Enhancing Battlefield Communications
through Network Integration

Download article as PDF

The ability to sense and observe activity on the battlefield in real time has never been greater with surveillance drones at work in the sky above, equipped with video and infrared capabilities, as well as intelligence gathered from the adversary's use of the electromagnetic spectrum. The diverse range of sensors are matched by an almost equal number of different communication links including wideband and narrowband waveforms, military and civilian. Much of the data gathered needs to be transmitted in its entirety from the sensor to a specialist to extract the important information and feed the commanders who will decide on the course and sequencing of any action so that all activities remain coordinated and in line with the wider intent.

Force elements demand robust and resilient communications that deliver the necessary services at the right level. There is a growing requirement for enhanced survivability, including minimising electronic signatures and operating at greater range to enable greater agility, tempo and dispersal.

The diagram below is only one example of the variation of communications links that are typically seen in the modern battlespace.

#	Role	Example Bearer Type
1	Strategic Surveillance UAV	Wideband Military Link (50+kms)
2	Kamikaze strike drone	Wideband Commercial Link (1-3kms)
3	Tactical Surveillance Drone	Wideband Commercial Link (1-3kms)
4	Reach Back Communications	Typically Military LOS or SatCom or commercial 4G infrastructure (50+kms)
5	Vehicle Communications	Typically V/UHF Military waveforms (10+kms dispersion)
6	Mounted to Dismounted Communications	Dismounted commander typically VHF with military waveform, range (5-10kms)
7	Dismounted Soldier Communications	Typically shorter range (1 - 2kms) so UHF or handheld MANET

The growing peer engagement threats means battlefield communications will be subject to enemy action so need to be resilient. This requires renewed emphasis on low probability of detection (LPD) and low probability of interception (LPI) for critical data communications and all voice communications to maximise protection of the force. The peer engagement threat does not immediately exclude the use of commercial off-the-shelf solutions (COTs) as their low cost and high availability could compensate for reduced effectiveness. However, COTs system deployment needs to be managed to minimise damage if the system is detected and targeted.

Battlefield Data Processing and Dissemination

Timely and accurate decision-making information is vital for battlefield success. Importantly, information needs to be routed to the correct command level to be reviewed, a plan of action developed and orders issues. This is the typical observe, orientate, decide and act (OODA) loop. Data flows are different at each sequence of the OODA loop. The 'observe' activity typically requires higher bandwidth services delivered to HQ staff whereas the 'act' activity typically consists of lower rate data flows (target locations, description) and voice to enact tactical manoeuvres as illustrated below.

In the battlefield example above, information for decision making is focused at the HQ level. Here, the video source from the strategic surveillance assets will alert the staff to the incoming enemy threat. At the HQ, the surveillance sources can be observed by trained individuals on larger screens with easier recourse to other assets and specialists that may be necessary as part of the 'orientate' stage. In this HQ environment, a fuller assessment can be made of the threat, together with any other concurrent enemy activity and if there is a wider coordinated activity.

From this, an appropriate response can be decided and orders issued to forward units at the Edge to 'act' on. In general, the orders can be communicated on narrowband links as they are smaller pieces of information such as target locations, map overlays and/or voice. Conveniently, these lower data rates services at the Edge of the battlespace can be transmitted over narrowband links and narrowband transmissions lend themselves to LPD/LPI techniques. Voice, blue force tracking (BFT), target locations, orders etc. can all be delivered in frequency hopping LPD, narrowband waveforms.

Ultimately, voice at the Edge remains the most important service - plans rarely survive beyond first enemy contact and the immediacy and emphasis of a voice command cannot be replaced with data exchange. In these tense periods there is little time to engage with end user devices and not all dismounted soldiers carry digital input/output devices, so voice is the only option.

Hybrid Network Solution for Dismounted Soldiers

Careful consideration of multiple trade off decisions need to be made when selecting, planning and implementing a tactical communications network to ensure appropriate networks are designed to support the various services in the operating environment. Flexibility to adapt the network for the mission or evolve as technologies and threats develop has also become an important aspect when architecting and procuring an enduring solution.

Traditional V/UHF military radio networks deliver resilient communications at range and allow direct exchange of voice and data between mounted and dismounted users.

Wideband 'flat network' architectures deliver high throughput and enable the dissemination of data rich services. However, this come at a cost in terms of soldier burden, detectability, shorter range, and more spectrum required.

Both traditional V/UHF military radios and wideband 'flat network' radio networks approaches have their specific benefits and these can be assessed against national operational requirements. Both types of radios have common drawbacks as they can be more bulky and heavy than ideally needed. Both radio types also carry a significant price tag, so it is often simply not affordable to provide every soldier with either type of radio. It is also clear that the majority of dismounted users only require a subset of these radios' capabilities, namely secure voice and location reporting.

The key question is: can different radio types be combined seamlessly in a hybrid network to take advantage of different capabilities where they are needed, while maintaining information exchange to support operations?

