Director of Aviation Development Presented to: The FACE™Consortium The Path to Open Mission Systems Architectures Distribution Statement A: Approved for public release, distribution unlimited. Presented by: William D. Lewis, PhD Director of Aviation Development U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center Date: 4 February 2016

Mission Systems Architecture Challenges for Future Vertical Lift (FVL) Increasing software (s/w) development costs: Commercial aircraft s/w development cost ≥ $10B >70% of new aircraft development cost is s/w >70% of s/w development cost in rework and certification S/W complexity increasing logarithmically Obsolescence driven by: Rapid advancements in computing technology and functional capability Proliferation of sophisticated threat systems Product deletions in the supply chain Increasing certification challenges: Multi-core processors Multi-level Security Integrated Modular Avionics Increasing complexity of Cyber Physical Systems Inefficient integration and fielding of new capabilities Emphasis on commonality across the fleet Re-use and portability of s/w between on-board and off-board systems Adequacy/maturity of architecturally centric model based system engineering tools and processes to address challenges

Joint Multi-Role (JMR) Mission Systems Architecture Demo (MSAD) JMR MSAD Approach to OSA JMR MSAD Purpose: Ensure that a potential FVL Family of Systems (FoS) Program of Record (PoR) has the processes, tools and standards necessary to specify, design, analyze, implement, acquire, qualify, certify and sustain a mission systems architecture that meets the performance requirements and business goals of the DoD. Approach: Leverage existing standards where possible Execute a series of increasingly complex demos Examine and assess maturity, applicability, and effectiveness of emerging SW engineering and development techniques Learn by doing JMR MSAD Schedule Focus Areas: Implementation of Open System Architectures (OSA) Joint Common Architecture (JCA) FACE™ Technical Standard Application of Model Based Engineering (MBE) Model-based specification/acquisition Execution of an Architecture Centric Virtual Integration Process (ACVIP) Predictive performance assessment Mission Systems Trades Joint Common Architecture (JCA) Dev MEP Definition Safety / Security Study JCA Demo / ACVIP Shadow Architecture Implementation Process Demos (AIPD) Capstone Demo Task FY 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Demonstrations

The Vision of Future Architecture(s) Yesterday Transition Tomorrow Communications Optionally Piloted Map Weather ASE Navigation Middleware Specific (not reusable) Vendor DVE-M SUMIT MIS/ROSAS FASTR Future EO Systems will be functionally similar to todays systems. The APACHE TADS/PNVS form factor was based on direct view optics, which are no longer implemented because of high resolution TV sensors. Future systems, excluding stealth applications, will be similar to a ball turret design. The Future designs will incorporate High Definition sensors, multi spectrum, integral electronics, and laser pointers/trackers and significant image processing. Future designs will be smaller, increased performance, and less power. BRUCE LEWIS COMMENT: Since the chart is entitled “Architectural Evolution” changed the statement of “Moving toward Integrated Modular Avionics” to “Moving toward common modularity leveraging architecture centric virtual integration and analysis”. Bruce noted that commercial aviation has already moved to IMA and the cost charts shown in the center are reflecting costs that are rising with respect to IMA systems on Boeing 777, 787, Airbus systems. UCS Closed Hardware Architectures Closed Software Architectures Vendor prescribed modularity Tightly Coupled Hardware/Software Many Unique Integrations Hardware Reuse (LRU Level) Accidental Software Reuse Document oriented procurement Isolated analysis Test–fix-test mentality Gov’t Prescribed Modularity Open Hardware Architectures Open Software Architectures Software portability & interchangeability Shared Integrations Strategic Reuse (HW, SW, artifacts) Model-based procurement & qualification Architecture Centric Virtual Integration Process UH-60V MH-60R/S 4

Complementary Open Systems Initiatives Solutions to mission systems architectural and qualification challenges are being informed through numerous open systems initiatives such as: Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE™) Army Common Operating Environment (COE) Joint Multi-Role Tech Demonstrator (JMR TD) Mission Systems Architecture Demonstrations (MSAD) Modular Integrated Survivability (MIS)/ Route Optimization for Survivability Against Sensors (ROSAS) Alignment of Multinational Open Systems Architectures (AMOSA) Vehicular Integration for C4ISR/EW Interoperability (VICTORY) Synergistic Unmanned Manned Intelligent Teaming (SUMIT) Functional Architecture for Strategic Reuse (FASTR) Degraded Visual Environment – Mitigation (DVE-M) Hardware Open Systems Technologies (HOST) Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA) Universal Control Segment (UCS) Open Mission Systems (OMS) Crew Mission Station (CMS) Airworthiness IMPACT UH-60V ... AMRDEC, as a founding member of FACE™, has transitioned its focus from development of the FACE technical standard to application and maturation of the FACE™ products US Army Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Aviation has adopted a strategy of incremental migration to the FACE™ technical standard as its response to US Army directives concerning the transition to the Common Operating Environment (COE). US Army senior leader support and policy direction (COE/FACE™) Blue text: AMRDEC significant involvement

Synergy through use of a Reference Architecture (RA) Mission Systems Reference Architecture Reference Architecture (RA): typically emerges when critical mass is reached: Increasing complexity Increasing dynamics and integration Multi-effect (multiple vendors, multiple domains, multiple locations, etc.) represents mission, vision, and strategy is based on proven concepts (architectural patterns) Complementary Open System Initiatives provides technical, business and user context is not a system architecture, design or solution provides foundational concepts, components and their relationships for solution architectures supports comparison and alignment of solution architectures An RA Guides and constrains architecture implementations by providing: a common lexicon and taxonomy a common (architectural) vision modularization and the complementary context Notional alignment of OS initiatives provides basis for a RA RA captures the essence of legacy architecture, the vision of the future, and necessary evolution to assist in solution architecture development

Qualification Traditional approaches to safety and security qualification are not effective in application to cyber-physical systems due to increased levels of integration and complexity Improved model-based approaches are needed to analyze and qualify systems effectively, efficiently and accurately Architecture Centric Virtual Integration Process (ACVIP) System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) Formal Methods (FM) Challenges that impact FVL, and upgrades to legacy systems: Qualification of multicore processors Maturation of MBE tools and methods and adaptation to qualification Improvement of safety and security assessment processes for complex systems Development/maturation of analysis tools and processes for deterministic systems Improvements in the human-machine qualification assessment Adaptation and tailoring of current airworthiness and acquisition processes to support the vision of future acquisition and assessment of complex systems Qualification (safety, security, airworthiness) must be considered at system inception, and kept up-to-date, accurate, understandable and accessible Component interactions affect the emergent properties of system safety, security and airworthiness Current methods for assessing and qualifying complex cyber-physical systems must adapt, and be implemented early in the lifecycle!

Conclusion Logarithmic growth in complexity requires a paradigm shift in how we acquire and qualify cyber-physical systems Defects must be identified earlier in the development process to realize an improvement in affordability Strategic reuse is necessary to fully realize the benefits of an open systems approach Safety, security and airworthiness are major design drivers, and must be considered from the beginning A strategy incorporating open systems, appropriate data rights, model-based engineering, and virtual integration and analysis is crucial AMRDEC is fully invested in this strategy Affordability and Resilience require proper implementation of: OSA to break vendor lock and increase competition MBE to increase transparency and communication ACVIP to reduce errors and identify defects and issues early in the lifecycle The future is not fully defined, but the path ahead is clear. Get on board, or get left behind!