Tom Herald 1

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

ConOps Development in a Highly Networked System

Tom HeraldSenior Staff Systems Engineer

Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors9500 Godwin Drive 105/013Manassas, VA 20110-4157

tom.herald@lmco.com(703) 367-2973

FAX: (703) 367-3942

Dinesh Verma, Ph.D.Professor and Director, SDOE Program

Stevens Institute of TechnologyCastle Point on Hudson

dverma@stevens-tech.eduHoboken, NJ 07030

(201) 216-8645 (or 8334)FAX: (201) 216-5080

Tom Herald 2

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

NCS ConOps Development Agenda

• Current Tops-down ConOps Development• Network Centric Warfare• Bottoms-up Performance Capability

Assessment• Research Considerations• Performance Assessment• Summary

Tom Herald 3

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Military ConOps Development and System Requirements Generalized Methodology Today:

System-LevelConcept of Operations

Document Contents

Element 1 Element 2 Element 3 Element 4 Element NElement 5

Sub-SystemSolution Elements

. . . New

Element 1New

Element 2New

Element M. . .

Systems EngineerResponsibleFocal Point

Multitude of Stakeholder Needs

Domestic ForcesCoalition Forces

Training & DoctrineSupportability

Non-War Operations

Program ControlFinancial Control

Political InputsPlanning Needs

Others . . .

Operations Program & Financial

Tom Herald 4

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Sensor

Control/Comm Grid

Command & Control

Information

Control

Shooter

Information Grid

Information

Sensor Grid

Information

Control

Platform Information

Raw Data ToInformation

DecisionMaker

Network Centric WarfareSource: Vision of NCW provided in a Department of Defense Report to Congress –

September 2001 – http://www.c3i.osd.mil/NCW/

Tom Herald 6

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Research Opportunity in Support of NCS Systems Engineer

System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4 System NSystem 5

Existing and Legacy Systems

. . .

Legacy Systems Network

New Systems ConOps

NewSystem 1

NewSystem M...

Network-CentricConcept of Operations

Document Content

Multitude of Stakeholder Needs

Domestic ForcesCoalition Forces

Training & DoctrineSupportability

Non-War Operations

Program ControlFinancial Control

Political InputsPlanning Needs

Others . . .

Operations Program & FinancialNCS Systems

Engineer - ProgramFocal Point

Research Area #1:

Performance Capability Assessment

• Benefit of Network Connectivity

• System Redundancy• Develop a Total

Capability Listing• Dynamic vs. Static

Stakeholder Requirements

Research Area #3:New Development

ConOps & Supportability

• New System Operational ConOps Input

• Technology Evolution Guidance

• Supportability Balance

• Performance Capability-to-Stakeholder Mapping• Affordability, Schedule and Value Trade

Optimizations • Identification of New-Development System Needs

Research Area #2:

Operational Mapping

& Optimizations

Tom Herald 7

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Research Opportunity in Support of NCS Systems Engineer

System 1 System 2 System 3 System 4 System NSystem 5

Existing and Legacy Systems

. . .

Legacy Systems Network

New Systems ConOps

NewSystem 1

NewSystem M...

Network-CentricConcept of Operations

Document Content

Multitude of Stakeholder Needs

Domestic ForcesCoalition Forces

Training & DoctrineSupportability

Non-War Operations

Program ControlFinancial Control

Political InputsPlanning Needs

Others . . .

Operations Program & FinancialNCS Systems

Engineer - ProgramFocal Point

Research Area #1:

Performance Capability Assessment

• Benefit of Network Connectivity

• System Redundancy• Develop a Total

Capability Listing• Dynamic vs. Static

Stakeholder Requirements

Research Area #3:New Development

ConOps & Supportability

• New System Operational ConOps Input

• Technology Evolution Guidance

• Supportability Balance

• Performance Capability-to-Stakeholder Mapping• Affordability, Schedule and Value Trade

Optimizations • Identification of New-Development System Needs

Research Area #2:

Operational Mapping

& Optimizations

Tom Herald 8

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Total Performance of a Network-Centric System ≈ N N M

PNCS = Pi + ( (Pi ∩ Pj) k ); For all i ≠ j AND

i = 1 i = 1 k = 1 where k > 0 (i.e. the system j = 1 pairing has connectivity)

• PNCS = The total performance of the Network-Centric System• Pi = The performance capability of a Stand Alone System (no network

connection)• Pj = The performance capability of a Stand Alone System (no network

connection)• N = The number of Independent Systems (Network Nodes)• M = The number of independent functional connection paths for a Pi and Pj

pairing• Pi ∩ Pj = This intersection represents the resultant performance from the system

connectivity, which could be Zero if there is no system advantage or detractor, Positive if the connectivity advantages the ConOps (Mission Needs) or Negative if the connectivity is not required by the ConOps (i.e. outside of the mission performance boundaries)

NOTE: System Triples, Quadruples, etc. can also be considered as necessary.

Tom Herald 9

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Measuring the Performance of the NCS?• Individual System Contribution (as understood by it’s

own ConOps document)• Networking of the systems results in potentially

positive or negative Performance Benefit.• The linkage of systems offers new direct functionality• The linkage of systems offers an indirect functionality

benefit (i.e., multiple path redundancy, degraded modes of operability)

• Negative linkage impacts such as Bandwidth overload, un-needed system-to-system connectivity leading lower system availability with no new performance benefit.

Changing Program Needs Drives Varying NCS Solutions

Tom Herald 10

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Direct Connectivity in NCS• Intentional Connectivity• Mission Performance requires linkage (Secure Wire,

Microwave)• Connect of System pairs yields summation of the

separate functionality of the 2 systems PLUS New capabilities that the linkage allows

• Possible Redundancy or Conflicts due to identical input types yielding different results (i.e. meteorological reports) that will require arbitration

• Example: Connecting an Army Company information to a Theater Battle Command center. Direct Connectivity to provide better decisions.

Tom Herald 11

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Indirect Connectivity in NCS• Unintentional Connectivity• Result of WAN connections• No Direct ConOps Requirement fulfilled by the

connectivity• Multi-path connectivity - Could be an advantage• Example: Weather Radar Connectivity in a NCS.

Valuable to those systems that use weather in decisions, and useless to all other LAN systems. Thus connectivity is available indirectly, but potentially not valuable.

Tom Herald 12

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

General Metrics Structure for NCS Systems

Axis Y = Capabilities per System, N.Axis X = Metrics, M, for each capability (as appropriate)Axis Z = Networking Advantages (or Disadvantages)

M MetricsSystem Unique

Common MetricsN Systems

X Ci Capabilities

N Systems Network

Interactions (if any at all)

Metrics Categories:1. System Architecture2. Data/Information &

Networking3. Supportability4. Logistics5. Technology Evolution6. Cost Metrics

Tom Herald 13

NDIA 6th Annual Systems Engineering Conference October 2003

Conclusions• NCS Complexity drives the need to provide the NCS

Engineer (or team) with more insight for mapping out a NCS ConOps.

• Must Support NCS Engineer with:⁻ Bottoms-up Performance Capability Assessment

Method⁻ Providing Mapping from Possible to Stakeholder

Needs⁻ Prioritizing of System Deployment⁻ Optimizing Solution Recommendation

• Facilitate variable solution sets within ConOps Development

• Identify Gaps and Drive New System ConOps Development