Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-19)
AIR VICE-MARSHAL
SIMON BOLLOM,
AIR VICE-MARSHAL
STUART BUTLER
AND AIR
VICE-MARSHAL
CHRIS NICKOLS
CBE
6 MAY 2008
Q1 Chairman: Welcome to our first evidence
session into ISTAR. Just before I ask you to introduce yourselves
and to tell us your responsibilities, please, even though you
are not all new faces to us, I need to warn you that at five past
five there will be either a vote or a series of votes. So, please,
do not feel dismayed if we all leave the room. We would be grateful
if the fact that we leave will not make you leave. Could you hang
on, in patience, for us to come back from the voting? Would you
like to begin by introducing yourselves, please, and telling us
just the briefest of overviews of your responsibilities?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Certainly.
If I may start, I am the senior representative here today leading
the team. I am one of three military capability managers in the
MoD, one from each service, and across the three of us we cover
all of the defence acquisition programmes across the board. My
specific responsibilities are for C4ISTAR, so all the communications,
the ISTAR collection, dissemination, processing, et cetera, and
I also look after special projects, which is primarily equipping
our special forces, and hence my involvement with unmanned air
vehicles.
Air Vice-Marshal Nickols: Air
Vice-Marshal Christopher Nickols. I am Assistant Chief of the
Defence Staff for Operations. I have two primary roles of relevance
to this afternoon: the strategic direction and management of our
operations, clearly principally Iraq an Afghanistan but worldwide
and UK operations as well, and I also look after the prioritisation
and management of in-service capabilities for operations.
Air Vice-Marshal Bollom: Good
afternoon. Simon Bollom; I work in the Defence Equipment and Support
Organisation. My role there is the Director General of Combat
Air, and as such I am responsible for the procurement and in-service
support activities associated with all combat air, which includes
unmanned air vehicles.
Q2 Chairman: This is an extremely
complicated and technologically advanced area, so please bear
in mind that we are lay people in this inquiry and explain things
to us as though we do not understand it, which, let me tell you,
from my point of view, I do not. I will therefore be grateful
if you could give us an overview of precisely what ISTAR is and
how it contributes to Network Enabled Capability and what is the
importance of this to the overall defence of the country?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: If I
may start, probably the easiest way to describe this is as part
of the ISTAR chain which is direct, collect, process, disseminate.
If I can go through those four stages: direct is really all about
trying to prioritise the intelligence and surveillance needs of
a commander on the battle field. So, what does he need to know,
by when in a particular area? So that is direct, and then turning
that into how we task the collectors that will then go out to
collect that intelligence surveillance information. Collect is
obviously the bit where, whatever type of collector it is goes
out to hoover up that information, albeit whether it is an airborne
platform or whether it is a ground sensor, or whatever it needs
to provide the information that the commander needs, that information
then comes in as raw data and then that need to be processed to
form an intelligence product, and then the dissemination bit is
how that is transmitted to the war fighter, and that war fighter
may well be a single troop in the field or it may well be somebody
working back here in defence intelligence, for example. So it
is whoever needs that information to effectively gain information
superiority which gives us the upper hand on any potential enemy.
If you regard it as that DCPD chain, that is ISTAR in a nutshell,
which, of course, the UAV platform fits into the collect but,
of course, we have to consider it end to end, because unless all
four bits of that chain work, the commander does not get the information
he needs when he needs it. How does it fit into network enabled
capability? The fundamental of network capability, to put it in
its simplest form, is to take two platforms or systems that would
be gaining information and, by virtue of making them work together
as a team, produce a better product. So the sum of the parts is
better than the individuals working on their own, and that is
how the collectors work in an NEC environment, but it is clearly
the connection between the two that makes the big difference.
Q3 Chairman: Can you give us an example
of how the sum of the parts would be greater than individual items?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Of course.
You may, for example, have a situation where you have a platform
that is providing you with imagery intelligence, maybe live video
or something like that, and you have got another platform that
is providing you with signals intelligence of some sort, i.e.
scanning of radar or listening to people transmit over a radio.
