1 / 41

NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief

FORCEnet. NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief. CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo” Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM 29 April 2004. Agenda. FORCEnet Organization and Alignment FORCEnet Experimentation Trident Warrior FORCEnet FY05/FY06 Sea Trial Priorities

haley-rowland
Download Presentation

NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief

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. FORCEnet NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo” Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM 29 April 2004

  2. Agenda • FORCEnet Organization and Alignment • FORCEnet Experimentation • Trident Warrior • FORCEnet FY05/FY06 Sea Trial Priorities • FORCEnet Engagement Packs

  3. Force Development Directorate

  4. FORCEnet Experimentation Division FORCEnet Execution Center San Diego LEGEND 1 – Gov GS 15 – Contractor 7 – military

  5. FORCEnet Alignment

  6. FORCEnet Organization & Process Architecture Operational Views System Views Technical Views PPBS Requirements Assessments Near term Modeling Mid Term Far Term Campaign Analysis Assessment Experimentation Concept Development Fleet Science & Technology Fleet Modernization Plan Innovation Sea Trial

  7. FORCEnet FORCEnet Experimentation CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo” Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM 29 April 2004

  8. FORCEnet Campaign Plan: Two Path Strategy Feeding Concepts to prototyping FORCEnet CD&E Path Mid and Far Term • Provide actionable recommendations from experimentation results to Navy PPBS process. FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FORCEnet Prototype Path Near Term • Field FORCEnet Block capabilities to the Fleet including the enabling organization and processes. • Pursue rapid prototyping of FORCEnet capabilities to improve joint warfighting now. FORCEnet Trident Warrior FY 05 FY 03 FY 04 Block 0 Block 1

  9. FORCEnet Concept Development • Develop a draft functional-level concept for FORCEnet which describes how future joint and combined network-centric capabilities may be used to facilitate and enhance naval operations in the 2015-2020 timeframe. • Supports: • FORCEnet transformational requirements development process, • FORCEnet operational architecture development • Concept development & experimentation • Guided by the FORCEnet Vision • FORCEnet concept will serve as a coherent unifying concept that enables Sea Strike, Sea Shield, and Sea Basing, as well as a range of supporting concepts. Foundation for FORCEnet Requirements, Architecture and CD&E

  10. FORCEnet Campaign Plan: Two Path Strategy Feeding Concepts to prototyping FORCEnet CD&E Path Mid and Far Term • Provide actionable recommendations from experimentation results to Navy PPBS process. FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FORCEnet Prototype Path Near Term • Field FORCEnet Block capabilities to the Fleet including the enabling organization and processes. • Pursue rapid prototyping of FORCEnet capabilities to improve joint warfighting now. FORCEnet Trident Warrior FY 05 FY 03 FY 04 Block 0 Block 1

  11. What is a Trident Warrior? • Trident Warrior is: • The Major FORCEnet Sea Trial Experiment • Annual • NETWARCOM sponsored • Trident Warrior Experiment Intent • Provide a rapid fielding of improved warfighting capability to the Fleet, with full supportability and maintainability. • Develop supporting Tactics/Techniques/Procedures (TTP) and Concept of Operations (CONOPS) on how best to use this new capability to optimize the execution of Naval operations.

  12. FORCEnet Trident Warrior Process Contributors • NETWARCOM – Navy’s Operational Agent for FORCEnet • Trident Warrior lead • SPAWAR – FORCEnet Chief Engineer • Trident Warrior CHENG • Naval Postgraduate School – Analysis Lead for TW • Naval War College – TW Wargame lead • Navy Warfare Development Command – Sea Trial Coordinator • Warfare Centers of Excellence develop CONOPS / TTPS • Fleet Forces Command (FFC) – Sea Trial Lead • Approval and oversight for all resources and ship installs • OPNAV N61 – Resource Sponsor • FORCEnet PE Line • Integrate experiment results into POM assessment process

  13. Trident Warrior Approach Leverage Fleet / Joint exercises and experiments Tailored to meet Fleet / COCOM requirements Fleet Driven Program of Record Ship Alts New CONOPS Program of Record Temp Alts Integration In Theater Prototypes New Tech. New Prototypes Impact onprocesses &organization Results in an early delivery of FORCEnet capability with a subset of supportable leave behind capability TTP and Conops

  14. FORCEnet Sea Trial and FORCEnet Priorities CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo” Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM 29 April 2004

