Pacific Warfighting Center (PWC)

Pacific Warfighting Center (PWC)
UNCLASSIFIED United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) J73 16th Annual JTLS International User’s Conference March 2014

PWC Mission Delivering Engagement activities across Pacific Theater
UNCLASSIFIED Deliver multi-faceted training, JLVC enablers, and exercise / event support to USPACOM CMDR and HQs staff; JTFs/CTFs; Component Commanders and staffs; Partners; and joint context to Service level activities (with focus on PACOM Joint Exercise Program) Coordinate and collaborate for Strategic M&S initiatives, new and enhanced capabilities, and represent USPACOM in multiple joint training venues in support of PACOM CMDRs joint M&S vision and requirements, warfighter needs, and elimination of training gaps and shortfalls Oversight and coordination for Joint training requirements across PACOM HQs, including individual training, staff training, collective training, and associated tools and processes Rapid prototyping solutions for PACOM requirements with an experiment and development platform to validate proof of concept capabilities within a training environment in order to quickly transition to the warfighter (joint operational environment) Deliver collaboration environments and control tools to build a synthetic environment that sets the conditions for realistic training and supports global operations Delivering Engagement activities across Pacific Theater UNCLASSIFIED

Pacific Theater Joint M&S Vision
UNCLASSIFIED Enhanced Pacific-Theater Joint / Combined M&S capability to efficiently organize and apply available joint tools, technical staff, and processes among regional U.S. and Partner Nation simulation centers for support of existing, new, and emerging joint exercise and training requirements PWC is the Lead Organization for implementing this vision in support of the USPACOM Commander Information sharing and achievement of common standards and compatible tools, systems, and networks to effectively conduct US and Partner Nation activities UNCLASSIFIED

USPACOM Joint Exercise Program (JEP)
UNCLASSIFIED Korea KEY RESOLVE / FOAL EAGLE ULCHI FREEDOM GUARDIAN Japan KEEN SWORD KEEN EDGE Alaska NORTHERN EDGE Hawai‘i TEMPEST WIND TTX 15 Thailand COBRA GOLD Guam VALIANT SHIELD Philippines BALIKATAN India Joint Exercise India ASEAN AEX Singapore COMMANDO SLING Malaysia BERSAMA WARRIOR Multi-national Planning and Augmentation Team (MPAT) TEMPEST EXPRESS Australia TALISMAN SABER Indonesia GEMA BHAKTI Increasing Readiness and Preparedness of U.S. Military and Pacific Partner Nations’ Forces UNCLASSIFIED

PWC Characteristics UNCLASSIFIED Primary Joint M&S Hub / Technology Center in the Pacific, delivering: Strategy; coordination and collaboration across simulation centers, Partner Nations, Joint Staff, and other DoD entities; providing joint solutions to meet today’s and tomorrow’s training and operational requirements and challenges Infrastructure, Networks, JLVC Enablers, Planners, and Engineers to support PACOM’s Joint Exercise Program and add joint context to Service level activities Joint / combined operating environments for exercises and training activities As part of the DoD Joint network, Subject Matter Expertise and facilities that contribute to Joint Staff J7's ongoing development / testing, and IOC / FOC implementation of the next generation Joint M&S architecture and environment – JTEA and JLVC 2020, cloud-enabled modular services Collaboration environments and exercise control tools Individual, staff, and collective joint training solutions and products UNCLASSIFIED

PWC Organization PWC Director (J73) UNCLASSIFIED
Deputy PWC Director (J730) Special Staff Admin / Logistics / Security Facility Management 7 PWC Program Management Model & Simulation/C4I (J731) UISS - All Partners Access Network- APAN (J732) PWC Core Services (J733) PWC Operations & Event Support (J734) Joint Training (J735) 5 38 21 12 6 M&S Planning, Simulation Operations and Training, Simulation Engineering, C4I Integration Project Management, Knowledge Management, Product Development, 24/7 APAN Help Desk Comms Security, Info Assurance, Non-NMCI Networks, Non-NMCI Systems, Configuration Management / VBDS, CFE Support Event Coordination, Info / Knowledge Management, IT Systems Support Individual & Staff Training JTF Training & Certification Training Interoperability UNCLASSIFIED

