Lessons learned from planning and preparing a distributed ISR LVC - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Lessons learned from planning and preparing a distributed ISR LVC Environment

• and there were

lots

John W. Diem Test Technology Director, US Army Operational Test Command ITEA Systems of Systems Engineering Workshop January 29, 2015

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Why did we need an ISR LVC Solution for OT – and why distributed?

• For the Distributed Common Ground Station – Army

(DCGS-A) Limited Users Test to be conducted as part of the Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) 15.2 in May 2015

• Preceded by lab based risk reduction @ Aberdeen Proving

Grounds, MD

• Preceded by developmental testing @ Fort Huachuca, AZ
• Preceded by multiple Technical Integration Events for each of

the 3 preceding NIEs (14.1, 14.2, 15.1)

• Required hybrid LVC solutions from testing, training,

experimentation, and operations – even 3 letter agency support – to create the right mix of simulation, scripting and control for a free-play environment for the system, its system of systems – and most importantly, its users

• Long ramp-up: multiple DTs, LBRRs, and NIEs as

preparatory events – the economy and power of distributed planning, engineering, and support became readily

• apparent. Getting there was another matter.

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

What does distributed mean for this test –and can it help? (according to dictionary

.com)

distribute

[dih-strib-yoot]

verb (used with object), distributed, distributing. 1 . to divide and give out in shares; deal out; allot. 2 . to disperse through a space or over an area; spread; scatter. 3 . to prom ote, sell, and ship or deliver ( an item or line of m erchandise) to individual custom ers, especially in a specified region or area. 4 . to pass out or deliver ( m ail, new spapers, etc.) to intended recipients. 5 ,6 . to divide into distinct phases or classes: The process w as distributed into three stages. These plants are distributed into 2 2 classes.

Build and prove-out hybrid teams and architectures Geography – but more: security, architectures, protocols, nationality, standards

YES! – starting with planning and ending in test execution

Link evaluators, testers, tool developers – concept to accreditation Leverage SoS elements for time needed Grow the capability from concept through LBRR through DT through LUT to IOTE

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

How has this test been distributed?

• Geography – but not always nation or world-wide. Sometimes the most

challenging link was between simulations at Fort X and live players at Range Y, 60 miles and multiple tactical and installation backbones away

• Security – unclassified live tactical engagement simulations tied to

collateral constructive simulations tied to SCI simulations and

• perational ISR systems, working at collateral and SCI
• Architectures, Standards and Protocols – DIS, HLA, TENA, multiple

tactical message formats and data exchanges distributed across an LVC federation linked at multiple points to a C4ISR enterprise as well as data collection and test control sysetms

• Responsibilities – PM, DT, OT, Evaluator for concept, multiple agencies

for scenario and event control development (data, road to war, event lists,….). A Team of Teams

• Time – Multiple events over a 2 year window
• System of Systems – mix of live and simulated sensors and other C4ISR

inputs working in the context of a common scenario and envionment

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Test Environment Design: A Team Sport

Planning and Preparation

• Operational Thread Requirements
• Friendly Force Structure
• Mission Profile
• Concept of Operations

Scenario Work Group Intel Architecture / Threat Work Group Validation Exercise (VALEX) Work Group Technical Integration Events

Validated Test Scenario Mission Events List Simulation to Mission Command Network Validated LUT

• Mission Profile
• Conventional / Insurgency
• Intel Message Requirements Threat Structure
• Threat Profile
• HVI Story Lines
• Mission Events List
• Five Events
• Simulation Interoperability
• Simulation to Mission Command System Integration
• Network Performance Assessment
• Complete build of Test Unit and NIE Tactical Network
• Intelligence WfF technical threads (live and sim)
• Fires and Maneuver WfF technical threads (live and sim)

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Test Environment Control: Another Team Sport

• Daily Intel / Threat Sync Meeting
• Coordinator: BMC G2
• OPFOR Commander
• Live OPFOR CDR
• Constructive OPFOR CDR
• Threat EW Lead
• LVC Team

Execution / Assessment

• ATEC Sync Meeting
• Coordinator: OTC
• AEC
• Test Team
• Test Team Team Hotwash
• Daily Operations Sync Meeting
• Coordinator: BMC

Deputy Commander

• OTC G3, Test Team,

BMC staff, OPFOR Commander, Threat EW, LVC team

• Tasks / Outputs
• Refine the Master

Event List

• Refine/Adjust

individual storylines

• Refine/Adjust

threat scheme of maneuver

• Synchronize Live /

Constructive OPFOR

Threat Entity Live / Sim Intel Signatures Intel Source Threat Cell #1 HVI #1 Live SIGINT

