Military Embedded Systems January/February 2022

@military_cots

John McHale

7

MOSA momentum continues

Cybersecurity Update

8

Army 365 upgrade continues

Mil Tech Trends

Leveraging SOSA for radar

Industry Spotlight

EW demands on RF & microwave www.MilitaryEmbedded.com

16 20

Jan/Feb 2022 | Volume 18 | Number 1

RADAR/EW ISSUE HYPERSONIC MISSILE DETECTION AND COUNTERMEASURES DEPEND ON PERSISTENT SENSING P 12

P 36

Improving the capabilities of cognitive radar and EW systems

By Tim Fountain and Leander Humbert, Rohde & Schwarz

We Have You Covered from RF to Bits The industry’s most complete portfolio of ICs and modules.

RF/µW Amplifiers/ TR Modules

Analog Beamforming

Frequency Conversion

Converters and Transceivers

ADC DAC

Power

Find your competitive advantage at analog.com/ADEF

The Only Full EcoSystem of 3U & 6U 100GbE Products Aligned with SOSA

TM

FPGA DIGITIZING & PROCESSING

6.4 Tb/s 100GbE SWITCHING

16 TB DEPTH & 5 GB/s RATE RECORDING CHASSIS, BACKPLANE & SECURE CHASSIS MANAGER

Annapolis

Micro Systems

We GUARANTEE Seamless 100GbE System Integration Because We Design and Manufacture Every Product

www.militaryembedded.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS 36

January/February 2022 Volume 18 | Number 1

20

COLUMNS Editor’s Perspective 7 MOSA momentum continues in 2022

By John McHale

Cybersecurity Update 8 Army 365 cyber upgrade continues for armed forces

FEATURES SPECIAL REPORT: Radar for missile/hypersonic defense

By Lisa Daigle

Mil Tech Insider 9 SAVE this space: Defining the C5ISR space for Army vehicles

By Jason DeChiaro

12 Hypersonic missile detection and countermeasures depend on persistent sensing

By Sally Cole, Senior Editor

MIL TECH TRENDS: Leveraging SOSA for radar applications 16 Leveraging the Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) for radar applications

By Nicholas Borton, SRC

THE LATEST

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT: RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

Defense Tech Wire 10 By Emma Helfrich

20 Electronic warfare systems demand multifunctionality and integration in RF and

microwave designs

Editor’s Choice Products 44 By Mil Embedded Staff

By Emma Helfrich, Technology Editor 26 Zero trust for military embedded systems

By Richard Jaenicke, Green Hills Software

Connecting with Mil Embedded 46 By Mil Embedded Staff

32 Open source SDR: a faster, better way to develop and deploy EW capabilities

By Chad Augustine, Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions and Haydn Nelson, NI 36 I mproving the capabilities of cognitive radar and EW systems

By Tim Fountain and Leander Humbert, Rohde & Schwarz

8

40 C ooling high-power radar systems: a thermal technology guide

By Bryan Muzyka, Advanced Cooling Technologies

WEB RESOURCES Subscribe to the magazine or E-letter Live industry news | Submit new products http://submit.opensystemsmedia.com WHITE PAPERS – Read: https://militaryembedded.com/whitepapers WHITE PAPERS – Submit: http://submit.opensystemsmedia.com

12

All registered brands and trademarks within Military Embedded Systems magazine are the property of their respective owners. © 2022 OpenSystems Media © 2022 Military Embedded Systems ISSN: Print 1557-3222

To unsubscribe, email your name, address, and subscription number as it appears on the label to: subscriptions@opensysmedia.com Published by:

4 January/February 2022

ON THE COVER: The U.S., China, Russia, and possibly even North Korea now have hyper­sonic weapon capabilities, which means they all need to develop detection and countermeasures. A key part of deterring, defending, and defeating the threat posed by hypersonic missiles will be advanced global and persistent sensing – the ability to detect and track threats through all phases of flight.

This artist’s illustration shows how hypersonic weapons heat up as they accelerate through the atmosphere. Image courtesy of Raytheon. https://www.linkedin.com/groups/1864255/

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

@military_cots

www.militaryembedded.com

BEHLMAN LEADS THE PACK AGAIN! FIRST PROVEN VPX POWER SUPPLIES DEVELOPED IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE SOSA™ TECHNICAL STANDARD

Behlman introduces the first test-proven VPX power supplies developed in alignment with the SOSA Technical Standard. Like all Behlman VPXtra® power supplies, these 3U and 6U COTS DC-to-DC high-power dual output units feature Xtra-reliable design and Xtra-rugged construction to stand up to the rigors of all mission-critical airborne, shipboard, ground and mobile applications.

VPXtra® 1000CD5-IQI

VPXtra® 700D-IQI

> 6U power module developed in alignment with the SOSA Technical Standard > Delivers 1050W DC power via two outputs > VITA 46.11 IPMC for integration with system management

> 3U power module developed in alignment with the SOSA Technical Standard > Delivers 700W DC power via two outputs > VITA 46.11 IPMC for integration with system management

The Power Solutions Provider SOSA™ and logo design and The Open Group Certification Mark™ are trademarks of The Open Group in the United States and other countries.

: 631-435-0410 : 631-435-0410

: sales@behlman.com : sales@behlman.com

: www.behlman.com : www.behlman.com

ADVERTISERS PAGE ADVERTISER/AD TITLE 2 Analog Devices, Inc. – We have you covered from RF to bits 3 Annapolis Micro Systems – The only full ecosystem of 3U & 6U 100GbE products aligned with SOSA 5 Behlman Electronics, Inc. – Behlman leads the pack again!

15 Cambridge Pixel Ltd – Radar acquisition, processing and display 28 Dawn VME Products – Rugged, reliable and ready 19 Elma Electronic – Award-winning development solutions 47 GMS – The world’s first ultra-mobile/ scalable single board 3U VPX system 34 Herrick Technology Labs – High performance SOSA aligned solutions 48 Pentek – The next big thing in RFSoC is here – and it’s only 2.5” x 4” 18 Phoenix International – Phalanx II: The ultimate NAS 33 PICO Electronics Inc – DC-DC Converters 42 State of the Art, Inc. – No boundaries!

31 Viking Technology – Powerful & compact 21 Wolf Advanced Technology – Look for us at … Nvidia GTC22 Virtual Conference March 21-24, 2022 21 Wolf Advanced Technology – VPX3U-A4500E-VO 23 Wolf Advanced Technology – VPX3U-RTX5000E-SWITCH 23 Wolf Advanced Technology – VPX3U-RTX5000E COAX-CV 25 Wolf Advanced Technology – VPX3U-RTX5000E-VO 25 Wolf Advanced Technology – VPX3U-XAVIER CX6-SBC/HPC 25 Wolf Advanced Technology – VPX6URTX5000E DUAL-VO

GROUP EDITORIAL DIRECTOR John McHale john.mchale@opensysmedia.com ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITOR Lisa Daigle lisa.daigle@opensysmedia.com SENIOR EDITOR Sally Cole sally.cole@opensysmedia.com TECHNOLOGY EDITOR Emma Helfrich emma.helfrich@opensysmedia.com CREATIVE DIRECTOR Stephanie Sweet stephanie.sweet@opensysmedia.com SENIOR WEB DEVELOPER Aaron Ganschow aaron.ganschow@opensysmedia.com WEB DEVELOPER Paul Nelson paul.nelson@opensysmedia.com CONTRIBUTING DESIGNER Joann Toth joann.toth@opensysmedia.com EMAIL MARKETING SPECIALIST Drew Kaufman drew.kaufman@opensysmedia.com WEBCAST MANAGER Ryan Graff ryan.graff@opensysmedia.com VITA EDITORIAL DIRECTOR Jerry Gipper jerry.gipper@opensysmedia.com

SALES/MARKETING DIRECTOR OF SALES AND MARKETING Tom Varcie tom.varcie@opensysmedia.com (734) 748-9660 MARKETING MANAGER Eric Henry eric.henry@opensysmedia.com (541) 760-5361 STRATEGIC ACCOUNT MANAGER Rebecca Barker rebecca.barker@opensysmedia.com (281) 724-8021 STRATEGIC ACCOUNT MANAGER Bill Barron bill.barron@opensysmedia.com (516) 376-9838 STRATEGIC ACCOUNT MANAGER Kathleen Wackowski kathleen.wackowski@opensysmedia.com (978) 888-7367 SOUTHERN CAL REGIONAL SALES MANAGER Len Pettek len.pettek@opensysmedia.com (805) 231-9582 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PRODUCT MARKETING/SALES Barbara Quinlan barbara.quinlan@opensysmedia.com (480) 236-8818 STRATEGIC ACCOUNT MANAGER Glen Sundin glen.sundin@opensysmedia.com (973) 723-9672 INSIDE SALES Amy Russell amy.russell@opensysmedia.com TAIWAN SALES ACCOUNT MANAGER Patty Wu patty.wu@opensysmedia.com CHINA SALES ACCOUNT MANAGER Judy Wang judywang2000@vip.126.com EUROPEAN MARKETING SPECIALIST Steven Jameson steven.jameson@opensysmedia.com +44 (0)7708976338 SENIOR EUROPEAN MARKETING SPECIALIST Alastair Swift alastair.swift@opensysmedia.com +44 7910 073565

WWW.OPENSYSMEDIA.COM PRESIDENT Patrick Hopper patrick.hopper@opensysmedia.com

EVENTS

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT John McHale john.mchale@opensysmedia.com

Sea – Air – Space April 4-6, 2022 National Harbor, MD https://seaairspace.org/

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT Rich Nass rich.nass@opensysmedia.com EMBEDDED COMPUTING BRAND DIRECTOR Rich Nass rich.nass@opensysmedia.com ECD EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Brandon Lewis brandon.lewis@opensysmedia.com TECHNOLOGY EDITOR Curt Schwaderer curt.schwaderer@opensysmedia.com ASSOCIATE EDITOR Tiera Oliver tiera.oliver@opensysmedia.com

AUVSI Xponential April 25-28, 2022 Orlando, FL https://www.xponential.org/xponential2022/ public/enter.aspx Eurosatory June 12-22 Paris, France https://www.eurosatory.com/?lang=en embedded world June 21-23, 2022 Nuremburg, Germany https://www.embedded-world.de/en

6 January/February 2022

ASSISTANT EDITOR Taryn Engmark taryn.engmark@opensysmedia.com ASSISTANT EDITOR Chad Cox chad.cox@opensysmedia.com CREATIVE PROJECTS Chris Rassiccia chris.rassiccia@opensysmedia.com MARKETING COORDINATOR Katelyn Albani katelyn.albani@opensysmedia.com FINANCIAL ASSISTANT Emily Verhoeks emily.verhoeks@opensysmedia.com FINANCE Rosemary Kristoff rosemary.kristoff@opensysmedia.com SUBSCRIPTION MANAGER subscriptions@opensysmedia.com CORPORATE OFFICE 1505 N. Hayden Rd. #105 • Scottsdale, AZ 85257 • Tel: (480) 967-5581 REPRINTS WRIGHT’S MEDIA REPRINT COORDINATOR Wyndell Hamilton whamilton@wrightsmedia.com (281) 419-5725

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

MOSA momentum continues in 2022

By John McHale, Editorial Director Each year since 2019 – when Army, Air Force, and Navy leaders issued their memo requiring the U.S. military use a Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) for new program designs and refreshes – momentum for the concept has only increased.

The launch of the Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) Technical Standard 1.0 in September 2021 marked another huge milestone for MOSA proponents.

While I walked the floors of military trade shows during the last couple months of 2021, I saw many companies touting their products’ alignment with the SOSA Technical Standard – none are deemed “conformant” with it yet, as that process is still about a year away from being complete. Those companies not aligned with SOSA shared how they are still embracing a MOSA approach; they also said that many of the requests for proposals they see are also requiring either a MOSA approach, use of open standards, or even specific MOSA approaches like the Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) Technical Standard and the C4ISR/Electronic Warfare Modular Open Suite of Standards (CMOSS).

CMOSS, FACE, SOSA, and other open architecture initiatives have been around longer than that 2019 Tri-service memo.

Their successful adoption into programs (FACE) and enthusiasm behind what they can do long-term for the deployment of high-performance technology to the warfighter – faster fielding of systems, less downtime, and easier tech refresh paths, plus lower long-term life cycle costs – is in fact what drove U.S. military leadership to issue the memo.

We’ve covered these MOSA initiatives and others like HOST [Hardware Open Systems Technology] and VICTORY [Vehicle Integration for C4ISR/EW Interoperability] for years, but last year the momentum for our coverage also got a big boost.

In September 2021, in conjunction with the SOSA Consortium, we launched the first of what will be an annual SOSA Special Edition. Exclusively published by Military Embedded Systems, it contains an aggregate of our staff written and industry contributed content about SOSA from the 2021. You can view it here: https://issuu.com/opensystemsmedia/docs/sosa_special edition_2021_e-mag_final?fr=sNGI1NjQ3MTg2. The 2022 edition will be published in August.

We also provide bimonthly coverage in our SOSA Update e-newsletter. View the archive here: https://militaryembedded. com/newsletters/sosa-update.

John.McHale@opensysmedia.com

https://opensysmedia.formstack.com/forms/face_special_ edition_reser­va­tion_form. Similar to the SOSA Special Edition, the FACE Special Edition will have an aggregate of staff-written and industry-contributed content about FACE from the past year, along with fresh perspective from FACE leadership.

Diving deeper into MOSA: We’re launching the MOSA Virtual Summit, to be held on February 23 at 11 a.m. EST. Our keynote speaker for the MOSA Virtual Summit is Giorgio Bertoli, Assistant Director for the Spectrum Dominance and Intelligence portfolio within the U.S. Army’s C5ISR Center. In his position he is responsible for the execution of science and technology efforts and delivery of novel capabilities within the area of defensive and offensive cyber, electronic warfare, signals intelligence, ground and airborne radar, tactical military communications, and countermine.

Sessions will include “MOSA for Military Avia­tion Platforms,” “Bringing MOSA to Electronic Warfare Applications,” and “Applying a MOSA Strategy Across Multiple Domains.”

To register, visit https://www.bigmarker.com/series/mosa-virtualsummit/series_summit?utm_bmcr_source=Editorial.

Another opportunity: On April 12, we will be hosting the Unmanned Systems Virtual Summit, to include a session on “MOSA Strategies for Unmanned Systems” and a keynote session that includes speaker Capt. Shelby Ochs, USMC, coprogram manager of Blue sUAS 2.0 for the Defense Innovation Unit, together with keynote host Dawn M.K. Zoldi (Colonel, USAF, Retired), CEO of P3 Tech Consulting and an unmanned system expert and recipient of the Woman to Watch in UAS (Leadership) Award 2019 on LinkedIn. Registration will open soon, so stay tuned to our social media channels and www.militaryembedded.com for the announcement.

Within our print magazine, we usually have a MOSA-related article each issue. In our January/February issue – where this column appears – our SOSA material includes a piece from Nick Borton from SRC, titled “Leveraging the Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) for radar applications” on page 16 and a column from Jason DeChiaro of Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions titled “SAVE this space: Defining the C5ISR space for Army vehicles” on page 9.

This spring we will also exclusively publish what will be the annual FACE Special Edition. If you are a FACE member and would like to participate in the product profiles, please visit

We also have plenty of opportunities to contribute material on MOSA in our print and digital vehicles. To view our 2022 content calendar, visit http://cloud1.opensystemsmedia.com/ MES-2022-Editorial-Calendar.pdf. To submit an abstract for a possible published article, please contact our assistant managing editor Lisa Daigle at lisa.daigle@opensysmedia.com.

www.militaryembedded.com

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

7

CYBERSECURITY UPDATE

Army 365 cyber upgrade continues for armed forces

By Lisa Daigle, Assistant Managing Editor The summer of 2021 saw the U.S. Army embark on a servicewide migration to Army 365, which provides soldiers and Army civilians with a cloud-based collaboration capability; final email and platforms integration is expected sometime later in 2022.

