Annual Report to the President and Congress, Chapter 15

William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense
1998
Department of Defense website
http://www.defenselink.mil/execsec/adr98/chap15.html#top

Chapter 15
IMPLEMENTATION

The Department’s efforts to transform U.S. military forces for the 21st century have thus far focused on establishing a process that will effectively merge quality fighting forces, leading edge technologies, and new operational concepts such as those discussed in Chapter 14 to promote the integrated development of new operational capabilities. A key element that distinguishes this transformation effort from a more traditional evolution of military capabilities is the concurrent development of new concepts and doctrine, as well as organizational configurations that will maximize the utility of new technologies.

The broad operational concepts and other key aspects of Joint Vision 2010 provide a common framework for the Services as they develop their capabilities to carry out a wide range of joint operations to meet the demands of a challenging and uncertain future. The implementation of Joint Vision 2010 is well under way and involves the commanders in chief (CINCs), the Services, and joint organizations that must be meaningful participants in developing, testing, and integrating these new concepts.

The vital first step in the process of transformation is to increase the information processing capabilities of current systems and those under development to help provide U.S. forces with information superiority. The Department is undertaking substantial testing and experimentation efforts to determine how forces that possess information superiority can more effectively accomplish current missions as well as gain proficiency—indeed dominance—in new missions.

The transformation of U.S. military forces goes well beyond gaining information superiority and developing new technologies. Through a wide variety of analyses, wargames, studies, experiments, and exercises, the Department is systematically and aggressively investigating new operational concepts, doctrines, and organizational approaches that will enable U.S. forces to maintain full spectrum dominance of the battlespace well into the 21st century. Many of the activities associated with implementing the ongoing transformation of U.S. military forces are described in the following sections.

ASSURING INFORMATION SUPERIORITY

The Department is already well along the path to achieving significant improvements in U.S. military capabilities by successfully harnessing new information technologies. Programs are under way throughout DoD to improve the capabilities of current weapon systems, platforms, and communications systems through aggressive exploitation of information technology. For example, the Army will field a fully digitized heavy division by 2000. This division will be capable of rapidly moving critical battlespace information among its units, enabling them to overwhelm opposing forces. A digitized corps will follow by 2004. The Navy is rapidly implementing the results of its Cooperative Engagement Capability experiments that net and integrate radar tracking data from sensors carried on both airborne and surface platforms into a system of systems that permits airborne and surface-based shooters to jointly mount effective air, cruise missile, and ballistic missile defense. The Department has committed major resources to such implementation efforts.

A series of analytic assessment efforts have provided senior decision makers with key insights into the increased combat power that can be generated with prudent and balanced investments in the building blocks of information superiority. For example, the Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) Mission Assessment, and several sensor-to-shooter studies, improved the Department’s understanding of the return on investment in various types of systems to create a C4ISR common backbone. The C4ISR Decision Support Center provides a continuing capability for conducting cost and performance trade-off analyses on complex C4ISR issues.

Network Centric Warfare

Just as economic success is increasingly determined by the ability to rapidly acquire, process, and act on information, future military success will be determined increasingly by the ability of joint and combined forces to gain battlespace awareness and exploit it faster and more effectively than adversaries. The Department is working to provide a secure, open C4ISR network architecture that has three closely connected parts: the sensor grid, the information grid, and the engagement grid.

The Department is capitalizing on its investment in surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities by linking their output into coherent sensor grids. For example, the sensor grid embedded in the Navy’s Cooperative Engagement Capability has demonstrated the significant performance increase associated with a shift to network-centric operational architectures that link distant sensors to the appropriate engagement platform. Future sensor grids will feature a variety of new imaging and signals intelligence sensors, currently in advanced stages of development, deployed aboard the Global Hawk, DarkStar, and Predator unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), as well as new space-based sensor grids, like the high and low orbit elements of the Space-Based InfraRed System (SBIRS).

