CSBA "Third Offset" paper

[bobbymike]

https://news.usni.org/2016/05/18/manazir-networked-systems-are-future-of-5th-generation-warfare-training

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-b-52-arsenal-plane-americas-super-bomber-set-massive-16262

 

[bobbymike]

Somewhat of an "operational" document tangential to Third Offset??

http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNASReport-EAP-FINAL.pdf

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/05/how-pentagon-preparing-tank-war-russia/128460/?oref=d-topstory

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/moscow-pentagon-us-secret-study-213811?o=1

 

[bobbymike]

http://warontherocks.com/2016/05/diy-insurgency-emerging-technologies-threaten-the-sof-mission/

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.army.mil/article/168222/

Multi-mission munitions

 

[bobbymike]

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/05/secdefs-tech-right-hand-scos-will-roper-tours-subs-drones/

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/05/defense-secretary-strategic-innovation/128627/?oref=DefenseOneFB

 

[bobbymike]

http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/future-missions-through-the-lens-of-the-us-army-operating-concept

 

[bobbymike]

I'm placing this here as another 'concept of operations' article

http://warontherocks.com/2016/05/do-not-give-up-on-stealth-technology/

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/what-americas-big-new-defense-plan-gets-wrong-16421

 

[bobbymike]

Older article but interesting

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/americas-secret-weapon-battlefield-dominance-build-the-swarm-11588

 

[bobbymike]

Swarm Tech from ONR

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FukTsKmXOo&feature=youtu.be

 

[bobbymike]

http://warontherocks.com/2016/06/from-strategy-to-execution-accelerating-the-third-offset/

 

[bobbymike]

https://news.usni.org/2016/06/10/expanding-distributed-lethality-web

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/11/us/the-war-of-the-future-picture-big-armies-and-many-fronts.html?referer=https:/t.co/pBoDBt3Aiq&_r=0

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-army-looks-its-crystal-ball-how-will-enemies-the-future-16602

 

[bobbymike]

https://defensesystems.com/articles/2016/06/16/dod-rapid-prototyping-acquisition-cyber.aspx

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/06/19/military-lateral-entry-force-of-the-future-ash-carter/85884998/

[Raises eyebrow]

 

[sferrin]

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/06/19/military-lateral-entry-force-of-the-future-ash-carter/85884998/

[Raises eyebrow]

Well, that's one way to fill middle management with clueless yes-men.

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/some-the-us-armys-most-lethal-weapons-war-are-getting-big-16644

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/06/17/robots-swarming-drones-and-iron-man-welcome-to-the-new-arms-race/

 

[fredymac]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cWa7hCAwkk

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2223

Defense tech breakthroughs coming soon?

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=2225

I've made the comment before that with $400 billion spent on R&D every decade I am hoping there is some stuff "out there" ready for fielding.

 

[bobbymike]

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/06/army-vice-says-yes-on-anti-drone-tech-maybe-on-missiles-no-on-iron-man/

So long-range land-based missiles are a priority both for the Army and for William Roper’s Strategic Capabilities Office. “Dr. Roper has got together a team pursuing some pretty significant innovation in that area and we partnered with him,” said Gen. Allyn. “Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF) is certainly one of the areas where we are ready to accept any help that others can provide, because the bottom line is in multiple theaters that’s an area of significant stress and it’s a gap that we need to close as rapidly as we can.”

“I am cautiously optimistic (about) some of the long-range precision fires innovations that are under development,” Allyn added, “but I say cautious because new capability never seems to arrive as fast as you need it.”

Why the greater caution and the longer timeline? Unlike anti-drone defense, which can stitch together multiple existing systems, a new long-range missile is, well, rocket science. No matter how clever you are, ultimately you have to build a new missile that goes farther than the Army’s existing ATACMS, and that’s not trivial.

Yes sooner rather than later Army should revive this concept from AvWeek

 

[bobbymike]

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/06/confronting-conflict-in-the-gray-zone/

http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=1325

 

[bobbymike]

The Pointy End of the Third Offset

Directed energy is well-positioned to be the “pointy end” of the Pentagon’s Third Offset strategy, Air Force Materiel Command chief Gen. Ellen Pawlikowski said Thursday. Speaking at the Directed Energy Summit hosted by Booz Allen Hamilton and the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment in Washington, D.C., Pawlikowski said building autonomous platforms and enabling operators to harness large amounts of data have been the focus of the new strategy. “You could do both of those, but if you do not have something that has the power and precision to then use once you’ve been able to do that autonomous operation or to integrate all that data, then you aren’t going to have a Third Offset,” she said. Directed energy, she said, can be the “end game of the Third Offset.” Pawlikowski, who described the difficulty of fielding powerful lasers earlier in her speech, said if the autonomous vehicles are able to get close to their targets, they won’t need powerful weapons to have an effect. “And if I can get the precision, I can minimize collateral damage,” she said. During his nomination hearing, ​Air Force Chief of Staff nominee Gen. David Goldfein said he would push the development of directed-energy technology if confirmed by the Senate.

