AFCEA ‘INTEROPERABILITY REVISITED’ C3 INTEROPERABILITY AFCEA ‘INTEROPERABILITY REVISITED’ 16 June 10 Dick Whittingham Principal Technical Coordinator NATO HQ Consultation, Command and Control Staff

Implications of Interoperability Keys Actions and Initiatives CONTENT Overview Implications of Interoperability Keys Actions and Initiatives

Interoperability is a challenge! OVERVIEW Interoperability is a challenge! For C3, lack of interoperability means: No network enabled environment No information sharing Move to a federated networked environment makes interoperability central to National as well as NATO activity Pre-requisite for effective operations in the real world

RELATIONSHIPS For C3, our required capabilities are always in the context of the federated (NATO, national and multinational) networked environment In NATO, required capabilities are defined and implemented via the NATO Defence Planning Process and the Operational Planning Process Interoperability is a characteristic of a capability Standardization is a tool to support interoperability

FEDERATED ENVIRONMENT ACO HQ NATO JFC HQ NATO STATIC DJSE NATO DEPLOYED INFORMATION FLOW MARITIME CC HQ LAND CC HQ AIR CC HQ SOCC NATIONAL DEPLOYED NATO TASK FORCE NATIONAL AIR FORCES & BASES NATIONAL FORCES

Requirements unclear and changing Dynamic ad hoc solutions needed OPERATIONAL REALITY Forces come as they are Interoperability low Requirements unclear and changing Dynamic ad hoc solutions needed Work-arounds AMN Identification to Endorsement Cost estimation Authorisation Implementation Handover Bridge to the future Parallel staffing CRO PLANNING POLITICAL DIRECTION CONOPS FORCE ACTIVATION DIRECTIVE GENERATION CJSOR OPLAN OPERATIONAL PLANNING OPERATIONAL PLANNING

INTEROPERABILITY KEYS Understanding and documenting the interoperability requirement (IOR) Identifying solutions to the IOR Implementation of the solutions by all parties Test and validation of the implemented solutions

REQUIREMENT SOLUTION IMPLEMENT PROVE NATO DEFENCE PLANNING PROCESS (NDPP) Political Guidance 1 Requirements & Shortfalls 2 Set Targets 3 Implement 4 Review 5 1 INT PG LoA Pol – Mil Analysis Future Trends Operations PS Minimum Capabilities Requirements (MCR) REQUIREMENT Lessons Learned 2 NATO and National Existing and Planned Capabilities Compare Fulfilment Exercise Surplus Capability RISK Analysis Capability Shortfalls Capabilities to be Maintained Prioritise Shortfalls Note Synopsis of MCR including Priority Shortfall Areas SOLUTION National Targets Multi-National Targets Develop Targets – apportion Determine Capability Shortfall Solutions NATO Targets IMPLEMENT Associated Risk Agree Targets Reasonable Challenge PROVE National / Multi-National Implementation NATO Monitor / Facilitate Support NATO Capability Survey Progress Report Annual Capabilities Report

BALANCING REQUIREMENTS AND RESOURCES PROCESS RELATIONSHIPS DEFENCE PLANNING Identification to Endorsement Cost estimation Authorisation Implementation Handover Bridge to the future Parallel staffing CRO PLANNING POLITICAL DIRECTION CONOPS FORCE ACTIVATION DIRECTIVE GENERATION CJSOR OPLAN OPERATIONAL PLANNING OPERATIONAL PLANNING 2 3 4 5 PG INT Pol – Mil Analysis PS Operations Lessons Learned Future Trends Minimum Capabilities Requirements Compare Fulfilment Exercise Surplus Capability Capabilities to be Maintained Capability Shortfalls RISK Analysis PLoCS Acknowledge PLoCS Determine Capability Shortfall Solutions Develop Targets – apportion National Targets Multi-National Targets NATO Targets Reasonable Challenge Associated Risk National / Multi-National Implementation NATO Monitor / Facilitate Support NATO Capability Survey Progress Report Annual Capabilities Report NATO and National Existing and Planned Capabilities Step 1 Agree Targets LoA BALANCING REQUIREMENTS AND RESOURCES

COHERENT ARCHITECTURE PROCESS RELATIONSHIPS DEFENCE PLANNING Identification to Endorsement Cost estimation Authorisation Implementation Handover Bridge to the future Parallel staffing CRO PLANNING POLITICAL DIRECTION CONOPS FORCE ACTIVATION DIRECTIVE GENERATION CJSOR OPLAN OPERATIONAL PLANNING OPERATIONAL PLANNING 2 3 4 5 PG INT Pol – Mil Analysis PS Operations Lessons Learned Future Trends Minimum Capabilities Requirements Compare Fulfilment Exercise Surplus Capability Capabilities to be Maintained Capability Shortfalls RISK Analysis PLoCS Acknowledge PLoCS Determine Capability Shortfall Solutions Develop Targets – apportion National Targets Multi-National Targets NATO Targets Reasonable Challenge Associated Risk National / Multi-National Implementation NATO Monitor / Facilitate Support NATO Capability Survey Progress Report Annual Capabilities Report NATO and National Existing and Planned Capabilities Step 1 Agree Targets LoA INTEROPERABILITY COHERENT ARCHITECTURE MCR PSA TARGETS COHERENT PROCESS

ACTIONS AND INITIATIVES NATO Policies, Processes and Tools Acquisition Process Reform Common framework, ownership, funding scope, simpler Principles for C3 Testing Reference facilities: certification Information Management NIMA, information sharing environment NATO Interoperability Standards and Profiles Linkage to architecture: SIOP

ACTIONS AND INITIATIVES Strategic Commands Develop generic deployed ops C3 requirement Simplify capability management Industry Really adopt open standards Support establishment of distributed Reference Facilities for testing conformance to NATO agreed standards Support spiral development and delivery

MESSAGES Interoperability in the C3 environment is now a core attribute for NATO and Nations Processes need to be re-focussed, funds need to be re-prioritised We need to solve tomorrow’s problem as well as todays