3.8 System Planning and Control Functions
The ARTA defines three general areas for dealing with planning and control functions and related standards. These are:
Collection management is a process that is performed by a Collection Management Authority (CMA) who uses a specific collection management system. The interfaces with those systems are covered in Section 3.8.1 below. Mission planning is a process that may be performed within an airborne reconnaissance system or it may be performed externally. These functions and interfaces are covered in Section 3.8.2. Mission control is a process which deals with execution of specific reconnaissance missions and is therefore an integral part of airborne reconnaissance systems (i.e., internal functions). The mission control functions and associated technology standards are covered in Section 3.8.3.
3.8.1 Collection Management Interfaces
Standards for this functional area are:
There are currently two basic procedures for tasking airborne reconnaissance
missions. Normal peacetime operations are under Sensitive Reconnaissance
Operations (SRO) rules and undergo rigorous and time intensive tasking and
planning procedures. These procedures are detailed in CJCSI 3250.01, 02,
and 03 and the various theater reconnaissance operations directives. These
will not be discussed here. Contingency and wartime reconnaissance missions
follow the same general procedures as SRO missions, except that the planning,
tasking and execution focus is dictated by the theater or JFCC operations
orders. Collection requirements are generated by warfighters and then allocated
to collectors by the CMA. The CMA typically uses a system such as the JCMT
to provide an overview of the requirements database. Next JCMT conducts
a feasibility assessment considering all classes of collection assets, ranging
from ground to airborne to space collectors. Once a particular collector
is deemed appropriate and able to conduct the operation, JCMT will perform
a more detailed feasibility analysis using a model of the reconnaissance
system and sensors. With these results, the CMA will task a collection system;
this requires coordination with the Air Operations Center (AOC) for the
scheduling of reconnaissance missions. Actual tasking then flows to the
operational unit potentially twice: the mission route and timing sequence
is generated as an integrated part of the Air Tasking Order (ATO) and approved
by the AOC while specific sensor tasking is generated directly by the collection
management system (in the form of sensor tasking messages such as the Form
1684 for imagery). The CMA's collection management system provides the reconnaissance
feedback to the warfighters who originated the requests for information.
The notional tasking flow is depicted in the following diagram.
The collection tasking and feedback messages form the key interface functions for airborne reconnaissance systems. These messages will vary depending on which collection management system the CMA is using, and what type of collection is being tasked (i.e., SIGINT, IMINT, or MASINT). The interface between airborne reconnaissance and collection management systems is effected through the Command and Control Interface Functions (Section 3.7.3).
IMINT collection tasking has long been dependent on a machine readable message format - the Form 1684, which was eliminated in November 1994 by DIA/CL (the collection management authority). However, systems such as CARS and ETRAC, functioning as U-2 ground stations, continued to use this message format since there is still no replacement. Other airborne reconnaissance systems are equally dependent on a standard machine-readable tasking message. In some systems, collection tasking is not automated and telephone conversations (voice) may be the sole means for receiving and coordinating tasking from the CMA.
SIGINT collection tasking is highly structured and follows priorities similar to those expressed in the National SIGINT Requirements Listing (NSRL). The collection operator is provided with a prioritized listing of collection needs with detailed descriptions of known operating procedures and intelligence needs. From this prioritized listing, the SIGINT collection system managers allocate resources to meet tailored mission needs. For airborne collection, SIGINT Numerical Tasking Requirements (SNUTRs) usually detail a prioritized set of target signals (and specific collection and/or processing requirements) for any number of collection scenarios.
Collection tasking for MASINT systems is limited to selecting airborne platforms with future areas not yet fully defined for airborne reconnaissance systems.
An RMS Aircraft Tasking Message is proposed to come into use by RMS during the 1999 to 2000 time frame. JCMT also plans to use the new RMS Aircraft Tasking Message format for imagery tasking. This format could be adapted for SIGINT and MASINT, thereby making this message effective for multi source tasking. This would require coordination among DIA, NRO, CIO, NSA, DARO, and CMO etc. With this standard a commander at any echelon can forward his collection request to the appropriate collection management office for validation. The CMA will be able to forward the request for national satisfaction or route the request to the appropriate tactical airborne collector. Organic tactical collection assets will continue to be tasked by their tactical commanders without change from current practice.
Airborne reconnaissance systems must provide feedback to the CMA who, in turn, provides status to the warfighters. This includes the following information:
Figure 3-7: Notional Flow for Collection and Mission Tasking
3.8.2 Mission Planning Functions and Interfaces
Standards for this functional area are:
In general, all of the following high-level "mission planning" functions have to be accomplished for any airborne reconnaissance mission, whether it be for UAVs or manned platforms:
Not all airborne reconnaissance systems have their own integral mission planning capabilities. In some cases, the planning functions are performed externally by flight operations personnel (e.g., flight crew), and the detailed plans are then passed to the associated ground/surface system so they can plan for the subsequent processing, exploitation, and reporting. In other cases, processing, exploitation, and reporting functions are performed on-board the platform, so passing the detailed mission plans is not a necessary interface.
