DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere) » Winning (and Losing) the First Wired War

Winning (and Losing) the First Wired War

This war in Iraq was launched on a the­ory: That, with the right com­mu­ni­ca­tion and recon­nais­sance gear, American armed forces would be quicksilver-fast and supremely lethal. A coun­try could be con­quered with only a frac­tion of the sol­diers needed in the past.
iraqtech_illo_485.jpgDuring the ini­tial inva­sion in March 2003, this idea of “network-centric war­fare” worked more or less as promised — even though most of the front­line troops weren’t wired up. It was enough that the com­man­ders were con­nected.
But now, more than three years into the Iraq con­flict, the net­work is still largely incom­plete. Local com­mand cen­ters have a tor­rent of infor­ma­tion pour­ing in. For sol­diers and marines on the ground, this war isn’t any more wired that the last one. “There is a con­nec­tiv­ity gap,” a draft Army War College report notes. “Information is not reach­ing the low­est lev­els.”
And that’s a prob­lem, because the insur­gents are stitch­ing together a newt­work of their own. Using throw­away cell­phones and anony­mous e-mail accounts, these guer­ril­las rely on a loose web of con­nec­tions, not a top-down com­mand struc­ture. And they don’t fight in large groups that can be eas­ily tracked by high-tech com­mand posts. They have to be hunted down in dark neigh­bor­hoods, found amid thou­sands of civil­ians, and taken out one by one.
David Axe — recently back from his 6th trip to Iraq — and I have a spe­cial report in this month’s Popular Science, on “Winning (and Losing) the First Wired War.” Give it a read. And see how this network-centric ideal is play­ing out, for real.

Share |

May 19th, 2006 | Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere), Comms, Info War, Net-Centric | 188118 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/05/19/winning-and-losing-the-first-wired-war/Winning+%28and+Losing%29+the+First+Wired+War2006-05-19+15%3A48%3A33david_axe You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Axe Grades Iraq Tech | Rapid Fire 05/20/06 » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. C-Low says:
    May 19, 2006 at 11:48 am

    I got that issue the other day great read by Noah and Axe worth pick­ing up for any­one who hasnt read it.

    Reply
  2. Byron Skinner says:
    May 19, 2006 at 1:20 pm

    Good Morning Noah,
    Your arti­cle in PS as I said before, is great. My prob­lem with it is that it’s all old news. All the C4 prob­lems that you and David talk about in the June 2006 issue of PS have been hap­pen­ing since the War in Iraq begain.
    In Afghanistan it appears more and more every­day that the U.S. is man­ag­ing to pull defeat out of the jaws of vic­tory, again. The Taliban have had three years to be edu­cated by there broth­ers in Iraq, they are learn­ing well.
    The return of the Taliban should come as no sur­prise to any­body since we had Mullah Omar in a ship­ping con­tainer and then released him in 2002.
    Catch and release is good in Bass fis­ning, bad in war.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  3. Harry Toor says:
    May 19, 2006 at 1:36 pm

    I have to ask though, what’s new?
    “Information is not reach­ing the low­est lev­els.”
    That’s been hap­pen­ing since the dawn of time, it seems. I mean you ask any WWII or I vet how the infor­ma­tion down­flow was, and they may respond, “Information? What infor­ma­tion?”
    It was never, has never, but hope­fully will be a pri­or­ity for the Pentagon to get on the ball about their information.

    Reply
  4. Powkat says:
    May 19, 2006 at 2:01 pm

    Did these clowns sleep through U.S History class? Well, yeah, they prob­a­bly did, but any­one who was even min­i­mally con­scious remem­bers that the Revolutionary War was won by the guys who hid behind walls and snuck up on the enemy (that would be us) and not the guys with the big state-of-the-art mil­i­tary (that would be Britian). Those who do not remem­ber hisotry, yada, yada, yada.