• Live OPFOR communications network

GMTI

• Truck (Sim)

HUMINT

• TiMS Inject Live Role Player

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

To ensure the test environment is robust…

1. Develop overall scenario including DCGS-A LUT Test Team requirements 2. Develop storylines 3. Develop individual messages to support storylines

4. Live and Simulated portions must be synchronized

5. Supports BDE Operations and DIV ACE (-) (ISR)

Distributed Scenario Development

ATTICA

4th ID attacks 2/1 AD VBIED 2/1 LOG PAC attacked

Example Storylines

TACREP - OPFOR Comms HUMINT reporting

Unit Reporting

Messages of Quality

Targeting Decision Points BCT Operations

Plan, Prepare, Execute, Assess

Lessons Learned: 1) Robust is a small word but is open for lots of interpretation; 2) Synchronization is a bigger word but getting that right – and defining robust - has consumed 3 NIEs and we still have a lot of work left between multiple sites to be ready for OT

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

End State: Unit feels like they are conducting live BDE operations and are supporting the commander’s decision making process

• Operational Mode Summary / Mission Profile: describes the concept of

employment, missions, and environmental conditions DCGS-A capability will encounter during the full range of military operations

• Combination of Wide Area Security and Combined Arms Maneuver
• Messages – describes what messages should stimulate the BDE S2
• TOC/TAC jumps are executed throughout the exercise in response to

the Situation

• Filling data buckets – ensure our messages properly stimulate the use of

DCGS-A; quality ensures that it is a true operational environment that is relevant to the fight

• Master Event List with dynamic scripting to adjust; REDFOR Commander

(Live and Sim) can make decisions (traceability i.e. truth table); reviewed/updated daily

Getting the Scenario Right (1/2)

Lessons Learned: 1) Art & Science; 2) Insuring that the means to deliver information “filled the data buckets” correctly would have benefited from a lot more distributed engineering and integration; 3) Event control distributed across simulations, scripting and control cell could also have benefited from a lot more distributed rehearsal.

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Message Type (24 hour period) SIPRNet JWICS “SCI” min max min max min max Maneuver/OPS Mission Command

 

Combat Reports

 

All Source Collaboration

 

Weather

 

Intel Products

 

Collection Management

   

Biometrics

 

GEOINT Engineer Products

 

Imagery Products

   

FMV



Moving Target Indicator

 

SIGINT Operations

 

Reporting

 

HUMINT/CI Operations

 

Reporting

 

MASINT MASINT

 

Getting the Scenario Right (2/2)

• Structured from the OMS/MP Message Requirements

Lessons Learned: 1) More trial and effort than expected on finding – and documenting “operational realism” – what information, in what sources, over what networks? 2) Close collaboration with TCM and PM required – and has been improved via distributed integration efforts pre-test.

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Distributed LVC Environment

LVC Simulation Tool Functional Representation Outputs to Mission Command

One Semi-Automated Forces (OneSAF)

• Friendly/Threat Ground Maneuver Systems
• Threat Rocket, Artillery, and Mortar Systems
• Neutral Ground Systems/Personnel
• Combat Messaging
• Joint Variable Message Format (JVMF) and Data

Distribution Services (DDS) combat messaging

Intelligence Model And Simulation for Evaluation (IMASE) – Simulation and Scoring Subsystem (ISSS)

• Airborne COMINT and ELINT platforms
• Unmanned Airborne ISR above BCT
• TS/SCI SIGINT messaging
• GEOINT interpretation messages (RECON

Exploitation Report)

Multiple Unified Simulation Environment (MUSE)

• JSTARS
• Unmanned Airborne ISR above BCT
• Ground Moving Target Indicator data
• Full Motion Video

Joint Cryptologic Mission Simulation (JCMS)

• Pulls SIGINT messaging from simulation and

SIGINT scripting cell into a Real Time Regional Gateway (RTRG)

• TS/SCI SIGINT messaging

Training Brain Operations Center (TBOC) Traffic Integration Messaging System (TiMS)

• Scripted HUMINT and Open Source products
• HUMINT, Open Source news feeds, other All-

Source products

Extensible C4I Instrumentation Suite – Fire Support Application (ExCIS-FSA)

