Army Digitization Campaign Plan

31 January 1995

REFERENCES:

A. Chief of Staff, Army (CSA), Letter, 8 Mar 94, Subject: Force XXI

B. HQ Department of the Army, Force XXI Campaign Plan, Draft

C. DAMO-FDQ Memorandum, 18 Aug 94, Subject: Draft Force XXI Implementing Directive

D. Charter for the Army Digitization Office, 9 Jun 94

E. Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Pamphlet 525-5, Force XXI Operations, 1 Aug 94

F. Army Acquisition Executive and Vice Chief of Staff, Army (VCSA), Memorandum, 28 Sep 94, Subject: 1994 Army Science Board Study: Technical Architecture for Army C4I

1. SITUATION:

a. General. The Army is at the threshold of a new era, and must proceed into it decisively. Today, the Industrial Age is being superseded by the Information Age. The Army must evolve a new force for this 21st century age - Force XXI. Accordingly, the Force XXI Campaign Plan describes the actions required by all partners in the modernization process in order to move along three primary axes.

Figure 1 - The Three Axes of the Force XXI Campaign Plan

The main effort is to redesign the operating force, which is being done by the Joint Venture partnership, led by the TRADOC Commander with membership of the Army Major Commands (MACOMs). Supporting efforts are to re-engineer the Institutional Army and to introduce modern technology, which introduces digital equipment to the battlefield. Re-engineering the Institutional Army is the responsibility of the VCSA in concert with each Major Command. Introducing digital technologies is under the direction of the VCSA and the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE), and executed by the Army Digitization Office (ADO). The work done along each axis is being coordinated by the Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force (LAM-TF).

b. Assumptions. The assumptions under which this plan is formed are as follows:

The Army of the 21st century cannot be designed against a single definable threat - it must be adaptable to a wide range of threats.
The Army of the 21st century will be characterized by its requirement for force projection.
Information technologies require changes in tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) to achieve measurable improvements in lethality, optempo, and survivability.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense and Congress will support the ADO's initiative to execute a streamlined digitization program.
The Army will create technical, operational, and system architectures that meet joint, combined, and service interoperability requirements.
Resources are available, that, when prioritized, can meet design and experimentation requirements.

2. MISSION: The ADO oversees and coordinates the integration of Army battlefield digitization activities. The ADO is the VCSA's instrument for providing guidance across the major commands, and the AAE's instrument for providing guidance, assistance, and direction in acquisition matters related to digitization.

3. EXECUTION: The ADO campaign plan focuses on the execution of the third axis of the overall Force XXI Campaign Plan, introducing modern information technologies onto the battlefield. The redesign of the operating Army and the implementation of digital technologies will be an iterative process in which technology capabilities will influence both intra- and inter-Service operational concepts, which, in turn, will drive technology requirements. Iterative cycles of experimenting, learning, and deciding, supported by streamlined acquisition processes that allow faster implementation of decisions, will characterize the execution process.

a. Concept Of The Operation. The ADO Campaign Plan consists of four efforts, or thrusts (Figure 2, below), which will be executed in compliance with the technical, operational, and system architectures to ensure compatibility and interoperability with other Services' and allied forces. These architectures are the basis for a seamless information system.

(1) Technical Architect. The Army Acquisition Executive (AAE) is the Army's Technical Architect. The Director of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications and Computers (DISC4) supports the Technical Architect by developing and maintaining the technical architecture for both battlefield systems and installations. The Director, Communications and Electronics Command Research, Development and Engineering Center (CECOM RDEC) is the Systems Engineer, providing technical support to the DISC4. The ADO ensures that digital efforts are compliant with the Technical Architecture.

Figure 2 - ADO Campaign Plan

(a) The Technical (Information) Architecture is the key to achieving the Army's digitization goals. The Technical Architecture is the "building code" upon which the System and Operational Architectures are based. The Technical Architecture prescribes the electrical and human computer interface standards, communication protocols, message sets, and the government and commercial software infrastructure used on computers. The Technical Architecture is based on the National Institute for Science and Technology's open and layered model for information systems. Layering permits the introduction of new hardware and software with minimal impact to the overall system. Impact on software is minimized because the interfaces between layers are "open"; i.e., they are well defined and public. The Army's standards-based Technical Architecture will substantially improve horizontal and vertical interoperability and will reduce life-cycle costs by capitalizing on commercial products and the reuse of government products. It will also reduce the time needed to acquire andfield new hardware and software technology, because of the open and layered approach.

