National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR16
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR17
Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." 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. doi: 10.17226/26525.
×
PageR18

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

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 PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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. PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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. PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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. PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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. v PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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 DONOVAN THOMAS, Finance Business Partner (from June 2021) 1  Member, National Academy of Engineering. 2  Member, National Academy of Sciences. vi PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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 infor- mation 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 1  U.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, D.C. 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. vii PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

viii P re fac e 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 ses- sion 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 com- mand 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 ex- perts 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 Sys- tem,” 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.nationaldefense magazine.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. PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

P re fac e ix 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 con- sensus 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 direc- tor, Ellen Chou, and her excellent staff, including Evan Elwell and Ryan Murphy. Philip S. Antón, Chair Committee on Air Force Advanced Battle Management System PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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 xi PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

xii Acknowledgments 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 PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

Acknowledgments xiii 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 PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

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 indepen- dent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published re- port 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,2 NAE, 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. xv PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

xvi Acknowledgment of Reviewers 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 recommenda- tions 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. PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

Contents SUMMARY 1 1 PERSPECTIVES 9 Vision of Future Air and Space Operations, 12 Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2), 16 Air Operations Center (AOC), 18 Current AOC, 18 An Alternative Future AOC, 22 Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS), 23 Evolution of ABMS, 23 A Non-Traditional Acquisition Approach, 24 From Demonstrations to Capabilities Releases, 28 ABMS as a Contributor to JADC2, 30 Other Contributors to JADC2 and Complicating Factors, 32 2 ARCHITECTURE AND DATA 36 Architecture Overview, 36 Architecture and Technology Status, 40 Technology for Data-Centric Operations, 44 Highly Capable Processing: AI and ML, 45 Data and Data Standards, 48 Containerization and Kubernetes, 50 xvii PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

xviii Contents Software Considerations, 53 Application Software and DevSecOps, 54 Data Rights, 58 Security, 59 Network Reliability, Resiliency, and Fault Tolerance, 59 Multi-Level Security, 62 Cybersecurity and Zero Trust, 64 Testing and Modeling, 68 Test and Evaluation, 68 Model-Based Systems Engineering, 70 M&S and VV&A, 73 Digital Twin, 74 Common Mission Command Center, 76 3 GOVERNANCE 78 Organization Integration, 82 Human Factors, 86 Human Systems Integration, 86 Training, Culture, and Other Considerations, 88 4 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES 93 Interoperability, 93 Intelligence, 95 Major Recommendations, 96 Technical, 96 Non-Technical, 99 Concluding Thoughts, 100 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 102 APPENDIXES A Statement of Task 107 Data-Gathering Meetings 109 C Acronyms and Abbreviations 116 D Committee Member Biographical Information 121 E Disclosure of Unavoidable Conflicts of Interest 128 PREPUBLICATION COPY—Uncorrected Proofs

Next: Summary »
Advanced Battle Management System: Needs, Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities Facing the Department of the Air Force Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $40.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The U.S. Department of Defense is pursuing an improved ability to more closely integrate and operate jointly against agile adversaries through Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2). This framework will seamlessly integrate sensors, networks, platforms, commanders, operators, and weapon systems for rapid information collection, decision-making, and projection of joint and multinational forces. The Department of the Air Force's contribution to JADC2 is the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS). As an evolving system in the early stages of definition, ABMS architecture and its supporting elements remain dynamic. Advanced Battle Management System assesses the technical approach being employed by ABMS and its ability to effectively support the range of system integration desired, while also supporting operational and development agility; and the governance being applied by ABMS and if it is appropriate and sufficient to enable quick development and evolution of capabilities while maintaining appropriate government control over the output.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!