AFMSS and TAMPS are the mainstream mission planning systems currently used with many types of aircraft. Both AFMSS and TAMPS have the requisite functions and capabilities needed to perform most of the mission planning functions for airborne reconnaissance platforms, but they do not have capabilities for collection strategy and sensor planning, nor do they have the platform-specific parametric data, performance models, etc. Nevertheless, AFMSS and TAMPS are the preferred technology standards for meeting airborne reconnaissance mission planning needs. Using a DoD standardized capability, even a de facto one, is preferable to proliferating custom-built, unique subsystems just for airborne reconnaissance.
Mission planning requires a wealth of information, some of which is listed below. Acquiring and managing this information in a "standardized" mission planning system is (arguably) the prime benefit realized by picking a standardized system/technology. In addition, much of the information can and should be shared with other functional areas, although this is too often not the case in current systems. In the context of the airborne reconnaissance FRM, the information should be stored and managed in the database functional area described in Section 3.6.2. Examples follow:
- Orders of Battle including Air, Electronic, Missile (fixed), Tactical (mobile), Naval, and Ground
- Data correlated and fused from multiple theater sources (e.g., from JIC/JAC)
- Near-real-time intelligence from broadcast or tactical data links
- Local intelligence from post mission analyses and briefings
- Global Navigation Charts, 1:5,000,000
- Jet Navigational Charts, 1:2,000,000
- Operational Navigational Charts, 1:1,000,000
- Tactical Pilotage Charts, 1:500,000
- Joint Operations Graphics-Air, 1:250,000
- Topographic Line Maps, 1:50,000
- City Graphic (variable scales from 1:5,000 to 1:15,000)
- Digital Terrain Elevation Data (DTED)
- Probabilistic Vertical Obstruction Data (PVOD)
- Digital Features Analysis Data (DFAD) Level 1
- Vector Smart Map (VMAP)
- Digital Nautical Chart
- Digital Bathymetric Database
- Navigation Information Network
- Tactical Terrain Data
- Digital Chart of the World (DCW)
- Vector Product Family (VMAP0, VMAP1)
- Urban Vector Map
- Electronic Chart Updating Manuals (ECHUMs)
- Digital Point Positioning Database (DPPDB)
The interfaces required for mission planning functions vary depending on specific system operational requirements and mission needs. For example, systems operated by the USAF will receive intelligence data from the unit-level Combat Information System (CIS), whereas Special Operations Forces will be served by SOCRATES (their intelligence system), and the Army will generally rely on their All Source Analysis System (ASAS). Regardless of the source of the data, it will generally be received in airborne reconnaissance systems through the Command and Control Interface Functions described in Section 3.7.3 or via bulk digital media such as magnetic tape and CD-ROM.
3.8.3 Mission Control Functions
Standards for this functional area are:
Mission control functions provide for real-time and near-real-time control of the platform, sensor suite, and communications subsystems during the execution of reconnaissance missions. This functional component of the FRM refers to the control functions implemented in ground/surface subsystems. Real-time control functions in the airborne components are covered in the System Processing and Control Functions part of the FRM described in Section 3.5.2. Obviously, there is an interface between these two functional components which is implemented through the data link (Section 3.4.4).
The three highest-level types of mission control functions are listed below. Note that different implementations may provide none of the functions, any combination, or all of the mission control capabilities depending on specific systems employed, their configuration, and mission operational requirements.
In the case where a UAV is remotely piloted, telemetry data is transmitted to the ground/surface system and piloting commands are transmitted to the vehicle via the data link in real-time. The telemetry data essentially provides the same data that would otherwise be displayed to a cockpit pilot, but it is processed and displayed on ground-based equipment. As an aide to the ground-based "pilot," telemetry data also includes real-time video (e.g., in the visible part of the spectrum). The remote piloting functions are also used to facilitate take-off and landing for UAVs that may otherwise operate autonomously by executing programmed flight and sensor operations plans. Currently there are no standards for remote piloting and telemetry data interfaces.
Remote sensor control functions serve to extend real-time, direct control of the collection equipment to operators stationed in ground/surface systems. Remote commands may include, for example, tuning receivers, aiming directional antenna, changing sensor modes, pointing cameras, adjusting focal length and exposure, setting on-board processing parameters, and a host of other operator-controlled functions. Currently, there are no standards for remote commanding functions.
However, a standardized command set for each major type of sensor (e.g., for tuners, cameras, SAR, MTI, spectral, video, etc.) would likely facilitate a much higher degree of interoperability among systems (e.g., a step towards enabling common ground/surface systems to interoperate with multiple platforms). Standardized command sets would also enable the manufacture of interchangeable sensors (e.g., same form, fit and function components from multiple vendors).
Dynamic retasking functions enable reconnaissance operations to be changed in near-real-time by designated users/operators. Changes may affect the platform, such as navigating to a new track (flight path), or they may affect the sensor suites, such as switching SAR modes or switching from SIGINT to imagery collection. Dynamic retasking increases mission effectiveness by enabling reasonably rapid response to unexpected events such as changes in weather, tip-offs from other collection systems (e.g., national), cross-cueing among multiple interconnected platforms, and changes in ISR needs. Retasking generally involves preparing revised mission and sensor plans in near-real-time and "up loading" the new information to the affected platform. Currently, in the case of manned platforms, the retasking is usually communicated to the Mission Commander via voice or message. In the future, as for UAVs, retasking will involve transmitting updated data to the platform electronics and sensor subsystems (including reinitializing the navigation systems). Functions and standards for preparing mission and sensor plans are discussed in Section 3.8.2 above.
DRAFT