 

[bobbymike]

https://news.usni.org/2016/06/24/20355

Navy distributed operations

 

[jsport]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cWa7hCAwkk

IMHO tube and wing craft will never have the stealth, agility (altitude, speed, maneuver), or range (internal volume) to accomplish this mission effectively. T&Ws will be predictable and easily countered.

 

[jsport]

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/06/army-vice-says-yes-on-anti-drone-tech-maybe-on-missiles-no-on-iron-man/

So long-range land-based missiles are a priority both for the Army and for William Roper’s Strategic Capabilities Office. “Dr. Roper has got together a team pursuing some pretty significant innovation in that area and we partnered with him,” said Gen. Allyn. “Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF) is certainly one of the areas where we are ready to accept any help that others can provide, because the bottom line is in multiple theaters that’s an area of significant stress and it’s a gap that we need to close as rapidly as we can.”

“I am cautiously optimistic (about) some of the long-range precision fires innovations that are under development,” Allyn added, “but I say cautious because new capability never seems to arrive as fast as you need it.”

Why the greater caution and the longer timeline? Unlike anti-drone defense, which can stitch together multiple existing systems, a new long-range missile is, well, rocket science. No matter how clever you are, ultimately you have to build a new missile that goes farther than the Army’s existing ATACMS, and that’s not trivial.

Yes sooner rather than later Army should revive this concept from AvWeek

Would be all for even 100k lb payload it it were cost effective and defendable, but the much lighter payload AXE/Boss (using modern material science innovations) concept might well be more cost effective and affordable..

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/rip-fog-war-the-us-armys-high-tech-master-plan-kill-the-16731

 

[bobbymike]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEqsQJpYRec&feature=em-subs_digest

USAF Rapid Capabilities Office.

 

[bobbymike]

Army wants in on the game

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/07/armys-new-rapid-capabilities-office-studies-electronic-warfare-boost/?utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=31254472&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_Ln_QW6kZ6ixIOG6xiliiq-ECI1nXA_rKK-PjBdgkgjYlhSrvC7IdqqCia615ir0DqW1alp4zdpFQne9cpfZDgLZHGzA&_hsmi=31254472

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/americas-third-offset-isnt-enough-stop-future-major-war-16853

 

[GeorgeA]

RAND study on US Army use of theater ballistic missiles in Asia:

Missiles for Asia? The Need for Operational Analysis of U.S. Theater Ballistic Missiles in the Pacific:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR945.html

 

[marauder2048]

RAND study on US Army use of theater ballistic missiles in Asia:

Missiles for Asia? The Need for Operational Analysis of U.S. Theater Ballistic Missiles in the Pacific:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR945.html

Thanks for posting this. The flexible, field-changeable payload discussion had me thinking about a common propulsion stack for a field uploadable ABM kill-vehicle or unitary HE/sub-munition front-end.
But I don't think believe this to be an original thought. Wasn't there a previous project (or projects) that explored this?

 

[sferrin]

RAND study on US Army use of theater ballistic missiles in Asia:

Missiles for Asia? The Need for Operational Analysis of U.S. Theater Ballistic Missiles in the Pacific:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR945.html

Thanks for posting this. The flexible, field-changeable payload discussion had me thinking about a common propulsion stack for a field uploadable ABM kill-vehicle or unitary HE/sub-munition front-end.
But I don't think believe this to be an original thought. Wasn't there a previous project (or projects) that explored this?

ISTR that was an ATK concept for using the KEI stack as an IRBM, with 3 or 4 to a cell on SSGNs.

 

[bobbymike]

RAND study on US Army use of theater ballistic missiles in Asia:

Missiles for Asia? The Need for Operational Analysis of U.S. Theater Ballistic Missiles in the Pacific:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR945.html

Thanks for posting this. The flexible, field-changeable payload discussion had me thinking about a common propulsion stack for a field uploadable ABM kill-vehicle or unitary HE/sub-munition front-end.
But I don't think believe this to be an original thought. Wasn't there a previous project (or projects) that explored this?

ISTR that was an ATK concept for using the KEI stack as an IRBM, with 3 or 4 to a cell on SSGNs.

And for a couple of years ATK had the "Forward Based Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile" on their website which was a land based missile on a mobile launcher.

 

[bobbymike]

https://news.usni.org/2016/07/18/pentagon-new-rounds-old-guns-change-paradigm-missile-defense-navy-army

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=186fmLvCLWE

 

[bobbymike]

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/cross-domain-fires-us-militarys-master-plan-win-the-wars-the-17029