The post Indian Army neutralizes drone on LoC with DRDO’s advanced system. appeared first on IMR.

The post IAF to Enhance Counter-Drone Defense with Indigenous Bhargavastra System appeared first on IMR.

GOLETA, Calif. ― Teledyne FLIR, part of Teledyne Technologies Incorporated, today announced the release of the Neutrino LC CZ 15-300, the latest Neutrino IS series model of mid-wavelength infrared (MWIR) camera modules with integrated continuous zoom (CZ) lenses.Designed for integrated solutions requiring crisp, long range, SD or HD MWIR imaging, the ITAR-free Neutrino IS series offers size, weight, power, and cost (SWaP+C) benefits to original equipment manufacturers (OEM) and system integrators for airborne, unmanned, C-UAS, security, ISR, and targeting applications.

“The Neutrino IS series portfolio and our ability to combine our off-the-shelf MWIR cameras and lenses provide integrators faster time to market, superior performance, and lower cost,” said Dan Walker, vice president of product management, Teledyne FLIR. “This model launch demonstrates our rapid integration capability from a single supplier, taking what once required multiple suppliers and more than two years to complete.”

Based on Teledyne FLIR HOT FPA technology, the Neutrino LC CZ 15-300 offers high performance, 640×512 HD MWIR imagery and 15 mm to 300 mm CZ capability for ruggedized products requiring long life, low power consumption, and quiet, low vibration operation. The long-life FL-100 linear cryocooler drives reliable operation and an industry-leading two-year warranty, further reducing integration risk and cost of ownership. 

All Neutrino IS products include a Teledyne FLIR CZ lens integrated with a Neutrino SWaP Series camera module (VGA or SXGA). The camera module and lens are designed for each other, providing optimal performance not achievable when buying and integrating cameras and lenses from multiple sources. Teledyne FLIR also provides highly-qualified technical services teams for integration support and expertise throughout the development and design cycle.

All Neutrino series are classified under US Department of Commerce jurisdiction as EAR 6A003.b.4.and are not subject to International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).To learn more about the entire Neutrino family visit www.teledyneflir.com/neutrino.

The post Teledyne FLIR Announces the Neutrino LC CZ 15-300 Demonstrating Rapid MWIR Integration Capability appeared first on IMR.

“First deployment is happening at the civil airports, which are owned by Adani’s and the intention is to take it to the largest set of airports within the country – and then you talk about any critical establishment, nuclear establishment, seaports, power plants, each and every establishment which require counter drone technology,” Ashish Rajvanshi, CEO of Adani Defence & Aerospace said.

Adani Airports operates Ahmedabad, Lucknow, Mangaluru, Jaipur, Guwahati and Thiruvananthapuram airports through the Airports Authority of India’s globally competitive tendering process. And in February 2020, the company signed the Concession Agreement (CA) for three airports and subsequently commenced operations in Mangaluru International Airport (Mangaluru), Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport (Lucknow), Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport (Ahmedabad). The company also manages 12 ports.

Adani Elbit Advanced Systems India Limited, a joint venture between Adani Defence & Aerospace and Elbit Systems, Israel has set up the first private UAV manufacturing complex at Adani Aerospace Park in Hyderabad to assemble unmanned aerial platforms.

The company is manufacturing Hermes 900 Unmanned Aerial Platforms and marketing it to international customers.

The post Adani to deploy C-UAS equipment at major airports appeared first on IMR.

Undoubtedly, countries are investing large sums for R&D and procurement of the unmanned combat aerial systems (UCAS). The US Air Force received the prototype of the vehicle-mounted C-UAS – High-Energy Laser Weapon System (HELWS) in 2019. As per the Congressional Research Service paper of Jan 2021, the US Army as well as the US Navy, is working on the development of computer-enabled C-UAS products in collaboration with the Defense Digital Service. As per the Navy Technology news of 17 Mar 21, the US Navy is set to deploy the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, (ODIN) and the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) in 2021. It took the delivery of HELIOS from Lockheed Martin for testing in January 2021. Lockheed Martin is also developing a 60kW laser weapon system combining multiple fiber lasers to counter drone attacks. Further, ICARUS system, a cyber solution to combat small drone threats, has also been developed.