The new Army program is an upgrade to the commercial virtual remote (CVR) environment somewhat hurriedly fielded to the Department of Defense (DoD) workforce during the spring of 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic forced widespread remote work.

A three-phased approach will transition all Microsoft Teams, email, and SharePoint systems to Army 365 and eliminate the need for the temporary CVR and other functions, says Lt. Gen. John B. Morrison Jr., Army deputy chief of staff, G-6. The goal, he adds, is to provide a much-improved user environment among the Army’s 1.2 million service members, civilians, and support contractors.

Raj Iyer, the Army’s chief information officer, says that while the CVR “came in handy” during the early part of the pandemic when everyone had to resort to telework, “Army 365 gives us an enduring capability to collaborate across the Army, along with our sister services, the joint force, and industry.”

Army 365 hosts a range of resources including video and voice teleconferencing, email, instant messaging, and access to shared drives. As soldiers and civilians log into the Army 365 environment for the first time, they will see a suite of programs that will far exceed the CVR experience, Morrison asserts. The system hosts a range of resources to include video and voice teleconferencing, email, instant messaging, and access to shared drives.

“Cybersecurity was baked into the development of this architecture from the beginning,” Morrison says. “As we migrate to Army 365, we’re treating it like an operation. It is aligned against an operational [command-and-control] construct.”

Vital to the rollout: Army Cyber Command and Army Network Enterprise Technology Command, both of which are involved to provide an added layer of protection beyond what the commercial market can offer.

The shift to Army 365, Morrison says, will also help the service phase out previously used computer capabilities, like SharePoint and CVR, by shifting all personnel to a shared, familiar environment to improve productivity.

Iyer adds that users will also get computer support from a single source, as the Army will provide support from the Army enterprise service desk.

8 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

Security in a hurry Delivery of the CVR, the initial enhanced security capability to the Army enterprise, at the beginning of the remotework order in March 2020 was facilitated by the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C5ISR) Center (a component of Army Futures Command’s Combat Capabilities Development Command) along with Army Cyber Command (ARCYBER), Army Network Enterprise Technology Command (NETCOM), and Microsoft.

“When DoD needed a team to provide 24x7 Defensive Cyber Operations (DCO) for CVR [at the beginning of the pandemic], they turned to the C5ISR Center because of our subject-matter expertise in cloud and our history of rapidly adapting to new technologies,” says Greg Weaver, operations manager of the Center’s Defensive Cyber Solutions Branch. The C5ISR Center transitioned the CVR cybersecurity services mission to the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) in the fall of 2020.

The Army then also sought the C5ISR Center’s help when it decided to develop and implement Army 365 while sustaining the DCO mission.

CVR was never intended to be permanent, says Carlos Mateo, a cybersecurity architect at the C5ISR Center; Army 365 is the Army’s follow-on to CVR to ensure there is no loss of the lessons learned and capabilities achieved during CVR. Three-phased approach The first phase of the Army 365 migration began in the summer of 2021 with the service-wide transition of CVR and Microsoft Teams capabilities, with the second phase transitioning government email capabilities to Army 365 before the closure of the Defense Enterprise Email service by March 2022.

The final phase will move all SharePoint services to Army 365, with this portion of the transition taking the longest – the finish date for this piece is expected some time late in fiscal year 2022.

Program officials will continue to test and validate Army 365 as it’s rolled out and gains users. As it evolves, Morrison says, ­officials will generate user guides for the force to ensure a seamless transition: “Army 365 is going to be such a game-changing integrated capability and it pushes the limit on how we can improve our business and operational processes.

“We are going to look for that feedback. We know that soldier and civilian ingenuity will use this capability in ways we couldn’t even imagine. Capturing those lessons learned will be important.” www.militaryembedded.com

MIL TECH INSIDER

SAVE this space: Defining the C5ISR space for Army vehicles

By Jason DeChiaro An industry perspective from Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions To lower the cost and help speed the pace of technology upgrades for C5ISR [command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] systems on Army vehicles – while supporting the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) mandate for modular open system architecture (MOSA) solutions – the U.S. Army’s Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Ground Combat Systems (GCS) has issued an Interface Description Document (IDD) that describes the Standardized A-Kit/Vehicle Envelope (SAVE), a new physical SWAP and connector standard for fielding new C5ISR capabilities.

GCS Common Infrastructure (GCIA) framework, but SAVE covers only the purely physical elements instead of how data flows between the systems integrated on a vehicle.

The Standardized A-Kit/Vehicle Envel­ope (SAVE), which stipulates the internal mounting and physical interfaces for connecting CMOSS [C5ISR Modular Open Suite of Standards] solutions such as radios, to platforms, is primarily intended for new integrations and systems. SAVE is only intended for modular systems that electrically or digitally integrate into Army platforms, and isn’t relevant to stowed equipment, vehicle elements such as engines or weapons, or external components such as antennas or armor.

Because the SAVE IDD defines only the outer envelope (maximum dimensions), a wide variety of possible configurations are permitted within the envelope. The idea is to provide flexibility within the standard to encourage innovation and competitive acquisition. The standard physical volume defined by SAVE is based on the standard existing radio shelves envelope, measuring 15.9 inches wide by 16.1 inches deep and 9.3 inches tall, about the size of a dorm room microwave. Within those maximum rectangular dimensions any size and shape of subsystem is allowed, and adaptor plates can be used to mount smaller devices as long as they fit within the set dimensions.

Connectors defined within SAVE include RF cables at radio, RF cables at antennas, RF-GPS, power input, power output, plus audio and data cable types.

Intended to speed and simplify the installation of C5ISR [command, control, computers, communications, cyber, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] systems in Army vehicles, SAVE regularizes the size, shape, and physical interfaces (RF, data, power, etc.) for mounting those systems. SAVE joins the CMOSS standards – such as VICTORY, MORA, and OpenVPX – already called out by the

Figure 1 | The eight-slot CMOSS/SOSA enclosure is a powered enclosure aligned to CMOSS/SOSA Technical Standard 1.0. www.militaryembedded.com

One of the key goals of SAVE is to lower the cost of deploying new C5ISR capabilities on combat vehicles. It accomplishes this by minimizing the time and effort of integrating SAVE-compliant systems into SAVE-compliant vehicles by ensuring that systems fit into the same size envelope, use the same mounting holes, and have the same connector types. The standard provides extra cable loops to support adaptation between systems without requiring new wiring.

The SAVE IDD [Interface Description Document] recognizes the need for flexibility, so instead of taking the approach of a rigid military specification, it understands that vehicle and system PMs will sometimes only call out a subset of the SAVE IDD language in formal proposals and contracts as appropriate. The IDD states that “perfect compliance across all vehicles and PMs is not expected” and provides direction for handling those cases where variations are needed.

SAVE specifies ATPD 2407A 2404A Interface Standard Environmental Conditions for Ground Combat Systems and ATPD Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) for U.S. Army Tank and Automotive Vehicle Systems tailored From MIL-STD-464C for vibration, operating temperature, and RF tolerances.

Examples of C5ISR solutions addressed by the SAVE standard include handheld, manpack and small form fit – manpack (HMS-MP) data radio; legacy SINCGARS radios; future CMOSS systems; capability set (CS, ITN) systems; IVAS Mounted Soldier and Nett-Warrior support kits; and robotic systems with manned ground vehicles. SAVE will facilitate the integration of new radios, waveforms, Assured Position Navigation Timing (A-PNT) systems, electronic warfare (EW) systems, and vehicle protective systems (VPS) components and subsystems.

Examples of CMOSS chassis designed to meet SAVE requirements are the CurtissWright CMOSS/SOSA Starter Kit (CSSK), which carries a preintegrated four-slot SWaPoptimized SOSA aligned 3U VPX system combining a VICTORY network module, A-PNT module, single-board computer, and 3U VPX power supply unit; another is the eight-slot CMOSS/SOSA enclosure (Figure 1), a powered enclosure aligned to CMOSS/SOSA Technical Standard 1.0.

Jason DeChiaro is a system architect at Curtiss-Wright.

Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions • https://www.curtisswrightds.com

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

9

DEFENSE TECH WIRE NEWS | TRENDS | DoD SPENDS | CONTRACTS | TECHNOLOGY UPDATES

By Emma Helfrich, Technology Editor

LEO satellite tracking layer to address global hypersonic threats At a recent forum, officials from the Space Development Agency (SDA) asserted that satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO) will make up the tracking layer that will detect hypersonic threats by the weapons’ heat signatures. According to speakers from the SDA, satellites in LEO can detect those dim heat signatures better than satellites in higher orbits. Also, if there are several satellites doing the tracking, getting a geometric fix on a hypersonic threat could be more precise.

The SDA speakers said that the transport layer of satellites would move data from the tracking satellites down to the shooter for a fire-control solution at the Joint All-Domain Command and Figure 1 | A Falcon 9 rocket carrying 49 Starlink satellites into orbit launches from LC-39A at Kennedy Space Center, Florida during early January of 2022.

Control. Those tracking satellites will be engineered to comU.S. Department of Defense photo. municate with the transport satellites via laser optical cross links. Current SDA projections plan that 144 transport layer satellites will begin launching by September 2024, with an additional 28 tracking layer satellites launched in 2024-2025.

Unmanned systems leveraging AI and ML tested by U.S. Navy Central Command U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) is now operationally testing a new unmanned surface vessel (USV) in the Gulf of Aqaba (off the coast of Jordan) as part of a drive to integrate new unmanned systems and artificial intelligence (AI) into U.S. 5th Fleet operations.

NAVCENT launched Exercise “Digital Horizon” and placed a Saildrone Explorer USV [unmanned surface vessel] into the water of the Red Sea for its initial voyage from the Royal Jordanian naval base in Aqaba, Jordan. The Saildrone Explorer is a 23-foot-long, 16-foot-tall USV propelled by wind power and uses a package of solar-powered sensors for establishing situational awareness.

Additionally, says Capt. Michael Brasseur, commander of NAVCENT’s new task force for unmanned systems and AI, the Saildrone fleet leverages machine learning (ML) and AI to enhance maritime domain awareness.

Calidus B-250 aircraft to be equipped with Intellisense Systems modular displays Avionics company Intellisense Systems will supply the large-format primary flight display (PFD) for the Calidus B-250, a light-attack combat and training aircraft. The carbon-fiber B-250 is intended to train users on physical weapons and EO/IR [electro-optical/ infrared] sensors. According to the company, the new cockpit display features optical-design techniques that are intended to provide a brightness and contrast ratio for peak sunlight readability and reduce reflections within the B-250’s bubble canopy.

The LAD–2008 display enables redundant design and a human-machine interface (HMI) in its touch screen and bezel. The displays will come equipped with ­vFusion technology, which is aimed at enabling simultaneous display of video from multiple sources on the aircraft and supports a modular avionics architecture. This technology will also give users in the cockpit picture-inpicture capabilities, windowing, cropping, scaling, and a video-recording output.

10 January/February 2022

Figure 2 | The B-250, a light-attack combat and training aircraft set to carry the Intellisense Systems displays. Calidus photo.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

AI-powered voice and video tech to support NASA’s Artemis 1 mission Lockheed Martin, Amazon, and Cisco have teamed up to integrate human-machine interface technologies into NASA’s Orion spacecraft to provide an opportunity to learn how future astronauts could benefit from far-field voice technology, artificial intelligence (AI), and tablet-based video collaboration.

The Callisto technology demonstration will be integrated into NASA’s Orion spacecraft for the agency’s Artemis I uncrewed mission around the Moon and back to Earth.

Callisto uses Amazon Alexa and Webex by Cisco to test and demonstrate commercial technology for deep space voice, video, and whiteboarding communications. Officials claim that the payload features a custom hardware and software integration developed by engineers from Lockheed Martin, Amazon, and Cisco. The payload also includes technology that enables Alexa to work without an internet connection, and Webex to run on a tablet using NASA’s Deep Space Network.

Figure 3 | Artist’s rendering of the human-machine interface technology in development to supplement the Artemis I mission. Lockheed Martin graphic.

BAE Systems awarded contract to cyber harden and sustain C5ISR systems BAE Systems won a five-year contract, worth up to $137 million, to provide life cycle management and sustainment of the U.S. Navy’s command, control, communications, computers, combat systems, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C5ISR) systems. Under the terms of the contract, the company will also train military personnel on how to operate the C5ISR systems. These systems are built, integrated, and networked with the end goal being to improve military operators’ and decisionmakers’ situational awareness.

AI startup’s situational tech for European defense funded by Spotify co-founder Daniel Ek, the co-founder of audio streaming giant Spotify, has invested 100 million euros (over $133 million) into a Germany-based artificial intelligence (AI) startup called Helsing for the development of battlefield AI. The money for the Helsing stake comes from Ek’s investment company Prima Materia, which he founded in September 2020 to “solve the world’s greatest challenges” and “help society achieve a better future,” according to language on the Prima Materia website.

Navy officials plan that the integrated C5ISR systems will be fielded to military installations across the U.S. and globally, where personnel will then be trained on how to leverage the systems’ full capabilities. As part of this contract, BAE Systems is tasked with post-fielding support and sustainment, including implementing various technical upgrades and cyber hardening; in-service engineering; and logistical support to end users who are onsite at U.S. government facilities.

According to a press release authored by YPOG, the advising legal team for the latest round of funding, the Helsing AI technology is described by the company as a real-time software platform that will be designed to pull in and process data from various onboard sensor systems with the intent to create a unified view of the operating environment. The situational awareness software is aimed at speeding up the decision-making process for the warfighter.

Next-gen avionics computers launched by HENSOLDT HENSOLDT announced it will be launching a family of avionics computers under the company’s CAVION brand that are designed to expand the performance of existing computers for mission control on-board various flying platforms. According to the company, CAVION is based on a HENSOLDT proprietary development of electronic modules that enables the use of multicore processors even in safety-critical areas while securing their aeronautical certification.

Company officials noted the challenging nature of certification of multicore processors in aerospace applications, due to the process flows within these multicore processors being unpredictable. By using the new multicore processor boards from HENSOLDT, the computers of the CAVION family are intended to be more powerful than the previous generation of avionics computers and are available in various modular configurations, according to the release. www.militaryembedded.com

Figure 4 | HENSOLDT graphic.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

11

SPECIAL REPORT

Hypersonic missile detection and countermeasures depend on persistent sensing

By Sally Cole, Senior Editor A key part of deterring, defending, and defeating the threat posed by hypersonic missiles will be advanced global and persistent sensing – the ability to detect and track threats through all phases of flight.

The U.S., China, Russia, and possibly even North Korea now have hypersonic weapon capabilities, which means they all need to develop detection and countermeasures.

12 January/February 2022

Radar for missile/hypersonic defense

This artist’s illustration shows how hypersonic weapons heat up as they accelerate through the atmosphere. Image courtesy of Raytheon.

“Unlike the traditional ballistic missile defense (BMD) system, which was built to defend against ballistic missile threats with a clear and predictable trajectory – akin to throwing a football – the future system architecture must evolve to account for proliferation of unpredictable, survivable, and maneuverable threats that can quickly change course to evade our sensors,” says Erin Kocourek, senior director of Hypersonics Requirements & Capabilities for Raytheon Missiles & Defense (Tucson, Arizona).

Threats today come in the forms of land-based, air-launched, sea-launched, and even submarine-based cruise and ballistic missile threats, including hypersonic missiles. Hypersonics fly at Mach 5 (five times or more than the speed of sound; approximately 3,853 mph) or above within the upper atmosphere, and can maneuver to avoid detection, tracking, and countermeasures.

