Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability

Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability
United States Joint Forces Command Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability J89 Joint Architectures & Capability Engineering 1 1

Joint Mission Thread Definitions
A joint mission thread (JMT) is an operational and technical description of the end to end set of activities and systems that accomplish the execution of a joint mission. (CJCSI E) – Recommended By CJCSI E definition, JMT Synonyms = Scenario, Vignette, Use Case, and Test Thread However, in practice, multiple scenarios, vignettes, and use cases are required to document the breadth of a Joint Mission Thread for reusability A complete, end-to-end JMT architecture is comprised of multiple scenarios, vignettes, and use cases An operational thread is defined as a set of operational activities, with sequence and timing attributes of the activities, and includes the resources needed to accomplish the activities. A particular operational thread may be used to depict a military capability. In this manner, a capability is defined in terms of the attributes required to accomplish a given mission objective by modeling the set of activities and their attributes. The sequence of activities forms the basis for defining and understanding the many factors that impact on the overall military capability (DoDAF 2.0) – Provided for Reference Only 2

Assumptions, Scope & Purpose
Joint Mission Threads (JMTs) are required to provide operational context for: Joint DOTMLPF/capability analysis Joint Testing and Evaluation (JT&E) Joint Training Exercises Joint Experiments Joint Modeling & Simulation (M&S) Other Joint Capability Assessments No formal, repeatable process is codified for JMT development that promotes: Maximum reusability by establishing a minimum JMT information set JMT “deep dive” extensions down to the tactical level Scope: Establish a list of critical JMTs that are needed by joint stakeholders to guide their analysis & assessment efforts. Purpose: Collaboratively develop a list of desired JMTs 3

Recommendation: Joint Mission Thread Development Should Be UJTL-Based
UJTs provide Operational Mission Area Context for Joint Mission Thread development UJTs are recognized and credible joint “touch points” for warfighter training, organizing, and equipping Services and COCOMs map their task lists to UJTs (Service Task Lists and JMETLs). The UJTs reference those Service Task Lists where those linkages have been validated UJTL is an authoritative source UJTs provide detailed, amplifying information (Task Description, Measures, Additional Task Description, Joint Conditions, and Doctrine References) that will inform and guide JMT development UJTs are also mapped to overarching Joint Capability Areas (JCAs), the overarching binning mechanism for the DoD 4

UJTL-Based Joint Mission Thread Guidelines
Joint Mission Threads (JMTs) should be primarily based on Operational (OP) and Tactical (TA) level Universal Joint Tasks (UJTs). JMTs contain operational nodes/roles that can be filled by more than one Service, Agency, or coalition partner to ensure “joint context”. JMTs should be based on UJTs that are activity based (indicate sequence or sequences of activity) and have supporting joint doctrine. JMTs should be threads that are focused on mission performance vice enabling mission completion (see following slide). JMT minimum information sets should be able to be developed within 90 days, using 4 FTE developers and 2.5 FTE operational analysts/SMEs JMTs may be based on more than one UJT to provide proper context; e.g., the Net-Enabled UJT under development, SN7.X, Ensure Information Services Interoperability, will be bundled with other UJTs to ensure information interoperability for mission accomplishment. 5

