Advanced Battle
Management System
Needs, Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities
Facing the Department of the Air Force
______
Ellen Y. Chou, Editor
Committee on Air Force Advanced Battle
Management System
Air Force Studies Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Consensus Study Report
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract No. FA9550-16-D-0001/FA8650-20-F-9314 with the U.S. Air Force. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-68621-1
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-68621-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26525
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Advanced Battle Management System: Needs, Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities Facing the Department of the Air Force. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26525.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON AIR FORCE ADVANCED BATTLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
PHILIP S. ANTÓN, Stevens Institute of Technology, Chair
SHARON A. BEERMANN-CURTIN, STRATCON, LLC
MICHAEL A. FANTINI, U.S. Air Force (retired)
PRISCILLA E. GUTHRIE, Institute for Defense Analyses
PAUL G. KAMINSKI, NAE,1 Technovation, Inc.
THOMAS A. LONGSTAFF, Carnegie Mellon University
KATHARINA G. McFARLAND, Blue Oryx, Inc.
GUNASEKARAN SEETHARAMAN, Naval Research Laboratory
DAVID M. VAN BUREN, Crossroads Management, LLC
Staff
ELLEN Y. CHOU, Board Director, Study Director
EVAN ELWELL, Research Associate
RYAN MURPHY, Program Officer
See Appendix E, Disclosure of Unavoidable Conflicts of Interest.
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
AIR FORCE STUDIES BOARD
ELLEN M. PAWLIKOWSKI, NAE,1 Independent Consultant, Chair
KEVIN G. BOWCUTT, NAE, Boeing Company
CLAUDE CANIZARES, NAS,2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MARK F. COSTELLO, Georgia Institute of Technology
WESLEY L. HARRIS, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JAMES E. HUBBARD, JR., NAE, Texas A&M University
LESTER L. LYLES, NAE, U.S. Air Force (retired)
WENDY M. MASIELLO, Wendy Mas Consulting, LLC
LESLIE A. MOMODA, HRL Laboratorios, LLC
OZDEN OCHOA, Texas A&M University
F. WHITTEN PETERS, Williams and Connolly, LLP
HENDRICK RUCK, Edaptive Computing, Inc.
JULIE J.C.H. RYAN, Wyndrose Technical Group
MICHAEL SCHNEIDER, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
GRANT STOKES, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Staff
ELLEN Y. CHOU, Director
GEORGE COYLE, Senior Program Officer
EVAN ELWELL, Research Associate
AMELIA GREEN, Senior Program Assistant
ADRIANNA HARGROVE, Finance Business Partner (through May 2021)
RYAN MURPHY, Program Officer
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator (through February 2022)
DONAVAN THOMAS, Finance Business Partner (from June 2021)
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
Preface
To address what the 2018 National Defense Strategy describes as the “ever more lethal and disruptive battlefield, combined across domains, and conducted at increasing speed and reach,” the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is pursuing an improved ability to more closely integrate and operate jointly against adversaries in a digital, distributed approach through Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2).1 To realize this concept will require the seamless integration of sensors, networks, platforms, commanders, operators, and weapon systems for rapid information collection, decision-making, and force projection.
The Department of the Air Force’s (DAF’s) contribution to JADC2 is the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS), which seeks to modernize joint operations through sensor-to-shooter information collection, processing, routing, decision-making, and engagement to bring capabilities to bear faster against an agile adversary. Much attention has been given to ABMS, because it was presented as an evolving “system of systems”2 and “a radically new acquisition model for the
___________________
1U.S. Department of Defense, 2018, Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America: Sharpening the American Military’s Competitive Edge, Washington, DC.
2 R. Uppal, 2021, “USAF Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) Developing ‘Internet of Military Things’ to Enable Joint All-Domain Command and Control Comprising Family of Platforms Including Satellite Constellation,” International Defense, Security, & Technology (IDST) News, https://idstch.com/space/usaf-advanced-battle-management-system-abms-developing-internet-of-military-things-to-enable-joint-all-domain-command-and-control-comprising-family-of-platforms-including-satellit/, March 30.
Air Force.”3 However, significant questions remain precisely because ABMS has not followed a traditional acquisition approach and the DAF projects that it will spend roughly $3.3 billion through fiscal year 2025.4 Congress is therefore seeking greater clarity regarding ABMS’s costs and technical development efforts.5
The Office of Management and Budget and the Department of the Air Force requested the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to assess planned ABMS architecture, technology gaps, and governance. From October 2020 to May 2021, the Committee on Air Force Advanced Battle Management System conducted an extensive literature review from mostly open-source trade press and convened 12 unclassified sessions and one multi-day classified data gathering session to receive expert testimonies and collect information about available ABMS communications and systems integration architecture, technical approach, and governance structure plans and capabilities. Although the COVID-19 pandemic hampered the committee’s ability to conduct site visits to operational and command and control (C2) centers, the committee was nonetheless able to collect valuable insights from the many experts who presented on ABMS and JADC2. The committee also held weekly virtual planning sessions from October 2020 to April 2021 and an in-person meeting in late May 2021 to deliberate and discuss key findings and recommendations. Writing commenced in June and was completed in September 2021.
The committee is grateful for the contributions of a wide range of noted experts and thought leaders to include representatives from the U.S. Departments of the Navy, the Army, and the Air Force regarding their respective communication systems and their approaches toward JADC2. Other expert organizations consulted during the course of the study included the Joint Staff, U.S. Northern Command, the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, the National Security Agency, federally funded research and development centers, university-affiliated research centers, commercial industry, and numerous others. Many of the experts who participated
___________________
3 A. McCullough, 2019, “ABMS Expected to Pick Up Speed with New Chief Architect in Place,” Air Force Magazine, https://www.airforcemag.com/abms-expected-to-pick-up-speed-with-new-chief-architect-in-place/, March 10.
4 R.S. Cohen, 2020, “Air Force Bets on ABMS Success in Fiscal 2021,” Air Force Magazine, https://www.airforcemag.com/air-force-bets-on-abms-success-in-fiscal-2021/, February 11.
5 See GAO (Government Accountability Office), 2019, “Defense Acquisitions: Action Is Needed to Provide Clarity and Mitigate Risks of the Air Force’s Planned Advanced Battle Management System,” https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-389.pdf, April. See also Y. Tadjdeh, 2020, “Advanced Battle Management System Faces Headwinds,” National Defense Magazine, https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2020/9/11/advanced-battle-management, September 11, and S.J. Freedberg, Jr., 2019, “House Armed Services Scrutinizes F-35 Costs, ABMS, Army Modernization,” Breaking Defense, https://breakingdefense.com/2019/06/house-armed-services-scrutinizes-f-35-costs-abms-army-modernization/, June 3.
in the study’s committee meetings have a distinguished record of public service, including in the military, and the committee thanks them for their service to our nation.
While ABMS remains an evolving ecosystem under development, this report summarizes the findings and recommendations of the National Academies consensus study on ABMS, providing a point-in-time perspective on what ABMS is and could be, and how it may be improved as it continues to evolve. This study was conducted by eight committee members and was greatly aided by our study director, Ellen Chou, and her excellent staff, including Evan Elwell and Ryan Murphy.
Philip S. Antón, Chair
Committee on Air Force Advanced Battle Management System
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgments
The committee would like to thank the following individuals for providing input to this study:
Andre’ (Dre’) B. Abadie, U.S. Army Futures Command
Christopher P. Azzano, Air Force Test Center, U.S. Air Force
Ally Bain, Office of Management and Budget
Marc Bernstein, Office of the Chief Architect, Department of the Air Force
Aaron Blow, MITRE Corporation
Eric Bryant, National Security Agency
Matthew Butkovic, Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
Christopher Carey, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Kelii “Koala” H. Chock, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, U.S. Air Force
Dennis A. Crall, U.S. Marine Corps, Joint Staff J6, U.S. Department of Defense
Robert Cunningham, Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
Mark Daniel, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Preston Dunlap, Chief Architect, Department of the Air Force
Roy El-Rayes, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
Drew Fanning, Chooch AI
James F. Geurts, U.S. Department of the Navy
Chad Haferbier, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
Marin Halper, MITRE Corporation
Mark D. Happel, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
George M. Hart III, Air Combat Command, U.S. Air Force
Walter C. Hattemer, Air Combat Command, U.S. Air Force
Christopher Hocking, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
Lauren Knausenberger, Chief Information Officer, Department of the Air Force
Scott Lee, MITRE Corporation
Sherrill Lingel, RAND Corporation
Art Manion, Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
John D. Matyjas, Air Combat Command, U.S. Air Force
Kelly McCool, Navy Digital Warfare Office, U.S. Department of the Navy
Dennis P. (Devo) McDevitt, Air Combat Command, U.S. Air Force
Keith C. McGuire, Air Combat Command, U.S. Air Force
Nicholas Miknev, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, U.S. Air Force
Jeff J. Mrazik, DCS for Strategy, Integration and Requirements (AF/A5), U.S. Air Force
Nand Mulchandani, Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, U.S. Department of Defense
Aaron “Ocho” Nelson, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
John “JP” A. Priestly III, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, U.S. Air Force
Scott M. Roberts, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance and Cyber Effects (AF/A2/A6), U.S. Air Force
Michele Schuman, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Forrest Shull, Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute
Douglas W. Small, Naval Information Warfare Systems Command, U.S. Navy
John P. Stenbit, Viasat, Inc.
Katherine “Claire” Stowe, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, U.S. Air Force
Matthew “Nomad” D. Strohmeyer, U.S. Air Force
Bryan Tipton, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
Jeffery D. Valenzia, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategy, Integration, and Requirements (AF/A5), U.S. Air Force
Kyle Volpe, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
John Vona, Air Combat Command, U.S. Air Force
Randall “Waldo” Walden, Program Executive Officer, Rapid Capabilities Office, Department of the Air Force
Jennifer Watson, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
John S. Wellman, Joint Staff J6, U.S. Department of Defense
Martin Whelan, Aerospace Corporation
Stuart A. Whitehead, Joint Staff J6, U.S. Department of Defense
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Claude R. Canizares, NAS,1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Hao Huang, NAE,2 University of Houston and University of Wisconsin,
Claire Leon, NAE, Loyola Marymount University,
Steven B. Lipner, NAE, SAFECode,
Leslie A. Momoda, HRL Laboratories, LLC,
Donald G. Sather, The Aerospace Corporation,
Patrick M. Shanahan, Former Deputy Secretary of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense,
Scott H. Swift, The Swift Group, LLC,
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
David M. Van Wie, NAE, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, and
Stephen P. Welby, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Alton D. Romig, NAE Executive Officer, Lockheed Martin Skunk Works (retired). He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Contents
Vision of Future Air and Space Operations
Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2)
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
A Non-Traditional Acquisition Approach
From Demonstrations to Capabilities Releases
ABMS as a Contributor to JADC2
Other Contributors to JADC2 and Complicating Factors
Architecture and Technology Status
Technology for Data-Centric Operations