The information grid is an electronic network that stores, correlates, and relays the data needed to provide dominant awareness of the battlespace to commanders and forces. Through battle command centers that task and synchronize the operations of combat and support elements, it links multiple intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance sensor platforms and assessment centers that determine friendly and enemy locations with the attack systems that will engage hostile forces. The grid is comprised of computational nodes, communications links, and deployed applications that rely upon voice communications, data transfer, and network information. Examples of ongoing initiatives in this area include the Defense Message System, which will provide commanders and forces a secure means of communication on a worldwide basis; the Programmable Modular Communications System, which will allow all U.S. forces operating in a given area to talk to each other in real-time; and various new types of satellite communications, including the jam-resistant Milstar constellation and the Global Broadcast System, which will provide various types of information to the forces in the field. The recently deployed Global Command and Control System (GCCS) provides commanders with a wide range of software applications for command and control, and support that are deployed at the computational nodes of the information grid. Network management is crucial to an effective information grid, especially in monitoring and controlling network traffic, managing the assignment of frequencies, and managing communications security.

The Department has made important progress in the development of engagement grids that link with information grids and multiple sensor grids to forces that can rapidly and decisively carry out the assigned missions. Exciting new capabilities for employing counter-battery fire against mobile enemy multiple rocket launcher and artillery systems have been demonstrated by the Precision/Rapid Counter-Multiple Rocket Launcher Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration conducted in 1997.

As sensor grids, information grids, and engagement grids are networked together, commanders will increasingly be able to employ every element of their force for maximum military effectiveness. Such an integration of capabilities through the use of computer-based networks, known as network-centric warfare, offers the possibility of revolutionary improvement in warfighting capabilities.

Information Operations

Information and information technologies are so central to global military, civil, and economic activities that information itself is bound to become an object for future competition and even conflict. The United States has embraced modern computer-based information networks. The U.S. economy and national life are increasingly dependent on information in digital, electronic, or optical form and on the national infrastructure that handles such information. The rapid movement and use of information, employing networked computers, are spurring national and international economic growth. The Department’s adaptation of information technology to military uses is greatly increasing the capability of U.S. forces, but also making DoD more and more dependent on these same technologies.

The DoD Information Operations (IO) Master Plan establishes the Department’s vision for information operations and lays out the processes for dealing with IO challenges. It provides the baseline description of IO policy, guidance, goals, objectives, initiatives, and strategies, as well as proposed timelines for achieving these. It is a management tool for addressing issues and opportunities, as well as identifying and correcting voids and discrepancies.

Information operations fall into two categories. Defensive IO, including information assurance/security efforts, defend the information and information systems required for joint force operations. Offensive IO exploit vulnerabilities in the information systems of adversaries to reduce their overall capabilities. Information operations concepts and policies are captured in a series of DoD directives, as well as security guidance for information operations and special information operations.

Defensive IO, or information assurance, protects U.S. and allied forces’ globally distributed communications and information processing networks from interference or exploitation by an adversary. The Department has conducted education and training to increase awareness of information assurance, and conducted wargames and exercises to increase warfighters’ experience in applying IO to military operations. The 1997 Eligible Receiver exercise, sponsored by the Joint Staff, provided vivid evidence of the challenges associated with defending against a coordinated IO attack on key elements of the defense information infrastructure. This exercise highlighted the need to quickly detect and recognize an IO attack, to promptly warn the defense information infrastructure that an attack is under way, and to quickly coordinate joint responses to such attacks.

Offensive information operations help U.S. forces to penetrate, manipulate, or deny an adversary’s use of information in order to hinder the battlespace awareness and operations of enemy forces. Offensive IO requires the complete integration of technology, intelligence, and operational concepts, as well as forces trained in the conduct of information warfare. The United States Atlantic Command (USACOM) exercise Evident Surprise focused on the planning activities for successful conduct of an IO campaign, highlighting the interagency coordination process required to deconflict and execute offensive information operations in a future joint environment.