(b) The Operational Architecture, being developed by TRADOC, depicts the connectivity of tactical elements and the types and volume of traffic between the elements. The Operational Architecture describes who needs to exchange information, what information needs to be exchanged, and how that information will be used. Anticipating that digitization will change current tactics, techniques, and procedures, it follows that the Operational Architecture will be very dynamic.

(c) The System Architecture depicts the physical systems needed to implement the Operational Architecture and the physical connectivity of those systems. The System Architecture shows all of the radios, computers, local area networks, etc., in an operational facility or area. CECOM RDEC is responsible for defining the System Architecture in coordination with the ADO and affected Program Executive Officers and Program Managers.

(2) Thrust 1- Acquisition.

(a) To maximize the advantages of digitization across the force, a large number of participants must be equipped with a digital capability. Since very few systems currently possess an embedded digital capability, it must be added as an "appliqué". Selected platforms and soldiers require a processor and situational display (a computer), a position/navigation unit, a connection to a communications means, and the software to make the entire system work together. Selected platforms from the Marine Corps and the Air Force will also require appliqués to participate in the experiments.

(b) For a platform that has no digital equipment, the appliqué will consist of a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver, a computer unit (commercial, ruggedized or militarized), and a Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS), and/or Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS) radio. A common "core" software capability will reside in all appliqués, regardless of platform. Additional software modules will provide the interface with platform-unique systems, as required.

(c) The appliqué solution will be coordinated and integrated by the ADO, with the Program Executive Officer for Command and Control Systems acting as Executive Agent for the acquisition, development and procurement. Other PEOs are responsible for assisting in appliqué installations and for eventual integration of the core command and control (C2) software into embedded systems. For the initial brigade through division experiments, the appliqué contractor will be responsible for development of the platform integration package, as well as for initial training and logistics functions. In the future, these functions will become part of the normal training and logistics process used for all systems.

(3) Thrust 2 - The Tactical "Internet". The three primary Army tactical communications systems - the Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS), the Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS), and the Mobile Subscriber Equipment/Tactical Packet Network (MSE/TPN) - will all be needed to move an ever increasing amount of digital data on the modern battlefield. In the near-term, these three communication systems will be combined to form a complete, seamless system that will provide the tactical equivalent of the Internet architecture for the initial brigade and division digitization experiments. Capabilities will also exist to interface commercial and military satellite communications (SATCOM) systems to the tactical internet to provide significant capacity and access to very low echelon units. The tactical internet will function very much like the Internet system used by both civilian and government for electronic mail and computer data-transfer. Tactical Multinet Gateways (TMGs) and Internet Controllers (INCs) provide integration through commercially-based routers and bridges. PEO-Communications (PEO, COMM) is responsible for developing the tactical "Internet" in accordance with the Technical Architecture.

(4) Thrust 3 - Integration.

(a) The embedded digital systems already in use in battlefield functional areas will be merged into the architecture. The architecture will include interoperability with the command, operations and support elements of the Army Battle Command System (ABCS), as well as other Services' and allied forces. At the upper echelons, the Army Global Command and Control System (AGCCS) has demonstrated interoperability with the strategic planning systems of all the Services. The challenge of integration remains at the lower levels, where existing legacy systems have been developed to provide vertical "stovepipe" information flows for specific battlefield functional areas. The horizontal integration of weapon systems, aviation platforms, intelligence and C2 systems will be the most challenging aspect of the digitization program.

(b) The Program Executive Officers and Program Managers will ensure their systems are compliant and interoperable with the digitization technical architecture and the Army's software common operating environment. They also will continue to be responsible for automated platform management functions. Platforms with embedded C2 computers will operate the Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) software supplied by PEO, CCS and the appliqué contractor. The ADO will coordinate the efforts between the software developers and the platform developers, and will assist the platform developers in testing their interoperability prior to fielding.