“Adversary hypersonic missiles are exo-atmospheric maneuvering glide vehicles and can be launched from anywhere,” Kocourek says. “To deter, defend, and defeat the threat, we need advanced global and persistent sensing – the ability to detect and track threats through all phases of flight – from boost to midcourse and through the terminal phase of flight.”

One key strategy, she points out, will be getting eyes on the threat through a distributed sensing architecture of networked sensors to enable full-track custody, data fusion, low latency, and incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) and machine

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

New and emerging threats “demand a systems-of-systems approach that expands our understanding of the full-spectrum threat so we can develop full-spectrum counters that are agile, adaptive, predictive, and effective,” she continues. “We must understand every aspect of the adversary missile threat, including logistics of deploying the launch systems, launch capability/capacity and location, C2, decision-making calculus, and of course the signatures and capability of the missiles themselves.”

Network of distributed sensors This approach will require an architecture of distributed sensors networked together – including those looking at data in cyberspace, space, subsurface, air, land, and sea.

“Enhancing this network of distributed sensors with AI and ML could enable more timely detection, association, prediction, and tracking of adversary actions – expanding the battlespace and enabling more time to maneuver and make informed decisions,” Kocourek says. “This global persistent awareness enables attribution of actions to adversaries, which supports deterrence.”

Raytheon Missiles & Defense produces the U.S. Navy’s SPY-6 family of radars – the most powerful radars being integrated into the fleet – that can detect and track hypersonics. SPY-6 will be the centerpiece of the Navy’s new Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyers, and is slated to be installed or backfitted into seven types of ships.

In December 2021, Raytheon announced Aegis Light Off with SPY-6 (V) 1 was achieved on the first of the Flight IIIs, the future USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG 125).

Raytheon Missiles & Defense is building a radar for the U.S. Army known as the LowerTier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS). The name of the radar it’s building for the U.S. Army’s Lower-Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor Program is “GhostEye.” When the first LTAMDS are delivered to the Army later in 2022 for testing, these will be the latest-generation air and missile-defense radars, providing capability against proliferating and increasing threats, such as high-speed maneuvering threats. (Figure 1.) learning (ML) for more timely decisionmaking capabilities.

“Networked and distributed sensors from space to ground will create an improved threat picture,” she explains.

“We need to remain focused on the command and control (C2) capability that will enable execution of this advanced mission. A Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) type of capability is required for multidomain sensing.”

Raytheon Missile & Defense’s modern sensors are being built to execute the mission objectives of JADC2. “Our software-defined apertures, as we’re calling modern sensors, can perform multiple missions near-simultaneously within any domain,” Kocourek says. “That means the hardware is ready to accommodate distributed sensing and multiple missions to tie sensors to shooters.” www.militaryembedded.com

Figure 1 | The Army is looking to field a new Lower Tier Air and Missile Defense Sensor (LTAMDS) by fiscal year 2022. The new IBCS [Integrated Battle Command System]-networked device is designed to provide the Army with a 360-degree view of the battlespace. The LTAMDS also aims to defeat advanced threats, to include hypersonic weapons. (Photo courtesy of Raytheon.)

Hypersonic basics Many hypersonic-flight technical challenges have been overcome; one major one – protecting electronics, avionics, and payloads from extreme heat – has now been realized. “We’re developing new materials, propellants, manufacturing processes, and aerodynamic shapes to withstand the high speeds and extreme temperatures and managing propulsion, thermal-protection systems, avionics, and sensing flying at hypersonic speeds,” Kocourek says.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

13

SPECIAL REPORT Hypersonic weapons require vast amounts of energy, highly maneuverable missiles, and accurate low-latency communications to counter erratic flight patterns and counter­measures or address time-sensitive targets. “Three hundred sixty-degree sensing and overhead persistent sensing (space layer) is imperative for resiliency and mission effectiveness,” she adds. “The ‘seeker’ technology is the weapon’s ‘eyes.’

Datalinks or comms from the sensing layer reduce latency.”

As you can imagine, fitting a lot of technologies into a small package is a challenge.

“Think of how smart devices have changed our lives,” Kocourek notes. “They couple cameras, phones, web services, messaging, etc., into one small device. We’re doing the same with hypersonic weapons to change the way we address the threat.”

Closing the gap The main technology hurdles for developing hypersonics center around operationalizing it. The technology itself has existed for decades, but it’s expensive and it didn’t necessarily make sense to pursue it in the past.

“About 10 years ago, our peers made a dedicated push to develop the technology.

And the last couple of years we’ve seen the results in their hypersonic flight testing, which are stunning. The Chinese have tested hundreds of hypersonic missiles,” she adds. “They have funded tens of thousands of advanced degrees within the discipline, while the U.S. continues to be challenged with developing our STEM/engineering workforce in numbers. The U.S. testing is a fraction of that of our peers. We must increase testing and quickly move toward full rate production.”

The U.S. is learning a lot from other countries’ missile tests and working to close that gap. These efforts include investing in digital engineering to speed innovation plus leveraging digital engineering to create models and simulations of the kill chain to demonstrate the value of advancing the entire layered system of terrestrial sensors, C2, and space sensors and effectors to detect and engage advanced threats.

“Developing hypersonic weapons quickly requires digital engineering technologies, a robust supply chain, and highly skilled human resources,” Kocourek says.

The design and development of hypersonic technologies demands investment in new infrastructure and people with skillsets ranging from high-speed flight engineering to digital tech and mathematics.

“We also invest in training to ensure our workforce is at the cutting edge of R&D and innovation – working with a wide network of universities, industry peers, allied countries, and the U.S. administration to advance the science behind hypersonic technologies,” she says. “By working together, we can share knowledge, funding, infrastructure, and human resources needed to address current and future global threats.

More synergies, funding in STEM education, and research partnerships are needed to advance hypersonic capability.”

Operationalizing hypersonics Operationalizing advanced technology – taking technology out of labs and delivering it to the warfighter – “is cool, and what’s even cooler is the pride and sense of accomplishment you see in the eyes of the people working on this mission,” Kocourek says.

During the initial successful flight test of a hypersonic airbreathing weapon concept (HAWC) in September 2021, “there were no words to describe the comradery, excitement, and drive to keep going. It was like a ‘landing on the moon’ moment,” she adds. “Seeing people want to come together every day to solve hard problems with a shared purpose is cool … to say the least.

14 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

Radar for missile/hypersonic defense When the first LTAMDS are delivered to the Army later in 2022 for testing, these will be the latest-generation air and missile-defense radars, providing capability against pro­liferating and increasing threats, such as high-speed maneuvering threats.

It is more than inspiring. It drives action and positive momentum toward something far greater than any individual – making history is cool.”

Why hypersonics?

What can hypersonic weapons do that ballistic missiles can’t? “Unlike traditional ballistic missiles, hypersonic missiles are highly maneuverable during flight, which makes these weapons difficult to detect and track,” Kocourek says. “The threat from our adversaries isn’t a theoretical challenge – it’s a reality today. They’re testing multiple hypersonic weapons and at greater frequency than the U.S.” This fact makes it critical for the U.S. and allies to continue to innovate in breakthrough hypersonic technologies to maintain a strong force-projection capability against current and future global threats.

“The U.S. is committed to accelerating the fielding of hypersonic systems,” Kocourek notes. “This is evident by the ongoing bipartisan support and associated budget to continue hypersonic research, development, and testing.

We’ve had hypersonic technology for decades, and we’re now focused on the development and are ramping up our testing frequency.”

The 2022 budget request for hypersonic research shows that the government is serious: The U.S. Department of Defense request was $3.8 billion. MES www.militaryembedded.com

Radar Acquisition, Processing and Display

RADAR ACQUISITION

TRACKING & FUSION

DISPLAY APPLICATIONS

Interface to radars using analogue signals or network interfaces with ASTERIX or proprietary standards. Full Windows/ Linux SDK support available for over 75 radar types.

Target tracking and autoacquisition from 2D or 3D primary or IFF radars with output in standard ASTERIX CAT-48 or CAT-10 formats with optional fusion or AIS or ADS-B.

Radar visualization applications for USVs, air defense, C2, maritime security and ARPA. Readyto-run applications or development frameworks for custom applications.

enquiries@cambridgepixel.com T: +44 1763 852749 Cambridge Pixel Ltd. Represented in the US and Canada by: EIZO Rugged Systems, Orlando, Florida T: 407 262 7100 spxsales@eizo.com

Use code MES22RCT to claim a free copy of Radar Coverage Tool

MIL TECH TRENDS

Leveraging SOSA for radar applications

Leveraging the Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) for radar applications

By Nicholas Borton With the highly anticipated release of Version 1.0 of the Sensor Open Systems Architecture Technical Standard in September 2021, there are more and more Requests for Information and contracts asking specifically for SOSA. The SOSA Technical Standard is targeting five sensor modalities: electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR), electronic warfare (EW), radar, and signals intelligence (SIGINT). What does the first version of the SOSA Technical Standard have to offer a system designer? Specifically, how can SOSA be applied to radar systems?

Radars are critical tools to armed forces for situational awareness. Potential uses include a unmanned aerial system (UAS) carrying a synthetic aperture radar (SAR), surveillance on a vessel at sea, or precision target acquisition.

As the various threats and needs of the warfighter keep increasing, so does the

16 January/February 2022

need to develop ever more advanced radars with an increasing list of capabilities. The Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) for system development provides a path to get warfighters the equipment they need to meet these requirements. Adhering to the MOSA ecosystem enables: › › › ›

Getting sensors to the field sooner to counter emerging threats Reducing integration time and costs Reaching higher technology readiness levels faster Enabling competition for capabilities and technology

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

As the Sensor Open Systems Archi­tec­ture (SOSA) is part of the MOSA ecosystem, there is a lot of push to develop radar systems with it. With the stringent performance requirements radars need to meet, can it be done within the bounds of a modular open architecture like SOSA? Can the MOSA benefits be capitalized on while still meeting performance needs with SOSA? In fact, SOSA can indeed enable performance while simultaneously delivering the MOSA benefits.

Basic radar with SOSA V1.0 As SOSA does not define a system per se, rather components to build a system with, one of the first questions is “How much of the system should be SOSA?” Often the answer to this is “As much as possible.” Regardless of the answer, this question needs to be revisited again and again throughout the design process.

Central to the SOSA Technical Standard are the SOSA modules. Although many module interfaces are not fully standardized yet, planning for how they will manifest in the SOSA infrastructure will pay future dividends. SOSA is split into two major sections of standardization which is shown in the SOSA taxonomy in Figure 1.

Dealing with custom or non-SOSA components When determining “how much of the system should be SOSA,” it is important to first consider which SOSA modules might eventually be used. Using module boundaries, basing where a system is or is not SOSA will help enable uses of future versions of SOSA and capitalize on the SOSA marketplace. To gain a sense of where to make that break, looking at the high-level data flow diagram from V1.0 of the Technical Standard can help.

(Figure 2.)

Whether other standards are going to be used needs to be weighed when asking “how much SOSA.” Alternate standards might be needed for many reasons, most commonly when there will be reuse of a system or an existing system upgrade. These other standards might include Common Open Architecture Radar www.militaryembedded.com

Sensor Component

SOSA Module

Module 1.1

Module 3.1

Module 1.2

Module 3.2

Module 2.3

Module 3.3

Module 6.7

Hardware Element

Module 6.8

…

Module 6.9

Module 3.4

Module 2.4

SOSA Infrastructure

Chassis

Plug-In Card

Connectors

Module 6.10

Aperture

Mount

Connectors

Chassis Mgr.

Mount

Backplane

Run-time Environment

Interaction Infrastructure

Operating System

Transport API

Container Engine

Interaction Binding

Hypervisor Power Supply

Figure 1 | The SOSA taxonomy shows the two major sections of standardization. Courtesy Technical Standard for SOSA Reference Architecture, Edition 1.0, The Open Group.

SOSA Sensor Management 1.1: System Manager

1.2: Task Manager

System Monitoring and Control

6.9: Host Platform

Platform C2

Platform

Sensor Sensor Tasking Interface (HPI) SOSA Taxonomy Products (Pg. 56, Technical Standard for SOSA™ Reference Architecture, Edition 1.0) State Control Config Health Monitoring

Capabilities Task Scheduling Resource Management Task Monitoring

Selected Format from Standard Formats (i.e., JIODS 4.2, etc.)

Processed Data

Processing Chain/Data Path Transmission/Reception

Process Signals/Targets

Emission 2.4: Emitter/ Collector

2.3: ConditionerReceiver-Exciter

RF Digital Data

Collection

System Support Services

Data

6.2: Encryptor/ Decryptor

3.1: Signal/Object Detector/Extractor

Convey

3.2: Signal/Object Characterizer

Characterizations

3.3: Image Pre-processor

Time Data Local Oscillator Frequency 6.7: Time and Frequency

Radar Imagery

5.1: Reporting Services

Relative Pointing Info Platform Nav

6.6: Nav Data

Figure 2 | Pictured is the high-level data flow of the SOSA Technical Standard. Courtesy Technical Standard for SOSA Reference Architecture, Edition 1.0, The Open Group.

Program Specification (COARPS) and Fires Radar Open System Technologies (FROST).

Depending on the use case, either a clean break would need to be made between the SOSA components and the other architectures on a SOSA module boundary, or the other architectures’ components be encapsulated Figure 4.3-1: SvcV-2: could Top-Level SOSA Serviceinside a SOSA module’s boundaries.

Resource Flow Description for Edition 1.0 As the front end of a radar provides the system with most of its mission-critical performance characteristics, it makes sense that it is most likely to be the custom portion of the sensor. From a SOSA standpoint, the front end is constrained to the 2.4 and 2.3 modules. In many radar systems, the very low-latency constraints tend to occur in the front end. Low probability of intercept (LPI) and low probability of detect (LPD) are prime examples of low-latency-inducing requirements.

Tight requirements in dwell scheduling and execution may require a large amount of hardware interconnected in a way that prevents a break between the 2.4 and 2.3 SOSA modules (depicted in Top-Level SOSA Services Context Description diagram, Figure 3, next page). If a highly custom front end is needed, maintaining the 2.3 receiver exciter module boundary and the SOSA aperture and electro-mechanical interface will enable full capitalization on SOSA for the rest of the system.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

17

MIL TECH TRENDS

Leveraging SOSA for radar applications

Balancing today’s needs against future functionality and technology insertions As the designer moves past the front-end modules into the rest of the processing chain, command and control (C2), and the support modules, there is more of an ability to embrace the SOSA technical standard. Even in the case where size, weight, and power (SWaP) concerns may initially prevent SOSA adoption, adherence to the SOSA standard now will enable rapid tech insertion when new technology with a reduced SWaP becomes available.

Radar back-end processing may be demanding in terms of overall throughput, or complexity of algorithms, but it does not typically have the same real time and latency requirements of the front end. Here we are typically dealing in full dwell, or possibly scan SOSA Sensor System

SOSA Sensor Management 1.1: System Manager

Transmission/Reception 2.4: Emitter/ Collector

6.1: Security Services

2.3: ConditionerReceiverExciter

6.2: Encryptor/ Decryptor

1.2: Task Manager

Process Signals/Targets

Analyze/Exploit

3.1: Signal/Object Detector and Extractor

3.2: Signal/Object Characterizer

4.1: External Data Ingestor

4.2: Encoded Data Extractor

3.3: Image Pre-processor

3.4: Tracker

4.3: Situation Assessor

4.4: Impact Assessor and Responder

6.3: Guard/ Cross-Domain Service

6.4: Network Subsystem

6.5: Calibration Service

6.6: Nav Data Service

6.7: Time & Frequency Service

Convey 4.6: Storage/ Retrieval Manager

6.8:

Compressor/ Decompressor

5.1: Reporting Services

6.9: Host Platform Interface

timelines, which are much larger than the pulse to pulse (or even intra-pulse) deadlines the front end must cope with.