Individually one certainly will give you a bearing but may well
not give you anything else, whereas the other one might give you
some detail, and by combining the two and doing what we generally
term data fusion, i.e. putting one over the top of the other,
you get a much better idea what the dynamic is that is happening
in that particular area and hence better information by joining
the two together.
Q4 Chairman: What progress are we
making with Network Enabled Capability? Is it good, is it disappointing,
is it what we hoped for by this stage and how is ISTAR progressing
at the same time?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: I would
say in some areas it is extremely good and in some areas it is
more of a challenge, but overall certainly I think we are making
good progress. You may well be aware that reasonably recently
we appointed a Senior Responsible Owner, the Director Equipment
Capability, or DEC[1],
who is looking across the whole of the NEC piece to make sure
it all comes together, and it is effectively three constituent
parts, one being the networks, one being the information (i.e.
how we assure the information) and the other one being about people.
So it is not just about equipment, it is actually about bringing
the three together. We have a fairly comprehensive NEC plan and
we are delivering the individual constituent parts of that in
individual programmes or system of systems which are coming together
to provide network enabled capability, but clearly it relies on
a number of things and it is not just about ISTAR. It is actually
about how you communicate, how you do command and control, for
example, and it is bringing all of those together. I would say
overall progress is pretty good. We would clearly always like
to move faster but, within the constraints of the financial situation
that any organisation finds itself in, it is given its relative
priority, and we are constantly assessing, as you know, over time,
about where we put our investment.
Q5 Chairman: Network Enabled Capability
is an extremely important aspect of defence, but in our inquiry
we have to eat this elephant one mouthful at a time, and so we
decided to choose within ISTAR UAVs. You say UAVs are particularly
important to the collection of the information. Do they have any
other function as well?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Again,
it is important to remember that for a UAV to work it must be
a system and must fall within that DCPD chain, because a platform
on its own just collecting the data is worthless. What you have
to do is make sure that you are able to task it, put it in the
right place at the right time, it then hoovers up the information
in whatever context it is meant to be doing that, that data is
then processed and then we disseminate it. That is where the overlap
of the NEC bit and the ISTAR bit come together, but we always
have to consider it end to end, and we are at pains to do that
on every occasion. So, yes, UAVs are an extremely important part
of the collect, but you have got to remember that there is also
the actual chain to make sure the information is then given to
the right people at the right time.
Q6 Mr Jenkin: UAVs are becoming a
major part of the overall equipment programme, competing with
limited resources. Is this controversial in defence circles? What
do you say to people who say we do not need all this very complicated
kit, what we need is more soldiers to put on the ground and then
have the Government spend the money on the wrong things?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: As you
know, the MoD is constantly assessing its requirements both in
terms of equipment, people, tactics and procedures, et cetera.
So my view would be that UAVs, like any other military capability,
is balanced in terms of what we can afford to put into the programme
over time. We assess the capability gaps that we need to fill
and then we look at what is best to fill it. In the case we are
working at the moment, UAVs form a key part of filling some of
those capabilities that we need to provide. So we are always assessing
the utility, for example, of UAVs over other sensors against do
we need more people? We are constantly doing that assessment of
how best we provide the capability that we need at the front-line.
Q7 Mr Jenkin: What do you say to
people who say that all this very high tech, technological internationally
shared data is not what you need to fight counter-insurgency wars
in Afghanistan and Iraq where you are dealing with people with
a Kalashnikov and some home-made explosives?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Again,
we go through, firstly, a very comprehensive generally annual
or bi-ennial capability assessment to work out where the gaps
are and then we look at how best to fill those capability gaps,
and we always consider it on a capability basis. We do not simply
say, "Right, that is a gap; we will fill it with a UAV."
We do an assessment to work out what is the best way of doing
it. Again, I would argue that it is a balance, and, in fact, certainly
in current theatres, there is a thirst for, for example, full
motion video, because that is actually what is winning out there,
or one of the contributory factors. So it is in constant assessment,
and I would argue that we always get the best capability for the
capability gap or the situation that is requiring it.
