3/17/2003FOUO IPR #3 NATO Sea-Strike 21, Team 2 Paid Proposal - Phase 0 Tumir Lead Systems Engineer for Equipment Precision Company, Inc.

3/17/2003FOUO Introduction & Overview Architecture Requirements Examine Four Architecture Solutions Trade-Offs of Each Solution Interfaces Use Cases Hardware and Equipment

3/17/2003FOUO Architecture Requirements A.Architecture components should fit in or compliment many alternative architectures (C4ISR, common imagery architecture, sensor processing, weapon systems) B.Support multiple services C.Expand to address greater load or processing requirements D.Support the common operating environment at the CAOC E.Capability to receive, process, exploit, store, and disseminate imagery products an imagery derived intel reports based on multi-source imagery from national and tactical sensors F.Capability to receive imagery in real/near real-time from virtually any source, national or tactical, and in virtually any format

3/17/2003FOUO Four Possible Architecture Solutions I.Co-located operational functionality, concurrent operations, remote located information processing II.Distributed operational functionality, centralized (within Cell) control, centralized execution, centralized information processing III.Distributed operational functionality, Decentralized control (remote command area), centralized information processing IV.Distributed operational functionality, centralized control, centralized information processing, Centralized execution

3/17/2003FOUO Cell Conceptual Spaces #1 Assess Strike Ops Task Plan Actors Server Area Servers Located in Computer room

3/17/2003FOUO Cell Conceptual Spaces #2 Access Control Operations AreaServer Area Assess Strike OpsTask Plan Plan/Task/Assess Area Actors Command SOO Area

3/17/2003FOUO Cell Conceptual Spaces #3 Access Control Operations AreaServer Area Assess Strike OpsTask Plan Plan/Task/Assess Area Actors Remote Command and SOO Area

3/17/2003FOUO Cell Conceptual Spaces #4 SOO Area & Access Control Operations AreaServer Area Assess Strike OpsTask Plan Plan/Task/Assess Area Actors

3/17/2003FOUO Trade Off Analysis (I): How each Architecture supports the operational mission Pros: Co-located – decision makers can see entire operational view A Lot of information at commander’s fingertips Remote info processing Cons: Co-located – noisy human interface environment No filtering or assessing prior to decision makers viewing Too much information, shared resources Remote info processing – can’t easily identify system failures, inaccurate data Confusion with chain of command influencing operations out of functional area

3/17/2003FOUO Trade Off Analysis (II): How each Architecture supports the operational mission Pros: Distributed operational functionality - Areas of expertise are distributed Command and Ops coordinate decisions based upon info flow Cons: Data is filtered by expertise Localized info processing –easily identify system failures, inaccurate data, system resets

3/17/2003FOUO Trade Off Analysis (III): How each Architecture supports the operational mission Pros: Command can be co-located with other CAOC commanders Command cannot perform access control Cons: Remote command can lose control of the actors Loss of communications can isolate command

3/17/2003FOUO Trade Off Analysis (IV): How each Architecture supports the operational mission Pros: Distributed operational functionality - Areas of expertise are distributed Operations is not biased by other actors in same room Cons: Computer Servers must be locally maintained Information must flow from command to operations or plan/task/assess

3/17/2003FOUO Trade Off Analysis : How each Architecture supports the operational mission

3/17/2003FOUO Required External Interfaces: Users Sensor network C2 nodes/cells Network and communications system at CAOC Interoperable with: Microwave link to shore command CAOC Integrated Air Defense Commander (IADC) AOCC MASSTIC BICES RPC net / RAP US & Allied air and ground forces via TADIL-J and HF/UHF communications

3/17/2003FOUO Interfaces Specs to be developed: Logical Data Model Data requirements and business rules of operational views Operational Information Matrix Info exchange between nodes and attributes (media, quality, quantity and level of interoperability) Operational Node Connectivity Diagram Activities at each node and information flows Integrated Dictionary Defines terms used throughout entire system System Interface Description Identifies systems and system components and Interfaces within and between nodes, components, and other systems Physical Data model Physical implementation of logical data model (message formats, file structures, etc.)

3/17/2003FOUO Real-time Operations Area Direct links to weapons Visible from command area Isolated from Planning area Separate Server (Redundant) from Planning / Tasking /Assessing area

3/17/2003FOUO Developing the Architecture Using: Standards and guidance (C4ISR Arch, JTA, DII COE, ISO 9000, DoD 5000) Joint Vision 2010, 2020, Defense planning guidance, DoD directives Capability maturity models (SEI CMM, CMMI) Other International or NATO standards as applicable System Engineering tools (requirements mgt, word processing, drawing tools, data models, dictionary, and elements) Need a consistent LANGUAGE and architecture otherwise systems will be non-integratable and non-interoperable. Need BALANCED Operations to ensure efficient and accurate information flows for completing the Operations Cycle.

3/17/2003FOUO Backup Details

3/17/2003FOUO Architecture Definition Object-oriented, client-server architecture Hardware, software and people included User-Case examination determines players and functions Abbreviated user-case definition period (2 weeks) due to time constraint Object-oriented design for future upgrades and flexibility Ensure requirements are well understood prior to system design/integration O-O architecture provides inheritance, encapsulation, minimizes mistakes in developing requirements Allows for future upgrades with reasonable efforts Will work with software sub to implement the O-O methodology

3/17/2003FOUO User Case Actors & Roles Squadron CDR Platoon CDR NSS-21 Planner Build Asset Database Weapon (s) Senior Ops Office NSS-21 OPS Execute Strike Asset / Threat Database Senior Ops Officer NSS-21 Tasker Build ATO INTEL / Sensor NSS-21 Assessor BDA Senior Ops Officer

3/17/2003FOUO Use Case Functional Flow Execute Strike Build Asset Database Build ATO BDA Blue Team Teal Team Gold Team Red Team

3/17/2003FOUO Hardware Equipment To achieve decreased unit costs, common logistics support, and standardized training: Uses same hardware for the suites and other ADP equipment already onboard the ship (Afloat planning system, tactical terminals, imagery terminals etc.) Already certified for Shock and Vibration standards Uses COTS for all tactical computers and hardware Reduces need for spares and technical maintenance training Relieves need for additional formal qualification testing or first article testing Consistent computer platform allows for CAOC systems interoperability, interchangeability, etc. Leverage on established relationships with current Hardware vendors

3/17/2003FOUO Hardware Equipment List Multipurpose workstations/servers (Windows2000 per software specifications) Include audio/video display, input devices 12 Computers with 17” flat screens that can be integrated into consoles 6 large screen displays although we can trim this based up cost, so upto 6 consoles will have to be able to drive the large screen displays as well. That is 6 consoles will be of a dual computer single display and 6 will be single computer single display. The LSDs will be spec’d to a standard computer video output COMSEC equip, only needed if SIPRNET is not available Network equip (hub, router, cabling, LAN drops, etc.) Furniture (desk, table, chair, etc) to build into consoles Uninterruptible Power Source (space based) Color Laser Printer/scanner Phones (secure/non-secure), plug into existing ship comms Infrastructure logistics (heating, cooling, power)