JRAE 05 Quick Look Report

JRAE 05 was a distributed experiment investigating the technical viability of migration of current legacy systems involved in targeting to a Common Joint Target List Management (JTLM) service.  Spiral 1 was conducted 16 May - 2 June 2005 and Spiral 2 was conducted 13 -17 June 2005.  The event was conducted across the Distributed Research Enterprise Network (DREN) utilizing test facilities at the Joint Forces Command's Joint Service Interoperability Command (JSIC), USAF Electronic Systems Command (ESC) Hanscom, Naval Surface Warfare Systems Division Dahlgren, SPAWAR Systems Center (SSC) San Diego, SSC Charleston, Naval Research laboratory GIG Evaluation Facility, and the Marine Corp Tactical Systems Support Activity (MCTSSA).  Due to real world requirements, Army participation was facilitated at SSC San Diego.  The success of this experiment is directly related to the enthusiasm and support of the experiment sites and sponsors, Program Office involvement, GIG EF facilitation, and NRL and USNR assessment support.

Leveraging a multi-service-JFCOM sponsored 2004 Architecture Standards and Engineering Analysis White Paper on "Target List Management Migration Strategy in the Context of Time Sensitive Targeting", the primary goals of this experiment were to:

1)       Validate and assess the migration architecture of a Joint dynamic target list management capability in a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)

2)       Validate standards for information sharing across the Services for target management

3)       Assess the operational efficiencies to be gained from employing such an approach

4)       Assess the impact of an operational-like (2008 simulated GIG) network on a SOA service in terms of Quality of Service for tactical data

Based on a prototype XML schema agreed to by the participating military services, the JTLM service effort harmonized targeting data for both air and ground forces to provide a common approach to manage targets across the Joint and other agencies involved across the Area of Interest.  The JTLM Service provided three levels of detail. The minimal Summary level provided the What, When, Where for targets.  The Extended level provided additional data such as Target Priority, Percent Destroyed, Time Available, Protection Level, etc.  The Detailed level provided a Uniform Resource Indicator (URI) that would enable direct access to the detailed target data contained in the originating system. The JTLM Service updated all subscriber target lists as soon as changes were published to the JTLM service using Machine-to-Machine communication.  The potential of such a service is to:

1)       Increase situational awareness of targets in an Area of Interest for any authorized entity (Joint, Service, OGA, Coalition) with any legacy system

2)       Reduce the timeline for disparate units to assess and manage targets across emergent and preplanned missions

3)       Facilitate reduction of duplicate targets across legacy systems

4)       Use Machine to Machine (M2M) interactions and Business Process Language to minimize error, reduce time, and reduce war fighter workload

JRAE 05 involved multiple programs of record, all of whom implemented The JTLM service interface: the Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS), the Command and Control Personal Computer/Target Situational Awareness (C2PC/TSA), the Joint Targeting Toolbox (JTT), and the Theater Battle Management Core Systems (TBMCS). A Web browser interface was also developed.  Initial results from this limited objective systems engineering experiment:

a.          Spiral 1 showed that the Joint Target List Management service is technically feasible and an accelerated migration of these legacy systems to support a targeting service is achievable.  Each of the legacy systems was able to subscribe to a Community of Interest (COI) and automatically receive updates as they occurred on targets in that COI. They could publish targets from their system into the Common Target List, which displayed a short Target Summary, a more detailed Extended Target Data, and a Web URI that would link back to the originating system/source of that target.  As part of the "publish" function, targets were compared to targets in the existing Common Target list for potential duplicates and operators were given the option to publish or not.  Users were able to search for targets by a variety of attributes and update target details as new information became available.

Users were able to delete targets from the Common Target List.  The prototype schema and data standards were usable.  Additional warfighter input will enhance them.  The lessons learned here will contribute to the efforts of the JFCOM chartered TST COI and other like efforts to resolve data standards and definitions.

b.          Though the impact of this capability on operational concepts and doctrine still need to be addressed in follow-on events, at this level of experimentation it is clear that a JTLM service capability has the ability to increase operational efficiency.  The timeline for an operator to review a status of all targets in an AOI regardless of source system can be reduced from hours to minutes.  The automation of duplicate target checks across systems can significantly improve decision processes and increase efficient resource allocation.  The ability to compare preplanned and emerging target information can increase situational awareness and increase resource efficiency.

c.          Spiral 2 included experimentation with a QOS schema identified by the DoD QOS Working Group. In the future GIG environment, it will be critical to allocate priority to tactical data through a QOS schema.  In a number of Spiral 2 test events, tactical data was lost in a congested network lacking QoS prioritization.  Under these circumstances, a time sensitive targeting mission's odds of success would be questionable.  Additional development of specific QoS policies and procedures for prioritization of tactical time sensitive data "sets" will be needed.  One potential solution to this would be the use of a "Type of Service" bit to identify a specified data set that must receive top priority across the GIG.

A single prioritization schema, seen as a potential approach to this issue, applied to the numerous tactical applications effectively negates prioritization causing all tactical data to have the same priority for throughput.  Specific time sensitive data sets from these applications are what must receive prioritization rather than all data from those applications.  Dynamic prioritization of specific time sensitive tactical data sets via operator intervention or business process language is needed.

Based on the positive results of this JTLM service experiment, the C2PC / TSA Programs are quickly moving forward to incorporate the capability for operational use.  The remaining participants are currently evaluating the best way forward.

The Final Report for JRAE 05, which will be released in the September timeframe, will provide more detailed analysis on the JTLM service and QOS. As part of the Navy Sea Trial process, a Military Utility Assessment board will review results from JRAE 05.

This material is courtesy of:

Michele McGuire, SPAWAR 051-1
Chief Engineer's Office
Operational Experimentation & Assessments
Email:  michele.mcguire@navy.mil
Phone: 858.537.0192