FORCEnet Implementation Strategy (2005) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Coevolution of FORCEnet Operational Concepts and Materiel
4 Coevolution of FORCEnet Operational Concepts and Materiel
Pages 79-114
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 79... ...
2003. "Sea Power 21 Series, Part VIII: Sea Trial: Enabler for a Transformed Fleet," U.S.
|
From page 80... ...
The challenge in implementing FORCEnet is to make this linear process highly iterative and integrate it with concept development, as suggested by Figure 4.1. The authority for each of the three major FORCEnet implementation activities is indicated in the diagram: the CFFC for operational concept and requirements development; the ASN(RDA)
|
From page 81... ...
-- that take advantage of the new FnII capability if advances are to be achieved in the naval warfighting capabilities represented in Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing, and EMW. Coevolution of technical-capabilities development and operational-concept development is the process by which change in one can be synchronized with change in the other.
|
From page 82... ...
The operational concepts are adjusted or changed only after experience with the new equipment is gained in the operational environment. For example, when the F/A-18 Hornet was first introduced to fleet operations in the postVietnam War era, flight profiles used in large-airwing strike packages (known as Alpha strikes)
|
From page 83... ...
The Navy has formalized this process under the name Sea Trial. Figure 4.2 is drawn from the instruction that describes the Sea Trial process.
|
From page 84... ...
2003. "Sea Power 21 Series, Part VIII: Sea Trial: Innovation Enabler for a Transformed Fleet," U.S.
|
From page 85... ...
. 4.3.2 Navy Concept Development NWDC coordinates concept development for the Navy, but the CFFC has assigned concept-development responsibility for the Sea Power 21 pillars to operational agents -- the Second Fleet for Sea Strike and Sea Basing and the Third
|
From page 86... ...
The functional concept for FORCEnet is intended to support the development process for FORCEnet transformational requirements, the development of the FORCEnet operational architecture, and CD&E. The FORCEnet concept is to evolve to serve as a coherent unifying concept that enables Sea Strike, Sea Shield and Sea Basing.
|
From page 87... ...
Core competencies are signature characteristics of Marines and the Marine Corps. 4.3.4 The Navy Pillar Concepts and Capabilities The Navy is in the process of further refining and defining operating concepts for the three Sea Power 21 pillars of Sea Shield, Sea Strike, and Sea Basing.
|
From page 88... ...
A draft document entitled "Sea Trial Concept Development Plan -- Top Level Version 030213," provided to the committee by the Commander of the Third BOX 4.2 Sea Shield Mission Capability Packages Force Surface Undersea Theater Air and Protection Warfare Warfare Missile Defense · Protect · Provide · Provide self-defense · Provide self against self-defense against subsurface defense against Special against threats. air and missile Operations surface · Neutralize submarine threats.
|
From page 89... ...
No further information on the plans for concept development beyond the list was provided. The lists for each warfare area provide insufficient detail and little indication of what Sea Shield will bring to naval warfare that is new or different in operational concepts from what has been the case historically, although homeland defense is a new area altogether in need of much development.
|
From page 90... ...
90 TTPs terrorism/ of analysis and Defense domain interdiction of protection neutralization Combating force Maritime awareness Predictive Maritime and Refinement concepts operations Homeland · · · · · aids aids operations (TMD) -- operations Development localization, decision of localization, decision of Defense (TAD)
|
From page 91... ...
Sea Basing underpins the capability provided through Sea Strike and Sea Shield. The Second Fleet developed the "Fleet Required Capabilities List for Sea Basing" that includes the following: · The Joint Force Maritime Component Commander (JFMCC)
|
From page 92... ...
As with the "Fleet Required Capabilities List for Sea Strike," the list for Sea Basing includes several areas that require FORCEnet capabilities for such things as connectivity, information flow, and information management. A draft concept paper for Sea Basing has been written.
|
From page 93... ...
For example, the 360-degree multiband antenna is a point solution for a reliable (meaning that BOX 4.6 FORCEnet Mission Capability Packages Common Operational Intelligence, Surveillance, Communication and and Tactical Picture and Reconnaissance Data Networks · Provide mission · Conduct sensor · Provide communications planning. management and infrastructure.
|
From page 94... ...
Rather BOX 4.7 Top Fleet Requirements as Determined by the FORCEnet Operational Advisory Group Requirements · Battlespace Awareness -- Scalable common operational picture (selective availability with confidence) -- Fused Joint Data Network to and from Joint Planning Network -- Multi-Tactical Digital Information Link management · Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance -- Intelligence products to tactical user -- Fused intelligence connectivity (Blue (Navy)
|
From page 95... ...
. EMW is firmly aligned with Sea Power 21 and supports the three pillars Sea Strike, Sea Shield, and Sea Basing by providing forces and capabilities directly from the continental United States, from a sustainable sea base, or from adjacent shore locations.
|
From page 96... ...
The pressure to provide something now tends to override thinking about what FORCEnet, as the enabler of Sea Power 21, is supposed to do. The result is that efforts tend to gravitate toward solving old problems rather than toward addressing the new challenges of Sea Shield, Sea Strike, and Sea Basing and the ways in which FORCEnet relates to them to bring real combat capability to those concepts.
|
From page 97... ...
