meaning the unstoppable rise of entitlement spending compared to the rest of the budget.

 

[bobbymike]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/what-will-new-bomber-squadrons-mean-for-air-force-75-more-b-21s/?utm_campaign=Breaking%20News&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=66032269&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--CkXKuGokYXNnZSRSv-7SYOXxo5nSVmk3JNrBkGoMR8bCQ4lHllHjm0cLW6Dh8rhCexgx6nOmzb_Pby6P-sjOAmG9vsA&_hsmi=66032269

AFA: Perhaps the biggest money — and strategy — question of the new Air Force plan to build 74 new squadrons is: how many B-21 Raiders and people will they need to fill five new bomber squadrons?

The standard answer being proffered by the Air Force Chief off Staff, Gen. David Goldfein, and the head of Air Force Global Strike Command, Gen. Timothy Ray, is that the service doesn’t know how many planes it needs to buy for the squadrons. Goldfein just told reporters here that the service looked at the number of people needed to meet the National Defense Strategy and isn’t yet sure of the number of “tails” that will fill each squadron.

Ray told me he didn’t know the number yet and wasn’t sure when the service would know precisely how many bombers it needs — no matter how possible timelines I offered him.

 

[bring_it_on]

Given the budget outlook, the National debt, the changing nature of discretionary spending and the political polarization, in 2020-2035 barring a significant elevation in the threat that can bring the two political parties together, I really do not see this happening together with the expansion in the Navy, Space Force and other potential investments.

Your post should read "the unchanging nature of non-discretionary spending" meaning the unstoppable rise of entitlement spending compared to the rest of the budget.

Yup, that is what I meant.

https://twitter.com/wgeary/status/1038097651147923457

 

[bobbymike]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/dial-a-blast-for-smart-bombs-afrl-weapons-adjust-yield-to-target/

AFA: The Air Force is developing smart bombs that detonate differently depending on the target. These “Dialable Effects Munitions” could turn up the blast to devastate an enemy camp or turn it down to kill a single terrorist without hurting nearby civilians.

In the extreme case, said Col. Garry Haase, the director of munitions at the Air Force Research Laboratory, you want to be able to turn the explosive off completely and just slam the now-inert warhead like a bullet into one person at a crowded table, sparing the people sitting on either side. But the next time, you could use the same weapon at full blast to bring down the building.

 

[bobbymike]

Securing 21st Century Combat Success: The Munition Effects Revolution

http://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/a2dd91_8f658e911e224d409903fb9aa234b0ed.pdf

 

[bobbymike]

Heritage Foundation Index of Military Strength

https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2018-09/2019_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength_WEB.pdf

 

[bobbymike]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/10/trumps-industrial-base-report-blames-china-congress/

PENTAGON: Congress and China have emerged as the primary culprits for the weakening the US defense industrial base. Those are the most striking findings of a new White House report that takes a deep-dive into the state of defense manufacturing in the United States, sounding alarm bells over the decline in capability and the rise of China’s industrial might.

Nothing, the report indicates, has harmed America’s industrial base more than the self-inflicted harm of sequestration.

“The decade-long reliance on Congressional continuing resolutions11 has exacerbated uncertainty, both for DoD and across the supply chain. Combined with the adverse impacts of the Budget Control Act,12 these fluctuations challenge the viability of suppliers within the industrial base by diminishing their ability to hire and retain a skilled workforce, achieving production efficiencies, and in some cases, staying in business,” the report says. “Without correcting or mitigating this U.S. Government- inflicted damage, DoD will be increasingly challenged to ensure a secure and viable supply chain for the platforms critical to sustaining American military dominance.”

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.army.mil/article/211981

WASHINGTON -- "Innovation is the result of critical and creative thinking and the conversion of new ideas into valued outcomes." --U.S. Army Operating Concept, 2020-2040: Win in a Complex World

In preparing to write this column, I thought broadly about the role that technological innovation has played in changing the nature of warfare over the years: robotics, night vision technology, air mobility, the internal combustion engine, GPS, radar, the internet, the machine gun, the chitosan bandage, freeze-drying technology (both food and blood), and even duct tape. I could go on and on, but my point here is that continued innovation -- in forms both large and small -- has improved the lives of our Soldiers and contributed immeasurably to their success on the battlefield, and will be critical to modernizing the force. Not only that, but those innovations have also created countless jobs and helped create untold wealth.

