Next Generation Command and Control — the state of the Army’s future network and the service’s number one priority for modernization — has been billed as an entirely new way of doing business with a clean-slate approach rather than continuing to either bolt on or work within the confines of existing systems and processes. NGC2 aims to provide commanders and units a new approach to information, data and command and control through agile and software-based architectures.

A prototype of the system was recently tested at Project Convergence at Fort Irwin, California, in March.

As part of that updated network architecture and approach, service leaders are envisioning the elimination of single- and two-channel radios for troops on the ground. In their place will be what the Army calls end user devices, which are Android devices that are strapped to soldiers’ chests and have typically been reserved for team leaders.

These end user devices feature position and location information. They can now also enable communication using emerging voice-over-IP technology.

“The fundamental difference [between the existing network and NGC2] is in that data and transport layer because we are convinced that if we get that part right, there will be a day when our soldiers, instead of carrying … the batteries, the multiple radios that are out there, it’s an end user device at the edge and that is all that they’re going to need for the next fight,” Gen. James Mingus, Army vice chief of staff, said Tuesday at an event hosted by AUSA. “No more radios, no more batteries, because all I’m carrying is an end user device on the edge.”

A separate official clarified that the tactical level, battalion and below, is where the Army envisions eliminating single- and two-channel radios. Higher echelons will still need larger pipes and thus will still require radios.

Mingus explained that while the cloud storage and edge compute and storage is more refined, the terrestrial transport layer for data is something the Army will have to smooth out over the next year.

In the future, instead of using individual radios, forces will move radio frequency signals from point A to point B through “pucks on trucks,” Mingus said.

“Anything that moves, it’s got a puck on it that emits, it’s bringing in the long-haul comms, and then it’s establishing that terrestrial-based mesh through a series of pucks that are on the battlefield that then connects to the end user device,” he said.

The Army has been on a radio journey for many years, trying to determine the right mix, at what echelon certain capabilities are needed and even exploring if an as-a-service model makes sense.

Some in industry have noted that there’s a massive shift going on within the Army from what worked in the recent past to a penchant for something completely new — and it’s not clear to some industry members why that’s the case.

The approach of eliminating radios in favor of voice-over-IP, WiFi or 5G pucks to provide transport is puzzling to some observers. They warn it could put the Army at risk of not having a diverse enough architecture for what officials call PACE, or primary, alternate, contingency and emergency.

In future operating environments against sophisticated adversaries, enemies will seek to jam or deny communications and data access across certain waveforms and parts of the spectrum these systems operate on. Thus, it is important to have a diverse set of transport to where units can fall over to still conduct their missions and pass data if one system fails or is jammed.

“To see such a drastic shift, to say that Next Gen [C2] doesn’t include any forms of radios, I think it puzzles a lot of people … It’s a head scratcher,” an industry source said.

They added that while the networks support the push-to-talk feature that can be enabled through the end user device and voice-over-IP, there needs to be a mix of different capabilities and radios.

“Most of us still believe that you need flexible architectures, which include a mix of radios perhaps,” the industry source said.

The post Army could be moving to eliminate radios at the tactical edge appeared first on DefenseScoop.

“I think that’s what’s coming next … I think the next part of this network journey is really our investment strategy around tactical radios and tactical voice and data, and what does that look like for the Army,” Mark Kitz, program executive officer for command, control, communications and networks, said in an interview at the Army’s Technical Exchange Meeting. “How do we diversify? I would love to have a really diverse set of tactical infrastructure where I have multiple companies working in a really diverse environment, so a division may implement three different companies’ technologies, because that’s what’s the best network for them. Today, we’re too brittle in our approach to the tactical echelon in order to do that.”

He noted that the Army will likely always be on a journey with regard to who gets what radios, be it single channel, two channel, or sensitive but unclassified-encrypted.

Efforts such as Command and Control Fix — an initiative aimed at bolstering soldiers’ so-called “fight tonight” ability by using commercial and existing Army gear differently as a bridge before Next Generation C2 capabilities come online — taught the service important lessons on who needs what types of radios at what level.

“SBU-E and C2 Fix taught us we need a lot less exquisite radios in certain places. But [other communities], like aviation, needed more exquisite radios,” Kitz said. “We learned a lot about the distribution. I think over the next year, our focus now on the radios is: what is the right investment strategy in radios?”

