Page 110 - Australian Defence Magazine September 2018
P. 110

“Integrating Land 19 as a node on a much larger system will not necessarily be complex, you just need the right communication interface and that will be Link 16.”
sensor package for NASAMS. This would include a self-contained generator and control module.
Option 2 involves replacing the Sentinel capability with the two CEA radars, and utilising Hawkei in two separate roles as the host platform for CEATAC, and as a high mobility launch vehicle.
The standard high mobility launch ve- hicle for NASAMS is the US Humvee, mounting a six-rail launcher on a pedestal. Unlike the canister launcher the missiles are exposed to save weight, and only four missiles are carried because the canards on the AMRAAM B model deployed by most users are too big to permit a full load.
For the Australian option, Hawkei would provide the requisite crew protec- tion while in transit. Weight issues suggest
the same four-missile load would be carried should Option 2 be selected, although the later AMRAAM C model has smaller ca- nards and its acquisition would allow a six- weapon fitout.
Comms support
The second RMA work package checked whether Army’s current com- munications would provide the capac- ity and low latency for the information exchange required by NAMSAMS – data flowing from the radar(s) to the fire distribution centre, from the fire distribution centre to launchers, and from the launchers to the missiles. It also developed an overall system archi- tecture based on internal and external exchange requirements.
Within the fire direction centre the air defence console provides the battle management aspect, fusing informa- tion from radars and other sensors, handling track management, and also acting as the fire control centre for up to 12 launchers that may be at widely- dispersed firing points.
“All these things needed to be tested to make sure the systems would work with the systems we’ve got because we’d prefer not to buy more radios and such- like. It was a case of how can we maxi- mise those systems presently in service or about to enter service,” COL Mallett commented. “With the old RBS 70 solu- tion, the last link in the command and control aspect lay between the ears of the soldier who was pointing the weap- on system.”
The third work package checked the technical trade-offs and limitations of integrating NASAMS to ADF vehicles to satisfy Options 1 and 2, with particu- lar emphasis on ensuring that the inputs to the system were as common as possible so as to avoid the creation of unique sup- port arrangements.
104 | September 2018 |

   108   109   110   111   112