1 / 34

AGDIMP and TPIO-TD Initiatives

AGDIMP and TPIO-TD Initiatives COL David A. Kingston Director, TPIO-TD 26 May 2004 Purpose To inform the Army geospatial Community on data challenges and requirements initiatives: J-GES ICD Joint Force Integration Review Team Army Geospatial Data Integrated Master Plan

daniel_millan
Download Presentation

AGDIMP and TPIO-TD Initiatives

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AGDIMP and TPIO-TD Initiatives COL David A. Kingston Director, TPIO-TD 26 May 2004

  2. Purpose To inform the Army geospatial Community on data challenges and requirements initiatives: • J-GES ICD • Joint Force Integration Review Team • Army Geospatial Data Integrated Master Plan Capabilities for the Joint Force Commander

  3. Agenda • TPIO Overview • J-GES • FDU/FEF • MOS Consolidation

  4. Mission TPIO-TD, as TRADOC representative to the Army develops,coordinates and synchronizes all Army digital terrain data requirements for current and future forces and coordinates with the JIM community. Ensures terrain visualization and terrain data capabilities are implemented in current military operations, combat developments, exercises, experiments, training, and modeling and simulation. Reviews requirements documents for Army systems (subsystems) that require digital terrain data and ensures interoperability and commonality aspects of terrain data and products. Partners with AMSO, NSC, BCBL, TPIO-Virtual, and othersto guarantee that geospatial aspects in M&S are compatible with C4ISR.

  5. Problem Statement • Current geospatial data holdings and the capability to rapidly generate, manage, analyze, and distribute geospatial data do not meet the current or future needs of the Joint Force Commander. • Does not support: • Joint Battle Command • Joint Training • Embedded Training • Enroute Mission Planning and Rehearsal • Modeling and Simulation

  6. Current Geospatial Data HoldingsThis is what we have today… … and 1:50K is the minimum level of GEO data that the Army needs to plan and execute operations.

  7. DTSS Digital Topographic Support System (USA) TPC Topographic Production Capability (USMC) MIPS Multispectral GIPS Geospatial Imagery Production System (USAF) SCANNER SCANNER RAID RAID Navy FoS Family of Systems (USN) JC2 Joint Command and Control DCGS Distributed Common Ground/Surface System Generate, Manage, Analyze and Distribute Geospatial Data (Joint Geospatial Enterprise Service) ICD Supporting the Joint Force Commander Joint Geospatial Capabilities MIPS/GIPS Current Systems Mature to Support JC2 and DoD DCGS DTSS Navy FoS Imagery Production System (USAF) TPC

  8. For Official Use Only PDA GMADGD...An Enterprise Service Supporting the Joint Force Commander Installations as Flagships Current To Future Joint Expeditionary Mindset DB ABCS DB DCGS DB DB Theater HW & SW Foundation Initial MSDS J-GES Tactical HW & SW J-GES Geospatial Database UAV Enhancement MSDS NGA/National/ Service-level Geospatial Assets/HSOCs DB DB DB ABCS Good Enough Combat Training Centers/BCTP Theater-JTF Level activities ASK/ Aristotle SUGV The Network DB FCS DB Actionable Intelligence Tactical-level Geospatial Collectors Authorities, Responsibilities, & Accountability

  9. Way Ahead • Plan of attack – two parallel paths: • JBMC2 BoD endorsed ICD on 21 Apr 04 and recommend forwarding the GMADGD (J-GES) ICD into the JCIDS process with the Command and Control Functional Capability Board (FCB) as lead • Complete Service Staffing • Additionally: • Clear document for foreign disclosure to ABCA allies • Will work with other NATO allies once JROC approved • Concurrently socialize with BA FCB, N-C FCB, DoD Interoperability • Senior Review Panel (ISRP) and NGA

  10. Joint Force Integration Review Team Geospatial Data Requirements for the Future Combat SystemThe Challenge • BUT: • Asking NGA to provide this level of accuracy of data for the whole world is infeasible • 10’ changes occur regularly enough that data would require repeated update to be accurate • and unaffordable • Cost to provide this accuracy through NGA is greater than $4-6B. THEREFOR: To meet our operational requirement for GEO data the Army must have available a “Good Enough” capability sufficiently accurate to support immediate planning and which will allow rapid integration of additional data about a limited area to satisfy FCS requirements.

  11. Joint Force Integration Review Team TRADOC Recommended Army Position: Proposed Threshold and Objective Values • FCS Threshold (2012) MSD Geospatial Requirements: • Open Terrain: 150x150km (Within 12 days)-MSD 3, HRTe 3, Imagery 1m • Complex Terrain: 75x75km (Within 12 days)-MSD 3, HRTe 3, Imagery 1m • Urban Terrain: 50x50km (Within 12 days)-MSD 3, HRTe 3, Imagery 1m • FCS Objective (2020) MSD Geospatial Requirements: • Open Terrain: 150x150km (Within 3 days) - MSD 3, HRTe 3, Imagery 1m • Complex Terrain: 75x75km (Within 3 days) - MSD 5, HRTe 5, Imagery 1m • Urban Terrain: 50x50km (Within 3 days) - MSD 5, HRTe 5, Imagery 1m At HQDA, both G2 and G3 are concerned that the Threshold Requirements should be MSD/HRTe 4 or 5 in areas of high interest.

  12. Joint Force Integration Review Team TRADOC Recommended Army Position:Key Elements of the Fix • Joint/Service’s geospatial data enhancement (co-production) • Army supports concept • Sensor Capabilities must be Brought on Line (LIDAR, etc.) • Can do “Value Added” Now and into the Future • Assumption on refresh: • Joint/Service’s will have capability to refresh data and provide geospatial data enhancement of features and higher resolution elevation data • Army Geospatial Data Integrated Master Plan (draft) and Joint Geospatial Data Enterprise Service ICD include this capability • Proposed NSGI Threshold: • Joint/Army needs threshold requirements as stated in NSGI ORD as soon as possible

  13. I E E E E E E E E Finish/Print Finish/Print ANALYSIS ANALYSIS CGM CGM HQ SRC: 05607A000 TOPOGRAPHIC COMPANY 8-6-183-197 •• ••• ••• ••• 2-0-11-13 1-1-35-37 1-1-30-32 1-1-21-23 MAJOR EQUIPMENT 13 – HMMWV 4 - L/R Vehicle 8 - Exp cap HMMWV 4 - UAV Cl IV 8 - DTSS-Light 4 - LIDAR Detectors 24 - DTSS-Deployable 1 – DTSS-Base 12 – DTSS-HVMP 12 – MTV-LWB 20 - Trl Mtd Gen Set 23 - LMTV 8 - LMTV Trl 12 – ¾ T Trl 1 – Water Buffalo

  14. Way Ahead • Continue working with HQDA to solidify an Army Position • Brief JFIRT Panel (Date TBD) • Recommended position carries with it funding requirements to execute (Increased funding to NGA, increased Army funding for Army data enhancement capabilities) Primary Beneficiary is the Joint Force Commander

  15. Army Geospatial DataIntegrated Master Plan(AGDIMP) PURPOSE: Provide Background Information on Status and Progress of Army Geospatial Data Integrated Master Plan (AGDIMP) And Solicit Support Presented by COL George Stone (DAMO-SB)

  16. Background: G-3 Directives • 8 Jul 2003: ADCS, G-3 approved development of an Army Geospatial Data Integrated Master Plan • Definition of an End To End Process (Horizontal and Vertical) • Recommend policy changes (AR 115-11, AR 5-11, etc) • Need to Also Address Doctrine and Architecture Issues and determine the need for CRD • Integration of all Army geospatial data users • Mission planning/mission rehearsal (MP/MR), training, command and control, embedded training, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), etc. • Identification of funding requirements: • POM 06-11 • Refine year of execution (FY04/05)

  17. New Geospatial Data Process Trade Study #4: Joint Considerations - Joint Geospatial Enterprise System - Joint Program Office

  18. Army GeospatialData Funding Priorities

  19. The Way Ahead • Complete Final Draft of AGDIMP • Staff AGDIMP through TRADOC, BC CoC, ARSTAF by EOM-May • Brief 2-Star/3-Star Battle Command GOSCs (TBD) • Get CSA Approval/Signature on AGDIMP (TBD) • Establish standards to drive interoperability for Battle Command systems using geospatial data • Review current MDEPs for all Geospatial Capabilities (EMAP, GPIS, GIP-K, JNTC, RD3, GDI FACT, etc.) • Conduct a rigorous experimentation program to understand capabilities of the End-to-End process

  20. Discussion

  21. BACKUPSLIDES

  22. What We Think We Need ’04 – ‘12 Threshold Content and Currency for Geospatial Data in Areas of High Interest Feature Content Feature Currency Image-Base Currency Refresh/Fusion Geospatial Enhancement in Near real Time 2 years (Seasonal) MSD 3 <10 years OPEN Geospatial Enhancement in Near real Time 2 years (Seasonal) COMPLEX MSD 3 <10 years Geospatial Enhancement in Near real Time 2 years (Seasonal) URBAN MSD 3 2 years

  23. Complementary Strategies to Solve the Geospatial Data Problem • Joint Geospatial Data Enterprise Service • Future Combat Systems Joint Force Integration Review Team (JFIRT) • Army Geospatial Data Integration Master Plan (AGDIMP)

  24. Lack of System to Generate, Manage and Distribute Geospatial Data JC2 and DCGS Will Not Function Without Timely, Accurate, Synchronous and Relevant Geospatial Information No Joint System !

  25. Imagery and Geospatial Intelligence CRD National System for Geospatial Intelligence ORD IG CRD and NSGI ORD (NGA) (NGA) National Level (DoD Dollars)

  26. Imagery and Geospatial Intelligence CRD Generate, Manage, Analyze, and Distribute Geospatial Data (GMADGD/J-GES) ICD National System for Geospatial Intelligence ORD NSGI ORD and the GMADGD (J-GES) ICD (NGA) (NGA) (JFCOM) Joint/Service/Component Level (Title-10 Service/Joint Dollars) National Level (DoD Dollars)

  27. Joint Force Integration Review Team Task from Jan ‘04 JFIRT • JFIRT Action from 30 Jan 04 meeting (Army): • Brief Army position on FCS threshold requirement for Mission Specific Data (MSD) Content, Quantity, and Timeliness (C,Q, & T) at FOC (2012), • to include assumption that Army has primary responsibility for refresh of responsiveness (MSD) • and the proposed co-production capability • and NGSI threshold. • OSD additional action (from 10 Feb FCS IIPT) • Army assess impact if NSGI ORD UFR is not funded • Implied Tasks: • Army position must include answers affecting rest of Army, which is also affected by Geospatial decisions

  28. Joint Force Integration Review Team The Common ComponentsFoundation Data and Mission Specific Data Controlled Image Base (CIB) Mono Imagery. Supports Battlefield Visualization. Unclassified. Feature Data An agreed-to set of coverage, features, and attributes that varies in density, accuracy and content based upon readiness requirements. Elevation Data Uniformly-spaced grid of terrain elevation values. Supports line-of-sight analyses, modeling & simulation, cross-country mobility and landing zone analyses. Targeting Data Stereo imagery. Supports war fighter's needs for targeting. Classified. Safety of Navigation (SON) Provides statutory navigation information for planning and operations. (TLM, City Graphics). There are products associated with each of these components

  29. Joint Force Integration Review Team Mission Specific Data BRIDGE Bridge Ref. No. = 2342656 Use = Road Bridge No. of Spans = 2 Width = 20M Length = 300M Overhead Clearance = 10M UnderBridge Clearance = 40M Load Class = 60 Short Tons HIGH NO BRIDGE INFORMATION LOW MSD 2 1:100K (TLM 100) MSD 1 1:250K (JOG) MSD 5 1:15K (City Graphic) MSD 3 1:50K (TLM 50) Scale/Granularity Feature Data Content Relationship Content relationship between a traditional map and the feature component of Mission-Specific Data of commensurate scale/granularity Cost and Time to Produce Information Content Terrain Fidelity

  30. Joint Force Integration Review Team ‘DTED 1’ ‘SRTM DTED 2’ HRTe 3 HRTe 4 HRTe 5 POST SPACING 100m 30m 10m 3m 1m FILE SIZE (28km x 24km) 0.021 MB 0.196 MB 26.3 MB 291.8 MB 2,626.2 MB COST Elevation Data UAV * LIDAR $ • Down-sampled Light Detection And Ranging Sensor

  31. Joint Force Integration Review Team What Happens to the Rest of Joint Force/Army if NSGI ORD UFR is Unfunded? (current operations to 2012) • Will Not Have “Home Field” Battlespace Awareness • Individual/Collective Training Simulations Will Not Replicate Conditions Found in Many Locations Around the World. • Battle Command/C4ISR Systems Will Not Function to Full Capability • Current Operations Will Continue to Suffer • Threat Forces Use Urban/Complex Terrain to Offset US Technology • Lack of Accurate, Robust Geospatial Data Increases the Difficulty for US Forces Operating in These Environments

  32. Joint Force Integration Review Team Bottom Line • Fund the NSGI ORD threshold capabilities as feasible • Establish standards to drive interoperability • Conduct a rigorous experimentation program to get the requirements right • Provide for a Joint Force/Service “data enhancement” capability Primary Beneficiary is the Joint Force Commander

  33. PURPOSE Provide Background Information on Status and Progress of Army Geospatial Data Integrated Master Plan (AGDIMP) And Solicit Support

  34. Conclusion • Geospatial Data is absolutely critical for both current and future joint forces: • Battle Command • Embedded Training • Mission Planning and Rehearsal • Geospatial Data production and management has been chronically under-funded: • National Level • Joint Service Level • The recommended strategies, (JGES ICD, FCS JFIRT, and the AGDIMP) if implemented, address the critical shortfalls in geospatial data production • Support for funding is needed to ensure the geospatial data is there when we need it

More Related