Saturday, June 28, 2025
  • About us
    • Write for us
    • Disclaimer
    • Terms of use
    • Privacy Policy
  • RSS Feeds
  • Advertise with us
  • Contact us
DefenceTalk
  • Home
  • Defense News
    • Defense & Geopolitics News
    • War Conflicts News
    • Army News
    • Air Force News
    • Navy News
    • Missiles Systems News
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Defense Technology
    • Cybersecurity News
  • Military Photos
  • Defense Forum
  • Military Videos
  • Military Weapon Systems
    • Weapon Systems
    • Reports
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Defense News
    • Defense & Geopolitics News
    • War Conflicts News
    • Army News
    • Air Force News
    • Navy News
    • Missiles Systems News
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Defense Technology
    • Cybersecurity News
  • Military Photos
  • Defense Forum
  • Military Videos
  • Military Weapon Systems
    • Weapon Systems
    • Reports
No Result
View All Result
DefenceTalk
No Result
View All Result
Home Defence & Military News Army News

Army Communications: Networking, or Just Not Working?

by Editor
February 16, 2006
in Army News
3 min read
0
14
VIEWS

The Lexington Institute, Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey is the most capable manager to occupy that post in modern times. Originally tapped to oversee network integration in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the University of Pennsylvania Ph.D. (material sciences) was shifted to the Army's top job when the nomination of former Air Force Secretary James Roche to head the Army came unraveled in a procurement scandal. Having spent decades managing complex technology projects at major corporations, Harvey is well equipped to grasp the intricacies of next-generation networking initiatives such as the Future Combat System. Whether he is ready to deal with the Army's baroque, ingrown acquisition community is another matter. 
 
The Army's acquisition culture has come a long way since The New York Times editorialized during the Civil War that it was a “hotbed of wickedness and corruption.” But it has never managed to escape a reputation for being more concerned with its own internal rhythms than the needs of the warfighter. 
 
The clearest evidence of a problem lies not in controversies over body armor and improvised explosive devices — subjects which elicit a continuous stream of cheap shots from national media — but in the management of next-generation communications programs. The media barely cover these programs at all, but their cumulative cost exceeds a hundred billion dollars, and some of them aren't going so well. Insiders say the difficulties are due in large part to incompetence at the Army's Communications-Electronics Command. 
 
CECOM, as the command is known, canceled a program called Aerial Common Sensor (ACS) after spending $140 million in an abortive effort to help soldiers find hostile emitters on future battlefields. It also issued a stop-work order to contractors for next-generation “software-defined” radios that were supposed to replace outmoded battlefield communications with new digital gear capable of accommodating virtually any signal — a goal that turns out to be nearly impossible to achieve within the laws of physics. 
 
That program, the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS), will be scaled back so that it can only communicate with some of the radios in the force, while providing a “wideband networking waveform” that looks inadequate even before it is fielded. 
 
Now CECOM is embarked on a new restructuring initiative that will delay the availability of agile communications to soldiers on the move for the better part of a decade. The latest target is the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical, or WIN-T, a wireless architecture of ground, airborne and orbital nodes that was conceived to provide a secure information backbone for future battlefield operations. 
 
CECOM managers have come up with a raft of bureaucratic excuses such as the color of money, testing requirements and the need for competition to argue that the service should wait until the next decade to field WIN-T. The fact that communications-on-the-move is a priority requirement, that the technology has been proven in realistic exercises, and that adequate funding is available all seem to be irrelevant to the people overseeing the program. They are so consumed by process issues that they appear to have forgotten the warfighters (not to mention taxpayers). 
 
What all three of these programs — ACS, JTRS, and WIN-T — have in common is that they were supposed to be building blocks in the architecture for the Army's $160 billion Future Combat System. Doubts about the viability of that program's vast network will inevitably be increased by the restructuring and delay of so many vital pieces. 
 
Perhaps it's time for the Army to admit that its executive officers at the Communications-Electronics Command don't know what they're doing, and are undercutting the whole concept of spiral development. As for Secretary Harvey, who has made fast delivery of new technology to the force a top priority, he might want to consider one more “off-ramp” to accelerate networking efforts: leave some of CECOM's top managers at that last rest stop on the Jersey turnpike when the command moves to Maryland in the near future. 

Previous Post

Acquisition Radar Accepted into Service by Australian Army

Next Post

Hermes 450 Tactical Long Endurance UAV Offers High Operational Versatility

Related Posts

Indonesia Orders Additional CAESAR Artillery Systems

France to send more mobile artillery to Ukraine

February 1, 2023

France will ship 12 more Caesar truck-mounted howitzers and fresh air defence equipment to Ukraine to bolster the fight against...

Leopard tanks to arrive in Ukraine around late March: Germany

Leopard tanks to arrive in Ukraine around late March: Germany

January 27, 2023

Leopard tanks pledged by Germany to help Ukraine repel Russia's invasion will arrive in "late March, early April", Defence Minister...

Next Post

Hermes 450 Tactical Long Endurance UAV Offers High Operational Versatility

Latest Defense News

Britain, Germany jointly developing missiles: ministers

Britain, Germany jointly developing missiles: ministers

May 17, 2025
Trump announces ‘full and immediate’ India-Pakistan ceasefire

Trump announces ‘full and immediate’ India-Pakistan ceasefire

May 10, 2025
Pakistan says Indian missiles strike air bases as conflict spirals

Pakistan says Indian missiles strike air bases as conflict spirals

May 10, 2025
J-10C fighter jet

Pakistan says India has brought neighbours ‘closer to major conflict’

May 9, 2025
North Korea fires multiple suspected cruise missiles

North Korea fires flurry of short-range ballistic missiles

May 9, 2025
China says ‘closely watching’ Ukraine situation after Russian attack

China vows to stand with Russia in face of ‘hegemonic bullying’

May 9, 2025

Defense Forum Discussions

  • The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread
  • Indonesia: 'green water navy'
  • Middle East Defence & Security
  • KAI KF-21
  • ADF General discussion thread
  • Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
  • USAF News and Discussion
  • Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
  • Russian Air Force News & Discussion
  • F-35 Program - General Discussion
DefenceTalk

© 2003-2020 DefenceTalk.com

Navigate Site

  • Defence Forum
  • Military Photos
  • RSS Feeds
  • About us
  • Advertise with us
  • Contact us

Follow Us

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Defense News
    • Defense & Geopolitics News
    • War Conflicts News
    • Army News
    • Air Force News
    • Navy News
    • Missiles Systems News
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Defense Technology
    • Cybersecurity News
  • Military Photos
  • Defense Forum
  • Military Videos
  • Military Weapon Systems
    • Weapon Systems
    • Reports

© 2003-2020 DefenceTalk.com