• Friendly Indirect Fire Platforms, Sensors, and

Mission Command Nodes

• Tactical Messaging between live and simulated

Field Artillery units’ AFATDS and simulated artillery firing platforms

CRAM Distributed System of Systems Simulation (CDS3)

• Friendly Air Missile Defense sensors, C2 nodes,

and firing platforms

• Fixed Wing Aircraft and Ballistic Missiles
• Air Defense Engagement messaging
• Air Picture to BCT Air Defense Airspace

Management (ADAM) Cell

The ATEC Player Evaluation Tracking System (TAPETS) integrated with MILES

• Live Player Instrumentation
• Tactical Engagement, Position Location

Common Data Link (CDL)

• Integrate Live Player position data from

TAPETS into the constructive simulation

• Live and Constructive synchronization

Lessons Learned: 1) Getting all the tools to work together – most of which we don’t own – would have benefitted from more distributed testing, up front. 2) As we got more comfortable with how the tools worked – alone and together – we began to employ more and more from their home station vice bring to the test site.

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Distributed Live Enablers

Linked to LVC and/or Tactical Systems/Networks

Enabler Functional Representation Outputs to Mission Command System

OPFOR and civilian communications network

• Threat and civilian role player communications
• Signature for live SIGINT assets

SIGINT White Cell (BMC G2 and Strategic Plans and Exercise Branches)

• Discrete SIGINT reporting to augment

simulation feed

• COMINT messaging

ISR Integration Cell (formerly ISR TOPOFF)

• COCOM ISR Collection Manager
• Provides GEOINT and Imagery products
• Responds to Unit RFIs
• GEOINT
• COCOM ISR Collection Plan to Division/JTF HQ

Live Role Players

• Represent HVI and civilian persons of interest
• Interact with live forces and company response

cells during live and simulated engagements

• HUMINT Sources
• SIGINT Signature

Live Sensors

• Organic BCT ISR
• Live SIGINT and Full Motion Video

Live Maneuver Battalion

• All Warfighting Functions
• HUMINT Collection Teams (HCT)
• Combat Reporting
• HUMINT
• Tactical Questioning

Company Response Cells`

• Live Company Headquarters
• Tactical Communications and Mission

Command Systems

• Constructive maneuver platoons
• Combat Reporting
• HUMINT
• Tactical Questioning

Observer Controller Network

• Indirect Fires adjudication
• Facilitate Live OPFOR / Constructive OPFOR

synchronization

Lessons Learned: 1) Some of the hardest distribution challenges are within the 60 mile radius of the test site: lack of cross-domain solutions, “stitching” multiple test support networks together, synching live sensor feeds on live force w/ simulated sensor feeds on live + constructive force; 2) Lack of a cross- domain solution (CDS) that can link LVC and operational systems on open SIPR (and higher) is moving from nuisance to mission critical; 3) Geographic boundaries only go so far when synchronizing live and simulated forces.

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

How it all comes together: Distributed ISR OT – more than geography Distributed Sims and Operational Networks for Product Distribution Lessons Learned: 1) In almost every case, the impact of disruptions to network connectivity – the “glue of the event” - were no worse than if the LVC assets were collocated with the test. Said another way – they weren’t an excuse not to go distributed 2) Geographic boundaries only go so far when synchronizing live and simulated forces (worth saying twice).

12

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Summary: We found real or potential benefits –and learned lessons –across the whole OT timeline

• More insightful analysis of alternatives for test plans,

scenarios, architectures – “Try before you buy”

• Achieved more realistic scenarios and test environments –

and may have only seen the tip of the iceberg

• Earlier identification of potential issues – and solutions -

during scenario, LVC architecture, data collection, and test control development

• We were able to help PM relatively late in the cycle – could

have helped avoid even more unexpected costs and delays

• Lowered the cost to prepare for and execute the OT – using

distributed architecture will save roughly $400K for one event

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Questions

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Networked Systems “Plug In” to a Tactically Realistic Virtual Network

Network Emulations

Data Collection & Analysis Tools Hardware /System in the Loop Interface (HWIL/SITL) Platforms C5ISR Sensors Airspace Integration Distributed Simulations

SAFs (OneSAF) TENA/HLA/ DIS Interfaces Virtual Simulations Tactical Network Model Library Terrain / Weather RF Propagation Cyber Model Library

Information Systems

Operates On Top of Wide Area Networks

Distributed testing capabilities and methods benefit OT during planning, engineering, preparation, and execution.

OT Test Environment Template for Networked Systems