(5) Thrust 4 - Battlefield Information Transmission System. While the tactical internet described above will substantially improve communications connectivity, the digital data load of the future is expected to exceed the capacity of the tactical internet. Experiments will be conducted with commercial technologies, such as direct broadcast satellites and digital cellular phones, to determine their military utility. These technologies have the potential to supplement existing military systems, particularly in operations other than war. A longer term Battlefield Information Transmission System (BITS) strategy is being formulated, which capitalizes on commercial and government investments in multi-band, programmable radios. The Army needs the flexibility provided by these radios to interoperate with existing systems, and to easily and cheaply incorporate new, higher capacity waveforms. The short term strategy, to support the Division and Corps level exercises, will be based on commercial standards and specifications. The far term strategy will be developed by the Directorate of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications and Computers (DISC4) to use an experimental process to address future communications needs.

(6) Experimentation and Evaluation Plan.

(a) The assessment strategy for validation of the warfighting capability of forces equipped with digitization technologies can best be characterized as a continuous evaluation effort. This effort will be based primarily on timely and cost-effective assessments of validation and training exercises such as the major Advanced Warfighting Experiments (AWEs), results from related operational and developmental tests, and the outcomes of modeling and simulation (M/S) efforts.

1. The ability to capitalize on opportunities for early testing, experimentation and simulation in the Battle Lab environment will result in the early identification of problems and required solutions. From the beginning, the Army Analytic and Test and Evaluation communities will be involved in assessing the effectiveness of technologies, doctrine, procedures and force structures. Operational Performance Objectives (OPO), Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) and Measures of Performance (MOP) are established within the Experimentation Master Plan to assess specific changes and track their effect over time. The measures of effectiveness focus on increases in force lethality, survivability and tempo. OPO, MOE, and MOP will be validated by the Director, Joint Venture.

2. The assessment is structured around a "rolling" baseline concept that integrates the experimentation and modeling and simulation efforts. Modeling and simulation (M/S) sponsored by the LAM Task Force will be conducted by the TRADOC Analysis Command (TRAC) initially to establish thresholds for baseline MOEs using existing force structures and communications capabilities. The same model will be run using expected digital capabilities to establish initial MOE thresholds for a digitized force. Cumulative data from digitization experiments and exercises will be used to calibrate the models. Once calibrated with this live exercise or experiment data, the models will be re-run to assess potential impacts of digitization on the force measures of effectiveness as well as to look at the synergistic effects between and within the battle operating systems (BOS). Using the calibrated models permits further examination of impacts caused by organizational changes versus those caused by digitization. It also supports an assessment of the effects of different employment concepts with the same systems, as well as varying scenarios and force structures. The major AWEs will be used to validate the M/S thresholds established for lethality, survivability and lethality measures of effectiveness.

3. This cyclic process supports the ADO's evaluation of the value-added by digitization, while minimizing the need for large scale, costly field experiments and exercises. The TRADOC-led Analysis Experimentation Planning Group (AEPG) will be the forum to facilitate the close coordination and cooperation needed among the M/S, system developer and test communities.

(b) An initial Experimentation Master Plan (EXMP), prepared by PEO, CCS, will guide the experiments for assessment of the appliqué (through Bde TF XXI). The Army's Independent Evaluators - Army Material Systems Analysis Activity (AMSAA), and Operational Test and Evaluation Command (OPTEC) - in conjunction with the ADO, material developers, TRADOC, AMC(CECOM) and FORSCOM will optimize test and evaluation support of the battlefield digitization effort through the EXMP. Experimentation and testing of digital information technology will be designed to determine adequacy of requirements, to identify the best use of new capabilities, and to collect data necessary to provide credible evaluations in support of procurement decisions. Continuous evaluation through constructive, virtual, and live experiments and separate operational and technical testing will verify equipment progress toward meeting mission needs and performance objectives.

(c) In general, there will be five classes of experimentation and testing conducted to support the development and evaluation processes:

1. Integration Laboratory Certification - Preliminary examination of prototype hardware and software to verify ability to perform critical functions and meet interoperability requirements. Lead is CECOM with participation from ADO, AMSAA, TRADOC, and OPTEC.