He acknowledged that the Army in the past has been myopic when it comes to purchasing radios and radios acquired for a specific purpose or platform. But going forward, the service must be more flexible and better forecast its needs to industry to make the investments to stay competitive.

Officials in the program office over the next six months will be undergoing a collaborative effort with industry for the right investment strategy on radios. They’ll also be conducting an as-a-service pilot with 3rd Infantry Division, with the goal of getting two vendors on contract in first quarter of fiscal 2026 — a type of effort the Army has embarked on before.

“Radios-on-demand makes sense for the Army. Having the right radio with the right training when I need it is a whole lot better than a radio sitting in a room for two years,” Kitz said. “It’s absolutely worth us giving it a full go to see if this will work for the Army and working with these radio companies on — they need to make money, we need to be in a positive business relationship — how can they make money? How can we be in that relationship? We’re going to give it a go with the pilot in early FY ’26.”

The service wants to ensure soldiers have modernized radios that also make sense for their job roles.

“More cheaper radios in the end gets a lot more radios and all the best to the guys [who] are using, as opposed to buying really high-end radios that can [do] a whole bunch of things. In [the post-9/11 Global War on Terror] that may have made sense, but in a lot of cases today, it doesn’t,” Maj. Gen. Patrick Ellis, director of the C2 cross-functional team, said in an interview.

It ultimately comes down to radios and capabilities that enable soldiers to effectively communicate, be it via voice or text chat.

“Commanders want options,” Ellis said. “Commanders are looking for options for command and control.”

The post Army turning network attention to radios next appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The capabilities are being modernized with NSA cryptographic standards, which the agency is mandating across the Department of Defense.

Marine Corps System Command has already fielded over 4,000 of the platforms since October 2023, with tentative plans to complete fielding of new radios and upgrading existing systems in fiscal 2025, according to a spokesperson.

The tools will be issued to units throughout the Marine Air Ground Task Force and supporting organizations. The spokesperson said the technologies will initially be fielded according to current tables of equipment reflected in the Total Force Structure Management System. Replacement is being prioritized for units that possess radios that can’t accommodate required updates.

Software-defined capabilities allow for them to be rapidly updated, enabling forces to keep pace with current threats.

“The closest analogy to our current transition in radio technology is akin to moving from the era of flip phones to the advanced world of smartphones,” Richard Sessions, program manager for Communications Systems, said in a statement. “In the past, we were limited to purchasing radios with fixed capabilities and had to replace them with newer models as technology evolved. Now, we’re shifting towards acquiring highly adaptable hardware radios that are not just modular but also capable of supporting new waveforms, marking a significant milestone in our communication capabilities.”

Moreover, the Marines say that not making these updates would result in the systems becoming obsolete in the future.

“These systems offer upgrades to current tactical radios operating in a broad range of the ground and air communication spectrum,” the spokesperson said. “The flexibility offered by software defined radios allow easier upgrades through product improvements and hosting of a wider range of capabilities. These radios now offer enhanced situational awareness, communications network resiliency, improved size, weight, and power attributes, and increase overall effectiveness.”

According to the Corps, these upgrades are also in accordance with Force Design, the service’s broad modernization effort to ensure it stays ahead of rapidly evolving threats.

Marines need redundant systems that have multiple paths for communication in the event they are jammed or are operating in a congested signal environment, which is anticipated in future conflicts against sophisticated adversaries. Multi-channel, software-defined systems are expected to enable the flexibility and redundancy required for dealing with those types of challenges.

The post Marine Corps plans to upgrade 50,000 radios across the force appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The Army writ large talks about ongoing modernization efforts aimed at building the “Army of 2030,” a key point in time when the service wants to be ready to for a possible confrontation with China.

From a network standpoint, it has been on a journey for about five years to modernize its capabilities and overall architecture to give units more forms of redundant communication and the ability to move rapidly on the battlefield through a series of experiments. The Army is taking several lessons from ongoing experimentation, especially as it begins focusing on the Pacific given its unique geography. It will likely tailor capabilities depending on the theater of operations.

Prior efforts were done mostly in the Middle East and European theaters, but the Pacific poses significant challenges with with regard to distance, terrain and foliage.