  15. Sea Trial Organization N701 N703 CNO N702 N704 CFFC Sea Trial ESG Executive Agent for SEA TRIAL ST ESG: All OA, N7, CNR, NWDC, MCCDC SEA TRIAL Coordinator Operational Agents NWDC Sea Shield Sea Basing FORCEnet Sea Strike C2F/5F NETWARCOM C3F/7F C2F/6F Sea Strike Sea Shield Sea Basing FORCEnet Comms & Data Networks Conventional Strike (Include SOF) Strategic Deterrence Integrated JT Log Deploy and Employ ISR Theater Air & Missile Defense AT / FP CSF FFC N2 NSAWC NETWARCOM C2F FFC N41 FFC N9 SWDG STOM PrePo JT Assets Afloat NFS SUW COP / CTP Undersea Warfare SWDG C2F CPF N00ASW NETWARCOM SWDG C2F Fleet Collaborative Teams Intel. Surv. & Reccon. Team Lead: FFC N2 CPF, CNE, CSF, CNSF, CNAF, NWDC, NNWC, NSAWC, NNSOC Consulting Members: OPNAV N61, ONR COTF, ONI,SPAWAR MCCDC Comm. Op. & Tac Pict. Team Lead:NETWARCOM CPF, CNE, CSF, CNSF, CNAF, NWDC, NSAWC CUS Consulting Members: OPNAV N61, ONR, COTF SPAWAR, MCCDC Comm & Data Netwks. Team Lead: NETWARCOM CPF, CNE, CSF, CNSF, CNAF, NWDC, NNSOC Consulting Members: OPNAV N61, ONR, COTF SPAWAR, MCCDC

  16. Commander’s Intent • Guidance for FORCENet FCT’s to be used to develop the FY 05/06 FORCEnet Sea Trial Execution Plan • Specifics: • 50% of experimental initiatives will address NCDP gaps • Highest priority is network visualization and instrumentation • 50% of experimental initiatives will address Numbered Fleet Priorities • Top 10 IT priorities • Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing FORCEnet enabling capabilities • FY 05 main Effort • TW 05, theme is coalition / MN interoperability partnership with C2F, East Coast, ESG or CSG • Covers the full spectrum of experimentation • Prototyping, concept development, non leave behind initiatives

  17. Commander’s Intent • Top Priority, NLT Jul 2004 • Develop a FORCEnet Functional / Enabling Concept based on the NOC • Foundation for concept based experimentation in the future • Basis for FORCEnet requirements and architectures • End State • FORCEnet two-year Execution Plan will directly impact PR 07 and POM 08 and have immediate and tangible results which address Fleet priorities for SP 21

  18. NETWARCOM FY 05 Priorities COMMS AND NETWORK DATABASES 1.      INSUFFICIENT BANDWIDTH (BW) FOR SMALL SHIPS 2.      360 DEGREE SATCOM RECEPTION 3.      MONITORING AND CONTROLLING BW USAGE 4.      GLOBAL NETWORK VISUALIZTION – NETOPS COP 5.      ENTERPRISE-WIDE INFORMATION ASSURANCE 6.      AUTOMATED NETWORK SOFTWARE-CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT 7.      UNUSED BW TO SHIPS 8.      MLS IN SUPPORT OF COALITION OPERATIONS 9.      DISTRIBUTED ISR FROM JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (JSF ISR) COMMON OPERATIONAL-TACTICAL PICTURE 1.      BLUE FORCE TRACKER AND SITUATIONAL AWARENESS 2.      UNDERSEA COMMON OPERATIONAL-TACTICAL PICTURE 3.      IMPROVED MARITIME COTP

  19. NETWARCOM FY 05 Priorities INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE 1.      ISR Management 2. ISR sensors INFORMATION OPERATIONS 1.      COMPUTER NETWORKD DEFENSE-IN-DEPTH 2.      CENTRALIZED IO MISSION PLANNING CAPABILITY 3.      DEPLOYABLE MULTI-MEDIA NAVAL PSYOP CAPABILITY 4.      COMMUNICATIONS ELECTRONIC ATTACK CAPABILITY 5.      ENHANCED SPECIFIC EMITTER IDENTIFICATION (SEI) CAPABILITY 6.      NEXT GENERATION SURFACE EW SYSTEM 7.      SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT TOOL 8.      SHIP-BORNE COUNTER SPACE CAPABILITY 9.      TACTICAL-OPERATIONAL COMPUTER NETWORK ATTACK 10.  DATA LINK DECEPTION CAPABILITY

