James Lackey, Redstone Scientific Information Center chairman and U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center director, and board members reviewed near-term actions as well as far-term strategic plans during Board of Directors meeting held Mar. 11 at the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center.

March 20th, 2015 By Army News Service - defencetalk.com

The board of directors for the largest science and technology library in the Army met March 11 at the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development and Engineering Center, or AMRDEC.

Redstone Scientific Information Center, or RSIC, is a unique, national asset containing a collection of specialized materials including technical reports, contractor reports, technical memorandums, informational briefs, special reports, and conference papers open to all government employees and contractors at Redstone Arsenal.

In addition to being the largest technical library, it is also the only joint Army/ NASA library.

The RSIC board of directors is composed of various Redstone organizations to include AMRDEC, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, or MSFC, Missile and Space Intelligence Center, Space and Missile Defense Command and most recently, Missile Defense Agency as an emergent funding partner.

“RSIC is extremely important to NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center as a resource for technical data on a wide variety of topics ranging from rocket propulsion to space physics, from systems design to vehicle operations,” said MSFC Center Chief Technologist and board member, Dr. Andrew Keys. “Marshall is committed to working with the ‘Team Redstone’ members to ensure RSIC has a future within our community.”

RSIC Board Chair and AMDREC Director James Lackey shared insight on future development for the center.

“One of the key challenges for RSIC is making a secure transition into a more digital future. The entire definition of what a library means is fundamentally changing,” Lackey said. “Just look at how eBooks are proliferating over traditional hardback products in your very own home. Brave new world concepts of ‘knowledge management’, ‘data mining’, and ‘cloud analytics’ prevail over traditional dusty phrases of ‘card catalog’, ‘bound periodicals’, and ‘microfiche’.”

Library customers can provide information on their topics of interest and the staff will set up a profile in several databases. Customers will then receive journal articles, conference papers, and report citations by email when something new is published on their subject. This service saves researchers time and keeps them informed about the latest publications in their field.

All registered users at RSIC also have desktop accessibility to the library’s online resources, which include access to the library’s online catalog, 20 electronic databases, the electronic books and journals, RSIC’s digital collection containing electronic documents produced by AMRDEC, MSFC, Redstone Test Center, and the Comanche Project Office.

Lackey said, “RSIC must keep pace with information technologies to remain viable and relevant for today’s and tomorrow’s technical workforce. This entails a variety of activities including converting existing collections into digital format, exploring use of information technology tool sets, and social media as well as potentially expanding partnerships of RSIC beyond the arsenal gates to include local academic institutions. All of this future greatness comes with a literal cost.”

The objective of RSIC board of directors, or BoD, was to review the current operational status of the RSIC and make decisions on near-term actions as well as far-term strategic plans, including how to secure a more stable funding future.

“While the answer to this question is complex and obviously depends on a variety of factors, BoD members remain committed to support the RSIC charter going forward in the best supportive manner under our current and projected budget constrained environment,” Lackey said.

February 11, 2015: Strategy page

In 2014 there were further advances in sniper detection systems. The latest one (Serenity) incorporates acoustic and heat sensors as well as cameras (actually vidcams that are used in real time) and a RWS (Remote Weapons System) turret that is linked to the sensors and uses special software to quickly locate the source of the fire (rifle, machine-gun, mortar, rocket) and point the vidcams and RWS weapon (usually a 12.7mm machine-gun) at the source of the fire, enabling the human operator to immediately open fire before the enemy (especially a sniper) gets away. The software also captures video and other data for every instance that the system is alerted by what seems to be an attack. This all such events, whether they led to return fire or not, can be studied and analyzed. Serenity was developed by a U.S. Army research organization (AMRDEC) and was able to work with over a decade of similar work in this area.  Part of Serenity, the acoustic detection (called Firefly) is sometimes used separately.

Acoustic gunfire (sniper) detectors have been in the field for over a decade, and have gotten better each year. By 2010 over 60,000 sniper detectors had been shipped to American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they were increasingly useful and generated a continuous flow of user suggestions for improvements. These were addressed and that resulted in new and improved models appearing every year.

The first sniper detection systems simply provided directional information about where the snipers are. The troops always wanted detectors that were faster and more accurate and after several generations of these systems showing after that first heavy use in 2004 you end up with something like Serenity. A really important improvement was manufacturers tweaking these systems to decrease the number of false alarms. Also important was improved user interface and increased accuracy. There were other reasons for all this progress, including major advances in computing power, sensor quality and software development. By 2010 the latest sniper detectors could provide nearly instant, easy to comprehend and accurate location info on the sniper.

One of the first, and most useful, sniper detection system was Boomerang, which was it was developed in a few months, in response to a 2004 U.S. Department of Defense request for an affordable acoustic sniper detector. Testing delayed it from entering service immediately. Boomerang was mounted on vehicles, was in wide use by 2o06 and cost about $5,000 each. Boomerang was effective enough to get initial orders for over 10,000 units, and lots of use from the troops who had it. There were two major upgrades, prolonging the service life of the system.

British, American, French and Israeli manufacturers have produced most of these systems, which are also sold to police organizations. The systems have varied greatly in capabilities, and price. Some of the first ones cost over $200,000, but prices have been dropping rapidly over the last five years, as the technology matured.

An example of the constant development of new tech was SWATS (Soldier Worn Acoustic Targeting Systems). In 2011 U.S. Army infantry in Afghanistan began receiving SWATS sniper detectors. About 1,500 a month were delivered and there were never enough of them once the usefulness of the system became known. These 183 g (6.4 ounce) devices come in two pieces. One is the sensor, which is worn on the shoulder, while the cell phone size controller, with small LCD display, is worn in front, where it can be quickly glanced at. SWATS calculates (from the sound weapon fired) direction of fire in a tenth of a second. SWATS cost about $2,000 each. SWATS was also be mounted on vehicles, and worked when the vehicle is moving at speeds of 80 kilometers an hour or more.

At the same time German firm Rheinmetall introduced a similar vehicle-mounted acoustic sniper detection system called ASLS (Acoustic Shooter Locating System). The Germans had been working on this for over a decade and were following the American firms that had, because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan taken the lead in this effort.

As the capability and reliability of these devices has improved, the troops came to depend on sniper detectors and these detectors saved hundreds of American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan because with a sniper detector troops could quickly turn on the enemy shooter and deliver accurate fire of their own. This made it difficult, if not impossible, for the sniper to get off a second shot and made the sniper more vulnerable to getting shot. Moreover Arab and Afghan snipers were not always good enough to always get a hit with their first shot and the nervousness created by the knowledge that the American troops would quickly fire where the sniper was because of sniper detectors made it even more likely that the first shot would miss. It got to the point where trying to get off a second shot was suicidal and Taliban and Iraqi snipers were trained to only take a first shot if they were certain of a hit and be ready to immediately duck and move after that first shot.

The new Serenity system is meant for base protection or mounting on vehicles. Parts of the Serenity system were sent to Afghanistan in 2012 for field testing.

Mar. 24, 2014 By Erik Schechter  - FG

New York - Concerned about the emerging threat of unmanned aircraft, the US Army is canvassing American defence contractors for information on systems that can detect, classify and destroy drones of varying sizes.

According to the request for information (RFI), the army’s Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center (AMRDEC) is open to both “kinetic and non-kinetic options” – the latter referring to lasers.

The US Navy has already placed a laser weapon system demonstrator aboard the destroyer USS Dewey and tested the weapon against target drones in June 2012. The Army has likewise tested a vehicle-mounted Boeing high energy laser mobile demonstrator against mortar rounds and drones. However, there is no programme of record among the services to develop such a directed energy weapon.

Another interest of ARMDEC is that proposed systems be able to operate at both at the brigade-and-above and brigade-and-below echelons, which have their own network connectivity issues and levels of situational awareness.

The RFI, for example, notes that those at the tip of the spear resemble those homeland security operators in terms of the ad hoc nature of their deployment and size of their area of operation.

Indeed, the systems proposed should be designed for both overseas and domestic operations, the RFI states.

Contractors have until April 1 to answer the RFI, with selected respondents invited to two-day workshop starting April 30 at Redstone Arsenal, Ala.

The RFI opens the acquisition phase of the army’s pursuit of a capability to defeat unmanned aircraft.

Last year, the army’s armaments research, development and engineering center (ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal staged an experiment.

The center integrated a fire control radar with existing weapon systems. Using a “novel warhead design”, a gun-launched munition destroyed a small-class unmanned aircraft, according to army documents.

One challenge in the fight against unmanned aircraft is the cost. The army has highly capable air defence batteries, but their cost may seem excessive if used against a small unmanned aircraft.

The ARDEC experiment focused on a “low-cost-per-kill weapon system”, the army says.