slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 41

NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 138 Views
  • Uploaded on

FORCEnet. NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief. CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo” Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM 29 April 2004. Agenda. FORCEnet Organization and Alignment FORCEnet Experimentation Trident Warrior FORCEnet FY05/FY06 Sea Trial Priorities

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation and Experimentation Brief' - haley-rowland


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

FORCEnet

NDIA SLAAD FORCEnet Innovation

and Experimentation Brief

CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo”

Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM

29 April 2004

agenda
Agenda
  • FORCEnet Organization and Alignment
  • FORCEnet Experimentation
  • Trident Warrior
  • FORCEnet FY05/FY06 Sea Trial Priorities
  • FORCEnet Engagement Packs
forcenet experimentation division
FORCEnet Experimentation Division

FORCEnet Execution Center

San Diego

LEGEND

1 – Gov GS

15 – Contractor

7 – military

forcenet organization process
FORCEnet Organization & Process

Architecture

Operational Views

System Views

Technical Views

PPBS

Requirements

Assessments

Near term

Modeling

Mid Term

Far Term

Campaign Analysis

Assessment

Experimentation

Concept Development

Fleet

Science & Technology

Fleet Modernization Plan

Innovation

Sea Trial

slide7

FORCEnet

FORCEnet Experimentation

CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo”

Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM

29 April 2004

slide8

FORCEnet Campaign Plan:

Two Path Strategy

Feeding Concepts to prototyping

FORCEnet CD&E

Path

Mid and Far Term

  • Provide actionable recommendations from experimentation results to Navy PPBS process.

FY 03

FY 04

FY 05

FORCEnet Prototype Path

Near Term

  • Field FORCEnet Block capabilities to the Fleet including the enabling organization and processes.
  • Pursue rapid prototyping of FORCEnet capabilities to improve joint warfighting now.

FORCEnet Trident Warrior

FY 05

FY 03

FY 04

Block 0

Block 1

forcenet concept development
FORCEnet Concept Development
  • Develop a draft functional-level concept for FORCEnet which describes how future joint and combined network-centric capabilities may be used to facilitate and enhance naval operations in the 2015-2020 timeframe.
  • Supports:
    • FORCEnet transformational requirements development process,
    • FORCEnet operational architecture development
    • Concept development & experimentation
  • Guided by the FORCEnet Vision
  • FORCEnet concept will serve as a coherent unifying concept that enables Sea Strike, Sea Shield, and Sea Basing, as well as a range of supporting concepts.

Foundation for FORCEnet Requirements, Architecture and CD&E

slide10

FORCEnet Campaign Plan:

Two Path Strategy

Feeding Concepts to prototyping

FORCEnet CD&E

Path

Mid and Far Term

  • Provide actionable recommendations from experimentation results to Navy PPBS process.

FY 03

FY 04

FY 05

FORCEnet Prototype Path

Near Term

  • Field FORCEnet Block capabilities to the Fleet including the enabling organization and processes.
  • Pursue rapid prototyping of FORCEnet capabilities to improve joint warfighting now.

FORCEnet Trident Warrior

FY 05

FY 03

FY 04

Block 0

Block 1

what is a trident warrior
What is a Trident Warrior?
  • Trident Warrior is:
    • The Major FORCEnet Sea Trial Experiment
    • Annual
    • NETWARCOM sponsored
  • Trident Warrior Experiment Intent
    • Provide a rapid fielding of improved warfighting capability to the Fleet, with full supportability and maintainability.
    • Develop supporting Tactics/Techniques/Procedures (TTP) and Concept of Operations (CONOPS) on how best to use this new capability to optimize the execution of Naval operations.
forcenet trident warrior process contributors
FORCEnet Trident Warrior Process Contributors
  • NETWARCOM – Navy’s Operational Agent for FORCEnet
    • Trident Warrior lead
  • SPAWAR – FORCEnet Chief Engineer
    • Trident Warrior CHENG
  • Naval Postgraduate School – Analysis Lead for TW
  • Naval War College – TW Wargame lead
  • Navy Warfare Development Command – Sea Trial Coordinator
    • Warfare Centers of Excellence develop CONOPS / TTPS
  • Fleet Forces Command (FFC) – Sea Trial Lead
    • Approval and oversight for all resources and ship installs
  • OPNAV N61 – Resource Sponsor
    • FORCEnet PE Line
    • Integrate experiment results into POM assessment process
trident warrior approach
Trident Warrior Approach

Leverage Fleet / Joint exercises

and experiments

Tailored to meet Fleet / COCOM requirements

Fleet Driven

Program of Record Ship Alts

New

CONOPS

Program of Record Temp Alts

Integration

In Theater Prototypes

New

Tech.

