MSSE Project 2005: FORCEnet Implications for Coalitions. NUWC Keyport Cohort 1 and NSWC Port Hueneme Cohort 3 MSSE Capstone Project

Transcription

1 MSSE Project 2005: FORCEnet Implications for Coalitions NUWC Keyport Cohort 1 NSWC Port Hueneme Cohort 3 MSSE Capstone Project 1

2 Background - Stakeholders The Technical Cooperation Program US, UK, Canada established in 1957; Australia & NZ joined in 1960 s Foster cooperation in S&T for conventional national defense mostly R&D Organization - 10 permanent Groups focused on a warfare area or a technical functionality supported by technical panels & action groups within each permanent group AG-1: Net Centric Warfare Study - Oct 2001 Provide guidance & analysis on the implications of NCMW for coalition maritime force capabilities, C4I interoperability to help shape national acquisition strategies AG-1 products are being recognized as ground-breaking seminal work in coalition NCMW AG-6: FORCEnet Implications for Coalitions Sep 2004 Examine implications & way ahead for realizing coalition capabilities compatible with USN s FORCEnet Define, in functional terms, levels of coalition interoperability assess the incremental value of higher levels of interoperability for national balance of investment studies FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 2

3 Background This Project Overall Purpose: To provide analysis guidance on the tactical technical requirements for coalition maritime warfare interoperability Emphasis placed on the alignment of coalition national acquisition strategies with FORCEnet Project Goal: Develop a high-level system architecture to accomplish the specified missions in a true network-centric fashion. Presented in the form of a CDD (interim deliverables) Supporting products from the DoD Architecture Framework Other artifacts of the systems engineering process Extend the work of TTCP s AG-1 & AG-6 Approach: Define in functional terms various levels of interoperability with FORCEnet Assess the incremental value of higher levels of interoperability Provide input to national balance of investment studies FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 3

4 Task Scope Military operations emphasis: maritime coalition littoral warfare operations Initial warfare domain emphasis: surface (ASUW, MIO, ISR), air (AAW, ISR) undersea (ASW, MIW, ISR) NSWC CSG NUWC CSG NSWC ESG NUWC ESG Forces: Non-nuclear coalition forces opposed by current emerging threats. Size of force appropriate to the tactical situation Operational timeframes: Current to 2015 forces Intended to affect forces, intended to affect 2008 systems hardware investment decisions And near-term tactics, techniques, procedures, training FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 4

5 Study Approach Identify Mission Areas Survey Systems Identify Coalition Options Choose Best Configurations Determine Gaps, Price of Admission Analyze Coalition Options FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 5

6 Tactical Situation Review TACSIT 1 East Timor NEO with a substantial hostile threat (PRC supports anti-government faction) Five coalition nations operating in Fn-enabled way TACSIT 2 Repel a potential invasion of Palawan Isl by PRC forces TACSIT 3 Re-establish Indonesian sovereignty of Kepulauan Natuna Focus on: Executing mission Evacuation Defense Attack Comming, coordinating, positioning naval assets in AOR Minimize friendly exposure to threat The scenarios described here are unclassified. They are for academic purposes only do not represent any official DoD operational plan or the official policy of the US Government. FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 6

7 Tactical Situation Review ESG 1 LHD 2 LPD-17 5 LCS 2 CG-47 3 DDG-51 2 FFG Aus 1 FFG NZ Will also use l-based maritime patrol MIW aircraft. CSG 1 CVN 2 CG-47 2 SSN 1 AOE 1 DDG UK 2 FFG Can Will also use l-based maritime patrol MIW aircraft. FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 7

8 Questions to Answer What is the minimum level of common systems architecture required to participate effectively in each of the warfare areas? To systems engineer a net-centric force As-Is architecture based on RIMPAC 04 & TW04 To-be architecture emphasized capabilitiesbased integration vice named h/w & s/w Run simulations Coalition force not networked Coalition force with FORCEnet Coalition force with degraded FORCEnet (if possible) Quantify differences Measures Of Effectiveness Cost Analyze data & provide recommendations FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 8

9 4 Groups similarities & differences Like products focused on C2 in D-C-E paradigm OODA loop Common assumptions Bwidth & latency P d for sensors P k for weapons System failures & lost asset replacement Information assurance 2 models MOEs not all the same, comparison differences FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 9

10 NSWC PHD ESG DoDAF product key elements Model overview MOEs Results & Conclusions 10

11 OV-1: Operational Concept COALITION EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP ISR SATCOM OUT OF THEATER NAVAL JSF NAVAL JSF AIR THREATS LPD 17 CJTF-N HELO CG DDG TACTICAL TOMAHAWK SURFACE THREATS LCS GROUP LHD TACTICAL TOMAHAWK UNDER WATER THREATS DDX Australian FFG New Zeal FFG FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 11

12 OV-5: Operational Activities Model (Top Level) ESG Commer Analyze Higher HQ Inference of Intention Threat Assessment Generate Tactical Options Evaluate Options Portfolio of Available Assets Correlate Recognition/ Identification Classification Contingent Decision Loop CFP Simple Decision Loop CTP Complex Decision Loop Monitor COP Sensor Grid Detection Select Best Option Decide Maneuver Weapons Grid Act Collect Get More Information