“The Pacific fight is that it’s jungle, it’s thick jungle. The placement of your radios, the waveforms have to be resilient enough to cut through the brush,” Col. Shermoan Daiyaan, project manager for tactical radios at program executive office for command, control, communications-tactical, told DefenseScoop in a September interview.

The Army just wrapped up a series of exercises in the region under the umbrella of Pacific Pathways. From the network perspective, Daiyaan said the capstone event was Garuda Shield in Indonesia with the 25^th Infantry Division.

One way the Army is looking to improve comms in that dense environment is experimentation using unmanned aerial systems to boost the range of a signal by being able to get higher off the ground. As part of the integrated tactical network kit — which includes a combination of program-of-record systems and commercial off-the-shelf tools — the Army has experimented with what it calls a variable height antenna, which was essentially a tethered drone that could extend signals.

Now, the Army wants an untethered system that can get even higher.

“With the next exercise with 25^th, we’re experimenting with a radio inside a UAS and so we get up and above the canopy and able to extend the network,” Daiyaan said. “Now you’re talking a drone, a UAS that loiters for hours enabled to extend and network a lot wider.”

Forces were also able to successfully test in the Pacific an unprecedented level of situational awareness with ties to the Pentagon’s new concept for warfare known as Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2).

“They actually really shook out the capabilities and was able to enable their division command to be able to have the [common operational picture] being fed from the individual soldier all the way up to [U.S. Army Pacific]. That’s big, right? An individual team leader or soldier was able to provide data all the way up to a four-star quarters … They were managing their forces in Indonesia, but they will also [be] managing another brigade in another exercise back in Hawaii. Two separate commands, offshore, onshore in two different areas,” Daiyaan said.

“The bottom line on the benefit we learned there is at the lowest level, not that a four-star commander wants to see that low, but he could. If you talk about JADC2 and sensor to shooter, that soldier is a sensor. If he sees something, that individual soldier’s being able to send something all the way back up … on a four-star common operating picture is powerful,” he added.

Daiyaan’s team also began experimenting with handheld Link 16 radios. Link 16 is a NATO tactical data link network capability.

This was a “big deal for kill chain management down at the tactical edge where before the Link 16 radios and those capabilities were back in the headquarters, this is down at the individual soldier,” Daiyaan said.

It now allows for more joint interoperability and the ability to call for fires from the Air Force and others.

The experimentation with Link 16 will help the Army decide how many of these handheld systems to buy and at what echelon they should reside as they are not an inexpensive capability.

The service is also looking into low-cost radios that are easy to use. It issued requests for information at the ninth technical exchange meeting at the end of 2022 to learn what is possible.

They got about 15 responses, according to Daiyaan.

“What we did is we challenged the vendors. The vendors brought their capabilities out, we took them out in the brush and we only gave them one hour to train soldiers how to use their radios. Then we turn the soldiers loose,” he said. “Each vendor kind of went off into their own little area in this field, trained a squad of soldiers and gave them the radios and they took them out … What we’re finding is that many of the radios, the simpler at the team level, at the very low levels, they just need a very simple radio that works.”

This push is a result of direct feedback stemming from the first instantiation build out of the integrated tactical network in which soldiers said it was a complicated process to train on the two-channel radios and required a lot of time to upload data prior to deploying.

The experimentation is helping the Army make resourcing decisions on where these capabilities need to reside and how systems might augment each other — in this case, officials are looking at whether there’s an offset between a two-channel leader radio and a lower cost, single-channel radio.

The next step is at the upcoming technical exchange meeting. The Army will issue another contract opportunity seeking to purchase a unit’s worth of low-cost radios to test scaling.

The low-cost radios also have secure but unclassified-encrypted capability, or SBU-E, which reduces overall network complexity and has had huge benefits in terms of interfacing with partner nations and eschewing the need for liaisons — which increases the speed of operations.

“We’re leaning in to find those radios that are SBU only, but still provide the network resiliency and protections that our soldiers need by using commercial encryption and … technology,” Daiyaan said.

The Army still needs to codify a policy for SBU-E. Presently, there is no policy decision on the capability, which could direct at what echelon this should reside at.

