• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

ADF Jericho Dawn

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,071
Points
1,260
Very cool stuff with great future applications.

New advanced Air Force capability demonstrated in Canberra

Senior Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel in Canberra today toured an Air Force C-17A Globemaster fitted with a new advanced satellite communication and imagery display system for its crew and passengers.

The newly-installed system was used to stream full motion video on large screens in the aircraft from a Heron remotely piloted Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operating 2000km away over Woomera Test Range in South Australia.

The new system is an outcome of Plan Jericho, the plan to transform Air Force and the wider ADF into a fighting force that capitalises on the high technology systems that are being introduced over the next few years.

Director of Plan Jericho, Group Captain Robert Chipman, said that the system was a good example of exploiting and connecting capabilities that Air Force, Army and Navy currently operate.

“The networks and systems demonstrated in Canberra today allow passengers in the aircraft to receive live updates and video of their destination, such as enemy positions or disaster damaged areas, right up to the point of insertion,” said Group Captain Chipman.

“The systems may also provide utility in supporting other kinds of operations such as Aeromedical Evacuations by giving medical staff on board the ability to video conference with specialists on the ground.”

Plan Jericho will look at all aspects of ADF operations and support – systems, command and control, training, simulation, organisational structure, trade groups – to ensure Air Force, Army and Navy jointly operate their new and existing capabilities in the most effective manner.

The aircraft was in Canberra as part of the Air Force’s Jericho Dawn series of capability demonstrations.

http://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/grid.fwx?ArchiveID=5003&Search=S20151391

https://www.facebook.com/RoyalAustralianAirForce/photos/a.171177837638.124610.88014372638/10153082991452639/?type=1&fref=nf
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,071
Points
1,260
Bumping this thread with some more Plan Jericho topics - this one shouldn't be too hard to do ourselves, since the HF kits should be in place already...?  Any sigs pers with expertise can feel free to chime in.

The ADF was able to establish a standard internet protocol (IP) data link between an army node at HMAS Harman, the chief information officer group's (CIOG) strategic HF network at RAAF Base Townsville and RAAF Base Wagga, and an AP-3C Orion aircraft at RAAF Base Edinburgh.  The WBHF radio technology doesn't rely on a satellite and can transfer voice communications, messages, photographs and videos. It's considered a major advance over the existing high-frequency (HF) radio infrastructure.

The technology can provide data rates up to ten times faster and can integrate with the existing HF infrastructure.

http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsaustralian-defence-force-trials-new-wideband-high-frequency-technology-4705447
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,727
Points
1,060
We're just getting back into the HF game after discovering comms deficiencies in Afghanistan. Our issue, was that we had to buy new radios as the PRC138s could not support the data speeds required for modern applications.

It sounds like they're using the same or similar radio to what we've purchased in the RF7800 from Harris.

HF was left behind by everyone over the last 20 years, the technology was relatively simple and no one bothered to push the envelope. With rapidly decreasing VHF/UHF bandwidth, it came into the fore front with new waveforms to really push the envelope. I've heard of one system demonstration that pushed FMV from a Utah-area UAV to Kingston back when we were figuring out what to buy. Likely was the 7800, but never got inside the truck to see.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,096
Points
1,090
Perhaps we need to put apps on a data diet?  Militaries operate in conditions where networks may be degraded or have limited bandwidth; apps need to be designed to be minimalist in their demands.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
1,279
Points
1,160
dapaterson said:
Perhaps we need to put apps on a data diet?  Militaries operate in conditions where networks may be degraded or have limited bandwidth; apps need to be designed to be minimalist in their demands.


:goodpost: Milpoints inbound.
 

Jungle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
PuckChaser said:
We're just getting back into the HF game after discovering comms deficiencies in Afghanistan...

...

HF was left behind by everyone over the last 20 years, the technology was relatively simple and no one bothered to push the envelope.

We learned the hard way in East Timor 16 years ago. The 77 sets could not be used beyond 500m, so we switched to HF using the 138. It was not the most practical, as we had to stop every 2 hours while patrolling, assemble and ground the NVIS, then report our location and situation. But that was better than no comms.

Obviously nobody paid attention, as this was a very valid lesson learned.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,096
Points
1,090
Jungle said:
Obviously nobody paid attention, as this was a very valid lesson learned.

Lesson recorded.  Lesson taken to heart by all who were there.

But as long as the institution keeps making the same mistakes, it's not a lesson learned.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
1,279
Points
1,160
Jungle said:
We learned the hard way in East Timor 16 years ago. The 77 sets could not be used beyond 500m, so we switched to HF using the 138. It was not the most practical, as we had to stop every 2 hours while patrolling, assemble and ground the NVIS, then report our location and situation. But that was better than no comms.

Obviously nobody paid attention, as this was a very valid lesson learned.


In fairness, I believe (I was retired but still "connected" from my civvy job) the lesson was taken, but a powerful element in the CF didn't want to learn from it because it contradicted the narrative that says that connectivity ~ enough connectivity for data intensive operations ~ is always there, somehow, and the radio can, somehow, be made to suit the data needs, data need not be made to fit the radio bandwidth available. HF radio was, therefore, a very unpopular answer because everyone ~ even the generals ~ knew that HF has bandwidth limitations.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,938
Points
1,360
E.R. Campbell said:
In fairness, I believe (I was retired but still "connected" from my civvy job) the lesson was taken, but a powerful element in the CF didn't want to learn from it because it contradicted the narrative that says that connectivity ~ enough connectivity for data intensive operations ~ is always there, somehow, and the radio can, somehow, be made to suit the data needs, data need not be made to fit the radio bandwidth available. HF radio was, therefore, a very unpopular answer because everyone ~ even the generals ~ knew that HF has bandwidth limitations.

I was at the Army of Tomorrow WG today.  They army still doesn't get it when it comes to comms. 
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,727
Points
1,060
Part of that is Sigs problem. I had an excellent Sig O explain me to me once that we keep making sigs solutions to sigs problems, instead of Sigs solutions to Army problems. Part of that is the inability for the Army to articulate what they want (transcends Sigs issues), but when all we offer is massive detachments with big footprints with technology only one guy can pronounce the name of, let alone run; we've lost a lot of credibility.

I'd be interested to hear what the Army wants out of next-gen comms, and how much connectivity they want/need. Someone hit the nail on the head when speaking about semi-denied spectrum in a near-peer conflict, we ran out of spectrum in Afghanistan, and the enemy was only using about 60mhz combined out of the whole spectrum.
 
Top