13 OV-5: Operational Activities Model (Level 1) Portfolio of Available Assets ESG Commer Inference of Intention Evaluate Situation Higher HQ Threat Assessment Perform Threat Assessment Generate Tactical Options Create Tactical Options COP Evaluate Tactical Options Evaluate Options Recognition/Identification Schedule FORCE Net Engagement Select Best Option Send Engagement Orders to Weapons Decide Course of Action Create FORCEnet Engagement Pack CTP CFP Create Composite Track Analyze ISR Classification Correlate Data Identification of Friend or Foe Weapons Grid Monitor Get More Information Maneuver Input into Multi-Intel DB Act Get Organic Data Sensor Grid Get National Data Get Theater Data Detection

14 Simulation Block Diagram Extend Threat Generation Entity Generation Event Queue Hling Scenario Position Updater Engagement Calculations Excel Scenario Results FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 14

15 Excel Block Diagram Excel Get Initial Condition data from Extend Calculate Distance to each threat Find closest (in distance) threat to each friendly Check for friendly weapon availability Calculate intercept time for each friendly/threat combo Schedule to fire friendly weapon with smallest engagement time If threat destroyed, Post destruct time remove position data If friendly destroyed, remove from scenario Extend FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 15

16 Extend Model FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 16

17 NSWC PHD ESG MOEs/MOPs MOE 1: Percent increase in engagement effectiveness (engagement with higher probability of success is selected) MOP: Engagement opportunities per target. MOE 2: Percent of increase in ability to hle larger raids MOP: Percent increase in engagement rate. MOP: Percent increase in engagement sustainability. MOE 3: Minimize Probability of unintentional overengagements MOE 4: Probability of all units holding same COP Decrease confusion clarify conflicting data FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 17

18 Tactical Situation 2 & 3 BRG 000 Modeling Objective: 1. Ability to hle larger raids 2. Engagement sustainability X XX X CG CG X XXX LCS 3. Measure amount of over-engagements BRG 270 DDG FFG LHD FFG DDG BRG 090 Simulation Run Cases: 1. As Is Mix of Link 11/16, can only engage organic tracks (no Integrated Fire Control) 2. All units have FORCEnet communication, can engage if capable X X X X LCS LPD FFG DDG LPD X X X X BRG 180 FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 18

19 Modeling Simulation Results MOE 2: Analyzed percent of increase in ability to hle larger raids MOE 3: Analyzed probability of unintentional over-engagements MOE 1 4 were deferred are recommended for further study FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 19

20 Analysis of MOE 2 To evaluate MOE 2, analysis of MOP was necessary: MOP 2.1 is evaluated by the average survival time of the HVA while FORCEnet is enabled divided by the average survival time while FORCEnet is disabled. Percent decrease in engagement sustainability: 6.786sec 6.751sec = 0.51%. MOP 2.2 is evaluated by an average of threat weapons killed while FORCEnet is enabled divided by the average number of threat weapons killed when FORCEnet is disabled. Percent Increase in the threat weapons killed: 7.3 threats 6.6 threats = 10.6%. When FORCEnet is engaged, the ESG can engage more threats while using fewer assets defending the high-value asset FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 20

21 Analysis of MOE 3 Minimize Probability of unintentional overengagements When FORCEnet is engaged, HVA can destroy more incoming threats use fewer assets MOE 3 is evaluated by the average number of friendly weapons launched while FORCEnet is engaged divided by the average number of friendly weapons launched while FORCEnet disabled. 59.5% decrease in over-engagement: (28 69 = 59.5%) FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 21

22 NSWC PHD CSG Results & Conclusions 22

23 MOP 1.2: Increase in Weapons Coverage AAW TacSit 2, 1000 ft target As As Is Is Interop InteropLevel I,II,III I,II,III Full Full FORCEnet Interop InteropLevel IV IV CG CVN FFH DDG FFH CG 250 NMI CG CVN FFH DDG FFH CG 250 NMI Weapons On Target Weapons On Target = 0 = 0 = 1 = 1 = 2 = 2 = 3 = 3 = NMI = NMI FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 23

24 Results Implementation of Fn Concepts to a Coalition Force Increase in Combat Reach Increase in Effective Engagement Envelope (E3) Increase in Probability of Raid Annihilation Decrease in Time to Establish Common Picture Reduced time from initial detection to all units holding track Scenario design important Some inconclusive results FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 24

25 What s the Cost of Admission? Compatibility with FORCEnet stards Systems under development Commensurate Weapons Sensor integration Take full advantage of potential kill chains capabilities that ALL units bring Will Coalition Initiatives (e.g. UK s NEC) be compatible? Particularly important if capabilities such as ability to use non-organic sensor info for engagement are in the plan FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 25

26 What s the Cost of Omission? Reduced Platform Effectiveness Inability to participate in the kill chain Inability to utilize readily available information to make decisions Potential loss of tactical communications Reduced Force effectiveness Coalition forces may not be considered for key warfare roles (Alpha Xray, Alpha Whiskey, Alpha Sierra, etc.) Inability to support timely passing of data to other units who need it Potential inefficient use of bwidth due to legacy platforms FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 26

