War-planning software currently in development for Navy Aegis cruisers
will give air defense planners at sea—via digital simulations—a
capability to try to predict how their proposed layout of forces
would affect the outcome of the battle.
The system is called the area air defense commander (AADC), a program
that started in 1998. It automates air defense planning—a
task that traditionally has been accomplished with paper and pencil.
AADC produces a digital, 3-D picture of the battlefield, which expedites
the process of conducting “what-if” scenarios for air
defense.
AADC is a command and control system that uses data received from
other sensors to develop alternative solutions for placing blue
forces in the theater. The air defense commander tool allocates
resources and does not manage individual engagements.
There are three prototypes being tested today. The Navy plans to
install AADC on 12 ships by 2006, as part of an overall upgrade
program for the Aegis cruisers.
One of the prototypes is at the Johns Hopkins University Applied
Physics Lab, in Laurel, Md., where the system first was developed.
The other two systems are being demonstrated on the USS Shiloh and
the USS Mount Whitney.
“The warfare area commander function in the past was done
manually with pencils,” said Navy Cdr. Dean M. Pedersen, AADC
program manager. “The system that we are building automates
those functions and gives [the commander] better information,”
he said, during a conference on naval theater ballistic missile
defense, in Columbia, Md.
The main reason the Navy is trying to carve out a role for AADC
is that it expects to be “first on the scene when the crisis
begins,” said Pedersen. The AADC system can be operated by
the ship force, organically. A reserve team of about 33 people would
be sent onboard the cruiser to augment the force. “Once you
enter crisis support mode, the cruiser would support the joint task
force commander,” he explained. “AADC would transition
capability ashore for joint operations. A regional area defense
commander would remain on the cruiser.”
AADC has encountered “challenges in development,” said
Pedersen, because of the various concepts of warfare “shaped
uniquely by the services, independently, for air defense. The AADC
operators would be coordinating defensive roles, for example, for
the Army’s Patriot and theater area (THAAD) anti-missile systems.
“We also are working the air defense picture against cruise
missiles and manned aircraft,” said Pedersen. “Our vision
is to bring all that together to fight the area defense battle,
so sensors and weapons can be coordinated.”
The prime contractor for AADC, General Dynamics Advanced Technology
Systems, received an award last July for engineering and manufacturing
development work.
Pedersen touted the system’s ability to model scenarios and
run war games. “We can never fully predict what the enemy
will do, but by running multiple scenarios against the same plan,
it allows us to see what would happen if the enemy changes its forces.
“We do ‘what if’ analysis,” he explained.
The system “allows you to do that multiple times, based on
different priorities and asset formation. In the past, with pencil
and paper, the planners could do one, two or three at best. With
this system, they can run 10 options in a matter of minutes. A warfare
commander can see up to 100 runs against a plan, or against two
or three plans, and choose one to best protect the forces.”
The subcontractor responsible for the modeling and simulation technology
in AADC is Science Applications International Corp. Inc. (SAIC),
in Arlington, Va. The company’s contract is for 48 months.
Tom Schooley, program engineer at SAIC, said there are several
areas where models and simulations will be used. “Models and
sims look at the optimal way to position the forces to best defend
the assets,” he said in a recent interview.
AADC largely will rely on existing force-on-force simulations that
the military services have been using for some time, said Schooley.
The commander will have a “dynamic re-planning,” capability
so that he can change the makeup of the friendly forces in response
to enemy movements.
“One of the challenges of this program is to figure out how
to incorporate the real-time activities,” said Schooley. “It’s
something we have had to do manually for years.”
The current AADC prototypes, he said, “didn’t take
a hard look at the modeling and simulation arena. ... There will
be a lot of [integration] challenges with the services. ... The
services have to develop concepts and tactics.”
Schooley believes AADC could achieve a basic air defense plan “in
a couple of hours. Adjustments to the plan can be made in minutes.”
The system’s end product is a “real plan that provides,”
he said, “not only maps and overlays and pictures, but also
detailed information that establishes priorities and rules of engagement.”