Mission Performance vs. Mission Enablers
Thread has a direct impact on mission outcome. Characterized as being mission-specific, requires mission analysis and planning, results in a fixed and finite outcome, and multi-nodal with diverse participants in a temporary or ad-hoc configuration Mission enablers Activities that indirectly support multiple JMTs. Enablers are characterized as being routinely performed by established organizations, repetitive in nature, and support oriented. Examples of mission enabler UJTs Most C2 UJTs – 5.xxx [e.g., OP 5.5 Establish, Organize, and Operate a Joint Force Headquarters & TA 5 Exercise Command and Control] Most Sustainment UJTs – 4.xxx [e.g., OP Supply Operational Forces & TA Conduct Air Refueling] All Force Deployment/Readiness/Counter–CBRNE – 7.xxx [e.g., OP 7.8 Integrate Passive Defense Operations in Joint Operations Area (JOA) & TA 7 Operate in a CBRNE Environment] All Multinational/Interagency – 8.xxx All CBRNE Deterrence – 9.xxx Note: Mission Enablers must be looked at ACROSS the mission performance-based JMTs in order to provide context for command and control (C2) execution and decision-making. The mission enablers include most of the UJTs associated with Command and Control. Many times the C2-associated mission enablers are extremely broad – e.g., SN 5.4 Provide Strategic Direction to Forces Worldwide or, they may be laser-focused on one area – e.g. ST Issue Theater Strategic Operation Plans, Orders, and Rules of Engagement (ROE). Without the operational context provided by a mission performance UJT – e.g., Given a JMT of Conducting Joint Operations Area Missile Defense, then “issue strategic operations plans, orders, and rules of engagement.” Without the mission performance JMT, the mission enabler is extremely difficult to scope and develop. Some mission enablers, such as OP Prepare Campaign or Major Operations and Related Plans and Orders, can have a refined process model developed for them that would allow for the process model activity sets to be applied wherever operational planning is needed, and then modestly adjusted for the JMT. For reference, the high-level list of C2-associated UJTs are: SN 5 Provide Strategic Direction and Integration SN 5.4 Provide Strategic Direction to Forces Worldwide SN 6.7 Provide Command and Control Over Mobilized Forces SN Support Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Defense ST Provide Command and Control of Deploying Units ST 5 Provide Theater Strategic Command and Control, Communications, and Computers (C4) ST 5.4 Provide Strategic Direction to Theater Forces ST Issue Theater Strategic Operation Plans, Orders, and Rules of Engagement (ROE) ST Synchronize Joint Operations and Subordinate Campaign Plans ST Establish or Participate in a Joint, Combined, or Multinational Force ST Promote Regional Security and Interoperability ST Establish Bilateral or Multilateral Arrangements OP 5 Provide Operational Command and Control (C2) OP 5.4 Command Subordinate Operational Forces OP Synchronize and Integrate Operations OP 5.5 Establish, Organize, and Operate a Joint Force Headquarters OP Develop a Joint Force Command and Control Structure OP Develop Joint Force Liaison Structure OP Establish or Participate in Task Forces TA 5 Exercise Command and Control 6

Range Of Military Operations Types of Military Operations
Crisis Response Strikes Major Operations Campaigns Raids Limited Contingency Operations Show of Force Protection of Shipping Combating Terrorism Security Cooperation Military Engagement Deterrence Many to Many Tailor Joint Forces for Deployment M I S O N Provide Global Strike Capabilities Space Joint Interdiction Antisubmarine Warfare A R E A S Determine and Report Force Readiness Humanitarian Assistance Air Assault Manage National Strategic Firepower Manage Personnel Recovery Destroy Enemy Bases Coordinate Joint/Multinational Training Events Develop Prototypes of Improved or New Capabilities for the Warfighter Synchronize Strategic Attack Information Warfare (Operational Templates, Strategic National, Strategic Theater) Many to Many Theater Missile Defense M I S S I O N T H R E A D S JCAS Interdiction CIED Non-Lethal Attack JPR Joint Fires JSEAD Countermine Defensive Countermeasures TST EW/EA Mine Operations Non combatant evac CWMD Interdiction Military deception Amphibious Assault MEDEVAC PSYOP CND/CAN/CNE Counter Drug Tactical Airlift (Operational, Tactical) Maritime interception Intel Support Coalition Support Prepare Plans Supply Analyze COAs Mission Planning OPSEC CID ENABLING Universal Joint Tasks Air Refueling (Operational, Tactical)

Joint Mission Threads Gray areas indicate related JMTs
Joint Mission Thread TACTICAL Universal Joint Task Operational Universal Joint Task Joint Pub (Doctrine) Gray areas indicate related JMTs

Joint Mission Threads 9 Gray areas indicate related JMTs
Joint Mission Thread TACTICAL Universal Joint Task Operational Universal Joint Task Joint Pub (Doctrine) Gray areas indicate related JMTs 9

EXAMPLES – Not Intended to be all inclusive
ENABLING UJTs EXAMPLES – Not Intended to be all inclusive Enabling UJT TACTICAL Universal Joint Task Operational Universal Joint Task Joint Pub (Doctrine)