Intelligence plays a central role in both offensive and defensive information operations, providing assessments of adversary intentions and offensive capabilities, as well as the technical data on adversary information systems and socio-political assessments, all of which are required for effective offensive IO. The Intelligence Community recently published the first National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on information operations. The NIE will be updated periodically to keep up with rapid changes in technological developments and geopolitical trends. The Department established the Information Operations Technology Center (IOTC) at Fort Meade, Maryland, to enhance cooperation between the Department and the Intelligence Community in developing capabilities to take advantage of advances in computers, telecommunications, networks, and other information technologies.

Enhancing C4ISR Interoperability

The Department established the Joint C4ISR Battle Center in July 1997 at Suffolk, Virginia, to provide the combatant commands with a joint capability and experimental environment at the joint task force (JTF) level. The Center assists JTF training exercises and conducts tests designed to assess joint capabilities and synchronization, foster C4ISR interoperability, and enable the rapid insertion of new technology into the operating forces that will fully support joint operations.

The Joint Interoperability Test Command (JITC) at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, performs several critical missions. The command provides command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) operational and technical assistance to the warfighting commands. Teams of experts from the command deploy during selected joint exercises to assist in on-site resolution of C4I interoperability problems. JITC operates a 24-hour hotline to answer joint C4I interoperability issues, publishes C4ISR lessons learned on a quarterly basis, and operates a worldwide web homepage. The JITC is also the sole authority for DoD interoperability certification of C4I systems, assuring that interoperability concerns are addressed early in the design process and supported throughout the operational life of a system. The JITC tested over 259 systems for interoperability during FY 1997 and plans to complete more than 290 tests in FY 1998. JITC provides operational test and evaluation for DoD procured and managed C4I systems. JITC has cooperative agreements with research and development centers in industry and universities that ensure the command remains on the leading edge of interoperability technology.

The Military Communications Electronics Board, composed of senior leaders in the communications field from the Joint Staff, the Services, and other U.S. government agencies, is responsible, in addition to its other duties, for assuring that allied and coalition partners can operate in conjunction with U.S. forces. The Board routinely evaluates investment priorities to ensure information superiority in allied and coalition operations.

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND ACQUISITION

U.S. technological superiority is essential to achieve the full spectrum dominance envisioned by Joint Vision 2010. To maintain this technological superiority, the DoD Science and Technology (S&T) program continues to invent, develop, and harness technology to realize new warfighting capabilities. Combined with new operational concepts, the S&T program is a powerful instrument for improving military capabilities.

To insure continued U.S. military preeminence, the Department must always invest in the next generation of defense technologies. Tomorrow’s capabilities depend in part on today’s S&T investments. The modernization of U.S. forces, the future ability to prevent, deter or defeat armed threats, and the achievement of Joint Vision 2010 capabilities are all premised on the technological superiority of U.S. forces. Advanced military capabilities and concepts do not spring into being fully developed. They are preceded by years of investment in enabling technologies which are integrated into new systems and employed using emerging operational concepts.

The Department is conducting an aggressive S&T program to ensure that future U.S. forces have the combat edge provided by superior technology. Four publications—the Defense Science and Technology Strategy, its supporting Basic Research Plan, the Defense Technology Area Plan, and the Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan—lay out the Department’s science and technology vision, strategic plan, and objectives for defense planners, programmers, and those who develop defense science and technology. The Basic Research Plan presents the Department’s objectives and investment strategy for DoD-sponsored basic research performed by universities, industry, and service laboratories. The plan highlights six particularly promising technologies: biomimetics, nanoscience, smart structures, mobile wireless communications, intelligent systems, and compact power sources. The Defense Technology Area Plan looks across service and defense agency investments and describes the Department’s applied research and advanced technology development programs. Defense Technology Objectives focus these investments and describe the specific benefits derived from each technological advance. There will be 346 Defense Technology Objectives associated with the FY 1999 President’s Budget. Nineteen are scheduled to be completed by the end of FY 1998 and 36 by the end of FY 1999.

The Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan takes a joint perspective, looking horizontally across the Services and defense agencies to ensure that DoD S&T programs address priority future joint warfighting capabilities. Published annually, this plan identifies ten Joint Warfighting Capabilities Objectives (JWCOs) associated with critical capabilities needed for U.S. forces to maintain a clear cut warfighting advantage. The JWCOs, developed by the Joint Staff in collaboration with the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the S&T executives of each Service, are focused on supporting the operational concepts of Joint Vision 2010. The 1998 Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan contains the following JWCOs: Information Superiority, Precision Force, Combat Identification, Joint Theater Missile Defense, Military Operations in Urban Terrain, Joint Readiness and Logistics and Sustainment of Strategic Systems, Electronic Combat, Chemical-Biological Warfare Defense and Protection and Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction, Combating Terrorism, and Force Projection/Dominant Maneuver.

Advance Concept Technology Demonstrations

Marrying new operational concepts with new technologies, advanced concept technology demonstrations (ACTDs) are aimed at rapidly fielding new systems to evaluate their military utility—generally within two to four years. The ACTD represents DoD’s approach to capturing and harnessing technology and innovation rapidly for military use at reduced cost. ACTDs are focused on three principal objectives: to gain an operator’s understanding and evaluation of the military utility of new technology applications before committing to acquisition; to develop corresponding battlefield operational concepts and doctrine that make the best use of the new capability in the joint warfighting arena; and to provide new capabilities to the combatant forces. ACTDs are designed to foster directly an alliance between the technologists and the joint warfighters, eliminating barriers and improving the management of these critical efforts.

Some 40 ACTDs are now under way, with six more already completed, all addressing key JWCO challenges. Twelve ACTDs are planned for completion in FY 1998. Planned results for FY 1999 are outlined in justification material provided to Congress in support of the President’s Budget. ACTDs focus on critical military needs as determined by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) and respond to those needs with near-term solutions based on mature or nearly mature technologies. The involvement of the JROC in the ACTD initiation process ensures a sharp focus on development of critical operational capabilities highlighted in Joint Vision 2010. By limiting consideration to mature or nearly mature technologies, the ACTD avoids the time and risks associated with technology development, concentrating instead on the integration of various technologies and demonstration activities. There is also strong emphasis on the use of commercial technologies to leverage industry investments and to gain the benefit of commercially available spares and product improvements. This approach permits an early user evaluation of solutions to critical military needs on a greatly reduced schedule, and at a significantly lower cost.

The evaluation of military utility is the heart of the ACTD process. After the proposed solution to the military need has been designed, fieldable prototypes are fabricated in sufficient quantity to permit operational utility to be determined. This is typically accomplished by evaluating a minimum operational capability in field exercises against realistic opposing forces. The evaluation of utility includes effectiveness of individual units, suitability for use by troops, and overall impact on the outcome of the conflict. As a result of these exercises, the user is able to refine both the concept of operations and the operational requirements for the system, and to assess the overall value of the proposed concept to warfighting capability. This process significantly improves the quality of subsequent acquisition decisions. It also allows the test systems that were evaluated in the ACTD to remain with the operating forces in the field after the evaluation is completed, providing an early interim capability.

A recent ACTD with immediate operational impact involved the Predator UAV deployed with U.S. forces in Bosnia. The Predator is a fully autonomous, relatively low cost UAV that takes advantage of available technology to provide continuous, near all-weather day/night coverage with optical, infrared, and radar sensors. The ACTD began in November 1993 with an ambitious 30-month schedule. In March 1996, the Predator was flying operational missions protecting allied forces in Bosnia. At the conclusion of the ACTD in September 1996, the system was transferred to the USAF’s recently reactivated 11th Reconnaissance Squadron deployed to the region, where it remains today, providing improved information to the NATO Stabilization Force in Bosnia. In August 1997, the Predator entered production, just four years after ACTD initiation.