“We have a little bit more work to do. We just want to make sure that we got it right, so that we know the right way, the right mix of SBU-E capabilities and U.S. secret capabilities,” Lt. Gen. John Morrison, deputy chief of staff, G-6, told DefenseScoop in an August interview. “What echelon should that be at? We’re using things like Project Convergence and other fieldings of the integrated tactical network — capability set fieldings is probably more accurate — to inform us what is the right disposition of the number of radios and what have operating in this environment and what echelon we’re actually going to put it … We definitely see it as a key piece where we will be moving forward, especially at the tactical edge, where information is so perishable.”

Part of that is coordinating with the joint force, Daiyaan noted.

“It’s a lot of coordination with the joint force, because as you know, for example, in the radio portfolio [Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System] radios, that waveform is in multiple services,” he said. “Ensuring that the Army doesn’t push itself out onto an island takes coordination with the other services and the other 6s. They’re working through those challenges with the other services to make sure that we’re not on an island and we don’t break interoperability.”

Daiyaan also provided details on work officials are doing to outfit platforms with radio and communications capabilities. In 2017, when the Army first started working on the integrated tactical network, the baseline was set with light infantry units given they were easier to deal with. Platforms pose integration challenges that are more complex and must be worked through.

The only mounted platforms Daiyaan’s team has finished working with are those of the 2^nd Cavalry Regiment in Europe. Next for them is 1st Cavalry Division, which will take place in fourth quarter of 2024.

“We’re looking forward to that, because … we are excellent at the lights, the light units. Now let’s go to the mounted units and bring them the new capabilities,” Daiyaan said.

The post Continued network experimentation informing future Army priorities with an eye on 2030 appeared first on DefenseScoop.

DRS Global Enterprise Solution and Intelsat won contracts under the effort with a scope spanning six months of turnkey, end-to-end managed subscription services. The two companies will support connectivity to commercial teleports and internet services that will enhance Army units’ SATCOM as well as their broader communication pathways, referred to in service parlance as Primary, Alternate, Contingency and Emergency, or PACE.

Officials told DefenseScoop that the SATCOM-as-a-Managed-Service effort will help to augment capability for units that might not have certain systems within their existing kits. Not every capability is fielded to every unit in the Army, resulting in what officials described as haves and have-nots. An as-a-service model could help remedy this, provide a backup and a surge capability for units deploying in a crisis in a hurry.

“If there’s a surge requirement for a unit to push up the door and they don’t have a certain amount of kit, we’re looking … at the option for said unit that says ‘I have this mission, this is what I need to be able to do’ and a particular vendor provides him the kit, they provide them the airtime and then we don’t have to worry about the sustainment tail, if you will, or procuring new systems like we would in a traditional acquisition,” Col. Stu McMillan, project manager for tactical network at program executive office command, control, communications-tactical, told DefenseScoop at Aberdeen Proving Ground on Tuesday. “Maybe there’s a capability that [a unit] needs for a particular mission set. This provides an opportunity for us to use a SATCOM-as-a-Managed-Service to enable that unit that doesn’t have that kit because we only have so many systems that are out there in the Army [to] enable them to be given a certain capability for them to accomplish their mission.”

McMillan said this is a good opportunity to perform analysis, conducted by Johns Hopkins University, to see if the traditional model versus managed service will complement capability in the field now, stressing this is not meant to replace capability.

The pilot could potentially realize real cost savings for the Army.

“It would allow us to invest or reinvest those dollars that we would spend on the development to fielding the training and then sustaining of the system. There could be substantial cost savings,” McMillian said, noting that’s why they’re asking Johns Hopkins University to do the analysis. “Then based upon that analysis, we’ll present that to senior leaders.”

But, they first have to conduct the pilot and test the concept in order to see if “the juice is worth the squeeze,” McMillan said.

The broad promise that as-a-service models portend has the PEO as a whole looking at this paradigm.

Mark Kitz, PEO for C3T, told DefenseScoop that they will be looking at other areas for as-a-service pilots and experiments where they make sense, mentioning cloud as one potential example.

“If we go to that on-demand model – not for everybody, but for parts of the Army – can we get a higher return on investment?” Kitz said.

As-a-service is getting to an on-demand model now, he said, that can have broad application across many portfolios to serve as a backup or surge to existing systems.

The initial creation and fielding of the Security Force Assistance Brigades provided a perfect use case for a potential as-a-service model, Kitz said. These units were created in 2018 and are a specialized group designed solely to advise and assist local, indigenous forces.