The race to the swift has nations vying for leveraging the 5G spectrum, since the space to render effective counters to the UAS will vacillate across the electro-magnetic spectrum, utilizing both passive and offensive measures. The range includes radar systems, microwave weapons, jammers, directed energy weapons, swarms riding artificial intelligence and autonomous systems. The cocktail is indeed a heady mix, but it also reflects the lethal operating milieu that militaries will need to contend with in not too distant a future.

Transformational Technologies

Presently, the established means to neutralize UAS is by resorting to physical downing means. Millimeter wave (mmW) radar along with data fusion methods are considered promising trends in the future. Due to the low footprint and low collateral damage, Hacking and Spoofing have emerged as a promising negation solutions, though a package to develop mature scalable, modular and affordable solution is a while away.

AI and ML in the domain of C-UAS assists the human operator in the loop to overcome complexities of sheer volume and speed of an impending attack. The process combines data from multiple sensors and fuses output to be used collaboratively with available data. The database to train the algorithms for ML is extrapolated from existing radars. The decision matrix loop of an incoming attack is in seconds for the operator to detect, mitigate and neutralize the UAS. The dilemma lies in the threat assessment, which is eased by AI that helps improve quality and speed of decision-making.

To optimize the process from Detection to Strike, use of ‘Quantum Computing’ (QC) is also being envisaged. Though the concept is the nascent stage, as the method to leverage these ‘surge technologies’ by factoring life cycles and operationalizing paradigms is still being worked out. QC is considered ideal for detection of patterns and conjuring digital signatures.

What needs to be understood is that AI and ML is good to optimize processes (by training on the datasets to track/recognize the drones) and is ideal for detection; however, for initiating the Strike, the operator in the loop is mandated. This is to guard against cyber threat of a malware being introduced into the system that would generate algorithms, turning the weapon rogue. The scientific community is working on the intrigue of trying to ‘Program Common Sense’, as it were. The approach being adopted by countries on the throes of developing Counter-UAS technologies using AI and ML are:-

• Focusing on the ability to democratize data and use it to generate intelligence.

• Enhance decision making by assisting human operator in the extremely short time critical window.

• Develop infrastructure at the ‘Edge’ to transform data collected into intelligence/ insight.

The ultimate aim of the C-UAS philosophy is the safe integration of the UAS into the airspace. Methods of detection and mitigation overlap and are often combined to provide a more effective and layered capability.

Policy Basket

Whilst, technological advances in AI, QC and Robotics are transformative, they also pose considerable threats and risks regards ethics, privacy, security and sovereignty, that countries developing these technologies require factoring.

The policies for export of weapons-grade technology followed by China and Russia are fairly accommodative when compared to the control regimes that the US has bound itself by. The Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) Policy, revised in 2018 aims to preserve U.S. national security, its economic security, strengthen strategic U.S. allies, and perpetuate the U.S. military’s technological edge in line with its other international trade policies. The International Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) to which Washington voluntarily adheres, provides a framework of understanding amongst states aimed at limiting the proliferation of missile technology with payload and range of the rockets and UAVs of at least 500 kgs and 300 kms, respectively.

Turkey joined the MTCR in 1997 but China does not participate in the initiative. US intends to institute reforms to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) that would provide a level playing field and allow it to compete with countries that diluted arms export restrictions, especially with respect to drone exports. The debate in the US rages between the aspects of diluted control for equivalence in the economic security and national security and the jury is still out with the Biden administration considering its pros and cons.

India promulgated the rules for UAS titled, “Unmanned Aerial Systems Rules-2021” on 12 Mar 2021. The rules list out the category of UAS and modalities for permits and licence applications and penalties for non-compliance. The civil aviation ministry has also promulgated the UAS National Traffic Management Policy spelling out the architecture, concept of operations and deployment plan for enabling UAS Traffic Management (UTM) ecosystem in India.

Doctrinal Precepts

India and the US have signed four significant foundational agreements reinforcing military cooperation. Progress made by the US in the UCAS domain will assist India leverage the development at some stage. According to Janes, India is the world’s third largest armed force and third largest defence spender after US and China. In the midst of a large military modernization drive, with the indigenous defence industrial bases having been put into motion with a corridor each in the Indian states of UP and Tamil Nadu, the Defence Acquisition Procedure-2020 classifies Capital Procurement under a new category – “Buy (Global – Manufacture in India)” – with minimum 50 per cent indigenous content. The UCAS from any of the Indian allies may be routed through this category.

