5 minute read
Tactical Military Communications – an Evolving Landscape
Tom Cropper, Editor
Why improved communications are crucial to the future operational effi ciency of the modern military force.
DURING THE First World War, the German General Erich Ludendorff remarked: “The English fight like lions,” to which his staff offi cer replied: “Yes, but they are led by donkeys 1 .” It’s an opinion that, to this day, typifi es the view of the British force during the Great War. Of all their many faults, though, the biggest affecting poor military leaders tend to be poor communications.
The Key to Success Take the example of the 1915 amphibious invasion of Gallipoli. The British General, Sir Ian Hamilton, believed the best position to oversee the battle was from a command ship based offshore – not the worst choice one might have thought. But he chose a vantage point with little clear overview of the battle and with dreadfully poor communications to the shore. As a result, the soldiers on the beaches were left to face the chaotic situation more or less alone.
More recently, a US army patrol in the Hindu Kush mountains found itself 100kms away from base with radio communications blocked by mountainous terrain 2 . With the mountains looking unclimbable, they had to hike to a location in range of a friendly radio retransmission station, which helped them set up a secure lifeline back to their base. It was only then that the patrol began to feel more comfortable.
Both these examples show the crucial role communications can play in war, and that even in this age of high speed information technology, age old problems such as the shape of the landscape can still hinder communications. The goal of communications is also exactly the same as it ever has been – right back to the age of antiquity – to provide direct, clear and secure communication between army commanders and their troops on the ground.
What has changed is the nature of warfare; the technical challenges of providing
secure communication have evolved, and the available technology has improved. The goal of the modern military is to fi nd a way to adapt to changing demands, to improve the effi ciency, speed and reliability of communications, and find a way of adapting the latest mobile communications technology that most of us already take for granted.
Catching up with Consumers It is this third point which is perhaps the key to development. We live in a world of high speed communication – a place where a person can speak instantly with a friend living on the other side of the world. They can send text, images, audio and video straight away at the touch of a button. They can draw up instant information about their location and fi nd maps to places they are looking to get to – all by checking their smartphones.
Set against this, even the most advanced modern military machines often look as though they are stuck in the stone-age. Radio communications may have evolved considerably, but they are still lacking when it comes to the demands of modern warfare. For example, when speaking to Gizmodo, Doran Michels, Program Manager for DARPA’s Transformative Apps program, complained about the state of maps in the military.
“It’s really strange,” he told the publication, “because in 2014, if you were to accompany, let’s say, a Marine patrol on a really scary, highly complex mission, they’re going to have paper maps, pencils, acetate, transparencies with magic markers [for] ‘John Madden drawings.’ 3 John Madden, for those who don’t know, is the American Sports commentator famed for drawing complex diagrams over TV Football replays. In other words, soldiers are using map reading technology which would not have been entirely unfamiliar to soldiers in the Second World War.
A FINNISH COASTAL JAEGER (THE AMPHIBIOUS ARM OF THE FINNISH NAVY) WEARING A SAVOX IMP HEADSET CONNECTED TO HIS IMP PERSONAL CONTROL UNIT (PCU), WHICH IS A LIGHTWEIGHT AND ERGONOMIC VOICEPROMPTED UNIT PROVIDING CONTROL OF INTERCOM FUNCTIONS AND INSTANT ACCESS TO TWO TACTICAL RADIOS.
Technology and a Changing Military Given the changing nature of modern warfare, it’s understandable that the army wants to close the gap between the kind of mobile communications a solder might experience in the civilian world and those that he might use in the battlefi elds.
Today’s military is more mobile, more connected, working across longer distances, operating more remotely and facing a very different enemy. The days of two relatively modern armies facing one another are in the past. Today’s warfare is conducted against small cells of terrorists – groups of people hidden in the shadows. It’s a much more secretive and slippery enemy to handle.
Furthermore, the appetite of major powers for boots on the ground is diminishing. After Iraq and Afghanistan, the move is towards interventions based on air power and remote drone attacks such as we’ve seen in Libya and Syria.
This more complex type of warfare increases the need for a sophisticated support system. Strategic communications must deliver instant up-to-date information, graphics or video content and if possible, local information. It needs a secure core communications system capable of working on land, sea and air and connecting troops on the ground with leaders at base and in other locations. This need has driven the emergence – over the past few years – of voice over internet protocol (VoIP) technology which has become a standard around the world. This enables the move from a system based on command and control (C2) to Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4i). The result is communications which are faster, more secure, standardised and provide commanders with more real-time information from multiple locations. It means a network which can connect troops with a number of locations, enhancing the range of support services which can be delivered to troops on the ground.
The arrival of this technology is heralding a significant increase in the capabilities and operational effectiveness of the modern military machine. Even so, there is much work to be done. Existing technology must be adapted from the consumer world for use in the hostile environment of the battlefi eld. New technology will also have to be adaptable to existing systems. The military has a tendency to veer towards legacy operational systems, which can make integrating new functionalities challenging. Overcoming these barriers will be critical to the success of developers in ensuring new technologies work in the real world. Today’s military is more mobile, more connected, working across longer distances, operating more remotely and facing a very different enemy
