More on the U.S. Military embedded systems sector.
The most recent description of the future of the U.S. military force structure is contained in the December 1997 report of National Defense Panel, "Transforming Defense - National Security in the 21st Century." Under the section "Projecting Military Power", we find:
Forward-deployed land forces would have to operate dispersed. They would not operate from a few fixed bases characterized by "iron mountains" of supplies, but would rather rely on a combination of numerous small, dispersed supply points. Along with dispersion, ground units would emphasize speed to facilitate the ability to concentrate rapidly for close combat as required. They also may operate in smaller units that place great emphasis on seeing deep (through Special Operations Forces and deep-reconnaissance teams, along with reconnaissance helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles). These units would be integrated into the U.S. reconnaissance architecture, which would also comprise constellations of satellites and unmanned aerial vehicle "grids." Employing rocket artillery, unmanned combat aerial vehicles, and attack helicopters, these units would both emphasize extended-range precision strikes and support similar strikes by air and sea forces. Concentrating ground forces, either to seize or to control certain kinds of terrain (e.g., urban areas), may prove exceedingly challenging in this environment.
Maritime forces would rely more heavily on a "distributed" and networked battle fleet that would comprise, along with carriers, extended-range precision strike forces based on surface and submerged combatants, including submarines, arsenal ships, land-attack destroyers and integrated amphibious forces. The naval expeditionary power projection fleet would employ both short-range aircraft maneuver forces, and reconnaissance and strike unmanned aerial vehicles. Maneuver forces would employ systems that would insert forces to strike or seize objectives while avoiding an enemy's defenses.
Air forces would place greater emphasis on operating at extended ranges, relying heavily on long-range aircraft and extended-range unmanned systems, employing advanced precision and brilliant munitions and based outside the theater of operations. Aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and unmanned combat aerial vehicles operating in theater could stage at peripheral bases outside enemy missile range, or on Mobile Offshore Bases or carrier. Great reliance would be placed on aerial refueling to extend aircraft range, and perhaps on multiple, austere bases in theaters where "touch-and-go" refueling and reaming could take place.
Such a force would be fully joint and increasingly combined, engaging in multidimensional (i.e., integrated ground, sea, and aerospace) and, where possible, multinational operations at close and extended ranges. It would be fully integrated through a global, distributed reconnaisance and intelligence architecture composed of satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles, sensors, and infiltration forces. Unmanned systems would likely provide a growing proportion of airborne reconnaissance and strike forces.
Impressive goals to reach within a decade or two. How is the military going to achieve them on reduced budgets? The report answers this question:
First and foremost, we must be able to exploit advances in commercial technology. Given that commercial technology is ubiquitous, we will have to develop the means to exploit it (i.e., transform technology into military capability) more quickly than our military competitors. We must also recognize that our ability to exploit information technologies to create systems architectures-the integration of forces and platforms-is likely to be a future core capability. Second, we must have effective defensive and offensive information capabilities. Not only must we be able to defend our systems against cyber-attack, but we must also be able to discern the origin or cyber-attacks and provide a commensurate response. (Would someone please warn Mark Brophy his days are numbered.)
It should be obvious to everyone that the U.S. military and allies have to shift into high gear and use WIND's embedded products in ever higher quantity if they intend to get a passing grade when judged against their own goals. In fact the changes required are so great in the military that they have coined the latest buzzword "Revolutions in Military Affairs" (RMA) to try conceptualize the enormity of what is needed.
You probably are beginning to see embedded systems in every piece of military equipment which will be emerging from now on, and a lot of retrofitted embedded systems as well. While you no doubt see zillions of embedded processors needed, you are seeing about half of them. Why? Because of training requirements. You probably forgot training requirements.
How do you think the military is planning to keep everyone at peek performance, given the technological advances envisioned? Not by keeping everyone in school. Consider the following article by Major General Jack Walker, USA (Ret.), "Leveraging Technology for Joint Training" which appeared in a recent Joint Force Quarterly.
One area in which the military is ahead of industry is embedded training, which is defined as a training capability designed or built into operational systems. Its key feature is allowing participants to use the same equipment in training as is employed operationally. Rather than practice tank gunnery on a simulator, for example, embedded training permits the tank crew to practice in their assigned tank with little or no external support. In effect the tank becomes a simulator and the crew gets instant feedback on their performance.
While each service emphasizes embedded training-the current Chief of Staff, U.S. Army, has stated that all new systems must have embedded simulation
There you have it, all these weapons and systems made smart with embedded systems also have to be video games to keep warfighters (what ever happened to the word soldier?) skills razor sharp. Think of all the sophisticated embedded systems.
I can't help but mention one other connection, derived from the public Emultek prospectus. Notice that Emultek won its spurs doing training simulation systems for the Israeli military. WIND's newly-formed relationship with Emultek could prove beneficial to both companies in helping the U.S. military develop and produce new systems with embedded training along with controls.
These are some of the reasons why I think the military sector for WIND already has begun to grow rapidly, and is slated to accelerate in the years to come.
Allen |
