Capabilities Based Planning An ATL Perspective on FCB

Capabilities Based Planning: An AT&L Perspective on FCB Interactions Mr. James “Raleigh” Durham OUSD(AT&L) Defense Systems

Overview q Capabilities-Based Planning (CPB) ØNew Joint Capability Areas ØNotional Mapping to Current Capability Areas ØDo. D End-to-End Process (old and new) q Force Application Activities under CPB q AT&L Perspective 2

Capabilities Based Planning (CBP) Objectives CBP should be a top-down, competitive approach to weigh options vs. resource constraints across a spectrum of challenges CBP should: q Link Do. D decision-making to the Defense Strategy ØEncompass the full set of Do. D challenges q Inform risk tradespace -- identify joint capability gaps, redundancies and opportunities ØGenerate common framework for capability trades ØCouple programmatic capability development to operational needs q Facilitate the development of affordable capability portfolios 3

New Capabilities-Based Processes q PPBS, the last major change in Do. D resource management (1960 s), was based on a decade of prior analytical development CBP Progress QDR (Sec. Def) 2001 Joint Capabilities Integration & Development System (JCIDS) Capability-based assessments (J 8) Service CBP Initiatives 2002 Do. D 5000 Acquisition Update (AT&L) 2003 OA Study Series Defense Planning Scenarios Analytic Agenda (Policy, PA&E, J 8) Aldridge Study MID 913: PPBE (PA&E) Adaptive Planning (Policy) SPG EPP / IPLs JPG 2004 Capability Area Reviews (AT&L) Joint Functional Concepts Joint Operations Joint Operating Concepts Joint Integrating Concepts Joint Concept Development (J 7) Top-Level Capabilities 4

CBP Top-Down Process s Reviews ive r D Strategic Planning Council (SPC) • Sec. Def Chairs • SLRG Principals plus Co. Commanders As se s - Sec. Def decision points -Iterative Sec. Def engagement Time Goal: Dec Jan Overall Defense Capabilities Process: • Senior Leadership Upfront • Department-Level View of What’s Needed • Linking Strategy to Planning to Programming Apr May Oct Nov 5

CBP Integrates Across Processes Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution System CBP integrates major Do. D processes to facilitate strategic planning Strategic Planning Requirements Acquisition CBP is enabled through a common set of joint capability definitions 6

DJCS(J-8) CBP Process Defense Planning Scenarios Do. D Planning Construct and Stretch Goals Irregular Catastrophic Traditional Disruptive OSD Policy Strategy Warfighting Capabilities and Corresponding Force Structure DJCS (J-8) Macro Operational Availability Assessments JCIDS For materiel and Non-materiel solutions Joint Integrating Concepts Functional Capability Boards Micro Capabilities Based Assessments Capabilities Gaps and Overlaps 7

Proposed Definition Set: Joint Capability Areas (Tier 1) • Battlespace Awareness • Homeland Defense • Command Control • Strategic Deterrence • Network Operations • Shaping & Security Cooperation • Interagency Coordination • Stability Operations • Public Affairs Operations • Civil Support • Information Operations • Non-Traditional Operations • Protection • Access & Access Denial Operations • Logistics • Land Control Operations • Force Generation • Maritime/Littoral Control Operations • Force Management • Air Control Operations • Space Control Operations Developing a common lexicon 8

Notional Mapping of Joint Capability Areas to Current Joint Operating Concepts Homeland Security Major Combat Operations Homeland Defense Civil Support Access & Access Denial Operations Space Control Operations Air Control Operations Maritime/Littoral Control Operations Land Control Operations Non-Traditional Operations Information Operations Stability Operations Strategic Deterrence Shaping & Security Cooperation Stability Operations 9