Q8 Mr Crausby: Reaper, Hermes 450
and Desert Hawk UAVs have all been procured as urgent operational
requirements. Can you tell us why the urgency and their need was
not identified earlier?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: In many
cases they were identified earlier actually, and if I can take
you through the individual ones, starting maybe with Hermes 450:
Hermes 450 was procured effectively as a stop-gap filler because
Phoenix, the previous system, was inadequate in a hot and high
climate, but, as you know, we have a follow-on to Hermes 450 in
terms of the Watchkeeper programme, which was already well established
before we did the UOR provision of Hermes 450; so that was there.
Equally, if I take the Reaper Programme, we already have in our
plans the requirement for a deep and persistent surveillance capability
of which Reaper will ultimately be a contender for that longer
term programme. However, in the interim, again it was identified
and, in fact, in many cases confirmed the fact that we did need
a deep system of surveillance capability with a full motion capability
and with radar, for example. So arguably Reaper is filling a gap
that we had already identified, we do have a programme in the
longer term, and it will ultimately, when we get to that stage,
be potential equipment that might fill that gap. On the Desert
Hawk side, again we have always had mini UAVs for many years[2]
and when we looked at the assessment of what we could get on time
with the right process and dissemination capabilities, again it
filled the gap adequately and we went in to buy it. In the slightly
longer term, particularly based on the experience we are getting
with Desert Hawk, we will look at how we will fill that capability
gap in the future. So I would argue actually the UORs, albeit
urgently, because that is why they are UORs, have filled gaps
that we had already identified in the longer term programme but
we were not quite there. But certainly Hermes 450, for example,
will go out of service when Watchkeeper, which is the long-term,
already planned programme, comes into service.
Q9 Mr Crausby: How effective have they
proven to be on current operations?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Chris
may wish to mention. The requirement was for something urgently
that did both what we call "on tether" UAV operations
in terms of Hermes 450 with the Army, and Reaper, which does something
slightly more in the deep, i.e. a lot further away from where
it is operated, and I would argue that in both cases they have
done extremely well and they have been battle winning capabilities
beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Q10 Chairman: Chris, do you want
to add anything?
Air Vice-Marshal Nickols: No,
there is little to add. Obviously, Reaper is only operating in
Afghanistan, Hermes 450 in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I think
for the style of operations, particularly the counter-insurgency
style of operations, the ability to loiter over an area for very
long periods, which allows you to watch what we call "pattern
of life" so you can build up a picture of what is happening
in a particular location is one of the great needs and, of course,
that is one of the great strengths of a UAV and that is why they
have been so successful. The other point to make perhaps in counter-insurgency,
which goes back to an earlier question, is that they very much
need to be intelligence-led. You can only find the insurgents
through comprehensive intelligence, and that is why the wider
ISTAR architecture, including the UAVs, is so important in this
style of operations.
Q11 Mr Crausby: What about improvement?
I guess this is relatively early days, but we have UAVs, sensors,
data links, ground control stations. Which of these aspects could
be improved from what we have learned in these current operations?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Actually
all of them. We can always improve. I think the bit that probably
we need to concentrate on more now is the direct process and disseminate,
whereas the collector is just about doing what we need it to do.
You can always improve sensors, particularly in some of the faster-moving
sensors, I would suggest, where you have got things like electronic
surveillance, you have to keep pace with the enemy, but generally
in collection terms now we are getting reasonably good. It is
the direct, process, disseminate chain that we need to put more
effort into, and we do, again, have a programme in the longer
term to actually start looking at how we might do that much better
than we do. In fact, the vast majority of programmes in my area
are helping with that DPD as against DCPD chain, but, that said,
you can always improve on all of them. It is just that the DPD
is probably the bit where we need to make slightly more effort
now than we have done hitherto.
Q12 Chairman: So if the direct, process
and disseminate is what you need now to concentrate on, precisely
what are you doing with programmes within your responsibilities
to improve that: because clearly the balance between those four
elements is very important?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Indeed.
