Extensible Battle Management Language

Similar documents
The 9th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium

Battle Management Language (GeoBML) for Terrain Reasoning

John Kearley Alion Science & Technology

Future Battle Command: Geospatially-Enabled

Standardizing Battle Management Language Facilitating Coalition Interoperability

U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Analysis Center (TRAC)

Integrating National C2 and Simulation Systems for BML Experimentation

MSG-079 C-BML Workshop Farnborough UK, Feb Coalition Battle Management Language 2009 Experimentation

Obstacle Planning at Task-Force Level and Below

C4I System Solutions.

Joint Battle Management Language (JBML) Project (Phase 1) Dr. Stan Levine. Outline. JBML Phase 1 Description/Status

PREPARE AN OPERATION OVERLAY

Adding Reports to Coalition Battle Management Language for NATO MSG-048

Information-Collection Plan and Reconnaissance-and- Security Execution: Enabling Success

Obstacle Planning at Corps, Division, and Brigade Levels

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Battle Management Language Transformations

Enemy-Oriented Tactical Tasks. Exploit Feint Fix Interdict Neutralize. Terrain-Oriented Tactical Tasks. Retain Secure

APPENDIX D STUDENT HANDOUTS D-1

CLASSES/REFERENCES TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE

Test and Evaluation WIPT

Army Expeditionary Warrior Experiment 2016 Automatic Injury Detection Technology Assessment 05 October February 2016 Battle Lab Report # 346

IN 1990, RETIRED Lt. Gen. (then Col.) L.D. Holder wrote an article for

LESSON 2 INTELLIGENCE PREPARATION OF THE BATTLEFIELD OVERVIEW

DANGER WARNING CAUTION

Evaluating the Proposed Coalition Battle Management Language Standard as a Basis for Enhanced C2 to M&S Interoperability

DIGITAL CAVALRY OPERATIONS

Mission Definition. Joint: Army:

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Net-Enabled Mission Command (NeMC) & Network Integration LandWarNet / LandISRNet

Obstacle-Integration Principles

Network Centric Operations (NCO) Case Study: Stryker Brigade Combat Team Command & Control Research & Technology Symposium

Decisive Action Operations Planning BY SFC (RET) Vincent TJ Taijeron

APPENDIX B. Orders and Annexes

FM AIR DEFENSE ARTILLERY BRIGADE OPERATIONS

CHAPTER 5 SECURITY OPERATIONS

Plans and Orders [CLASSIFICATION] Copy ## of ## copies Issuing headquarters Place of issue Date-time group of signature Message reference number

FM (FM 19-1) Headquarters, Department of the Army. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Techniques to Shorten The Decision-Making Process At the Task Force Level

150-LDR-5012 Conduct Troop Leading Procedures Status: Approved

NEWS FROM THE FRONT. CPT Nick Morton 19 JAN 17. Approved for public release: Distribution unlimited

Future Combat Systems

Section III. Delay Against Mechanized Forces

RECRUIT SUSTAINMENT PROGRAM SOLDIER TRAINING READINESS MODULES Conduct Squad Attack 17 June 2011

Chapter FM 3-19

FCS Embedded Training: An Overview

Bottom Line Up Front

On the Formal Representation of Enemy Courses of Action. June 15, 2009 VIStology ICCRTS '09 Washington, DC

MECHANIZED INFANTRY PLATOON AND SQUAD (BRADLEY)

21st ICCRTS C2-in a Complex Connected Battlespace. Operationalization of Standardized C2-Simulation (C2SIM) Interoperability

Headquarters, Department of the Army

OPERATIONAL TERMS AND GRAPHICS

AUSA BACKGROUND BRIEF

COMMAND AND CONTROL FM CHAPTER 2

Geospatial Battle Management Language (geobml)

Mobile Subscriber Equipment (MSE) Operations

20th ICCRTS C2-Simulation Interoperability. Identifying Command Post Staff Tasks for Simulation Augmentation (Paper 047)

Battle Staff Graphics Workbook This workbook contains 36 pages of symbols to aid in your understanding of ADRP 1-02.

DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION:

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

CHAPTER 4 MILITARY INTELLIGENCE UNIT CAPABILITIES Mission. Elements of Intelligence Support. Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Electronic Warfare (EW)

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Integration of the targeting process into MDMP. CoA analysis (wargame) Mission analysis development. Receipt of mission

ORGANIZATION AND FUNDAMENTALS

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Collaboration, Interoperability, and Secure Systems

Deliberate Breach FM Chapter 4

Commander and Staff Organization and Operations

CHAPTER 2 FIRE SUPPORT DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit)

JAGIC 101 An Army Leader s Guide

HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Obstacle Framework. Chapter 2

COMMON AVIATION COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM

Future Expeditionary Armor Force Needs

BRIEFING FORMATS. Section I. Mission Analysis Briefing

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

ARMY RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION (R-2 Exhibit)

Future Combat Systems Industry Day Briefing

TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES FOR FIRE SUPPORT FOR THE COMBINED ARMS COMMANDER OCTOBER 2002

US Army CIO/G6 Battle Management Language (BML) Architecture Project ISSUE

APPENDIX A. COMMAND AND GENERAL STAFF OFFICER COURSE CURRICULUM DESCRIPTION C3 ILE, ATRRS Code (Bn Option) Academic Year 05 06

Joint Warfare System (JWARS)

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

AUSA BACKGROUND BRIEF

The 19th edition of the Army s capstone operational doctrine

(QJLQHHU 5HFRQQDLVVDQFH FM Headquarters, Department of the Army

Mission Command. Lisa Heidelberg. Osie David. Chief, Mission Command Capabilities Division. Chief Engineer, Mission Command Capabilities Division

ADP309 AUGUST201 HEADQUARTERS,DEPARTMENTOFTHEARMY

Command, Control, and Troop-Leading Procedures

Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures For Fire Support for the Combined Arms Commander

Achievement of Cognitive Interoperability is Key for Coalition Command and Control in the Networked Era

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HEADQUARTERS 8 TH INFANTRY DIVISION OFFICE OF THE COMMANDING GENERAL APO NEW YORK 09111

Utilizing Force Management Service (FMS) to Support Realistic Training

Department of the Army Washington, DC, 4 July 2001 TACTICS. Contents

Joint Command and Control Capability Portfolio Management (JC2 CPM)

Doctrine 2015 Information Briefing

Trends in Defensive Operations

Transcription:

Extensible Battle Management Language Dr. Michael Hieb Alion Dr. Hieb is an Architect of the US Army Simulation to C4I Interoperability Overarching Integrated Product Team. He can be reached at (703) 933-3376. Also on the XBML Team are: Dr. Mark Pullen - GMU Dr. Andreas Tolk - ODU William Sudnikovich - ACS 1

What Is Battle Management Language (BML)? BML is the unambiguous language used to: Command and control forces and equipment conducting military operations, and To provide for situational awareness and a shared, common operational picture. Slide 2 Along with this definition, we offer four principles that guide our discussion of BML though this brief: 1)BML must be unambiguous. 2) BML must not constrain the expression of a commander s intent. 3) BML must use standardized data representations. 4) BML must allow forces to communicate information pertaining to their mission, their status and their environment. 2

The Problem Currently, Command and Control is conducted primarily via verbal and textual means, formatted messages are used only in special cases The GIG will provide new abilities to communicate and collaborate Without standard Command and Control formats, this communication will be dependent upon human interpretation As such, it is incapable of transitioning to the full range of automation that the DoD is implementing and will not support the integration of advanced M&S with digitized command and control in the GIG. Slide 3 The current BML is a loosely knit language lacking clearly delineated rules governing its use. Strict application of its meanings is not required due to the give and take between people which leads to an understanding of what is meant, not necessarily what is said. This is particularly true when one has not been precise enough to begin with, or has given conflicting information. As such it does not lend itself to supporting integration of our digitized command and control systems with simulations. 3