Do. D End-to-End CBP Process Capability Area Reviews (CARs) • Strategic Planning Guidance • Defense Planning Scenarios • Family of Concepts • Transformation Select a Joint Integrating Concept Develop Concept Capabilities Based Assessment • • Capabilities Tasks Attributes Metrics Functional Area Analysis • Gaps Shortfalls Redundancies • Risk areas Non-materiel solutions Materiel solutions • S+T initiatives • Experimentation • • *Functional Needs Analysis *Functional Solutions Analysis • Refined concept • Analysis of Alternatives • Technology Strategy • Systems Engineering Plan Concept Decision ICD MS “A” Analysis of Alternatives Capability Based Assessment Navy USMC OSD/JCS COCOM FCB COCOMs OSD (AT&L) OSD (NII) Sec. Def Technology Development CD CD CDD D D MS “C” System Development CP CP CPD D D Production nn Air Force Services DIA OSD (PA&E) Joint Chiefs & Joint Requirements Oversight Council Strategy MS “B” Evolutionary or Spiral Development OSD (AT&L)- led Capability Roadmaps Army • Revise KPPs • LRIP • Detailed • IOT&E design • System • LRIP integration • FOT&E • DT&E/IOT&E • Affordable military-useful increment • Technology demonstrated • Initial KPPs Capabilities Definition Joint OSD Joint. Staff /(OSD) OSD (AT&L, PA&E), Services and OSD (DOT&E) -- Joint Staff (JROC) Concept Refinement Acquisition and Test “as is” Roadmaps 10

Capabilities-Based Planning: Perspective from AT&L q Acquisition has traditionally focused at the program level q Under CBP, acquisition will widen its perspective Ø Infuse technology and programmatic reality into planning and decisions Ø Shape, engineer, and validate solutions to capability needs Ø Make decisions on systems within a capabilities context (systems perspective) Ø Engineer the relationships across the set of systems that together satisfy the need (systems of systems) Ø Synchronize the interaction among programs to satisfy multiple capabilities (roadmaps) Ø Provide a coherent logistics transformation strategy supporting distributed, adaptive operations 11

Process Overlays OLD MS I MS 0 MS III Program Initiation MNS Acquisition Process MS II ORD Pre-MS 0 Phase III Determination of Mission Need Concept Exploration Program Definition & Risk Reduction Engineering and Manufacturing Development Production, Deployment, and Operational Support NEW MS B MS A MS C Program Initiation Concept Refinement Technology Development System Development and Demonstration System Integration Concept Decision Joint Capabilities Integration And Development System (JCIDS) Systems Engineering Plan Initial Capabilities Document (ICD) Analysis of Materiel Approaches Technology Demo Analysis of Alternatives System Demonstration Production and Deployment Production Readiness and LRIP Operations And Support Full Rate Production & Deployment Design Readiness Review Full Rate Production Decision Review Prototype Demos Production Representative System Meets Requirements Capabilities Development Document (CDD) Sustainment Disposal FOC Capabilities Production Document (CPD) DOTMLPF Capabilities-Based Assessment - Functional Area Analysis - Functional Needs Analysis - Functional Solutions Analysis Test Experimentation/ATD/ACTD DT/EOA/Prelim LFT&E IOT&E/LFT&E FOT&E 12

The FCBs --“Hot, Sweaty Pile” AT&L participates and advises Capabilities-Based Assessment Joint Integrating Concept Development • Missions • Capabilities • Tasks • DPS-based vignettes FAA FSA FNA – Capabilities – Tasks – Attributes – Metrics – Gaps – Shortfalls – Redundancy – Risk Areas – Non-materiel Alternatives – Materiel Alternatives – S&T Initiatives – Experimentation Army Navy USMC COCOMs COCOM or Service OSD AT&L FCB Co lead - OSD SES FCB OSD NII Air Force DIA OSD PA&E 13

Current ATL (DS/SMI/JFA) FCB Activities q JCIDS Capabilities Based Assessments Ø Joint Undersea Superiority Ø Joint Forcible Entry Operations Ø Global Strike Ø Integrated Air and Missile Defense q AT&L-led Capability Area Reviews and Roadmaps Ø Previous: Integrated Air and Missile Defense; Conventional Engagement Capability (Land Attack Weapons) Ø Future: Electronic Warfare; JBMC 2 q Studies Ø Medium Range Bomber/Long Range Strike; Emerging Technologies for TACAIR; Aviation Capabilities; Cross-Capability Assessment and Risk Management Framework for Evaluating Major Do. D Force Capability Options 14

