1. 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.

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. FCS Fusion Levels

6. 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)

7. 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.

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

9. 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

12. Architecture the Infrastructure Necessary to Support Fusion Solution

13. 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.

14. 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

15. 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

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

17. 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

18. 4D/RCS
for
DEMO III
Experimental Unmanned Vehicle

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

20. 10 Computer Architecture for Future UGV

21. DARPA’s MICA Approach

22. 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

23. MICA Limitation ~ Open Loop Battlefield

24. MICA Enhancement via CLM

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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.