Here the possibility of broadly embracing the Ethernet-centric SOSA inter-module infrastructure is reasonable.

SOSA design patterns are ways in which sensor functionality can be realized through SOSA infrastructure implementations. The focus on the design pattern is on the level of severability they provide, and therefore differing levels of independence from the surrounding system. The design patterns impact how functionality upgrades and technology insertions occur.

The various software patterns provide the most independence. The software patterns can be moved to any piece of hardware which is running a compliant SOSA run-time environment.

That could be a SOSA PIC [programmable interface controller] with an x86 processor onboard or an FPGA SoC

6.10: Power

Support System Operation

Figure 3 | Shown is the Top-Level SOSA Services Context Description. Courtesy Technical Standard for SOSA Reference Architecture, Edition 1.0, The Open Group.

AS 9100D / ISO 9001:2015 CERTIFIED

THE

Figure 4.2-1: SvcV-1 Top-Level SOSA Services Context Description Table 4.2-1: SvcV-1 Module Descriptions

PHALANX II: THE ULTIMATE NAS Supports AES-256 and FIPS140-2 encryption

The McHale Report, by mil-embedded.com Editorial Director John McHale, covers technology and procurement trends in the defense electronics community.

Utilizing two removable SSDs, the Phalanx II is a rugged Small Form Factor (SSF) Network Attached Storage (NAS) file server designed for manned and unmanned airborne, undersea and ground mobile applications. w w w . p h e n x i n t . c o m

ARCHIVED MCHALE REPORTS AVAILABLE AT:

https://militaryembedded.com/newsletters/the-mchale-report

18 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS PHX_OSP_3.375_4.875.indd

1

www.militaryembedded.com 1/22/18 11:36 AM

[field-programmable gate array systemon-chip] whose Arm cores are hosting a run-time environment.

Of the hardware patterns, either a single PIC or box-/chassis-level implementation would provide the next level of independence. In these instances, the functionality is tightly coupled to the hardware in question. To move that piece of functionality, or add new functionality in its place, the old hardware needs to be removed and new hardware which matches the backplane or milcircular connector interfaces must be installed in its place. With the standardization which SOSA provides, finding a hardware solution already on the market is very likely.

The last major hardware pattern is the multiple PIC implementation. This is typically the most restrictive version of functionality from a reuse standpoint.

With multiple PICs there are multiple interfaces to match up, but beyond just matching those interfaces, there must also be the proper interconnections between those multiple PICs. This pattern may have some common use cases such as an SBC [single board computer] paired with a GPU. Due to the popularity of the specific pattern, they might not be as restrictive as at first glance.

SOSA V1.0 provides a handful of tools based on standardized interfaces for building radars. These standardized interfaces provide many benefits to the development and sustainment of radars. It’s important to begin with the end in mind, as pre-planning for future upgrades and sustainment and making those components SOSA compatible will provide enduring threat-matched capabilities and cost savings. MES Nicholas Borton is a machine intelligence hardware architect at SRC, Inc. and vice chair of the SOSA Steering Committee.

Borton has worked at SRC for more than 17 years and is currently conducting research in edge-machine-learning to maximize the use of size, weight, power, and cost, in addition to furthering open standards adoption at SRC. Borton earned his bachelor’s degrees in both computer engineering and electrical engineering from Clarkson University.

SRC Inc. • https://www.srcinc.com/

Award-Winning Development Solutions

Sustainment considerations Strongly correlated with functionality and technology insertions are sustainment considerations.

As much as technology insertions are reliant on the SOSA interfaces to replace an old technology with a new one, these same interfaces are useful from a sustainment standpoint. The best of both worlds occurs when a planned technology insertion to keep pace with a threat also solves an obsolescence issue.

To enable that best-of-both-worlds scenario, a plan needs to be in place to upgrade SOSA components in a system.

When reuse is leveraged properly, SOSA can enable merging among different supply chains as well. This can also be coupled with the rolling upgrades of SOSA components as well. When more sensor systems are reusing the same SOSA components, and team up for upgrades, the savings continue to multiply. www.militaryembedded.com

Elma’s new CompacFrames are innovative lightweight platforms for card or system development based on open standards like VPX or aligned to SOSA™.

With you at every stage!

Learn More

Elma Electronic Inc.

elma.com

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

19

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

Electronic warfare systems demand multifunctionality and integration in RF and microwave designs

By Emma Helfrich, Technology Editor Radio frequency (RF) and microwave technology used in the military is everevolving and necessarily acclimating to the congested digital battlefield. These solutions need to be fluent in the language of electronic warfare (EW). Demands for multifunctionality, digitization, and increased sensitivity are pushing designers to add these capabilities that warfighters require when translating electronic noise into actionable information.

20 January/February 2022

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

When the military mission calls for gathering and interpreting signals, war­ fighters are only as smart as their machines. Twenty-first century combat frequently occurs in a command center, ground-control station, or behind a screen just as often as it does on a physical battleground, making it paramount that the U.S. military be equipped with robust radio frequency (RF) and microwave solutions.

Radars that can see ahead farther than a human ever could and electronic warfare (EW) systems that can intelligently and efficiently jam or spoof an incoming threat are critical to maintaining superiority over the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS). Companies that engineer electronics for these domains are making strides in RF and microwave innovation to better position U.S. armed forces against digital threats.

It comes down to a matter of dynamic range, or what can be described as the ability to see and decipher smaller perhaps more significant signals while in the presence of larger ones. In theaters of war, where both allies and adversaries are always emitting electromagnetic noise, it becomes critical that radar and EW capabilities can quickly decipher whether the interference is friendly or threatening.

While much of a system’s architecture depends on mission requirements, industry officials are touting methodologies like direct digitization as an enabler for size, weight, power, and cost (SWaP-C) optimization; cognitive EW; and modified commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) reuse as promising advancements for RF and microwave technology.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

Look for us at…

VIRTUAL CONFERENCE MAR 21— 24, 2022

… and find out more about Wolf rugged VPX SOSA™ aligned Ampere and Xavier boards

VPX3U-A4500E-VO 2022 Ampere The Best Tactical Solution

HPEC GPU++ Payload

SWaP-C Optimal

NVIDIA RTX™ A4500 17.66 TFLOPs peak 512 GB/s peak NVIDIA Ampere architecture 1.8x perf/slot ECC memory increased reliability

Requirements dictate COTS versus custom When comparing the requirements for a radar or EW system, military electronics manufacturers use overall mission architecture to aid in deciding whether a COTS-based product should be used in place of a fully custom capability. With RF and microwave, ensuring that the products are operating on military frequencies is critical.

“Very few full solutions are COTS,” says Tony Mitchell, vice president of advanced technology and strategy for CAES (Arling­ton, Virginia). (Figure 1). “Military operations

“I LOVE THIS NVIDIA CONFERENCE AND ABSOLUTELY RECOMMEND IT. ATTEND AND LEARN HOW TO LEVERAGE NVIDIA SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE INTO SUPERIOR DEPLOYABLE SOSA AND OPENCOTS SOLUTIONS” GREG MAYNARD

CTO, Wolf Advanced Technology

Attend the GTC Webinar: Next Generation WOLF Products Powered by NVIDIA®

5888 CUDA® 8.6 cores 184 3rd Gen tensor cores 16GB GDDR6 Provides maximum advantage to field applications. The Wolf A4500E is precisely optimized for SOSA 3U VPX with new features to win at the edge.

Contact us and learn more about the power, performance, capabilities, and reliability for next generation EW, ISR and autonomy applications.

wolf.ca (905) 852-1163

Figure 1 | CAES photo depicting the single3U-slot wideband up/down converter with integrated local oscillator and preselection designed for RF-based EW applications. www.militaryembedded.com

Next level optimization tunable SWaP-C

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022 M&A WOLF GTC + 1448 TwoThirds Page Ad v3.0.indd 1

21

2022-01-10 5:05 PM

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

avoid the commercial spectrum, which means defense systems are typically custom products. Components can be COTS, but modules, boards, and subsystems tend to be custom. The different bands of operation drive different filters and the environmental demands of government systems can be more strenuous.”

Mitchell goes on to assert that it is this fact that makes modified COTS reuse so pivotal, thereby inspiring U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)-led efforts to push for commercial investment in new technologies such as direct digitization and distributed processing architectures. However, it remains important to consider similarities and differences in radar and EW applications.

“By and large, noise has the same effect in both types of applications,” says Chuck Davis, director of sales and business development for the Crane Aerospace and Electronics microwave group (Chandler, Arizona). “EW systems have to operate over a much wider frequency range than radar systems. So, additional challenges and complexities are added to the requirements for an EW system. They have to have multiple channels and an ability to discern a valid signal from an interfering signal.”

Even with RF and microwave system design being heavily dictated by the needs of the end user, manufacturers are still supporting standard form factors in RF and microwave electronics design. Interoperability is a widely held DoD goal, especially when operating on the spectrum, and radar and EW commonalities are helping to ease the design process.

“Requirements are converging,” Mitchell says. “Radar systems have traditionally been used for detection, tracking, and target identification. Active electronically steered arrays (AESA) are phased-array antennas which enable the radio waves to be steered and pointed in different directions without moving the antenna, which allows for the design and implementation of smaller apertures. Modern radar systems combine transmit and receive functions which enables them to be more agile and to perform both traditional radar and EW functions.”

The trajectory of RF and microwave technology is projected to become far more symbiotic than it has been in the past, with radar and EW operationalities growing more integrated and digitized with each advancement. As RF and microwave capabilities are pushed further into the digital realm, however, it’s necessary to note that it will come at a cost.

SWaP-C optimization, with an emphasis on “C” “We’re seeing reduced SWaP trends all of the time as we encounter new opportunities to propose and participate,” Davis says. “One of the technologies that we’re employing in some of our integrated assemblies is what we call our Multi-Mix technology (Figure 2). That’s an integrated RF and microwave technology that allows for stacking of electronic features within a circuit board, so that allows you to occupy less surface area within a configuration. We also have specialized heat-removal technology that we can build into that approach to continue to enhance that small packaging and those dimensions.”

Davis also adds that Crane is utilizing both low-noise technology and high levels of integration in hopes of delivering complex systems in small spaces to fit existing platforms. With this methodology, larger numbers of capability could be deployed in a small space. Concurrently, digitization efforts are producing different kinds of power challenges.

“We’re making the RF section simpler, but we’re making the digital signal processing and the power burn a problem,” says Benjamin Annino, systems and applications director of aerospace, defense, and RF products for Analog Devices (Wilmington,

22 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

Figure 2 | Crane Aerospace and Electronics image depicting the company’s RF converter miniaturization using its Multi-Mix technology that features a miniature footprint but is flexible and high-performance.

Massachusetts). “That’s a challenge we need to overcome. When you look at a complete radar and EW signal chain, you have bottlenecks. From a power standpoint and size standpoint, the FPGA tends to be a major offender.”

High-performance FPGAs skew on the larger side and consume a significant amount of a system’s power budget, so manufactures like Analog Devices are looking at ways to pull the digital signal processing away from the FPGA and onto high-speed data converters to better realize the power benefits. But powerful and small also often means cost pressure.

“In the SWaP-C conversation, cost is often forgotten,” says Mitchell. “But in certain systems, smaller SWaP-C drives cost up. Keeping cost down, while designing and manufacturing for smaller scale systems and components, is a challenge being attacked by advanced packaging techniques. RF MMICs [monolithic microwave integrated circuits] are becoming commonplace in military radar and EW systems.”

Manufacturers have also been trying to address RF and microwave SWaP concerns by pushing electronics closer to the antenna. In these scenarios, power and cooling capabilities can vary depending on the platform. www.militaryembedded.com

Figure 3 | Mercury Systems photo of the RFM3202 SOSA aligned microwave transceiver with a compact design to better enable smaller, lighter platforms to mitigate EW threats.

“One of the things that I’d say has pivoted over the last decade is the amount of electronics that are now getting very close to the aperture,” says Bill Conley, chief technology officer for Mercury Systems (Andover, Massachusetts). “And it’s one thing when you’re at the center fuselage of an aircraft or you’re below deck in a ship, you generally have a lot of power, and you have a lot of cooling available to you. Certainly not infinite, but substantial in comparison the environment that you’re operating in. When you’re out right next to the aperture is much more challenging from a SWaP-C standpoint, so the thermal side is critical.” (Figure 3.)

The emergence of DoD cross-domain programs like Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) makes addressing these SWaP concerns paramount. The sheer amount of radar and EW systems that is soon set to operate on the EMS will ask a lot of RF and microwave electronics.

RF and microwave in a joint domain While standardization and DoD goals surrounding common architectures and components across the EMS are predicted to aid in joint-domain programs, electronics companies are also putting their money on establishing better control over waveforms.

VPX3U-RTX5000E -SWITCH

VPX3U-RTX5000E COAX-CV

10Gb LAN PCIe Gen-4 + GPGPU

PCIe Gen-4 Switch AV67.3 - SDI / RS-170

Fabric Switch + HPEC GPU

HPEC GPU + Sensor Payload

NVIDIA RTX™ 5000 Compute 8x 10GBASE-KR 24x PCIe Gen4

NVIDIA Turing™ RTX™ 5000 10.9 TFLOPs peak 448 GB/s peak

Extensive PCIe Topology optional 9th LAN optional front panel PCIe

Improved EW/ISR accuracy / efficiency powered by NVIDIA

Tunable module power optional min power GPU

SOSA™ aligned 14.6.11/13 slot profile

GPUDirect - sensor to GPU SOSA™ aligned 14.4.15 slot profile 3072 CUDA® cores 384 Tensor cores 16GB GDDR6 Reduce slot count, simplify system architectures, and optimize the OpenCOTS system. The tunable HPEC GPU adds the compute processing needed for the tactical edge while addressing the fabric switching requirements of larger systems.

“We are involved in the EW side in building systems that help to jam and increase the noise in the environment,” Conley says. “In the case of JADC2 – a fully networked force – what that also means is that we’re going to have a variety of networks and a variety of sensors that www.militaryembedded.com

Drive SDI and RS-170 outputs without IO panel circuitry on coaxial ANSI/VITA 67.3 cabling 3072 CUDA® cores 384 Tensor cores 16GB GDDR6

Integrate, demonstrate, deploy and upgrade modules, sensors efficiently with SOSA and AV67.3 coaxial connections.

Tune power and PCI Express topologies to reduce slot count and increase overall system efficiency and deploy excellent GPGPU CUDA, AI, autonomy for EW, ISR and data processing.

wolf.ca (905) 852-1163

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022 M&A WOLF 134S + 1349 TwoThirds Page Ad v3.0.indd 1

23

2022-01-10 5:05 PM

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

will be soaking up all this energy in and through the EMS, so we have to make sure we don’t put bad data in front of one of our own commanders.” (Figure 4.)

Wideband is predicted to be a significant facilitator in multidomain operations, considering the multitude of waveforms that require collecting so the warfighter can then more effectively engage in the observe, orient, decide, and act (OODA) loop.

“There’s a desire to take dedicated systems that were federated but responsible for one function in the system and converging them into a single platform,” Annino says.

“The wideband RF allows you to do multiband systems, so maybe instead of having a dedicated C-band radar, you could have a radar capable of L, S, C, X-band all in a single platform, and the RF would be capable of that. That allows for cross-domain compatibility.”

From a digital standpoint, Annino touts wideband data converters. Industry is looking at such solutions to enable simultaneous observation of multiple frequency channels that may all be doing something different on the EMS. The ability to split up an other­ wise busy spectrum and process it for separate functions could be key in enabling multidomain efforts.

“You need the ability to be able to give an adversary something that causes them to pause or to make bad decisions because what they are observing and how they think something is going to happen turns out to be incorrect,” Conley says. “If we then ask what technology would be required to do that, we have to acknowledge that no one in modern combat has only one single sensor. There are multiple radars, cameras, and infrared systems that will make it a multidomain fight in some shape or form. With that in mind, how do you solve not just one problem but multiple at the same time?”