The FBE results are used to accelerate the delivery of innovative warfare capabilities to the fleet, identify concept-based requirements, and evaluate new operational capabilities.10 As part of the Sea Trial process, the CFFC has assigned responsibility for prioritization and coordination for the warfighting concept development and experimentation related to each of the Sea Power 21 pillars and FORCEnet to numbered fleet commanders and the commander of NETWARCOM as opera 8Another recent study conducted under the auspices of the Naval Studies Board contains additional information on experimentation: National Research Council, 2004, The Role of Experimentation in Building Future Naval Forces, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. However, that report was not made available to the committee during the course of the present study because it was undergoing Navy classification review prior to its public release.
|
From page 98... ...
chartered by the CFFC. Generally aligned with the Mission Capability Packages associated with the four NCPs discussed previously, FCTs will provide operational agents with the expertise needed to develop and evolve Sea Power 21 operating concepts.
|
From page 99... ...
Trident Warrior is established as a series of large-scale Sea Trial events in the joint operational environment. FORCEnet Trident Warrior events are aimed specifically at delivering initial, incremental FORCEnet capability and at developing TTPs and concepts of operations related to the best use of the new FORCE 12CAPT Richard Simon, USN, Head, FORCEnet Experimentation and Innovation Group, Naval Network Warfare Command, "FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation," presentation to the committee on November 17, 2003.
|
From page 100... ...
The first Trident Warrior event -- Trident Warrior 03, conducted September 2530, 2003 -- was a fleet C4ISR experiment cosponsored by the CNO, NETWARCOM, and SPAWAR to demonstrate FORCEnet capabilities with existing C4ISR products and to deliver the first increment of FORCEnet capability to the fleet. The main focus was on exercising robust, dynamically reconfigurable networks in support of command and control and integrated fires for the ESSEX Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG)
|
From page 101... ...
4.4.4 Marine Corps Experimentation The Marine Corps Combat and Force Development process provides for the Marine Corps what Sea Trial provides for the Navy. The Marine Corps is an equal partner in the Sea Trial process.
|
From page 102... ...
SOURCE: Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, Va. future sea-based Marine Expeditionary Brigade, ESG, and Expeditionary Strike Force (ESF)
|
From page 103... ...
Each Naval Capability Package contains several MCPs that relate to the stated missions each Naval Capability Package is to conduct, and that include specific capabilities that must be realized to some degree in each Naval Capability Package or deployed maritime force package. Note that to the operational agents, the MCPs are sets of operational capabilities; to the NCDP, an MCP is a set of programs that could provide these capabilities.
|
From page 104... ...
104 FORCENET IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY year, culminates in a set of joint approved system requirements and priorities being delivered by N8. The N8 then compares the priorities from the N6/N7 against the Navy's available resources and works closely with the CNO to develop the POM, the DON prioritized budget request submitted to OSD.
|
From page 105... ...
The material that follows first discusses those activities individually and then discusses the interactions among them. 4.7.1 Improving the Activities The committee observed that the Sea Power 21 operational agents devoted relatively little time to concept formulation.
|
From page 106... ...
Some committee members, impressed by the resources of the Pacific Fleet and by the operational insights that the fleet has gained from its mission, believe that this fleet could contribute substantially to concept development and exploitation. A major limitation of the OPNAV process is the separation of the FnII from the other Naval Capability Packages in the NCDP.
|
From page 107... ...
Instead, there should be continuous interaction so that progress in materiel development can be calibrated against changing threats and operational concepts for dealing with them. 4.8 GOVERNANCE Achieving FORCEnet capabilities will require extraordinary process coordination and integration in order to be successful.
|
From page 108... ...
The Programs-Acquisitions Coordination Board would have support from a dedicated staff in OPNAV and the office of the ASN(RDA) to monitor events in 18Including the Commander, Fleet Forces Command, or Commander, Naval Network Warfare Command, on the board could resolve the differences between the requirements priorities of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and the fleet.
|
From page 109... ...
2000. Network-Centric Naval Forces: A Transition Strategy for Enhancing Operational Capabilities, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., p.
|
From page 110... ...
4.9 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.9.1 Findings Following are the committee's findings with respect to the three major FORCEnet implementation activities -- operational concept and requirements development, program formulation and resource allocation, and acquisition and engineering execution -- and the prospects for improving their coordination. Coevolution using the dual-spiral approach for the development of the operational construct and architecture of FORCEnet provides positive opportunities for interaction between operators and acquirers as a means to validate solutions for FORCEnet capability needs and gaps.
|
From page 111... ...
The Second and Third Fleets demonstrate only very limited requirements development for the three Sea Power 21 pillars of Sea Shield, Sea Strike, and Sea Basing. While fleet FORCEnet requirements lists have been made, very little interaction of the three pillars with FORCEnet is evident.
|
From page 112... ...
The committee recommends that CFFC determine whether the increased resources would come by reassigning personnel already assigned to the organizations or by request to the CNO for additional personnel. · Recommendation for the CNO: Assign the Pacific Fleet greater direct responsibility in Sea Power 21 concept development.
|
From page 113... ...
· Recommendation for the Second and Third Fleets: Devote more resources to the development of requirements for the three Sea Power 21 pillars. Needed capabilities for the pillars must be adequately specified in order to determine the necessary FORCEnet capabilities.
|
From page 114... ...
The review would include the following: the status and plans for concept development and experimentation for each of the Sea Power 21 pillars and FORCEnet, the current understanding of the set of capabilities required in the fleet, recommended changes in programs to align them better with this set of capabilities, and opportunities for employing acquisition prototypes in naval and joint experiments and exercises. NETWARCOM would provide the staff support to the CFFC in preparing this assessment.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.