The air and ground radar package must include low power, low signature KU-band radars, networked by AI compute, made resilient through redundancy, looking at all angles, capable of simultaneous detection and tracking multiple threats (essentially a guard against swarms). The inclusion of directional radio frequency inhibitor in the process would mitigate the UAS by instituting loss of control thereby denying, deterring or disrupting an impending threat. If the electronic counter-attack is insufficient, the kinetic hard-kill option still exists due to the layered approach across the full kill-chain.

Own vulnerabilities must be assessed, factoring AI and ML. A 360-degree cardinal situational awareness, layered with sophisticated AI facilitated techniques to deduce swarm objectives and threat mitigation needs to be propagated. International cyber attacks either through nations or through organizations, leveraging the power of AI can have catastrophic impact on society. Juxtapose this with lethal autonomous weapons and the problems get accentuated.

UCAS is not a silver bullet but a natural corollary to the evolution of UAS continuum. Nagorono-Karabakh was the real conflict experience for the U-CAV. At different levels of operation, the integration levels preferred are:

• At the technical level, there is a requirement of multi-domain solutions.

• At the tactical level, there is greater requirement of integration to develop a common operational picture to avoid fratricide.

• At the operational level, there is requirement of a seamless integration of the UCAS with existing capabilities.

• At the Strategic level, there is a requirement of whole of the government approach. The entire gamut of actions from Prevention (that stresses on the EW signals to Intelligence) to Situational Awareness (that legislates detection, tracking, classification and identification) to Response (by defeating, deterring, destruction or capturing) and to the post event analytics (or PSDA); the entire flow chart of activities is constructed and these precepts incorporated in the CUAS operational strategy.

The Chief of Defence Staff, Gen Bipin Rawat, during a webinar on ‘Shaping the Armed Forces to meet likely current and future challenges’ at the Vivekananda International Foundation, New Delhi, on 7 April, spelt out the emerging paradigm to be adopted by India and he stated, “Future battles requires us to confront the growing capabilities of our adversaries, i.e., the hybrid imprint, collusive support and threat posed from emerging technologies. Needless to say, we cannot fight the next war premised on the experiences and structures of the past wars. The keystone to the way forward is by joint-ness, integration and modernization by imbibing technology in line with the changing security environment and utmost optimization of resources generating greater combat effectiveness”.

Out of the world glare, India has donned the ‘Green (creativity) Hat’ from De Bono’s Six Thinking Hats to try new ideas and perspectives – something vital for assuming leadership in the global context. Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), as part of it next generation Combat Air Teaming System (CATS) has unveiled the Air Launched Flexible Asset (ALFA-S) swarming drone system to penetrate contested airspace. Remember, a swarm itself maybe used as an effective C-UAS against a swarm attack. The approach is collaborative with the USAF’s ‘Air Force Research Labs’ joining the bandwagon with India.

A layered approach with integration of different systems is ideally suited for the Indian approach. Since C-UAS needs to be factored into the air defence philosophy at the Service level, the announcement of an Air Defence Command, as part of the overall theaterization, synergizing all resources under direction of a single theater commander augurs well for the concept. The system must be capable of detecting – tracking -identifying – deterring and ultimately defeating an incoming attack. The strategy must be based on an ‘autonomous’ model with fused systems, capable of more than one vector response, used proactively. It is a concept that needs incorporation sooner than later.     (Concluded)

The post Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems (Part 2) appeared first on IMR.

That the world is riding into a ‘Geo-political flux’ is hardly an intelligent statement to be making these days. Power-play manoeuvres are being initiated at multilateral levels – between nation states and across domains; from military to economic, diplomatic, space and cyber amongst others, to either establish supremacy or have the target nation accede with threat of punitive action. Moves to leverage and posture own national assets to safeguard interests either by forging strategic alliances or through regional constructs are the order of the day. Technology is playing greater role in tipping the balance than was earlier envisaged. With this great power competition has emerged the rise of both high and low-end threats that call for a whole of the nation approach to deal with.