New Prototypes

Impact onprocesses &organization

Results in an early delivery of FORCEnet capability with a subset of supportable leave behind capability

TTP and Conops

slide14

FORCEnet

Sea Trial and FORCEnet Priorities

CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo”

Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM

29 April 2004

slide15

Sea Trial Organization

N701

N703

CNO

N702

N704

CFFC

Sea Trial ESG

Executive Agent

for SEA TRIAL

ST ESG: All OA, N7, CNR, NWDC, MCCDC

SEA TRIAL

Coordinator

Operational Agents

NWDC

Sea Shield

Sea Basing

FORCEnet

Sea Strike

C2F/5F

NETWARCOM

C3F/7F

C2F/6F

Sea Strike

Sea Shield

Sea Basing

FORCEnet

Comms & Data

Networks

Conventional Strike

(Include SOF)

Strategic Deterrence

Integrated JT Log

Deploy and Employ

ISR

Theater Air & Missile Defense

AT / FP

CSF

FFC N2

NSAWC

NETWARCOM

C2F

FFC N41

FFC N9

SWDG

STOM

PrePo JT Assets Afloat

NFS

SUW

COP / CTP

Undersea Warfare

SWDG

C2F

CPF N00ASW

NETWARCOM

SWDG

C2F

Fleet Collaborative

Teams

Intel. Surv. & Reccon.

Team Lead: FFC N2

CPF, CNE, CSF,

CNSF, CNAF, NWDC,

NNWC, NSAWC, NNSOC

Consulting Members:

OPNAV N61, ONR

COTF, ONI,SPAWAR

MCCDC

Comm. Op. & Tac Pict.

Team Lead:NETWARCOM

CPF, CNE, CSF, CNSF,

CNAF, NWDC, NSAWC

CUS

Consulting Members:

OPNAV N61, ONR, COTF

SPAWAR, MCCDC

Comm & Data Netwks.

Team Lead: NETWARCOM

CPF, CNE, CSF, CNSF,

CNAF, NWDC, NNSOC

Consulting Members:

OPNAV N61, ONR, COTF

SPAWAR, MCCDC

commander s intent
Commander’s Intent
  • Guidance for FORCENet FCT’s to be used to develop the FY 05/06 FORCEnet Sea Trial Execution Plan
  • Specifics:
    • 50% of experimental initiatives will address NCDP gaps
      • Highest priority is network visualization and instrumentation
    • 50% of experimental initiatives will address Numbered Fleet Priorities
      • Top 10 IT priorities
      • Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing FORCEnet enabling capabilities
    • FY 05 main Effort
      • TW 05, theme is coalition / MN interoperability partnership with C2F, East Coast, ESG or CSG
      • Covers the full spectrum of experimentation
        • Prototyping, concept development, non leave behind initiatives
commander s intent1
Commander’s Intent
  • Top Priority, NLT Jul 2004
    • Develop a FORCEnet Functional / Enabling Concept based on the NOC
    • Foundation for concept based experimentation in the future
    • Basis for FORCEnet requirements and architectures
  • End State
    • FORCEnet two-year Execution Plan will directly impact PR 07 and POM 08 and have immediate and tangible results which address Fleet priorities for SP 21
netwarcom fy 05 priorities
NETWARCOM FY 05 Priorities