JOINT/SERVICE BATTLE LABS

Battle Lab Concept

Over the past few years, the Services and the Joint Staff have created a series of battle labs to develop new concepts and capabilities to carry out critical missions and tasks to meet current and future challenges. The joint and Service battle labs are the Department’s test bed for exploring ways for 21st century military forces to maximize their effectiveness across the spectrum of future military operations.

The Joint Warfighting Center

The Joint Warfighting Center, operated by the Joint Staff at Fort Monroe, Virginia, guides the development and assessment of concepts and capabilities needed for joint warfighting in the future. In May 1997, it published the Concept for Future Joint Operations, which serves as the intellectual foundation for Joint Vision 2010 implementation. The Joint Warfighting Center (JWFC) is coordinating ongoing assessments of several innovative approaches to warfighting. The Center uses computer modeling, state-of-the-art simulations, and real-world joint exercises to investigate new operational concepts, technologies, information processes, and organizational arrangements. While still in its early stages, the JWFC has helped develop the common conception of future joint warfighting that underlies many of the new joint experiments.

The Joint C4ISR Battle Center

In addition to working to assure C4ISR interoperability, the Joint C4ISR Battle Center (JBC) at Suffolk, Virginia, provides combatant commands at the joint task force level with joint assessments and an experimentation environment. Its Federated Battle Lab Project establishes a distributed, collaborative C4ISR experimentation environment between the JBC, the Services, DoD agencies, CINCs, battle labs, and the Joint Interoperability Test Center. The Federated Battle Lab represents a major step towards the creation of a virtual joint experimentation environment. The cyberspace linking of each Service’s battle labs will enable more rapid development of joint concepts and equally rapid initial testing and experimentation utilizing state-of-the-art models and simulations, without duplicating efforts.

Service Battle Labs

The Army’s battle lab program is an integral part of the Force XXI process to determine the shape and size of land maneuver forces for the 21st century. Army battle labs accelerate the combat development process by determining operational requirements faster and better through warfighting experiments. The battle labs enable users, developers, and industry to work together to exploit technological advancements and synchronize advanced warfighting concepts.

Currently, there are ten Army battle labs: Mounted Battlespace; Dismounted Battlespace; Command and Control at Forts Gordon, Leavenworth, and Huachuca; Depth and Simultaneous Attack; Combat Service Support; Maneuver Support; Air Maneuver; and Space and Missile Defense. All ten operate under the direction of the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command.

One of the many innovative concepts and technologies that has emerged from the Army’s battle lab efforts is the Advanced Precision Airborne Delivery System (APADS). APADS was initially conceived as a way for delivery aircraft to execute airdrop missions while remaining out of the engagement range of most air defense systems. Working together with the Air Force, the United States Special Operations Command, and the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab, the battle labs used off-the-shelf guidance systems and parafoils in an aggressive 15-month program. This effort resulted in an effective operational capability to accurately deliver equipment and supplies for humanitarian and disaster relief purposes, as well as during conflict, with significantly reduced risk to the delivery aircraft.

In order to investigate technology and operational concept advances under real world conditions, the Navy is employing fleet units as At-Sea Battle Labs. Navy Fleet Battle Experiments are integrated into regular fleet training exercises to explore capabilities represented by technology and new warfighting ideas, with assistance provided by the Maritime Battle Center and the Naval Doctrine Command.

The Navy’s Maritime Battle Center is designed to manage the innovation process and provide the oversight required to translate promising concepts into new operational capabilities, which can in turn be tested as fleet battle experiments. Planning responsibilities include building the scenario, establishing objectives, developing measures of effectiveness, analyzing results from experiments, and briefing senior Navy leadership on potential new capabilities illustrated by experiment results.