Joint Mission Thread Descriptions
Operational Context: Excerpts from Universal Joint Task List Examples: (U) TA Conduct Close Air Support Task Description: To provide support for amphibious and/or land operations by air assets through attacking hostile targets in close proximity to friendly forces. (JP 3-0, JP 3-09, JP ) (U) TA Engage Time Sensitive Targets Task Description: To engage in battle tracking by detecting and identifying sensor elements, mission approval from command nodes, availability of attack assets at the right time and place with appropriate munitions, transfer of target from tracking element to attack asset, attack, and battle damage assessment. (JP , JP 3-09, JP 3-60) (U) TA Conduct Counterdrug Operations Task Description: Counterdrug operations are those active measures taken to support federal, state, and local LESs in their effort to detect, monitor, and disrupt the production, transportation, and distribution of illegal drugs into the United States. DOD land, sea and air forces can be effectively employed to conduct detection and follow-on monitoring of illicit drug cargoes, source areas and associated personnel until a law enforcement agency (LEA) can effect interdiction. This task may include host nation (HN) support, command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I), land, air and maritime intelligence and reconnaissance and interoperability links with LEAs at international, federal, state and local levels. (JP 3-07, JP ) 11

Joint Mission Thread Required Documents & Data
All/Operational Views (As-Is): AV-1, Overview and Summary Information OV-1, High Level Operational Concept Graphic OV-2, Operational Resource Flow Description OV-3, Operational Resource Flow Matrix OV-5a, Operational Activity Decomposition Tree OV-5b, Operational Activity Model OV-6c, Event-Trace Description System Views (As-Is): SV-1, System Interface Context Description SV-4, Systems Functionality Description SV-5b, Operational Activity to Systems Traceability Matrix SV-6, Systems Resource Flow Matrix SV-10c, System Event-Trace Description Process Model (Executable Architecture) Other Documents Authoritative Sources: Joint/multi-Service doctrine, TTPs, CONOPs SoS CCIs, System of System Critical Capability Issues As Available: Lessons Learned, GDF, studies, WG recommendations, IPLs, JUONs, etc A well-defined Executable Architecture facilitates building these products NOTE: This is intended to show the level of data collection and mapping required, so that the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) artifacts listed can be developed. These are DoDAF v2.0-based views, and may need be expanded to include additional DoDAF 2.0 product sets based on additional viewpoints (e.g., Standards Viewpoints or StdVs, which replaced Technical Views (TVs), Capability Viewpoints, or CVs; Data and Information Viewpoints or DIVs, which replaced OV-7 and SV-11; and Project Portfolio Viewpoints or PVs.) SoS Critical Capability Issues (CCI) – are used to assess performance pertaining to capabilities which support joint missions. CCIs are phrased as: Assess the ability to perform (Task X) by (System/SoS Configuration Y) under the following (specified conditions) to achieve (Mission Desired Effect Z). [Action Officers: The Capability Test Methodology for Testing in a Joint Environment Handbook, JTEM] 12 12

Next Steps: Staff, Validate & Prioritize
J8 Internal (Front Office & Div Chiefs) – 21 Jul JFCOM CoS Tasker – 29 July Joint Mission Thread Architecture & Testing Working Group (JMTAT WG) – 24 July Joint Architecture Integration Working Group (JAIWG) – 30 July JSAP 136 – Aug Review & Recommendations JMT List will be included in Joint C2 Network Test & Partnership JROC package – Aug 09 Validate: C2 Optimization value of threads selected/which threads impact more C2 JCAs/UJTs/Service Tasks/Systems Comparative Analysis with JMTAT WG Data Call Adjudication of JSAP comments/inputs Value of the thread to mission outcome Prioritize: JROC will finalize priorities “Divide and Conquer” JMT development, based on priorities 13

BACK-UPs

JMT Relationship to Testing
(CJCSI E) Testing using established Joint Mission Threads will verify the operational effectiveness of the information exchanges of the system under test with all its enabling systems. Interoperability evaluation must assess the exchange and use of information to include established joint mission threads where these have been defined and included in J-6 I&S certified documents. 15