COMMS AND NETWORK DATABASES

1.      INSUFFICIENT BANDWIDTH (BW) FOR SMALL SHIPS

2.      360 DEGREE SATCOM RECEPTION

3.      MONITORING AND CONTROLLING BW USAGE

4.      GLOBAL NETWORK VISUALIZTION – NETOPS COP

5.      ENTERPRISE-WIDE INFORMATION ASSURANCE

6.      AUTOMATED NETWORK SOFTWARE-CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

7.      UNUSED BW TO SHIPS

8.      MLS IN SUPPORT OF COALITION OPERATIONS

9.      DISTRIBUTED ISR FROM JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER (JSF ISR)

COMMON OPERATIONAL-TACTICAL PICTURE

1.      BLUE FORCE TRACKER AND SITUATIONAL AWARENESS

2.      UNDERSEA COMMON OPERATIONAL-TACTICAL PICTURE

3.      IMPROVED MARITIME COTP

netwarcom fy 05 priorities1
NETWARCOM FY 05 Priorities

INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE

1.      ISR Management

2. ISR sensors

INFORMATION OPERATIONS

1.      COMPUTER NETWORKD DEFENSE-IN-DEPTH

2.      CENTRALIZED IO MISSION PLANNING CAPABILITY

3.      DEPLOYABLE MULTI-MEDIA NAVAL PSYOP CAPABILITY

4.      COMMUNICATIONS ELECTRONIC ATTACK CAPABILITY

5.      ENHANCED SPECIFIC EMITTER IDENTIFICATION (SEI) CAPABILITY

6.      NEXT GENERATION SURFACE EW SYSTEM

7.      SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT TOOL

8.      SHIP-BORNE COUNTER SPACE CAPABILITY

9.      TACTICAL-OPERATIONAL COMPUTER NETWORK ATTACK

10.  DATA LINK DECEPTION CAPABILITY

netwarcom fy 06 priorities
NETWARCOM FY 06 Priorities
  • COMMS and Networks
    • GIG-Compliant Network Monitoring & Control experimentation
    • On-the Move Naval Networking experimentation
    • Coalition information sharing (comms, COP, CIE and CDS)
    • Information Assurance / Computer Network Defense-in-Depth
    • Information Management/Knowledge Management
  • COTP 
    • BFT and Situational awareness
    • Coordinated Real-time Execution experimentation
    • Improved Maritime COTP and Decision Making experimentation
    • COP correlation and fusion
    • XTCF (Extensible Tactical C4I Framework)
    • Battle management and synchronization
    • USW CUP 
  •  ISR
    • On-Demand ISR experimentation
    • Improved Imagery Experimentation
    • Horizontal fusion
slide21

FORCEnet

FORCEnet Engagement Packs

CAPT (sel) Rick Simon “Simo”

Deputy FORCEnet NETWARCOM

29 April 2004

forcenet engagement pack fnep definition
FORCEnet Engagement Pack (FnEP) Definition

FORCEnet Engagement Packs are small scale system ensembles which demonstrate the engagement enabling power of FORCEnet by integrating Jointsensors, platforms, weapons, warriors, networks, and command & control systems with requirements to perform cross-mission enabled Network-centricCombat Reach Capabilities

Combat Reach Capabilities:

Integrated Fire Control

Automated Battle Management Aids

Composite Tracking

Composite Combat Identification

Common/Single Integrated Pictures

  • FnEP Attributes:
  • Joint e.g. Naval, AF, Army
  • Engagement-oriented
  • Adaptive e.g., Strike and MD
  • Field near-term e.g., w/in 5 Years
  • Capability Based

POC: LCDR Joe McMahon, NETWARCOM, [email protected]

fn pathfinder fnep
Fn Pathfinder: FnEP

MD/Strike Pack Factor Integration

IOC Packs

Pack Development

Pack Development

SUW/USW/MCM

Field Exercises/Sea Trial

Tech Demos

M&S/HWIL

JDEP

Experimentation

FY2004

FY2005

FY2007

FY2008

FY2009

FY2006

Initiate Pathfinder Effort

Document requirements

Common Reference Scenarios, Choose systems

JFCOM BMC2 Oversight

Organization

Organization

Align Combat Reach technology and acquisition efforts

Pack Development

ONR NIFC Demo

Experimentation

questions
Questions?

“Speed to Capability”

slide25

“FORCEnet will enable the naval service to employ a fully netted force, engage with widely distributed combat forces, and command with increased awareness and speed as an integral part of the joint team.”

- Admiral Vern Clark

We’ve started to FORCEnet … appreciate the reason why, get to know the language and join up!

