Multi Domain Task Force - Canada

[Kirkhill]

A NATO MDTF exercise targeted on the Kaliningrad A2AD bubble

Cutting-edge Army unit challenged right out of the gate with complex NATO drill

A Germany-based Army unit dubbed a test bed responsible for high-tech battlefield operations is fresh off facing its first big test.

www.stripes.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Japanese Forces Test Deployment of Hypersonic Missile System - USNI News

The Japan Self-Defense Force recently tested the deployment of a developing hypersonic missile system that is designed to defend Tokyo’s islands from foreign warships. The Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency (ATLA) showcased the Hyper Velocity Gliding Projectile (HVGP) during an...

news.usni.org

Long Range Precision Fires.

 

[Kirkhill]

Parking this here. Kind of MDTF. Kind of Pan-Domain Ops. Kind of 6 CCSB.

New Army unit seeks to disrupt ‘malign influence’ in Indo-Pacific

The 1st Theater Information Advantage Detachment in Hawaii is the first of three such units to activate, with two units planned for Georgia and Germany.

www.armytimes.com

The unusual 65-soldier formation combines military intelligence, psychological operations, electronic warfare, public affairs, civil affairs, information operations and cyber operations into a set of dedicated teams.

The unit’s purpose is to “gain and maintain a strategic advantage through information dominance in the Indo-Pacific region by disrupting malign influence, increasing cooperation with key partners, and promoting regional stability through a shared commitment for a free and open Indo-Pacific,” according to an Army fact sheet. It will be responsible for a region spanning 36 countries across northeast, southeast, south Asia and Oceania.

The Hawaii unit is the first of three Theater Information Advantage Detachments to activate, Capt. Avery Smith II, a member of the 1st detachment’s engagement team, said in a statement. Second TIAD is projected to activate at Fort Gordon, Georgia, in the spring of 2026 and 3rd TIAD will follow at Wiesbaden, Germany, in the fall.

 

[ytz]

I’m going to say that 6 CCSB is not related to the comments by Comd CJOC in any way.

The multi domain integration being discussed is between the various L1/2s; RCN, CA, RCAF, CAFCYBERCOM, and 3rd Cdn Space Division.

I suspect the actual integration point will be JTF-N and CJOC itself.

Correct. The MDTF thing is basically the US army trying to provide enough capabilities to support a Corps so they need less help from other services. Only the US is that big.

For everybody else, those functions can be disaggregated and pushed to division level support units. Mostly we need to bolster existing units (JSR, 21 EWR, 7 Wg) to deliver a lot of the same functionality.

The only gaps I see are some kind of intelligence regiment that provide a deployable fusion cell to speed up targeting. And maybe an information regiment that can do civil affairs, psyops, information warfare.

Other capabilities like the long range sensing and long range fires are coming.

 

[Kirkhill]

“We need to be able to intercept, defeat 600 to 1,200 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and long-range one-way attack drones every 24-hour period,” said Brig. Gen. Steven Carpenter, the commanding general of Multidomain Command Europe. Those numbers, he said, reflect the scale of attacks seen in Ukraine.

“At the same time, we need to be able to develop, maintain custody, and pass a minimum of 1,500 targets during that same 24-hour period,” he said. That number, according to Carpenter, is intended to assert dominance instead of simply meeting the capabilities of enemy forces.

US Army leaders say future European fight could mean 1,500 targets daily

The projection, informed by the Russia-Ukraine war, is shaping how the service thinks about automation and speed on the battlefield.

www.militarytimes.com

Sitting under our sector of the Golden Dome, how many targets will we need to manage?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

None. They'll be managed by the US. Ah! Ah! Ah!

 

[FJAG]

“We need to be able to intercept, defeat 600 to 1,200 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and long-range one-way attack drones every 24-hour period,” said Brig. Gen. Steven Carpenter, the commanding general of Multidomain Command Europe. Those numbers, he said, reflect the scale of attacks seen in Ukraine.

“At the same time, we need to be able to develop, maintain custody, and pass a minimum of 1,500 targets during that same 24-hour period,” he said. That number, according to Carpenter, is intended to assert dominance instead of simply meeting the capabilities of enemy forces.

US Army leaders say future European fight could mean 1,500 targets daily

The projection, informed by the Russia-Ukraine war, is shaping how the service thinks about automation and speed on the battlefield.

www.militarytimes.com

Sitting under our sector of the Golden Dome, how many targets will we need to manage?

I'm a bit of two minds about this.

Golden Dome, unlike Iron Dome, is essentially a space-based system and still in its formative stages. Trump put out it would be up in three years and funding has been going on, but I seriously doubt it will make the timeline. Plus it starts a whole new arms race with folks deploying cheap suicide satellites in orbit to take out American sensors and effectors at trike time.