 

[bobbymike]

Military modernization - Daniel Goure Heritage Paper

https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2018-09/2019_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength_CHAPTERS_GOURE.pdf

 

[bobbymike]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/10/army-unveils-multi-domain-concept-joined-at-hip-with-air-force/?utm_campaign=Breaking%20Defense%20Multi%20Domain&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=66719342&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9uaXmRJD4j48Cj3nplrsgdPCPalaxPjc9G3tROuVfQL4nGo3WW1zymIaUctVVpzuZwPvynyuF2YgdxEuMLXAMua4FjmQ&_hsmi=66719342

AUSA: If you doubted the importance of Multi-Domain Operations to the US military, all you had to do was listen yesterday to Army generals lay out the foundations of the emerging doctrine for fast-paced future wars. And it’s not just the Army: The service is increasingly intertwined with the Air Force.

The last time the US military grappled with a shift this profound — and the last time the Army and Air Force went through such an intellectual evolution together — was when it crafted AirLand Battle in the 1980s. Just as AirLand Battle was aimed straight at the former Soviet Union, with its massed mechanized armies, Multi-Domain Operations is aimed straight at Vladimir Putin’s Russia, with its long-range missiles, electronic/cyber warfare expertise, and Little Green Men. Of course, the concept also includes China as a threat, but the immediate focus is Russia.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.ft.com/content/442de9aa-e7a0-11e8-8a85-04b8afea6ea3

Couscous might not be the most obvious harbinger of World War III. But in the corner of a spartan army warehouse on the coast of Maryland, I find myself eyeballing a pallet of 48 boxes of the foodstuff more usually associated with peacenik vegans.

Jason Pusey, a mechanical engineer, thinks these dry particles, when shot through with air, will fluff up enough to approximate the conditions of water without electrocuting him in the process. That will help him in his quest to develop the perfect set of gaits for his military robot.

“I’m trying to develop the fundamental technologies, transitioning between walking to trotting to galloping to maybe bounding or to jumping,” he says. “What if I want to run through water? When a lifeguard runs out into the water, he high-steps.”

The autonomous military vehicles of the future — whether tanks, robots or drones — may have legs rather than tracks or wheels. Besides humans on the beach, Pusey avidly watches nature documentaries to help translate the speed of a cheetah, the energetic burst of a greyhound or the dexterity of a jumping lemur to one single, extraordinarily capable robot. “Our legs are very intelligent things,” he tells me.

I am in the depths of Aberdeen Proving Ground, which is home to a sprawling high-security army research base dedicated to reshaping the military 50 years into the future. “Making today’s army and the next army obsolete,” goes its tagline. Created as a bomb-testing site in the first world war, it became a hub for biochemical weapons in the 1990s. Today it hosts the US Army Research Laboratory (ARL), the sole US location for emerging tactical offensive warfare in cyber and electronics.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2018/11/27/why-the-military-needs-skynet/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow+AIR&fbclid=IwAR0Z68xUdLwWGmke_uURWsR7MfzLQLeUEevM9Bo90JcF2_89VlkwRQDyR30

In October 1984, the movie “The Terminator” introduced us to Skynet, a futuristic artificial intelligence system that eventually became “self-aware” before turning on its creators and aiming to wipe out humanity. It is an overly sensational image of a future dominated by renegade intelligent machines.

In a more realistic future environment, artificial intelligence is distributed throughout the battlespace, collecting, curating, aggregating, fusing and routing information to create an ever-increasing advantage across various operations and sustainment scenarios for the military. Unlike Skynet, this distributed AI is underpinned by a delegation framework where humans are essential.

