Military need for C2 to C2 interoperability Pre-processing incoming - PDF document

2/4/09 Coalition Battle Management Language 2009 BML Symposium MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Military need for C2 to C2 interoperability • Pre-processing incoming data allow to • Optimize in a timely fashion the huge amount of information • Notice and exploit unexpected and fleeting opportunities • Understand correctly the information at the right time • To act, react quickly automation of information is necessary and requires a formal language that must be understood by systems • Orders, requests and reports convey sender’ s intent that has to be unambiguous MSG-048 1

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Military need for C2 to Simulation interoperability • Reduce the cost of Staff exercise • Orders must be processable by simulation • Orders must preserve meaning and intent of commander • Decision support • Provide quick and automatic reports in order to get an impression how a specific order might influence an ongoing operation • Mission rehearsal • Staff gain accounted to execute course of action and react to unexpected events MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Military need for Simulation to Simulation interoperability • BML is not intended to replace HLA • BML provides what HLA is not made for • BML should be used to simulate military communication between simulated forces • Simulated force can be substituted by a real force (vice versa) without any change or adjustment • Training audience can have a synthetic commander • It will help SME to validate the models • VV&A process could be more efficient if one common language is used for military experts to understand models’s behaviors based on formal inputs and outputs MSG-048 2

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Crawl (2002-2005): SISO Initiatives and ET-016 • Concept development – Prove of feasibility Walk (2006-2010): MSG-048 – SISO PDG CBML • Gather interests and first assessment We are right now half way for CBML to become a reality MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Charter • The requirement for improved M&S-C2 interoperability is well recognized by NATO bodies for defence planning, training, exercises and support to operations • A NATO effort is necessary to define and standardize M&S-C2 interoperability • The Coalition BML Technical Activity is based upon voluntary contributions from Nations and provides insights regarding the usefulness of M&S-C2 interoperability and capability it can offer to coalition forces MSG-048 3

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Objectives • Evaluate the available specification of a Coalition BML and to assess operational benefits to C2 and M&S communities • Conduct experimentation with national existing systems that have been made compliant with this specification • Recommend a C-BML specification for standardization consideration by NATO • Provide input to SISO in standardizing and improving M&S-C2 interoperability for automatic, rapid and unambiguous command and control of one by the other MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Program of Work and Deliverables 2006 2007 2008 2009 Substantiation for a NATO C- Implementation of C-BML BML Feed back lessons Reports learned to SISO C- BML PDG I/ITSEC Move to MIP Design for a NATO C- BML Demonstration C-BML ITEC Experimentation & Military needs Education Test bed capability Technical requirements Align data of Design, Goals, Priorities ACT participating systems and Scope I/ITSEC Integrate systems Perform Experimentation I/ITSEC Specifications for reference implementation with operational users Develop experiments and scenario roadmap Release open source C-BML Identify National candidate systems reference implementation 2006 2007 2008 2009 MSG-048 4

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Past and current roadmap • Prove the feasibility of the concept • ET-016 demonstration during 2005 NMSG conference • Share knowledge and get the same know-how • IITSEC 2007 and 2008 technical demonstration on NATO booth • Perform operational assessment • Conduct 2009 an experimentation involving military SMEs • Demonstrate the efficiency of CBML with multiple C2 & simulation • Collect via MOM & MOP end users required improvements • Provide information and education on NATO C-BML Conduct a 2010 NMSG symposium with GMU • MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Purpose of ET-016 demonstration • Demonstrate the feasibility of a C2IEDM Web Services interface between national C2IS and M&S systems • Indentify limitations of current standards that must be addressed by MSG-048 • Build experience to help structure the TA APLET Push CoA COA Def. Push CoA Simulation Pull CoA BML Web services C2IEDM Augmented CAPES with APLET BML JSAF COA Definition Simulation MSG-048 5

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language MSG-048 Scenario CJTF TACP ACC 43 MNB 3 (GBR) ATF 1 (USA) TF 2 (NOR) TF 2 (NLD) TF Caspian Sea Region A/1-66 AR 1 MBT SQN A Team Mech B/1-66 AR 3 Mech Coy B Team Mech B/1-12 Mech 4 Mech Coy C Team AR C/1-22 Mech MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Purpose of 2007 experiment • Demonstrate C2-Sim interoperability • 8 systems/components (from 5 different Nations) • Work in concert orchestrated by the use of JBML • Show simulated units can be commanded directly • The commander (nor the operator of his C2 system) does not need any knowledge about the simulation system • Demonstrate the potential of C-BML • Easy to expand and to adjust to new kinds of tasks MSG-048 6

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Lessons learned • It requires significant effort from participating Nations to bring, adapt, integrate systems together in a short period of time (6 months) • Internet Reference implementation made this task possible and has given Nations the capability to test before integration and to be more effective • Simulations used were improved to behave as automated as possible • In principle all Nations are now technically able to share the same information • A list of improvements have been collected for future development of reports, language and data model extensions and scenario’s • Military SME involvement from Nations is key in the development of consistent scenario’s, shared understanding of doctrine and military terminology MSG-048 7

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Purpose of 2008 experiment • Demonstrate 2-way C2-Sim interoperability • 8 systems/components (from 6 different Nations) • Work in concert enabled by IBML WS and JBML Order • Highlight improvements since last year • automated generation of situation reports (spot and ground truth) from simulations using IBML reports • display those reports in C2IS to enable the commander to reflect on new orders or FRAGO as required • reduction of “man-in-the-loop”; the C2IS interface being able to translate orders according to the C-BML grammar • introduction of air operations that proves multiple domains JBML capabilities MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language MSG-048 8

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Lessons learned • Time Management • C2IS displays a variety of status with different times of occurrence • There is a time delay in availability of information • Define expected performance of the web services • Simulation execution management • C2IS does not control simulation (start, stop, freeze, speed, …) • Create a specification the way the simulation uses the WS • Reporting frequency • Is strongly linked with simulation speed • Could overwhelm C2IS • Filter pulled reports : publish and subscribe mechanism regards to units and sender • Simulation initialization process should be included MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language More lessons learned • BML complements Multilateral Interoperability Program • MIP developed for C2 interoperability during mission execution • MIP covers the exchange of OOB, actions, features, units location, status, holdings, and enemy situation (JC3IEDM core management) • MIP has exchange mechanism based on subscription and publication using data replication • Collaborative Planning can combine MIP and C-BML • Initialize C2 OOB and initial state using MIP • Exchange multiple plans and reports using C-BML • C-BML supports alternative views - allows collaborative planning during mission execution • Web services support collaboration MSG-048 9

2/4/09 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Operational architecture for 2009 experimentation ICC SICF Ba,leview Brigade CP (TACP) (G3) (G2) PAFAD NorTAC ABCS Ba+alion CP (66 Btn) (22Bn) (Recce Squad) ISIS Ennemy CP MSG-048 MSG-048 Coalition Battle Management Language Technical architecture for 2009 experimentation SICF Ba,leview MISSION REHEARSAL ICC SIMBAD JC3IEDM + JSAF UAV SimulaHon DIS IBML WEB SERVICES OneSAF NorTAC PAFAD ISIS ABCS MSG-048 10