Blue Force Tracking
Written by Peter Buxbaum
GCT 2011 Volume: 2 Issue: 5 (October)
In 2002, during the run-up to Operation Iraqi Freedom, combat planners and commanders began clamoring for a satellite-based blue force tracking (BFT) system. Such a system would identify friendly forces without the necessity of line-of-sight communications, to minimize battlefield confusion and prevent fratricide.
The Army succeeded in adapting its Movement Tracking System (MTS), which identifies the location of logistics assets, to BFT. The decision to install BFT in units designated to deploy to Iraq was made in October 2002.
What prevailed before the satellite system came about was a terrestrial radio-based system, which had obvious limitations. The radio-based system, unlike its satellite-based counterpart, was subject to vagaries of weather and topography. The satellite-based system is impervious to those impediments.
The BFT system mounts ruggedized computers, monitors, keyboards and position location guidance systems in trucks, tanks, HMMWVs and other vehicles, depending upon the application, as well as in helicopters. The system automatically relays the vehicle’s position and receives regular updates on the location of other friendly forces, which are displayed graphically on a screen.
BFT is only one method for identifying friendly forces on the battlefield. Other devices equip vehicles and troops with special equipment that reflects infrared waves, allowing warfighters to identify friendly forces as part of the immediacy of a shoot/don’t shoot decision. At least one company is working on a device that would automate that battlefield process with radio frequency technology.
The next generation of BFT, which will provide the systems with greater capacity and bandwidth, is currently being tested. The future of BFT will likely see blue force data brought down to the lower echelons of warfighters, to units of dismounted soldiers, perhaps eventually to individual warfighters over handheld devices.
“BFT is the system necessary to pass information about where soldiers are,” said Greg Eslinger, a member of Fairfax County, Va.-based General Dynamics’ technical staff who focuses on handheld devices. “That system consists of a network to pass information from a position sensor worn by soldiers and the means of transmission, whether that is a radio or a satellite.”
The first satellite-based BFT system used commercial satellite communications and services. The Department of Defense later asked industry partners to develop a system using the more reliable L-band satellite frequency. Fairfax County, Va.-based Northrop Grumman is the prime contractor for the Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2), a battle command system which includes BFT.
“Deploying the satellite-based system had a big impact on affordability,” said Chris Lerch, director of battle command programs at Northrop Grumman. “We were able to develop a satellite transceiver that was cheaper than the radios available to the Army at that time.” With over 100,000 FBCB2 platforms now deployed, it is the most widely deployed command and control platform fielded by the U.S. military, according to Lerch.
“The original BFT was a quantum step from line-of-sight tracking,” said Phil Berry, vice president of Carlsbad, Calif.-based ViaSat’s Command and Control Situational Awareness unit, which provides the BFT satellite transport layer. “It provides higher capacity and lower latency rates, which impacts the accuracy of information on exactly where warfighters are located.”
Since the original deployment of BFT, two developments—the FBCB2 Joint Capabilities Release (JCR), which was deployed in January, and the Joint Battle Command-Platform (JBC-P), the next spiral of development—allow the emerging system to converge Army and Marine Corps BFT on the same battle command platform. JCR and JBC-P also enhanced FBCB2 capabilities with the availability of type one secret encryption.
BFT2, which is currently in initial production, will provide enhanced benefits, according to Lerch. “It will dramatically increase bandwidth,” he said. “That’s going to save the Army money and it’s going to reduce data latency.” The increased bandwidth will also better allow system users to share information.
“It’s going to be a noticeable improvement over the previous systems,” said Berry. “It also includes room for growth so that as the Army continues to develop applications, the infrastructure can accommodate them.”
BFT2 was designed with the military’s requirements in mind, according to Berry. “We tailored commercial technologies to meet those requirements,” he said. “Before, we simply adapted commercial technologies and that approach had some limitations.” The system recently completed a successful field demonstration. Berry expects the rollout of the technology to begin in January.
