What are the challenges of integrating systems in to military vehicles? And what is Generic Vehicle Architecture?
The modern Fighting Vehicle uses an array of often complex electronic subsystems to carry out its mission. No longer just a ‘large gun’ or ‘battlefield taxi’, today’s vehicles are considered an important asset in the digital battlespace, providing front line information to the strategy planners as well as a hub for the troops on the ground.
In the past, providers of the subsystems have protected their products by locking down the interfaces, leading to closed or so-called stovepipe systems, often with their own control panels and displays. Closed systems, although functionally acceptable are difficult to justify through the life of the platform. The need to upgrade, adapt and enhance a particular subsystem effectively holds the MoD to ransom and can often lead to high platform integration and platform re-qualification costs.
Electrical vs Electronic
Given the systems now deployed in a modern Fighting Vehicle, the need to provide integration between them is more important than ever before. Point to point electrical wiring as conventionally found in automotive vehicles will no longer support the need for flexibility, where a more open, scalable approach is needed if the Fighting Vehicle is to reduce space claim and weight in addition to taking advantage of the ever-changing capability of the sub systems the end-user requires.
By employing a data and power backbone in the vehicle, various sub-systems can be integrated within the vehicle to a common set of vehicle services. By applying this approach, platform integrators can fit the most appropriate sub-system at the time of build, with the knowledge that these can be more easily changed and replaced in the future. This presents the end customer reduced throughlife costs, as integration, re-design and re-qualification of the vehicle is reduced.
Mission Systems
A Fighting Vehicle consists of several different electronic systems to provide power, data and video information to various sub-systems and sensors in the vehicle. The following section reviews the types of sub-systems which need to be integrated within a Fighting Vehicle. Automotive: Each Fighting Vehicle has an element of electronics regarding its automotive functions. In its simplest form, the electronics provide a means to start and stop the engine and monitor basics such as road speed, coolant temperature and fuel level. Obviously as the Fighting Vehicle automotives become more complex (such as ABS, or perhaps even hybrid electric drive) then the electronics needed to control them become more complicated too. This leads to an increased amount of electronics needing to be fitted and integrated into the vehicle resulting in greater integration complexity.
Communications
Fighting Vehicles are now fitted with an array of radio communications equipment, ranging from local VHF networks to satellite communications. Each communication system can either run standalone or can be cross patched allowing seamless links across the battlespace. The transmission of data, video, as well as conventional voice traffic, means that the communications are required to interface into other sub-systems increasing platform integration complexity.
Weapon System
Whether the Fighting Vehicle is fitted with a simple self-defence weapon or a full long-range cannon, command and control of the weapon as part of the vehicle’s defence system is paramount to the survival of the Fighting Vehicle and its crew.
Battlefield Mission System
To support modern warfare, Fighting Vehicles are often full of computing capability for data acquisition, management of the sensors on the vehicle, as well as management of information from and to assets remote from the vehicle. Modern Fighting Vehicles are processing rich platforms with approximately 100,000 times more computing power in a single Battlefield Mission Computer than the Apollo 11 guidance computer used to land on the moon.
Situational Awareness
The need to conduct surveillance and reconnaissance from under armour has been paramount since the invention of the first Fighting Vehicle. Still common place today, the periscope or vision block provides the crew with a view of the outside world. However, it is often desirable to share the view with other crew members in the vehicle as well as being able to export the information off platform. The use of modern camera technology has become common place, with fully integrated distributed vision systems providing 360-degree vision for each crew member simultaneously and interchangeably.
Generic Vehicle Architecture
By making use of computer network technologies on the vehicle, the Electronic Architecture can provide an almost ‘plug and fight’ solution. In addition, many of the subsystem controls can be integrated onto a common display screen optimising the ergonomics and usability of the crew station controls. As well as de-cluttering the workspace, use of a common display reduces the burden on training across vehicle fleets. In recognition of the challenges identified, the UK MoD has been working in collaboration with industry to develop a defence standard to incorporate the use of a Generic Vehicle Architecture (GVA) within new and upgraded vehicle fleets.
Defence standard 23-009 was first published in August 2010. The GVA Defence Standard allows the MoD to realise the benefits of a common approach to platform open architectures by mandating standards for their design and implementation. In standard aims to improve operational effectiveness and reduce the cost of ownership across the fleet and all Defence Lines Of Development (DLODs). Key aspects of the standard include the mandate of standard interfaces, both physical (connectors and pinouts) and logical (data messaging). The UK MoD have stated that the standard will be applied to all current and future land platform procurement, as well as legacy platform refurbishment and upgrade programmes.
The concept of defining an architecture standard has been adopted by NATO and Australia who have based their approach on the UK GVA Defence Standard. The US has taken a slightly different technical route, but nevertheless have published an open standard (Victory/CMOSS).
Certification Considerations
Traditionally it has been the Primes responsibility to integrate sub-systems and systems onto the vehicle. Each of the sub-systems on an AFV can be considered as a closed system with their own integration requirements. The integration of all of the equipment from multiple vendors is a high integration risk area for a Prime. By using a common Electronic Architecture, the interfaces between the sub systems become open as they are declared and owned by the System Integrator and the risk is reduced as each sub system complies with the common backbone specification.
This approach also improves through life upgrades. In the past, due to the closed systems provided on the vehicle, “swap in, swap out” of new electronic systems has been an exceptionally complex, or sometimes impossible task. This has sometimes resulted in sub-optimum assets being available on the vehicle, or an array of new systems integrated on top, causing the vehicle to become cluttered. This has a detrimental effect to crew stations which are commonly affected and can lead to power management issues on the platform. The use of common interfaces through using a GVA approach takes steps to mitigating these integration issues and enables the customer to take advantage of better technologies through the life of the vehicle.
The move by the end customer to improve integration of vehicle systems and sub-systems, coupled with a drive for value-for-money, has led to an increasing trend to buy COTS platforms and integrate the sub systems over the top. This system integrator role may not suit all platform vendors, and therefore a teaming partner is often found to provide the electronic systems integration expertise.
Deployment
Ultra PCS has developed a truly open, modular and scalable GVA solution called UltraEAK®. The Electronic Architecture Kit provides seamless integration of the data and power needs for military vehicle systems described previously. It comprises of the processing, networking and power distribution hardware, along with mission system software. The mission system software is delivered through the Platform Gateway Interface (UltraPGI). At its core is the means of describing the data exchange mechanism, the “middleware” that glues all the mission system components together. On top of this is the User Interface (UI) that provides an intuitive means of interacting with the platform systems, whether simple lighting commands or complex mission planning and routing. The middleware (using the Land Data Model) and UI are fully compliant with the GVA standard.
Sub-systems interface with the core by creating plug ins – a software module that adapts the sub-system interface into the common GVA language. UltraPGI can not only interface the mission system components, but also gateway to an existing platform databus, whether that’s a simple CANbus or something more complex such as Victory. By reusing modules/plug-ins developed from previous projects/vehicles and only developing new modules where a new feature/vehicle is encountered, UltraPGI is technically and commercially open as the system includes an API allowing vehicle integrators and third party manufacturers to develop their own mission system interface into GVA.
Creating an eco-system of platform manufacturers and mission sub-system partners, Ultra PCS is leading the way in deploying a truly open electronic architecture that meets the needs of platform integration today and into the future.
Want to know more about Electronic Architecture Kit? Visit our UltraEAK® page here.