BML Representation - The 5Ws Tasks to Subordinates Graphics convert to BML Division Mission Division attacks on order in zone to seize OBJ SLAM. Division Concept of Operations Form of maneuver: Penetration Main effort: BLUE-MECH-BDE2, on order BLUE-ARMOR-BDE1 Supporting effort: BLUE-MECH-BDE1 BLUE-ARMOR-BN1 Deep: None Reserve: BLUE-AVN-BDE1 Security: BLUE-CAV-SQN1 Tactical Combat Force: BLUE-MECH-TM1 Who What When Where Why BLUE-MECH-BDE1 Attacks Zone Fix (MRR1) BLUE-MECH-BDE2 Attacks Zone Penetrate (MRR2) BLUE-ARMOR-BDE1 Follows and Assumes (B-M- BDE2) Zone Seize (OBJ SLAM) BLUE-AVN-BDE Occupy AA EAGLE Reserve BLUE-ARMOR-BN1 BLUE-CAV-SQN1 BLUE-MECH-TM1 Follow and Support (B-A- BDE1) Screen Tactical Combat Force Zone Zone (PL AMBER to PL BLUE) DSA Support (B-A-BDE1) Protect (Division left flank) Protect (Division Rear Area) Slide 4 This slide shows an example of a COA sketch. Imagine the graphics being linked to the BML. 1) we can interpret the overall division mission: Division attacks on order in zone to seize OBJ SLAM Note that in place of the general description of Division we could actually identify the specific division by knowing what machine we were logged onto and keying to the ORG ID. Also on order was selected as the when for this example since there is not enough information to determine otherwise. Normally the COA sketch would be accompanied by additional products such as the COA statement and if analysis is complete, a synchronization matrix. 2) we can determine the Division s concept of operation. Since this is an offensive operation we are interested in the chosen scheme of maneuver, in this case a penetration. We can identify the main and supporting efforts as indicated. As well as the reserve, security and tactical combat force. Again without the additional products it is assumed that the Aviation Brigade is the reserve. It is also assumed that the Cavalry Squadron is performing a screen. The graphics shows it doing a security mission by adding an S, a G, or a C to the graphic this would be clarified. 3) we can translate the graphics into specific tasks to subordinates as shown. This could all be linked to the proper paragraphs of the OPORD and completed through auto-fill. Though the simulation may only be able to interpret the message, we can see that it would be fairly easy to include graphics into the BML and translate the graphics to populate the correct fields of a BML message. 4

BML in a Standardized Data Model (Command and Control Information Exchange Data Model - C2IEDM) ACTION-OBJECTIVE ACTION-id (FK) ACTION-OBJECTIVE -index ACTION-OBJECTIVE -categorycode WHY ACTION WHAT ACTION-id ACTION-category-code ACTION-name ACTION-category-code ACTION-TASK ACTION-EVENT ACTION-TASK WHAT ACTION-TASK-id (FK) ACTION-TASK -minimum-duration ACTION-TASK -maximum-duration ACTION-TASK -estimated-duration ACTION-TASK -planned-start-date ACTION-TASK -planned-end-date ACTION-TASK -planned-start-time ACTION-TASK -planned-end-time WHEN ORGANISATION-TYPE ORGANISATION-TYPE -id ORGANISATION-TYPE -category-code ORGANISATION-TYPE- CATEGORY-CODE UNIT-TYPE POST -TYPE UNIT-TYPE UNIT-TYPE -id (FK) UNIT-TYPE -category-code UNIT-TYPE -mobility-code UNIT-TYPE -service-code UNIT-TYPE -size-code (echelon) ORGANISATION WHO ORGANISATION-id (FK) ORGANISATION -category-code ORGANISATION -nickname-name ORGANISATION -type-id (FK) LOCATION WHERE LOCATION-id LOCATION -category-code ORGANISATION-ACTION-ASSOCIATION ORGANISATION-id (FK) ACTION-id (FK) ORGANISATION- ACTION-ASSOCIATION-index ORGANISATION- ACTION-ASSOCIATION -category-code ORGANISATION- ACTION-ASSOCIATION -effective-date ORGANISATION- ACTION-ASSOCIATION -effective-time ORGANISATION- ACTION-ASSOCIATION -intent-text ORGANIZATION-POINT FACILITY-LOCATION MATERIAL-POINT FEATURE-LOCATION PERSON-POINT Slide 5 An examination of the LC2IED shows that the 5Ws can be represented to support BML development. 5