2. Battle Lab Warfighting Experiment - Virtual, constructive, or field event to examine new equipment, processes, and force design issues. BLWEs should provide significant opportunities for rigorous data collection to satisfy evaluation requirements. Lead is TRADOC with participation from OPTEC, AMSAA, ADO, and CECOM.

3. Advanced Warfighting Experiment (AWE) - Major event conducted in a tactically rigorous environment to confirm experimental hypotheses regarding increases in warfighting capability. System-performance data collection during these events will be limited to minimize interference with training, realism, etc. objectives. Lead is TRADOC with participation from OPTEC, AMSAA, ADO, and CECOM.

4. Technical Test (TT) - Event conducted to confirm that critical technical parameters and contractual specifications have been met, and also to examine system performance in especially stressful and controlled environments. These events will be conducted as necessary after successful Integration Laboratory certification and in parallel/coordination with BLWEs and Operational Tests. Lead is AMSAA with participation from OPTEC, ADO, TRADOC, and CECOM.

5. Operational Test (OT) - Event conducted to obtain data on total system performance when employed by representative soldiers in an operational environment. OT will be conducted as necessary to fill "data voids" in order to provide credible operational assessments for procurement and fielding decisions. Lead is OPTEC with participation from TRADOC, ADO, AMSAA, and CECOM.

(d) Advanced Warfighting Experiments (AWEs) and Battle Lab Warfighting Experiments (BLWEs)

1. The Army, through its Joint Venture Campaign Plan, will conduct a series of experiments to demonstrate improvements in force effectiveness as a result of fielding digital-information technologies, and subsequently by changing organizational designs, functions, and procedures. These AWEs and BLWEs will be designed to yield data to address both system-level performance and operational effectiveness issues. Appliqué and Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) equipment will be examined in these experiments to establish an early understanding of their warfighting potential. Each experiment will build upon the results of previous experiments, creating the "rolling" baseline to which subsequent experiments will be compared.

2. Two 1994 events, Desert Hammer and Desert Capture III are the baseline for two AWEs to be conducted in 1995 - Focused Dispatch and Warrior Focus. These will form the rolling baseline for the early 1997 AWE called Brigade Task Force XXI (Bde TF XXI). The major goals of this exercise will be to document the improvements in survivability, lethality, and operational tempo. The exercise will also provide insights to division and corps command and control processes. The analysis of Bde TF XXI AWE will become the baseline for a division level Battle Command Training Program (BCTP) exercise, called Division XXI AWE, which will be conducted in 1998. This exercise will use modeling, simulation and the Bde TF XXI EXFOR unit in a live interactive environment. The analysis and lessons learned from Division XXI AWE then will become the baseline for a corps exercise to be conducted around the turn of the century.

(e) Additionally, experiments involving other Services will be designed and conducted to ensure joint interoperability of systems. The ADO assessment will leverage off such Joint experimentation fora as the Joint Warfighting Interoperability Demonstrations (JWID) that are conducted yearly.

(f) Modeling and Simulation (M/S) Strategy

1. Models will be used throughout the digitization program to evaluate operational and technical architectures, alternative technologies, interoperability and force effectiveness issues. These models and simulations are categorized as either constructive, virtual or live. Combinations of these provide the most complete environment possible in which to examine digitization.

2. Constructive models and simulations require little human interaction during operation. A majority of system performance, network assessment and force-on-force combat models fall into this category. Virtual simulations use manned simulators sharing "real" world computer generated images that require extensive interaction by participants. Live simulations are categorized as experiments, training exercises, demonstrations and tests that take place in a field-like environment.

3. An objective simulation environment is needed to support digitization efforts. This objective environment integrates system performance models, constructive models and virtual simulations through the use of distributed interactive simulation (DIS). Common representations of system and technology performance, architecture designs, network components and environmental impacts (e.g., electronic warfare) across all simulation categories will provide a "seamless" evaluation environment. Data requirements to properly calibrate the models must be clearly identified by the M/S organization and the data collected by the test agency

4. All models and simulations used to support the ADO assessment of digital communications are to be verified and validated (V&V) by the sponsoring/developing organization, as well as accredited by the using organization. This requirement for V&V includes combinations of separate models, such as a digital radio model interacting with simulators in DIS.