With this in mind, I’m reminded what Gen. Raymond Thomas, the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, said last December: “We need to embrace technology as a central essential weapon in our arsenal.” So how do we do that with an AI system?

 

[marauder2048]

More money for the demo.

Raytheon Missile Systems, Tucson, Arizona, is awarded $8,988,458 for modification
P00007 to a previously awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee contract (N0001917C0059) for
engineering and technical support for the flight test demonstration of an extended range
capability in support of the Joint Stand Off Weapon extended range Phase 3b
development effort. Work will be performed in Tucson, Arizona, and is expected to be
completed in January 2021. Fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation
(Strategic Capabilities Office) funds in the amount of $661,621 will be obligated at time of award,
none of which will expire at the end of the fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command,
Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity.

The J&A for JSOW-ER was posted; curious as to what Lockheed was pitching.

 

[bobbymike]

https://breakingdefense.com/2018/12/beyond-386-squadrons-afwics-four-futures-for-the-air-force/?utm_campaign=Breaking%20Defense%20Multi%20Domain&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=68593197&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9oqs4xp3uU8BGC6eqrMjNYpDPj596eml5_DxEJWCC78caXWIxcCmXNBKbdrKZegFfP7_RZm8hNCMuJex9iff5jbe2m-g&_hsmi=68593197

Hence Fantini’s four sweeping scenarios:

The “baseline” future is the 386-squadron force that Sec. Wilson proposed in September and will elaborate in a report to Congress required by Section 1064 of the National Defense Authorization Act. “That’s for today We’re about 25 percent too small for what the nation has asked us to do,” Fantini told the Air Force Association yesterday. But he implied that figure isn’t final: “If you put a gun to my head today and say, how many squadrons do you need today, I’m going to say 386.” That number may change as the Air Force evolves, he said, and even if the overall figure stays at 386, the mix of squadrons will probably need to change.

The “evolutionary” future looks for new tactics, techniques, and technologies to make better use of what the Air Force already has in a future war. “Evolutionary is like using the force structure we have and figuring out how to use it more effectively,” Fantini told reporters after his AFA talk.

The “revolutionary” future includes more radical options to wage warfare from a distance (“stand-off”), such as large-scale use of remotely directed drones instead of manned aircraft with a human in the cockpit. Imagine, Fantini said, “I take virtual reality goggles and put them on, I’m fighting from a desk in (DC), and I’m controlling multiple penetrating capabilities in the western Pacific.”

The “disruptive” future is even more far-out, studying extreme possibilities like doing away with manned aircraft altogether in favor of big bets on drones, hypersonic missiles, or laser weapons.

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612421/us-china-quantum-arms-race/

In the 1970s, at the height of the Cold War, American military planners began to worry about the threat to US warplanes posed by new, radar-guided missile defenses in the USSR and other nations. In response, engineers at places like US defense giant Lockheed Martin’s famous “Skunk Works” stepped up work on stealth technology that could shield aircraft from the prying eyes of enemy radar.
Recommended for You

The innovations that resulted include unusual shapes that deflect radar waves—like the US B-2 bomber’s “flying wing” design (above)—as well as carbon-based materials and novel paints. Stealth technology isn’t yet a Harry Potter–like invisibility cloak: even today’s most advanced warplanes still reflect some radar waves. But these signals are so small and faint they get lost in background noise, allowing the aircraft to pass unnoticed.

 

[Moose]

CSBA's Bryan Clark gave a good interview to Vago Muradian on his thoughts re: the future of Aircraft Carriers in near-peer conflict.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-94gVX7ZFI
Especially notable to me was that although he's critical of the current plans re: the carrier air wing and advocates in more investment for a more capable/flexible wing, he's still strongly in the camp of large CVNs. He cites superior sortie generation over a sustained period of time, and the difficulties defending individual carriers in a more diffuse/distributed fleet of smaller carriers.

 

[jsport]

Thank you for posting Moose. It was great that he mentioned the need for more EW both training and capability.
Glade he mentioned the missile magazines being expended early in a conflict and that current carrier air wing is not sufficient to make up for reload time. Some major decision and changes should be in the USN's mind.

