Understanding Modern Artillery Operations: Insights from the Top Guns and the future of AFATDS
Summary from
Introduction
I highly recommend The Crucible - The JRTC Experience Podcast, where unit leaders share candid insights and lessons from their Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) rotations. One particularly insightful episode featured LTC Christopher Haskell, commander of 1st Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, call sign "Top Guns" within the 101st Airborne Division. This summary captures key takeaways from his discussion and explores the broader modernization efforts shaping the future of artillery operations.
Key Takeaways
Starshield: A “Game-Changer” in Tactical Communications
Starshield, a militarized version of Starlink, has revolutionized battlefield connectivity with its high mobility, ease of use, and impressive 200 Mbps data throughput—compared to the 5–20 Mbps of legacy systems.
The Importance of Digital Sustainment Training
Continuous and repetitive rehearsals in AFATDS and related digital systems proved essential to reducing data errors and accelerating fire-mission processing times. Early preparation, such as Operation Lethal Eagle and self-initiated digital sustainment training between dedicated training blocks, was key to Top Guns’ success at JRTC.
The Emerging Role of Multifunctional Reconnaissance Units (MFRCs)
A new company-sized formation reporting directly to the brigade commander, the MFRC is designed to sense across multiple domains and enable rapid strike missions. It was the “most lethal” asset during Top Guns’ recent training events. Additionally, it allows the formation to analyze its own signature, enabling proactive signature management to minimize detection and improve survivability.
Observations & Lessons Learned
The C2 Fix Initiative: Modernizing Command and Control
The C2 Fix initiative is a critical Army effort to streamline and modernize division- and brigade-level C2 networks. By integrating multiple programs of record and commercial technologies, it establishes a mobile, survivable, and resilient communications architecture. This approach seeks to enable both command on the move (OTM) and at the quick halt (ATQH), ensuring that forces can operate without relying on large, vulnerable command posts.
During Top Guns’ JRTC rotation, they tested several key components of C2 Fix, revealing valuable lessons that will refine future implementations:
SBU-E (Sensitive But Unclassified – Encrypted) Networks: Integrating SBU-E with SECRET-level systems (e.g., AFATDS, radars, and TAIS/air picture) required new troubleshooting procedures and mission-planning processes to maintain seamless data flow between echelons. AFATDS, as the primary fire-mission processing system, necessitated a "gateway" solution to ensure message integrity across classification boundaries.
Starshield (Militarized Starlink):
A next-generation SATCOM solution replacing older STNs.
Offers significantly higher bandwidth (e.g., ~200 Mbps vs. 5 Mbps previously).
Rapid, easy to set up, and highly concealable, enabling small, mobile, and survivable command posts.
Enabled MS Teams-based “strike bridges” that keep the FA battalion, brigade staff, and division LNO teams connected.
MUOS (Mobile User Objective System) Digital
Provides secure SATCOM for voice, push-to-talk, and moderate data applications (e.g., positional updates, reports, and limited file transfers).
UHF signals penetrate foliage and urban environments, ensuring reliable communication in contested areas.
Serves as the "P" in the PACE (Primary, Alternate, Contingency, Emergency) plan.
At JRTC, the “Top Guns” incorporated MUOS as a critical link within their communications architecture, enabling robust information flow across multiple echelons.
Forward observers (FOs) primarily transmitted targeting data via TSM radios.
The Battalion Fire Support Element (FSE) served as a central coordinating node. Leveraging MUOS for beyond-line-of-sight connectivity, the FSE communicated with both the Brigade Fires Cell and the Battalion Fire Direction Center (FDC) to relay mission-essential information and coordinate fires priorities.
The Battalion FDC received and processed fire missions, performing the technical fire direction calculations. Once validated, the FDC issued commands to the howitzer or mortar sections—the “gun line”—for execution.
Gun crews operated within an FM radio bubble, maintaining localized coordination with the FDC for final fire commands and ensuring rapid, clear communication on the gun line.
MUOS provided the essential beyond-line-of-sight bridge across forward observers, the FSE, and firing units, ensuring continuous and reliable communications even in challenging terrain or extended ranges.
Army’s New Multifunctional Reconnaissance Companies (MFRCs)
As of the podcast, only two brigades across the Army were employing MFRCs, one of which participated in Top Guns’ JRTC rotation. Despite its limited fielding, the unit proved highly effective in shaping the battlefield.
Reports directly to the brigade commander, ensuring seamless integration into brigade operations.
Integrates electronic warfare (EW), robotics, and UAS across three hunter-killer platoons and one dedicated robotics platoon forming a company-sized element.
Specializes in hunting high-value target lists (HBTLs) based on specific engagement criteria.
Works closely with artillery battalions, accelerating target acquisition and kill-chain execution.
Across all training exercises, the MFRC has consistently been the brigade’s “most lethal asset”.
Closing Observations from Top Guns’ JRTC Rotation
Mastering the Basics
Success started with the fundamentals: dispersal, digging in, and camouflage. By effectively repositioning batteries into new PAAs, maintaining good dispersion, and hardening positions, friendly forces were able to reduce their vulnerability. These measures forced OPFOR to waste munitions on empty terrain, preserving friendly combat power for higher-priority targets.
Novel Employment of Emitters
Coupled with the innovative use of signal emitters, Top Guns was able to induce OPFOR into inadvertently revealing their entire integrated fire complex, opening them up to attack.
The Future of Artillery Operations: AFATDS Modernization
Repeatedly referenced throughout the podcast, AFATDS remains central to fire-mission processing and targeting. Recognizing its critical role, the Army has launched a major modernization effort to enhance its adaptability and interoperability for future conflicts. However, the current status remains ambiguous to outsiders.
AFATDS & Joint Targeting Modernization Efforts
A 2023 RFI outlined plans for AFATDS and the Joint Targeting Integrated Command and Coordination Suite (JTIC2S)—two key components of the digital fires enterprise.
PEO C3T and ACC-APG are spearheading these modernization initiatives, with the Army pursuing a consortium model, similar to the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS), to facilitate multi-industry collaboration on digital fires solutions.
However, this modernization effort builds upon earlier efforts to enhance AFATDS, including those outlined in a 2022 RFI, which focused on upgrading the system’s architecture, interoperability, and sustainability.
The 2022 AFATDS Modernization Effort: Laying the Foundation
Prior to the current push for next-generation fires capabilities, the Army sought to modernize AFATDS through a phased approach, balancing incremental enhancements with a broader shift toward an open, AI-enabled system. The 2022 Army RFI highlighted the need for a fully modernized AFATDS that:
Integrated the strengths of both the existing Ada-based AFATDS 6.8 and the Java-based AFATDS 7.0 modernization effort.
Improved the system’s UI, embedded training, and cyber resilience while expanding sensor-to-shooter capabilities and support for next-generation munitions.
Enhanced sustainment and maintainability, allowing for easier long-term upgrades and lifecycle management.
The 2022 RFI also acknowledged challenges in transitioning AFATDS from Ada to Java—a key step toward modernization. While the AFATDS 7.0 effort sought a full codebase conversion, the Army ultimately halted the migration of AFATDS 6.8.1.3 to Java, signaling a reassessment of the best path forward.
AFATDS AXS: The Next Generation of Digital Fires
Building on lessons from previous modernization efforts, the Army is now developing AFATDS AXS—a micro-service, open-architecture, hardware-agnostic application-based fires solution. The three core elements of AFATDS AXS include:
Fire Support Element: Manages targeting and intelligence integration.
Technical Fire Direction: Processes fire-mission calculations.
Tactical Fire Direction: Executes fire missions at the tactical level.
AFATDS AXS will also incorporate AI/ML tools to optimize sensor-to-shooter workflows and is based on the government-owned Tactical Assault Kit (TAK) software.
JTIC2S: The Future of Joint Targeting Coordination
As a complementary effort, JTIC2S will provide a federated Joint Targeting Common Operating Picture (COP), enabling real-time collaboration across all Joint and Coalition fires assets.
Key features include:
High-volume target processing for contested environments (e.g., counter-fire operations in U.S. Forces Korea).
AI-driven intelligence integration for automated target vetting and validation.
A "Team of Teams" Approach to Digital Fires Modernization
To accelerate modernization, the Army is forming a consortium of top-tier developers across the fires and non-fires communities. This group will:
Deliver software products, roadmaps, and integration plans.
Inherit and refine the AFATDS AXS MVP, SDK, and JTIC2S MVP.
Ensure rapid software updates and reduced kill-chain latency to maintain fire superiority against near-peer threats.
THR’s Take / Final Thoughts
If I were the PLA, degrading or destroying MUOS and Starshield would be a top priority. My concern is that they have both the resources and expertise to make this a real possibility.
MUOS:
Targeting a geostationary (GEO) satellite like MUOS with a direct-ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon requires significantly more energy and time compared to striking a low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite like Starshield. This makes a kinetic or co-orbital attack on a GEO satellite more challenging and expensive.
That said, once an adversary commits to a co-orbital attack, the engagement can be relatively slow-moving. GEO satellites maintain a predictable position over the equator, making them easier to track and intercept, even if the process takes weeks or months.
Starshield:
Operating in LEO, Starshield is more vulnerable to ASAT attacks and non-kinetic threats than satellites in higher orbits. However, SpaceX’s high launch cadence means replacements could be deployed quickly if a significant portion of the constellation were compromised.
Still, a prolonged conflict in LEO raises concerns about Kessler Syndrome—where accumulating debris from repeated engagements could trigger a cascading effect, rendering portions of orbit hazardous or even unusable.
Dynamic Mission Planning & Kill Chain Optimization:
Listening to these podcasts, it’s hard not to appreciate the level of training and preparation required for effective dynamic mission planning. As I’ve said before, the ability to execute this at scale is what distinguishes the U.S. military. By contrast, Russian forces have only managed to coordinate company-level operations in Ukraine on a handful of occasions—with very limited success.
This advantage, however, is not static—it must be continuously refined. Optimizing and simplifying kill chains should be a top priority.
Where can we automate?
Where can we eliminate unnecessary steps?
Given the number of interdependent links in the process, how do we mitigate single points of failure that could cause a precipitous drop in effectiveness?
Deconstructing these operationally-based kill chains—each step and system used across different echelons—is no small task. However, systematically mapping these out and bringing in outside experts to offer fresh perspectives seems like a worthwhile endeavor. Furthermore, comparing these frameworks to deconstructed Ukrainian kill chains could provide valuable insights into how they have adapted to a high-intensity, resource-constrained fight.
To this point, I am reflagging the "Automated Course of Action (CoA) Generation" SBIR Phase I covered in Issue #12 of The Hatch Report. Currently, Battalion-level units spend hours using the Military Decision-Making Process (MDMP) to generate and vet CoA options. Through this SBIR, the Army is exploring how AI/ML algorithms can accelerate this process by an order of magnitude, enabling real-time replanning during execution.
Integrating UAS for Direct Fire Coordination
Lastly, if such a capability doesn’t already exist, it should: A UAS equipped with an ISR-T sensor should be able to pass targeting data directly to a howitzer or mortar fire-control unit, automatically slewing the system onto the target.
*DISCLAIMER / CAVEATS
This newsletter is not associated with any other person, organization, or entity.
Please respond to this email if you feel a correction is warranted.
Please respond to this email if you have any feedback or recommendations.