25

transformation drivers for sea power 21
Transformation Drivers for Sea Power 21

JOINT CAPSTONE CONCEPT

SEA POWER 21

NAVAL OPERATING CONCEPT

MARINE CORPS STRATEGY 21

USMC CONCEPT HIERARCHY

USN CONCEPT HIERARCHY

National Guidance

NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY

NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY

JOINT VISION 2020

Joint Guidance

TRANSFORMATION PLANNING GUIDANCE

Naval Vision

NAVAL POWER 21

Naval Strategy

The how to achieve Naval transformation

NAVAL TRANSFORMATION ROADMAP

Joint Operating Concept

Under development

Operational Concepts =

Sea Shield

Sea Strike

Sea Basing

Operational Concepts =

Ship to Objective Maneuver,

Exp ManueverWarfare

Functional Concepts = Intel, Log, MCM, …

Naval Capstone

Concept to achieve

Global CONOPS

Functional Concepts = FORCEnet

forcenet taxonomy the basis for the concept development experimentation path
FORCEnet Taxonomy: The basis for The Concept Development & Experimentation Path

4. IKA

4.1 Expeditionary, multi tiered sensor and weapons grids

4.2 Dynamic multi-path and survivable networks

4.3 Adaptive / Automated decision aids and human centric engineering

4.4 Distributed, collaborative C2 and human centric engineering

4.5 Information Assurance

4.2.1 - Node adressable network architecture

4.2.2Universal access

4.2.2.1-Tactical (LTNs)

4.2.2.2-Operational (LANs)

4.2.2.3-Strategic (Enterprise)

4.2.3 - Fault Tolerant

4.2.4 - LPD/LPI Comms

4.2.5 - Quality of Service

4.2.6 - Multiple, redundant comm paths

4.2.7 -Mobile/Expeditionary

4.2.8 - Scalable

4.2.9 - Trusted

4.2.10 – Highly available

4.2.11 - Standards based protocol

4.2.12 - Next generation internet like

4.2.13 – Adaptable to C2 needs

4.2.14 – Self organizing

4.2.15 – Self healing

4.2.16 – Common geo/temporal reference…..

4.4.1 - Distributed commanders

4.4.2 - Well understood ROE

4.4.3 - Well understood commanders intent

4.4.4 - Situation specific training

4.4.4.1 - Adversary’s Region

4.4.4.2 - Adversary’s Culture

4.4.5 - Robust team rehearsal

4.4.6 - Collaborative planning (Naval, Joint, Coalition)

4.4.7 - Access to information (Naval, Joint, Coalition)

4.4.7.1 - Based on need vice comms/computers

4.4.8 - Reduce reaction time

4.4.9 - Cognition

4.4.9.1 – Presentation

4.4.9.2 – Representation…..

  • 4.5.1 - Defensive IO
  • 4.5.1.1 - Strong computer network defense
      • Hardware
      • Software
      • Processes
      • Procedures
  • 4.5.1.2 -Intrusion detection
  • 4.5.2 Quality of Service……

4.3.1 – Information Management

4.3.1.1- Data mining

4.3.1.2 - Filtering

4.3.1.3 - Association

4.3.1.4 - Analysis

4.3.1.5 - Alert

4.3.1.6 - Prediction

4.3.1.7 - Decision support

4.3.1.8 – Assimilation

4.3.1.9 – Fusion

4.3.1.10 - Trust/Pedigree

4.3.2 - Common, intuitive user interface

4.3.3 - Common, intuitive info representation

4.3.4 - Real time processing

4.3.5 - Reach back

4.3.6 - Semantic data markup

4.3.7 – Agent based computing….

4.1.1 - Large Numbers (>10000)

4.1.2 - Low cost

4.1.3 - Distributed

4.1.4 - Autonomous

4.1.5 - Multiple Phenomena

4.1.6 - Continuous coverage

4.1.6.1 – Subsurface

4.1.6.2 – Surface

4.1.6.3 – Air

4.1.6.4 - Cyber space

4.1.7 - Standards based output

4.1.8 – Connected

4.1.9 – Remotely Operated …..