(g) In general, there will be four classes of M/S to support the development and assessment processes:

1. Network assessment models and simulations will be used to examine both the technical and operational communications architectures. The Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Battle Command Battle Lab (BCBL) will use operational architecture models to investigate operational considerations over a multiple number of communications networks simultaneously. These models assess information flow and communications means, development and portrayal of mission thread paths, mission timelines and variables, insights of system integration and interoperability and identification of architecture redundancies. The output from these efforts will be used as input by the Communications-Electronics Command (CECOM) for detailed engineering models that will be employed to examine specific net structures and determine where bottlenecks or other problems occur. These models will examine and develop techniques for insertion of new protocols or modifications to existing transmission facilities and systems.

2. The simulations that are part of the Digital Integration Lab (DIL) at CECOM Research Development and Engineering Center (RDEC) will be used to support system engineering and integration efforts. The DIL will permit hardware and software developers to test products in a realistic communications environment early in their design to enable redirecting development or eliminating inappropriate concepts. This capability supports the ADO plan for decreased system development time and evaluation of future technology insertions. The Army Interoperability Network (AIN), a critical aspect of the DIL, will be used to help resolve interoperability issues.

3. CECOM RDEC and the TRADOC Battle Labs will use DIS, such as Simulation Networking (SIMNET) and Battlefield Distributed Simulation-Developmental (BDS-D), in conjunction with system and network performance models to the maximum extent possible to answer questions relating to the man-machine interface, use of digitally provided information, concepts of employment, acquisition and fielding.

4. Constructive force-on-force M/S is a primary factor in the "rolling" baseline assessment concept proposed for Force XXI. This cyclic modeling process supports the ADO's evaluation of the value-added by digitization, while minimizing the need for large scale, costly field experiments and exercises.

(h) The TRADOC Battle Labs play key roles in refining the requirements for digitization and in defining the operational concepts and doctrine that will allow the Army to optimize the combat application of these technologies. The Battle Labs participate throughout the development process developing and validating digitization requirements, providing technology assessments and evaluating alternative tactics, techniques and procedures which digitization will enable. Battle Labs work closely with the operational test community to develop suitable test scenarios. Battle Labs conduct experiments and sponsor new technology into exercises as part of their requirements development process. Battle Labs are key participants in defining Force XXI objective requirements through experimentation in ATDs, AWEs and exercises such as Prairie Warrior and Mobile Strike Force.

(7) Joint and Combined Interoperability.

(a) Joint interoperability is a requirement for all future Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) capabilities. Contrary to the independent way in which the Services have developed C4I capabilities in the past, the ADO's campaign plan will be executed in an environment of joint and combined interoperability. The ADO's task is to ensure that the Army's C4I capability on the digitized battlefield is in compliance with the Joint Staff's "C4I for the Warrior" concept.

(b) The Joint Staff developed "C4I for the Warrior" as a joint interoperability objective, derived from joint operational requirements. It creates a broadly connected joint system of joint systems that provides total battle space information to the warrior. It provides a seamless connectivity for the warrior to the information, offensive and defensive, needed to carry out any mission, at any time and at any place.

(c) An integral part of the "C4I for the warrior" concept is the development of the Global Command and Control System (GCCS). The GCCS core consists of the basic functions required by the warfighter to plan, execute, and manage military operations. The basic functions are satisfied by selecting the "best of breed" applications from existing C2 systems of the Services. This process ensures interoperability, minimizes training requirements, and allows efficient use of limited resources.

(d) Similar to the other Services, the Army has implemented a framework to meet and conquer the challenges of joint interoperability, and to synchronize Army programs with the "C4I for the Warrior" concept. This framework is called the Enterprise Strategy .

(e) The Enterprise Strategy defines interoperability as the overall ability of C4I systems to exchange voice, data, and imagery information effectively, in near or real-time, as dictated by the operational situation. Achieving interoperability will require strict adherence to those technical architecture standards established by the Department of Defense (DoD) and Joint Staff, information transfer protocols, and standard data elements. Standards are key to ensuring the migration of the Army Common Operating Environment (ACOE) to the GCCS.

