Lt.Col. Superior Instructor GHEORGHE OLAN

Transcription

1 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MILITARY COMMUNICATION STANDARDS IN MILITARY EDUCATION Lt.Col. Superior Instructor GHEORGHE OLAN Abstract This article presents some aspects concerning the interconnection and the compatibility communication techniques with the mode tactics to imply for communication and the information. The main part of the article explains the necessary conditions for communication and the information systems to provide the interconnection communication networks and equipments of communications in the connections that are realized at different echelons, this is compatible in NATO structures. 1. The NATO Standardization Organization The NATO Standardization Organization (NSO) includes The NATO Committee for Standardization, The NATO Executive Committee and The NATO Standardization Agency. NSO role is to enhance the interoperability and to contribute to the capacity of Alliance forces to instruct, practice and operate efficiently together or, when is needed, beside forces from partner or other countries, in order to accomplish the missions that they have been given. The organization achieves all these through the harmonization and the coordination of the efforts for standardization in the whole Alliance, as well as through offering support in the activities of standardization. Concordantly with Alliance politics, the NATO authorities and the national ones are encouraged to develop, adopt and implement concepts, doctrines, procedures and plans, which will enable them to obtain and maintain the interoperability. This implies to establish the necessary levels of compatibility, mutability or reciprocity in the operational, procedural, education, material, technically and administrative areas. NSO was funded by North-Atlantic Council in January 1995 and was reformed in 2000 as result of analysis for standardization made in order to meet the requirements established by the Summit from Washington in 1999, as well as by challenges enforced by the initiative for defense capacities, launched in the frame of the same Summit. The NATO Committee for Standardization (NCS) is the superior authority of the Alliance in general maters of standardization and is subordinate to the Council. It is supported by the Group of the representatives NCS (NCSREP) who ensures the harmonization and

2 consultancy at the level of delegates, under the direction and the general administration of the Committee. The main objective of activities undertaken by NCSREP is the harmonization of the standardization between NATO and national organisms, as well as promoting the interaction between these, in the area of standardization. NCS is presided by General Secretary, usually represented by two permanent co-presidents, respectively General Secretary assistant for defense and the head manager of international General Staff. Since September 2000, the partner countries have actively involved in the NCS activities. The Executive Committee for standardization of NATO is subordinate to the NATO Committee for standardization. His main duties are the harmonization of politics and procedures of standardization and to coordinate the standardization activities. The NATO standardization program is composed from representatives of strategic headquarters, of services belonging to international General Staff and international Secretary ship, propping up the authorities coordinating the standardization. These are the superior organism of NATO that have the authority to demand from the subordinate groups to produce the agreements of standardization (STANAG) and to achieve allied publication (AP); these are the Military Committee (MC), The conference of directors for national armament (CNAD), The Conference of high NATO experts on logistics maters (SNLC), as well as The NATO commission for consultancy, command and control (NC3B). At the NSSG works are also participating representatives of other organisms and organization. The NATO standardization agency (NSA) has an unique and integrated organism, established by the North-Atlantic Council and has in its componence civil and military personnel. It answers in front of the NATO Committee for standardization in matters concerning all areas of standardization. It establishes the procedural functions used in planning and executing the standardization, which will be applied in the whole Alliance. It is responsible with preparing the work sessions of NCS, NCSREP and NSSG, as well as with the general administration of all standardization agreements (STANGs) and allied publications (APs). NSA also props up the commissions for individual and commune services, each among these acting as executive authority for the operational standardization, including doctrine, according to the delegation from Military Committee. The commissions for services are responsible with the development of operational and procedural standardization between the member countries. Like others responsible authorities, they

3 achieve this thing through development of STAHAGs and applicable APs with the member countries and NATO headquarters. The NSA head manager is responsible with the permanent works of its five subsidiary: Politics and requirement; Joint forces; Naval forces; Land forces; Air forces. Subsidiary for services offer personnel support to collateral committees and have as mission the monitorization and the harmonization of standardization activities that comes in their area of responsibility. The commissions, containing a member in behalf of each nation, are in permanent session and they gather officially once a month. The decisions are taken, usually, in unanimity. With all these, because the standardization is a voluntary process, the agreements can also be founded on decisions made by the most of participating countries at any agreements of standardization. The strategic commanders of NATO have one representative besides each desk. 2. Classifications of military standards The most important constrains about interoperability in the informational domain, including communications, are made by diversity of existing systems based on the concept of open system OSI (open system interconnection), the recognition of fact that some standards were developed in the absence of a common NATO strategy, the capability to adopt the performances and functionality of informational systems to a fluctuant environment, the utilized must not block the addition of new technologies but to increase the systems interoperability. There are five components of NATO interoperability strategy in the informational area, which refers to: the formulation by the operational authorities of requirements about information changes to support command, control and consulting processes, specifying the informational systems interoperability degree of forces that must develop common actions, especially their command posts; identification and definition of three sets of NATO interoperability standards about operational, procedural and technique aspects of informational (including communications) systems; the implementation of NATO interoperability standards to all the systems that will be developed in the alliance and in the national armies;

