It’s not easy to wrap one’s mind around the Future Combat Systems program and all its various components, capabilities and technologies. Indeed, the program is the most complex, multi-faceted and ambitious program in the U.S. Army’s history. Certainly it’s the most expensive program—forecasted to cost $100 billion or more over its lifetime. In a way it’s actually 19 programs consisting of 18 platforms plus the network linking them together. Yet it’s the very idea of developing all those platforms together, and to interoperate together, that’s at the heart of what FCS is. And don’t forget the logistical and embedded training advantages of having common hardware and software across many platforms (see sidebar “Advantages of Commonality and the LSI Model”).
Running down the roster of those 18 platforms, there are unattended ground sensors (UGS); two unattended munitions, the Non-Line of Sight – Launch System (NLOS-LS) and Intelligent Munitions System (IMS); four classes of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) organic to platoon, company, battalion and Unit of Action (UA) echelons; three classes of unmanned ground vehicles, the Armed Robotic Vehicle (ARV), Small Unmanned Ground Vehicle (SUGV), and Multifunctional Utility/Logistics and Equipment Vehicle (MULE); and the eight manned ground vehicles.
Common Operating Environment
Central to FCS network implementation is the System-of-Systems Common Operating Environment (SOSCOE), which supports multiple mission-critical applications independently and simultaneously. It is configurable so that any specific instantiation can incorporate only the components that are needed for that instantiation. SOSCOE enables straightforward integration of separate software packages, independent of their location, connectivity mechanism and the technology used to develop them.
The SOSCOE architecture combines COTS computing hardware and a Joint Tactical Architecture–Army (JTA-A)-compliant operating environment. The result is a nonproprietary, standards-based component architecture for real-time, near-real-time and non-real-time applications. SOSCOE also contains administrative applications that provide capabilities including login service, startup, logoff, erase, memory zeroize, alert/emergency restart and monitoring/control.
The software applications running on SOSCOE—or Battle Command (BC) mission applications as they’re called—include mission planning and preparation, situation understanding, BC and mission execution and warfighter-machine interface (WMI). These four software packages’ combined capabilities enable full interaction among the FCS-equipped units.
The “engine” that makes the FCS network work is its multilayered Communications and Computers (CC) network. The network will support advanced functionalities such as integrated network management, information assurance and information dissemination management to ensure dissemination of critical information among sensors, processors and warfighters both within and external to the FCS-equipped organization.
No large and separate infrastructure is needed for the CC network because it’s primarily embedded in the mobile platforms and moves with the combat formations. The FCS communication network is comprised of several homogenous communication systems such as Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) Clusters 1 and 5 with Wideband Network Waveform (WNW) and Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW), Network Data Link and Warfighter Information Network–Tactical (WIN-T).
The JTRS program is currently on hold, pending restructuring. But the basic plan calls for every FCS vehicle in the unit to be equipped with a 4- or 8-channel Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) Cluster 1. Soldiers and other weight and power-constrained platforms will be equipped with a 1- or 2-channel Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) Cluster 5.
In addition to the Wideband Network Waveform (WNW) and Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW) communications backbone, the software-programmable Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) will support other waveforms to ensure current force Joint, Interagency and Multinational (JIM) interoperability. The WIN-T will provide additional communications capability within the unit, as well as reach to echelons above.
FCS will employ an integrated computer system (ICS) to host the SOSCOE, ensure common processing, support networking and employ consistent data storage/retrieval across all FCS platforms and applications. The integrated computer system consists of processors, storage media, dynamic memory, input/output devices, local area networks (LANs) and operating systems. A suite of seven computing system types have been identified to meet the various FCS platform-specific requirements for security, processing capability, computational capacity, throughput, memory, size, weight and power. The contract for the ICS is shared between General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems and Rockwell Collins. LynuxWorks’ Linux-compatible LynxOS-178 safety-critical RTOS was chosen as the embedded operating system by General Dynamics for the ICS.
Boeing Integrated Defense Systems
St. Louis, MO.
(314) 232-0232.
[www.boeing.com].
LynuxWorks
San Jose, CA.