J731 – Roles and Responsibilities
UNCLASSIFIED J731 – MAJ Matt Mackey M&S Support Team Mike Fagundes, M&S Strategic Planner / Exercise Technical Control Peter Schupp, Simulation Operations / OPFOR / Model Control Michael Haraway, Simulation / COP Engineer Vacant, C4I Integrator Richard Seeley, M&S Planner/Engineer (infrastructure SME) Simulation Operations / Trainer (future - per requirements/resources) Surge SMEs provided during event execution support 24/7 operations Reservists / other government organizations SMEs from industry (MSEL Manager / Exercise Control / Sim Ops) Roland and Associates, Database Administration / JTLS SME UNCLASSIFIED

Use Case Project Discussion
UNCLASSIFIED United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) J73 Training Gaps and Analysis Forum (TGAF): Training Gap 44 Feb 19, 2014

Training Gaps & Analysis Forum (TGAF)
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project TGAF is a forum that is facilitated by the Joint Staff J7 with members from the Combatant Commands (COCOMs) and Services to share problems and challenges within the Joint Training Community Work together to identify, prioritize, and define requirements for training gaps USPACOM J73 is the sponsor for Training Gap (TG) 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture Problem Statement: The Joint Community lacks a joint training enterprise architecture that is economical, sustainable, scalable, flexible, distributable, and deployable for support of U.S. only, bilateral, and multinational training environments. As part of TG 44 activities, USPACOM has completed a Use Case Project to collect requirements from across the Joint Community UNCLASSIFIED

Use Case Statistics Tier I - IV
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project COCOM T I-IV T I&II USAFRICOM USCENTCOM 3 USEUCOM 4 2 USNORTHCOM 9 USPACOM 29 17 USSOCOM USSOUTHCOM USSTRATCOM 1 USTRANSCOM Service T I-IV T I&II US Air Force 1 US Army 8 6 US Marine Corp 5 US Navy 2 In response to JSAP# J-7A the Joint community submitted 67 use cases, including 7 duplicates. Within this group, there are 42 Tier I and II use cases, including 6 duplicates. The charts provide a listing of the total use cases submitted across the stakeholders for Tiers I – IV and the subset of Tiers I and II. We have duplicates for multiple use cases submitted, which include: Ulchi Freedom Guardian (UFG) provided by Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) and USFK; Foal Eagle (FE) provided by USPACOM J71 and USFK; Talisman Saber (TS) provided by USPACOM J71 and US Army; Terminal Fury (TF) provided by USPACOM J71 and PACAF x 2; Key Resolve (KR) provided by USPACOM J71 and USFK; and Fleet Synthetic Training (FST) provided by Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet (COMPACFLT) and US Navy. All use cases are Tier I and II duplicates except for FST. We did not duplicate the responses within our analysis and calculated totals; however, we did include data that was relevant based upon different perspectives (i.e. detail on exercise environment, C2 devices, enablers, threads, and/or scenario). Also, the TF event includes information on the command post exercise and related JELC activities and events. While the use cases submitted do not compare directly to the actual activities listed within Joint Training Information Management System (JTIMS), they do provide an adequate sample of the type of events, activities, and requirements across joint stakeholder organizations. UNCLASSIFIED

Event Classification Event Classification Classified 14
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project Event Classification Classified 14 Classified Releasable 29 Unclassified 17 This category validates the need to train across U.S. only, bi-lateral, and multi-national environments while protecting sensitive data. Given policy and process constraints, this is a challenge during current operations and training venues across Department of Defense organizations. Infrastructure solutions with Cross Domain Information Sharing (CDIS) capabilities provide flexibility to the training community; however, it is a common practice to use mature, tested, and validated solutions to ensure mission success. The breakdown of event classification data submitted is provided within the chart. There is a diverse sample of event classification levels. The classified releasable numbers make up 48% of the use cases, reinforcing the priority requirement for next generation solutions to include CDIS and be releasable to multiple countries. UNCLASSIFIED