“When we stood up the SFABs, we had to move equipment. We had to get them equipment. That meant we were taking from somebody, because we didn’t have a production line that we could just pull things off of,” he said. “The SFABs are a great model of ‘you’re standing up a capability that needs something. OK, industry — can you deliver in 90 days the capacity that’s needed on demand for this unit?’ I think it’s a great way for us to supplement our current capacity or the capacity that we buy.”

In the SATCOM example, Kitz said if operations in a particular part of the world are increasing, they could go to industry, request a number of terminals and in 90 days, have those delivered.

The Army last year began looking at the prospect of a radio-as-a-service model, issuing a request for information to industry.

The RFI asked questions in a broad manner: If the Army were to do an as-a-service model, how would industry do it, Col. Shermoan Daiyaan, project manager for tactical radios at PEO C3T, told DefenseScoop.

The responses included a full network in a box providing everything for a network, including sustainment; a hybrid approach where companies would provide some radios and some support; a management or broker approach for the Army’s process; and only the support work.

Since Kitz took over C3T at the end of June, he’s been prioritizing running a radio-as-a-service pilot in 2024, Daiyaan said. The PEO will be getting a final decision from the acquisition leadership with the next step on issuing another RFI to tighten the question to industry.

Kitz said the Army currently spends a lot of money on radios. But an as-a-service model wouldn’t just realize cost savings — it could also be more efficient for the Army.

“You take the radio portfolio, a typical radio, much like a weapon, you don’t use it for 30, 40 days at a time,” Daiyaan said. “Let’s say we’re going to do a division, three or four brigades, what if we only fielded two brigades, kept a stock, and then the other we rotate. But now that last brigade, we can go forth to the next division. That’s where it’s about efficiency, using the capabilities you have more and potentially being able to allow industry to keep them up to date, service the unit and provide that support.”

Kitz noted that the tradeoff with an as-a-service model broadly is the potential capital investment that must be made with industry in order for them to have the necessary capacity.

“I think we’re going to learn whether that return on investment is really there or not,” he said. “The SFAB example I used is pretty atypical, right? Standing up whole new units is not something the Army does all the time. In this case, we needed to, so we did it. Well, is that OPTEMPO a feasible thing so we can get that return on investment? I think that’s what we want to learn with industry.”

The post Army awards SATCOM-as-a-Service contracts, looks to experiment with as-a-service models across entire network portfolio appeared first on DefenseScoop.

The indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contracts provide for an initial delivery of over 1,100 radios, to include those for first article test. They were awarded to L3Harris, $20.6 million, and Thales, $18.2 million. The effort has a ceiling of $6.1 billion and delivery orders can be placed until March 2032.

The combat net radio (CNR) is a single channel voice and data system that is part of a larger effort to phase out the legacy Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System, or SINCGARS. Another component of the SINCGARS modernization strategy is fielding HMS Manpack and Leader tactical data radios and cryptographic device modernization.

As adversaries have become more technologically sophisticated in recent years, legacy waveforms and cryptology have to be modernized as they are easier to be interfered with.

The new combat net radio enhances frequency hopping and transmission security. Once fielded, it will be available for both mounted and dismounted missions, according to the Army.

“Thanks to software-defined capabilities, the CNR effort will support the new, resilient waveforms that are either in development or under consideration as part of our efforts to prepare for future modernization,” Lt. Col. Sherida Whindleton, product manager for waveforms at Program Executive Office Command, Control, Communications-Tactical, said.

Furthermore, the radios will provide assured command and control voice as well as limited fires and air defense data where access to other network assets might be degraded, which allows commanders multiple paths of communication.

As the Army modernizes its tactical network, one of the key tenets is providing multiple and redundant paths of communication and data in case one is unavailable due to adversary activity or failure, which is known in Army parlance as PACE, or primary, alternate, contingency and emergency.

“CNR is a critical enabler of multipath diversity and for continued network modernization at the tactical edge,” Col. Garth Winterle, Project Manager for Tactical Radios, said. “The reprogrammable nature of CNR radios lends itself to the Army’s capability set approach and the ability to upgrade over time.”

First unit equipped with the new radios is expected in fiscal 2024 following first article test and National Security Agency certification.

The post Army awards radio contracts aimed at improving security and connectivity appeared first on DefenseScoop.