JMT Relationship to Architectures
(CJCSI E) – 1 of 2 The joint critical mission threads for the system will be documented in OV-6Cs and should be identified as threshold or objective. The associated joint critical operational activities required to perform these joint critical mission threads are documented in text with the OV-5. The joint critical operational activities are traced through the DOD Information Enterprise Architecture and solution architectures from OV-6Cs to OV-5, OV-3, TV-1, SV-5, SV-4, and SV-6. DoDAF views in CJCSI E are based on DoDAF v1.5, and have not been updated to reflect updates in DoDAF v2.0 16

JMT Relationship to Architectures
(CJCSI E) – 2 of 2 The information and data exchanges and mission critical performance attributes are identified and documented in the OV-3 and SV-6, including those derived from established joint critical mission threads DoDAF views in CJCSI E are based on DoDAF v1.5, and have not been updated to reflect updates in DoDAF v2.0 17

A Joint Approach to Developing
Reusable JMT Information Capability Mapping Baseline – Framework of mapped authoritative sources UJTL information from the Joint Doctrine, Education and Training Electronic Information System (JDEIS) Web Portal: UJT Operational Templates: 18

Net-Enabled Leader-Centric
Capability Mapping Baseline “Periodic Table” for Operational DOTMLPF Analysis Policy Standards “Deep Dive” Architecture-Driven Analysis that Extends the Common, Joint Language and Enables Interoperability TESTING Policy Net-Enabled Architectures Joint Capability Areas (JCAs) Systems Functions CPM Areas Standards ARCHITECTURE Elements That Provide A Common, Joint Language Under the JCA Umbrella Tier I Analysis Joint Common System Functions List (JCSFL) Technical Policy M(Materiel) USN Accreditations Standards C2 Portfolio* JCAs USMC - Programs of Record - Systems - Sub-systems - New Capabilities USA Policy USAF Platforms/Weapons NCES/NECC Other CPMs Standards Leader-Centric ADS & Data Models Policy Joint Staff J7 Mapping Standards Operational Activities Applications/Services Policy L(Leadership) JTF Operational Activities / Tasks / Sub-tasks Networks/Comms UJTL SN X.X ST X.XX OP X.X.X TA X.X.X.X Standards Policy Assessments P(Policy) Joint Tasks PROVIDES JCA-BASED Framework: Establishes a joint lexicon, based on authoritative sources and a consolidation of mapping efforts Detailed mapping process links JCAs – UJTs-activities-system functions-systems- policy and standards. Critical to focusing analysis on total capabilities vice individual programs and systems. Can help identify the impact(s) (intentional or unintentional) on any operational, programmatic, or technical change across the entire joint enterprise. The “ripple effect.” Allows for cross-portfolio analysis Provides essential elements of capability assessments – through joint mission threads (which start with UJTs) or other avenues of analysis MAPPING TYPES: Joint Capability Areas (JCAs) to UJTL Mapping – Re-uses Joint Staff J7 Mappings To better capability portfolio management efforts, align with the prescribed DoD lexicon and taxonomy for capability development, and establish priorities for capability assessment; C2 CPM issues are aligned with Joint Capability Areas (JCAs). JCAs are the overarching organizational constructs that begin to provide a common lexicon for capability efforts. There are 9 Tier 1 JCAs, all of which have Capability Portfolio Managers (CPMs) assigned to them, including Command and Control (C2), which JFCOM has the lead for. The UJTL to Joint Capability Mapping identifies the UJTs which support a JCA. JCAs have been mapped to appropriate UJTs by the Joint Staff J7, and vetted with the FCBs as the initial step in integrating JCAs into the future UJTL as directed by the SecDef. This mapping is being re-accomplished, following the extension of the JCA Tier 3s and below in Jan 2009, and is being formally staffed with all stakeholders. For the purposes of the C2 mapping process, this mapping provides the authoritative data source to be used for Program Review and POM analysis, as well as the Optimum Capability Mix Study, and C2 Portfolio Baseline updates. UJTs to Operational Activities Mapping CJCSM D; 1 August 2005 provides the authoritative set of Joint Task Force (JTF) activities. The UJTL to Operational activities mapping identifies the activity/tasks/sub tasks which support a UJTL, at both the Service level (via various Service Task Lists) and the JTF level. In this context, the term “Operational Activities” refers to actual operations that are normally conducted in the course of achieving a mission (Not to the operational level of warfare). Tasks and sub tasks are descriptions of clearly defined and measurable activities to be performed by organizations or individuals. The Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) 1.5 Deskbook reference defines Operational Activities as follows: An activity is an action performed in conducting the business of an enterprise. It is a general term that does not imply a placement in a hierarchy (e.g., it could be a process or a task as defined in other documents and it could be at any level of the hierarchy of the Operational Activity Model). It is used to portray operational actions not hardware/software system functions. The operational activities represent a hierarchy and relationship mapping of UJTs–to–Joint Mission Essential Tasks (JMETLs), Service Task Lists and other subordinate activities, tasks, and subtasks. Currently, UJTs are mapped to operational activities from the CJCSM A, September 2003, JTF HQ Master Training Guide, in the USJFCOM JTF HQ Baseline Template and Architectures. As integrated architectures continue develop in support of C2 CPM assessments, UJTs will be mapped to appropriate operational activities, tasks and sub tasks at all levels of the architecture. Moreover, the UJTs and Service Task Lists inform the Training requirements required by any changes across the capability mapping enterprise. Because CJCSM A, JTF MTG, will not undergo further revision, the enterprise-level version of the JTF Enterprise Architecture is derived directly from the expanded UJTs, and the Service Tasks called out in the UJTL, as provided in the Joint Capability Area Management System (JCAMS) via JDEIS. Operational Activities to Operational Nodes & Billets: While JTF Operational Activities are helpful, without including the individual JTF Boards, Bureaus, Centers, and Cells (operational nodes) that perform an activity, and the human beings that will execute those activities for the operational nodes (billets), a process mapping of any mission area would be incomplete. Together, the Operational Activities and Operational Nodes form the Organizational, Personnel, and Facilities (if included or required for assessment) portions of DOTMLPF analysis. Leadership is synthesized from the ability to understand the organizational, personnel, and facilities. Operational Activities to Systems Functions Mapping Operational activities, tasks, and sub tasks can be decomposed so they can be traced to systems functions. For the purposes of C2 portfolio management, products from the development of the JC2 Integrated Architecture will map operational activities to system functions. A higher level of operational activity to system function mapping fidelity is achieved when the operational activities are broken down to the lowest level practical to identify what the system functions/systems are performing. The Activity to