Land Force: Project JP2110 - clearing the air | ADM March 2012
Nigel Pittaway | Melbourne
When Australian personnel deployed to Iraq in 2003, Saddam Hussein was still thought to be harbouring weapons of mass destruction. This deployment, coupled with the sheer audacity and scale of terrorist strikes around the world, helped to sow the seeds for Joint Project 2110 the ADF’s Chemical, Biological, Nuclear Defence program.
The 2011 Defence Capability Plan notes that recent deployments and terrorist activities have heightened ADF concerns of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defence (CBNRD) capability. It also raises the possibility of both accidental or deliberate exposure to Toxic Industrial Chemicals (TICs) and Toxic Industrial Materials (TIMs) during such deployments.
In addition, a study carried out by the DSTO a couple of years ago determined that current Chemical, Biological and Radiological equipment was designed for cold-war threats and maybe not best suited to the asymmetric nature of emerging threats.
Recent participation of ADF personnel around the globe has increased the risk of exposure to asymmetric warfare, from the Taliban in Afghanistan to Somali pirates in international shipping lanes. Humanitarian missions have their share of risk too, which can range from exposure to radioactive plumes from damaged nuclear reactors, to chemical fires in the aftermath of earthquakes and the like.
Accordingly, JP2110 has a very broad scope and will replace or upgrade existing equipment. It will seek to harness recent developments in technology and simulation to better prepare the ADF against such threats.
Its goal is to enhance defence against CBRN exposure through greater protection, achieved by enhanced prediction, training and the supply of new equipment. These measures are designed to safeguard personnel from what it calls the strategic, tactical and physiological impacts of exposure to CBRN weapons and exposure to TICs and TIMs.
Gestation
Project JP2110 has its origins in a directive from the office of the Chief of the Defence Force in 2005 and, such was the scope, it was split into two sub phases during 2009.
Phase 1A is upgrading or replacing existing radiological and chemical point detectors and will also acquire additional quantities. The acquisition process is underway, having achieved Second Pass Approval during 2009. It will deliver new and upgraded detectors to all three services.
Phase 1B has yet to achieve First Pass Approval and has a broad field of regard. It will address the five doctrinal elements of CBRND – detection, identification and monitoring (including reconnaissance); warning and reporting (through data fusion); physical protection (both individual and collective); hazard management (personnel, equipment and environmental) and (to some degree) medical support, including casualty management.
First Pass is currently planned for Fiscal Year 2012/13 and Second Pass will follow between two and a half and three years after that. The cost of Phase 1B will be somewhere between $100 million and $300 million and a Year of Decision is expected between 2013 and 2015. Initial Operational Capability is to be achieved between 2015 and 2017.
In support of project definition a market survey was released to industry during the course of 2010.
Phase 1A
A requirement to introduce the point detectors into service as quickly as possible was another reason JP 2110 was divided into the two phases.
It will rely on MOTS and COTS equipment wherever possible to provide the individual with basic threat detection and, as noted, this equipment is now being acquired. The requirement is for the point detectors to be able to rapidly detect and identify contaminants but they must also be easy to carry and easily interpreted by a range of users. The fast-tracking of the point detector acquisition has allowed the more complicated elements of the project to be migrated to Phase 1B.
Phase 1B
According to the DCP, Phase 1B has a very broad scope which includes equipment that will require integration with existing personal equipment as well as the broader Command and Control network. It will span the five doctrinal elements of CBRND and will consider COTS/MOTS solutions, either through the tender process or government to government processes such as the Foreign Military Sales pipeline.
The first two “pillars” of Phase 1B, the Detection, Identification and Monitoring and Warning and Reporting doctrines will complement the Phase 1A capabilities. Together they will deliver a sophisticated, networked system which will revolutionise how CBRN threats are handled and controlled.
“We are looking to procure a system that will be networked with current radios and battle management systems,” explained Lieutenant Colonel Mark McAuliffe, Deputy Director Engineering/CBRNE in the Land Development branch of the Capability Development Group.
If a personal or remote sensor detects a warning, a message is sent back to the central command post or headquarters where it is analysed by computer software and a warning sent out to take appropriate action, which may be to don Personal Protective Equipment, or possibly evacuate the area.
This concept is similar to the US JWARN concept, which connects JBRN sensors directly into Joint and Service Command C² systems to automatically analyse and plot the scope of a threat in near real time.
“It is designed primarily to detect threats released into the air, either deliberately or accidentally, and will provide timely warning and protection for our troops on the ground,” said LTCOL McAuliffe.
The Physical Protection element will replace or upgrade masks and protective clothing, to not only provide better protection of the troops on the ground but to allow them to continue on operation for as long as is safely possible. Previous studies have highlighted the drawbacks of CBRN protective clothing, which can result in a large number of heat strain casualties if not carefully managed.
Hazard Management will primarily address the decontamination of personnel and their equipment and also the environment.
“Some of our existing equipment is a bit dated and needs to be replaced,” said LTCOL McAuliffe. “We will consider the decontamination of not only the personnel and their vehicles, but also delicate equipment such as laptop computers.”
Although the Medical Support doctrine as not a major activity within JP 2110 (other outcomes are delivered under other projects such as JP 2060, ADF Deployable Health Capability) it nevertheless is an important element.
“Phase 1B is very focussed on how contaminated casualties are handled,” explained LTCOL McAuliffe to ADM. “It will concentrate on items such as casualty handling bags.”
Simulation
Collective CBRN training is also a major deliverable and will rely heavily on simulation.
“It is hard to physically train for such an event, as there are a range of Occupational Health and Safety concerns, so we are looking for an electronic alternative,” said LTCOL McAuliffe. “The idea is to be able to simulate a release, which is picked up by detectors and distributed through the system, where it will stimulate the warning systems. It is quite wide-ranging and complex.”
At the personnel level it may be used to detect whether individuals are wearing their protective equipment properly, training both the wearer in correct procedures and providing ‘casualties’ for the exercise.
Simulation is also used extensively in the modelling of contaminant ‘plumes’, an example of this is a detailed modelling and simulation tool known as the CBR Virtual Battlespace (VB). Developed by the UK’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, it is being used by our own DSTO to investigate the performance of systems under consideration for JP2110. When the training simulation is in service it will rely heavily on the modelling work performed by CBR VB.
“DSTO has an active engagement in the project,” said LTCOL McAuliffe.
Market Survey
“We conducted a market survey of industry in 2010 to help inform us about the available systems that might meet our requirements and to also help with the definition of our requirements,” explained LTCOL McAuliffe. “The industry response was very good and has provided excellent supporting information for the development of the project. We continue to engage with industry through working groups and the like, to further refine requirements and documentation before going out to tender. This is both to make sure they can meet our requirements and for them to advise us if we’re being too aspirational, or aiming too low.”
The ongoing discussions with industry have included participation with the Land Environment Working Group. One such forum last year discussed the major aspects of the program: “We tend to use that forum to engage industry to help us define our goals,” said LTCOL McAuliffe.
Australia is actively engaged with allies such as the US, UK and Canada in the field, but LTCOL McAuliffe says JP2110 is not modelled on any particular system.
“We are looking at what is applicable to us. We have taken the UK experience on board, in terms of requirements definition, but we may also take aspects of others in our definition. They are also looking to us in the development of their own systems,” he said.