2003 National Fire Control Symposium NIST/Raytheon Joint Paper Application and Benefits of the NIST RCS Architecture as the Net-Centric Warfare Command and Control Standard Abstract Dr. James Albus Dr. Al Fermelia NIST Raytheon The goal of the Future Combat System (FCS) is to achieve a lighter, more lethal, and highly deployable force. To a large degree, this depends on the development of intelligent Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGV) such as the Unmanned Armed Reconnaissance Vehicle. It will also require the integration of information from, and command and control of, multiple sensors, including those on Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAV) and Unattended Ground Sensors (UGS). To achieve the necessary level of machine intelligence and human-robot interaction, a systematic architecture such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s 4D/RCS reference model architecture, DARPA’s Mixed Initiative Control of Automa-teams (MICA), and Raytheon’s CLM (close loop methodology) is required. The combined architecture can be hosted in a Net Centric Command & Control Laboratory to validate its feasibility and benefits to intelligent distributed battle management, command and control for transformational systems such as FCS.

Content Objective and Approach Background Readiness Status of Components Overview of : - NIST Architecture - DARPA Closed Loop Battle Management - Raytheon’s Closed Loop Methodology Implementation Notions Next Steps

Objective and Approach Demonstrate the ability to fuse information obtained from UGS with respect to UGV and UAV platforms in the FCS context Approach Implement the framework of DARPA’s Closed Loop Battle Management and Raytheon’s Closed Loop Methodology into the NIST Hierarchical RCS Architecture Validate the Resulting Integrated Command and Control System in a Command and Control Battle Laboratory

Intelligent Net-Centric Approach Overview CLM Closed Loop Methodology (Raytheon) Simultaneously addresses identification, estimation and control problem Intelligent Net-Centric BMC4I Adds ability to model the entire battlespace - including adversaries Mixed Initiative Control of Automa-teams (DARPA) Addresses Hierarchical battlespace management and distributed control of semi- autonomous systems MICA + Enhances accuracy of world model - improving anticipatory planning 4D/Real Time Control System Methodology (NIST) Addresses intelligent control as a conceptual framework, a reference model architecture, and as engineering guidelines 4D/RCS + Intelligent adaptive real time control of distributed sensor and weapons systems

FCS Fusion Levels

Background~ Simplistic Definition of FCS Fusion Levels   Level 0:  Organize Level 1:  Identify/Correlate (Beginning of situational awareness) Level 2:  Aggregate/Resolve (Situational awareness increases and beginning of situational understanding) Level 3:  Interpret/Determine/Predict (Situational understanding achieved) Level 4:  Assess (Review performance; Adjust accordingly) Level 5:  Visualize (Feedback; Redirect activities) Level 1:  Identify/Correlate (Beginning of situational awareness)

Background ~ The FCS Fusion Problem & UGV Tasks Autonomy All FCS sensor/platforms must autonomously (no human-in-the-loop) fuse to Level 0/1 and update the Distributed Information Data Base (DIDB) or FCS is at risk . Objective Force concepts are heavily dependent on dramatic advances in fusion technology. Specifically the ability to fuse measurement information relative to: (i) mission distance , and (ii) velocity requirements key research areas in the field of autonomous UGV’s has been the development of a type of mobility often called A-B autonomy.

Background: Relationship of Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) Tasks to Autonomy

Readiness Status of Components Maturity of fusion technology has a significant impact on force structure in the Objective Force. There must be a careful assessment of what is technologically achievable, when, and the force structure needed to bridge the gap between desired and available capabilities

Architecture the Infrastructure Necessary to Support Fusion Solution

4D/RCS Features Only architecture that has been extensively tested on UGVs under conditions and on terrain consistent with operational deployment. Only system that has been tested extensively on applications using real hardware. UGVs using 4D/RCS were recently certified at a technology readiness level of TRL-6 by Boeing, the Lead System Integrator for the FCS program.