    Reply
  5. TrafficGeek says:
    May 19, 2006 at 2:20 pm

    Sound awfully like another case of Server-Client vs Peer-to-peer…

    Reply
  6. Wildcat says:
    May 19, 2006 at 2:55 pm

    “…the Revolutionary War was won by the guys who hid behind walls and snuck up on the enemy (that would be us) and not the guys with the big state-of-the-art mil­i­tary (that would be Britian).”
    Don’t mis­take Walt Disney’s ver­sion of the American Revolution for the real thing. Remember von Steuben, Pulaski, Kosciusko and the other for­eign gen­er­als who came to the colonies to help in the war effort? They trained the Continental Army in con­ven­tional 18th-century bat­tle tac­tics. Our side did not fire on the red­coats nearly as often as you might think from watch­ing “Johnny Tremain.”

    Reply
  7. Wildcat says:
    May 19, 2006 at 2:57 pm

    Uh, I meant to say “our side did not fire on the red­coats from behind rocks and trees and fences…”

    Reply
  8. emirsfall says:
    May 19, 2006 at 7:10 pm

    Trafficgeek has it absolutely right. It’s an exam­ple of a rigid hier­ar­chy being torn to pieces by a mil­lion small bites from a dis­trib­uted, decen­tral­ized mycelium net­work.
    For more on that sub­ject, check out john robb @
    globalguerrillas.typepad.com. In my opin­ion, he’s the fore­most expert on mod­ern insurgencies.

    Reply
  9. Adrian Forest says:
    May 19, 2006 at 9:02 pm

    Sounds to me like a sim­ple case of try­ing to use a sys­tem before it’s ready. When the system’s not actu­ally in place on the ground, you can’t expect it to func­tion as advertised.

    Reply
  10. Gordon Housworth says:
    May 20, 2006 at 6:49 am

    Can you pro­vide par­tic­u­lars on the ‘draft Army War College report’ as a Google search does not turn it using the phrases “There is a con­nec­tiv­ity gap” and “Information is not reach­ing the low­est levels.”

    Reply
  11. DubhghaillSR says:
    May 20, 2006 at 1:41 pm

    The Intel/Cmmunications Sciences are still as in VietNam , at the end of a long money chain in Washington D.C.When did we decide as a nation to not attack the per­pe­trai­tors of 911 ? USAma is Arab, as are the Wahabiests sect . They attacked us in two dis­tinct Decades , at the World Trade Center. Politics by one Party dic­tated tied hands of one President,Clinton , and Money seems the issue tied into the Current President and Pentagon effort. SEND Congress and Presidents of War Supplies Corporations to IRAQ , let the real­ity effect guide their efforts.The attacks on America were not humane , just human. We need not bother being humane in War. That think­ing bank­rupted Americaalready, and is doing it again. Kill them all , let GOD sort out the mis­takes.
    Combat Bob-RVN , etc.

    Reply
  12. The Angry Man says:
    May 21, 2006 at 12:17 am

    All right…
    “Combat Bob”…do you have any­thing coher­ent to say? You can *try* to flame me, but chances are, any­thing you have to say will come across as so much drivel…however, I think it would be amus­ing if you tried. Let it rip, you monkey-brained fool!

    Reply
  13. The Angry Man says:
    May 21, 2006 at 12:20 am

    Ok, ok, ok…
    I’ll give you guys what you think you know you are talk­ing about…Google the term “asym­met­ric war­fare”. If you are really tal­ented, you can look put “net­war” at the Rand web­site, read a few of the free pub­li­ca­tions (writ­ten a while ago), then, once again, act like you have a clue about what you are speak­ing about…talk amongst your­selves now…