The Marine Corps Warfighting Lab provides an institutional mechanism for investigation, innovation, and experimentation in six functional areas: command and control; fires and targeting; mobility and maneuver; survivability; sustainment; and training, education and manpower. The lab developed Sea Dragon, a five-year experimentation plan with three phases: Hunter Warrior (completed in March 1997), Urban Warrior, and Capable Warrior. Each phase starts with limited objective experiments and ends with an integrating advanced warfighting experiment.

Urban Warrior, now under way, will be conducted in two phases and along six experimental tracks. The first phase will be conducted primarily on the East Coast with II Marine Expeditionary Forces and will end in September 1998 with a Culminating Phase Experiment. The second phase will commence in October 1988 on the West Coast with I Marine Expeditionary Force and will terminate in an Advanced Warfighting Experiment on the West Coast during the Spring of 1999.

The Marine Corps Warfighting Lab works very closely with the Navy’s Fleet Battle Experiments. Hunter Warrior and Fleet Battle Experiment Alpha, for example, were conducted concurrently with a number of overlapping activities. The Urban Warrior Advanced Warfighting Experiment (AWE) will integrate results from the Military Operations in Urbanized Terrain ACTD conducted with the Army’s Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab and the Extended Littoral Battlefield ACTD.

The lab is also actively involved in non-lethal weapons development and experimentation. The 1992-1994 U.S. deployments to Somalia indicated the need for non-lethal weapons and illustrated the utility of this class of weapons in order to provide the military commander with realistic options. Over the course of a year, the lab developed a capability to effectively deliver non-lethal agents remotely using a UAV and conducted several limited objective experiments involving a wide range of potential operational non-lethal agents and munitions.

In 1997, the Air Force established six battle labs with the mission of identifying innovative ideas, assessing their merit, and validating innovative operational concepts that have the potential to impact future Air Force training, doctrine, requirements, and acquisition programs. The six battle labs are: the Air Expeditionary Force Battlelab, the Command and Control Battle Management Battlelab, the Force Protection Battlelab, the Information Warfare Battlelab, the Space Battlelab, and the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Battlelab.

Assessing the merit of a new concept for operations requires the integration of battle lab and field expertise with existing and emerging operational capabilities. Validated ideas and concepts that satisfy an operational requirement are presented to senior Air Force decision makers, offering them the opportunity to revise Air Force doctrine, organization, requirements, training, or acquisition programs. Ultimately, however, the primary focus of a battle lab initiative is to quickly investigate a concept’s merit and measure its ability to support the Air Force’s core competencies and Joint Vision 2010 for the next century.

WARGAMING

While force exercises and experiments typically test capabilities that could be employed within five to ten years, wargames generally focus on improving understanding of the security environment and the relative merits of alternative means of meeting critical military challenges over the longer term. Wargames are carefully constructed simulations in which experienced civilian and military players, normally organized into teams representing various nations, must make decisions regarding the use of force in the context of a future conflict scenario. Wargames are primarily conducted at DoD’s senior service colleges, and are a critical tool in ensuring that senior decision makers and joint force commanders and staffs are able to maximize warfighting capabilities in the 21st century.

Each of the services is active in wargaming. The Army sponsors a series of wargames entitled Army After Next at the Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania. These wargames focus on operational concepts for warfare in the 2020 time frame.

The Navy sponsors an annual summer wargame at the Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island. This game examines U.S. policy, strategy, and operational concepts in the context of global and regional trends, issues, and crises. The 1997 wargame examined the future of joint warfare in the context of potential conflicts in two regions of the world.

The Air Force has begun a series of wargames entitled Global Engagement at the Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. These wargames are intended to illuminate the capability of joint air and space power.

The Marine Corps has conducted a series of wargames on Revolution in Military Affairs and Urban Warfare at the Marine Corps War College, Quantico, Virginia. These wargames focused on identifying the capabilities required to implement future Marine Corps concepts.

Many of the Department’s efforts to explore operational concepts and forces for beyond 2010 are facilitated by the Office of Net Assessment, which sponsors various wargames and related workshops, conferences, bilateral discussions, and independent assessments. Through Net Assessment, the department also stays deeply involved in the analytical efforts of allies and friends, i.e., France, Germany, Sweden, Japan, and Australia.

JOINT FORCE EXPERIMENTS

Joint experimentation is critical to gaining insights into future operational concepts and validating the ability of new battlefield operational concepts to provide required capabilities. The Joint Training System is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s program to shape the way the armed forces plan, think, and train for future military operations. This system translates the Joint Vision 2010 concepts into an achievable process. It improves the synergy of the overall effort by guiding the co-evolution of joint doctrine, agile organizational structures, training, exercises, and enhanced experimentation that turns future concepts into focused capabilities.

Part of the Joint Training System, the Joint Simulation System (JSIMS), is guiding training simulation for the future. JSIMS is a simulation network that will assist in training units and staffs, joint task forces, CINC staffs, and interagency personnel. It will globally connect training audiences to allow distance training without deployment. The intrinsic assessment capabilities of JSIMS will enhance the exploration and evaluation of new operational concepts and joint force experimentation.

The United States Atlantic Command has already begun to combine joint force experimentation with joint force training. This serves to reduce the already significant strain on operating forces, since a single exercise serves the dual function of training and experimentation. An excellent example of this was USACOM’s exercise Unified Endeavor, conducted in October and November 1997. The exercise was designed to train the USACOM commander and staff, the joint task force commander and staff, the joint intelligence center, and component commanders. Additionally, the exercise involved a parallel lead nation command structure, with United Kingdom forces falling under U.S. tactical control while the United Kingdom retained its national command structure. The exercise also served as the vehicle for evaluating two ACTDs on the synthetic theater of war and on the joint countermine concept.

Acting in its role as a joint force integrator, USACOM also conducted Exercise Roving Sands at Fort Bliss, Texas, in April 1997. Roving Sands was a joint tactical air operations exercise employing Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and allied forces operating under the command of a joint task force. The exercise trained participants in the conduct of joint suppression of enemy air defenses, the integration of joint tactical firepower, and both active and passive tactical missile defense operations. Due to the high concentration of joint forces, Roving Sands proved to be an excellent vehicle for experimentation as well, demonstrating the operational effectiveness of several advanced tactical ballistic missile defense concepts.

The Department plans to conduct a series of other joint force experiments to evaluate the impact of various concepts, doctrines, technologies, and organizations on the warfighting capability of joint and combined forces. DoD will leverage the significant experience that USACOM has in planning, coordinating, and conducting this type of exercise/experiment, as well as the Service contributions.

ADVANCED WARFIGHTING EXPERIMENTS

AWEs are large-scale warfighting experiments that explore emerging operational concepts and new technologies in an end-to-end manner. They enable organization, doctrine, and systems to be varied in a more controlled manner than during joint exercises in order to explore new operational concepts for generating joint combat power. The compelling need for AWEs arises from the fact that organization, doctrine, training, and leadership must co-evolve with systems and technology to fully realize the improvement in joint combat power envisioned in the Revolution in Military Affairs. AWEs are Department-wide joint efforts that often require years of preparation to create both a surrogate material capability to simulate future systems and a joint force that is fully trained in the new doctrine for employment of that future capability.

Army Force XXI Advanced Warfighting Experiments

In March 1997, the Army conducted the Task Force XXI AWE at the National Training Center. Conducted in a realistic joint force environment, the experiment was designed to determine if intelligence from advanced surveillance and reconnaissance systems, passed rapidly throughout the force by digitized information systems, would allow a brigade to increase the tempo of operations beyond the enemy’s ability to respond effectively, and thereby increase its lethality and survivability. The joint experiment showed that aerial intelligence collection assets provided by the Air Force (UAVs and JSTARS) could significantly augment organic brigade tactical reconnaissance, allowing ground force commanders to have a better understanding of the enemy and friendly situation than ever before. The improved joint situational awareness enabled the brigade to significantly improve its performance. In addition, air defense artillery sensors and shooters participating in this experiment, using the Enhanced Position Location Reporting System, demonstrated significantly increased lethality against hostile aircraft.