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) are nobody’s exclusive preserve. Today, Gen-Z, through the sheer power of their imagination and result-oriented research has galvanized the concept of flying. Technology has further acerbated the utility and with a few alterations to the aerodynamic and software parameters can mutate the airframe to a lethal military grade weapon. By description, UAS includes both Drones and UAVs and the operators controlling them. Just a couple of months back, the Indian Army exhibited the offensive capability of a Swarm of 75 Autonomous Drones with distributed intelligence and Edge computing, destroying a variety of simulated targets including kamikaze attack capabilities during the Army Day parade in New Delhi in January 2021. The capability also exhibited enhancing and reducing the size of the swarms as per operational requirements.

India, due to its geographic location has been touted as a land of opportunities, threats and paradoxes. The Indian vision is intrinsically linked to its regional aspirations and safeguarding its own national security interests. The implications are instructive and include maintenance of territorial integrity both from external and internal threats, security of the vital Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC) and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). It’s focus and importance was highlighted, on 8 April, in some ways when USS John Paul of the US Seventh Fleet forayed 130 nautical miles west of the Lakshadweep Islands, inside India’s EEZ, without requesting India’s prior consent, “consistent with international law” amidst much consternation from the Indian Security establishment.

Former US Secretary of Defence, Mark Esper, in a statement at the Air Space and Cyber conference, on 18 Sptember 2019, said, “the conveniences of today’s battlefield will not be the realities of the future.” The underlying message that lay there in pointed, amongst others, to the ever-evolving threats from UAS. Just when the world was awe-struck by the maturation of the UAS, another voyage beyond the final frontiers was being undertaken in the realms of counter-UAS.

Developmental Helix

Development of any ‘Counter-Technology’ goes through an iterative spectrum process from ‘Inactivity’ (solution thrust upon, often with disastrous consequences), ‘Reactivity’ to ‘Pre-activity’ and ‘Pro-activity’ (resultant solution best suited to meet developing threats). Employment of UAVs is perceived in multiple roles. With varied armed configurations, armed drones or Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UVACs) are capturing the fancy of nations. Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 UCAVs used in 2020 in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, created history in the disputed region by use of UAVs. War planners across the world have been forced to take a serious note of these weapons, their characteristics and wartime outcomes. The punch that the concept packs for surprise and damage, justifies its utility for scaling and is now an important resource for force planning and packaging.

On 14 September, drones were used to attack the Saudi state-owned Aramco oil facilities leading to a global surge in the crude oil price around the world.

On 1 January 2020, Gen Qasem Soleimani, the Iranian commander, was killed by a US drone strike at Baghdad airport. Some of the other headlines that captured the imagination of the world read – “Trump’s plane was nearly hit by a small drone”, “Ex CIA official warns of Iran, ISIS drones armed with chemical weapons”, “Warning over terrorist attacks using drones given by EU Security Chief”, “Gatwick drone disruption cost over £50 mn” and so on.

Smaller UAS, at times operating as swarms, are becoming the popular weapon of choice. Evolutionary developments in its design and utility to target important communication nerves without collateral damage, something borne in contact warfare, reflects its scalability. When relevant associated sciences like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Deep Learning (DL) algorithms that offer disruptive outcomes are juxtaposed into the concept, the results become reverberant. Today, the UAS propel the users to a whole new level of Information, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR) and strike capabilities. Professional armies need to be alive to this capability, be agile and pivot its advantages.

Though handled at tactical levels, the resource is strategic in its application. Grouping of UAVs in force planning is a necessity for all war entities. Based on weight, they have been categorised into Nano, Micro, Mini, Small and Large UAVs. Also, based on their operational range they are either High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) or Medium Range Long Endurance (MALE) UAVs. Medium range ones are Tactical UAVs and the ones with smaller range are in the Mini and Nano categories.