4 the gradual development of informational systems by crossing from the initial standards to NATO interoperability standards in a way that will not affect the system operational functions; in cases when common standards must be modified to optimize the performances of a certain system to achieve objectives about information changes, the interoperability between interconnected systems will be assured by a tampon solution, based on common standards. NATO strategy pushes to the maximum the common elements about procedure techniques and operational interoperability systems to minimize tampon solutions. The most important elements that determine the acceleration study about standardization are: technical, tactical, operative terms don t have the same mean in different national armies and, as a result, the specific operative and battle documents and the informational structure couldn t be defined univocally; in the staff activity the operative and battle documents (and the communications to) were different from an army to another, concerning the number, content, form and tactical situations conventional representation; there was no correspondence about military regulations content and utilized instructions; in the staff personnel preparation it wasn t any known hierarchy about common used languages, and as a result it was no possibility to establish exact missions for each officer; the organizational principles and adopted structures were different from an army to another, making great difficulties to establish battle missions, battle missions execution, optimal deployment of informational actions and management; leading systems weren t organized unitary and were not compatible fact that doesn t permitted their direct interconnection and the optimal informational management; the armament and battle technique from each national army doesn t have the same standards (NATO and international recommendations); geographic maps were different, fact that influenced the planning and execution of battle actions; mathematical models and simulation methods were different with different performance parameters; databases doesn t have an unified structure. In this purpose it was defined the series of standards STANAG (Standardization Agreement) that assure the interoperability of information changes. This ensemble of norms is named NATO interoperability model (NIM) and serves like base to development and evolution of common standards including a lot of civilian international standards.

5 Interoperability operational standards refer to military objectives and operational issues, doctrine, tactical procedures, military terminology and utilized language, specific plans about information transfer. These standards are always independent from utilized systems, to accomplish the requirements about information transfer. This necessity is achieved by redacting an ensemble of glossary with common terms about information changes like: Military use terms and definitions glossary AAP-6U, Electronics and communications terms glossary ACP-167F and NATO terms and definitions glossary for auto data work ADatP-2 (G). Interoperability standard procedures are elaborated to satisfy the requirements of information changes in the same national army and between different armies, specifying the procedures about the form of transferred information between different leading systems standard, reporting terminology and operational procedures of the NATO data channels, including common conventional signs for the graphical situation representation. Procedural standards are divided in: informational standard procedure; communication standard procedure. Informational standard procedures includes messages refereed to utilizable data that will be change between informational systems and are designated to automatic work, rules to structure these messages and their representation. The standards are divided in: analogical oriented standards, about those messages utilized currently on telegraphic lines and are independent from communication system; digital oriented standards about that messages directly transmitted by computers networks interconnected with data links who currently are depending by system. Communications standard procedures include communications protocols about messages transfer into a communication environment. There are two types: operation procedures for data links that are depending by communications environment; operation procedures for other services (voice and text), that are independent from communication environment. The responsibility for standard elaboration and improvement is the attribute of North Atlantic Communications and Information System Committee (NACISC) and information systems and communications networks subcommittees.

6 Techniques interoperability standards establish functional, electric, physics characteristics of equipment designated to information changes or represent definitions, protocols and profiles elaborated in concordance with NATO reference model about open communications systems interconnections, based on OSI model. This model assure the growth of system possibilities for host systems, multiunit connections (multi address), Internet work, system or LAN management and security functions, precedents, preemption and real time work in tactical communications networks. Technical standards must also satisfy the elements specific to needed information exchange, through the standardization of the service set which must be executed through the functions of the model s level of interface, as well as between these and the transmission mode, through settling standard protocols for all levels. Utilizing this model has as result elaboration of technique standards, independent from systems that assure national prerogative in choosing and designing leading informational systems by employment of commercial products. Interoperability standards must be independent by NATO systems or national army corps thing that will permit to these systems to operate even if their interconnection wasn t designed from project phase. This onset is not practical because adopting some standards will reduce unacceptable the operational performances of the system. Standards which depend of a system are used when operational demands have interferences regarding the usance of independent system standards. The dependency of a system is due to the fact that procedural and technical standards, as well the environment s transmissions characteristics are strongly independent. NATO s specialized organizations act for the maximization of generalizing different standards depending to the system, where operational demands demonstrated exist and where those are economically accepted. The forecast generalization refers mostly to operational technology and system s architecture. On long terms, NATO has in its attention the usance of interoperability standards systems independent for tactical data connections. For integrate some complex systems, NATO adopted the politics of Common Operating Environment.

7 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. *** Concepţia comunicaţiilor şi informaticii Forţelor Terestre, Bucharest, Bechet, P., Standardizare şi interoperabilitate în medii de comunicaţii speciale Curs Master Sisteme integrate de comunicaţii cu aplicaţii speciale, Sibiu, Cristea, D., C 4 I Systems in Romanian Armed Forces. In: International Conference Communications 2002, Bucharest, 5-7 December Powers, F.J., Brown, D.P., Hansen, S.E., Brusseau, F.G., Sivills R.C., A Study about Romanian C 4 I System, MITRE, Massachusetts, USA, 2000 (studiu realizat în urma colaborării dintre experţi din SUA şi România) 5. Toma, C., Interoperabilitatea şi compatibilitatea sistemelor de comunicaţii militare, Bucharest, APP Publishing House, 1999