Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

News & Supplemental  

Key military network operating system made by company with Ptech ties

Edited on Sun Jan-21-07 09:53 PM by ftr23532

Here’s the gist of this post: the Pentagon is currently throwing billions of dollars into its visionary Future Combat Systems network (FCS). This is going to the the network that allows all of the military systems of the future to communicated and coordinate, including remotely controlled drones that will patrol the streets of tomorrow’s urban warfare nightmare environments.

It appears that the company chosen to provide the embedded operating system for the vital “command, control, communications, computing, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance” (C4ISR) infrastructure used across all FCS platforms had (and possibly still has) Yaqcub Mirza on its board. And Yaqcub Mirza just happens to be the guy that set up the Saudi/Muslim Brotherhood’s SAAR network that was raided in the Operation Greenquest raids of 2002 AND sat on the board of Ptech. Friggin’ wonderful.

Here’s an overview of the Future Combat Systems indicates how critical C4ISR is to the whole system:

FCS Overview

The Army’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) network allows the FCS Family-of-Systems (FoS) to operate as a cohesive system-of-systems where the whole of its capabilities is greater than the sum of its parts. As the key to the Army’s transformation, the network, and its logistics and Embedded Training (ET) systems, enable the Future Force to employ revolutionary operational and organizational concepts. The network enables Soldiers to perceive, comprehend, shape, and dominate the future battlefield at unprecedented levels as defined by the FCS Operational Requirements Document (ORD).

The FCS network consists of four overarching building blocks: System-of-Systems Common Operating Environment (SOSCOE); Battle Command (BC) software; communications and computers (CC); and intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance (ISR) systems. The four building blocks synergistically interact enabling the Future Force to see first, understand first, act first and finish decisively.

Communications and Computers (CC) Systems

The FCS Family-of-Systems (FoS) are connected to the command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) network by a multilayered Communications and Computers (CC) network with unprecedented range, capacity and dependability. The Communications and Computers (CC) network provides secure, reliable access to information sources over extended distances and complex terrain. The network will support advanced functionalities such as integrated network management, information assurance and information dissemination management to ensure dissemination of critical information among sensors, processors and warfighters both within, and external to the FCS-equipped organization.

The Communications and Computers (CC) network does not rely on a large and separate infrastructure because it is primarily embedded in the mobile platforms and moves with the combat formations. This enables the command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) network to provide superior Battle Command (BC) on the move to achieve offensive-oriented, high-tempo operations.

Networked Logistics Systems

The key to the success of the FCS is the Networked Logistics Systems integrated through the Family-of-Systems (FOS) to achieve the logistics goals of reducing the logistics footprint, enhancing deployability, increasing operational availability, and reducing total ownership costs. These critical program goals are included in the two logistics Key Performance Parameters (KPP), KPP 4 (Transportability/Deployability) and KPP 5 (Sustainability/Reliability). Inherent to meeting these KPPs is the integration of logistics in the command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) network primarily through the Platform-Soldier Mission Readiness System (PSMRS) and the Logistics Decision Support System (LDSS). These systems provide unprecedented logistics information and decision tools to the commanders and logisticians by enabling the distribution system to deliver the right stuff to the right place at the right time. The networked logistics is further enabled by the demand reduction technologies designed into the System of Systems. Increased Reliability Availability Maintainability – Test (RAM-T) goals and implementing a Performance Based Logistics (PBL) support concept through extensive up front systems engineering efforts will result in increased Operational Availability and significant decreases in both parts and maintenance personnel while generating increased combat power for the Soldiers.

So guess who got the contract to provide the C4ISR system:

LynuxWorks Selected as Embedded Operating System Vendor for Army’s Future Combat Systems Program
04/11/2005

SAN JOSÉ, Calif., April 11, 2005—LynuxWorks™ Inc. today announced it was chosen as the embedded operating system vendor by General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems for the U.S. Army’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) program’s Integrated Computer System (ICS). Under terms of the contract, LynuxWorks’ Linux®-compatible LynxOS-178® safety-critical real-time operating system (RTOS) will be used to meet the performance and reliability needs of the FCS, a family of advanced, networked air- and ground-based military systems for use by the Army’s Future Force.

As the command, control, communications, computing, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) infrastructure used across all FCS platforms, General Dynamics’ ICS will provide computer processing, networking, information assurance, and data storage resources necessary to support the network-centric operations of FCS.

Now, looking at the LynuxWorks website there’s no reference to Yuqub Mirza, although, on a side note, former GOP VA governor James Gilmore sits on its technical advisory board. But it turns out that one of the investors in Lynuxworks was the Herdon VA-based Sterling Management Group (SMG), and the President and CEO of the SMG is Yaqub Mirza. Here’s an SEC filing from 2000 for LynuxWorks (formerly known as “Lynx Real Time Systems”) that lists “Sterling Lynux Group” as one of the owners and Yuqub Mirza as a director. According to this site, Yacub Mirza might possibly still sit on LynuxWorks’s board. And here’s another company, PocketPass.com that has both Mirza and Lynux Chairman Inder Singh of its board of directors. The two apparently put financed the crea
tion of PocketPass back in 1999, so the two appear to have more than just a casual business relationship.

And as mentioned above, Yacub Mirza also just happens to be both a financier of Ptech (along with accused al-Qaeda financier Yassin al-Qadi) and a Ptech board member. And for those interested, here is some info on Operation Greenquest, the SAAR network and its ties to Grover Norquist, here is some info on Yassin al-Qadi and obstruction of investigations into him (skip down the to the “Operation Vulgar Betrayal” stuff).

To make matters worse, it appears that Ptech was involved with the military’s C4ISR system:

Military Information Architecture Accelerator (MIAA)

The Ptech FrameWork™ Military Information Architecture Accelerator enables military information architects and decision makers to create a comprehensive, concordant context for planning and managing change in the information-related capabilities that are critical to the success of military operations and enterprises. With domain-specific metamodels based on concepts and behavior rules adapted from the DoD C4ISR Architecture Framework, the CADM, and operational experience, the MIAA creates and automatically enforces a consistent taxonomy (artifacts, interrelationships and rules) throughout all operational, system, and technical view products. The MIAA also incorporates the ability to organize architecture data according to Zachman, Boer and other architecture frameworks, and provides file-based interfaces to the Joint C4ISR Architecture Planning System (JCAPS) and powerful discrete event simulation capability (Design/CPN).

Who knows what, if any, significance this all has, but considering the Ptech investigation just kind of died (along with the Operation Greenquest investigation) after being obstructed by the FBI in the first place and now it’s apparently making money primarily by licensing its software to other companies, one wonders what involvement the Ptech software and/or Muslim Brotherhood-related individuals might have with this grand vision for the future of warfare.

Discussion

One comment for “Key military network operating system made by company with Ptech ties”

  1. I think Skynet just drooled:

    New drone has no pilot anywhere, so who’s accountable?
    The Navy is testing an autonomous plane that will land on an aircraft carrier. The prospect of heavily armed aircraft screaming through the skies without direct human control is unnerving to many.

    By W.J. Hennigan, Los Angeles Times

    January 26, 2012
    The Navy’s new drone being tested near Chesapeake Bay stretches the boundaries of technology: It’s designed to land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, one of aviation’s most difficult maneuvers.

    What’s even more remarkable is that it will do that not only without a pilot in the cockpit, but without a pilot at all.

    The X-47B marks a paradigm shift in warfare, one that is likely to have far-reaching consequences. With the drone’s ability to be flown autonomously by onboard computers, it could usher in an era when death and destruction can be dealt by machines operating semi-independently.

    Although humans would program an autonomous drone’s flight plan and could override its decisions, the prospect of heavily armed aircraft screaming through the skies without direct human control is unnerving to many.

    “Lethal actions should have a clear chain of accountability,” said Noel Sharkey, a computer scientist and robotics expert. “This is difficult with a robot weapon. The robot cannot be held accountable. So is it the commander who used it? The politician who authorized it? The military’s acquisition process? The manufacturer, for faulty equipment?”

    Sharkey and others believe that autonomous armed robots should force the kind of dialogue that followed the introduction of mustard gas in World War I and the development of atomic weapons in World War II. The International Committee of the Red Cross, the group tasked by the Geneva Conventions to protect victims in armed conflict, is already examining the issue.

    “The deployment of such systems would reflect … a major qualitative change in the conduct of hostilities,” committee President Jakob Kellenberger said at a recent conference. “The capacity to discriminate, as required by [international humanitarian law], will depend entirely on the quality and variety of sensors and programming employed within the system.”

    Weapons specialists in the military and Congress acknowledge that policymakers must deal with these ethical questions long before these lethal autonomous drones go into active service, which may be a decade or more away.

    Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said policy probably will first be discussed with the bipartisan drone caucus that he co-chairs with Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-Santa Clarita). Officially known as the Congressional Unmanned Systems Caucus, the panel was formed in 2009 to inform members of Congress on the far-reaching applications of drone technology.

    “It’s a different world from just a few years ago — we’ve entered the realm of science fiction in a lot of ways,” Cuellar said. “New rules have to be developed as new technology comes about, and this is a big step forward.”

    There is no plan by the U.S. military — at least in the near term — to turn over the killing of enemy combatants to the X-47B or any other autonomous flying machine. But the Air Force said in the “Flight Plan” that it’s only a matter of time before drones have the capability to make life-or-death decisions as they circle the battlefield. Even so, the report notes that officials will still monitor how these drones are being used.

    “Increasingly humans will no longer be ‘in the loop’ but rather ‘on the loop’ — monitoring the execution of certain decisions,” the report said. “Authorizing a machine to make lethal combat decisions is contingent upon political and military leaders resolving legal and ethical questions.”

    Peter W. Singer, author of “Wired for War,” a book about robotic warfare, said automated military targeting systems are under development. But before autonomous aerial drones are sent on seek-and-destroy missions, he said, the military must first prove that it can pull off simpler tasks, such as refueling and reconnaissance missions.

    That’s where the X-47B comes in.

    “Like it or not, autonomy is the future,” Singer said. “The X-47 is one of many programs that aim to perfect the technology.”

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | January 26, 2012, 3:02 pm

Post a comment