System Function Mapping identifies the transformation of an operational need into a purposeful action/task (i.e. System Function) performed by a system. The related System Functions implement the automated portions of the Operational Activity it is mapped to. The analysis of system functions performed across an integrated architecture requires a common point of reference to normalize the identification and description of system functionality. This enables the mapping of systems that provide similar functionality to capabilities and activities, and systems from different Services. Further mappings may associate operational nodes, operational billets, networks, and system applications depicting comprehensive threads across the architecture. The USJFCOM Joint Common System Function List (JCSFL) has provided this common point of reference for describing a common lexicon for system functions. JCSFL v1.0, which focused primarily on C4ISR functions, and a lesser set of support tasks, including Logistics and Medical, was JSAP 136’ed, and published on 30 Apr 08. Joint Common System Function List (JCSFL) Since each Service has a set of definitions for system functionality, USJFCOM J89 developed the JCSFL to provide the common point of reference, or lexicon for system functionality depicted in Joint Integrated Architectures. Using Service provided CSFLs as source data, the JCSFL fuses the Service information into a single representation of Joint Force system functionality employed across the range of Joint Force operations. System Functions to C2 Portfolio (Including Systems’) Mapping The System Function to C2 Portfolio Mapping identifies the systems that execute System functions. For C2 CPM actions, USJFCOM J89 / JSIC performed this mapping, using the most authoritative source available. This begins an excursion into the Materiel portion of DOTMLPR analysis Authoritative Sources Every node within the capability mapping baseline is linked to at least one authoritative source. This provides requirements traceability throughout joint architecture development and integration, or for joint mission thread analyses. Because authoritative sources often include JCIDS documents, Joint Pubs, or other regulatory or policy-based documentation, authoritative sources often represent the Doctrine portion of the DOTMLPF analysis and assessment. C2 Portfolio For Programs of Record (POR), the preferred authoritative source is data acquired through Program Manager interface. When available, program system functions provided using a Service CSFL will be traced through the JCSFL pedigree to the appropriate joint system function. Otherwise, the best available programmatic data available will be used to map systems directly to the JCSFL functions through analysis. In cases where a system/application is not yet a POR but clearly needs assessment in support of CPM, the best available data from various sources including manufacturer, C/S/As, and operational Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will be fused to derive joint system functions. The C2 Portfolio attempts to bound CPM in the near term for PR/POM analysis, and a “list of lists” have emerged for PR09, POM 10, CENTCOM Best of Breed (BoB), and JTF C2 equipping core lists. The pedigree of these lists are maintained in JACAE to allow for comparative analysis and to re-use the information from previous CPM analyses and assessments. C2 Portfolio CPM Areas: Attributes / Enablers Each system in the portfolio can be decomposed to system attributes/enablers. It is within this decomposition that the portfolio manager will find addressable gaps, overlaps, and redundancies for acquisition recommendations. There are three main categories of attributes: technical, operational, and programmatic Technical Area Each system is made up of applications that support the system functions. Many of these applications will be common from one system to another, and more importantly there may be many applications in various systems that perform the same function. By mapping these applications we will be able to see these relationships clearly, identifying potential areas of management within the portfolio. Each system requires some form of data management, data integration, or normalization of data models. Some systems share the same data management process, others do not. Again, by mapping these out the portfolio manager may finds focus areas of management. Each system interfaces to networks in some fashion, and the resulting mapping will provide critical interoperability insight as to how to improve the network capabilities across the portfolio. Many systems exist in various forms designed to support activities at the platform level. These relationships need to be understood and defined during CPM assessments. As with the other CPM Area attributes, the policy and standards enacted by each element within the Technical CPM Area will reveal the heart of non-interoperability issues and integration challenges. Operational Area The operational system characteristics can be defined in terms of available testing (DT&E and OT&E) or other assessments (JSIC, MRX, etc.), various capability and fielding documents (including JCIDS), as well as other Program Management Office-generated systems documentation. Additionally, CONOPS, Functional Plans (FUNCPLANs) Operational Plans (OPLANs), or other documentation that describes the operational attributes of an capability will be used to assess whether the capability is meeting operational requirements, including the development of metrics. . Programmatic Area Perhaps the hardest area to map, programmatic attributes of each system will need to have the complete technical mapping discussed above in order to determine the areas within Service budgets that apply. OSD PA&E supports the CPMs’ needs in this area by mapping the Program Element Codes (PEC) to the JCAs. It is expected that, over time, the PEC-to-JCA mapping will become more granular so that the overarching JCA for any sub-system within a platform can be traced by the PECs. Architecture Driven Analysis of Standards and Policy The primary purpose of developing the Capability Mapping Baseline is to enable the assessment of standards and policy, down to the tactical level for bit-level implementation. By having all the elements of the baseline mapped together, it is possible to assess the affect of any element’s change across the entire DOTMLPF spectrum. Therefore, the Capability Mapping Baseline becomes the common backbone for DOTMLPF analysis, and should be used as the “periodic table” of capability through which the analysis of all joint mission threads should be “pulled” or cross-checked. Acronyms: UJTL – Universal Joint Task List AUTL – Army Universal Task List MCTL – Marine Corps Task List NTTL – Navy Tactical Task List AFTL – Air Force Task List PA&E – Program Analysis and Evaluation (Director under the Secretary of Defense) PEC – Program Element Code DOTMLPF – Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel, and Facilities CENTCOM – United States Central Command COAs – Courses of Action (AKA recommendations) Operational Standards T(Training) AUTLs, MCTL, NTTL, AFTL Documentation Service Tasks Policy P(Personnel) Operational Nodes & Billets Concepts/Plans Standards O(Organization) Joint Warfighter Billets Op Nodes Programmatic JCAs- to- PECs JCAs F(Facilities) PA&E Mapping Joint Integration & Interoperability Recommendations via Detailed DOTMLPF Analysis Authoritative Sources: D(Doctrine)