(f) The ADO is responsible for orchestrating all of the Army's digitization efforts to evolve present and proposed C4I capabilities into an integrated, interoperable, global network - an infosphere - that meets Army, joint and DoD requirements. The ADO's long term focus will be on: 1) the development of a technical architecture that is in compliance with DoD-defined military and commercial standards, 2) the development/acceptance of common hardware and software to provide compatibility among the Services, particularly between the Army and the Marine Corps, and 3) the construction and Joint Services acceptance of effective and efficient message formats and standards.

(g) The ADO will maintain its focus through the established DoD/Joint Staff review and approval process, particularly, the Military Communications-Electronics Board (MCEB). Through the Army member (usually, the DISC4), the ADO will ensure that all Army efforts towards joint interoperability on the digitized battlefield are coordinated with the Joint Staff and the other Services.

(8) The Digitization Master Plan, developed and coordinated by the ADO, contains detailed explanations about each ADO thrust, the three architectures, the experimentation plan, acquisition and funding plans, and joint and combined interoperability, as well as schedules that show synchronization of all of the many efforts involved.

b. Digitization/Architecture Responsibilities. Responsibilities for the Force XXI efforts are listed in the Reference plans and directives. The following responsibilities are specific to digitization efforts (the major portion of the third axis of the Force XXI Campaign Plan). Detailed plans for achieving each digitization responsibility will be worked separately between the ADO and each organization.

(1) Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research, Development and Acquisition (SARDA)/Army Acquisition Executive (AAE).

(a) Sponsor Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs) that bring digital capabilities to a state of technical maturity that permits their capabilities to be proven in Battle Lab Experiments - Battle Lab Warfighting Experiments (BLWEs) and Advanced Warfighting Experiments (AWEs).

(b) Provide Army Staff-level planning, authorization and funding support for Force XXI requirements.

(d) Coordinate digitization science and technology efforts with the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA).

(e) Ensure the digitization effort capitalizes on acquisition streamlining initiatives.

(f) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(g) Coordinate Technical Architectures and Science and Technology efforts with Joint and DoD C4I agency Component Acquisition Executives (CAEs).

(2) Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans (DCSOPS), Headquarters, Department of the Army.

(a) Integrate and synchronize Army Staff efforts across all three axes of the Force XXI Campaign Plan, and lead the axis to re-engineer the TDA/Institutional Army in concert with Army Commanders.

(b) Adjust the fielding schedules of programs, such as the Army Tactical Command and Control System (ATCCS) and Tactical Radio Communications Systems, as required by the Experimentation Force (EXFOR).

(c) Ensure digitization programs are prioritized consistent with the Chief of Staff of the Army's (CSA'a) goals to field a digitized force.

(d) Validate the Operational Architecture developed by the US Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).

(e) Coordinate Land Information Warfare activities.

(f) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(3) Director of Information Systems for Command, Control, Communications and Computers (DISC4).

(a) Support the Army Acquisition Executive by developing and maintaining the Army's Technical Architecture for both battlefield systems and installations, with the support of Army Program Executive Offices (PEOs), Major Commands (MACOMs), and agencies.

(b) Ensure Army Enterprise Strategy tasks are consistent with the Army's accepted definitions of Operational, Technical, and Systems Architectures.

(d) Establish Army policies for multi-level security.

e) Coordinate the Army's Technical Architecture with other Services.

(f) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(g) Oversee the requirements developments for the future data radio.

(h) Oversee data standardization efforts for the Army and act as the interface for Joint data standardization.

(4) Army Digitization Office (ADO).

(a) Oversee and coordinate the integration and interoperability of Army battlefield digitization activities.

(b) Provide guidance, assistance and direction in acquisition matters related to digitization.

(c) Apply streamlined acquisition procedures to emerging technologies in order to accomplish the Force XXI digitization objectives.

(d) Coordinate and synchronize the efforts of combat and materiel developers to develop and deploy information technologies needed to support the wide range of future military operations.

(e) Assure implementation of a Global Command and Control System (GCCS) Common Operating Environment (COE) is compliant with the Technical architecture in digitization efforts.