The answer may be artificial intelligence (AI). While wideband RF and microwave technologies could enable streamlined multidomain access to EMS data, managing and optimizing newfound resources becomes an entirely different challenge that AI and machine learning (ML) has the potential to address.

Using AI to power radar and EW systems “Wideband direct sampling with ‘edge’ processing, at or near the aperture, will enable systems to deploy AI for signal discrimination and low-latency EW response while also executing traditional radar, SIGINT [signals intelligence], and ELINT [electronics intelligence] missions,” CAES’s Mitchell says.

Efficiently and accurately executing tasks that may be cumbersome or strenuous on a human operator is what AI and ML algorithms do best. In the radar and EW arenas, AI is positioned as an enabler for timely access to actionable information.

Figure 4 | The Mercury Systems SCFE6931 is an OpenVPX heterogeneous processing module designed for high performance and easier system integration.

24 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

Very few full solutions are COTS,” says Tony Mitchell, vice president of advanced technology and strategy for CAES (Arlington, Virginia).

“Military operations avoid the commercial spectrum, which means defense systems are typically custom products.

Components can be COTS, but modules, boards, and subsystems tend to be custom.”

“AI plays a role in many applications, including cognitive EW,” Mitchell says.

“CAES has developed several AI algorithms for inferencing and sensor fusion.

Cognitive EW must be able to react to threats in real time without reliance on database look-up tables. The cognitive EW system must learn during the mission and react appropriately. Progress is being made, and we see AI enabling quick decision-making on the battlefield, which will be critical in future conflicts.”

What stands in the way isn’t lack of funding or technological hindrances, but rather building trust between human and machine. Once the RF and microwave data has been observed, analyzed, and put in front of the warfighter, how will the ethics be established for the decisions that follow?

“The challenge with the EMS is that there are all of those different signals out there,” Conley says. “Finding a needle in a haystack isn’t that hard if you give me a metal detector but finding a specific needle in a pile of needles is not an easy feat. That’s what we’re asking of our EW systems today. With that in mind, anything you can do that automates that signal processing very quickly can help you identify when something is behaving in a threatening way.” MES www.militaryembedded.com

VPX3U-RTX5000E -VO

VPX3U-XAVIER CX6-SBC/HPC

VPX6U-RTX5000E DUAL-VO

NVIDIA Turing™

Xavier AGXi, 10/40/100GbE 4 port 16x PCIe Gen-4

NVIDIA® NVLink® 32 Lane PCI Express

HPEC GPU Payload SOSA™ Aligned

NVIDIA with ARMSBC or Payload Profile

NVIDIA RTX™ 5000 10.9 TFLOPs peak 448 GB/s peak

8-core Xavier SoC with ARM64 + 512 CUDA cores : 32 TOPs 32GB LPDDR4 : 137 GB/s

Enhanced PCIe support x8, x4+x4, x4

Standalone - no CPU required

SOSA™ aligned 14.6.11/13 slot profile

Module power configurable from 50W 3072 CUDA® 6.1 cores 384 tensor cores 16GB GDDR6

Accelerate EW, ISR, autonomy, synthetic vision, sensor fusion, encoding and reduce cognitive overload at the tactical edge.

Tune power and PCI Express topologies to reduce slot count and increase overall system efficiency.

wolf.ca M&A WOLF 1348 + 12T0 + 2348 FullPage Ad v3.0.indd 1

100GbE and x16 PCI Express Gen-4 to the backplane SOSA™ aligned 14.6.11/13, 14.2.16 slot profiles Optional SBC I/O + WOLF FGX for SDI / CVBS Standalone HPEC processing without requiring an SBC allows, a smaller system, and sensors connect direct to the GPU processor with GPUDirect.

Securely connect and drive the highest data rate VPX backplane fabrics to control or share data between other Xavier modules, Payloads or sensors and optimize software execution with the Linux Jetpack BSP ecosystem.

HPEC DUAL GPU Payload + Graphics 2x NVIDIA RTX™ 5000 21.8 TFLOPs peak 896 GB/s peak NVLink® 2.0 50 GB/s GPU to GPU SOSA™ aligned DisplayPort 10.6.3/4 slot profile Module power configurable 80 - 300W 6144 CUDA® cores 768 Tensor cores 32GB GDDR6 Dual GPU configuration with NVLink provides a new way to process large sensor and data arrays. At 50 GB/s, independent GPUs operate as one. This reduces bandwidth congestion and improves efficiency and SWaP across the backplane with the highest HPEC available in 6U VPX today.

Smaller SWaP-C, single GPU versions available.

+1 (905) 852-1163

2022-01-10 5:07 PM

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

Zero trust for military embedded systems

By Richard Jaenicke

A zero-trust security posture assumes every user and device is untrusted, even if it is located within the protected perimeter of the local network. The concepts of such perimeterless security have been around for more than a decade, including the “black core” in the architectural vision of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Global Information Grid. Integrators of embedded systems who must have the highest levels of security for such applications as electronic warfare (EW) warning systems can layer higher-level security – such as advanced analytics – atop the embedded computer’s real-time operating system (RTOS) to complete the zero-trust architecture.

26 January/February 2022

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

In the commercial world, Google was one of the first companies to implement such a perimeterless security with their BeyondCorp security model starting in 2009. Yet, until recently, the military has been slow to adopt and implement zero-trust architectures.

All that changed in early 2021. In February, the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) published the Department of Defense (DoD) Zero Trust Reference Architecture1. Two months later, the DoD Chief Information Security Officer, David McKeown, described plans to create a zero-trust portfolio management office that would provide critical centralization and orchestration for the department’s move toward the advanced cybersecurity architecture2. Then in May 2021, Executive Order 140281 on improving the nation’s cybersecurity3 directed each federal agency, including each military department, to develop a plan to implement zero-trust architecture.

The DoD program often cited as designed for zero trust from the beginning is the Air Force’s Cloud One program: Even though that example is a cloud hosting service, zero trust can also apply to military embedded systems. From one viewpoint, an embedded system can be thought of as an appliance on a larger network. Consequently, hardening the embedded system increases the overall security of the network. From another viewpoint, military embedded systems with high functionality often have an internal network connecting various subsystems and can implement a broad set of zero-trust concepts.

Zero-trust motivation The motivation for implementing a zero-trust architecture stems from the increase in network breaches for both public and private enterprises. Traditional cybersecurity architectures attempt to establish and defend a network

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

perimeter around a trusted computing environment using multiple layers of loosely connected security technologies. Contemporary threat actors, ranging from cybercriminals to state-funded hackers, have demonstrated the ability to breach the network perimeter defenses. At that point, they are free to move laterally over the network to other systems and gain largely unfettered access to systems and the data and algorithms contained within.

Beyond being susceptible to external threat actors, perimeter defenses do not protect well against internal threats (Figure 1). Malicious insiders can carry out fraud, theft of data and intellectual property (IP), and sabotage, which can include modifying or disabling functions, installing malware, and creating back doors.

A zero-trust approach shifts the emphasis from the perimeter of a network to the discrete applications and services within a network, building more specific access controls to those specific resources.

Those access controls match the identity of users and devices to authorizations associated with those users and devices to ensure access is granted appropriately and securely4.

Security environment in military embedded systems Most modern embedded systems are connected to a network, making them vulnerable to attack. This increasingly applies to military embedded systems, such as connecting to a cloud for data analysis or downloading new waveforms while on a mission. In addition to network-based attacks, there are also attacks during maintenance and insider attacks, including supply-chain attacks. Yet many embedded systems have only loose security postures, primarily because of the perceived cost to implement stricter security. When security is implemented, it is almost always perimeter-based security at the edge of the embedded system. That can be as simple as a user ID/password combination that can grant broad admin-level privileges or something slightly more sophisticated like a firewall. Embedded systems can benefit from a zero-trust architecture, but they have two significant differences from enterprise environments that impact the security solution. www.militaryembedded.com

Figure 1 | A perimeter defense does not protect well against stolen credentials or insider threats and is also vulnerable to sophisticated hackers.

The first big difference is that embedded systems have a stable set of subjects (applications), devices (embedded processors), and communication paths. Adding new applications or devices is rare, and even upgrading applications or replacing failed devices happens infrequently. The result is that the system integrator can lock down the system configuration – not just the hardware and the operating system (OS), but also the middleware and applications. Scheduling execution of trusted applications and specifying approved communications paths both can be defined statically in a configuration file used at boot time. Dynamic integrity testing is still advised to detect if any software component gets altered.

The second significant difference is that many embedded systems operate autonomously or with a minimal number of users and roles. This results in two broad implications for secure operation. First, minimal administrative functionality is needed to support the system. Second, additional assurance measures are inherently required to ensure the highly robust autonomous execution of the security management functions5.

These differences in environment and use cases enable embedded systems to tailor the security solution more easily than in an enterprise environment.

Zero-trust principles A zero-trust architecture moves away from the default policy of “trust but verify” for entities inside a perimeter defense to a policy of “never trust, always verify” for all entities. Every user, device, application, and data flow is verified, whether inside or outside a traditional network boundary. The other core concept of zero trust is the principle of “least privileged” to be applied for every access decision. Common to many security approaches, the principle of least privilege calls for a subject to be given only the minimum access level required to perform a given task.

The National Security Agency (NSA) defines three guiding principles for zero trust6, and the DoD Zero Trust Reference Architecture1 adds another for monitoring and analytics: 1. Never trust – always verify: Treat every user, device, application, and data flow as untrusted and potentially compromised, whether inside or outside a traditional network boundary. Authenticate and authorize each one only to the least privilege required to complete the task.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

27

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

2. Assume breach: Consciously operate and defend resources with the assumption that an adversary already has breached the perimeter and is present in the network. Deny by default, and scrutinize every request and requestor.

3. Verify each action explicitly: Use multiple attributes (dynamic and static) to derive confidence levels for contextual access decisions to resources.

4. Apply unified analytics: Apply unified analytics for Data, Applications, Assets, and Services (DAAS) to include behavioristics, and log each transaction.

Separation kernels for embedded security A well-accepted foundation for military embedded security is the use of partitioning to run applications in separate, isolated partitions. Apart from microcontrollers and digital signal processors, most CPU chips used in embedded systems include a memory management unit (MMU) that can be used for hardware-enforced partitioning of memory for different applications. Although that MMU can be controlled

by a general-purpose OS or an industrial real-time operating system (RTOS), the most secure systems use a separation kernel. A separation kernel is a specific type of microkernel where the essential functions running in privileged kernel mode are only the most critical security functions.

A separation kernel is a minimized OS kernel whose only function is to enforce four basic security policies: data isolation, fault isolation, control of information flow, and resource sanitization7. All other OS services are moved to user space so that the code size and attack surface of kernelmode code is the absolute minimum (Figure 2). One way to think of this is to apply the principle of least privilege to the OS itself. Software components with the largest attack surfaces and the most vulnerabilities, such as the networking stack, file system, and even virtualization, can execute sufficiently in user mode, so the security policy should not allow them to execute in privileged kernel mode.

A less secure alternative to a separation kernel is a hypervisor, which adds virtualization to the kernel code to increase virtualization performance at the expense of a larger attack surface. That more extensive code base is much harder to secure, let alone prove it is secure.

Mapping separation kernel attributes to zero-trust principles The fundamental security policies enforced by a separation kernel – data isolation, fault isolation, control of information flow, and resource sanitization – map well to zero trust principles. Layered security extensions in the OS services provide additional capabilities. (Table 1.)

Zero-trust architectures for embedded systems The National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-207 “Zero Trust Architecture”8 describes a general architecture that uses a policy engine, a policy administrator, and a policy enforcement point (PEP) as the core of zero trust (Figure 3).

The policy engine makes the decision to grant, deny, or revoke access to the resource. The policy administrator

28 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

executes the decision by establishing or shutting down the communication path, generating any session-specific authentication and authentication token or credential used by a client to access an enterprise resource. The PEP is in the data path of resource access and is responsible for enabling, monitoring, and terminating connections between a subject and an enterprise resource.

In some implementations, the PEP is divided into a client-side agent and a resource-side gateway.

In practice, zero-trust architectures often segment individual resources or groups of resources on a unique network segment protected by a security gateway that acts as the PEP. Segmenting network traffic reduces the attack surface and makes it harder for the adversary to move laterally through the network.

Micro-segmentation for data security Micro-segmentation is the deployment of a virtual firewall at every single virtual network interface where network traffic enters and leaves each virtual machine.

The firewall residing on each virtual machine isolates every network resource and endpoint from each other even when residing on the same subnet9.

Micro-segmentation is an essential part of moving from a network-centric approach to data-centric security. It works at a more granular level to protect DAAS by creating policies that limit network and application flows between workloads to those that are explicitly permitted. It does this by segmenting users, applications, workloads, and devices based on logical, not physical, attributes1. Implementing micro-segmentation early in the zerotrust process follows the NSA’s advice6 to first focus on protecting critical DAAS before securing all paths to access them.

The smaller virtual network segments also present a reduced attack surface.

Applying this to embedded systems, a separation kernel directly supports microsegmentation. Microsegmentation uses lists of explicitly permitted network and application flows between workloads, sometimes called “access lists” or “allow lists.” If a connection is not explicitly www.militaryembedded.com

Figure 2 | With a separation kernel, the OS services, middleware, and applications run in isolated partitions and only explicitly permitted, preconfigured communications occur between them.

Zero-Trust Principle

Separation Kernel Mapping

Assume Breach requires defending resources with the assumption that an adversary already has breached the perimeter and is present in the network. That includes denying by default and scrutinizing every request and requestor.

A separation kernel isolates every application in a partition, denying data access by default both into and out of the partition.

A separation kernel goes even further by preventing any action or fault in a partition from affecting any other part of the system.

Never Trust – Always Verify requires authorization of each user, device, application, and data flow only to the least privilege required to get the task done.

A separation kernel has the security property of being “always invoked” and enforces the principle of least privilege on every access. An authenticated load process can be used for an application and even the separation kernel itself.

Verify Each Action Explicitly uses multiple attributes to derive confidence levels for contextual access decisions to resources.

A separation kernel does not allow dynamic access requests but instead enforces security policy through a static configuration file.

In that way, it only allows pre-approved information flow regardless of privilege level.

Apply Unified Analytics requires logging all access requests and using analytics to look for suspicious behavior.

Separation kernels can include audit logging, which collects the data needed for analytics.

The analytics engine itself is beyond the scope of a separation kernel or even the OS services.

Table 1 | The fundamental security policies enforced by a separation kernel map well to zerotrust principles.

Figure 3 | Core zero-trust logical components (NIST SP800-207 figure 2).

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

29

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

stated, it is denied by default. A separation kernel implements such an access list in a static configuration file that is loaded when the kernel is booted. No application or other software running in user space can be given a level of privilege that can change the configuration file or circumvent the access list.

Device application sandboxing NIST SP 800-207 describes different variations of a zero-trust architecture, including a VM-based variation called “device application sandboxing” (Figure 4). In that scenario, vetted applications run compartmentalized on assets, where the compartments could be virtual machines, containers, or some other implementation. The goal is to protect each application from a possibly compromised host or other applications running on the asset. The applications can communicate with the PEP to request access to resources, but the PEP will refuse requests from other applications on the asset.

The fundamental property of a separation kernel is to isolate applications in hardware-­ enforced partitions. Those partitions align with the “sandboxes” and “compartments,” fulfilling the goal to protect the application or instances of applications from a possibly compromised host or other applications running on the asset. A separation kernel offers even more security by providing a secure, trusted base upon which each application can rely. The ideal separation kernel is one that is certified to host a mix of trusted and untrusted applications at mixed security assurance levels.