The advanced warfighting experiment conducted in November 1997 at Fort Hood, Texas, utilized USACOM’s Air Force units and the Army’s 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) as an Experimental Force, as well as active and Reserve component support units from the Army’s III Corps. The experiment investigated the ability of a mechanized infantry division based joint force to capitalize on new intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance sensors and new information processing capabilities, operating at an increased tempo with increased lethality and survivability. The results of this and six previous Army AWEs served to validate design requirements, operational concepts, battle command and information requirements, and combat service support concepts for joint land forces with greatly enhanced information processing capabilities.

Navy Fleet Battle Experiments

Fleet battle experiments are intended to gain an understanding of how technology may affect future naval roles. The Fleet Battle Experimentation Plan, executed by the Maritime Battle Center, consists of two experiments per year with specific warfare themes and objectives assigned to each experiment. This plan was initiated in 1997 with Fleet Battle Experiment Alpha, conducted in conjunction with the Marine Corps Hunter Warrior Experiment in March, and Fleet Battle Experiment Bravo in September. Fleet Battle Experiment Bravo evaluated two new concepts: the Ring of Fire described in Chapter 14, and Silent Fury, designed to test joint task force targeting of Global Positioning System guided weapons and supporting C4ISR architecture needs.

Marine Corps Sea Dragon Experiments

During the spring of 1997, the Marine Corps completed the first phase of the Warrior series of concept based experiments with the Hunter Warrior Advanced Warfighting Experiment. Hunter Warrior was designed to examine extended, dispersed battlespace concepts, and the contribution that a Marine Air-Ground Task Force could make at the operational level of war if provided selected conceptual and technological improvements. Through the use of enhanced targeting, precision fires, C4I enhancements, and a limited deep operational maneuver capability, a sea-based Marine force operating as part of a naval task force was able to demonstrate a capability to shape the battlefield beyond current force employment options. In the process, the experiment explored the potential impact of a digitized battlefield using palm top computers and state-of-the-art commercial communications capability, tactical UAVs for reconnaissance and target acquisition, ship-to-unit sustainment, and advanced computerized decision aids for operational maneuver from the sea.

Building on Hunter Warrior, the Urban Warrior phase of experiments will investigate a range of further enhancements aimed at ensuring that forward afloat forces can effectively respond to a crisis.

Air Force Expeditionary Forces Experiment

In 1998, the Air Force will conduct the first of a planned annual series of advanced warfighting experiments. Expeditionary Forces Experiment 98 will experiment with revolutionary technologies while testing new operational concepts in a simulated wartime environment. The experiment will fully integrate real-time actual aircraft missions, modeling and simulation elements, and advanced technology insertions into a seamless warfighting environment. The first scenario will focus on the rapid deployment and employment of a robust air expeditionary force into a simulated combat environment to conduct offensive air operations. New concept examples include rapid strategic mobility through collaborative deployment planning; dynamic assessment, planning and execution through near real-time sensor-to-decision maker-to-shooter capabilities; joint forces air component commander en route employment planning; distributed air operation center concepts; and agile combat support using in-transit visibility and total asset visibility.

CONCLUSION

The transformation of U.S. forces for the next century is a continuous process—training and equipping today’s forces to employ new technologies and innovative operational approaches, conducting advanced concept technology demonstrations and advanced warfighting experiments to develop and test improvements that will be fielded within the next several years, and taking the first conceptual steps to devise the technological and operational concept bases for the force that will be fielded in the second decade of the next century and thereafter. The Department’s plan for implementation of this transformation ensures progress on all three temporal fronts. Focusing the Department’s resources on the accomplishment of a particular mission has led to phenomenal success in the past. Just such a focused process is now working to ensure the transformation of U.S. forces for the next century.

© Copyright 1998

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of criminal justice, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.