(f) Coordinate with the Joint Staff and Commanders-in-Chiefs (CINCs) on all ADMP matters that impact on maintaining interoperability of all Joint information exchanges.

(g) Coordinate with the Joint Staff and CINCs to ensure that all ADMP software programs and protocols, and Internet Protocol (IP) router plans and data rates for all Joint information exchanges remain interoperable.

(h) Maintain the ADMP.

(i) Monitor Army-wide digitization integration to ensure consistency with the ADMP.

(j) Advising the VCSA and AAE on all matters concerning the integration of digital capabilities across the force. ADO responsibilities are further documented in the charter signed by the VCSA and the AAE. (Ref D)

(5) US Army Forces Command (FORSCOM).

(a) Provide the Experimental Force (EXFOR).

(b) Provide feedback to the Army Staff (ARSTAF) concerning the utility of fielded equipment associated with digitization.

(6) Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC)/Joint Venture.

(a) Redesign the operating force to be knowledge-based, modular in design, and tailorable in capability.

(b) Planning, coordinating, conducting, and analyzing AWEs and BLWEs to provide timely feedback for decisions of Force XXI design.

(c) Reviewing annual Total Army Analysis and Program Objective Memorandum for conformance with Army priorities stemming from Joint Venture experiments.

(d) Coordinating Joint Venture experiments and findings with other Services and Allies.

(e) Developing and documenting operational requirements associated with the Horizontal Integration of Battle Command (HIBC) Mission Needs Statement (MNS).

(f) Develop and update the operational architectures.

(g) Define, coordinate and consolidate Joint and Combined information exchange requirements.

(h) Develop, in conjunction with the materiel developers, Battle Lab Experiments that evaluate and refine the operational capabilities of new equipment and software from the Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below (FBCB2) contract, related ATDs and other digitization-related development efforts.

(i) Align Advanced Concepts in Technology II (ACT II) Battle Lab Experiments with digitization objectives.

(j) Develop programs (in conjunction with the FORSCOM, Program Executive Officers (PEOs), and AMC) for training EXFOR personnel to operate and maintain the digital equipment.

(k) Define Joint and Combined information exchange requirements in coordination with Joint Staff, CINCs, DISA and Joint Interoperability Test Center (JITC).

(l) Design, resource, execute, and evaluate AWEs.

(m) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(n) Develop criteria for evaluating the operational effectiveness for digitization.

(7) Army Materiel Command (AMC).

(a) Maintain oversight of the Technical Information Architecture through matrix support to PEOs/Program Mangers (PMs).

(b) Serve as the Army's Systems Engineer, reporting to the Technical Architect for system engineering and Technical Architecture matters.

(c) Provide matrix systems engineering support to the Army Technical Architect and PEOs/PMs. Coordinating all information technology generation and application efforts as they relate to the Army digitization effort.

(d) Provide matrix support to the AAE and DISC4 for developing and maintaining the Army Technical Architecture by evaluating solicitations, proposals and system designs for compliance.

(e) Interface with Joint/Coalition technical agencies.

(f) Provide recommendations for updates to the Technical Architecture.

(g) Participate and influence commercial standards and forms.

(h) Provide expertise in the latest information processing technologies.

(i) Evaluate hands-on commercial technologies.

(j) Establish and maintain the Digital Integration Laboratory (DIL) for the verification of prototype hardware and software to meet the functional and interoperability requirements.

(k) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(l) Serve as the Army Executive Agent for international digitization efforts and technology sharing with Allies.

(m) Coordinate Platform Integration.

(n) Provide technical assistance, subject matter expertise, and material support to exercises and experiments.

(8) Space and Strategic Defense Command (SSDC)

(a) Coordinate the inclusion of space and missile defense capabilities into Force XXI.

(b) Provide space and Theater Missile Defense (TMD) mode modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(9) All Program Executive Officers (PEOs)/Program Managers (PMs).

(a) Provide periodic digitization reviews.

(b) Develop a plan to migrate to the Army's Technical Architecture.

(d) Support the experimentation process.

(e) Responsibilities for tasks associated with appliqué (digitization processing equipment added to vehicles) and communications systems installation kits will be split between the Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below (FBCB2) Program Manager and the various platform Program Managers/Item Managers. The installation kits do not include line removable applique items. The following table depicts which Program Manager has responsibility for each task. The FBCB2 Program will provide funding for these tasks.

