"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:06:30 -0400, Paul Austin
wrote:
FCS
Ah, "Future Combat System".
if the ultimate MagicTech, consisting of ground and airborne recon
platforms, data networks, robotic fire and logistics vehicles and
incidentally, replacements for the current generation mechanized
vehicles for troop carriers, fire support, C&C and direct fire
combat.
So what data rate will FCS run at? Consider a unit such as a Brigade
- will the data links be radio, or something else (laser beams?
fiber optic? ethernet?) or a mixture?
The first Brigade XXI exercises were run using 64Kbps links over HF
radios. Not suprisingly, trials proved that slow a data fabric
completely inadequate. There are advantages to HF links but VHF, UHF
and higher frequencies will be used. The Navy is planning EHF links.
If the data links are radio, how will routing within the brigade
happen? Will every vehicle be presumed to be in radio contact with
every other, or will the system work as a smart swarm and
automatically reconfigure routing between nodes by itself, or will
routing be manually configured?
In the interim, "digital battlefield" electronics, wide
distribution
of ubiquitous and persistent recon imagery and analysis and
precision
fires from airborne and ground systems help a lot.
My understanding is 4th Infantry Division use the interim system -
is this correct?
How will FCS be better than the interim system - my understanding is
the interim system's bandwidth is quite low, about 4.5 kbit/s.
It's not so much interim as the first spiral of fielded systems with
more and better to follow.
The USMC completed
a wargame about 6 months ago using all of this stuff and a light
Marine Blue Force did very well against a conventional mech OPFOR.
They also discovered that the Red Force could compensate for the
advantages these technologies give US forces by targeting
communications and fire support elements.
Comms equipment is giving out radio signals; if these can be
pinpointed and targeted, the unit is ****ed. Imagine a swarm of
cheap cruise missiles[1] homing in on radio signals from the nodes
on the tactical internet.
Not nearly as easy as it seems, since everything is spread spectrum,
fast hopping and anti-jam.
[1]: http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/
If they can be degraded,
then light forces lose the means to stand up to enemy mechanized
forces and are often defeated.
If your comms are degraded badly enough, you'll lose whether you
have light forces or tanks; even the best MBTs don't have perfect
protection against ATGMs, etc.
MBTs are nearly immune to ATGMs now. About the best that can be hoped
for by man-portable systems is a mobility kill. Heavier ATGMs have
some hope of doing more than blowing a track but not along the frontal
arc. Everyone has a story but damn few examples of success. Makes you
wonder if the Chechens used the three man anti-tank team: first man
waits until the tank noses out past the edge of the building, then
shoves a section of rail road track into the drive sprocket. Number
two throws a blanket over the vision blocks and number three crashes a
gallon jug of gasoline onto the blanket. Number one then lights the
blanket and the team skips off for a pint.
As usual with military affairs, there's no panacea and the guy
you're
trying to kill has powerful incentives to circumvent your
advantages.
Indeed.
isn't ready yet, never mind
"electric armor"
And this?
Britain has done development on large capacitor banks that pass
very
large currents through shaped charge jets hitting an armored
vehicle,
melting the jet before it can hit the inner armo(u)r. They say that
scaled up versions might be able to do the same to long-rod
penetrators.
Does this work? It sounds nice, but I'm not sure if it's practical.
What if the capacitors short out? That would release large amounts
of enery, if it's enough to melt a solid piece of metal.
Success is a matter of sufficient development
I find the notion of
melting a 10-20mm thick rod of refractory metal in microseconds
literally incredible.