(408) 979-3900.
[www.lynuxworks.com].
General Dynamics
Advanced Information Systems
Arlington, VA.
(703) 271-7300.
[www.gd-ais.com].
Rockwell Collins
Cedar Rapids, IA.
(319) 295-1000.
[www.rockwellcollins.com].
SAIC
San Diego, CA.
(800) 430-7629.
[www.saic.com].
Advantages of Commonality and the LSI Model
Unlike traditional military programs, the Army’s Future Combat Systems program isn’t contracted to a prime contractor. Unlike traditional programs, FCS is managed by what’s termed a Lead Systems Integrator (LSI) team. Comprised of Boeing and Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC), the team integrates other companies’ products—much like a general contractor building a house—and helps the Army manage the program. The Army went with that strategy because they very wisely understood that they didn’t have the man power or expertise to do it themselves. Also, the Army wanted to have contributions from all the best companies in the industry, rather than from one that was, for example, a leader in building armored vehicles.
But why choose Boeing, a giant aircraft builder, for an Army program like FCS? Bob Mitchell, Boeing’s director of strategic business development for the Future Combat Systems (FCS) Program says “Part of our proposal was that we’re not going to try to sell you any hardware. We’re trying to sell you our expertise in system of systems engineering, in integration across the systems, and best-in-class supplier management.” Before taking on his current role, Mitchell was the Boeing FCS program manager for the initial Concept Development Phase of FCS.
The LSI approach has been working quite well, according to Mitchell. “When you go back and look at the DoD’s record on building systems, we’re running this 30% faster than anything they’ve done. And we’re running basically 19 programs—the 18 vehicles plus the network—all in formation.” There are a lot of advantages to having one integrated management team versus 19 independent teams trying to coordinate with each other. It’s the most effective way to get to the end stage with an integrated family of systems for the unit of action as opposed to a tank here, cannon there, and so on.
Commonality between the vehicles has some nice implications. According to Mitchell, there’s around 80% commonality among all the vehicles in the program. They all use the same Integrated Computer System and all the driver’s compartments will be the same. The result is a reduced training requirement, a reduced set of skills needed for the environment. This means you can reduce the number of Military Occupational Specialties (MOSs). There’s also a 60% reduction in manpower in terms of mechanics across that fleet of eight vehicles. The LSI model saves costs too. “We’ve run some models and we see about a 37% cost savings for doing it all as one program compared to doing it as 19 separate programs. And we think it reduces lifecycle costs by greater than 50%,” says Mitchell.
Figure 1
Future Combat Systems networks 18 platforms together with the soldier. The eight manned ground vehicles range from the Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon (NLOS-C) that provides networked, extended-range targeting and precision attack of point and area targets, to Reconnaissance and Surveillance Vehicles (RSVs) that feature a mast-mounted, long-range electro-optic infrared sensor, an emitter mapping sensor for radio frequency (RF) intercept and direction finding, remote chemical detection and a multifunction RF sensor. Other vehicles provide command, infantry transport and medicial evacuation.
Four classes of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) serve reconnaissance, security/early warning, target acquisition and designation for both the bridge and for the dismounted soldier. Three classes of unmanned ground vehicles serve combat, utility and tight terrain “cave” crawling. And finally there are unattended ground sensors (UGS) that target detection, location and classification; and have imaging capability for target identification. A sensor field will also include a gateway node to provide sensor fusion and long-haul communications capability for transmitting target or other information. The Non-Line of Sight – Launch System (NLOS-LS) has self-contained tactical fire control electronics and software for remote and unmanned operations. And the Intelligent Munitions System (IMS) can be arranged in a munitions field that can be armed, turned off to allow friendly passage, and then rearmed to resume its mission.
Figure 2
Several homogenous communication systems make up the FCS communication network. These include Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) Clusters 1 and 5 with Wideband Network Waveform (WNW) and Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW), Network Data Link and Warfighter Information Network–Tactical (WIN-T).
