1. ASCMD,
4.1 NAVAL MISSILE DEFENSE R&D PROGRAMS
4.1.3 Department of the Navy BMC3 Research and Development .1 Background
4.1.3.2 Department of the Navy BMC3 Technology Programs Theater Ballistic Missile Defense
Development of advanced technology for TMD and BMC3 is the responsi- bility of BMDO. BMDO-sponsored work in BMC3 is discussed briefly in Sec- tion 4.4.4, “BMDO and DARPA BMC3 Efforts.”
ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT AND PROJECTED R&D PROGRAMS 101
Cruise Missile Defense
The Department of the Navy’s efforts in cruise missile defense come under its missile defense FNC and platform protection FNC programs. A significant portion of the missile defense FNC program is addressing BMC3 issues.
In the platform multisensor integration (MSI) program, a sensor fusion ca- pability is being developed for the E-2C. This capability will correlate and fuse radar, infrared, and electronic support measure (ESM) data to better identify and track targets.
The objective of the composite combat identification (CCID) program is to attach high-confidence identification to theater-wide tracks to get theater-wide combat identification (CID). The approach is to develop a universal CID engine that will collect CID attributes from all relevant sources in theater, correlate CID attributes to a common track database, reason over the data collected to produce high-confidence CID, and deliver CID with low latency to theater units.
The theater collaborative tracking (TCT) program is developing technology for a theater-wide tracking network that would improve bandwidth efficiency and reduce life-cycle costs (by eliminating the need to modify computer soft- ware as new sensors are added to the network). The program objectives are to develop and demonstrate a collaborative tracking architecture and algorithms that incorporate need-based data distribution, that have minimal bandwidth increase when participants are added to the network that require no a priori knowledge of sensor or data source location, that require no software changes to accept new sensors, and that include sensor resource management algorithms.
In the threat evaluation and weapon assignment (TEWA) program, algo- rithms are being developed for force-level TEWA in a distributed environment.
These algorithms would perform automated threat evaluations that consider all air and missile threats and all assets requiring protection in the theater and then provide automated shooter and weapon recommendations that consider all po- tential combinations.
Work under the platform protection FNC program is focused at the platform level, so there are no BMC3 projects planned. There is an unfunded demonstra- tion program called the horizon extension platform. It would demonstrate a small, long-endurance, tethered hovering platform with electrical power as well as optical fibers provided by the tether. Were this concept to be developed, it could provide a platform for a communications relay for missile defense BMC3 systems and perhaps for look-down sensors as well.
BMC3 Technologies
Although the committee did not perform an in-depth analysis of the research programs reviewed so briefly in the preceding section, its general impression is that these programs are addressing many of the key BMC3 technology priorities.
The importance of discrimination algorithms in TMD and distributed tracking and of resource allocation algorithms in CMD is reiterated.
A concern for both TMD and CMD is the lack of a systems context and an evaluation test bed for BMC3 technologies, such as were developed for national missile defense BMC3 in the early to mid-1990s. For example, the experiment version-88 (EV-88) prototype BMC3 system and associated test bed developed by the Army in Huntsville, Alabama, and the space-based experimental version (SBEV) developed by the Air Force Electronic Systems Center. These test beds provided a means of integrating technology developed by multiple contractors, evaluating the contemporaneous COTS software technologies, and demonstrat- ing the technology to users in a system context. They provided the basis for and led directly into the ongoing development of the national missile defense (NMD) BMC3 system.
The committee believes that a missile defense BMC3 test bed should be established.6 This test bed would allow multiple participant organizations to demonstrate their technologies in a system context. The system concept should be relatively unconstrained by current military implementation considerations and CONOPS. Thus commercial wireless communications links and Internet networking technology should be applied. Commercial software technologies should be used in exercises to demonstrate the rapid integration of heteroge- neous applications softwares to create a real-time, distributed BMC3 system.
The focus would be on future threats, weapons, and sensor systems. This test bed would permit advanced technology to be evaluated in a low-cost environ- ment incorporating it in a development program.
Approaches for the Provision of Improved BMC3 Capabilities for Naval Forces
The committee believes that BMC3 for TMD will need to undergo a revolu- tionary redesign. Traditional approaches to BMC3 adopt a design philosophy that is overly static given the highly dynamic environment that will characterize ballistic missile and cruise missile defense. Systems that use these approaches directly link specific preplanned sensors to interceptors, creating a closed-loop control system that guides the interceptor to the target. The fatal flaw of such systems is that a failure, weakness, or unavailability of key components may
6A previous Naval Studies Board report recommended that Internet Protocol ports would provide valuable evolutionary enhancements (e.g., increased interoperability) and should be pursued (see Naval Studies Board, National Research Council, 2000, Network-Centric Naval Forces: A Transi- tion Strategy for Enhancing Operational Capabilities, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.).
This committee agrees with that approach; however, it believes that merely pursuing the “wrapping”
of legacy applications will not get the Navy to the desired modern end state—hence the emphasis on a test bed.
ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT AND PROJECTED R&D PROGRAMS 103 irreversibly degrade the entire system, and redundancy is needed to overcome this flaw.
The alternative that the committee proposes is to engineer a highly dynamic system in which the entire sensor-to-shooter chain is assembled in real time from whatever components happen to be working and available, very much in the spirit of network-centric operations.7 In network-centric operations, information would be shared across the sensing network. Specific sensors would be brought into play and focused on a specific task if they can provide discriminatory pow- er, and airspace is managed dynamically to allow the best use of sensors and the clearest paths for interceptors. Finally, interceptors would be tasked dynamical- ly to afford the most effective protection for the most valuable assets.
4.2 ARMY MISSILE DEFENSE R&D PROGRAMS