4.4 Distributed, collaborative C2 and human centric engineering

4.2 Dynamic multi-path and survivable networks

4.1 Expeditionary, multi tiered sensor and weapons grids

4.3 Adaptive / Automated decision aids and human centric engineering

4.5 Information Assurance

forcenet alignment1
FORCEnet Alignment

NAVAIR

NAVSEA

SPAWAR

Assistant Secretary of the NavyResearch, Development, Acquisition

Chief of Naval Operations

Operations

& Requirements

Acquisition

Commander

Fleet

Forces

Command

Additional

Duty

CFFC

Additional

Duty

Additional

Duty

Naval

Network

Warfare

Command

NETWARCOM

SPAWAR as FORCEnet

Chief Engineer

SPAWAR as FORCEnet Chief Assessor

status of forcenet requirements architectures standards implementation
Status of FORCEnet Requirements/ Architectures/ Standards Implementation

CLIP

CVN21

DDX

LCS

BAMS

CNO and ASN(RD&A)

Endorsed FORCEnet

Pilot Programs

definition of enterprise forcenet requirements architectures standards
Definition of Enterprise FORCEnet Requirements/Architectures/Standards
  • FY 2003 Appropriations Conference Report (107-732): “While a solid organizational structure for the development of FORCEnet requirements has been established … conferees direct that the Secretary of the Navy submit, by May 1, 2003, a detailed report on the FORCEnet program …define requirements.”
  • FY 2004 Senate Appropriations Committee Report (108-87): “ The Committee is supportive of the goals of this integration program. … The Committee directs that the FORCEnet program establish these requirements, test them within the Navy Warfighting Experiments and Demonstration line, and release the approved requirements to those affected programs as quickly as possible in FY 2004.”
spiral development and implementation of forcenet requirements architecture standards
Spiral Development and Implementation of FORCEnet Requirements/Architecture/ Standards

Congressional Direction

FY2003/2004

  • Operational Implementation,
  • Refinement, and Update:
  • FORCEnet Innovation Continuum
  • Trident Warrior “Speed to Capability”

SECNAV

Report to Congress

on FORCEnet

Working Baseline FORCEnet Requirements:

2003 FORCEnet Campaign Plan

FY03

Updated FORCEnet Requirements:

2004 FORCEnet Campaign Plan

FY04

  • Acquisition Implementation,
  • Refinement, and Update:
  • JRAE
  • FIOP/JBMC2/Other
  • FORCEnet Pilot Programs

Operational Requirements

System/Tech Requirements

Support/Policy Requirements

Implementation Requirements

  • Enterprise Instantiation:
  • FORCEnet Compliance Process/ Checklist
process for iterative transformation
Process for Iterative Transformation

Concept Development

CFFC, Fleets, NETWARCOM, OPNAV, ONR, NWDC, MCCDC, COEs, NPS

Experimentation & Assessment

Implementation

Fleets, NETWARCOM, CFFC, NWC, NWDC, MCCDC, TYCOMs, SYSCOMs, COEs, JFCOM, ONR

CFFC, OPNAV, NETWARCOM,SYSCOMs

DoD

Joint

SSG

Fleet

CCI

Input to OPNAV assessment

Strategy/ Warfare Challenges

Liaison w/ Sea Warrior

Exp &

Assess

Doctrine

Concept Development

Organization

Exp &

Assess

Capability Increment

Concept Generation

Wargaming

POM

Training

Operational

Architecture

CONOPS

Exp &

Assess

Capability Increment

Material

Enabling Technologies

Exp &

Assess

Leadership

S&T

Basic Research

Personnel

Facilities

Fast Track - Sea Enterprise

Disciplined Speed to Capability

slide35

Architectures

Exercise

Venues

Experiment

Venues

“AS IS”

Prototype

Evaluations

“TO BE

Analysis

And

Assessments

Experimentation

Requirements

INNOVATION

Current

Future

Joint

Fleet

COEs

DARPA

ONR

DOD

Industry

Private

Sector

Service

LABS

Academia

NWDC

Technology

Concepts

Capabilities

Fleet

Immediate Needs and Issues

Acquisition

and

SYSCOMS

POR

Fit & Shortfalls

Gaps/Required

Warfighting

Capabilities

Technology

and

Concepts

slide36

FORCEnet FY 04 / FY 05 Experiment Plan

FORCEnet Enabling

FY 2003

FY 2004

FY 2005

JCD&E

A M J J A S

FORCEnet Sea Trial

O N D

J F M A M J J A S O N D

J F M A M J J A S O N D

Fleet Battle Experiments

FBE K

Spiral 4 /Sea Viking AWE Part 2

Spiral 2

Spiral 3

Fleet LOEs

Silent Hammer

Trident Warrior 05

ESG LOE

WG

Fn LOE 03-1

(Trident Warrior 03)