BML Scope and Uniqueness C4I BML Orders & SA C4I Simulation Robotic Forces Slide 6 Battle Management Language is intended to be used to exchange C2 Information (Orders and Situational Awareness (SA)) between: 1) Individuals using C4I Systems; 2) Simulations; and 3) Future Robotic Forces. While C4I systems can exchange primarily free-text based C2 directives designed for human consumption, Simulations cannot consume such information. Instead, Simulations need a large overhead of trained military experts to translate C4I free-text orders into Simulation Commands. 6

BML Methodology Joint International XML/ Data Replication XML/ Data Replication C2IEDM BML C2IEDM BML NATO Doctrine Joint Doctrine Army XML/ Data Replication JCDB Data Model BML FM-1-02 Slide 7 This approach to building the BML into the C4I data model also points the way towards expanding the concept to accommodate joint and international interoperability. BML accommodates Doctrine explicitly in it s methodology. 7

XBML Testbed BML GUI OTB XML/ SOAP X M L / S O A P Multi Source DB XBML Presentation to DMSO C4I -Sim TEM X M L / S O A P 3 October 2003 CAPES Slide 8 The XBML project is currently focusing on taking an existing Army BML testbed and using SOAP/XML interfaces to develop a demonstration of XBML s utility. The goal is to develop a testbed for plugging in C4I and Simulation systems. 8

What Is XBML? XBML is BML provided as a Web Service via XML/SOAP and the C2IEDM. XBML is being developed as an integral part of the Extensible Modeling and Simulation Framework. Slide 9 Supporting Technologies include: XMSF C2IEDM Structured Representation of Doctrine as in FDMS Doctrinal Definitions and Task Lists: Joint Level Definitions and Task Lists [e.g. Joint Pub 1-02 Dictionary of Terms Joint Universal Task List (UJTL)] Service LevelService Definitions and Dictionaries e.g. FM 101-5-1 Operational Terms and Graphics Service Task Lists e.g. FM 7-15, The Army Universal Task List (AUTL) 9

Critical M&S Initiatives for the GIG XBML XMSF Sharable M&S Components Operational Node GIG M&S Node Joint Transformation Doctrine Developer 10

Backups For more information on XMSF and XBML visit: netlab.gmu.edu/xmsf/pubs 11

BML is Key Enabler for GIG Capable Forces Network Centric Know precisely, in real-time, location of all friendly and enemy forces Robotics Integrated into Force Amplify capability of manned elements Multi-functional (RSTA, armed, sustainment) Increased Reliance on Extended Range Engagement Organic plus strategic and tactical support Long range ISR and precision fires Capable of Air-Mobile Operations Commercial and minimum DoD strategic and tactical lift Indirect Fire Function Direct Fire Function Networked Command, Control & Comms Organic & Inorganic RSTA Infantry Carrier + C2 Function Sensor Function Slide 12 The US Army is devoting much effort to defining requirements for a Future Combat System. (FCS). Key to this is performing studies to analyze what C2 configurations and technologies will be needed. This slide portrays a configuration of FCS that is being used for C2 Analysis. The configuration shown is of 2 Infantry Carriers and 2 C2 vehicles with a crew of 4-6 people. The other vehicles are robotic, consisting of Scout Vehicles, Unmanned Ariel Vehicles, and Direct and Indirect Fire Vehicles. Current Operations Orders will not support C2 requirements for these robotic forces. Neither voice (via radio) nor text-based directives, as used today, will be sufficient. Thus we have determined that there is a requirement for a digitized Battle Management Language. We also note that the current requirement for Simulations to receive unambiguous, data-based orders is very similar to the requirements for a FCS force. 12

Army, Joint and NATO Doctrine Hierarchies Slide 13 13