Primary Training Audience
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project USCENTCOM 3 USEUCOM 4 USNORTHCOM 5 NORAD 1ST Responders USPACOM USFK/CFC USFJ 2 COMPACFLT CNFJ 3RD FLT 7TH FLT 8 MARFORPAC MARFORJ PACAF 5TH AF SOCPAC 1 US JTF USARPAC 2 USARJ I Corps 25TH IN DIV USSOCOM MARSOC USSOUTHCOM USSTRATCOM USTRANSCOM US Air Force US Army 7 US Marines 5 US Navy United Nations CMD Coalition/Allied Partners 4 Australia 6 Canada 1 France 2 India Indonesia Italy Japan 7 Malaysia Philippines Republic of Georgia Republic of Korea Singapore Thailand United Kingdom We have captured more than 14 international partners (countries) and 32 U.S. organizations that are the primary recipients of the training activities. This also validates the need for releasable environments, collaboration, and event management tools across the Joint training community. The secondary training audience provided similar totals, with over 33 U.S. organizations and more than 16 international partners (countries) identified. The majority of international participation is from countries within the Asia-Pacific Region – also reflected within the Sponsor Command category, which identified the United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) with 18 events; nearly triple the amount of any other organization. UNCLASSIFIED

Echelon and Certification
UNCLASSIFIED Tiers Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project Tiers Trained I 14 II 27 III 33 IV 24 All IV Tiers 4 JTF/OCA TIERS TRAINED There was a lot of discussion on this category and the consensus of the TGAF stakeholders was to capture which use cases trained Tiers I – IV training audiences [Tier I = CCMD Commander and Staff; Tier II = Joint or Combined Task Force; Tier III = Component Commander and Staff; and Tier IV or below = tactical units]. The CCMD Joint Exercise Programs (JEPs) focus at the strategic and operational training levels. We received a robust sample of Tiers trained, as illustrated in the chart on the slide. Tier I and II are trained in 68% of the use cases, which validates the next generation joint simulation solution focus on this level of training audience. The Joint Training Enterprise must have support organizations equipped with required tools, expertise, and infrastructure to distribute the synthetic environment and deliver capabilities locally, regionally, and globally to meet CCMD and Service training and exercise requirements. JTF/OCA CERTIFICATION This category enabled us to capture the quantity of use cases that include a Joint Task Force (JTF) Accreditation or Operational Capability Assessment (OCA), which adds to the complexity of training objectives, scenario events, and subject matter expertise required. Out of the 60 use cases received (without duplicates), there were 20 with JTF/OCA Certification, 32 without, and 8 blanks which reflect unknown responses. Almost 40% of all use cases require JTF or OCA certification, with 50% of Tier I and II use cases identifying JTF or OCA certification. JTF/OCA results demonstrate a strong requirement for certification events, as well as a JLVC toolset to support these events and assessment activities. JTF/OCA (8 Blanks) Yes 20 No 32 UNCLASSIFIED

Mission Threads Recurring Added Thread UNCLASSIFIED MISSION THREADS
Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project MISSION THREADS In collaboration with the Joint Staff, several mission threads were identified that align with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) priorities and guidance. Each use case data sheet provided for the selection of Top 5 mission threads from a drop down menu. To ensure all critical data was captured, an additional field was established “other mission thread” so that organizations could manually enter whatever mission threads were used during their events and/or training activities. We collected a diverse sampling of the Top 5 mission threads, the most common responses being battle rhythm, targets and fires. 75% of use cases include executing a staff battle rhythm as a Top 5 mission thread. The numbers remain the same when focusing only on Tier I and II events. 40% of use cases include developing a campaign plan as a Top 5 mission thread. The numbers increase by 10% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. 57% of use cases include conducting joint targeting as a Top 5 mission thread. The numbers increase only by 1% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. 55% of use cases include conducting joint fires as a Top 5 mission thread. The numbers decrease by 11% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. 35% of use cases include conducting joint integrated air and missile defense operations as a Top 5 mission thread. The numbers decrease by 4% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. 23% of use cases include cyber operations as a Top 5 mission thread. The numbers increase by 8% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. Some important mission threads added by subject matter experts (SMEs) include: Consequence Management (CM) / Foreign Consequence Management (FCM), Homeland Defense (HD), Humanitarian Assistance / Disaster Relief (HA/DR), Non-Combat Evacuation Operations (NEO), and Inter-Agency. Logistics is also a key element, and we will continue this analysis through the next section, scenario. These mission threads must be supported within the synthetic environment and associated control group tools and computer models. Cyber operations is also an emerging requirement for inclusion into next generation joint simulation solutions. Recurring Added Thread UNCLASSIFIED

Scenario UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED SCENARIO
Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project SCENARIO As seen in the chart, the scenario count is by occurrence within a use case, i.e. combat operations (CBT Ops) is a scenario in 41 of 60 use cases. Most events include multiple scenarios. The CBT Ops mission thread has been a key area of training for many years, so the scenario results aren’t a surprise. Further analysis between other strong mission threads and scenarios include: In the Top 5 mission threads, battle rhythm and campaign plan include a significant amount of military operations other than war (MOOTW), inclusive of HA/DR / NEO / Inter-Agency and HD / CM / FCM, which are recurring added mission threads and the second and third highest recurring scenarios. HA/DR / NEO / Inter-Agency coordination is a predominant scenario in 40% of use cases, and the numbers increase to 50% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. HD / CM / FCM is a predominant scenario in 20% of use cases, increasing to 28% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. In Joint Vision 2020, General Dempsey also focus’ on MOOTW, stating “A full range of operations also includes those ambiguous situations residing between peace and war, such as peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations, as well as noncombat humanitarian relief operations and support to domestic authorities”. There is ongoing discussion within the Joint community as to how to best design and create a synthetic environment that establishes realistic conditions for these elements. Academics, computer models, scripted events, role players, and gaming are all tools that could be part of the solution (based upon the requirements for the specific training event or activity). Continued research and analysis is needed to identify whether existing tools and/or if additional development is required to meet these needs. The next generation joint simulation solution must include capabilities to train across these scenario and mission threads. UNCLASSIFIED

Training Enablers Required
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project TRAINING ENABLERS REQUIRED The training enabler category was included within the data sheet to obtain which Joint Live Virtual Constructive (JLVC) tools were needed to set realistic conditions for the training audience, given the mission threads, scenario, and other factors. Understanding that not all respondents would be Modeling and Simulation experts, a small sample of “unknown” responses were submitted. In the chart, training enabler use case data was translated into percentages. For example, 49 out of 60 Tier I-IV use cases (or 82%) use a constructive simulation. Eight use cases (or 13%) do not use a constructive simulation, and 3 use case respondents (or 2%) did not know. Constructive simulations are present in over 80% of the use cases. This decreases by 4% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. Virtual simulators are present in 66% of use cases. This decreases by 10% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. Live enablers are present in 47% of use cases. This decreases by 11% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. 70% of the use cases identify the requirement to distribute the synthetic environment. This decreases by 5% when focusing only on Tier I and II events. The data captured validates that JLVC enablers are used extensively across joint training activities, and that the majority of the time the synthetic environment is distributed to multiple sites. Tier I and II require a constructive simulation, while Tier III and IV focus more on live, virtual simulator, and Service specific simulation solutions. The types of solutions are captured within the exercise environment section, and illustrated in the chart on slide 10. The next generation joint simulation solution must continue to integrate JLVC enablers as required by the joint training community and facilitate home station training opportunities for soldiers, sailors, and airmen to maximize resources. This does not change, and should complement the CCMD requirement for deployed events in IT degraded environments (partner countries, etc.) where the synthetic environment is built and executed locally. UNCLASSIFIED

Exercise Environment UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED
Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project EXERCISE ENVIRONMENT The exercise environment category was included within the use case data sheet to capture the requirements within the control environment (white cell), to include response cells, role players, assessment (after action review), functional and technical subject matter expertise, a description of JLVC enablers, organizational or technical architecture details, and names of organizations that provide the capabilities and expertise. This was a manual input section for the respondents and is a significant source of information as collected and also valuable through further discussion for any stakeholder involved with next generation joint simulation requirements definition, research, design, development, testing, validation, operations, training, and/or assessment. Understanding that the Joint Staff and other organizations are developing next generation joint simulation solutions, this chart illustrates the collection of tools identified within the use cases by respondents. Even though the intent of the use case data sheet was to capture requirements, M&S (and training) subject matter experts can perform additional analysis from the inputs to further define and document requirements and capabilities needed by the joint training community. Comparing Tier I-IV to Tier I & II findings, the exercise environment looks quite different. While aggregate level, entity based warfighting models are traditionally dominant in Tier III and IV events, Tier I & II shifts towards global protection, missile defense, sustainability, logistics and transportation. The below listing provides additional details concerning the identified tools across the use cases and Tiers: Missile Defense Agency / All Things Missile (MDA/ATM) simulation supports 13 of 60 events, 9 of them Tier I and II events. Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Tactical Warfare Simulation (MTWS) is the primary simulation in 12 of 60 events, but only 1 is a Tier I and II event. Distributed Environment Support System (DESS) supports 10 of 60 events, 9 of them Tier I and II events. Joint Theater Level Simulation (JTLS) is the primary simulation in 9 of 60 events and 8 are Tier I and II events. Joint Semi-Automated Forces (JSAF) is the primary simulation in 8 of 60 events, but no Tier I and II events. Air Warfare Simulation (AWSIM) is a simulation in 7 of 60 Events, all being Tier I & II events. Warfighters’ Simulation (WARSIM) is the primary simulation in 5 of 60 events, 4 of them Tier I and II events. JTTI+K is the primary simulation in 3 of 60 events, all being Tier I and II events. JLVC is the primary simulation in 5 of 60 events, 3 of them Tier I and II events. UNCLASSIFIED

Log, Intel, Area and Days Competitive CBT Log or Random Influence Yes
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project Competitive CBT Log or Random Influence Yes 29 No 15 DK/BLK 16 Single Source Intel Analysis 27 10 23 Geographical Area Global 5 Single Hemisphere 22 Single Continent 19 Single Nation 14 Event Length (6 Blank) 3-5 Days 5-7 Days 7-10 Days 18 10+ Days 11 EVENT PARAMETERS Some basic event parameters were captured that describe the size, scale, and complexity of an event, in order to identify capabilities and requirements for the control organization and synthetic environment. The requirement for competitive combat/logistics or random influences validates the need for a computer model versus scripted activities. Identification if there will be single source intelligence analysts in the training audience provide a level of detail and messages that will be required from the control organization to stimulate the training audience. The event length and scenario geographical area provide insight into resources required, computer model parameters, and number and types of role players within the control organization. All are important variables as the Joint community designs and plans for next generation solutions. The chart illustrates the event parameters captured across the use cases submitted. Competitive Combat/Logistics or Random Influence Competitive combat/logistics is required in 48% of the events and the numbers increase to 58% when focusing only on Tier I and II Events. Logistics is vital to combat operations and an essential capability within joint simulation solutions (and validated through the data collected). Single Source Intelligence Analysts in the Training Audience Single source intelligence analysts are present in 45% of events, and increase to 55% when focused on Tier I and II events. Additionally, of the Top 5 Mission Threads, 42% of events include conducting joint intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and 32% include conducting joint intelligence preparation of the operating environment. Intelligence is also an essential capability within joint simulation solutions (and validated through the data collected). Geographical Size of the Scenario Five events (or 8%) require a global exercise area. Next generation solutions must accommodate the full range of geographical areas when designing technical, scenario, and organizational parameters. Discussion across the stakeholders could further define the geographical area requirements and identify additional metrics for global CCMD and Service level training activities. Event Length Twenty-eight events (or 47%) run 5-10 days in length. Only 11 are 10+ days (or 18%), and the remainder were recorded as shorter than 5 days or left blank, validating the need for established processes and effective tools to establish the conditions for realistic training over a short timeline. For the event participants to be effective, tools and processes should facilitate and accommodate a sequence of activities for testing, validating, and training of technical and operational elements between the white cell and training audience. UNCLASSIFIED

C2 Devices GCCS 35 C2PC 16 ABCS/AFATDS 14 TBMCS ADSI 12 CPoF JADOCS 10
UNCLASSIFIED Training Gap 44: Joint Training Enterprise Architecture (JTEA), Use Case Project GCCS 35 C2PC 16 ABCS/AFATDS 14 TBMCS ADSI 12 CPoF JADOCS 10 Agile Client 7 BCS ATM 4 DCGS IBS CPoF – Command Post of the Future JADOCS – Joint Automated Deep Operations Coordination System DCGS – Distributed Common Ground Systems ABCS – Army Battle Command System ADSI- Advanced Distributed System Interface ATM – All things Missile BCS – Battle Control System IBS – Intel Broadcast System The C2 category was included in the data sheet to capture the systems used (or planned to be used) and identify from what locations. The inclusion of location enables some additional discussion and analysis for architecture requirements within and across use cases submitted. The Global Command and Control System is required for 58% of the use cases. Other C2 Devices used in 23% - 27% of the events include: TBMCS, ABCS / AFATDS, and C2PC. The next generation joint simulation solution must set priority to the global command and control system (GCCS), however, with a design that is based upon standard processes and protocols that are interoperable across a variety of systems. A critical component for next generation solutions is to standardize a common operational picture (COP) management program. This will aid in the interface and processes required between the synthetic environment and command and control systems used by organizations within the joint training community. UNCLASSIFIED

Joint Modeling & Simulation Users Group
UNCLASSIFIED Start discussion thread with other SMEs in the community A resource to documents and other M&S professionals A place (archive) for event specific data UNCLASSIFIED

JTLS Exercise Initiatives
UNCLASSIFIED United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) J73 JTLS in support of USPACOM supported exercises

Agenda Recent USPACOM JTLS Events Keen Edge 2014 (Jan)
UNCLASSIFIED Recent USPACOM JTLS Events Keen Edge 2014 (Jan) Cobra Gold 2014 (Feb) Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) Test PACOM Support to JTLS development Future Initiatives UNCLASSIFIED

Full Spectrum Operations
KEEN EDGE 2014 UNCLASSIFIED Strategic Deployment Full Spectrum Operations UNCLASSIFIED

KE14 Database Japan E-Land Training Audience Response Cells OPFOR
SITFOR OPFOR KE14 Database UNCLASSIFIED Japan E-Land Training Audience Response Cells Terrorists United States W-Land Radicals Neutrals All Others I-Land S-Land UNCLASSIFIED

JTLS to COP Systems JTLS Operational Interface (JOI) broadcast:
UNCLASSIFIED JTLS Operational Interface (JOI) broadcast: Over The Horizon - Gold (OTH-Gold) unit tracks to Global Command and Control System (GCCS) Link-16 platform tracks to Air Defense Systems Integrator (ADSI) Command & Control Personal Computer (C2PC) connected to Training Audience GCCS brought Common Operational Picture (COP) back to Exercise Control Group (ECG) UNCLASSIFIED

JTLS to TBMCS UNCLASSIFIED JTLS Air Tasking Order Translator (ATOT) read ATO into JTLS air missions Included strategic airlift missions to provide COP visibility JTLS Transactional Operational Interface (TOI) connected to Theater Battle Management Core System (TBMCS) Automatically updated Execution Status (ESTAT) and Force Status (FSTAT) Tables Operational test opportunity for 2004 format UNCLASSIFIED

Peace Keeping / Enforcement
COBRA GOLD 2014 UNCLASSIFIED Peace Keeping / Enforcement UNCLASSIFIED

Pacifica Scenario Arcadia Kuhistan Mojave Sonora Tierra del Oro
UNCLASSIFIED Arcadia 2 1 2 1 Kuhistan 2 8 2 6 2 4 Mojave Sonora Tierra del Oro Isla del Sol UNCLASSIFIED

CG14 Database Thailand Sonora Training Audience Response Cells OPFOR
SITFOR OPFOR CG14 Database UNCLASSIFIED Thailand Sonora Training Audience Response Cells Irregulars United States Nations MNF FMR Neutrals All Others Pacifica Nations Arcadia UNCLASSIFIED

JTLS and R&A at CG14 Classic CPX architecture
UNCLASSIFIED Classic CPX architecture JTLS connected to USMC Intelligence Operations System (IOS) – OTH-Gold unit and platform tracks ATOT read ATO into JTLS air mission orders 99.6% availability Opportunity to develop process to export JTLS graphics (slides) into overlay files (.ovl) for US C4I systems UNCLASSIFIED

PACAF Civilian Aircraft Test
UNCLASSIFIED PACAF experiment to generate civilian scheduled air traffic as a scenario element Tool to: mine civilian schedules from unclassified internet source read civilian air traffic schedule into a JTLS Civilian_Air_Traffic read order file Required matching ICAO airbases and squadrons with appropriate aircraft types in JTLS Hundreds of flights at the push of a button! UNCLASSIFIED

Ensures PWC success today! Supports development of JTLS for tomorrow.
PWC Business Process UNCLASSIFIED USPACOM simulations program characterized by: Local planners with R&A support during database development, event testing, and execution Operational test opportunities Identify and correct code errors Identify areas for possible improvement (Engineering Change Proposals) Ensures PWC success today! Supports development of JTLS for tomorrow. UNCLASSIFIED

USPACOM Support to JTLS
UNCLASSIFIED JOI/TOI links to C4I systems: Theater Battle Management Core System (TBMCS) – JS J7 NATO - Integrated Command and Control (ICC) HUMINT On-line Tasking & Reporting System (HOT-R) – JS J7 Interfaces with partner simulations: Multiple User Simulation Environment (MUSE) – JS J7 Joint Deployment Logistics Model (JDLM) - PACOM JTLS process improvements: Improve Naval Detection Representation ( ) - PACOM Representation of Personnel Bunkers ( ) - PACOM Combat Alert - PACOM Participated in JTLS 4.0 Beta and Acceptance Tests. UNCLASSIFIED

Future Events and Initiatives
UNCLASSIFIED KEEN EDGE 2016 COBRA GOLD 2016 BERSAMA WARRIOR (PWC attending CDC in April) GEMA BHAKTI COMMANDO SLING Joint Exercise India UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED Questions? UNCLASSIFIED

Typical Tier I Sim Training Environment
Role Players Exercise Control OPFOR Host Nation Training Audience JTF ARFOR NAVFOR AFFOR MARFOR SOC Unit Response Cells Computer Model Master Scenario Events List Synthetic Environment UNCLASSIFIED

VISION: Enhanced Pacific Theater Joint Modeling & Simulations Capability
Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK Korea Battle Simulation Center Yongsan, Korea Mission Command Training Center Sagami General Depot, Japan PWC Ford Island, Oahu Mission Command Training Center Fort Lewis, WA Korea Air Simulation Center Osan AB, Korea Mission Training Complex Schofield BKS, Oahu Battle Simulation Center MCBH Kaneohe, Oahu PACAF, Hangar 3 Hickam AFB, Oahu JSJ7 Suffolk, Va Pohakloa Training Area, Hawaii Townsville Field Training Area Darwin Bradshaw Field Training Area Tactical Training Group Pacific Point Loma, CA Shoalwater Bay Training Area LEGEND: JTEN NODE DTEN NODE (AUS) HUB PACIFIC REGIONAL NODE Australian Defense Force Joint Combined Training Center Canberra, Australia JTEN: Joint Training Enterprise Network DTEN: Defense Training and Experimentation Network UNCLASSIFIED

Building Summary: 34,300 SF on Two Floors
UNCLASSIFIED 2736 SF 2385 SF 723 SF 897 SF 512 SF 512 SF 1st FL (22,300 SF) – Six reconfigurable operational spaces to support USPACOM Joint Event Life Cycle activities Open Storage Secret Each room can be operated as Temporary Secure Working Area UNCLASSIFIED

Building Summary: 34,300 SF on Two Floors
UNCLASSIFIED 2nd FL (12,000 SF) Telecommunications equipment that services the building Administrative space for J73 staff UNCLASSIFIED

Joint Modeling & Simulations (M&S) Enablers
UNCLASSIFIED Facilitate Joint M&S Solutions for USPACOM Synthetic Environment Design, Scenario Development, M&S Architecture, COP Architecture Deliver M&S and C4I capabilities and experts throughout the Joint Event Life Cycle Simulation Control, Operations, Administration, and Engineering; Database and Terrain development and maintenance Provide functional experts for control group operations (OPFOR, SITFOR, Log, Intel, Ground, Air, etc.); Train participants on M&S and C4I applications and tools C4I Planning, Engineering, and Integration; Simulation to C4I stimulation Manage infrastructure and associated Joint Live Virtual and Constructive (JLVC) connections and enablers for USPACOM events and to add joint context for service tactical training activities Strategic and Operational Analysis and Assessment UNCLASSIFIED

Pacific Warfighting Center (PWC)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Pacific Warfighting Center (PWC)"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Pacific Warfighting Center (PWC)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Pacific Warfighting Center (PWC)"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback