6/11/2015 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. WESAS 2000 Re-Integrating the Operational Architecture Michael P

04/18/23 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved.

WESAS 2000Re-Integrating the Operational Architecture

Michael P. Minette

System Architect

Raytheon Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence Systems

Fullerton, CA

May 8, 2000

2 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved.

04/18/23

Briefing Objectives

Share Raytheon C3I organization experiences in use (and reuse) of architecture-based solutions

Indicate some of Raytheon’s present and projected future architecture objectives

Focus on a particularly challenging technical area in the use of COTS architecture based solutions

Suggest ideas and research opportunities that may lead to new or revised methods and tools


04/18/23

Command & Control in a Joint Ops Center and Air Ops Center

AEW

Radars

Civil ATC Center

AAA

SAM

Control Reporting Center

• Tracking• Identification• Threat evaluation• Weapon assignment• Weapons control

• Tracking• Identification• Threat evaluation• Weapon assignment• Weapons control

Air Operations Center Land Operations Center

Tactical Fighter

Air DefenseGround

Environment

Command and Control• Preparation• Planning• Direction• Coordination• Monitoring & Assessment

Brigade HQ

Battalion HQ

Brigade HQ

Naval Operations Center

Joint Operations Center


04/18/23

System Architecture Views

System View• The realization of a particular, actual system • Implements functionality and concepts of

the operational architecture,• Employs elements of the technical architecture • standard views

- block diagrams, - data flows, process flows, - allocation plans, - etc

Operational View• The form, structure, and interrelationships of the

- narrow application domain, - users, - functions, - data, - system mission

• Describes the conceptual solution in terms of the operational concept

Technical View• Describes the logical

structure, content and relationships

- standards, - processes, - guidelines, - common operating

infrastructure, - approved parts lists, - schema, - reference models

• The Product Architecture Establishes- Common Processes and Standards- Common Components and Artifacts- Common Environment

» Infrastructure» Foundation Components » Information Model

• Provides the Common Elements & Processes from which ManyCustomized C3I SystemsAre Possible.

Operational

Architecture

Technical

Architecture

System

Architecture

...

System

Architecture

PGM D

System

Architecture

PGM C

System

Architecture

PGM B

System

Architecture

PGM A


04/18/23

Raytheon’s Pre-COTS Process

System View• The results were highly capable systems,

uniquely optimized; some are still around

Operational View• Significant engineering effort expended in

operations analysis, acquiring domain expertise by hiring, training, and practice.

• Analysis and modeling tools used extensively

Technical View• Components and

subsystems are designed and implemented specifically for unique sets of requirements.

• Significant reuse of software and architecture within narrow domain

• But software is always modified to fit operational needs

• Prior to the widespread availability of reliable COTS components and architecture frameworks, the operations view and concepts drove Raytheon’s architecture strategy.

- Operational needs defined requirements

- Requirements determined architecture and design

- Design got implemented from scratch or modification of similar domain specific component

Operational

Architecture

ProprietaryTechnical

Architecture

System

Architecture

...

System

Architecture

PGM D

System

Architecture

PGM C

System

Architecture

PGM B

System

Architecture

PGM A


04/18/23

Transitioning to a COTS Architecture Process

System View• Many systems have successfully

incorporated some COTS by:- significant work behind the

scenes to make things fit- forcing the operations to fit the

general model.• Neither method makes the best use of

the architecture-based approach

Operational View• However, the advent of COTS disintegrated the

linear, closely coupled relationship between the operations view and the technical

• Generalized capabilities often do not fit domain specific operational needs well

Technical View • Increasing effort

devoted to working-around “features” of COTS.

• The ball peen hammer approach to integration

• Drive towards COTS, common, open architectures pushed by:

- Increasing complexity, sizes, numbers;

- The ongoing information technology revolution places extraordinary demands on systems.

- Desire for more advanced features

- Economics

- Healthy competition

Operational

Architecture

Common/COTSTechnical

Architecture

System

Architecture

...

System

Architecture

PGM D

System

Architecture

PGM C

System

Architecture

PGM B

System

Architecture

PGM A


04/18/23

Examples of Operational Mismatch

Using COTS HMI and information management software

— General purpose DBMS and GIF systems often cannot meet domain specific performance and operational needs

> track display

— Commercially available domain specific DBMS or GIFs are often too narrowly focused

> ODS ToolBox

Using COTS system control software

— Conflict between COTS software’s user model and situational imperatives: user need to force an action

> Network management, security, workflow

Commercial maintenance practices and rapidly shifting marketplace

— 60 second emergency restart for ATC system nearly defeated by Network Router vendor firmware maintenance process


04/18/23

Research Opportunities

Raytheon is committed to the architecture based development strategy and to the use of COTS architectures and components

We see continuing challenges in matching general-purpose COTS to the operational imperatives of our domain specific products

Refinement of techniques for mapping operational requirements to architecture solutions will be highly beneficial, for example

— Refinement of existing Software Quality Engineering Methods

— Development of new, situational, operational-context-based modeling techniques


04/18/23

Refine Software Quality Engineering Methods

Software Quality Engineering concepts from mid 80’s may offer an assessment approach

Methodology Summary

— Establish list of desired quality factors

— Associate factors with testable criteria for each factor

— Then, for a particular system use the selected criteria to define specific testable requirements

Suggested Research Approach

— Identify and collect key operational factors

> Operationally significant features of COTS architectures and components

> The new operational criteria are likely to be refinements of the older quality criteria: interoperability, timeliness, accessibility, etc.

— Investigate techniques for measuring and comparing

— Experiment and test the process for technology selection and evaluation based on operational need


04/18/23

Situational Logic and Modeling

Situational logic is a fairly recent extension to logic that provides means to model and operate processes in context

The research objective is to develop means to employ situational knowledge and context information in reasoning about architecture alternatives

Situational, i.e., contextual models may provide:

— Means to incorporate operational view into effective system models earlier in the development lifecycle

— Such operational models could draw attention to the environmental or processing features that impact COTS selection

— This would provide the means to measure qualitative distances between operational and technical solution spaces

Note “Situation” has high relevance in Raytheon C3I systems:

— Situation Display, Situational Awareness are key operational concepts

— Changes in situation, rather than mode or state, tend to be the performance drivers and suitability


04/18/23

Summary

New advanced automation techniques and architecture-based engineering and products have great potential

New COTS architecture-based solutions are incorporated in Raytheon’s systems

— But, mismatch between the domain operational concept for the system and the operational concept inherent in the technology is a continuing challenge

Raytheon’s experience suggests the need for new techniques to improve use of the Operational Architecture

— To guide Technical Architecture definition and use

— For assessing and evaluating alternate implementations


04/18/23

References

Architecture

— C4ISR Architecture Framework, US Department of Defense, http://www.c3i.osd.mil/org/cio/i3/AWG_Digital_Library/index.htm

> The DoD top-down architecture strategy for C4I domain

— Defense Information Infrastructure Common Operating Environment (DII COE) Homepage, http://diicoe.disa.mil/coe/

> The DoD initiative for the Technical Architecture for the C4I domain

Software Quality Engineering

— “Specification of Software Quality Attributes”, Rome Air Development Center, RADC-TR-85-37

> RADC is now Rome Air Force Research Laboratory

— Software Quality Engineering, Michael Deutsch, Ronald Willis, Prentice Hall, 1988

Situational Logic

— Stanford Center for Studies in Language and Information, http://www-csli.stanford.edu

— The Situation in Logic, CSLI Lecture Notes, Jon Barwise, Stanford University Press

Documents

6/11/2015 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. WESAS 2000 Re-Integrating the Operational Architecture Michael P