Technical-to-Tactical Interfaces:
Importance of Consistent Interface between Warfighters and Scientists/Engineers
___________________________________________________________________________
By Greg McHone and Dr. James D. Moreland, Jr.
Extensive Fleet interaction establishes the necessary
stakeholder relationships to understand operations,
capture capability needs, and consider the art of the
possible in scientific/engineering solutions through
architectures, derived from mission area requirements,
which are the vehicle for technical-to-tactical mission
engineering principles. In July 2013, scientists and
engineers from the Naval Surface Warfare Center,
Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD), participated in an
operational experiment and exercise known as Trident
Warrior. The exercise teamed systems and software
scientists/engineers with warfighters aboard a
destroyer as well as in the Combat Direction Systems
Activity (CDSA) laboratory to study surface warfare
functionality and evaluate effects/kill chains to determine
warfare effectiveness and technical execution of
a specific operational mission thread. These subject
matter experts witnessed and evaluated a Concept of
Employment (CONEMP) for Surface Warfare (SuW);
SuW Tactics, Doctrine, and Rules of Engagement
(RoE); SuW effects/kill chain for target dissemination
using tactical sensors; a prototype Common Weapons
Control System (CWCS) that introduced SuW
functionality; and technology for in-flight weapons
communication. The CWCS was manned by operational
warfighters to gain feedback on the systems’
design, functionality, and Human Computer Interface
(HCI). Shipboard scientists/engineers provided
expertise on the SuW CONEMP, in-flight weapon
communications technology, and existing combat
system capabilities and functions that were applied
to the experiment. From this information, SuW operational
requirements, system designs, system architectures,
and other related technologies were then
developed. Unquestionably, the technical-to-tactical
insights gained from collaborating with warfighting
operators provided an accurate view of capability gaps
that would lead to better system designs and system
architectures.
Definition
The Vice Chief of Naval Operation’s Integration
and Interoperability (I&I) Activity has evolved
NSWCDD’s coordination with the Fleet/Joint
warfighters, other Systems Commands (SYSCOM)
and Warfare Centers to one that is centered on
mission engineering and the technical-to-tactical
excellence principle. This principle is centered on the
warfighter’s desired mission effects. The tactical
capabilities required to achieve those effects are understood
by the acquisition community and included
in technical system designs by tight coordination
and interaction between warfighters and the warfare
centers’ scientists/engineers. The collaborative
Fleet and scientific/engineering team create mission
architectures based on a snapshot of Fleet exercises
and experiments to serve as technical reference documents,
Mission Technical Baseline (MTB), to inform
the naval community on the validated means of
executing particular mission threads. Mission architectures
of deployed force operations are developed to
support Fleet analysis, assessment, and requirements
generation of existing warfighting capabilities. MTB
architectures are derived from defined mission objectives
and effects, and deployed Joint and Navy assets
operating under theater-defined doctrine to rehearse
our blue force ability to effectively execute operational
and contingency plans. Theater-specific MTB
architectures that support the assessment of integrated
warfighting capabilities are made available
to the development and validation of system and
system-of-systems specific architectures. The extensive
Fleet interaction required to transition technical
developments to tactical capabilities has been termed
“warfighter integration.”
Benefits of the technical-to-tactical principle are
still being realized, as the interaction of warfighting
and acquisition communities continues to mature.
Across the naval enterprise, however, warfighting
capability has lacked clear definition between the
various acquisition and operational stakeholders.
Efforts to standardize processes and employ consistent
procedures to improve warfighting readiness
continue to evolve.
Strategic Implementation
NSWCDD began to formalize the technical-to-tactical
relationships by establishing Mission Focused
Capabilities (MFC). Mission Focused Capabilities are
represented by mission thrust areas in the context of
the Joint Capability Areas (JCA) to solve warfighter
challenges of today and tomorrow through an iterative
operational and engineering process. Heavy emphasis
continues to be focused on relationship building with
key warfighter and sponsor stakeholders. The culmination
of this effort is to understand the stakeholders’
operational needs and to develop a comprehensive
understanding of the stimuli that drive them (e.g.,
threats, challenges, and opportunities) for current-,
near-, mid-, and far-term capabilities. These operational
needs and stimuli are used to drive the future
direction of research and development activities to
focus the naval enterprise on the right requirements
and investments with the objective of increasing the
transition of capabilities to the Fleet.