If you look across my portfolio, the vast majority are stand-fast
areas where we are simply updating collectors to keep them current
and operationally viable. The vast majority of what I am doing
in my area is based around the DPD effort. For example, we have
got one of the biggest IT programmes in Europe currently running
with DII, which will enable us to move information across the
battlefield[3],
and we have a programme in the slightly longer-term called DABINETT,
which is effectively joining up the dots. So we have recognised
that we have some areas where, particularly in the network enabled
environment, you cannot afford what I would call seams, it has
to almost work as one single entity, and DABINETT is going to
help us do that across a whole variety of different phased programmes
to effectively join all the dots.
Q13 Chairman: Is that what is described
as improving connectivity?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Yes,
it is, but it is not just improving connectivity, it is also doing
things for processing, command and control, et cetera, so it really
trying to get at that sort of seamless architecture that you need
in an NEC environment.
Q14 Chairman: The Defence Information
Infrastructure programme is mainly aimed at what, dissemination?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Yes.
Q15 Chairman: So you decide how to
direct the UAVs which do the collection, somebody does the processing
and the DII shoves it out?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Correct,
and it is also based around things like being able to do effective
command and control and general information to the battle field.
So it is a number of things. It is an up to top secret, classified,
effectively secure Internet system for both command and control
and dissemination of data.
Q16 Chairman: Air Vice-Marshal Butler,
did you say you were representing all three services here?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: I am.
Chairman: Yet you are all three Air Vice-Marshals.
We will move on to this. Robert Key.
Q17 Robert Key: I wonder, Chairman,
if I could enquire why it is that the RAF is operating the Reapers
and the Royal Artillery are responsible for the Hermes 450 and
Desert Hawks?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: The important
thing is to concentrate on where the product is delivered, and
ultimately the product, irrespective of which UAV it comes from,
is delivered predominantly to the fighting troops on the ground,
and that is so in all three cases. I think when you look at how
the individual UAVs are run and tasked, they are generally tasked
by the unit best able to make sure that that information is delivered
to the ground. Again, in broad terms, the reason we are operating
them at the moment is because the Watchkeeper and the Desert Hawk
travel with the Army, and the Watchkeeper, when it is actually
flown and tasked, is tasked by the Army, it is on tether, so its
line of sight linked to the air vehicle and back again, and it
delivers to a fighting unit at the brigade or battle group level;
whereas Reaper, because it is generally operating higher, it is
much further into the deep, it is much more akin to an air force
type strike aircraft and, of course, is much more of a difficult
integration problem. So, generally, the Air Force is much better
placed because it is more experienced in that type of tasking,
but, again, I emphasise the fact that the really important thing
is it is done by the people best able to put the product down
on the ground where it is required, or, indeed, back into DIS
where it is required, or anywhere else. There is not, to my mind,
the discrepancy or conflict between the different services because
it is where it naturally falls in terms of what we do best.
Q18 Robert Key: Have there been any
issues about information being lost between different services
or is it a seamless operation?
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: It is
as seamless as things are in war time, I would suggest, because
these things are never easy, but predominantly there are two main
methodologies where information is sustained to the war fighter,
and, again, that is either direct from the UAV, wherever it is
being flown and by whoever it is being flown, direct to a small
ground terminal which the troops have in their hands—either
a laptop or on-vehicle borne system—or in the case of Reaper,
for example, the information also goes back to the US and is then
disseminated on where it is needed. Again, the important thing
is where it actually arrives to the ground troops.
Q19 Robert Key: On December 19 last
the Defence Security Co-operation Agency in the United States
said that Britain had requested the purchase of a billion dollars
worth of ten new MQ-9s, which are the Reaper or Predator B.
Air Vice-Marshal Butler: Yes.
1 Note by witness: the Senior Responsible Officer
for NEC is the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (Equipment Capability)
(DCDS(EC)) Back
2
Note by witness: Desert Hawk is the first mini-UAV to be deployed
operationally with UK forces. Back
3
Note by witness: DII will work with communication bearer systems
such as Bowman and Skynet 5 to achieve this. Back
|