27 NUWC Keyport CSG Results & Conclusions 27

28 Attrition Cumulative Attritions 7 6 Number of Attritions Non-FORCENet FORCEnet Time Step (x10) FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 28

29 Extend Modeling Results Statistical improvements with FORCEnet: Attrition Detection Engagements Statistically worse with FORCEnet: Time to transmit Information Kills (cumulative) FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 29

30 The Way Ahead 30

31 From AG-6 Brief to TTCP Analysis/Engineering Approach 1. Finalize Terms of Reference 2. Develop Hypothesis 1. Finalize Terms of Reference 2. Develop Hypothesis 2.1. Develop/Refine Subhypotheses 2.1. Develop/Refine Subhypotheses Underway Underway Completed Completed 8. Compare Model Results 8. Compare Model Results 7. Summarize Model 7. Summarize Model Results Results Main Main Analysis Analysis Loop Loop 3. Develop/Refine MOEs 3. Develop/Refine MOEs 4. Develop/Refine Scenario 4. Develop/Refine Scenario (Scripted Coalition Vignettes) (Scripted Coalition Vignettes) We are here. 10. Identify National 10. Identify National Impact, Architecture, Impact, Architecture, Stards, Timing, Costs Stards, Timing, Costs 11. Integrate Model Results 11. Integrate Model Results 6. Perform Studies 6. Perform Studies Systems Engineering Systems Engineering National Modeling National Modeling 5. Identify National Models 5. Identify National Models (DARNOS, MANA, NSS) (DARNOS, MANA, NSS) 9. Validate model results 9. Validate model results via experiment (TWx) via experiment (TWx) /or war game /or war game 12. Develop TTCP Report Models: 12. Develop TTCP Report Models: 5/23/ /23/2006 Advice to Nations Acquisition Implications of Fn 22 Advice to Nations Acquisition Implications of Fn FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 31

32 Next Group NSWC PHD Cohort 4 Timing of capstone project: PHD Cohort 4 Planning Nov/Dec complete Start Jan 2006 Finish Sep 2006 Will start with FORCEnet for the Coalition Hypothesis model New scenario humanitarian relief Eight vignettes more granularity Starts with OTW Extends to include ASuW, ASW, AAW, MIO Planned coalition C2 Order of Battle Platforms provided Working systems & capabilities FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 32

33 From AG-6 Brief to TTCP Online Online IP Reach Back Local IP Reach Area Back Networks Wideb Local Area Receive Networks RF Wideb Management Receive Survivable RF Management comms Survivable comms NCW Capability Stepping Stones Levels of FORCEnet Based Based on on Fn Fn Concept Concept Document Document Full Full IT21 IT21 Level Level 0 Net Net Connected Connected Improved decision making Improved decision making Web-based services Improved Web-based network services reliability Improved performance network reliability Increased performance bwidth Improved Increased coalition bwidth operations Improved data sharing coalition operations Tailorable data situational sharing awareness Tailorable tools situational Stardized awareness tools data exchange between Stardized domains data exchange Defense between in domains depth Defense in depth Level Level 1 Net Net Enabled Enabled Network based comm Network control based comm control Multi-path improved transport Multi-path reliability improved transport reliability Dynamic bwidth mgmt Dynamic bwidth mgmt Customized applications Customized data sources applications Common data infrastructure sources data Common exchange infrastructure stards Improved data exchange data exchange stards across Improved domains data exchange Enterprise across domains management for asset Enterprise analysis management repair for Initial asset knowledge analysis repair management Initial knowledge automated management decision aids Assured automated sharing decision aids Distributed Assured sharing comm control Distributed operations comm Modular control operations open architecture Modular open architecture Level Level 2 Fully Fully Net Net Ready Ready Decision-making under undesirable Decision-making conditions under undesirable conditions Robust, reliable communication to Robust, all nodes reliable communication Reliable, to all nodes accurate timely information Reliable, accurate on friendly, timely environmental, information on neutral friendly, hostile environmental, units neutral Storage hostile units retrieval of authoritative Storage data retrieval sources of Robust authoritative knowledge data management sources capability Robust knowledge with direct management access ability capability to raw with data direct access User-defined ability to raw data shareable SA Distributed User-defined collaborative shareable SA comm Distributed control collaborative Automated comm decision control aids to enhance Automated decision decision making aids to Information enhance decision assurance making Seamless Information cross-domain assurance access Seamless data exchange. cross-domain access Interoperability data exchange. across all domains Interoperability agencies across all Autonomous domains agencies disconnected operations Autonomous disconnected Automatic operations adaptive diagnostic Automatic repair adaptive Modular diagnostic architecture repair to expedite new Modular capabilities architecture to expedite new capabilities Level Level 3 5/23/2006 5/23/ Today Today FY07 FY07 FY10 FY10 FY14 FY14 FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 33

34 FORCEnet for the Coalition Hypothesis US Only Coalition Fully Netted Partial Netted Un-netted FORCEnet for Coalitions - NPS 34