    Reply
  14. Byron Skinner says:
    May 21, 2006 at 2:24 pm

    Good Morning Angr,
    It’s not easy com­ming up with thoughts how to solve the same stu­pid­ity reap­pear­ing prob­lems after you express them­selves nume­ri­ous times. But here we go again.
    The Military is still locked into the same band withs that won WWII, it’s time to change. The prob­lem is the “selected con­trac­tors” such as Harris who have made a bun­dle off try­ing to make a sys­tem that is back­ward com­pat­able with dig­i­tal tech­nono­gly.
    It is noted that Harris got the con­tract for the ATC in Afghanistan with a sys­tem that is com­pat­able with fifty year old Russian tech­nol­ogy, which by the way is also widely used by the Talaban and al Qaeda when they want ot ease drop on the U.S.
    The bad guys now hear all the ATC chat­ter and the num­ber of downed U.S. air­craft in Afghanistan has dra­mat­i­caly increased lately.
    The rea­son for this given by the Pentagon is that there are over 500K Radios in the DoD and the cost of total con­ver­sion to to much.
    Our ground forces are using every thing from the vin­tage ANPRC 25 (Vietnam Era) to the Harris build ANPRC 119B, it must be noted that both have the same 6km. range at best but they do share the same band with.
    The solu­tion is again, scrap the old band­withs and go dig­i­tal, amps is no solu­tion to the prob­lem. Maybe then a Platoon Leader in al Sar City on patrol can use an issued tran­sc­ceiver to com­mu­ni­cate with his/her com­pany com­man­der rather the a $29.99 per pair Wal-Mart Motorla Special.
    But we all know this won’t hap­pen as long as Harris, and now General Dynamics who has come up to the feed bucket, and other defense Contractors keep hir­ing for­mer DoD per­sonal both uni­formed and Civilian to jobs that pay three times what they were mak­ing in pub­lic ser­vice.
    I hope that you are not one of the turn­style Patroits lin­ning their own pocket with the blood of Americans dieing in Afghanistan and Iraq because of their greed.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  15. John says:
    August 22, 2006 at 12:59 pm

    Gentlemen,
    I flew UAV’s in Iraq as a Guardsman and there is the other side of the coin, too much action­able intel­li­gence, lazi­ness or lack of under­stand­ing. The Army in par­tic­u­lar is very reg­i­mented and hier­ar­chi­cal. I am a low rank, but have a Masters in the civil­ian world and when I found some­thing, or wanted to go the extra mile to catch some­one, or knew some­thing about the sys­tem that the Officer’s didn’t, I was looked at like, “Who the hell are you,” and dis­re­garded. The mil­i­tary espe­cially with the new tech­nol­ogy needs to become more flex­i­ble and open to new ideas.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Amazing MRAP Survival Photos
    • Real-Life Ray Gun: Say When?
    • Laser Weapons "Almost Ready?" Not!
    • New Navy Builds Up
    • Urban Combat Skateboard
    • Don't be Too Quick to Dis the Contractors
    • FCS Out -- What's In?
    • China's Killer Hovercraft
    • Chinese Laser vs. U.S. Sats?
    Recent Comments
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      Layout is beautiful, but the banner adds are a...
      @Earlydawn
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      P.S. "canes" is out of location in the right...
      Philo
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      Damn you Defense Tech! Just when I thought I was out,...
      Philo
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      Like the layout. But how will we know which Ugg boot...
      Andy
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
      "One exam­ple is the replace­ment...
      Valcan
    • What Does this Handle Do?
      Wonder how much that cost?!?!?!!? haha
      Hunter
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Good Evening Folks, I like it, dt 2.0 ALLONS, Byron Skinner
      Byron Skinner
    • The Sunday Paper
      Here is some actual Defenese Tech: TYPE: US Army M4 Horse Gas Mask ALIASES: n/a...
      b
    • Osprey Deployment Update
      Firing 105mm’s out of an aicraft is nothing very new. I know...
      Jones
    • It Was Dragon Skin All Along
      atacms, There is a huge difference between the blast and...
      TB
    Recent Articles
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Data Centers Unprepared For A Cyber Attack
    • While Obama ‘Consults’
    • Don’t be Too Quick to Dis the Contractors
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • Land Warrior Going to Special Forces
    • UK Gives Eyes To FIST
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage