1. JTLS at JWC ALLIED COMMAND TRANSFORMATION JOINT WARFARE CENTRE
[12 Dec 2012]
Mr Ivan Vianello
Chief Team A
CAX Support Branch
Simulation Modelling & C4 Division

2. New NATO’s Military Structure
Committee
SHAPE
HQ-SACT
ACT
ACO
JFC
Brunssum
LCC
Heidelberg HQ
Madrid JC
Lisbon
MCC
Naples
JFC
Naples
JWC
JFTC
JALLC HQ
AIRCOMM
Ramstein HQ
MARCOMM
Northwood HQ
LANDCOM
izmir
NRDC
JFC’S NOW WILL BE CONVERTED IN LARGER JOINT FORCE HQ CAPABLE TO DEPLOY 500 OF THEIR 850 PEOPLE.
ACC RAMSTEIN WILL TAKE THE TASK OF MISSILE DEFENCE
2 CAOCS NOT A DEPLOYABLE ONE DETACHED FROM THE 2 WILL BE CREATED. POGGIO AND NIEUW Milligen will be combined.
NC3A
NCST
2 CAOCs
FRRCORP
EUROCORPS
ARRC
NRDC-T
NRDC-I
NCIA
NRDC-GE/NL
NRDC-S
NRDC : NATO’s Rapid Deployable Corps ; ARRC : Allies Rapid Reac Corps

3. JWC Mission
JWC plans, conducts and executes operational training; conducts and supports collective training of joint and combined staffs of the NATO Command Structure (NCS) and NATO Force Structure (NFS) for Major Joint Operations (MJOs) and Small Joint Operations (SJOs)
SIMULATION,  MODELING & C4 DIVISION (SMC4) is responsible for the planning, management and provision of Computer  Assisted Exercises (CAX) and the C4 and CIS environments related to the JWC Programme of Work (POW).  
CAX SUPPORT BRANCH is responsible for  providing appropriate modeling and simulation support to deliver CAX capabilities for training events. 
he NATO Force Structure encompasses national and multinational forces and their associated operational headquarters, placed under the Alliance’s disposal on a permanent or temporary basis under specified readiness criteria.
The NATO Command Structure has a strategic scope, primarily intended to command and control the Alliance’s joint operations (i.e. operations in which more than one service are involved).
The NATO Force Structure is tactical in scope and provides additional command and control capabilities at the single service level. It is at present in the process of radical changes:

4. JWC Customers:
Joint Warfare
Centre
Joint Force
Command Brunssum
MCC Northwood
ACC Ramstein
SHAPE
SHAPE – 2 subordinate JFCs – generate land-based CJTF HQ - JFC Brunsum and Naples.
JCL sea-based CJTF HQ - no subordinate CC
If operational requirements dictate, JFCB / JFCN CC can be tasked by SACEUR to provide a C2 capability.
Responsible to ACT - responsive to ACO
Joint Force
Command Naples
LCC Izmir 4

5. Live Stream is definitely a TA requirement but at today :
Models in JWC
JTLS + VBS2 to support NRF (Nato Response Force ) Exercises
2 Main Events per year
1 JFC and 3 HQ’s involved (1200 people) - Distributed
Exercise Control 400 people - centralized in JWC
JWC CAX Specialist Team 9 People (Core Team) . Additional Support from Contractors , R&A , M&S COE (2 people)
VBS2 to support ISAF HQ Training Event
Live Stream is definitely a TA requirement but at today :
Multiple streams are not possible
max 3/4 vignettes per day (manpower demanding)
difficulties to support TA last minute requests for streaming outside the MEL MIL (MSEL) plan .Going towards Kinetic (Article V) scenarios this requirement may rise more frequently. TA can take initiative not only React.

6. 2012 a Challenging Year Steadfast Joist 12  Moving to New Building
The Complete infrastructure is Virtualized
JWC Staff use Thin client for daily job
During the Execution JTLS is running on VM :
Two Pools : 1 for Server (JTLS Services) , 1 for Clients (Whips).
In Total 5 full Games Running
1 JWC CAX Technician prepare and look after the entire CAX Infrastructure

7. 2012 a Challenging Year
Steadfast Juncture 12  New Scenario (towards Article V)
Settings (GEO – DB) :
52 national Boundaries
17 Countries
Around targets
(46520 Bridges , Facilities , 3040 Runways , 9789 Tunnels etc etc )
8 Sides
6345 Flight Corridor for Civilian flights.
1500 Civilians Flights per day over the exercise Area
Orbat : Alliance , Sitfor , OPFOR (new concept) , built with JOBE 7

8. JTLS in JWC Flexible ( easy to Rerun and deploy the model)
Manageable - no complex Architecture key
Size of the Game has impact on crash procedures i.e . CEP start time .(example of Next exercise)

9. JTLS in JWC “ Keep the CAX Architecture as Simple as possible”
-Scenario Size implications
Reduce Complexity of Setup / Crash - Recover procedures
Game Start up time
-Only CAX tools considered Critical for a specific Event are added in the event CAX Architecture .
-CAX Environment has to be easily reproducible after the exercise with minimum manpower and resources
-Minimize the possibility that required Architecture updates , can prevent a new model version to be used for an event.
Current Approach fits with JWC IT (VM) Environment and available Manpower

10. and within your organizations ?
Considerations
Mission requirements
Security
Feasibility
Usability
Coherence
Robustness
Affordability
Sustainability
Modularity
Cohesiveness
Connectivity
Economy
Extensibility
All design are technically feasible but the question is how do they fit with these 13 considerations
and within your organizations ?

11. SFJE12 EXPERIENCE JTLS to play a Cyber Attack incident
JTLS for EXCON “next day preview” in support of a Kinetic Incident.
JTLS information’s combined with Mel Mil (MSEL) layer and UAV Stream on a NATO C2 System

12. CYBER ATTACK with JTLS
One of the goals of Cyber Attacks is to discredit the “trust” in the IT systems used.
However, from training perspective, such an effect could be intentionally planned to achieve a specific training Objective.

13. CYBER ATTACK with JTLS
During the Execution of SFJE12 Mel Mil (MSEL) Team planned a specific Cyber Incident
One of the two C2 systems (MCCIS) used had to be “attacked” : Additional enemy tracks were supposed to appear in the RMP.
The goal was to have a mismatch in the Training Audience C2 systems.
MCCIS showing “enemy tracks detected”
AIR and Land C2 with no information's about the incoming threat

14. CYBER ATTACK with JTLS
A Specific side was selected as temporary source for the “fake” tracks .
Copies of enemies ships were created from the chosen side.
In JTOI the Naval update for the “fake tracks” side was Filtered out in order to prevent Air C2 system to be stimulated (potentially it could receive Ship updates as well)
TPFDD in

15. CYBER ATTACK with JTLS
Fake Ships were then Magic Moved and ordered to start sailing
Unit intel was passed to Training Audience Side to force detection
Fake Ships started getting reported only in 1 C2 system (MCCIS)
No DSA in the area
Air Cell were role playing “no detection” from air asset in the area (fake tracks were still appearing in the WHIP)

16. CYBER ATTACK with JTLS

17. ”The day after” Requirements :
An MEL MIL (MSEL) Incident triggered the Training Audience Decision to conduct an Amphibious Attack during the Night. (No 24 hrs manning).
Mel Mil team needed the “next day “ situation for a possible contingency plan.
Solution :
CAX team implemented the Amphibious in Run Ahead game Runahed was fast forwarded until the next morning with the TRIPP connected .
During the Evening MEL MIL Sync meeting , Mel Mil team intensively used the TRIPP to analyze the situation.

18. Experiment : C2 as UDOP
From Theatre : UDOP (User Defined Operational Picture) . The goal was to optimize the information flow and access within the HQ itself. The key was to reuse tools available in NATO (ICC) without starting new projects.
ICC clients have been fed with different KML files :
“Incidents” and “Actions” pulled from JEMM (MSEL tool)
Simulation data’s updated in real time from JTLS. (KOI)
JOC WATCH information's (Training Audience perception of incidents)
VBS2 Stream Hyperlink within the KML “info bubble” the pointed operator to directly to the Live feed (As in real Life)

19. JWC WAY AHEAD Looking into BBW capabilities for the future exercises
JTLS TBMD Stimulation Capabilities
next exercise TBMD will be Main TO
NATO new Air C2 systems (ICC 2.8.2) has embedded a TBMD “COP” tool that will be stimulated by JTLS

20. Questions
“……Clearly the value of JTLS to an operational-level exercise is enormous. If we were not able to maintain “white truth” via JTLS , the exercise would not only be unmanageable but the entire exercise would fall apart.
……JTLS set conditions for the execution of a revolutionary exercise in numerous way to include : cyber play , incorporating kinetic play as part of an operational-level exercise ….and the list goes on; I realize that we have only begun to tap into the potential for JTLS and I cannot imagine a serious exercise without it. ………”
JWC Chief Mel Mil
Steadfast Juncture 12 Exercise.