Support: Shed No Tears For JTRS


April 15, 2012: For over a decade the multi-billion dollar JTRS (Joint Tactical Radio System) program has been a major embarrassment for the U.S. Department of Defense. In response JTRS has been quietly put down. Oh, JTRS still exists, on paper, but its goal, to provide better combat radios, has been accomplished by adopting civilian radios that do what the troops needed done and calling it JTRS.

The main problem is that the troops need digital (for computer stuff) and analog (traditional radio) communications in one box and it has to be programmable, in order to handle new applications and the need to communicate with other radio types. That's what JTRS was supposed to do but it never happened. The procurement bureaucracy and government contractors consumed over six billion dollars but never quite got anything useful out the door.

Meanwhile, the war on terror gave the U.S. Army a chance to buy new radio technology they needed and that's what they did. In the last decade the army, air force, and marines have spent over six billion dollars on new hand held and backpack radios, to tie the infantry into a battlefield Internet, as well as larger radio sets for headquarters and vehicles. This is more than five times what the Department of Defense spent on new radios in the three years before September 11, 2001. Back then everyone was holding off on buying new radios because JTRS was to be available in 2007. Well 2007 came and went with no JTRS in sight. How did this happen?

There are many problems getting all the services to agree on "Joint" standards. Typical are the problems with the software. The Department of Defense insisted that manufacturers use specific software tools and supporting software for JTRS work. Rather than just tell manufacturers to, "make it work," the Pentagon bureaucrats insisted on getting into the details. This backfired, as it usually does when bureaucrats do that sort of thing. It has happened before. In the 1970s, when the Pentagon tried to force defense contractors to use a new software language, ADA, for all military related work, much confusion and missed deadlines ensued.

The Pentagon was very reluctant to admit error, or defeat, in these matters. Much better to spend billions more and let the needed equipment arrive late and missing important capabilities. It's something of a tradition. And you know how some people in the military, even Pentagon civilians, can be about tradition.

Meanwhile, the military took the JTRS concept and had radio manufacturers take commercial designs and adapt it, quickly, for military use. An example of this is SOCOM (Special Operations Command) buying half a billion dollars' worth of AN/PRC-150 radios. These cost about $2,500 each and all of them were delivered over the last three years. The 4.6 kg (ten pounds, without batteries) radios are very flexible (are used in vehicles or backpacks) and are able to use several different types of transmission (including bouncing signals off the ionosphere, for longer range or just to get a signal out of a built up area). Digital transmissions allow for data to get through under poor atmospheric conditions or when in a built up area. The radios also have good encryption and the ability to send and receive all forms of digital data. These radios are also now used by the army.

A similar situation occurred back in the 1990s, when SOCOM realized it needed a new personal radio for its troops and JTRS was supposed to take care of that as well. Rather than wait SOCOM got together with a radio manufacturer, told them what they needed, and within two years they had MBITR (which soon got official sanction as AN/PRC-148). When the rest of the army saw MBITR many troops bought them with their own money. After Iraq army units began buying the AN/PRC-148 on their own. Soon, over 100,000 MBITR radios were in use.

With JTRS behind schedule, over budget, and under review the customers decided that JTRS was not the future. Originally the services pledged to buy nearly half a million JTRS radios. Those orders fell to about 148,000 three years ago and now to zero. All that remains will be the basic JTRS idea, talked to death by the committees that were supposed to make it happen. But because of the war the radios needed got developed anyway, under realistic conditions and largely outside the JTRS bureaucracy. It's a battle that was largely unreported, but at least the good guys won.

SOCOM's efforts to go out and get the radios they need indicates they didn't expect the long awaited JTRS (Joint Tactical Radio System), which is designed so that all services can use it, to arrive any time soon. JTRS was never short of development problems but the troops needed digital (for computer stuff) and analog (traditional radio) communications in one box right now and it had to be programmable, in order to handle new applications.

The army and marines followed the lead of SOCOM, as they often do when the procurement establishment lets them down. JTRS is still in the pipeline and pieces of it are starting to show up. Meanwhile, the troops have improvised, as they are frequently forced to do.


Article Archive

Support: Current 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 



Help Keep Us Soaring

We need your help! Our subscription base has slowly been dwindling. We need your help in reversing that trend. We would like to add 20 new subscribers this month.

Each month we count on your subscriptions or contributions. You can support us in the following ways:

  1. Make sure you spread the word about us. Two ways to do that are to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
  2. Subscribe to our daily newsletter. We’ll send the news to your email box, and you don’t have to come to the site unless you want to read columns or see photos.
  3. You can contribute to the health of StrategyPage. A contribution is not a donation that you can deduct at tax time, but a form of crowdfunding. We store none of your information when you contribute..
Subscribe   Contribute   Close