CJADC2

[Kirkhill]

Cohere signs deal with Thales to use its AI for the Canadian Armed Forces - The Logic

As well as deploying AI in the military, the two companies will also jointly develop new agentic systems for security applications

thelogic.co

In a statement, Cohere co-founder Ivan Zhang said its AI system with Thales will “analyze complex naval environments in real time” and “deliver actionable intelligence at operational speed.” The two firms also plan to conduct joint research and development on other defence applications of AI agents.

Thales has contracts to maintain and provide engineering and technical help for the Canadian Armed Forces’ Arctic patrol ships, coastal defence vessels and auxiliary ships like tugboats—more than 100 craft in all. It’s already using digital technologies like AI to “optimize fleet support,” said Jennifer Tumminio, director of media relations for Thales North America. She added that the firm plans to use Cohere’s AI agents to “further enhance operational efficiency and readiness.”

Zhang is building a new team in Toronto to develop “agentic capabilities for cybersecurity,” he said in a LinkedIn post last month. Technical staff on the public sector team will build technology for “mission-critical use cases,” according to a job posting for members of the team. They must also be Canadian citizens and ideally have top-secret clearance.

 

[FJAG]

To my mind the simple solution is to stand up our own MDTF under our own joint command. We can call it the Canadian Pan Domain Task Force (CPDTF) if we like.

Just a point of order, Mr Chairman. Here's the broad definition of an MDTF.

The Army's Chief of Staff Paper #1: Army Multi-Domain Transformation Ready to Win in Competition and Conflict dated March 16, 2021, describes the Multi-Domain Task Force (MDTF) as "theater-level maneuver elements designed to synchronize precision effects and precision fires in all domains against adversary anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) networks in all domains, enabling joint forces to execute their operational plan (OPLAN)-directed roles."

See also: Congress document - The Significance of the Army's Multi-Domain Task Force.

In short an MDTF is part of an offensive strategy to punch through A2/AD networks.

To my way of thinking, we do not need an MDTF. What we need are a series of A2/AD networks to shield our real estate from malevolent actors. I do see an army role, as part of the Homeland division, in a comprehensive A2/AD network in conjunction with NORAD and our naval forces.

To a great extent the component parts of an army A2/AD brigade, does mot look much different from an MDTF albeit that its tactical role is oriented to the defence rather than enabling offensive operations.

 

[Kirkhill]

Just a point of order, Mr Chairman. Here's the broad definition of an MDTF.


See also: Congress document - The Significance of the Army's Multi-Domain Task Force.

In short an MDTF is part of an offensive strategy to punch through A2/AD networks.

To my way of thinking, we do not need an MDTF. What we need are a series of A2/AD networks to shield our real estate from malevolent actors. I do see an army role, as part of the Homeland division, in a comprehensive A2/AD network in conjunction with NORAD and our navel forces.

To a great extent the component parts of an army A2/AD brigade, does mot look much different from an MDTF albeit that its tactical role is oriented to the defence rather than enabling offensive operations.

Is an artillery brigade oriented to the offence or the defence? How about an infantry brigade?

If both formations cover the same turf and use the same tools need we get bothered by semantics?

 

[FJAG]

Is an artillery brigade oriented to the offence or the defence? How about an infantry brigade?

If both formations cover the same turf and use the same tools need we get bothered by semantics?

Yes if there is specific doctrine written for it.

More importantly are the details of what its component parts are and how they are configured, deployed and used. While each of these systems, in my mind at least, have the same basic systems - a signals, EW, MI, ISTAR based targeting and effects battalion, an anti-ship rocket and missile battalion, an air defence battalion, a possible a local defence battalion, a service battalion, the actual weapon systems and doctrine may will vary.

I think what we are both talking about for Canada are uniquely continental A2/AD systems. Let's call a spade a spade.

 

[GR66]

I do see an army role, as part of the Homeland division, in a comprehensive A2/AD network in conjunction with NORAD and our navel forces.

Is this some new weapon we've developed?

 

[FJAG]

Is this some new weapon we've developed?

Thankfully this came in time for me to still edit the original post.

 

[Kirkhill]

Yes if there is specific doctrine written for it.

More importantly are the details of what its component parts are and how they are configured, deployed and used. While each of these systems, in my mind at least, have the same basic systems - a signals, EW, MI, ISTAR based targeting and effects battalion, an anti-ship rocket and missile battalion, an air defence battalion, a possible a local defence battalion, a service battalion, the actual weapon systems and doctrine may will vary.

I think what we are both talking about for Canada are uniquely continental A2/AD systems. Let's call a spade a spade.

Fine, a spade then.

A Canadian Pan Domain A2/AD Task Force or Command or what have you.

What colour uniform is the boss wearing?

 

[FJAG]

What colour uniform is the boss wearing?

Right now - with reluctance, light blue. Once the new destroyers and subs are in place, dark blue.

 

[Kirkhill]

Right now - with reluctance, light blue. Once the new destroyers and subs are in place, dark blue.

I would have thought you would have gone with Royal Blue from the get go. Ordnance on battlements or ordnance on decks are still ordnance.

 

[FJAG]

I would have thought you would have gone with Royal Blue from the get go. Ordnance on battlements or ordnance on decks are still ordnance.

Nope. I think A2/AD brigades need to be Sheldrake with a heavy mix of Pronto, Acorn, Conrod, Cracker, and some Foxhound.

A2/AD in general, for a country like Canada, is a role for navy with air and army support and a healthy dose of EW/cyber.

 

[Kirkhill]

Italian position paper on "MDO" and National Security in the hybrid environment and the development of the Multi-Domain Brigade

https://www.difesa.it/assets/allegati/31787/2.1defence_approach_to_mdos.pdf

 

[daftandbarmy]

Nope. I think A2/AD brigades need to be Sheldrake with a heavy mix of Pronto, Acorn, Conrod, Cracker, and some Foxhound.

A2/AD in general, for a country like Canada, is a role for navy with air and army support and a healthy dose of EW/cyber.

Boxwood be like...

 

[ytz]

In short an MDTF is part of an offensive strategy to punch through A2/AD networks.

This. And it does so by snchronizing fires across several non-kinetic domains. EW, Space and Cyber specifically. To the extent it does use kinetic effects, it's long range fires for deep strikes.

We absolutely do need elements of this. Not in the way the Americans are doing it at the theatre level. The only large thing we actually should build is for the CA: a proper EW regiment. Everything else is about incorporating those other effects at the staff level in the OPP. Ideally, you want to deliver a cyber attack and maximum jamming seconds before the GMLRS arrive on the enemy's Div HQ that we found from space. We aren't big enough to have a full task force to synchronize all that. Doesn't mean we can't actually still synchronize those effects.