MICA Closed Loop Battle Management ~ a Fusion Solution Canonical structure applies at any echelon Frequently metaphorical Defines measurements required to make next move Control & estimation usually not separable

Mixed Initiative Control of Automa-teams (MICA) Cooperative Battle Management of Teamed UAVs Objective: Develop theory, algorithms, software, and modeling/simulation capabilities for hierarchical battlespace management and distributed control of semi-autonomous systems Achieve M operators << N vehicles 1:5 by ‘03, 1:30 by ‘05 Speed the sensor-to-shooter cycle Cooperatively couple sensing and strike Enable flexible self-reorganizing teams Allow event-driven dynamic replanning Process Communicate Sense Execute Kill Plan Cooperatively Assess Sense Kill Process Free operators of dull, dirty, and dangerous tasks via the collective power of automa-teams 1

CLM Overview ~ Modeling Solutions CLM the Infrastructure to Solve the Estimation Identification and Control Problem of Sensor Fusion CLM Overview ~ Modeling Solutions

Implementation Notions Notions as to the implementation of the NIST 4D/RCS Architecture as a Net-Centric Warfare Command and Control Standard which utilizes the DARPA Closed Loop Battle Management Concept Augmented by the Raytheon’s CLM validated via hosting in the USAF Command and Control Battlelab will now be presented, i.e., -Field Tests of Demo III Experimental Unmanned Ground Vehicle Controlled by 4D/RCS - Computer Architecture for Future UGV -Raytheon’s CLM Enhancements to DARPA’s Closed Loop Battle Management

4D/RCS for DEMO III Experimental Unmanned Vehicle

Experimental Unmanned Ground Vehicle Field Tests of Demo III Experimental Unmanned Ground Vehicle Controlled by 4D/RCS

10 Computer Architecture for Future UGV

DARPA’s MICA Approach

MICA Closed Loop Battle Management ~ a Fusion Solution Objective: Achieve SEAD The Commander is an actuator Plant Better Performance Better Info Better Decisions Decision & Control Commander/ Operator Battlespace Decision Aids Courses of Action Achieved SEAD Embedded Hierarchy Better status knowledge Measured status Estimation Sensors Canonical structure applies at any echelon Frequently metaphorical Defines measurements required to make next move Control & estimation usually not separable

MICA Limitation ~ Open Loop Battlefield

MICA Enhancement via CLM

MICA Technical Approach Team assignments  State estimator Estimates of vehicle survivability/availability, and task completion probabilities and times Tasks, resources Composition Controller and Task Terrain, weather, adversary order of battle Team Composition Dynamic allocation of UAV assets Team Composition and Task Plants (Multiple teams) (Tactical events) Estimates of event completion probabilities and times Event sequences Team Dynamics and Tactics Options Constraints Threat detections , damage assessments Team Dynamics & Tactics Collective, package level strategy (Multiple activities) Path Control Plants (Multiple vehicles) Vehicle controller ( Kinematic ) (Paths) Estimates of projected paths Positions, velocities Feasible missions Target, threat states Cooperative Path Controller jammers Plant (Vehicle Kinematics) Team Dynamics and Tactics Plants Weapons, Cooperative Path Planning Threat detection, avoidance and engagement Battlespace (Adversaries and environment) state estimator Uncertainty Management Robust/adaptive operation in an uncertain, adversarial environment Human displays Human control interface Human Supervisor(s) Variable Initiative Interaction Support dialogue and transfer of authority between operators and UAVs

Next Steps Extend NIST 4DRCS DEMO III Control of a UGV to include the UAV Submit Implementation Notions to USAF Command & Control Battlelab Duplicate this extension while being hosted at the USAF Command & Control BattleLab. Thus validating the notion of Net Centric Command & Control Validate FCS Level 1 Sensor Fusion via Net Centric Communication

Implementation of Approach to be a Demonstration of FCS Level 1 Fusion in the Air Force’s Command &Control Battlelab USAF Command & Control Battlelab Mission The Command & Control Battlelab is a small, highly focused organization whose mission is to rapidly identify and prove the worth of innovative ideas for Command & Control which improve the ability of the United States Air Force to execute its core competencies to support Joint Warfighting. We look for great ideas involving technology, concepts, doctrine, tactics, techniques and procedures to improve C2 of aerospace forces. Our ideas come from the field, the research and acquisition communities, headquarters, industry, academia and in-house. We rapidly research ideas and select those with the highest payoff potential as initiatives for assessment. The C2B will explore and measure the potential worth of these initiatives using courses of action ranging from modeling & simulation to actual employment of forces in exercise environments. At the completion of the assessment specific recommendations are briefed directly to senior USAF leadership.