Updated September 27, 2021
The Army’s Project Convergence
What Is the Army’s Project
Convergence?
Figure 1. Representative Exercise Operational
Scenario
Project Convergence is what the Army calls a “campaign of
learning,” designed to further integrate the Army into the
Joint Force. It is how the Army intends to play a role in
Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2), the
Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) plan to connect sensors
and weapon systems from all the military services—Air
Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Space Force—as
well as Special Operations Forces (SOF), into a single
network which, theoretically, could prove faster and more
effective in responding to threats from peer competitors.
Designed around five core elements—soldiers, weapons
systems, command and control, information, and terrain—
Source: From Army Briefing provided to CRS dated September 10,
Army Futures Command (AFC) plans to run Project
2020.
Convergence on an annual basis. The Army intends to
One of PC20’s experiments reportedly included using low-
conduct experiments with technology, equipment, and
earth orbit satellites and Grey Eagle UAVs to perform
solicit soldier feedback throughout the year, culminating in
sensing for air targets and a ground system to detect a
an annual exercise or demonstration. In basic terms , the
target. Data from the two systems was passed back to an
Army reportedly wants to “take the service’s big ideas for
organization at Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington,
future warfare and test them in the real world. The Army
where the target was processed.
wants to figure out what works and what needs fixing—and
figure that out as early as possible, when it’s much cheaper
The data was then passed back to Yuma Proving Ground to
to make changes.”
a system to engage the target—either a self-propelled
Project Convergence 2020 (PC20)
artillery system such as the Extended Range Cannon
Artillery (ERCA) system currently under development, a
PC20 took place at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona
Grey Eagle, or another ground platform. This entire
between August 11th and September 1st 2020 and involved
sequence was supposedly accomplished within 20 seconds.
about 500 personnel. PC20 was intended to provide
information to support decisions to:
The Army’s Plans for Project
Change how the Army fights by shaping how it
Convergence 2021 and 2022 (PC21 and
organizes for combat;
PC22)
At present, the Army has made planning information
Highlight opportunities to optimize operational
publicly available only for 2021 and 2022.
processes;
Project Convergence 2021(PC21)
Evolve how the Army visualizes, describes, decides, and While other supporting exercises and experiments have
acts on enemy threats; and
been conducted throughout this year, PC21’s main series of
live-fire events reportedly will take place October. 12th –
Build soldier and leader trust in emergent technologies.
November 10th at a number of installations located in the
United States. PC 21 plans to involve approximately 7,000
PC20 concentrated on what the Army calls the “close fight”
personnel including 900 data collectors, and will include
by integrating new enabling technologies at the lowest
experiments involving about 107 different technologies.
operational level so tactical networks could facilitate faster
decisions. At the unit level, PC20 focused on Brigade
Some of the Army’s objectives during PC21 reportedly
Combat Teams (BCT), Combat Aviation Brigades (CAB),
include identifying technologies to enable the Joint Force to
and Expeditionary Signal Battalion-Enhanced (ESB-E). At
penetrate enemy’s anti-access, aerial-denial (A2/AD)
the system level, PC20 involved the Army’s MQ 1C Grey
capabilities as well as determining which emerging
Eagle unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), the Air Launched
technologies are needed to execute the Joint All-Domain
Effects (ALE) —a multi-purpose helicopter- launched
Operations concept. The Army is also reportedly “looking
system—and the tactical network — command, control,
for ways to incorporate artificial intelligence (AI), machine
communications, intelligence, and computer systems used
learning, autonomy, robotics, and common data standards
by the Army in combat.
and architectures to more quickly make decisions across
multiple domains of operations.”
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The Army’s Project Convergence
PC21 also plans to include units such as the Army’s Multi-
Project Convergence be reflected in the Army’s Planning,
Domain Task Force (MDTF) based at Joint Base Lewis-
Programing, Budget and Execution (PPBE) process? How
McChord in Washington and elements from the Fort Bragg,
does the Army plan to communicate with Congress
North Carolina-based 82nd Airborne Division. Reportedly
regarding insights gained during PC21 and PC22?
major capabilities from the other services to be tested
include the Marine’s Ground/Air Task-Oriented Radar
Involvement of Al ies and Partners
(GATOR), the Navy’s SM-6 missile, and an Air Force F-35
As noted, PC22 plans to include Mission Command
fighter and B-1 bomber.
