Tactical communication failures and delays are the most essential silent killer on your next mission. It’s a controversial statement, I know. You’re probably used to training against adversaries, criminals, and other opposing human threats. All of these threats quickly become much more dangerous if your organization has tactical communication problems. In many cases, LTE wireless communication makes a critical difference in saving lives in a tactical situation.
Topics: Police, Tactical Communications, Military, LTE, Tactical LTE, coalition communications
In March 2019, the US Air Force launched an advanced military communications satellite. This satellite significantly increases the bandwidth available for military communication. There’s just one problem: protecting satellites from natural and human-made disruption and attack is severe. What are your other options to reinforce military communications?
Topics: Satellite communications, satellite, Military
There’s much hype around quantum computing and quantum cryptography. That doesn’t mean you should write off these technologies as unimportant. Instead, take a few minutes to understand the basics, how it can improve your security and how to get started.
Topics: security standards, communication security, cryptography, quantum cryptography
In tactical communications, there are endless choices.
Topics: Tactical Communications, security standards, communication security, security
Your coalition defense efforts have a vulnerability. This weakness has nothing to do with your weapons. It has nothing to do with your training though inadequate training makes it worse. Poor coalition communications processes and equipment are quietly holding your effectiveness back. Unless this problem is fixed, you are going to suffer slower response times, political difficulties and more causalities.
The High Cost Of Poor Coalition Communications
Western forces operating in Afghanistan in the 2000s have faced constant problems. Consider communication problems alone. As pointed out in a RAND report, “Lessons Learned from the Afghan Mission Network”:
“Despite its ostensible utility, a common mission network for ISAF forces did not emerge. This was due to three intertwined factors: (1) individual countries’ information, and data-sharing practices remained relatively stovepiped; (2) traditional and long-standing security concerns trumped operational necessity; and (3) the difficulties associated with connecting disparate national and functional systems.”
Topics: coalition communications, barriers, NATO, communication interoperability