Own the Spectrum or Lose the Network
The US Army's next battlefield edge isn't night vision — it's electromagnetic spectrum dominance. A retired general explains what that actually requires.
By The Defense Desk
For a generation of American soldiers, "we own the night" was more than a slogan — it was a tactical reality. Retired Maj. Gen. Jefforey Smith thinks the electromagnetic spectrum deserves the same level of cultural ownership, and he argues that most commanders aren't there yet. [1]
Smith, market development executive for the US Army and USSOCOM at Silvus Technologies, spoke with Breaking Defense about how the electromagnetic spectrum is changing warfare. When he commanded a brigade in the 82nd Airborne Division during Operation Iraqi Freedom, tactical communications meant SINCGARS, point-to-point links, and, when available, satellite communications. The electromagnetic environment was, by his own account, "relatively permissive." [1]
That environment no longer exists. Today, soldiers, sensors, vehicles, unmanned systems, weapons, and command nodes are constantly producing, consuming, and transmitting data across the electromagnetic spectrum. [1] The connectivity gives commanders extraordinary situational awareness and lethality — but it also creates an electromagnetic signature and a much larger attack surface. A capable adversary may be able to detect that signature, geolocate the source, and feed that information into a targeting process. [1]
The shift is less about new hardware than about how commanders think. An invisible terrain is still terrain — and failing to read it carries the same consequences as marching a column into unmapped ground.
Smith frames ownership of the spectrum around three requirements. First, spectrum awareness: commanders need to understand where the electromagnetic environment is congested, where interference originates, and what that means for the mission — just as they need a map and intelligence preparation before entering physical terrain. [1] Second, resilient connectivity: bandwidth demands of modern formations are enormous compared with 20 or 30 years ago, moving full-motion video, position-location information, sensor feeds, targeting data, voice, and command-and-control traffic across formations that are distributed and constantly moving. [1]
The third requirement is adaptability, and it carries a specific technical meaning. Low probability of intercept and low probability of detection — LPI/LPD — are no longer niche signals-intelligence concerns. Every transmission can become a targeting opportunity. [1] Silvus addresses this through what it calls Spectrum Dominance 2.0, a suite of EW defenses built on top of the company's MN-MIMO waveform — a proprietary foundation that provides resilient communications — with additional capabilities layered on top to reduce RF signature, maneuver away from interference, and mitigate electronic attack. Tools include MANET Power Control, which dynamically adjusts transmit power to the minimum required for network connectivity, and Wake on Wireless, which allows radios to remain RF silent while still receiving mission-critical information. [1]
Anti-jam capability is similarly layered by design. Dual Frequency Link provides frequency diversity by transmitting on one frequency channel and receiving on another. MANET Interference Avoidance identifies interference and moves the network to a cleaner frequency without requiring manual reconfiguration.
Survivability and connectivity have historically pulled in opposite directions — the quieter the radio, the fewer nodes it reaches. The engineering bet here is that software can close that gap without asking commanders to choose between staying hidden and staying networked.
Smith draws the analogy to night-vision goggles deliberately. Units had to train with them, understand their limitations, and rebuild how formations moved and commanded at night. Eventually, it became second nature. The spectrum is invisible, which makes it easy to treat as a specialist's problem rather than a commander's concern. [1]
"If we cannot do that, we should not assume that the network — or the decision advantage it enables — will be there when the shooting starts," Smith said. [1] The implication is pointed: connectivity built without electronic warfare resilience is a liability dressed as an asset. Every sensor feed and data link that reaches a command post also tells an adversary exactly where to look.
Owning the night took decades of doctrine, training, and equipment procurement before it became instinct. The electromagnetic spectrum is a harder problem — contested, invisible, and expanding with every new unmanned system added to the force. Whether the Army can build the same cultural muscle around spectrum operations before a peer conflict tests it is the question Smith leaves open.