Separation kernel, layered OS for security The INTEGRITY-178 tuMP high-assurance RTOS from Green Hills Software is a secure separation kernel and layered OS services that can be a solid foundation for a zerotrust architecture. INTEGRITY-178 tuMP enables the data isolation, control of information flow, resource sanitization, and fault isolation required for a separation kernel of high robustness.

In 2008, the INTEGRITY-178 RTOS became the first and only operating system to be certified against the NSA-defined Separation Kernel Protection Profile (SKPP)10. The certification against the SKPP was to both NSA “High Robustness” and Common Criteria EAL 6+, and it included a formal proof of correctness for the separation kernel11. That certification also included penetration testing and covert channel analysis by the NSA. Green Hills Software’s latest RTOS version for multicore processors, INTEGRITY-178 tuMP, still meets the SKPP’s rigorous set of functional and assurance security requirements for those customers needing it.

System integrators can layer higher-level security, such as advanced analytics, on top of the RTOS to complete the zero-trust architecture. MES References

1. Defense Information Systems Agency, “Department of Defense (DOD) Zero Trust Reference Architecture, Version 1.0” (Feb. 2021). https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/ Library/(U)ZT_RA_v1.1(U)_Mar21.pdf 2. “The Pentagon’s next move in expanding zero trust,” C4ISRNET (15 April 2021). https://www.c4isrnet.com/cyber/2021/04/15/the-pentagons-next-move-in-expanding-zero-trust/ 3. Exec. Order No. 14028, Executive Order on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity, 86 Fed. Reg. 26633 (17 May 2021). https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidentialactions/2021/05/12/executive-order-on-improving-the-nations-cybersecurity/ 4. K. DelBene, et al, “The Road to Zero Trust (Security),” Defense Innovation Board (9 Jul 2019). https://media.defense.gov/2019/Jul/09/2002155219/-1/-1/0/DIB_THE_ROAD_TO_ZERO_ TRUST_(SECURITY)_07.08.2019.PDF 5. T. Nguyen, et al, “High Robustness Requirements in a Common Criteria Protection Profile,” Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE International Information Assurance Workshop, Apr 2006.

6. National Security Agency, “Embracing a Zero Trust Security Model” (Feb 2021). https://media. defense.gov/2021/Feb/25/2002588479/-1/-1/0/CSI_EMBRACING_ZT_SECURITY_MODEL_ UOO115131-21.PDF 7. W. Mark Vanfleet, et al, “MILS: Architecture for High Assurance Embedded Computing,” CrossTalk (Aug 2005).

30 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

Figure 4 | Device application sandboxing (NIST SP800-207 figure 6).

8. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Special Publication 800-207: Zero Trust Architecture (Aug 2020). https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/ sp/800-207/final 9. National Security Agency, “Segment Networks and Deploy Application-Aware Defenses” (Sep 2019). https://media. defense.gov/2019/Sep/09/2002180325/1/-1/0/Segment%20Networks%20and%20 Deploy%20Application%20Aware%20 Defenses%20-%20Copy.pdf 10. National Security Agency, U.S. Government Protection Profile for Separation Kernels in Environments Requiring High Robustness, Version 1.03.

(29 July 2007).

11. P. Huyck, “Safe and Secure Data Fusion – Use of MILS Multicore Architecture to Reduce Cyber Threats,” 2019 IEEE/AIAA 38th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 2019. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ abstract/document/9081638 12. “Raise the Bar: Demanding Cybersecurity Excellence for Cross Domain Solutions in the Battlespace,” Modern Integrated Warfare. (3 Mar 2021). https://www. modernintegratedwarfare.com/spaceand-cyberspace/raise-the-bar-demandingcybersecurity-excellence-cross-domainsolutions-battlespace/

Richard Jaenicke is director of marketing for safety and security-critical products at Green Hills Software. Prior to Green Hills, he served as director of strategic marketing and alliances at Mercury Systems, and held marketing and technology positions at XCube, EMC, and AMD. Rich earned an MS in computer systems engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and a BA in computer science from Dartmouth College. Readers may email him at richj@ghs.com.

Green Hills Software https://www.ghs.com/ www.militaryembedded.com

Up to 85% space savings vs. standard DIMM modules

Rugged: Soldered-down – no DIMM connector

Actual Size (15mm x 20mm)

POWERFUL & COMPACT B U I LT T O D E L I V E R R U G G E D R E L I A B I L I T Y & D U R A B I L I T Y CUSTOMIZED DDR4 MCP, 4GB, 8GB, 16GB*, 32GB*

EXTENDED TEMPERATURE Commercial, Industrial, Automotive, & Military

SPACE SAVING Up to 85% space savings compared to standard memory modules

SWaP OPTIMIZED Shock & Vibration, Military-Grade

RUGGEDIZED Optimized for Extreme Conditions

COMPLIANCES ITAR Compliant & AS9100 Certified Facility

* 16GB/32GB capacities available late CY 2022

Scan this code for in-depth product features and specifications or visit: www.vikingtechnology.com/ddr4-military-mcp/parallelcell-ddr4-mcp

A Product Division of Sanmina Corporation Copyright © 2022 Viking Technology. All Rights Reserved

For sales information, please email us at sales@vikingtechnology.com, or visit our website at www.vikingtechnology.com Need support? Call us at (714) 913-2200

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

Open source SDR: a faster, better way to develop and deploy EW capabilities

By Chad Augustine and Haydn Nelson Maintaining dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum has never been more critical to mission success.

The challenge facing system designers is how to accelerate the transition of new communications and electronic warfare (EW) capabilities from concept to the laboratory and then expedite the deployment of those new capabilities to the warfighter.

32 January/February 2022

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

Delivering new wireless technology for defense applications requires significant time and cost to experiment, engineer, and iterate novel techniques. For example, software-defined radio (SDR) system designers typically develop and test novel wireless, sensing, and electronic warfare (EW) methods on the very same rugged and costly SDR mission system hardware on which those waveforms, such as MUOS, SINCGARS, and MN-MIMO, will be deployed.

This approach increases development schedules while reducing engineering flexibility and often locks the developer into a vendor’s very specific software framework.

A new breakthrough approach for SDR waveform development offers a better way by leveraging proven commercial SDR USRP [Universal Software Radio Peripheral] technology for lab development. Originally developed by Ettus Research, commercial USRPs are tunable hardware transceivers containing FPGA [field-programmable gate array] and processor resources that, when connected to a computer, provide engineers with access to the electromagnetic spectrum with the use of open-source software tools. By leveraging USRP hardware, the resulting waveforms can then be seamlessly deployed on rugged 3U OpenVPX boards aligned to the Sensor Open System Architecture (SOSA) Technical Standard or aligned to C5ISR/Electronic Warfare Modular Open Suite of Standards (CMOSS). Now, they are based on the exact same USRP architecture as the lab system on which they were developed.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

A44_MES_2_125x10_NEWWEB.qxp_A44.qxd 12

There are USRP models that can run headlessly for mobile operation and one model that has an IP-67 rated enclosure for outdoor installation. Customers and partners have also built custom housings for deploying USRPs on vehicles, drones, or manpacks. However, commercial lab-grade USRP SDRs are not natively ideal for deployment in extreme temperatures or high-shock and high-vibration environments. For rugged deployment of wave­forms and algorithms prototyped with USRP SDRs, this reality has necessitated mechanical work on enclosures to take the USRP to the field, or for the IP to be migrated to mission hardware via FPGA export tools or software rewrites. Without a common API shared by both platforms, transitioning waveforms devel­oped on commercial hardware to a mission system requires significant software and firmware work, sometimes taking months, just to modify a custom board support package (BSP) for a specific proprietary SDR or an FPGA board, for example.

Now, using SOSA aligned USRP-compatible commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) VPX hardware, lab development can be reduced from months to weeks. Engineers can go from taking delivery of the commercial USRP to developing an EW jamming technique test in as little as a week, while migrating the waveforms to the OpenVPX board can be done in only minutes.

Even better, the use of a commercial SDR solution for lab development opens up to an extensive open source community, providing system developers with immediate access to a huge IP library of SDR waveforms, including some dedicated defense code libraries. The result is a cost-effective approach for lab-based innovation and prototyping of SDR technology that also provides a seamless and direct path to migrate IP from prototyping hardware to deployment on a rugged modular open systems architecture-based mission-ready platform. Using the open source community, a waveform developer can access software code from multiple sources, and immediately try it out and then iterate it to the point where it performs the way they want. Compare this to the development process faced by an engineer at a traditional Tier 1 military vendor: First, they have to write a requirements specification, then they must get the spec approved, and then they have to get a contract signed before development commences.

Lowering the cost of SDR development and enabling engineers to leverage existing open source IP delivers a great boost to creativity and enables new techniques to be proved out more quickly. Because commercial USRPs – which can be run from a laptop – are significantly less expensive than mission system hardware, lab development now becomes scalable. and the lab USRP can be made available to a greater number of engineers on a development team. Instead of having to share time to gain access to a limited number of more costly mission systems, each engineer can now reasonably afford their own SDR. Bringing open source development to deployable SDRs Speeding the delivery of new techniques is essential in the cat-and-mouse world of EW as adversaries develop more novel, creative communications methods and threats, such as adopting low-cost commercial drones for weapons systems. What’s more, these new threats are being developed at the speed of commercial tools as opposed to the far slower speed of a defense program. Providing SDR system developers with access to open source IP is a true game-changer when it comes to addressing these new threats.

Instead of being limited to IP support developed for a very specific defense market, SDR engineers can now leverage open source USRP IP, expertise, and SDR maturity that scales across academic, commercial wireless, radio astronomy, and other domains. The huge available open source user base, combined with large amounts of IP, can, for example, give Army engineers who may not have been trained in radio access to a far greater knowledge base for collaboration. www.militaryembedded.com

DC-DC CONVERTERS 2V to 10,000 VDC Outputs 1-300 Watt Modules

Regulated/Proportional/Programmable Isolated/Single/Dual Outputs

High Reliability

Greater than 1,000,000 hrs.

Mil Hbk 217F •

Military Upgrades

Expanded operating temperature -55˚ to +85˚ C, no derating required •

Environmental Screening

Selected Screening, Mil Std 883 •

ULTRA Miniature

From 0.5" x 0.5" x 0.2" •

Surface Mount/Thru-Hole • Custom Models • US Manufactured • AS 9100 Approved High Reliability AC/DC Power Supplies, Transformers and Inductors

VISIT OUR EXCITING NEW WEBSITE

www.picoelectronics.com Featuring our easy-to-use product Search Wizard!

See PICO’s full line catalog at

www.picoelectronics.com

YOUR PROVEN SOURCE.

Over 50 years providing reliable products. Over 2,500 Standard Modules.

800-431-1064

PICO ELECTRONICS, Inc. 143 Sparks Ave., Pelham, New York 10803 Call Toll Free 800-431-1064 • FAX 914-738-8225

E Mail: info@picoelectronics.com

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

33

SOSA™ Release 1.0 Aligned

HIGH PERFORMANCE

SOSA™ ALIGNED SOLUTIONS > SOSA™ ALIGNED 3U VPX 11-SLOT CHASSIS

> KEY FEATURES

• • • • • •

HTLv-C3-11

> SOSA™ ALIGNED 3U VPX

SOFTWARE DEFINED RADIOS

HTLv-13

HTLv-23

HTLv-43

HTLv-53

> KEY FEATURES

• Frequency Range: 2 MHz – 20 GHz • • • • •

- HTLv-13 / HTLv-23: BW = 80 MHz, per channel - HTLv-43 / HTLv-53: BW = 2.0 GHz, per channel

2 ea. or 4 ea. Channels, per Transceiver Module High Performance Superhet Design 82 dB+ Spur Free Dynamic Range (SFDR) Selectable RX / TX per channel Open Architecture with Available SDK

> SOSA™ ALIGNED 3U VPX POSITION, NAVIGATION, TIMING REFERENCE MODULES

> KEY FEATURES

• • • • • • PNTRv3

Four payload slots 100 GBps switch slots IOSBC slot Radial clock slot Two power supply slots Two PCIe Gen4 switch slots

PNTRv23

For information on HTL’s portfolio of products designed to align with the SOSA™ Release 1.0 standard for a wide range of applications, platforms and mission requirements, email marketing@herricktechlabs.com

GPS INS Chip-Scale Atomic Clock (CSAC) SAASM / M-Code (Optional) Advanced GNSS (PNTRv23) Assured PNT (PNTRv23)

- GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, SBAS, QZSS - IRIDIUM-based Geolocation

herricktechlabs.com

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

HOST

PC

USRP – RF Network On Chip (RFNoC) User Application USRP Hardware Driver (UHD)

FPGA

Ingress Engress Interface

Crossbar

USRP

SDR development platform An example of a USRP for lab development is the Ettus Research USRP-E320 (Figure 1), a standard for developing wireless applications for commercial, academic, scientific, and defense applications.

Supported by a large open source community of professionals and hobbyists, Ettus Research USRPs were first developed to provide a prototyping platform for research into wireless applications, such as 4G/5G telecommunications.

Based on the 2x2 MIMO AD9361 transceiver from Analog Devices, the USRPE320 covers frequencies from 70 MHz to 6 GHz and provides as much as 56 MHz of instantaneous bandwidth.

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

Radio Core

Computation Engine User Defined

Computation Engine User Defined

Figure 2 | RFNoC is a network-distributed heterogeneous processing tool with a focus on enabling FPGA processing in USRP devices.

Because the USRP-E320 and VPX3-E320 support UHD and RFNoC, a lot of the FPGA programming tasks are automatically abstracted, making programming easier, and in some cases even eliminating the need for an FPGA code-development engineer. Also, some narrowband applications can be handled by the onboard CPU without requiring any FPGA development.

Figure 1 | The USRP-E320 covers frequencies from 70 MHz to 6 GHz, with as much as 56 MHz of instantaneous bandwidth.

Developed under agreement with NI, Curtiss-Wright’s VPX3-E320 SDR module is a fully rugged 3U OpenVPX functional equivalent variant of the USRP-E320 with backplane I/O designed for alignment with the latest RF system implementation standards, including CMOSS and Modular Open RF Architecture (MORA).

Both the USRP-E320 and the VPX3-E320 are fully compatible with the USRP hardware driver (UHD) and the open and flexible FPGA framework, RF networkon-chip (RFNoC). (Figure 2.) These two software frameworks enable engineers to rapidly prototype on commercial hardware and can be the path to a SOSA aligned deployed solution – bridging the gap from prototype to rugged embedded deployments. Building on the common UHD and RFNoC framework means that engineers can leverage the vast training, IP, and open source community to rapidly build and deploy new capabilities faster. www.militaryembedded.com

Consider the case of an engineer tasked with designing an SDR-based drone defense application: In the past, to do their development, the engineer would need to take SDR mission hardware out of commission, or instead design some custom development boards (or build up the infrastructure for data movement using some COTS boards).

Rather than having to go through that long and costly process – which includes the chores of designing the IP and then migrating it over to a mission system – the engineer can now simply design the application, run it in the lab, then assess the new capability using the USRP E320. After that, with very minimal changes, they can migrate the new IP over to the deployable VPX3-E320 version.

Open source SDR technology provides the warfighter with new tools for deploying novel EW techniques to the battlefield and a new path to dominance of the electromagnetic spectrum. MES Chad Augustine serves as a Product Manager for Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions, where he is responsible for the Rugged SDR Product Line. Chad has more than 20 years of experience in the COTS community.

Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions https://www.curtisswrightds.com/ Haydn Nelson is a U.S. Navy veteran with more than 17 years of experience in wireless and DSP technology applications.

He has worked in several industries – from military and aerospace research to RF semiconductor test – and has broad experience in radar/EW and communications systems. Haydn currently serves as a business leader at NI for their wireless prototyping and deployment applications in military and aerospace markets.