I&I activities institutionalize the processes and
products across the naval enterprise that are necessary
to effectively and efficiently improve warfighting
readiness. The governance structure across the naval
enterprise is illustrated in Figure 1 demonstrating a
tight linkage between Fleet operational needs and
readiness, OPNAV requirements and resourcing, and
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development,
and Acquisition (ASN RD&A) programmatic
oversight and acquisition direction.
Technical-to-tactical efforts provide a better understanding
of mission-level gaps and deficiencies across
the entire acquisition cycle and facilitate a decomposition
of requirements from technology to the warfare
level.
To align with Vice Chief of Naval Operation’s I&I
Activity and achieve organizational strategic goals
for technical-to-tactical relationships, NSWCDD created
an organization that serves as the unifying focal
point for mission engineering initiatives, known as
the Mission Engineering Cell, to enforce the development
of integrated warfighting capabilities. This
organization, working in conjunction with the Fleet
and similar organizations at other Warfare Centers
and SYSCOMs, draws on the technical depth of the
scientific/engineering community and tight Fleet
relationships to produce affordable and integrated
capabilities for the Fleet. These solutions consider
the Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel,
Leadership and Education, Personnel and Facilities
(DOTMLPF) spectrum to make sure any technical
inputs are tactically aligned to provide realistic recommendations
for acquisition investment decisions
and modifications to existing programs of record. By
working with the Fleet components, Operational Test
and Evaluation Force (COTF), Warfare Centers of
Excellence (WCOE), and the Navy Warfare Development
Command (NWDC), better Fleet experiments
and data collection efforts are occurring to result in
better requirements generation based on proven warfighting
operational needs. The team also works with
technology efforts to determine the future impact on
mission capability with proper technology integration
plans thus promoting the successful transition
of promising new technologies. Figure 2 represents
NSWCDD’s strategic organization alignment for mission
engineering.
The Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy
(DASN) Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation
(RDT&E) provides resources for I&I initiatives
to support the future development of tools, processes,
and workforce development for the new mission engineering
discipline. Mission Level Assessment and
Evaluation (MLA&E) is one of those initiatives that
embeds mission engineering principles with Joint/
Naval exercises and experiments to capture desired
warfighting capabilities. This initiative serves as the
primary mechanism to institutionalize the technical-
to-tactical principles. The MLA&E methodology
closely aligns Fleet assessment processes by building
stakeholder relationships and requirements identification
through intensive warfighter integration efforts.
Finding Solutions to Warfighter Needs
Past technical-to-tactical relationships and developments
have suffered from lack of collaboration
between the major stakeholders leading to tactical
implementation and weapon system introductions
with inaccurate warfighter requirements, integration
and interoperability problems, and uninformed user
community. Fleet-produced Tactics, Techniques, and
Procedures (TTPs) development driven by identified
system shortfalls or responding to emerging threats
have not always been specifically identified
to the technical or acquisition community.
Technical developments and
acquisition programs have not routinely
benefitted from direct observations
and objective analysis obtained during
Fleet exercises or been informed by TTP
developments. Technical engineering
and tactical solutions are different in
their nature, but these efforts impact
each other and must be informed by the
other to achieve holistic, cost effective
solutions.
To address past technical-to-tactical
deficiencies, NSWCDD and the Navy’s
Surface Tactical Development Group
(STDG) are developing a template for
long-term collaboration and alignment
between the WCOEs and the Naval Sea Systems Command’s
Warfare Centers under the Surface Warfare
Enterprise (SWE). The objective is to align the surface
domain operational and engineering forces to ensure
coordination of both technical and tactical developmental
efforts; provide timely, pertinent information
to both parties; establish recurring reporting procedures;
ensure analyses are consistent; and address
critical performance issues.
During recent Fleet engagements, NSWCDD
aligned technical experts with Fleet tacticians in a
collaborative Surface Warfare Improvement Program
(SuWIP) tactical analysis process with the STDG and
other operational and tactical Fleet organizations. The
SuWIP produces an Integrated Prioritized Capabilities
List (IPCL) for the Surface Warfare community
to drive the investment areas within the Program
of Memorandum (POM). This is accomplished by
conducting in-depth analysis on operational and
systems test data to define technical improvements
that are aligned with Fleet priorities to determine
possible improvement areas for warfare effectiveness
through performance characteristics for combat/
weapon systems. The SuWIP Working Group consists
of Anti-Surface Warfare (ASuW) tactical and
technical subject matter experts and stakeholders
with an overall objective to assess current tactical procedures
and identify operational gaps in multi-platform
combat/weapon systems and their employment
against adversary threats. NSWCDD has incorporated
I&I activities with SuWIP to ensure tactical/technical
alignment of warfighting gap analysis, requirements
generation, and proposed holistic solutions to accomplish
mission wholeness. This technical-to-tactical
collaboration supported implementation of new
warfighting capabilities demonstrated in a forward
deployed test firing as shown in Figure 3.