An in-depth understanding of the characteristics, maturation level and manifestation of the drone architecture, consisting of the unmanned aircraft itself, the ground control station (GCS) and the communication data link (CDL) is necessary to design an effective C-UAS. The C-UAS for desired effectiveness must proliferate domains, technologies, operating frequencies, articulation, manifestation and orchestration and transcend interoperability and synchronization across military systems and organizations. Notably, all UAVs are drones, however, not all drones are UAVs. ‘Counter Drones’ is a science that is fast being developed as the anti-thesis to the still evolving concept of UAS.

Counter-UAS

A C-UAS system can be defined as a mechanism capable of lawfully and safely disabling, disrupting, or seizing control of the UAS. The rapid rise of commercial and military grade technologies including autonomous operations combined with concepts such as ‘Swarming’ and ‘Multi-Modal Operations’ (MMO) requires the development of effective and advanced C-UAS systems. Today, UAS are available to state and non-state actors and individuals. These systems are a low-cost, yet effective means of conducting ISR missions. The operating philosophy of C-UAS includes both detection and mitigation. To placate the palate of the ‘Techno-Doctrinaire’, both techniques are explained in some detail.

Detection Methods

Algorithms fuse data from multiple sources to produce accurate and efficient data for credible detection. Detection is undertaken through the following means:

• Electro-optical, infra red or acoustic to detect target by visual, heat or sound signatures, respectively.

• By use of radar systems. However, accuracy of the system on UAS with smaller surface area is suspect.

• By using radio frequency sensors to identify the wireless signals for control of UAS.

Acoustic Detection. Machine Learning (ML) techniques have been leveraged to classify UAS from the audio data. The signal fingerprinting of the UAS engine is constructed and analyzed. Using Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN), detection is transformed to a binary classification for precision in identification. The technology is yet to achieve maturation, as the nature of acoustic approaches is a limiting factor, which at some stage will be addressed by ML.

Passive RF Detection. All UAS employ Radio Frequencies (RF) data link to its Command & Control (C2). The detection of UAS is derived from the spectral patterns of transmission using Software Defined Radio (SDR) receivers. Spectrum patterns are dependent on telemetry protocols that introduce errors in detection. True fix on the UAS is offered by unique signature study and vibration along with patterns of the transmitted wireless signals.

Vision based UAS Detection. Vision based detection technologies focus on Image Processing (IP). Videos and cameras are used in capturing rogue UAS images. Using computational methods, the ground station figures the appearance of UAS from the videos and pictures. The process introduces inherent challenges of distinguishing background signals from foliage and flying birds Image segmentation methods us Neural Networks (NN) to identify the UAS. A twin approach leverages the Thermal Camera to detect the UAS and NN to identify the UAS. An algorithm operating on an embedded system identifies the UAS in movement and the datasets of the pictures and videos train the algorithms to be discerning the UAS from the background. Evolution of Deep Neural Networks (DNN) in processing of image facilitates UAS detection and hold tremendous potential.

Radar based UAS Detection. Radars like Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave (FMCW), amongst all the sensors have the advantage of being time and weather agnostic. As per its principle of operation, they measure the range and velocity to provide detection.

Mitigation Methods

Mitigation technologies include the physical capture or jamming of the UAS. Jamming either through the RF Command and Control (C2) or the Global Positioning System C2 Jamming or Spoofing. UAS can also be neutralized or destroyed using guns, nets, by use of Eagles, Directed Energy or through traditional Air Defense systems. The criterion for use is ‘low cost per engagement’ and ‘least collateral damage’.

Physical Capture. In the physical capture of the UAS, soldiers fire projectiles through guns, which has nets stored in the warhead to capture a flying UAS. Directional Electromagnetic Pulse is also used to disable the control system.The method primarily focuses on disabling the mobility of Drone and control system and has the advantages of easy manipulation, lightweight and quick assembling. Itis efficient and low cost, but not pilot friendly.

Jamming. Another approach at mitigation is to jam the system or sensors rendering the UAS inoperable by the flight controller. This is the most common method at neutralizing an incoming attack. The defenders leverage signal to noise to interfere in the operation of UAS for neutralization.

Exploit Vulnerabilities. This deals with prioritizing the controls by either exploiting the vulnerabilities in the system by either use of GPS or sensor technology to alter existing protocols to control the drone and land it safely for subsequent analysis.     (contd in May 2021)

The post Counter Unmanned Aerial Systems (Part 1) appeared first on IMR.