NI • https://www.ni.com/en-us.html

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

35

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

Improving the capabilities of cognitive radar and EW systems

By Tim Fountain and Leander Humbert With today’s emerging threats, traditional approaches to radar and electronic warfare (EW) systems that utilize static threat libraries are vulnerable to ‘modeagile’ or wartime reserve modes (WARM) threats operating in nontraditional modes.

Use of a closed-loop integrated record, analysis & playback system (IRAPS)-based hardware-in-the-loop/software-in-the-loop (HIL/SIL) system is an excellent testbed to train, evaluate, and improve the artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI and ML) algorithms that are needed to implement the next generation of cognitive radar and EW systems and protect lives and assets against unknown threats.

36 January/February 2022

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

A cognitive RF [radio frequency] system perceives the RF spectrum by converting that spectrum into a stream of RF data. Through reasoning and understanding of the context of the data stream, the system makes autonomous judgements and determines a course of action without human intervention. The end goal of the system is to deny the use of the RF spectrum by an adversary (electronic attack or EA), protect a platform, for instance by employing antijam techniques to protect a communications link (electronic protect, or EP) and/or delivering supporting information to another system (electronic support, or ES).

A cognitive system uses a continuous feedback loop of situational perception, learning, reasoning, interaction, and action. (Figure 1.)

With today’s emerging threats, traditional approaches to radar and electronic warfare (EW) systems that use static threat libraries, as shown in Figure 2, are vulnerable to “mode-agile” or wartime reserve modes (WARM) threats operating in nontraditional modes. In a static-threat system, traditional threats such as an antimissile radar are characterized by their operating parameters, such as center frequency, occupied bandwidth, hopping characteristics, modulation, pulse repetition interval (PRI), and other parameters that are known, repetitive, and quantifiable. The static-threat library approach matches and classifies these parameters against a database. The classified threat may be converted into pulse descriptor words (PDWs) and fed to other systems on the platform, some of which may potentially deploy countermeasures.

WARM threats are signal characteristics and operating procedures that are held in reserve for wartime or emergency use and do not conform to the predefined parameters in a static threat library These modes may include new operating frequencies, modulation techniques, pulse repetition intervals and

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

There are several challenges to the implementation of a cognitive radar/EW system: 1. Significant computational resources are required at the tactical edge where the threat is encountered. The computational resources may combine FPGA [field-programmable gate array] GPGPUs and multicore host processors to implement the AI/ML algorithms. On-platform compute elements must meet the oftenharsh environments of in-theatre operating conditions.

2. An effective system needs to minimize the detect-to-counter time or RF-in to RF-out latency to improve platform survivability.

This is a challenge to design and implement as GPGPU and COTS [commercial off-the-shelf] data converters are deeply pipelined, which adds to the system latency design budget.

3. By nature, WARM emitters may operate in unexpected frequency bands, hop across wider bandwidths, and use wideband modulation techniques. This mode of operation requires a wide bandwidth RF spectrum stare which has its own challenges in terms of system dynamic range and noise www.militaryembedded.com

Artificial Intelligence Interact Reason Learn

Act

In a cognitive or adaptive radar/EW system, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) techniques are applied to the incoming spectrum to develop a counter to the perceived threat in the spectrum on the fly. It is entirely possible that a WARM threat may have the capability to detect that it has encountered a system that is using cognitive AI/ ML techniques and may itself change its operating parameters, potentially on a continual basis. This requires flexibility to quickly adapt to changing threats.

floor, which affect standoff, detection, and jamming range. Wider bandwidth requirements also complicate the task of data movement and processing.

4. A wideband cognitive AI/ML system uses more electrical power, which drives size, weight, power, and cost (SWaP-C) requirements – all of which must always be optimized on smaller autonomous platforms, such as an unmanned aerial system (UAS).

Perceive

hopping schemas. A static threat technique cannot match WARM modes against the database, and the electronic protect, attack, and support (EP, EA, & ES) system consequently has no method to counter this threat. WARM modes are not seen outside of a serious conflict.

RF to Digital

Digital to RF

The RF Environment (Spectrum)

Figure 1 | Cognitive radar/electronic warfare (EW) system is shown.

Tx Antenna(s)

Rx Antenna(s)

High Power RF Amplifier

Signal Conditioning

Signal Conditioning

Downconversion

Upconversion

Signal Conversion (AàD)

Signal Conversion (DàA)

DSP

Status Output to Platform (PDW, RWR, etc.)

DSP

Search & Tracking System

Threat Database

Signal Analysis, Evaluation & Interpretation

Threat CounterSolution

Threat Analysis System

Control, Timing & Synchronization

Waveform Synthesis

PRI, Pulse Width, Modulation, Operating Frequency, Amplitude, Polarization, etc.

Figure 2 | Traditional static-library radar/EW system is shown.

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

37

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

5. Mode-agile emitters may also be expected to enter “Low Probability of Intercept” modes, which require higher-resolution analog-to-digital converters (ADCs) and digital-to-analog converters (DACs).

6. Platforms need to be able to share information, which requires reliable communication links. They also need a common time reference, such as GPS, to ensure spatial and temporal information used in direction-finding and geotagging of emitters. Traditional GPS is vulnerable to jamming, spoofing, and deception; assured position, navigation, and timing (PNT) needs to be part of a system-level solution.

Elements of a cognitive radar/EW system A cognitive radar/EW system uses AI, which uses computer science to apply nonhuman intelligence to systems that emulate human reasoning and problem-solving skills. Common AI techniques used in ML are artificial neural networks, deep learning/ deep neural networks, fuzzy logic, and genetic algorithms.

Figure 3 shows a block diagram of a cognitive radar/EW system. It is comprised of the following functional blocks: › RF acquisition: The RF acquisition block converts the RF spectrum into a digital data stream. One or more antenna signals are routed to a signalconditioning system that filters, amplifies and/or attenuates the signal to ensure maximum dynamic range. It is followed by downconversion and digitization with ADCs. The digital data may use DSP such as digital filtering, digital downconversion, resampling, demodulation, or digital beamforming.

Tx Antenna(s) Rx Antenna(s) High Power RF Amplifier

Signal Conditioning

Signal Conversion (AàD)

RF Acquisition

Downconversion

RF Generation

Signal Conditioning

Upconversion

Signal Conversion (DàA) DSP

DSP Search & Tracking System AI Driven Analysis

AI Driven Threat Counter-Solution

Waveform Synthesis

Threat Database PRI, Pulse Width, Modulation, Operating Frequency, Amplitude, Polarization, etc.

AI Driven Signal Analysis & Inference

AI Driven Decision System

Status Output to Platform (PDW, RWR, etc.)

Core AI/ML System Control, Timing & Synchronization

Figure 3 | A block diagram lays out a cognitive radar/EW system.

38 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

› Search and tracking system: The search and tracking system continually monitors one or more frequency bands to determine angle of arrival (AoA) and emitter location. › Core AI/ML system: The core AI/ML system consists of the AI analysis engine that determines key parametric information about the signals, such as PRI, pulse width, signal power, polarization time of arrival [ToA], and AoA. The core AI/ML system also includes data from other sensors such as electrooptic, navigation, missile awareness, etc. This information is delivered to the threat library, giving an evolving view of the electronic battlefield and electronic order of battle; the library also contains previously identified signals of interest. The signal analysis and inferencing AI block determines whether identified signals are friendly emissions or potential threats by comparing the signals against the database.

The AI support system is primarily used as a final decision arbiter for a proposed course of action and communicates the threat and the proposed action to the rest of the platform and operator. The AI-driven threat countersolution determines key parameters of the signal in multiple domains such as time, frequency, and amplitude, whether jamming, spoofing, or something else. › Waveform synthesis: The waveform synthesis block interprets the output of the threat countersolution block and generates a digital stream representing the digital implementation of the counter. › RF generation: The RF generation block is the opposite of the RF acquisition block. It consists of DSPs and DACs. The upconverter converts the baseband analog signal into an RF signal and is followed by signal conditioning such as filtering, attenuation, etc. The signal is amplified before transmission to ensure it has sufficient power to jam or deceive the threat. www.militaryembedded.com

Challenges in training cognitive radar/EW systems AI techniques used in ML require rich training data. Training is the process of “feeding” the algorithms with representative sample sets of signals, analyzing the efficacy of the algorithm(s), modifying and improving the algorithm and repeating the training in a loop. This iterative process – known as RF hardware in the loop (RFHIL) – is long and therefore ideal for automation. RFHIL can be applied to initial algorithm development and evaluation; regression testing; in reprogramming labs, where mission data sets are established in preparation for deployment in conflicted or contested environments; and at the operational level before mission execution to ensure the radar/EW systems are operational.

Acquisition of datasets It is unlikely that a real-world collection would ever capture WARM signals. The collection process can still obtain valuable real-world signals that are useful in the hardware-in-the-loop/softwarein-the-loop (HIL/SIL) lab as they contain representative signals complete with interference, poor signal-to-noise ratio, fading, multipath, and other aberrations.

The AI/ML system can also be used to de-interleave and classify signals that are often difficult to discern in a complex real-world RF environment The AI/ ML system can be used to extract the signals of interest and save those as potential future training datasets.

Modeling and simulation (M&S) software such as Matlab, Simulink, R&S pulse sequencer and other commercially available software packages can be used to create training data sets.

They enable almost infinite variations in the prototypes with the addition of interferers, noise, and other aberrations and foster the generation of complex scenarios such as multiple moving emitters in a low-risk, controlled laboratory environment.

Training the AI/ML system can be accomplished with an integrated record, analysis, and playback system (IRAPS). The heart of the IRAPS system is the ERISYS SigPro, which is a high-performance www.militaryembedded.com

vector signal processor and server with between 8 and 64 cores, 8 x 256 GB of system memory, Gen-4 PCIe, bus, workstation graphics, and up to 60 TB of high-speed SSDs which can store thousands of training sets. The SigPro has 10 or 100 Gb Ethernet for fast movement of data. The SigPro includes a large FPGA development board for FPGA algorithm prototyping and in-line DSP of the IQ data streams. The SigPro also coordinates system communication and configuration via Ethernet and stores the results of training runs for further analysis.

The vector signal generator used, the R&S SMW200A, generates the RF waveforms.

It is connected to the SigPro via an optical QSFP+ connector, supporting up to 1 GHz of IQ data. The SMW can generate two independent RF signals, which could either be two RF signals played from the SigPro or one signal from the SigPro and one from the SMW’s onboard memory, such as interference and commercial RF signals such as terrestrial TV, LTE, 5G, GNSS etc. These signals are amplified by a broadband amplifier.

After amplification, the RF signal is fed to the system under training (SUT). The SUT may receive RF either via a cabled interface or over the air (OTA) with antennas. If the system is using OTA testing, then an EMC [electromagnetic compatibility] chamber may be employed to ensure that RF emissions do not emanate outside of the chamber.

The generated RF response from the SUT, again either cabled or OTA, may need attenuation before acquisition by the vector signal and spectrum analyzer, which converts the 1 GHz of RF spectrum into an IQ data stream that is fed back to the SigPro. The tool can also be utilized for powerful radar-signal analysis with over 60 pulse and pulse train analysis capabilities including waveform independent timed-sidelobe measurements. The same tool can be used to validate the commercial RF signals in the electromagnetic environment. A multichannel oscilloscope may also be useful to capture the temporal and latency information from the system under test.

A closed-loop IRAPS-based HIL/SIL system is an excellent testbed to train, evaluate, and improve the AI/ML algorithms that are needed to implement the next generation of cognitive radar and EW systems and protect lives and assets against unknown threats. MES Tim Fountain is the Global Market Segment Manager at Rohde & Schwarz, where he is responsible for the radar and electronic warfare segment. Tim has more than 30 years of experience with market leaders in the test & measurement industry, focusing on RF and microwave applications in aerospace/defense. Tim holds a master’s degree in electrical and electronic engineering from University of Hertfordshire (U.K.) In his spare time Tim likes to fly and is an instrument-rated private pilot.

Leander Humbert is a technology manager for radar-based measurement applications at Rohde & Schwarz. Humbert earned his Diplom-Ingenieur degree focusing in communications from the Helmut-Schmidt-University in Hamburg and a B.Sc. in computer science from Trier University of Applied Sciences (Germany). He has 17 years of professional experience in designing radar and electronic warfare systems from different perspectives of the ecosystem and worked in the German Air Force as EW officer and systems engineer. Leander is a member of the IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement and Aerospace & Electronic Systems Societies, the European Defense Agency CAPTECH Radar, and the Red Baron Roost AOC Chapter.

Rohde & Schwarz https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

39

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

Cooling high-power radar systems: a thermal technology guide

By Bryan Muzyka Large-scale radar systems are critical to U.S. national security, giving troops advanced abilities to detect and combat enemy strikes. As the demand for increased distance in coverage grows, more electronics are used, with the resulting waste heat becoming a primary challenge for designers. There exist a number of practical solutions to expand thermal capacity while staying mindful of size, weight, and power (SWaP) considerations.

40 January/February 2022

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

The thermal challenge for large-scale radar systems can be highly complex.

Losses in the system can result in waste heat ranging from tens to hundreds of kWs, primarily from discrete electronics throughout the antenna and control system. The problem is amplified when adding in mechanical requirements (often vehicle-mounted or requiring rotation/movement to enhance coverage) and environmental requirements (large range of operating temperatures, MIL-STD-810-G requirements, etc.). The thermal-management system must therefore be robust and high-performance. To break down the challenge and technology options, three areas of the overall thermal-management system (TMS) must be examined: local, high-heat flux electronics; the systems liquid loop; and the ultimate heat-rejection system.

Discrete electronics are a key piece of a radar’s functionality. As electronics and power amplifiers increase in power densities, the need for more advanced heat spreading becomes critical. In many cases, the challenge is to manage the local heat flux with highly efficient heat transfer to the next-level thermal assembly – in this case, the liquid loop.

Aluminum spreaders are often used due to weight and producibility considerations; however, they are limited in conductive heat transfer by their ~180 W/m-K thermal conductivity (k). Lower k-values lead to local hot spots and failures well before the heat gets to the primary cooling solution. To combat this issue,

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

When embedding heat pipes into a structural heat spreader, the resulting solution is known as a high thermal conductivity plate. A practical example of such a solution used in a radar application is shown in Figure 1: In this instance, several heat pipes were strategically positioned and implemented vertically into the T-shaped design. The base of the mounting frame was coupled with the higher-level thermal solution, and the discrete electronics were mounted on the vertical face. In terms of performance gains, these plates have demonstrated keffective ranges between 500 and 1,200 W/m-K, depending primarily on length. Also to be considered when deciding to use the technology: nonthermal benefits including little to no impact on weight, little to no impact on structural strength, and passive operation with no power consumption and long life.

Now that options for local heat-spreading improvement have been determined, the next step is to examine the system-level heat transfer. In this example of a large-scale system, the base design is a single-phase liquid loop. Air cooling is an option for lowerpower systems, but in many cases, a liquid solution is required to meet waste heat

passive two-phase heat transfer can be considered. By utilizing the latent heat of vaporization, one can achieve heat transfer rates in an order of magnitude greater than metallic conduction.

In rugged systems, the most common passive two-phase heat-transfer devices are embedded heat pipes. Heat pipes are closed-loop devices that are implemented near the critical electronics to promote fluid vaporization. This section is commonly known as the evaporator.

From here, an internal pressure gradient is created, rapidly transporting the fluid vapor to colder regions of the heat pipe.