Fleet Exercise Thrust
National policy for realignment of forces to the
Pacific Fleet area of operations provides strategic
guidance for technical-to-tactical alignment resourcing
requirements to achieve warfighting capabilities.
To align technical community with key operational
stakeholders and increased collaborative efforts with
Pacific Theater combatant, component and tactical
commanders are necessary to understand operational
needs that drive technical and tactical solutions.
Through DASN RDT&E-sponsored MLA&E initiatives,
the mission engineering team embedded with
key Pacific Theater Commanders (Pacific Command
(PACOM), Pacific Fleet (PACFLT), Commander,
Seventh Fleet (C7F)) and other theater component
and tactical commanders to assess full warfighting
capabilities. Using the Trident Warrior and Valiant
Shield Fleet exercise venues and processes as a test
bed, the team conducted engineering analysis of
deployed combat system operational and test data to
define performance characteristics and deficiencies in
combat and weapon systems to enable full effects/kill
chain capabilities. By articulating Fleet requirements,
expectations were better managed across technical
and operational stakeholders. Figure 4 shows the Fleet
forces rehearsal during Valiant Shield exercise with
NSWCDD scientists/engineers aboard to achieve a
desired warfighting capability.
MLA&E warfighter integration application during
Joint/Fleet exercise Valiant Shield surface warfare
events demonstrated the utility of mission engineering
principles as the underpinning for assessing existing
mission performance and proposed solutions. This
collaborative operational and technical community
approach to major Fleet exercises laid the foundation
of utilizing a Fleet user perspective to establish
the guiding principles necessary to capture mission
area requirements through capabilities-based architectures.
The outcome has driven the development
of combat system design specifications that enable
full combat employment of weapon systems
capabilities. A better understanding
of the gaps and deficiencies is now
achieved at the mission level across the
entire acquisition cycle, which facilitates
a decomposition of requirements
from the development of technology to
the execution of mission threads as an
integrated warfighting capability.
Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces (Training)
sponsored mission engineering
support of Commander, Strike Forces
Training Atlantic (CSFTL) assessors
to align technical experts with tactical
experts in order to identify improvements
in data collection and analysis
during fleet certification events, specifically
Composite Unit Training Exercises
(COMPTUEX). Fleet Training and Readiness processes
employ a Navy Mission Essential Task List
(NMETL) mapped to specific Navy mission areas
(capabilities) in a continuous improvement process
called the Navy Warfare Training System. The owners
of Navy Mission Essential Tasks use feedback from
exercises, operations, and other events to improve
how the Fleet articulates requirements, measures
performance, certifies readiness, and implements
improvements. Efforts to date have focused on Fast
In-Shore Attack Craft (FIAC) defense during Harry
S. Truman and George H.W. Bush Strike Groups’
Sustainment Exercises (SUSTEX) and Composite Unit
Training Exercises. It is expected that the MLA&E
application of the ICF/OCD data model will lead to
better defined measures of effectiveness that lead to
advanced levels of Fleet readiness. Figure 5 shows a
5-inch gun engagement of High Speed Maneuvering
Targets representing Fast In-Shore Attack Craft
during Harry S. Truman Strike Group’s Sustainment
Exercise.
Summary
Intensive warfighter integration technical-to-tactical
alignment enables achievement of surface domain
excellence through I&I by reducing costs, preventing
disjointed efforts, ensuring a linear approach, and
reducing time required to develop and implement
effective materiel and non-materiel solutions for the
surface warfare community. Warfighter integration
efforts to transition technical solutions to tactical
capabilities through MLA&E create conditions for
a philosophical change in evaluation, experimentation
and assessment that enable mission engineers to
participate in the planning, execution and analysis of
Fleet events. This tight technical-to-tactical linkage
results in higher confidence of producing integrated
warfighting capabilities for our warfighters through
validated MTB architectures from the Fleet.