Trident Warrior 04/

Sea Viking 04

FORGER

LOE

Fn LOE 04-2

Fn LOE 05-2

Prototype Path

Fn LOE 03-3

Trident Warrior

04 WG

Fn LOE 04-1

Trident Warrior

05 WG

Fn LOE 05-1

Global

Engagement VII

JFCOM MN

LOE 3

PI 03

Joint/Service CD&EWargaming

JFCOM JCD WG

Fn Title X WG

JFMCC WG

UC 04 Title 10WG

JEFX 04

APTX 05

JFTI RAP 1 / WARNET Demo (CG04)

CIE LOE

ATEX 05

JFTI / JNTC

RAP 2

fnep strategy aligning programs using the fn services and contribution to capability
FnEP StrategyAligning Programs Using the Fn Services and Contribution to Capability

Sensor

CT

CCID

CTP

Integrated Joint / FORCEnet

ABMA

Transformation Process

System Programs

IFC

WPN

COP

MP

PNT

Fn IG

$$$$$

$$

GEMINII & Associated Tools

  • 4. Analysis
  • Gap / Overlap Analysis
  • Dynamic Models

5. Portfolio of Solutions & Requirements

  • Establish the Architecture (FORCEnet)

2. Group Systems & Solutions

3. Decompose into SF/IE categories

FORCEnet Services

what you should know about fn engagement packs
What You should Know about Fn Engagement Packs
  • ForceNet is Network Centric Warfighting
    • FnEP Focuses on Engagement Capabilities, Consists of Operational Activities and CRC’s desired to yield Engagement Capability
    • FnEP Requirements:
      • Adaptable – Multi-mision focus (e.g. TAMD/STRIKE)
      • Compose-able Distributed Sensor- Weapon Target Pairing (no longer platform constrained)
    • CRC’s Defined:
      • Composite Tracking – “Sensor Management and Control”
        • Distributed sensors – access to multiple sensor data
      • Composite Combat Identification (CCID) – ID Management and Control
        • Common Shared Combat ID (red, blue, and orange)
      • Common Picture – Track Control
        • Tactical level Common shared Management and Track Level Operational Pictures w/ Integrated Track Management
      • Automated Battle Management Aids (ABMA) – Battle Space Management
        • Composeable, Adaptable, Redundant, Distributed Command & Control
      • Integrated Fire Control – Weapons Management and Control
        • Distributed Weapons management & Control – Compose weapon – C2 combinations
pom process functions
POM Process Functions

Force

Capability

Metrics

MCP

MCP

Warfighting

(Campaign)

Analysis

N6/N7 SPP

  • ISCP
  • Investment Priorities
  • Capability Balance

SYSCOM

Assessments

Strategic

Guidance

Mission Area

Analysis

FORCEnet

Concept &

Operational

Architecture

4

NCP

Transformation

Roadmap

S & T

Assessment

Program

Guidance

Force Structure & Munitions (NNOR)

Analyses

Investment

Strategy

SEA ENTERPRISE

Unclassified

fnep definition development process geminii
FnEP Definition & Development Process: GEMINII

WARFARE

DEVELOPMENT

Tech push

Capabilities pull

PPBS

S&T

Framework

&

Principals

Timeframe, Scope,

Boundary, and Context

Architecture

Vision

(Viewpoint)

Capability Metrics, Illustrating Issues

Capability

Metrics

Architecture

Maintenance

Requirements

Reference

Implementation

  • Architecture views
  • (OV’s. SV’s. TV’s)
  • Dependencies

Implementation

Governance

Planning, Procurement,

Acquisition, and

Deployment Governance

Migration

Strategy

Architecture

Assessments

Static: Functionality / Interoperability

Dynamic: Capability Metrics

Costs / Value/Benefit/Utility/ETE Functionality

Portfolio

Of Solutions

  • Prioritization, Sequencing of system
  • Deployment (CED?)
  • How Much And When?
  • Bundles/ Engagement Packs, and
  • Portfolios of Systems in To-Be architecture
  • FnEP Solution Sets
  • # consumers, Program Viability, Volatility
ad