- ISRAEL: Not A Good Sign
- SUPPORT: MOUT For The 21st Century
- ATTRITION: Internet Geeks Have More Choices
- ON POINT: Spy Novels and Whodunnit: North Korea's Criminal Reality Is Intolerable
- PHOTO: Over The Philippine Sea
- BOOK REVIEW: The Campaigns of Sargon II, King of Assyria, 721-705 B.C. (Campaigns and Commanders Series)
- IRAN: Pride, Prejudice and Persecution
- AIR DEFENSE: No Quick Fix For SHORAD
- SPECIAL OPERATIONS: Benghazi Aftermath
- PHOTO: Birds Of A Feather Flock Together
- KOREA: Purging The Dynasty
- INFANTRY: Tech Takes its Toll
- INFORMATION WARFARE: HVIs Wanted Dead Or Alive
- CIC: The Duel of the Two Men, the Two Horses, and the Two Dogs
- PHOTO: Old And New Friends
- BOOK REVIEW: Franklin D. Roosevelt. Vol. II, The War Years, 1939-1945
- BOOK REVIEW: Franklin D. Roosevel, Vol I, Road to the New Deal, 1882-1939
The U.S. Army is seeking to establish a line of combat smart phones (CSPs) that can be as flexible and up-to-date as their civilian counterparts. To that end, the army wants CSP designs that are rugged, cheap, and provide critical stuff like encryption via software, not custom hardware. Since even the smart phone hardware is a rapidly moving item, CSPs should cost the army less than $300 each and be built to get replaced every two years or less. This price is about what current cell phones sell (wholesale, to dealers). There would be a similar, but slower, replacement schedule for the battlefield cell towers, routers, and other gear. Not surprisingly, the army is allowing several different families of smart phones and supporting gear to be developed and tested.
One thing the military is trying to avoid is slow network speeds. Using mesh networks (CSPs automatically setting themselves up as nodes of a network) is seen as one solution. Mesh networks are discouraged for commercial cell phones because there is no advantage to the cell phone companies. But for the military, all their users are one customer so mesh makes a lot of sense.
Testing “ruggedized” versions of commercial smart phones for combat use has been going on for several years now. There have also been efforts to ensure these phones address crucial military needs. For example, a year ago the NSA (National Security Agency) created a version of the cell phone/tablet Android operating system suitable for combat use. SE (Security Enhanced) Android is based on a SE Linux that NSA developed 13 years ago. NSA has been active for decades in "hardening" PC operating systems. Since Android is based on Linux, NSA had a head start in creating SE Android.
SE Android is the last key element the U.S. Army needed to move commercial smart phones and tablets onto the battlefield. The troops have been clamoring for a combat smart phone, and last year the army began field testing the Atrix smart phone and Galaxy tablet. Both use Android and are designated as NWEUD (Nett Warrior End-User Device) by the military. The army has since gone on to test several more types of Android smart phone and tablet designs. Troops are testing this hardware in training and a few SOCOM (Special Operations Command) operators have apparently used some of this stuff in combat. SE Android provides the security (from enemy eavesdropping, hacking, and such) needed and which commercial cell phones and tablets could not provide. Apparently SE Android works pretty well, especially when worn on the forearm and usable with one hand.
This turn towards mass produced ruggedized (water and drop resistant) consumer designs has produced a lot of responses from manufacturers. Sales of several hundred thousand CSPs a year to one customer is an attractive piece of business. There is also a small commercial market for “ruggedized” smart phones and it would be easier to sell one that was “combat proven.”
Earlier attempts to create smart phone capabilities for combat troops produced a 2.3 kg (5 pound) wearable (and networked) computer with an eyepiece for the display and a handheld (or worn on the arm) input device (keyboard). This integrated radio, GPS, and 16 GB of storage for maps, pictures, or whatever. Troops found the system too heavy and not as easy to use as a smart phone or tablet. Soldiers and marines know that most smart phones can do the same job and now the army agrees and is deciding which commercial designs should be used for combat testing. The older NWEUD prototypes underwent combat testing and failed. But the CSP prototypes have received a much more enthusiastic response in troop tests. Combat experienced troops are eager to try this stuff out on the battlefield, especially if the new CSP systems are a bit more reliable than current radios. This reliability issue is something most civilians don’t appreciate. Since radios got their first wide-scale workout during World War II (1939-45) traditional radio gear, despite decades of improvements, has always suffered reliability problems (hardware, atmospheric, geographical). This rarely gets featured in movies, as it slows things down. But in the real world of combat, screwed up comms is a regular fact-of-life. Cell phone tech is not perfect but it is a step up from traditional battlefield communications gear.
Over half a century of studies have discovered what an infantryman needs to be more effective. They need to know where they are, quickly. Having a poor idea of where you are has long been one of the main shortcomings of armored vehicles. Armored vehicle crews tend to be cut off from this while inside their vehicle where they are even more easily disoriented. When the shooting starts even the vehicle commander, instead of standing up with his head outside the turret, often ducks back inside to stay alive. Infantry aren't much better off. Although they can see their surroundings they are often crouching behind something. When getting shot at standing up to look around is not much of an option.
CSPs give Team Leaders and Squad Leaders (and eventually each infantryman) a smart phone and the smart phone/tablet touch screen to control the thing. GPS puts the soldier's location on the map and the soldier knows where he is. Earlier in Iraq, infantry officers and NCOs, equipped with map equipped GPS receivers (at first, then smart phones), found the map/GPS combo a tremendous aid to getting around and getting the job done. CSP also provides a wireless networking capability, so troops not only saw where they were but could receive new maps and other information. Another goal is to use a vidcam to transmit images to headquarters, their immediate commander, or simply to the other guys in their squad. Perhaps most importantly the CSP gear provides the same capability as the 2003 "Blue Force Tracker" and shows Team Leaders and Squad Leaders where all the other guys in his unit are. When fighting inside a building this can be a life saver.
CSP type capabilities are already changing the way troops fight. Everyone is now able to move around more quickly, confidently, and effectively. This has already been demonstrated with the Stryker units equipped with CSP type gear. Captured enemy gunmen often complained of how the Strykers came out of nowhere and skillfully maneuvered to surround and destroy their targets. This was often done at night, with no lights (using night vision gear). When you have infantry using CSPs to do the same thing on foot you demoralize the enemy.
Troops in combat have some unique problems keeping smart phones operational. For one thing, there’s the problem of providing a reliable signal. But that’s long been a problem and there are a lot of new solutions that will work with a smart phone. Then there’s the need for encryption. Again, that’s another problem handled by SE Android. If the smart phone manufacturers and the NSA (SE Android) deliver, the troops will use it. They most certainly want it.