“Pulled” Through Capability Mapping Elements and Reused
Joint Mission Threads “Pulled” Through Capability Mapping Elements and Reused Mission Thread #2 JMT Repository For Reuse Mission Thread #2 Mission Thread #1 Mission Thread # 3 Mission Thread # 4 Etc…. Mission Thread #1 Operational (Leader-Centric) UJTs Net-Enabled UJTs The Joint Mission Thread Architecture and Testing Working Group (JMTAT WG) resulted from merging an internal JFCOM JMT Working Group with external reps from the Test Resource Management Center’s (TRMC’s) Net-Centric Systems Test (NST) and Interoperability Test & Evaluation Capability (InterTEC) organizations to: Develop joint mission threads (JMT) definition and terminology Define processes for JMT development and extension that promotes maximum reusability, down to the capability assessment level Discover the consumers and producers of JTMs across the DoD, including Interagency and Coalition threads Establish shareability of JMTs for re-use in architectures, analysis, and assessments The JMTAT WG will leverage previous JMT efforts, such as the JBMC2 Roadmap, Joint and Service Testing and Training Events, Development/Operational Testing, and other venues to accomplish the objectives above, which will published in a Concept of Operations (CONOPS). The JMTAT WG is a Sub working group of the Joint Systems Integration & Interoperability Lab (JSIIL), which is part of the JC2 Test Network Partnership effort that is expected to result in the stand-up of a Joint Testing & Evaluation (JT&E) Executive Steering Committee (ESC). The JT&E ESC is intended to provide coordinated integration of JT&E events, people, facilities, and processes to provide enhanced end-to-end, system of systems, capability assessments. This will provide more effective interoperability and information assurance analyses at reduced costs from current, “single systems- based” accreditation and certification initiatives. - In addition to agreeing that JMTs should be described via joint integrated architecture information, the JMTAT WG agrees that JMTs are: Essential for end-to-end capability analysis and assessment Require traceability back to Universal Joint Tasks (UJTs) and JCAs, as an overarching “umbrella” for functional binning Provide framework for metrics and measures Repository of reusable JMTs is highly desired by all participants Examples of Mission Threads already developed: Targeting and Collection Management (JSIC) Joint Close Air Support (JCAS) (JFCOM & Services via JCAS ESC) Joint Personnel Recovery (JPRA & JFCOM) Time Sensitive Targeting (USAF) Counter-IED/ISR Processing via UAS (JFCOM & Army) Joint Maritime Interdiction, Deep Strike/Air interdiction, and Dominant Maneuver (JTRS) 20

