Battle lab

Last updated

A battle lab or battle laboratory is an organization dedicated to studying changes in the military.

Contents

It provides means (premises, teams, operational equipment or operational platforms, hardware, software, IT infrastructure, processes, guidelines) to analyze or assess impacts that could be induced by changes in a military realm.[ clarification needed ] The changes can be of any kind: equipment, technologies, organization, doctrine or changes in the environment itself.

As in any other kind of laboratory, the analysis run in the lab is based on experiments. Since the capabilities to simulate a warfare environment, emulate systems or equipment, and model actors (including their interactions with other actors and their environment) are generally necessary to run such experiments, modelling and simulation is a major discipline required to operate a battle lab.

Other definitions

The definition of a battle lab provided by the Distributed Networked Battle Labs (DNBL) operating model document is "A combination of test capabilities brought together with operational end-users for the purpose of operator training and/or development/enhancement of operational concepts and procedures." [1]

Presagis defines battle labs as "A fairly new concept that allow for the virtual experimentation of new technology and solutions before they are fielded in battle. The goal is to test the latest in battlefield organization, tactics, doctrine, and technological capabilities to determine their potential value early on in the acquisition process - before significant investment has been made in their preparation and deployment. By using simulations or prototypes, the battle lab can cost-effectively evaluate battlefield performance of new technology or solutions."[ citation needed ]

The study "What are Battle Labs – Do We Still Need Them?" provides an academic view of the US battle labs in the early 2000s. [2]

Origins

The concept of a battle lab was born in the US army in the early 1990s. It was first introduced by the United States Army Training and Doctrine Command commander, General Frederick M. Franks Jr. as being a means to "quickly and thoroughly analyze both warfighting ideas and the means of warfare produced by emerging technologies."

Method

The analysis performed by a battle lab consists primarily in forming hypotheses, then conducting experiments based on modeling and simulation, possibly including operational end-users. Battle labs are mostly used with a concept development and experimentation approach to support experimentation campaigns. The Guide for Understanding and Implementing Defense Experimentation (GUIDEx) [3] is a reference in the domain.

Mission

The mission of the United States Air Force Battlelab is to "rapidly identify and prove the worth of innovative ideas which improve the ability of the Air Force to execute its core competencies and Joint Warfighting.” [4] The mission of the Mission Command Battle Lab (MCBL) at United States Army Combined Arms Center is to "[mitigate] risk to current and future Army forces by examining and evaluating emerging concepts and technologies through experimentation, studies, prototyping, and network integration, while simultaneously informing the combat development and acquisition processes."

Battle labs can be set to explore a specific topic (called an "ad hoc battle lab," generally with a limited life span and very specialized means and simulations) or can be set as a multi-purpose exploration capability (with unlimited life span, flexible and scalable means and simulations). Battle labs can be set by type of military forces (Air Forces, Naval Forces or Land Forces) or can be set across domains (Joint Forces, Combined lab). Battle labs can also be set for a military capability such as Command and Control. [5] The list of US battle labs published by the US Air Force Air University illustrates the diversity of battle labs. [6]

Battle labs interconnection

The interconnection of battle labs requires connecting the networks, connecting deployed systems and sometimes sharing technical means (simulation capabilities, test and evaluation services). Such interconnection requires setting a framework shared by the different stakeholders.

For example, the NATO Distributed Networked Battle Labs (DNBL) [7] have been created in order to tighten cooperation on preparation and conduct of Experimentation, Test and Evaluation (ET&E) events between the members of the framework. The DNBL Framework provides the operating model to enable the federated use of capabilities and systems for a wide range of user groups and to exchange ET&E services available in the DNBL Service Catalogue.
From the prospective of the simulation, a framework is dedicated to "distributed simulation" and simulation interoperability. The Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization develops standards and promotes modelling and simulation interoperability.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Joint Forces Command</span> Former U.S. Unified Combatant Command (1999–2011)

The United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) was a Unified Combatant Command of the United States Department of Defense. USJFCOM was a functional command that provided specific services to the military. The last commander was Army Gen. Ray Odierno and the Command Senior Enlisted was Marine Sergeant Major Bryan B. Battaglia. As directed by the President to identify opportunities to cut costs and rebalance priorities, Defense Secretary Robert Gates recommended that USJFCOM be disestablished and its essential functions reassigned to other unified combatant commands. Formal disestablishment occurred on 4 August 2011.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Army Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Center</span> Military unit

