Industry White Board Session

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Industry White Board Session"

Alexander Atkinson
10 years ago
Views:

1 Industry White Board Session SYNOPSIS AFCEA White Board Lunch

2 SYNOPSIS On Jan. 14, 2015, the U.S. Army Program Executive Office Command, Control and Communications - Tactical (PEO C3T), partnered with AFCEA APG Chapter, hosted a White Board Session with industry partners regarding capability challenges supporting the Army s future tactical network development. The open-forum discussion did not involve specific contracting opportunities, but rather highlighted technical priorities to encourage conversation and collaboration to meet potential future needs. This was the first of several planned White Board Sessions supporting PEO C3T s network modernization roadmap. Lessons Learned: (1) There is value in open dialogue sessions. (2) Need additional program manager participation,. (3) Future sessions would benefit from additional industry technical representatives in attendance. (4) Future sessions must focus on one or two topics only (5) Army will also develop feedback and notes into working documents that are more detailed for distribution after the event. Top feedback from industry included comments: (a) Future sessions should include CERDEC developers and leadership. Path Ahead: PEO will work with CERDEC for more in depth participation. (b) Industry would like to see how C3T challenges map with CERDEC S&T priorities. Path Ahead: Ongoing work with CERDEC and PEO technical management division to map priorities and determine what avenues are appropriate for industry collaboration and agreements. (c) Desire for more broad PM participation. Path Ahead: PMs will continue to engage industry at a variety of forums (d) STARNet: industry would like clear path on how Program Office intends to seek solutions that could solve STARNet challenges. Path Ahead: PEO working to codify process to evaluate potential technical solutions to STARNet challenges, this process (working jointly with CERDEC, ACC and others) is shaping while also working resourcing for key STARNet solutions at Army level. Both the process and resource efforts will take time to mature, PEO will continue to update industry as progress is made. (e) Additional information requested as to implementation timelines and modernization approach for Mission Command computing environments. Path Ahead: Program Office will partner with AFCEA to host a focused white board and technical discussion session outlining the key components of Mission Command standardization and computing environments. This session will include development path, integration, program timelines and key technical challenges. These topics will make up the first follow-on technical focused White Board session. Industry discussion included development, challenges and potential technical solutions for two key priorities for 2020: Enhanced Reliable Communications and Ubiquitous Collaboration. 15 January 2014 DRAFT - U//FOUO 2

3 Capability Challenge Synopsis Enhanced Reliable Communications Low cost aerial tier for terrestrial ground network thickening Protected communication enhancements High altitude, long endurance communication platforms Comment: Is Army looking at Psuedolites Comment: Is Army looking at or partnered with DARPA programs (EDICT Edge-Directed Cyber Technologies for Reliable Mission Communications) answer yes, but also looking at what industry has developed outside of that process Comment: Processes should be bandwidth aware / bandwidth adaptive Potential capability Discussions: Inmarsat GX Passive optical networks Military applications of LTE Ubiquitous collaboration Unanticipated partners and data are easily integrated Solution scales to all Unified Action Partners Desire and comment: Automatically identify and visualize the configuration of the network Industry comment: solutions exist or are working to allow for auto discovery of network, who is on the network, etc. Army comment: industry and Army both must work with other partners bring their resources forward (distributed mission training, etc.) Industry comment: NGA/AOSP spending a lot of money of on App environment will C3T pull lessons learned? Other Comments Master Data Management syncing data (for both ubiquitous collaboration and reliable communications) MDM like device manager for Quality of Service for devices Move the applications to the data, not the data to the apps helps reduce data duplication over network No data / inverse of data report by exception 15 January 2014 DRAFT - U//FOUO 3

4 STARNet Status Report Concept and Strategy Alignment: Synchronized Next-Gen capabilities/technologies with emerging Force 2025 Objectives Requirements Prioritization: Prioritized Next-Gen capability requirements in coordination with TRADOC Budget and Modernization Plan Synchronization: Aligning POM strategy to enable STARNet execution S&T Investment Synchronization: Established Army RDECOM support of Next-Gen capability developments Prioritized POM Initiatives: Prioritized STARNet initiatives competing as part of POM PEO C3T Technology Roadmap Next Steps: Update STARNet roadmap from POM results, S&T and Industry technology maturity Feed C3T System of Systems Engineering Process Generate priorities for C3T POM submission 4

5 Prioritizing Tactical Network Capability Development Tactical Network Gaps Command and Control On-the-Move Operating in a Satellite Contested Environment Dismounted, Networked Small Team Operations Simplified Command Post Operations Thickening and Healing the Network Enabling Expeditionary Operations Rapid Unit Task Reorg Integrated Air-Ground Operations G3 Focused End States & TRADOC Mission Command Network Refinement (MCNR) Lines of Effort Army Network Campaign Plan Synchronized Strategic Approach through Tactical Network Policy and Capability Delivery Priorities to Address Warfighter s Mission Command Network Gaps through

6 Capability Challenges: 2020 Enhanced Reliable Communications Low cost aerial tier for terrestrial ground network thickening Protected communication enhancements High altitude, long endurance communication platforms Dynamic Spectrum Access Frequency agility & frequency re-use Available spectrum pooled rather then statically assigned Compliance w/ National Spectrum Policy Solutions for spectrum constrained environments Ubiquitous collaboration Unanticipated partners and data are easily integrated Solution scales to all Unified Action Partners Operational Challenges and Technical Solutions 6

7 Capability Challenges: 2030 Adaptive network and mission command Network state adaptive software services management Dynamic Network Connectivity Especially military use of commercial infrastructure when available Zero end user provisioning of tactical devices and services High capacity Ubiquitous access to rich media, full motion video, collaboration and large data sets To the tactical edge / dismounted soldier Cloud based tactical cyber repository and services Intelligent, always updating, always in sync Operational Challenges and Technical Solutions 7

8 Capability Challenges: 2040 Modular platform (soldier, light vehicle, heavy vehicle, command post) integration solutions Swappable equipment with no/minimal ECP or re-cert. E.g., RF Components, C4ISR Components Repurposable equipment. E.g., Laser designator one day, communications device the next Computer assisted decision making Data reduction and analysis COA suggestion in response to the tactical environment Operational Challenges and Technical Solutions 8

Systems Engineering and Integration Efforts. 11 Dec 2013

Systems Engineering and Integration Efforts 11 Dec 2013 Mr. Leo Smith Director, PoR Engineering Support ASA(ALT) System of Systems Engineering & Integration Directorate (SOSE&I) Approved for Public Release;