Mission Areas (1 of 6)

Mission Areas (6 of 6) TOTAL OF 60

C2 Warfare Mission Area Selected

Joint Mission Thread Segments (1 of 2) Operational Mission Threads (OP-level)

Joint Mission Thread Segments (2 of 2) Select Operational Mission Thread Segment

Further Levels of Decomposition .. … …..
Joint Mission Thread (JMT) Mission Analysis JMT Development, including process model activities JMT Architecture Elements Further Levels of Decomposition .. … …..

Development of Tactical Segment (TA-level) of a Joint Mission Thread
Air Assault Mission Area Selected

Select Operational Mission Thread Segment OP 3.2.7

Select Additional Task Detail for OP 3.2.7

Brings Up - Task Word .doc w/: - Measures - Critical Elements
- Supporting Joint Tasks SVC Tasks Joint & Svc Doctrine - Task Conditions

Select Tactical Task TA for Tactical Joint Mission Thread Segment

Additional Detail - Task
of TA Provides Word .doc w/: - Measures - Critical Elements - Supporting Joint Tasks SVC Tasks Joint & Svc Doctrine - Task Conditions

OP 6.2.9 is listed under the Search & Recovery Operational Template
(Mission Area)

of a Joint Mission Thread
TA 6.2 is listed under OP 6.2.9 as a Tactical Segment of a Joint Mission Thread

Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Joint Mission Thread Development for Reusability"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback