From Radio to Messaging and Collaboration Apps on the Battlefield

Collaboration and messaging apps have surfaced on the European battlefield as a significant means of communication. Radios continue to be used. But the evolution in how the current day battle is fought has favored the rapid adoption of collaboration and messaging apps. The encryption capabilities, even on free version of messaging apps, are good enough and equivalent or superior to the encryption offered in radio communication available on the battlefield.

Each side is focused in improving its decision loop from detection to action by making the loop tighter than the adversary's ability to act (knock out enemy before he knocks you out). More precisely, in military terminology, this is referred as the ‘OODA’ loop.

These messaging apps were originally intended for better team collaboration with colleagues working from home and distant office locations or staying in touch with friends and family, or an alternate channel for businesses to engage consumers. How did they become so powerful to become the preferred means of communication for the longest symmetrical war? And why now?

 Here is why: 

1.        Ubiquitous connectivity: Low earth orbit satellites like Starlink and in the future Amazon's Kuiper, provide reliable internet connectivity anywhere on the battlefield. Before Starlink the soldier at the frontline had only radios to rely on as the primary form of communication, with some coverage for lower-bandwidth satellite. And these radios then required serialized communication up the chain and then down it again, wasting precious minutes or hours. NATO forces have had more sophisticated datalinks that supplement radios but these are not in use in Ukraine by either side.

2.        Data power is as important as kinetic power: Weapons platforms, and sensors have all changed because of ‘always on’ connectivity transmitting data:

• Imagery capture through multiple means: A drone can capture imagery and be cross referenced with what may be crowdsourced on social media or commercial satellites. Experts need to swarm to interpret it regardless of where they are sitting. Experts may no longer in a safe HQ location
• Decision on course of action needs to be done quickly by those closest to the battle. Multiple heads are better than one. Sharing of imagery across the team results in faster and better interpretation/analysis which then leads to consensus on course of action in minutes
• Once decision is reached, it is imperative to communicate instantaneously to the most optimal weapons operator (could be a drone or an artillery battery)
• Dialogue with the 'shooter' for a better outcome than just order to shoot: weapons are more accurate and rarely shot in a barrage because its almost useless to do so. As a result, some dialogue with the shooter is essential

3.        Familiarity leads to Speed: More citizen soldiers coming to the fight. They find it more efficient to use what they are accustomed to (messaging apps) vs. unlearn it and learn a more serialized way of operating with a radio for a serial flow of information. They are bringing how they work and act day to day to their military roles. Both Behaviors and in tools. Military policy restrictions on what to use or not to use can only go so far

4.        The entire nature of Command Control is adapting to the need for a tighter OODA decision loop: it’s not relevant how lethal or accurate the weapons are if all the information flows up the command chain in a serial manner and then flows down to the attacking platform. Too much time is wasted by people away from the point of contact making sub-optimal decisions

5. Eliminate the hierarchy associated with real-time communication and provide a unified view of truth: in chaos, every employee is a sensor and those sensors need to both feed and receive unfiltered information in real-time. Even in a simpler scenario of law enforcement, trusted broadcast communication is important. This was most recently illustrated in the July assassination attempt in Pennsylvania when the Secret Service were not on the same radio frequency as the local law enforcement. Even though the shooter was identified and the alert went out on radio, the counter-snipers did not receive the alert. A valuable 30 seconds were lost in the process.

6.        Flatten the asynchronous communication and decision path to those closest to the action. Command / Control philosophies have shifted from that shown in photo above to one focused on built on the mantra to trust those at the edge to make the right decisions and empowering them to make those decisions. Slower decisions can result in defeat at worst, or cost valuable lives at a minimum

7. Consistency reduces admin burden: just as in a commercial enterprise, different business processes require different applications (HR, Financial, Order Management). A deployed military uses the information backbone more than just for observation, decision, action. They have HR processing (recruiting, training), order management (food, fuel, parts, ammunition). More so they are using collaboration/messaging to conduct these tasks while in the field vs. learning the nuances of the HR or ERP systems. Its somebody else's job not at the front-line to enter the data in the enterprise system. The frontline troops get time back from not having to learn new systems

The worlds of consumer and military digital tech have converged before. GPS being a clear example. But in GPS, the innovation came from the military and was commercialized after. Frugality leads to the best innovation. With messaging and collaboration apps, the digital convergence is taking place again. Those that are engaged in the fight have demonstrated a path to getting an incremental advantage. This is the first time in last two decades that the military is adopting practices and behavior from the commercial world. The use of the collaboration platforms are going to get adopted further as the military tries to maintain its edge over the adversary.