Every FCS vehicle will be equipped with a 4- or 8-channel Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) Cluster 1. Soldiers and other weight and power-constrained platforms will be equipped with a 1- or 2-channel Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) Cluster 5. In addition to the Wideband Network Waveform (WNW) and Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW) communications backbone, the software-programmable Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) will support other waveforms to ensure current force Joint, Interagency and Multinational (JIM) interoperability. The WIN-T will provide additional communications capability within the unit, as well as reach to echelons above.
The FCS Network Management System manages the entire unit’s network including radios with different waveforms, platform routers and LANs, information assurance elements and hosts. It provides a full spectrum of management capabilities required during all mission phases, including pre-mission planning, rapid network configuration upon deployment in the area of operations, monitoring the network during mission execution and dynamic adaptation of network policies in response to network performance and failure conditions.
Figure 3
The System-of-Systems Common Operating Environment (SOSCOE) framework allows for integration of critical interoperability services that translate Army, Joint and coalition formats to native, internal FCS message formats using a common format translation service. Because all interoperability services use these common translation services, new external formats will have minimal impact on the FCS software baseline. The FCS software is supported by application-specific interoperability services that act as proxy agents for each Joint and Army system. Battle Command (BC) can access these interoperability services through application program interfaces that provide isolation between the domain applications, thereby facilitating ease of software modifications and upgrades.
The FCS Family-of-Systems (FoS) is connected to the command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) network by a multilayered Communications and Computers (CC) network with unprecedented range, capacity and dependability. The CC network provides secure, reliable access to information sources over extended distances and complex terrain. The network will support advanced functionalities such as integrated network management, information assurance and information dissemination management to ensure dissemination of critical information among sensors, processors and warfighters both within and external to the FCS-equipped organization. The CC network does not rely on a large and separate infrastructure because it is primarily embedded in the mobile platforms and moves with the combat formations.
Figure 4
Shown here is the schedule for “Spinning Out” technologies. Starting in 2006 there’s a decision point to decide which things will be spun out in Spin Out 1. Likely candidates are the unattended ground sensors and the Intelligent Munitions Systems. There is also an initial preliminary design review and an Experiment 1.1. That will entail a bunch of networks from surrogate vehicles from the FCS side, probably using modified Humvees with the radio systems and the computer systems in them. In 2008 (in the outer band) the Army is going to stand up an experimental brigade combat team. And they’re going to be configured like an FCS unit of action, but they will have Current Force equipment. They’ll give this team the unattended sensors, the intelligent munitions system and the NLOS–LS all for a limited user test.
If that test goes well, that gear will start production and spin into the Current Force. If the experiment shows technologies are not ready, it will spin back into a Lessons Learned loop. Going around the spiral chart, prototypes of all the families of vehicles will be tested and come out around Spin Out 3 and Spin Out 4. On the inner rings there are limited user tests for the main program and then production decisions and initial operational capability scheduled for 2014/2015. At that point, the plan is to field the entire unit as a unit. No doubt the first unit will be manned by soldiers that participated in the experimental unit that they have been training with all along.
Figure 5
This graphic depicts the way the Army is changing its force structure from a Division-based structure to Brigade-based—or Modular Brigade Combat Team structure. That shift is happening now, partly because the Army is out to start changing its culture so it will be ready for FCS when it gets here.
The entire Army is being reorganized into these Brigade Combat Teams. The experimental units evaluate the FCS technologies that are spun out. Then in Spin Out 2, seven Brigade Combat Teams will get the technologies from Spin Out 1. Finally, in the last spiral one—see right-most bar chart—one of those teams goes red and that’s the FCS team. At the bottom of each spiral chart there are five little red blocks that are unfulfilled requirements. The Chief of Staff of the Army says he needs 48 modular Brigade Combat Teams, but only has enough forces to do 43 at present.
Figure 6
Unlike traditional programs, FCS is managed by a Lead Systems Integrator (LSI) team. Comprised of Boeing and Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC), the team integrates other companies’ products and helps the Army manage the program. This makes it easier to coordinate contributions from all the best companies in the industry. The LSI functions as one integrated management team, with basically a one step design process to get all of the program requirements integrated into the capabilities.