Thales has recently worked with two customers to show how voice and data can be seamlessly shared between two different networks to support dismounted soldier operations. One customer solution used SquadNet, integrated with a longer-range V/UHF handheld radio, and the second customer also used SquadNet, integrated with a wideband network.

Example Customer Configurations

In both cases the customers wanted to explore the benefits of a two radio solution, utilising the SquadNet soldier radio for section/team members, benefiting from its lower SWaP, lower probability of detection and being significantly more affordable. Customer A prioritised range, low detectability and platform interoperability, so wanted integration with a V/UHF military radio. The data requirements included blue force tracking and target information. Customer B was looking for higher rate data services. This customer had a much larger army so had a suitable number of troops deployed to support the node density needed to ensure reliable range from the wideband radio. Both approaches provide an all-informed network with command segregated voice nets with blue force tracking and target data shared with all users.

The table below shows services on each of the separate network and which services are shared between the networks.
In both cases, Thales achieved an integrated system without the use of bespoke solutions by using standards products and interfaces that were available in the market and minimised the additional burden. Both solutions were demonstrated using very similar configurations which are detailed below for voice and data network bridging. In both cases, the section leader and Second-in-command carried a SquadNet radio and a V/UHF or wideband radio, and used an Android end user device for C2 and data bridging.

Voice Bridging

For both customer demonstrations, the voice bridging across the different networks was achieved using the Invisio V60 V2 PTT.

This solution requires no additional hardware as the voice bridging is now a feature of the Invisio V60 V2 PTT unit.

Decrypted audio is passed from one net to the second net in analogue, where it is digitised and encrypted onto the rebroadcasting net. Encryption remains within the individual radios. It is also possible to configure the system to only allow re-transmission in one direction if there are different security domains.

Data Bridging

For both solutions a smartphone was used to manage the transfer of data between the two networks.

For customer A with the V/UHF military backbone radio network, Thales employed the TMS2 application to manage the data flows including BFT, targets, text messages etc. All of the data flows from the SquadNet network were rebroadcast on the V/UHF network to handheld and vehicle units.

For customer B with the wideband MANET radio, the data integration was undertaken using the CIVTAK application. Similarly, all data flows from the SquadNet network were reported onto the CIVTAK application where it was rebroadcast on the wideband backbone network.

Typical Services Required	Wireband Network	V/UHF Network	SquadNet Network	Bridging between Networks
Voice
Blue Force Tracking
Target Locations
Points of Interest
SMS
Pictures
Videos
Long Range
Vehicle Interop

Benefits of the Hybrid Network Approach

V/UHF and wideband radio approaches have their operational merits but both solutions have drawbacks in terms of size weight and power (SWaP), costs and operational limitations. The mixed or hybrid solutions have significant benefits over a single radio solution they enable approximately 60% of the dismounted troops to carry the SquadNet radio with its lower weight, lower power consumption, lower radio frequency signature and lower cost.

In both the hybrid options (SquadNet and V/UHF, or SquadNet and Wideband MANET) there are significant SWaP and cost benefits. Compared to a network of all V/UHF or wideband MANET radios, the hybrid approach was estimated to be at least 40% cheaper than either single radio approach. It is also estimated that the hybrid solution would require 50% less batteries. Overall, the hybrid solution is estimated to be approximately 50% less in overall weight and use 50% less power consumption. With SquadNet employed at the lower level, there is no impact to capability as these users typically don't carry end user devices to manage data nor do they have a need to engage with platforms.

In Summary

The modern battlefield has a plethora of electronic systems gathering and disseminating data over a diverse set of communications links to provide the information needed to plan and act effectively. The diversity of communications links cannot be achieved within a single ubiquitous 'battlefield waveform' as the trade-offs required would make it unfit for many roles. Going forwards, we need to ensure that architectures, system designs and interfaces are more flexible to enable the various different communications systems employed to manage and exchange information. There are many benefits in adopting multiple and diverse communication networks in the battlespace:

1. Optimised communications for each system to provide specific services, meet range requirements, deal with operational challenges such as jamming or detection and provide appropriate SWaP for the use.
2. There are very significant savings to be made in cost, weight and power consumption by optimising communications for specific users. For example, the hybrid network approach for dismounted soldiers explained above offers the potential to cut cost, power consumption and weight approximately in half compared to a single waveform approach.
3. The diversity in communication systems offers more flexibility to align appropriate bearer networks with specific operations (the 'Golf-bag' approach).
4. It is easier to evolve and adapt an individual network to meet new operational or threat scenarios, or swap in a new communications network, as each network is standalone.
5. Multiple networks and waveforms are inherently more robust as there are different waveforms, frequencies and synchronisation mechanisms all making it more difficult for an adversary to degrade communications.

The work Thales is undertaking with various customers demonstrates how different communications networks in the battlefield can be readily integrated to achieve seamless information exchange. Much of the work undertaken has involved dismounted soldiers, making it critical to minimise the physical and cognitive burden of any solution.

For further information on integrating communications on the battlefield, especially integration on the dismounted soldier, please contact Thales.

For more information please visit:
http://www.thalesgroup.com