The fluid gives up its latent heat at the condenser, which is coupled to the system’s heatsink. The internal wick structure passively pumps the fluid back to the evaporator section using capillary force (See Figure 1). www.militaryembedded.com

Figure 1 | Shown is a heat pipe operation (top), with a fielded radar heat pipe assembly (bottom)

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

41

INDUSTRY SPOTLIGHT

RF and microwave in electronic warfare systems

and environmental requirements. In defense applications, it is common to use glycolwater fluids, which have favorable thermal properties and are often readily available at various integration sites. While single-phase fluid has a lot of merits and fielded heritage, a higher-performing option is pumped two-phase (P2P). Like heat pipes, this technology uses two-phase heat transfer to take advantage of the fluid’s latent heat phase. It requires similar architecture and components as single-phase designs (see Figure 2) while offering lower power consumption and lower overall mass.

In many cases – but specifically in phased array radars – it is desirable to have consistent temperatures across a system’s electronics. This adds to the reliability and performance of the radar system. A P2P system can achieve much tighter isothermality than singlephase cooling solutions due to the two-phase heat transfer. In a single-phase system, heat is dumped into the fluid, increasing fluid temperature. This is apparent by the governing mass flow equation shown in Equation 1; as power (Q) increases, the temperature

Figure 2 | Shown is a pumped two-phase (P2P) schematic.

difference from inlet to outlet increases (∆T), assuming fluid properties and flow rate remains constant.

Q =ṁCp∆T

Equation 1

Therefore, to achieve better temperature uniformity, the fluid flow rate must increase, which leads to larger pumps, higher pressure, and – ultimately – reliability concerns.

No Boundaries!

When engineers need resistors for critical missions in a no-replace environment like Mars, they choose State of the Art. We are aboard three Mars orbiters: Odyssey, MRO, and Maven. We are aboard four rovers: Pathfinder, Spirit, Opportunity, and Curiosity, with another rover to be launched in 2020. And we are aboard the InSight lander that is studying the interior of the planet. Working toward a manned mission to Mars, NASA chose State of the Art resistors. Whose resistors will you choose for your next mission?

Mission Critical?

Choose State of the Art resistors.

State of the Art, Inc. RESISTIVE PRODUCTS

Made in the USA.

42 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

In a P2P system, conversely, the temperature is absorbed in the latent heat of vaporization, and the fluid quality adjusts as heat enters the fluid (Note: to optimize performance, there are engineering considerations to maintain the fluid within a given fluid-quality range).

The system can also be sized for low flow rates since fluid velocity is not the driving factor in performance, ultimately leading to compact and lightweight solutions. Additionally, P2P systems have ancillary benefits, such as the use of dielectric working fluids, modular/scalable designs, and the ability to handle higher heat flux than traditional fluid loops. Such systems can be used in radar, directed energy, and medium- and highvoltage power electronics applications.

Controlling temperature and rejecting heat are the final elements of an effective thermal-management system. While many above-ambient, standalone P2P systems can offer fluid controls and integrated air-side heat rejection, most military applications require cooling below ambient air temperatures. Liquid chillers, which leverage vapor-compression technology, are often considered in order to precondition the fluid. This chilled liquid can be provided directly to the system’s liquid loop or a liquidto-liquid heat exchanger as geometry or www.militaryembedded.com

fluid selection require. The challenge in these chiller systems typically revolves around the harsh defense environment and must then encompass unique, rugged design considerations; the compressor, radiator, fans, and control electronics must all survive the shock, vibration, and weather conditions often found in military environments.

Tekgard chiller systems, which are suitable for use in mission-critical applications, range from 8 to 24 kW of capacity. A fielded example of a harsh-environment use – on

the Ku-band radio frequency system (KuRFS) is shown in Figure 3.

Thermal management is key to protecting electronics and extending system life of critical radar systems. As requirements become too challenging for traditional cooling methods, it is beneficial to have options to expand capacity and maintain or reduce the size, weight, and power (SWaP) consumption of the systems. MES Bryan Muzyka is ­manager, sales and marketing, at Advanced Cooling Technologies (ACT), implementing highly engineered thermal technology to mission-critical designs.

He has been with ACT for 13 years.

Bryan holds a mechanical engineering degree from Penn State University and an MBA and engineering degree from Lehigh University.

Figure 3 | The Tekgard chiller from ACT is used in the KuRFS [Ku-band radio frequency system] radar system, a 360-degree radar that senses incoming drones, rockets, artillery, and mortars.

Advanced Cooling Technologies photo.

Advanced Cooling Technologies https://www.1-act.com/

Accelerating Radar Research with an Open Architecture Sponsored by NI A major obstacle on the journey to bringing radar capabilities from concept to lab to the field: The time it takes to migrate IP from simulation to firmware, and to build up boards and infrastructure to assess the real-world performance of novel algorithms, waveforms, and components. Join NI for an introduction to a new architecture built on software-defined radio, which provides an advanced starting point for radar prototyping, and abstracts the complexity of synchronization and data movement for multichannel systems.

Watch the webcast: https://bit.ly/3sbDBTk

WATCH MORE WEBCASTS:

https://militaryembedded.com/webcasts/ www.militaryembedded.com

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS January/February 2022

43

EDITOR’S CHOICE PRODUCTS

Holt MAMBA terminals with MIL-STD-15535A capability Holt Integrated Circuits experts added MIL-STD-1553A capability to the company’s validated MAMBA family of MIL-STD-1553 integrated terminals. The new device, HI-6139, has a softwarecontrolled 1553A mode, and is otherwise functionally identical and drop-in compatible with Holt’s existing HI-6138 BC/RT/MT device. According to the company, the MAMBA family is available in a 48-pin PQFP or 6 mm by 6 mm QFN package, the world’s smallest MIL-STD-1553 integrated solution.

The devices include integrated dual transceivers on-chip and 8K by 17-bit word static RAM with parity. The host interface is via a 40 MHz Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI). According to the company, the HI-6139 provides fully compliant 1553A and 1553B capability in a single device and enables the support of legacy 1553A applications with minor software modifications. The device also provides the option in software for an Alternate RT Status Word, enabling direct control of the RT Status Word bits by the host processor rather than the device.

Holt Integrated Circuits | www.holtic.com

DBAS 9 connector intended for space and military applications The TE Connectivity (TE) DBAS 9 connector is specifically designed to offer increased configuration options providing additional design flexibility in the harsh environments of military and space applications. This push-pull connector combines the reliability of the DBAS 7 connector with the flexibility of standard D38999 inserts.

The DBAS 9 connector also enables cost-effective solutions using AS39029 signal and power contacts.

TE’s DBAS 9 connector – engineered for the extremely harsh environments found in space – has a leading clip that can help prevent accidental unmating on demand, is easy locking/unlocking (in heavy duty lanyard configuration), is scoop-proof, and has a rack-and-panel feature. The company also offers a wide range of inserts and large range of shell types and accessories with multiple surface-finishing options, intended to enable custom integrated solutions – including fiber-optic and high-speed options. If needed, users can request that DBAS 9 connectors be manufactured according to European Space Agency (ESA) procedures to improve traceability and meet the quality standards requested for critical space applications.

TE Connectivity | www.te.com

Open-architecture transceiver targets EW applications Mercury Systems’ RFM3202 Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) aligned wideband transceiver is targeted at demanding spectrum-processing applications.

With four high-bandwidth frequency-conversion channels, the new RFM3202 is designed to replace multiple products, enabling capabilities for smaller platforms. This single product is aimed at use in such smaller, lighter platforms such as unmanned vehicles, next-generation electronic attack pods, and space-constrained seaborne vessels as they seek to mitigate advanced electronic threats.

Features include two up-conversion channels and two down-conversion channels, 2 GHz of instantaneous bandwidth per channel, a tunable frequency range of 2 to 18 GHz, integrated channel-independent local oscillators, and 3U OpenVPX compliant and SOSA aligned design. Mercury officials say that the multiple high-bandwidth channels of the RFM3202 transceiver enables differentiating performance to electronic warfare, electronic intelligence, radar, and spectrum-processing applications. The transceiver, part of Mercury’s portfolio of RF processing and direct conversion modules, when coupled with Mercury’s DCM3220 digitization module, can digitize and process the selected 2 GHz for a full sensor-chain solution.

Mercury Systems | www.mrcy.com 44 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

www.militaryembedded.com

NAVIGATE ...

THROUGH ALL PARTS OF THE DESIGN PROCESS

TECHNOLOGY, TRENDS, AND PRODUCTS DRIVING THE DESIGN PROCESS Military Embedded Systems focuses on embedded electronics – hardware and software – for military applications through technical coverage of all parts of the design process. The website, Resource Guide, e-mags, newsletters, podcasts, webcasts, and print editions provide insight on embedded tools and strategies including technology insertion, obsolescence management, standards adoption, and many other military-specific technical subjects.

Coverage areas include the latest innovative products, technology, and market trends driving military embedded applications such as radar, electronic warfare, unmanned systems, cybersecurity, AI and machine learning, avionics, and more. Each issue is full of the information readers need to stay connected to the pulse of embedded militaryembedded.com technology in the military and aerospace industries.

www.militaryembedded.com

CONNECTING WITH MIL EMBEDDED

By Editorial Staff

GIVING BACK | PODCAST | WHITE PAPER | BLOG | VIDEO | SOCIAL MEDIA | WEBCAST GIVING BACK Each issue, the editorial staff of Military Embedded Systems will highlight a different charitable organization that benefits the military, veterans, and their families. We are honored to cover the technology that protects those who protect us every day.

This issue we are highlighting the Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that has the mission to connect military families, reservists, and veteran spouses – some of whom are veterans themselves – with resources including housing, food security, employment, and more.

According to the MFAN website, the organization is dedicated to building a community of military and veteran families – both in the U.S. and abroad – who are well informed about important resources designed to serve military families and connect families in need to leaders who serve this unique population. By employing leaders and influencers within the military family community – all of them are people who understand the challenges of military service and military families – the organization can effectively translate the needs of military and veteran families in a way that service providers can understand and facilitate services that speak coherently to these families.

One of the overarching MFAN resources is the MilMap, which is an online network of organizations, programs, and events curated expressly for military and veteran families to connect them with support surrounding relocation, child-welfare issues, employment, health and wellness, and crisis services. Another program is the One Million Meals Challenge: Launched in April 2021, the drive has already distributed the equivalent of 792,382 meals to military families in need. The food-distribution events, held on bases that were identified as having the greatest need, not only provided families with food to last for a few meals, but also introduced participants to local food banks and helped to break down any stigma associated with seeking help for food insecurity by creating a fun environment.

For additional information on the Military Family Advisory Network, please visit https://militaryfamilyadvisorynetwork.org/.

PODCAST

WHITE PAPER

ON THE RADAR: The current state of military hypersonic programs

In the latest episode of “On the Radar,” Military Embedded Systems Technical Editor Emma Helfrich invites Editorial Director John McHale to the podcast to discuss the concept of the hypersonic weapon and its history with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) as it stands entering the new year.

The U.S. Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike program and the U.S. Army’s Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon program are leading the charge for hypersonic advancements, while adversarial hypersonic developments are spurring embedded electronics manufacturers to design and build beefed-up defense and detection systems. The editors also mention notable programs on the forefront of hypersonic weapons-detection innovation, outline funding projections, explain China’s 2021 hypersonic test launch, and analyze congressional critiques of these MACH 5 missiles.

This podcast is sponsored by Pentek, now a part of Mercury Systems.

Listen to this podcast: https://bit.ly/3n9fOlh Listen to more podcasts: https://militaryembedded.com/podcasts

46 January/February 2022

MILITARY EMBEDDED SYSTEMS

New Supercomputer Enables Rugged, Real-Time AI at the Edge

By One Stop Systems/John Cox, PureB2B What capabilities should program managers look for in portable, rugged artificial intelligence AI deployments? Nearly all the current generation of AI compute platforms suffer from the failure to integrate and optimize high-performance computing with compact, rugged form factors. The result: Program managers too often end up trading performance for rugged design, or vice versa.

One Stop Systems (OSS) has created a new supercomputer-class server that eliminates these trade-offs: The Rigel super-computer merges NVIDIA’s four-GPU HGX configuration with the OSS PCIe switch fabric, optimized AI frameworks, and middleware, all of which are designed for AI processing, training, and workloads.

All Rigel technology components are the result of a design process that focuses on flowing AI workflow data into the GPUs and balancing the GPUs with the host processors, NVMe storage, and network components.

Read this white paper: https://bit.ly/3GtxqQt Read more white papers: https://militaryembedded.com/whitepapers

www.militaryembedded.com

THE WORLD’S FIRST ULTRA-MOBILE / SCALABLE

SINGLE BOARD

3U VPX SYSTEM Intel® 8 Core

Upgradeable DIMMs

Dual 100Gb Ethernet

Up to 2.6 GHz (4.6 GHz Burst)

PC3200 ECC

GPGPU or x16 Expansion

CORE™ i7 11th GEN

64GB DDR4

4x USB4

2x 10 GigE Base-KR

6x USB TYPE-C 4x with 100W+ Pwr

Aligned with the

SOSA™

Technical Standard

SYSTEM HIGHLIGHTS - Extensible open-standards “single-board systems” that scale up and out via high-speed USB4 and 100Gb Ethernet

- GMS-patented cooling rails and floating “clamshell” for superior cooling, shock/vibration tolerance and reliability (USPTO: 4456790)

- Intel® Tiger Lake-H up to 8 cores (2.6GHz, 4.6GHz Turbo Boost)

- TPM 2.0 for root of trust, Secure Boot or Windows 10/11

- 64GB DDR4 ECC DRAM via upgradeable SO DIMMs

- Display Port/DVI to VPX (P2)

- Boasts massive 455 Gbits/s bandwidth to external I/O

- Embedded System Controller for Control Plane / Intelligent Power

- x16 and x8 PCIe Gen 4 onboard/off-board inter-connect fabric with

- Operates on single 12 VDC supply from VPX backplane

optional fiber extender frees OpenVPX bus - Full size MXM for GPGPU, FPGA, or bus extension - 4x USB4/Thunderbolt™ (40Gbps each) USB-C with optional fiber (100m) and 100W+ Power Delivery (each) - Dual 100Gb Ethernet ports

- VITA 65 profile SLT3-PAY-1F1F2U1TU1T1U1T-14.2.16 - Modular stack (CPU/Carrier/HSIO) for upgradeable processor and OpenVPX pinout/profile changes without changing backplane - Available as single- or dual-slot air- or conduction-cooled modules (1” pitch for conduction, 0.8” pitch for convection)

- Dual 10 GigE Base-KR to VPX (P1) - RAID-capable, quad M.2 sites for storage or I/O - 2x USB 3.2 Gen 1 (5 Gbps) via USB-C w/power for console and I/O - 1x GigE, 8x GPIO, 2x COM, 2x USB, SATA/PCIe to VPX (P2) - Dual SAM™ I/O add-in modules for MIL-1553, ARINC-429, NTDS, GPS, or legacy I/O

GENERAL MICRO SYSTEMS, INC. TRUSTED AND DEPLOYED SINCE 1979 (800) 307-4863 / GMS4SBC.COM

All General Micro Systems, Inc products are proudly designed and manufactured in the U.S.A.

All designs copyright ©2021, General Micro Systems, Inc.

THE NEXT BIG THING IN RFSoC IS HERE AND IT’S ONLY 2.5" × 4" POWERFUL

SMALL

DEPLOYABLE

Models 6001 and 6003 QuartzXM modules enable the rapid integration and deployment of RFSoC technology.

And the SWaP-friendly design is ideal for aircraft pods, unmanned vehicles and mast-mounted radars.

A Zynq® UltraScale+™ RFSoC plus a full suite of pre-loaded IP modules, robust Navigator ® software, high-speed 100 GigE interfaces and fully integrated hardware from Mercury, formerly Pentek, helps shorten your development time and reduce your design risk.

pentek.com/go/mesrfsoc

[Form Factors] QuartzXM Module SOSA aligned 3U VPX 3U VPX SFF platforms PCIe