Figure 3

(10) PEO Command and Control Systems (CCS).

(a) Manage the acquisition of hardware, software, and systems engineering support for integrated command and control systems, with support from AMC.

(b) Manage the ADO's system integration effort, with support from AMC.

(d) Develop the Common Operating Environment (COE) documentation.

(e) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(f) Develop and enforce the standards of COE.

(g) Prepare, in coordination with the ADO, a capstone EXMP, which integrates the test programs of the following PEOs: COMM, CCS, ASM, Avn, IMD and IEW.

(11) PEO Communications (COMM).

(a) Provide the communications infrastructure needed to support reliable, horizontal and vertical seamless connections. This includes the following networks: Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS), Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System (SINCGARS), and Mobile Subscriber Equipment (MSE); as well as the Marine Corps, Air Force, and commercial communication equipment.

(b) Manage the development of the tactical internet in accordance with the Army's Technical Architecture, with support from AMC.

(d) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(12) PEOs for Armored Systems Modernization (ASM), Aviation (Avn), Missile Defense (MD), Tactical Missiles (TM) and Intelligence and Electronic Warfare (IEW).

(a) Upgrade existing system computer processors, displays, radios, navigation equipment, and underlying software and computer operating systems consistent with the Army's System, Operational and Technical Architectures.

(b) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

Ensure that protocols and systems interface with and incorporate the COE.

(13) Major Commands (MACOMs).

(a) Coordinate digitization efforts with the ADO.

(b) Provide feedback on the utility of fielded equipment and perceived needs for DITLOMS enhancements based upon battlefield digitization.

(14) Operational Test and Evaluation Command (OPTEC). (a) Provide an independent evaluation of the operational utility and suitability of digitization hardware and software.

(b) Plan for and participate in the entire spectrum of digitization field experiments.

(c) Provide a continuous and iterative suitability analysis to guide the development process and support acquisition decisions.

(d) Serve as the lead evaluation agency supporting the ADO.

(e) Establish a rolling baseline to support digitization experiments.

(f) Provide modeling and simulation support as appropriate for digitization.

(g) Assist in development of test plans and procedures for individual or phased efforts for Force XXI digitization AWEs, ABCs and COE applications and software tests.

(h) Review and evaluate training needs and effectiveness.

(15) Director Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force (LAMTF) (a) Maintain the Force XXI Campaign Plan.

(b) Integrate and synchronize all Force XXI efforts across the three axes of the Campaign Plan.

d. Coordinating Instructions.

(1) The Digitization Master Plan, of which this plan is a part, is dated January 1995.

(2) Digitization ATDs, BLWEs, AWEs, ACT II programs, and PEO/PM/AMC-managed digitization programs will be executed consistent with the Army's technical, operational, and system architectures, and will be linked to a requirement of the digitized brigade, division or corps.

(3) Joint and combined interoperability will be addressed by every digitization program and at each BLWE/AWE.

(4) The CECOM Digital Integration Laboratory (DIL) will be used to evaluate software maturity and system interfaces for all digital systems prior to their participating in Task Force XXI experiments.

4. COMMAND AND CONTROL:

a. Higher-Level Reviews. The Director, ADO, will participate on the LAM-TF Board of Directors (BoD) and will periodically report on progress to the Horizontal Technology Integration General Officer Working Group. These reviews will be the institutional means for review of progress and execution of digitization decisions. Synchronization of this campaign plan with the overall Force XXI Campaign Plan will be accomplished by the Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force. The LAM Task Force will report progress on a quarterly basis using BoD meetings and other senior leader forums.

b. ADO Reviews. The ADO will periodically conduct technical and program execution reviews. The release of program funding contained in the digitization Management Decision Package (MDEP) will be contingent on completing these reviews.

c. Status Reports. Parent organizations require status reports on many of the programs being tracked bay the digitization MDEP. For those portions of the program pertaining to digitization, copies of status reports required by parent organizations will be provided to the ADO in the same format and frequency required by higher headquarters.

NEWSLETTER

Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list