MOSA for the U.S. Army Airfleet

The Army’s Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) will serve a dual purpose for both the Future Vertical Lift program/Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) and its current fleet of Black Hawk, Chinook, and Apache platforms in areas of affordability, interoperability, and the ability to quickly upgrade and integrate new technologies.

We discussed this with Collins Aerospace’s Chet Treloar, director, Future Vertical Lift Strategic Pursuit, and Joseph Graf, Senior Fellow and communication systems architect.

Breaking Defense: Discuss Army aviation’s open-systems approach to accelerating outcomes for FVL and in modernizing the current fleet.

Treloar: The Army has done a great job of complying with the Modular Open Systems Approach and the new Title X regulations. That helps to keep them ahead of any threat since you can upgrade faster, keep up with technology, and maintain affordability. It is at the forefront of almost everything they talk about.

The Army intends to spiral in new capabilities but in order to do that you’ve got to have the system, the digital backbone, and you’ve got to be able to implement improvements quickly and have the flexibility to work with multiple vendors to make operations and sustainment cheaper.

Graf: Think of MOSA as a framework to enable more flexibility and capability. Part of that openness is standardizing on architecture. Chet mentioned the digital backbone, and to truly take advantage of new capabilities, we need an infrastructure to plug into to get data from point A to point B with a specified throughput and latency, so that new capabilities can be quickly and easily added to the mission.

One of the things the Army wants to do more is graphical data distribution. Standards like ARINC 661 and OpenGL are helping create a framework where we share information in an open way across the digital backbone, so that the Army doesn’t have to rely on vendor A or B to provide that capability. If another vendor comes along and they have a better way to synthesize the data and distribute it to the pilot or user, then that can be inserted efficiently.

The digital backbone is also a framework for power and cooling, among other things. And once you get a basic infrastructure in place, for example in the current fleet, you can start to replace mechanical actuation with electromechanical and begin migrating the system to fly-by-wire.

Then you can start looking at autonomous operations or even full up autonomy. There needs to be a more straight-forward path for technology insertions that allow the fleet to outpace the threat, and it all hinges on MOSA.

What current fleet aircraft do you envision could take most advantage of this?

Treloar: Recently, we attended Army Aviation Industry Days and based on the themes of that event, there seems to be modernization plans for the Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk and the CH-47 Chinook. There are likely to be opportunities for the Apache, as well. Of course, funding and timelines are subject to change, but there’s certainly an emphasis on modernizing the current fleet with MOSA as the cornerstone.

How is FLRAA and current fleet modernization working in tandem to meet capability goals for both?

Treloar: The Army is showing a unified front and they are happy to leverage each other’s investments and capabilities to improve their platforms whenever that fits and makes sense. They are looking at the capabilities being put on the -60 or the -47 that can go on FLRAA. When you hear the current fleet PMs talk, they mention that as FLRAA matures and uses the FAF, the FVL Architecture Framework, the digital backbone will flow down into the current fleet. I think they’re very much aligned.

Graf: To some extent, the existing fleet is a proving ground for a lot of these new capabilities even before they go into FLRAA. The question is how can we enable new capabilities, such as head-up displays or helmet mounted displays, in the existing fleet in the most cost-effective way to enable the users to start assessing that technology? You want to get those capabilities into the user’s hands, so they can start using them as much as possible ahead of time. The Army has stated that they want the end users involved in the assessment of new capabilities in real-time. The users are not going to be able to fully assess the technology until they actually receive it and are flying with it.

As we migrate toward this new world of open architectures, there’s a huge learning curve. It’s going to take some time as new technologies present themselves as possibilities, but their are certainly pathways to best utilize and deploy these technologies.

What are additional benefits to the Army of upgrading current fleets with an open systems cockpit?

Treloar: Take the UH-60, for example. It is expected to fly into 2070. Chinook and Apache are somewhere along the same lines. In order to do that, you’ve got to upgrade those fleets and MOSA is a key enabler to technology insertions, transformation in contact, and multi-domain operations.

It won’t just be FLRAA out there, you’re going to have current fleet platforms doing all kinds of things they don’t do today, especially in the area of launched effects. You’ll have FLRAA flying faster and farther, but the other platforms will also need upgrade capabilities, which MOSA expedites in order to be relevant.

Graf: For example, if I have mission computing hardware that is based on an open standard like SOSA (Sensor Open Systems Architecture) and I need to integrate a new capability that requires more computing power than my existing system, I can swap out a component and it won’t take years to do. They want to be able to upgrade in months or faster. With faster upgrades, comes increased affordability in the long-term – a win-win for all parties involved.

MOSA will prevent the Army from being dependent on single suppliers, the so-called vendor lock. How so?

Treloar: As we just mentioned, with MOSA you have the capability to insert modification in weeks or months as opposed to multi-year integration programs.

Enduring systems are not going to be on a platform forever. With MOSA, the Army can compete things as needed, which can make operations and sustainment cheaper. In the past when a system was not built with MOSA in mind, there were fewer opportunities for competition – often making upgrades and other enhancements more time consuming and expensive.

Graf: Affordability is enabled because we’re standardizing on particular interface standards, hardware profiles and so on. You snap a chalk line and give the industry some guide rails to know how they should be investing and what their boundaries are, so they can focus their investments. It is a different, but better way of thinking for industry.

Now, I have to provide a solution that distinguishes my product from other vendors because they could replace me. That generates competition, drives the prices down, and enables the Army to take advantage of the latest and greatest. That’s the whole vision for MOSA.