search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ARMY AL&T


CCDC’s work modernizing these technologies will enable the Army to conduct precision strikes and maintain battlefield dominance and lethality while operating in a GPS-denied or -degraded environment.


Soldiers, including precise time and exqui- site positioning without access to globally networked information. Tis will enable units that are separated in battle to func- tion as a cohesive whole and complete their missions. Te typical ARL timeline for these technologies has been substan- tially accelerated to deliver prototypes for Soldier testing within a few years. Key to this effort are Soldier touch-point events in which the ultimate users have an opportu- nity to evaluate the prototypes and make recommendations early in the develop- ment process. Tis helps the Army deliver better capabilities more quickly.


PUTTING TECHNOLOGY IN SOLDIERS’ HANDS Testing technologies at field exercises that simulate battlefield conditions is one key to the success of the APNT capabilities we are currently developing. We achieved this during the PNT Assessment Exer- cise, or PNTAX, at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, in July and August 2019. Tirty-four Soldiers from I Corps, U.S. Army Europe, the Colorado and New Mexico National Guards, U.S. Army Special Operations Command, Joint Special Operations Command and the Army Cyber Directorate participated in the event.


White Sands Missile Range is one of a few real-world settings where Soldiers can test capabilities in a GPS-denied or -degraded environment. During the exercise,


developers and Soldiers assessed how more than 80 mounted, dismounted and NAVWAR capabilities and systems oper- ated within a real-world, anti-access and area-denied environment. Te information we collected is helping us understand how developing systems perform and how they can significantly improve Soldier opera- tions in GPS-contested environments.


We also conduct other Soldier touch-point events throughout the year, including technology demonstrations, capability assessments and live-fire and training exer- cises. Our scientists and engineers gather feedback through these touch points that ultimately influence how CCDC matures technology to get it ready to transition to our partners. We gain vital insight to ensure new systems will be operation- ally successful by putting prototypes and systems directly into the hands of Soldiers.


CCDC works with hundreds of nontra- ditional defense companies, industry and academia partners to capture emerging technologies and refine APNT capabil- ities. One of the challenges, however, is testing commercial products on the mili- tary network. Later this year, we plan to launch the Open Innovation Lab, or OIL, at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. OIL will enable our industry partners to test their technologies in an unclassified lab with an open architecture. An open architecture not only fosters competi- tion among vendors, it also accelerates


innovation by providing a steady flow of information.


CONCLUSION CCDC is sharing information gathered from our partnerships with industry and academia and from Soldier touch-point events so we can refine requirements, develop technologies to fill capability gaps and accelerate timelines to field technol- ogy more quickly. Equipping Soldiers with the most advanced APNT technol- ogy will give them a critical advantage on the battlefield and enable them to fight and win against any adversary.


For mor e informat ion, www.army.mil/ccdc.


MAJ. GEN. JOHN A. GEORGE is the commanding general of CCDC. Before assuming command of CCDC, he served as deputy director and chief of staff of the U.S. Army Futures Command Futures and Concepts Center. He graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point and was commissioned into the Army in 1988. He has an M.S. in social psychology from Penn State University and an M.S. in national resource strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, which is now known as the Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy. His previous Road Map article, on the Synthetic Training Environment priority, appeared in the Spring 2020 issue.


https://asc.ar my.mil 117 go to


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196