Other Activities q Study of JCIDS/5000 Transition Ø Examining the transition (“lead change”) from requirements to acquisition; key point of intersection is the FSA through Ao. A. Ø Highlight success criteria, roles and responsibilities for critical decision points q Study of Capability Area Reviews Ø Examining the structure and content of CARs Ø Identify key focus areas, process requirements, and analysis requirements q DAB-level System “In context” Reviews Ø Expands the scope of individual program DAB reviews to include critical interrelationships between supported and supporting programs and systems within the capability / mission area ¢ Example on next slide 15

Example: JSF Interrelationships with Complementary Systems Supporting Platforms: C-17 A KC-10/135 Future Tanker KC-130 J Complementary Platforms: F/A-22 F/A-18 E/F Hosting Platforms: CVN-21 CVN-68 LHA (R) LHD Replacing: F-16 A-10 AV-8 B F/A 18 C/D ISR: JSTARS E-2 C AWACS Rivet Joint EP-3/ACS IBS GPS E-10 C 4: JTRS MIDS(Link-16) JMPS GATM JPALS VMF Weapons: AIM-120 JDAM JSOW Other: Crew Protection Modeling & Simulation Cost, Schedule, Performance & Integration Support Fielding Cost, Schedule, Performance or Integration Issues Cost, Schedule, Performance or Integration issues to be resolved SOLID DENOTES CURRENT SYSTEM OSD MDAP DAES Rating, DASH DENOTES FUTURE SYSTEM Not Rated (MDAP) OR SERVICE ASSESSMENT (ACAT 2/3) Cost Sched Perf 16

Current Issue: Family-of-Systems System Engineering • Problem Statement (IAMD CAR DAB): – Certain capabilities only appear in a Family of Systems context. – How do these FOS capabilities get engineered within the various individual systems – How do these FOS capabilities get tested • Example – Capabilities such as Combat Identification must be implemented in numerous systems across all Services and Agencies to enable the joint warfighter to use that capability in combat CLASSIFICATION 10/30/2020 17

di / ce i rv /PM e S O am PE gr s N pac O TI S im A C D FI JCI I S , t n so ts s ts ent men n m e emte re e iesm retem ture t s tio n io ts nt m emteim uituylrysst t ct. Suysenttec en tio tat enta su. Sireysyssteiqsm n a enm myeste ue. Sirysym n n s q yl e c Sa te mn i t os iseqr nsatlte. Rectunr. San. Rht ite. Anpmcehi oprmch islopatiosis taetisi en eme lem em em te ire. Sem yen te A erc lo. Ar el A esve t he nth lem pl p st uir. Syyssisqu yslyt se. Rctu. A S y n e m i q l e t a n m I h e S e na R Sn hit pm ch op Ais ve siesv t. D p Im Sy Im R A A rc lo r el es. De he. D yn lem. Syn plem S p A ve A ev th nt Im D yn Im Sy De S C r oo D em t SE m te em m te yst Sys s t Sy t S est Tes em st s st T Sy t Te Sy t s es n e T n T tio n io tio rat gra n a r n te io eg tio at nteg Int t In st ra gr I t s g e Te t s te Te In t s s t Te it ni Te t ni Un t U st U t e i T it st Tes Un t Te Un t s s e T Te Ch nd a s, s Te a Ca rific Ve n S tiore Sogeractu n teit tio Inch east Ar &rif. Tic Ve How do we do this? d ity an r ge ility er? ab ine p a ng E s t g in ts Jo igh pts e ty n f ili eme ur ar nce b ct t ) a ir is tetureenelnotc. i Co Cap qu lys checpm mal Re. Ana Ahr iet lo lnocp. c eu S v r So. ADe. Dcel. vf n (i te na m op el v e t, en g En ee in ri ng ge n a chity a r eabil o F ap c rop ility n d pab tio SE at a Capability Level*

Building a FOS Capability – One View JROC / JCB CA DAB / OIPT JCIDS process Acquisition process FCB One Idea – others? O-7 Bo. D Analytical Support Capability Set Manager (Service lead) O-6 Working Group Function FCB WG Capabilitybased Assessment Integrated Architecture Requirements Roadmap Fo. S Capabilities POR / Fo. S Synchroniz’n Specific Examples POR & Fo. S Testables & “J” ISP Proposed CAPSET Fo. S Schedule Staffing Stakeholder Coordination Service/Agency Agreements Resources Budget, People, Facilities Svcs/OSD resource proposals SE / SI Test 10/30/2020 Activities & Scope 8 SE Functions External Inputs & Data Sources Roadmap Master POR List APB Data Service POMs Fo. S configuration management Fo. S Test coordination for CAPSET CLASSIFICATION T&E Etc. 19

Example: Capabilities Based Acquisition Applied to JSEAD 20

JSEAD and Aircraft Survivability - Radar Jamming - Communications Jamming Key: Lethal SEAD Non Lethal SEAD JSEAD roles Mission Success Destruction - Stand-off Weps HARM Self Protect Deny, Delay Radar Acquisition/Tracking/Lock-On - Radar Cross Section design - On Board Radio Frequency/Infrared Countermeasures - Off Board Countermeasures -- Towed Decoys/Chaff/Flares SEAD capability interacts with Self Protection - synergistic effect 21

Service Response to AEA Ao. A: AEA System of Systems Concept AEA Ao. A Recommendation Complete Capability Sensing capability to support reactive jamming Full frequency coverage Specialized high power jamming* Stand-in jamming *AESA Radars, Advanced Waveforms, and High Power New Technology AEA Arrays collectively can provide Specialized High Power Jamming Capabilities. Do. D AEA JSEAD Plan Briefed to OSD(AT&L) June 2002 B-52 Compass Call EA-18 G EA-6 B F/A-18 E/F, JSF & F-22 W / AESA SAM Range Stand-off Outside Defended Airspace Mod-Escort Inside Defended Airspace UCAV w/ MALD-J Known SAMs Penetrating Escort Stand-In Inside Kinematic Range No Escape Range of Known SAMs 22

Where Are They Now…Sample AEA/SEAD Programs Today AEA MNS Jul 99 EA-18 G/ICAPIII ORD Oct 03 MS B Dec 03 MNS ORD CDR Apr 05 MS C Apr 07 IOC Sep 09 Interim Capability End ACTD EA-18 G ICD CDD B-52 SOJ Joint Strike Enabler ICD AEA AOA MALD ACTD JROC ICD Aug 99 – Dec 01 ACTD Approved 1 st Qtr FY 96 Preliminary Design Review 4 th Qtr FY 96 Critical Design Review 1 st Qtr FY 97 Engineering Development, Manufacturing, and Flight Testing Completed 3 rd Qtr FY 99 2 nd Qtr FY 01 23

Electronic Warfare (EW) Capabilities Analyses and EW Roadmap EW GAP ANALYSIS 2005 DOD EW Roadmap DOD EW Architecture 2004 EW Capabilities 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 EW Investment Strategy EW capabilities DOD EW ROADMAP 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Objectives: Document a Joint EW Vision; Develop an EW Roadmap and Investment Strategy 24

Requirements-to-Acquisition: Some AT&L Observations q Capabilities-Based Assessments help inform decision makers – not a decision-making tool in and of themselves Ø Still rely on Services to identify and attempt to resolve shortfalls q JCIDS is still evolving - potential to impact acquisition Ø Joint Capability Areas, Streamlining JCIDS are latest initiatives Ø Sufficient data/analysis to support decisions? q Process is still oriented towards Service-developed ICDs Ø Services are beginning to develop “joint” ICDs together (e. g. , JSE) q Need for process flexibility is recognized Ø Program migration from old to new acquisition framework (e. g. , MNS/ORDs to ICDs/CDDs, MS I to MS A) Ø Application of single-program criteria to Family-of-Systems programs (e. g. , Future Combat System) 25

Requirements-to-Acquisition: Some AT&L Observations q Early involvement of AT&L is a plus Ø Allows for greatest leverage in preventing mistakes / misconceptions and understanding Service objectives Ø Engaging with subject matter experts (e. g. , acquisition policy) can do a lot to avoid unnecessary delays Ø PA&E is our most useful partner in this phase q NII is an increasingly important ally as programs attempt to translate the Net Ready KPP into an actual capability 26

Questions? 27