The Combat Capabilities Development Command (CCDC) C5ISR Center, formerly the Communications-Electronics RD&E Center (CERDEC), is the United States Army information technologies and integrated systems center. CCDC C5ISR Center is headquartered at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, with activities at Fort Belvoir in Virginia and Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Department of Defense Architecture Framework</span> Enterprise architecture framework

The Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) is an architecture framework for the United States Department of Defense (DoD) that provides visualization infrastructure for specific stakeholders concerns through viewpoints organized by various views. These views are artifacts for visualizing, understanding, and assimilating the broad scope and complexities of an architecture description through tabular, structural, behavioral, ontological, pictorial, temporal, graphical, probabilistic, or alternative conceptual means. The current release is DoDAF 2.02.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Allied Command Transformation</span> NATO strategic-level military command

Allied Command Transformation (ACT) is a military command of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), formed in 2003 after restructuring.

Concept development and experimentation (CD&E) is the application of the structure and methods of experimental science to the challenge of developing future military capability.

The Command and Control Research Program (CCRP) was an active DoD Research Program from 1994 to 2015. It was housed within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (NII) and it focused upon (1) improving both the state of the art and the state of the practice of command and control (C2) and (2) enhancing DoD's understanding of the national security implications of the Information Age. It provides "Out of the Box" thinking and explores ways to help DoD take full advantage of Information Age opportunities. The CCRP served as a bridge between the operational and technical communities and enhanced the body of knowledge and research infrastructure needed for future progress.

LandWarNet (LWN) is the United States Army’s contribution to the Global Information Grid (GIG) that consists of all globally interconnected, end-to-end set of Army information capabilities, associated processes, and personnel for collecting, processing, storing, disseminating, and managing information on demand supporting warfighters, policy makers, and support personnel. It includes all Army and leveraged Department of Defense (DOD)/Joint communications and computing systems and services, software, data security services, and other associated services. LandWarNet exists to enable the warfighter through Mission Command, previously described as Battle Command. Other U.S. service equivalent efforts to LandWarNet include the Navy's "FORCEnet" and the Air Force's "C2 Constellation."

Capability management is a high-level management function, with particular application in the context of defense.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">688th Cyberspace Wing</span> Military unit

The United States Air Force's 688th Cyberspace Wing is a cyberspace operations unit located at Kelly Field Annex, Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, Texas. It was first organized in July 1953 as the Air Force Special Communications Center. It produced long term intelligence information and developed intelligence gathering techniques. Losing its communications intelligence functions, it focused on [[electronic warfare, and in July 1975 was redesignated the Air Force Electronic Warfare Center. As its mission grew to include all elements of the spectrum, it became the Air Force Information Warfare Center in September 1993 and the Air Force Information Operations Center in October 2006. In 2009, it was reassigned from the intelligence community to Air Combat Command and became the 688th Information Operations Wing, assuming its current name in September 2013.

DOTMLPF is an acronym for doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities. It is used by the United States Department of Defense and was defined in the Joint Capabilities Integration Development System, or JCIDS Process as the framework to design what administrative changes and/or acquisition efforts would fill a capability need required to accomplish a mission. Because combatant commanders define requirements in consultation with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), they are able to consider gaps in the context of strategic direction for the total US military force and influence the direction of requirements earlier in the acquisition process, in particular, materiel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Operational Test and Evaluation Force</span> U.S. Navy organization for operational testing and evaluation

The Operational Test and Evaluation Force (OPTEVFOR) is an independent and objective agency within the United States Navy for the operational testing and evaluation (OT&E) of naval aviation, surface warfare, submarine warfare, C4I, cryptologic, and space systems in support Navy and Department of Defense acquisition programs.

Marine Corps Operational Test and Evaluation Activity (MCOTEA) is the independent Operational Test and Evaluation (OT&E) authority for the U.S. Marine Corps. MCOTEA plans, executes, and evaluates testing of material solutions against warfighter capabilities, under prescribed realistic conditions and doctrine, to determine Operational Effectiveness, Operational Suitability, and Operational Survivability (OE/OS/OSur) of all new equipment for the Corps in support of its acquisition process. MCOTEA is based at Marine Corps Base Quantico. Unlike most Marine Corps organizations, MCOTEA has a Director instead of a Commander.