BFT is best thought of as part of a battle command system. Other devices work to identify friendly forces as part of a fire control system, in which decisions to engage or not engage a particular target must be made as part of operations on the battlefield.
The way this currently works is through the use of products such as those supplied by Bonita Springs, Fla.-based Cejay Engineering. These include active devices such as strobe lights and passive devices such as reflective patches and panels worn by troops and applied to vehicles.
“Strobe systems are placed on individuals or vehicles and broadcast a signal not visible to the human eye,” explained Cejay’s Mark Haynes. “Viewing the signal requires an infrared device, which detects the heat signature of an object.”
Passive markers include reflective materials in the flag patch worn on a soldier’s shoulder or on the infrared reflective sheeting with which vehicles are equipped. “An infrared viewer detects the cool image conveyed by the reflective material,” said Haynes.
There are a number of advantages to the use of reflective material on the battlefield, according to Haynes. “You need to give deploying troops quick and easy instructions,” he said. “It needs to be failure-proof and it needs to be supported in a number of different environments.”
The system is also conducive to coalition operations. “Not all of our allies are on the same page with technology,” said Haynes. “Many of them don’t have the budgets to invest in the kind of technology that the U.S. does.”
An attempt to take the concept of battlefield identification one better has been developed by Waltham, Mass.-based Raytheon Co. Raytheon’s miniaturized interrogation antenna, the size of an ice cube and weighing a fraction of an ounce, employs millimeter wave technology that has been certified for use on combat vehicles, but has yet to be acquired or deployed.
“The antenna sends a message, ‘We are fixing to shoot you,’” said Billy Mitchell, Raytheon’s business development manager of combat identification systems, “and the target responds, ‘Don’t shoot, I am a friend.’”
The millimeter wave band radio frequency operates at 50 GHz, explained Mitchell. “It is high frequency,” he said, “but operates at low power, making it difficult to detect. It is very covert and safe to use in a field environment.”
The technology itself is not new and got its start during Operation Desert Storm. What is new is its small size and light weight. The new miniaturized antenna replaces a device which measured around 20 square inches and was much heavier.
Raytheon’s product comes to compete with reflective panels and to complement blue force tracking. “IR devices are getting outmoded and are of questionable efficiency,” said Mitchell. “Our system is a definite improvement and works in adverse weather conditions. With BFT, a user has to dial into the system and look at a screen to see where everybody is. The information is subject to delays, although it is getting better.”
During testing at a 2009 exercise, the radio frequency-based technology was mounted inside an F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter aircraft pod. Raytheon’s product provided an air-to-ground capability to identify and locate friendlies equipped with the technology at typical tactical close air support ranges. Raytheon’s technology can be applied to airborne platforms, ground vehicles and dismounted warfighters, according to Mitchell. The technology is designed for ease of integration with surveillance, targeting and soldier systems.
The future of BFT, according to Lerch, is to extend its functionality to handheld devices so that blue force information can be made available to individual dismounted soldiers. Northrop Grumman’s Joint Tactical Handheld product is a software package that runs on Android smartphones. The software provides a BFT display in full color as well as free text messages and military email. “The key feature is that it is interoperable with JCR as it has been fielded by the Army,” said Lerch. The product has been delivered to the Army for evaluation.
General Dynamics has introduced the GD300, a wearable computer designed with BFT in mind. “The ability to communicate and knowing where your buddies are, those are the two most important capabilities of the GD300,” said Eslinger. The device runs on the Android operating system.
“It is a rugged device built with soldiers and security in mind,” said Eslinger. “With the Android operating system, the GD300 accommodates current and emerging applications for warfighters and is capable of running tactical maps, geo-positioning, and TIGR.” The Tactical Ground Reporting system, first fielded by the Army in 2007, allows soldiers to collect and share information to improve situational awareness. The Army is currently testing the GD300.
The GD300 is also capable of running applications to identify adversaries. “A soldier running into a potential person of interest in a village can message back to the vehicle or forward operating base to send a picture,” said Eslinger. “The soldier can then determine what to do with the person he is engaged with.” ♦