 

[bring_it_on]

I've read that the USN has now approved of the plans to deploy 7 Growlers on a carrier but has this started happening in practice yet? That will be a good interim capability though they really need a Next Gen AEA platform with 600-800 nautical mile unrefueled radius with the same payload. The NGAD is something that will take time and there is very little the Navy can do about it but in the meantime the Navy should also look to get some of the support capability back like taking something like the V-280 and using that as a replacement for the S-3..

 

[jsport]

The mention of 900B defense budget idea was interesting had not heard anyone actually bring up those kind of numbers even though the Congressional study supports it. Even the 750 does not match the challenges.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Army researchers building ‘smart’ land mines for future combat

The service is finding ways to give soldiers land mine-like tools to shape the battlefield.

www.armytimes.com

A slightly outdated article, for example the Spider system has all but crashed and burned. MOPMS is basically a Obama era zombie project.

 

[bobbymike]

Mosaic Warfare??

9.10 Mitchell Hour: Mosaic Warfare

The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies invites you to the next Mitchell Hour event for the release of its Mosaic Warfare research study.

events.r20.constantcontact.com

 

[fredymac]

Didn't want to create a new thread for this so parking it here.

 

[Forest Green]

Didn't want to create a new thread for this so parking it here.

Is that even a good idea in terms of electronic warfare?

 

[bobbymike]

Air Force Resources and Technology

One of the U.S. Air Force's top-ranked generals, along with a panel of military contractors and think tank scholars, spoke about the possible future technologies that could be used to modernize the military.

www.c-span.org

 

[bobbymike]

BREAKING: Air Force to Propose Major Funding Realignment

BREAKING: Air Force to Propose Major Funding Realignment

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

 

[fredymac]

Is that even a good idea in terms of electronic warfare?

I assume the fuze electronics are encased within something like a Faraday cage and the chips are EMI hardened.

 

[bobbymike]

Jumping into algorithmic warfare: US Army aviation tightens kill chain with networked architecture

A demonstration of an Army-developed capability showed the ability to nimbly pass control between operators of drones and munitions through a networked architecture of systems.

www.defensenews.com

 

[bobbymike]

Future wars will be won with open mission systems

Future success on the battlefield will be closely linked to rapidly processing information in space, in the air, and on land, sea and cyberspace.

www.defensenews.com

 

[bobbymike]

In Search of a 21st-Century Joint Warfighting Concept - War on the Rocks

After two decades of counter-insurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military is re-learning how to fight large, conventional conflicts

warontherocks.com

 

[bobbymike]

Air Force Pumps Cash Into 'Vanguard' Effort, Small Industry Teams - Breaking Defense

"We need that partnership with customers on the DoD side where they’re willing to take a step forward with us in understanding that neither one of us knows the ultimate answer."

breakingdefense.com

 

[jsport]

Future wars will be won with open mission systems

Future success on the battlefield will be closely linked to rapidly processing information in space, in the air, and on land, sea and cyberspace.

www.defensenews.com

The general is correct " The past is prologue" many recent DARPA projects are to hopefully provide true Net Centric via middleware. Net centric could have happened decades ago if it were not for proprietary networks. As an example JTRS has been a decades debacle because the USG refuses to take charge and or become at all competent writ large competent. Much like GMs folks looking at each other across a table rather than fixing the airbag issue.

 

[bobbymike]

What’s the future of the U.S. Air Force? | Defense News Weekly, Sept. 20, 2019

Find out the future of the Air Force from its top leaders at the AFA Air, Space & Cyber Conference. We’ll talk to General David Goldfein and others about what 2020 will look like.

www.defensenews.com

 

[bobbymike]

Months after release of new tech strategy, US Air Force is still deliberating a path forward

Putting the U.S. Air Force's new science and technology strategy into practice is still a work in progress.

www.defensenews.com

 

[bobbymike]

Not really “Third Offset” but new unique thread not needed IMO

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6442726/U-S-Role-in-the-World-BackgroundandIssues-for.pdf