 

[ytz]

Golden Dome (as envisioned) is never getting built. Maybe the sensor portion.

 

[FJAG]

Golden Dome (as envisioned) is never getting built. Maybe the sensor portion.

The only way that America can afford the concept of Golden Dome is if it seriously reduces funding for the other three branches of the Armed Forces.

There are two indicators that it might. First, the great retrenchment to concerning itself with the Western Hemisphere (and the American Homeland) makes a large army, navy and air force less necessary for them. Second, the threat of ballistic missile attacks on the Homeland is becoming secondary to large quantities of highly accurate hypersonic conventional and nuclear cruise missiles.

There is no real ground-based counter to such systems without having hundreds of anti-air battalions ringing the coast and borders to the US. That's neither plausible nor 100% effective. The primary defense, like always, remains MAD. But space-based effectors should be technically feasible even if cost prohibitive. The problem with technically feasible is it will create a new type of arms race because the country that first becomes capable of fielding such a defence will no longer be reined in by MAD.

 

[ytz]

But space-based effectors should be technically feasible even if cost prohibitive.

Technical feasibility is questionable. And "cost prohibitive" is an undestatement. This is like Elon Musk's "datacentres in space" idea. A submarine or disguised container popping up off the coast and firing a hypersonic is going to be hard to defend against. Especially if that target is on the coast itself. Extremely doubtful that a space based effector can counter that on time. The density required in orbit to do this would be insane. On par with building defences on the coast itself.

The part the Pentagon is actually interested in, to be honest, is MTI. Both AMTI and GMTI. Persistent and difficult to jam MTI would be a massive advantage.

 

[Kirkhill]

Golden Dome (as envisioned) is never getting built. Maybe the sensor portion.

The only way that America can afford the concept of Golden Dome is if it seriously reduces funding for the other three branches of the Armed Forces.

There are two indicators that it might. First, the great retrenchment to concerning itself with the Western Hemisphere (and the American Homeland) makes a large army, navy and air force less necessary for them. Second, the threat of ballistic missile attacks on the Homeland is becoming secondary to large quantities of highly accurate hypersonic conventional and nuclear cruise missiles.

There is no real ground-based counter to such systems without having hundreds of anti-air battalions ringing the coast and borders to the US. That's neither plausible nor 100% effective. The primary defense, like always, remains MAD. But space-based effectors should be technically feasible even if cost prohibitive. The problem with technically feasible is it will create a new type of arms race because the country that first becomes capable of fielding such a defence will no longer be reined in by MAD.

I agree with you both.

You are both wrong.

The Golden Dome as described will never be built and it cannot be completed in the timeline envisaged.

But.

Come back in 25 years and compare the result to the objective.

The intent of the Golden Dome speaks to a lot of Americans across generations. It is an extension of George Washington's view of foreign entanglements. It is an extension of Jackson and Monroe. It is an extension of NORAD.

The Golden Dome objective will influence spending priorities for decades.

And Infantry will lose out to technical solutions.

On the other hand, there will always be a need for security and that is best handled person to person.

 

[FJAG]

MTI I've heard of AMTI and GMTI are new terms to me and not very Google responsive.

Ground or Air MTI? And if so what are the effectors brought into play?

 

[Czech_pivo]

Technical feasibility is questionable. And "cost prohibitive" is an undestatement. This is like Elon Musk's "datacentres in space" idea. A submarine or disguised container popping up off the coast and firing a hypersonic is going to be hard to defend against. Especially if that target is on the coast itself. Extremely doubtful that a space based effector can counter that on time. The density required in orbit to do this would be insane. On par with building defences on the coast itself.

The part the Pentagon is actually interested in, to be honest, is MTI. Both AMTI and GMTI. Persistent and difficult to jam MTI would be a massive advantage.

I've asked this question a number of weeks/months ago. What happens if Russia/Chinese subs head south and launch off the west coast of Ecuador or Peru? What does the Golden Dome do then? Is the US planning on reaching out south well in Mexico without any support from the Mexicans? Why is the US not clamoring about the need for Mexico to be a part of the Golden Dome?

 

[ytz]

MTI I've heard of AMTI and GMTI are new terms to me and not very Google responsive.

Ground or Air MTI? And if so what are the effectors brought into play?

Correct. Moving Target Indication. It's what the JSTARS, Wedgetail, etc do. Use Doppler to detect moving vehicles and then other radar information to characterize and identify the target.

Moving target indication - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The whole rub is what you do to have effectors in play. Trump got this idea from Israel with the Iron Dome. Strategies that work for postage stamp sized countries don't scale though. They can deploy more unmanned air defence batteries and network them to provide some level of defence. But space based effectors is a whole different challenge. And I am honestly questioning whether this is more grift for Musk and Co or an actual plan.