Live, Virtual, & Constructive (LVC) Simulation is a broadly used taxonomy for classifying Modeling and Simulation (M&S). However, categorizing a simulation as a live, virtual, or constructive environment is problematic since there is no clear division among these categories. The degree of human participation in a simulation is infinitely variable, as is the degree of equipment realism. The categorization of simulations also lacks a category for simulated people working real equipment.

Mounted Warfare TestBed (MWTB) at Fort Knox, Kentucky, was the premier site for distributed simulation experiments in the US Army for over 20 years. It used simulation systems, including fully manned virtual simulators and computer-generated forces, to perform experiments that examined current and future weapon systems, concepts, and tactics.

The Five Eyes Air Force Interoperability Council(AFIC) is a formal military organisation, consisting of the "Five Eyes" countries, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and United States. The organisation is responsible for enhancing Air Force interoperability amongst member nations' Air Forces. The use of the term "Five Eyes" stems from the informal name for the intelligence sharing network consisting of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom and United States.

Joint Modernization Command Military unit

The U.S. Army Joint Modernization Command, or JMC, based in Fort Bliss, Texas, gains insights from "Fight Tonight" units about future ways of fighting, future technology, and force structure during realistic live, constructive, and/or simulated training exercises. Joint Modernization Command is subordinate to the Army Futures & Concepts Center in Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia; both report to the U.S. Army's newest Four-Star Command, the Army Futures Command (AFC) based in Austin, Texas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joint Deployable Analysis Team</span>

The Joint Deployable Analysis Team (JDAT) is part of the J6 Directorate of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The transformation of the United States Army is part of a strategy using Multi-Domain Operations (MDO). In 2019, the planning was for Large Scale ground Combat Operations at echelons above the brigade combat team. Multi-Domain Task Forces operate in a combatant commander's theater.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federated Mission Networking</span>

Federated Mission Networking (FMN) is a significant initiative to help ensure the interoperability and operational effectiveness of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. It is a key contribution to the Connected Forces Initiative, helping Allied and Partner forces to better communicate, train, and operate together. This includes the NATO Command Structure as well as the NATO Force Structure. The purpose of FMN is ultimately to support Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) and decision-making in operations by enabling the rapid instantiation of mission networks. Including the NATO Command Structure, 37 nations have joined the FMN initiative as so-called "FMN Affiliates" and work together under the FMN Framework Process to coordinate the design, development, and delivery of operational and technical capabilities required to conduct net-centric operations. Each development increment is referred to as an "FMN Spiral.". The respective requirements, architecture, standards, procedures, and technical instructions are documented in the so-called "FMN Spiral Specifications.". FMN Spiral Specifications are based on well-known standards and best practices, hence supported by most off-the-shelf products and vendor neutral. TACOMS standards and profiles specify a common, technology- and topology independent network interoperability layer for federated mission networks. There is also a rolling 10-year FMN Spiral Specification Roadmap of the envisioned future capabilities. At the same time, the Coalition Interoperability Assurance and Validation (CIAV) process ensures that current interoperability issues are being identified and fed back into FMN capability development.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">NATO Science and Technology Organization</span> The primary NATO organization for Defence Science and Technology

The NATO Science and Technology Organization (STO) is the primary NATO organization for Defence Science and Technology. Its stated intent is to maintain NATO's scientific and technological advantage by generating, sharing and utilizing advanced scientific knowledge, technological developments and innovation to support the alliance's core tasks.

References

  1. ↑ DNBL operating model document Archived February 18, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  2. ↑ What are Battle Labs – Do We Still Need Them?
  3. ↑ GUIDEx Book
  4. ↑ USAF Battlelabs SAB-TR-00-04 August 2000
  5. ↑ DoD Command and Control Research Program
  6. ↑ "List of US battle labs published by the US Air Force Air University". Archived from the original on 2017-07-22. Retrieved 2013-05-12.
  7. ↑ DNBL overview by the NATO NCIA Archived June 6, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.