Elements (MCEs) from selected Allies and Partners with
the intent of enabling them to seamlessly plug into the
The Army reportedly intends to examine seven scenarios
network and establish a common operating picture with
during PC21:
U.S. forces. While such interoperability can be viewed as
First Scenario: Test joint all-domain situational
essential for Coalition operations, this could prove elusive
awareness and incorporate s pace sensors in low earth
for some Allies and Partners who lack the resources and
orbit;
technology afforded to DOD. Taking this into
consideration, does the Army plan to test alternative means
Second Scenario: Conduct a joint air-and-missile
to integrate less-capable Allies and Partners into operations
defense engagement in response to an enemy missile
envisioned in the new Joint Warfighting Concept? Or,
attack;
instead, will they be expected to play “catch up,” possibly
excluding them from participating in future Coalition
Third Scenario: Conduct a joint fires operation as the
operations?
force transitions from crisis to conflict;
Project Convergence: Operations in a Denied
Fourth Scenario: Conduct a semiautonomous resupply
Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS) Environment
mission;
and Signature Management
In examining the basic goal of Project Convergence—
Fifth Scenario: Conduct an AI and autonomy-enabled
integrating sensors and shooters to more rapidly identify
reconnaissance mission;
and engage targets at close and long distances—it becomes
apparent achieving this goal depends on unfettered access
Sixth Scenario: Conduct an air assault mission
to the electromagnetic spectrum. As previously noted, one
employing the Integrated Visual Augmentation System
of the objectives of PC21 is to successfully conduct
(IVAS) - a heads-up display worn by soldiers that
operations in a contested electromagnetic spectrum
provides enhanced situational awareness; and
environment and it is likely that future Project
Convergences will continue to stress this ability. This raises
Seventh Scenario: Conduct a mounted AI-enabled
the issue of how the Army will function if instead of the
attack.
EMS spectrum being “contested” it is instead “denied.” For
example, what if a significant part of the EMS is “denied”
Project Convergence 2022 (PC22)
as it would be if U.S. space-based assets were attacked and
In PC22, the Army plans to include allies and partners -
significantly damaged or destroyed? Are there redundancies
focusing on closes allies and security partners such as
(systems or processes) envisioned for testing during future
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.
Project Convergences to address how the Army would
The project is to expand to the Combined Joint Task Force
detect and engage targets beyond visual range if aerial or
(CJTF) level and bring more technologies and assets to the
space assets become unavailable by kinetic actions or by
battlefield. The goal is to exercise from competition
some other means such as electronic warfare or
through conflict and return to competition levels of conflict.
cyberattack?
In addition to the CJTF (Corps and Division-level), the
Another related issue is that of signature management for
Army also plans to include a Multi-Domain Task Force
the Army’s networks and systems under development. In
(MDTF), a number of Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs), and
this context, signature management refers to all the various
Allied and Partner Mission Command Elements in PC22.
signatures—visual, infrared, radar, sound,
Potential Issues for Congress
electromagnetic—that a system emits. Potential enemies
could also rapidly detect these signatures and engage and
How Might Project Convergence Influence Army
destroy U.S. systems in a similar manner as Project
Force Structure and Modernization Efforts?
Convergence is attempting. Signature management seeks to
The Army has compared Project Convergence to the
control and reduce the detectability of systems and their
Army’s Louisiana Maneuvers conducted all across the
vulnerability to attack. Given the importance of signature
United States in 1940 and 1941 that played a major role in
management, what are the Army’s objectives for future
how the Army organized for, equipped itself for, and fought
Project Convergence efforts to address signature
World War II. If this is the case, by what formal
management associated with networks and systems?
mechanisms or processes, will the observations/findings of
Project Convergence inform Army force structure and
Andrew Feickert, Specialist in Military Ground Forces
modernization decisions? Will this be exclusively an Army
IF11654
Futures Command function? Will other entities, such as
Combatant Commands, play a role? How will the results of
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The Army’s Project Convergence
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permissio n of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11654 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED