Like the British Navy, the United States Navy is enamored with "unmanned ships, submarines, and aircraft." The question I would like to see addressed is in a "high-end" fight with an opponent with various electronic warfare capabilities, will we be able to communicate and direct our unmanned systems. This worry applies to our GPS navigation systems too. Just the rambling thoughts of an old sailor. (I hope I haven't upset anyone. (
In all future warfare we must assume that communications will be intermittent and GNSS may be jammed, spoofed or unavailable. Uncrewed systems therefore cannot depend on continuous remote control; they need sufficient onboard autonomy to continue, return to a safe area or abort according to pre-agreed rules. AI can be a tool to make onboard decisions in the event of loss of GNSS or communications.
To provide further input to these AI there are several examples of how the navigation problem can be mitigated. A HiPAP system, working with cNODE transponders on the seabed, can provide an underwater acoustic position reference to a vessel’s dynamic-positioning system. An inertial navigation system, such as HAIN Reference, combines those acoustic measurements with inertial data: the acoustics constrain the long-term drift, while the inertial system supplies a smooth, high-rate position between acoustic measurements or during short dropouts. Once the seabed references have been established and calibrated, the vessel is no longer wholly dependent upon GNSS for its position reference.
These do not remove the communications problem, but it shows what a resilient architecture should look like: several independent navigation methods, no single point of failure, and enough onboard autonomy to remain safe and operational when both GNSS and communications are disrupted.
Like the British Navy, the United States Navy is enamored with "unmanned ships, submarines, and aircraft." The question I would like to see addressed is in a "high-end" fight with an opponent with various electronic warfare capabilities, will we be able to communicate and direct our unmanned systems. This worry applies to our GPS navigation systems too. Just the rambling thoughts of an old sailor. (I hope I haven't upset anyone. (
In all future warfare we must assume that communications will be intermittent and GNSS may be jammed, spoofed or unavailable. Uncrewed systems therefore cannot depend on continuous remote control; they need sufficient onboard autonomy to continue, return to a safe area or abort according to pre-agreed rules. AI can be a tool to make onboard decisions in the event of loss of GNSS or communications.
To provide further input to these AI there are several examples of how the navigation problem can be mitigated. A HiPAP system, working with cNODE transponders on the seabed, can provide an underwater acoustic position reference to a vessel’s dynamic-positioning system. An inertial navigation system, such as HAIN Reference, combines those acoustic measurements with inertial data: the acoustics constrain the long-term drift, while the inertial system supplies a smooth, high-rate position between acoustic measurements or during short dropouts. Once the seabed references have been established and calibrated, the vessel is no longer wholly dependent upon GNSS for its position reference.
These do not remove the communications problem, but it shows what a resilient architecture should look like: several independent navigation methods, no single point of failure, and enough onboard autonomy to remain safe and operational when both GNSS and communications are disrupted.