The calculus, officials said, means batches of older radios and communication systems will be left behind. And troops will have to acclimate to a gradually shrinking number of radios, tailored to operational needs.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe have a small window of opportunity where we can, you know, pivot from legacy systems and programs to new ones,\u201d Army Chief Information Officer Raj Iyer told reporters in October on the sidelines of the\u00a0Association of the U.S. Army annual convention<\/a>. \u201cWe have to fight for the Army we have today, and we have to transform for the Army of 2030 at the same time. I think this is the biggest challenge that we have.\u201d<\/p>\n But what does that mean for soldiers on the ground who grew accustomed to ubiquitous radios that the service\u00a0scrambled to have<\/a>\u00a0in Iraq and Afghanistan? According to Iyer, the service is evaluating what is \u201cactually needed at the battalion level and below.\u201d<\/p>\n The move comes amid a pivot to division-level fighting and large-scale combat operations against potential foes like Russia and China, world powers with sophisticated signals intelligence and electronic warfare capabilities.<\/p>\n The Army, specifically, is considering how it can pare down its inventory of older single channel ground and airborne radio system, or SINCGARS, devices. Chief among the considerations: satisfying the Department of Defense\u2019s requirements for so-called data centricity while ensuring there is enough kit for soldiers to use now.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have cryptographic concerns and dates to meet modernization objectives in the crypto space. The floor for that is rapidly rising,\u201d Col. Shermoan Daiyaan, with the\u00a0Army\u2019s Program Executive Office for Command, Control and Communications-Tactical<\/a>, or PEO C3T, told C4ISRNET and Army Times at the convention.<\/p>\n \u201cOn the tactical radio side, we\u2019re trying to wrestle with ways to get crypto mod met and, oh, by the way, manage a budget that\u2019s counting every dollar for the most value it can get,\u201d Daiyaan continued. \u201cWhat we\u2019re trying to decide is: Where do we start to make some trades in risk?\u201d<\/p>\n The Army this spring selected two companies,\u00a0L3Harris Technologies and Thales Defense and Security<\/a>, to furnish voice and data radios as part of its combat net radio modernization program and a broader push to insulate military networks. The arrangement is worth as much as $6.1 billion.<\/p>\n More than 1,100 radios, including those to be used for quality checks and preliminary testing, had been ordered as of April, according to PEO C3T. L3Harris secured $20.6 million of the initial order; Thales, $18.2 million.<\/p>\n The program, the Army said, supports Pentagon and\u00a0National Security Agency<\/a>\u00a0cryptographic goals as well as the unified network strategy.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Army has too many radios, and as we get into being in a contested environment, we\u2019ve got to make sure that our radios are protected, our communication is protected,\u201d Iyer said. \u201cAnd that means that we\u2019ve got to modernize them with this type one encryption that\u2019s mandated by NSA.\u201d<\/p>\n Who will keep their radios?<\/strong><\/p>\n The Army is attempting to determine the best way to phase in modernized tactical radios and phase out legacy versions, according to Iyer. One thing is already clear:\u00a0modernization is expensive<\/a>, and there isn\u2019t money for the service to replace every single existing radio with a hardened one.<\/p>\n \u201cFor us to modernize our radios for encryption, that\u2019s a lot of money. When you look at the quantity of radios that we have in the Army, the cost and time that it takes us to modernize these radios gets us into the 2035-2040 timeframe,\u201d he said. \u201cThat is clearly not going to meet the Army of 2030\u2032s needs.\u201d<\/p>\n In addition to evaluating what echelons actually need as many radios as they\u2019ve had in recent years, Iyer indicated service officials are evaluating whether different theaters of operation \u2014 and different threats \u2014 have\u00a0different communications security requirements<\/a>.<\/p>\n He decried a one-size-fits-all mindset that he claimed influenced distribution of communications equipment in the past, pointing to lessons learned from today\u2019s battlefields.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen we were fighting the Taliban and ISIS, it was one thing,\u201d\u00a0Iyer said<\/a>. What the Defense Department is observing about the Russians and Chinese, he added, \u201cis a very different thing.\u201d<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.fie.undef.edu.ar\/ceptm\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/LEKI7MO4EVG7VEVXTCMMP4OMUQ.jpg\")