A new automated command and control system (ACS) is being developed in Russia, and its fragments have already been shown to the leadership of the Ministry of Defense. How do such systems work in NATO countries, to what extent are communications and command automated in their area today, and what is the importance of automated control systems for victory in battle?
A few days ago, Defense Minister Andrei Belousov took part in a meeting on the development and implementation of "information interaction systems" in the military. They are also called automated command and control systems (ACS). For the Russian army, what is happening is of great importance.
It is indicative of how such systems work for our likely opponent, the United States and NATO. Each combat vehicle has a terminal for displaying tactical information, which is graphically displayed (on the screen) at a minimum, their own combat equipment is shown with reference to the terrain.
The commander of any level sees all his combat vehicles on the map on the screen. And if the scouts report some kind of armored targets on the horizon, then he can simply understand by the presence of a blue icon on the screen (blue in the west indicates his troops, red indicates the enemy) whether they are his own or not.
Intelligence data is often displayed there, summarized, verified and brought to the commanders in the lower tactical level. And controlling troops in battle is like a computer game, with the only difference being that the tanks and infantry fighting vehicles on the electronic map are real, and they are firing real shells.
In 2003, in Iraq, American troops showed how armies that have such a system look like against those that do not. One can come across the opinion that the Iraqi generals were bribed and therefore they quickly surrendered the country. That's not so. The Iraqi army died in battle, fighting with weapons in their hands, under air strikes and multiple launch rocket systems, in attacks on American armored vehicles on foot with grenade launchers – just to be shot from a safe distance. Their defeat was swift and sometimes terrible in terms of losses, and the superiority of the Americans in management played a significant role in this.
In our country, automated combat control systems were also developed a long time ago.
In the 60s of the last century, such systems, capable of significantly reducing the time required for commanders of all levels to assess the situation and bring solutions to units and subunits, appeared in the Air Defense and Strategic Missile Forces. At the same time, the question arose about the introduction of such a system into the practice of the ground forces.
In 1964, the development of automated control systems by the troops of the Maneuver front began in the front – combined arms (tank) army – combined arms (tank) division – motorized rifle (tank or artillery) regiment. The system was created by the early 1980s, and its implementation began in 1982. It allowed for real-time monitoring of the actions of the troops. The time required to transfer commands and control was reduced several times.
In addition, the system documented all orders and reports, from the actions of the regimental commander to the front commander. Thus, the probability of a false report became negligible, as well as the probability of making a decision based on false information. The "maneuver" made it possible to control not only ground troops, but also front-line aircraft. The collapse of the Soviet Union, however, put an end to the system.
The subject of automated control systems came to life in Russia again only in 2001, when work began on a system that became known in the media first as Constellation M, and then as ESU TK, a unified tactical management system (by division inclusive). However, it was not possible to complete its development and implementation. The army did not receive a full-fledged integrated automated control system at that time.
SVO required an urgent decision on the automation of command and control. The decision came from the civil society. The army began to receive massive "substitutes" for automated control systems – various software and hardware complexes created on their own initiative by volunteer structures or by old players in the field of creating military control systems. As a rule, these are software and hardware complexes that automate part of the command processes, most often the correction of artillery and mortar fire.
In the most widespread version, such a system looks like a civilian tablet with a graphical interface in the hands of an observer (scout).
An image from a spotter UAV is broadcast to this tablet. The system allows you to obtain the exact coordinates of the point of rupture of the projectile, observed in real time from an unmanned aerial vehicle, and then instantly generate and transmit corrections to the gun's aiming angles to the control panel of the artillery battery.
Such systems went to the troops as early as 2022. They worked on civilian components, but at the same time data could be transmitted through standard army radio stations, including encrypted ones. In addition, they gradually gained compatibility with all domestic artillery systems.
There are systems that broadcast shooting data even through the Telegram messenger – and this turned out to be a surprisingly reliable way. Without replacing a full-fledged automated control system, such complexes helped to organize reconnaissance and firing circuits from drones and artillery (sometimes mortars or even automatic grenade launchers).
For example, the time required to open fire or adjust it has been reduced to tens of seconds.
However, the Armed Forces need, of course, a large-scale serial automated control system that allows commanders of all levels to fully manage all troops. Including, for example, logistics or missile units.
Now it has become known that the Minister of Defense personally took up this issue. At the meeting, Andrey Belousov was shown, as far as can be judged, fragments of the new automated control system. The Ministry of Defense designates it as "components of a promising digital infrastructure." It is stated that the results already achieved make it possible "to provide real-time access to various digital services for officials of control points for their operational information interaction." Behind this vague phrase lies the possibility of instant access of officers to the operational situation and the transfer of orders to the troops.
The meeting on the issue, which was attended by Andrei Belousov, was not staged, but real, and real questions were raised at it. Structures that have already solved similar tasks for the army are involved in the creation of new control systems.
Of course, such complex problems are not solved instantly, even in peacetime. In addition, the automated control system imposes certain requirements on radio communications. But, in any case, there are already prospects that the Russian army will receive automated control systems, along with all the benefits that it brings.
Alexander Timokhin
