1. 6/11/2015 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. WESAS 2000 Re-Integrating the Operational Architecture Michael P. Minette System Architect Raytheon Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence Systems Fullerton, CA May 8, 2000

2. 2 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Briefing Objectives n Share Raytheon C3I organization experiences in use (and reuse) of architecture-based solutions n Indicate some of Raytheon’s present and projected future architecture objectives n Focus on a particularly challenging technical area in the use of COTS architecture based solutions n Suggest ideas and research opportunities that may lead to new or revised methods and tools

3. 3 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Command & Control in a Joint Ops Center and Air Ops Center AEW Radars Civil ATC Center AAA SA M Control Reporting Center Tracking Identification Threat evaluation Weapon assignment Weapons control Tracking Identification Threat evaluation Weapon assignment Weapons control Air Operations Center Land Operations Center Tactical Fighter Air Defense Ground Environment Command and Control Preparation Planning Direction Coordination Monitoring & Assessment Brigade HQ Battalion HQ Brigade HQ Naval Operations Center Joint Operations Center

4. 4 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 System Architecture Views System View The realization of a particular, actual system Implements functionality and concepts of the operational architecture, Employs elements of the technical architecture standard views -block diagrams, -data flows, process flows, -allocation plans, -etc Operational View The form, structure, and interrelationships of the -narrow application domain, -users, -functions, -data, -system mission Describes the conceptual solution in terms of the operational concept Technical View Describes the logical structure, content and relationships -standards, -processes, -guidelines, -common operating infrastructure, -approved parts lists, -schema, -reference models The Product Architecture Establishes - Common Processes and Standards - Common Components and Artifacts - Common Environment »Infrastructure »Foundation Components »Information Model Provides the Common Elements & Processes from which Many Customized C3I Systems Are Possible. Operational Architecture Technical Architecture System Architecture... System Architecture PGM D System Architecture PGM C System Architecture PGM B System Architecture PGM A

5. 5 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Raytheon’s Pre-COTS Process System View The results were highly capable systems, uniquely optimized; some are still around Operational View Significant engineering effort expended in operations analysis, acquiring domain expertise by hiring, training, and practice. Analysis and modeling tools used extensively Technical View Components and subsystems are designed and implemented specifically for unique sets of requirements. Significant reuse of software and architecture within narrow domain But software is always modified to fit operational needs Prior to the widespread availability of reliable COTS components and architecture frameworks, the operations view and concepts drove Raytheon’s architecture strategy. -Operational needs defined requirements -Requirements determined architecture and design -Design got implemented from scratch or modification of similar domain specific component Operational Architecture Proprietary Technical Architecture System Architecture... System Architecture PGM D System Architecture PGM C System Architecture PGM B System Architecture PGM A

6. 6 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Transitioning to a COTS Architecture Process System View Many systems have successfully incorporated some COTS by: -significant work behind the scenes to make things fit -forcing the operations to fit the general model. Neither method makes the best use of the architecture-based approach Operational View However, the advent of COTS disintegrated the linear, closely coupled relationship between the operations view and the technical Generalized capabilities often do not fit domain specific operational needs well Technical View Increasing effort devoted to working- around “features” of COTS. The ball peen hammer approach to integration Drive towards COTS, common, open architectures pushed by: -Increasing complexity, sizes, numbers; -The ongoing information technology revolution places extraordinary demands on systems. -Desire for more advanced features -Economics -Healthy competition Operational Architecture Common/COTS Technical Architecture System Architecture... System Architecture PGM D System Architecture PGM C System Architecture PGM B System Architecture PGM A

7. 7 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Examples of Operational Mismatch n Using COTS HMI and information management software — General purpose DBMS and GIF systems often cannot meet domain specific performance and operational needs > track display — Commercially available domain specific DBMS or GIFs are often too narrowly focused > ODS ToolBox n Using COTS system control software — Conflict between COTS software’s user model and situational imperatives: user need to force an action > Network management, security, workflow n Commercial maintenance practices and rapidly shifting marketplace — 60 second emergency restart for ATC system nearly defeated by Network Router vendor firmware maintenance process

8. 8 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Research Opportunities n Raytheon is committed to the architecture based development strategy and to the use of COTS architectures and components n We see continuing challenges in matching general-purpose COTS to the operational imperatives of our domain specific products n Refinement of techniques for mapping operational requirements to architecture solutions will be highly beneficial, for example — Refinement of existing Software Quality Engineering Methods — Development of new, situational, operational-context-based modeling techniques

9. 9 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Refine Software Quality Engineering Methods n Software Quality Engineering concepts from mid 80’s may offer an assessment approach n Methodology Summary — Establish list of desired quality factors — Associate factors with testable criteria for each factor — Then, for a particular system use the selected criteria to define specific testable requirements n Suggested Research Approach — Identify and collect key operational factors > Operationally significant features of COTS architectures and components > The new operational criteria are likely to be refinements of the older quality criteria: interoperability, timeliness, accessibility, etc. — Investigate techniques for measuring and comparing — Experiment and test the process for technology selection and evaluation based on operational need

10. 10 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Situational Logic and Modeling n Situational logic is a fairly recent extension to logic that provides means to model and operate processes in context n The research objective is to develop means to employ situational knowledge and context information in reasoning about architecture alternatives n Situational, i.e., contextual models may provide: — Means to incorporate operational view into effective system models earlier in the development lifecycle — Such operational models could draw attention to the environmental or processing features that impact COTS selection — This would provide the means to measure qualitative distances between operational and technical solution spaces n Note “Situation” has high relevance in Raytheon C3I systems: — Situation Display, Situational Awareness are key operational concepts — Changes in situation, rather than mode or state, tend to be the performance drivers and suitability

11. 11 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 Summary n New advanced automation techniques and architecture-based engineering and products have great potential n New COTS architecture-based solutions are incorporated in Raytheon’s systems — But, mismatch between the domain operational concept for the system and the operational concept inherent in the technology is a continuing challenge n Raytheon’s experience suggests the need for new techniques to improve use of the Operational Architecture — To guide Technical Architecture definition and use — For assessing and evaluating alternate implementations

12. 12 © 2000 Raytheon Systems Company. An unpublished work. All rights reserved. 6/11/2015 References n Architecture — C4ISR Architecture Framework, US Department of Defense, http://www.c3i.osd.mil/org/cio/i3/AWG_Digital_Library/index.htm > The DoD top-down architecture strategy for C4I domain — Defense Information Infrastructure Common Operating Environment (DII COE) Homepage, http://diicoe.disa.mil/coe/ > The DoD initiative for the Technical Architecture for the C4I domain n Software Quality Engineering — “Specification of Software Quality Attributes”, Rome Air Development Center, RADC-TR-85-37 > RADC is now Rome Air Force Research Laboratory — Software Quality Engineering, Michael Deutsch, Ronald Willis, Prentice Hall, 1988 n Situational Logic — Stanford Center for Studies in Language and Information, http://www-csli.stanford.edu — T he Situation in Logic, CSLI Lecture Notes, Jon Barwise, Stanford University Press