  20. NETWARCOM FY 06 Priorities • COMMS and Networks • GIG-Compliant Network Monitoring & Control experimentation • On-the Move Naval Networking experimentation • Coalition information sharing (comms, COP, CIE and CDS) • Information Assurance / Computer Network Defense-in-Depth • Information Management/Knowledge Management • COTP  • BFT and Situational awareness • Coordinated Real-time Execution experimentation • Improved Maritime COTP and Decision Making experimentation • COP correlation and fusion • XTCF (Extensible Tactical C4I Framework) • Battle management and synchronization • USW CUP  •  ISR • On-Demand ISR experimentation • Improved Imagery Experimentation • Horizontal fusion

  21. FORCEnet FORCEnet Engagement Packs CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo” Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM 29 April 2004

  22. FORCEnet Engagement Pack (FnEP) Definition FORCEnet Engagement Packs are small scale system ensembles which demonstrate the engagement enabling power of FORCEnet by integrating Jointsensors, platforms, weapons, warriors, networks, and command & control systems with requirements to perform cross-mission enabled Network-centricCombat Reach Capabilities Combat Reach Capabilities: Integrated Fire Control Automated Battle Management Aids Composite Tracking Composite Combat Identification Common/Single Integrated Pictures • FnEP Attributes: • Joint e.g. Naval, AF, Army • Engagement-oriented • Adaptive e.g., Strike and MD • Field near-term e.g., w/in 5 Years • Capability Based POC: LCDR Joe McMahon, NETWARCOM, joseph.mcmahon@navy.mil

  23. Fn Pathfinder: FnEP MD/Strike Pack Factor Integration IOC Packs Pack Development Pack Development SUW/USW/MCM Field Exercises/Sea Trial Tech Demos M&S/HWIL JDEP Experimentation FY2004 FY2005 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2006 Initiate Pathfinder Effort Document requirements Common Reference Scenarios, Choose systems JFCOM BMC2 Oversight Organization Organization Align Combat Reach technology and acquisition efforts Pack Development ONR NIFC Demo Experimentation

  24. Questions? “Speed to Capability”

  25. “FORCEnet will enable the naval service to employ a fully netted force, engage with widely distributed combat forces, and command with increased awareness and speed as an integral part of the joint team.” - Admiral Vern Clark We’ve started to FORCEnet … appreciate the reason why, get to know the language and join up! 25

  26. Backups

  27. Transformation Drivers for Sea Power 21 JOINT CAPSTONE CONCEPT SEA POWER 21 NAVAL OPERATING CONCEPT MARINE CORPS STRATEGY 21 USMC CONCEPT HIERARCHY USN CONCEPT HIERARCHY National Guidance NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY JOINT VISION 2020 Joint Guidance TRANSFORMATION PLANNING GUIDANCE Naval Vision NAVAL POWER 21 Naval Strategy The how to achieve Naval transformation NAVAL TRANSFORMATION ROADMAP Joint Operating Concept Under development Operational Concepts = Sea Shield Sea Strike Sea Basing Operational Concepts = Ship to Objective Maneuver, Exp ManueverWarfare Functional Concepts = Intel, Log, MCM, … Naval Capstone Concept to achieve Global CONOPS Functional Concepts = FORCEnet

  28. FORCEnet Taxonomy: The basis for The Concept Development & Experimentation Path 4. IKA 4.1 Expeditionary, multi tiered sensor and weapons grids 4.2 Dynamic multi-path and survivable networks 4.3 Adaptive / Automated decision aids and human centric engineering 4.4 Distributed, collaborative C2 and human centric engineering 4.5 Information Assurance 4.2.1 - Node adressable network architecture 4.2.2Universal access 4.2.2.1-Tactical (LTNs) 4.2.2.2-Operational (LANs) 4.2.2.3-Strategic (Enterprise) 4.2.3 - Fault Tolerant 4.2.4 - LPD/LPI Comms 4.2.5 - Quality of Service 4.2.6 - Multiple, redundant comm paths 4.2.7 -Mobile/Expeditionary 4.2.8 - Scalable 4.2.9 - Trusted 4.2.10 – Highly available 4.2.11 - Standards based protocol 4.2.12 - Next generation internet like 4.2.13 – Adaptable to C2 needs 4.2.14 – Self organizing 4.2.15 – Self healing 4.2.16 – Common geo/temporal reference….. 4.4.1 - Distributed commanders 4.4.2 - Well understood ROE 4.4.3 - Well understood commanders intent 4.4.4 - Situation specific training 4.4.4.1 - Adversary’s Region 4.4.4.2 - Adversary’s Culture 4.4.5 - Robust team rehearsal 4.4.6 - Collaborative planning (Naval, Joint, Coalition) 4.4.7 - Access to information (Naval, Joint, Coalition) 4.4.7.1 - Based on need vice comms/computers 4.4.8 - Reduce reaction time 4.4.9 - Cognition 4.4.9.1 – Presentation 4.4.9.2 – Representation….. • 4.5.1 - Defensive IO • 4.5.1.1 - Strong computer network defense • Hardware • Software • Processes • Procedures • 4.5.1.2 -Intrusion detection • 4.5.2 Quality of Service…… 4.3.1 – Information Management 4.3.1.1- Data mining 4.3.1.2 - Filtering 4.3.1.3 - Association 4.3.1.4 - Analysis 4.3.1.5 - Alert 4.3.1.6 - Prediction 4.3.1.7 - Decision support 4.3.1.8 – Assimilation 4.3.1.9 – Fusion 4.3.1.10 - Trust/Pedigree 4.3.2 - Common, intuitive user interface 4.3.3 - Common, intuitive info representation 4.3.4 - Real time processing 4.3.5 - Reach back 4.3.6 - Semantic data markup 4.3.7 – Agent based computing…. 4.1.1 - Large Numbers (>10000) 4.1.2 - Low cost 4.1.3 - Distributed 4.1.4 - Autonomous 4.1.5 - Multiple Phenomena 4.1.6 - Continuous coverage 4.1.6.1 – Subsurface 4.1.6.2 – Surface 4.1.6.3 – Air 4.1.6.4 - Cyber space 4.1.7 - Standards based output 4.1.8 – Connected 4.1.9 – Remotely Operated ….. 4.4 Distributed, collaborative C2 and human centric engineering 4.2 Dynamic multi-path and survivable networks 4.1 Expeditionary, multi tiered sensor and weapons grids 4.3 Adaptive / Automated decision aids and human centric engineering 4.5 Information Assurance

  29. FORCEnet Alignment NAVAIR NAVSEA SPAWAR Assistant Secretary of the NavyResearch, Development, Acquisition Chief of Naval Operations Operations & Requirements Acquisition Commander Fleet Forces Command Additional Duty CFFC Additional Duty Additional Duty Naval Network Warfare Command NETWARCOM SPAWAR as FORCEnet Chief Engineer SPAWAR as FORCEnet Chief Assessor

  30. Status of FORCEnet Requirements/ Architectures/ Standards Implementation CLIP CVN21 DDX LCS BAMS CNO and ASN(RD&A) Endorsed FORCEnet Pilot Programs

  31. Definition of Enterprise FORCEnet Requirements/Architectures/Standards • FY 2003 Appropriations Conference Report (107-732): “While a solid organizational structure for the development of FORCEnet requirements has been established … conferees direct that the Secretary of the Navy submit, by May 1, 2003, a detailed report on the FORCEnet program …define requirements.” • FY 2004 Senate Appropriations Committee Report (108-87): “ The Committee is supportive of the goals of this integration program. … The Committee directs that the FORCEnet program establish these requirements, test them within the Navy Warfighting Experiments and Demonstration line, and release the approved requirements to those affected programs as quickly as possible in FY 2004.”

  32. Spiral Development and Implementation of FORCEnet Requirements/Architecture/ Standards Congressional Direction FY2003/2004 • Operational Implementation, • Refinement, and Update: • FORCEnet Innovation Continuum • Trident Warrior “Speed to Capability” SECNAV Report to Congress on FORCEnet Working Baseline FORCEnet Requirements: 2003 FORCEnet Campaign Plan FY03 Updated FORCEnet Requirements: 2004 FORCEnet Campaign Plan FY04 • Acquisition Implementation, • Refinement, and Update: • JRAE • FIOP/JBMC2/Other • FORCEnet Pilot Programs Operational Requirements System/Tech Requirements Support/Policy Requirements Implementation Requirements • Enterprise Instantiation: • FORCEnet Compliance Process/ Checklist

  33. Joint / Allied Interoperability

  34. Process for Iterative Transformation Concept Development CFFC, Fleets, NETWARCOM, OPNAV, ONR, NWDC, MCCDC, COEs, NPS Experimentation & Assessment Implementation Fleets, NETWARCOM, CFFC, NWC, NWDC, MCCDC, TYCOMs, SYSCOMs, COEs, JFCOM, ONR CFFC, OPNAV, NETWARCOM,SYSCOMs DoD Joint SSG Fleet CCI Input to OPNAV assessment Strategy/ Warfare Challenges Liaison w/ Sea Warrior Exp & Assess Doctrine Concept Development Organization Exp & Assess Capability Increment Concept Generation Wargaming POM Training Operational Architecture CONOPS Exp & Assess Capability Increment Material Enabling Technologies Exp & Assess Leadership S&T Basic Research Personnel Facilities Fast Track - Sea Enterprise Disciplined Speed to Capability

  35. Architectures Exercise Venues Experiment Venues “AS IS” Prototype Evaluations “TO BE Analysis And Assessments Experimentation Requirements INNOVATION Current Future Joint Fleet COEs DARPA ONR DOD Industry Private Sector Service LABS Academia NWDC Technology Concepts Capabilities Fleet Immediate Needs and Issues Acquisition and SYSCOMS POR Fit & Shortfalls Gaps/Required Warfighting Capabilities Technology and Concepts

  36. FORCEnet FY 04 / FY 05 Experiment Plan FORCEnet Enabling FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 JCD&E A M J J A S FORCEnet Sea Trial O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D Fleet Battle Experiments FBE K Spiral 4 /Sea Viking AWE Part 2 Spiral 2 Spiral 3 Fleet LOEs Silent Hammer Trident Warrior 05 ESG LOE WG Fn LOE 03-1 (Trident Warrior 03) Trident Warrior 04/ Sea Viking 04 FORGER LOE Fn LOE 04-2 Fn LOE 05-2 Prototype Path Fn LOE 03-3 Trident Warrior 04 WG Fn LOE 04-1 Trident Warrior 05 WG Fn LOE 05-1 Global Engagement VII JFCOM MN LOE 3 PI 03 Joint/Service CD&EWargaming JFCOM JCD WG Fn Title X WG JFMCC WG UC 04 Title 10WG JEFX 04 APTX 05 JFTI RAP 1 / WARNET Demo (CG04) CIE LOE ATEX 05 JFTI / JNTC RAP 2

  37. FnEP Concept

  38. FnEP StrategyAligning Programs Using the Fn Services and Contribution to Capability Sensor CT CCID CTP Integrated Joint / FORCEnet ABMA Transformation Process System Programs IFC WPN COP MP PNT Fn IG $$$$$ $$ GEMINII & Associated Tools • 4. Analysis • Gap / Overlap Analysis • Dynamic Models 5. Portfolio of Solutions & Requirements • Establish the Architecture (FORCEnet) 2. Group Systems & Solutions 3. Decompose into SF/IE categories FORCEnet Services

  39. What You should Know about Fn Engagement Packs • ForceNet is Network Centric Warfighting • FnEP Focuses on Engagement Capabilities, Consists of Operational Activities and CRC’s desired to yield Engagement Capability • FnEP Requirements: • Adaptable – Multi-mision focus (e.g. TAMD/STRIKE) • Compose-able Distributed Sensor- Weapon Target Pairing (no longer platform constrained) • CRC’s Defined: • Composite Tracking – “Sensor Management and Control” • Distributed sensors – access to multiple sensor data • Composite Combat Identification (CCID) – ID Management and Control • Common Shared Combat ID (red, blue, and orange) • Common Picture – Track Control • Tactical level Common shared Management and Track Level Operational Pictures w/ Integrated Track Management • Automated Battle Management Aids (ABMA) – Battle Space Management • Composeable, Adaptable, Redundant, Distributed Command & Control • Integrated Fire Control – Weapons Management and Control • Distributed Weapons management & Control – Compose weapon – C2 combinations

  40. POM Process Functions Force Capability Metrics MCP MCP Warfighting (Campaign) Analysis N6/N7 SPP • ISCP • Investment Priorities • Capability Balance SYSCOM Assessments Strategic Guidance Mission Area Analysis FORCEnet Concept & Operational Architecture 4 NCP Transformation Roadmap S & T Assessment Program Guidance Force Structure & Munitions (NNOR) Analyses Investment Strategy SEA ENTERPRISE Unclassified

  41. FnEP Definition & Development Process: GEMINII WARFARE DEVELOPMENT Tech push Capabilities pull PPBS S&T Framework & Principals Timeframe, Scope, Boundary, and Context Architecture Vision (Viewpoint) Capability Metrics, Illustrating Issues Capability Metrics Architecture Maintenance Requirements Reference Implementation • Architecture views • (OV’s. SV’s. TV’s) • Dependencies Implementation Governance Planning, Procurement, Acquisition, and Deployment Governance Migration Strategy Architecture Assessments Static: Functionality / Interoperability Dynamic: Capability Metrics Costs / Value/Benefit/Utility/ETE Functionality Portfolio Of Solutions • Prioritization, Sequencing of system • Deployment (CED?) • How Much And When? • Bundles/ Engagement Packs, and • Portfolios of Systems in To-Be architecture • FnEP Solution Sets • # consumers, Program Viability, Volatility

More Related