1 of 19

1

​

Scenario Development for C2 Services Identification in MDOs

​

Joint Work of

​

SAS-IST-171 Group

“C2 services in MDOs for Federated Mission Networking (FMN)”

​

Presented by

​

Rachid Khayari & Luciana Aceti

​

22st ICCRTS Meeting

24-26 September 2024, London, UK

​

​

Company General Use

2 of 19

SAS-IST 171 team members

  • L. Aceti (Leonardo, ITA)
  • A. Eikelboom (TNO, NLD) (Co-chair)
  • R. El Abdouni Khayari (IABG, DEU)
  • F. Kollmann (Fraunhofer, DEU)
  • S. Lockwood (NCIA, NATO)
  • M. MacLean (DRDC, CAN)
  • M. Peerdeman (TNO, NLD) (Co-chair)
  • L. Pigeon (DRDC, CAN)
  • K. Tsetsos (UniBwM/Sicyon Risk, DEU)
  • T. van der Venne (TNO, NLD)

Company General Use

3 of 19

Outline

​

​

3

  1. Introduction
  2. Why Scenario: Background
  3. Scenario Description
  4. Scenario Usage/Deployment Approach
  5. Conclusion and Way Ahead

​

Company General Use

4 of 19

Introduction

  • There are various MDO Definitions, depending on: nations, decision makers view, military background, etc.
  • This is also captured in SAS-IST-171 questionnaire results and documented in Paper (003 ICCRTS, 2024) (previous presentation)

​

This presentation will:

  • Discuss the need for scenario development for better understanding of the required interoperability and the resulting necessity for C2-Services for MDO.
  • Introduce a comprehensive MDO scenario by involving all military domains, as well as civilian counterparts.
  • Use examples to show which domains, dimensions and services could be involved in the various scenario vignettes.

​

​

​

​

4

Company General Use

5 of 19

Why Scenario: Background

  • Scenarios can be used (alongside the architecture based approach, e.g. NAF):
    • to discover requirements for a new capability (scenario-based capability development/ management), or
    • to adapt an existing Capabilities (gap analysis).

​

​

5

SAS-IST-171 methodology

​

​

​

​

Company General Use

6 of 19

Scenario focus

  • Explore scenario-driven capability development that highlights the need for an incorporation of civilian and military assets in MDO operations before, during and after the onset of conflict

​

  • Identify gaps and future needs for C2 services. Describe its potential future use and the benefits thereof
    • to discover requirements for a new capability (scenario-based capability development/ management), or
    • to adapt existing capabilities (gap analysis).

​

6

Company General Use

7 of 19

Scenario aim

  • Better understanding of the relationships and interactions between the different stakeholders and instruments of power, specifically focused on types of collaboration and required harmonization options

​

  • Evaluation of the scenario as per relationship among different domains and dimensions of effects, (virtual, cognitive, physical)

​

  • Determine/define C2 Services or eventually, its evolution to host a different perspective

​

  • Derive implications for “technical” implementation of C2 services for MDO.

7

Company General Use

8 of 19

Towards an MDO Scenario

  • Our aim is to develop a scenario including the kinds of events that demand MDO and could be used to identify C2 requirements and services.

​

  • The KADRI scenario (NIAG Group 263):
    • represented a good starting point for our analysis
    • however, our conceptualization of MDO was more comprehensive than was represented in the NIAG scenario.

​

  • The KADRI scenario needed an extension and adaptation in order to:
    • better capture the impact on the military (multiple domains),
    • show the cooperation between civilian and military entities, resource mobilization, and human and social impacts (cognitive effects) of information sources.

​

8

Company General Use

9 of 19

Scenario requirements

MDO scenario should include at least the following characteristics:

  1. The need of collaboration between military and non-military instruments of power;
  2. Synchronization between levels of warfare from strategic to operational and tactical level;
  3. Development in time through the continuum of competition; from competition to crisis and conflict;
  4. Various interconnected crises that must be managed through cross-sector operations using military and civilian resources;
  5. Changing relationships over time between the entities that work together.

​

9

Company General Use

10 of 19

SAS-IST scenario

  • The SAS-IST 171 scenario includes:
    • An extension of the NIAG scenario including JIMP (Joint, Interagency, Multinational and Private) roles
    • A detailed descriptions at the vignette/use-case level

​

10

Company General Use

11 of 19

Scenario Description (1) from NIAG263

  • Neotonia: NATO member state
  • Grey State: a military power aiming to extend its sphere of influence.
  • A Grey State ethnic minority of 20% is in the border region of Kadri.
  • 200,000 Neotonians live across the border in Grey State.
  • NATO deployed forces in the country.
    • Aleksander Air Force Base (AFB) with Air Defense Fighter squadron
    • a GBAD (Ground-Based Air Defence) Unit
    • NATO cyber center of excellence.
    • A Reconnaissance Satellite

11

Company General Use

12 of 19

Scenario Description (2)

  • Political differences between Neotonia and Grey State.
    • escalatory rhetoric
    • disinformation campaigns
    • support of radicalized groups

​

  • Military Actions:
    • Members of the Grey State ethnic minority, took control of the Kadri region. They are unofficially supported by the neighboring Grey State
    • civilians are held hostage at Kadri Airport.
    • Grey State: No direct military Support (Ambiguity)

​

  • Neotonia asks NATO to intervene

​

​

12

Company General Use

13 of 19

Scenario Usage

  • highlights challenges that can only be addressed by MDO:
    • Military (multi domain) impacts
    • The inter-agency collaboration between civilians and the military
    • The mobilization of resources
    • Human and social impacts and information sources 

​

​

13

Company General Use

14 of 19

Deployment Approach

  • Within our approach, we decided to:
    • Split the steps introduced in different vignettes
    • Classify the events regarding the impact domain and effect dimension
    • Determine if some domains are not fully represented / considered. Adjust, if necessary
    • Focus on selecting use cases to be analyzed in detail

​

14

Company General Use

15 of 19

Vignette 3 of the scenario

15

KADRI+ Scenario – Vignettes

LEGEND:

DECISION: DECISIONS TAKEN BY JFC BASED ON AVAILABLE INFORMATION

INFORMATION: INFORMATION FLOW FROM TO

RESULT: Outcome of previous decisions

REQUEST: Request posed to JFC/NRF

USE CASE

DATE TIME

EVENT

Stake holder

Impact domain

Effect dimension

NR

UC 3�Crisis Response Pre-paration

23.4.25

• NATO deployment impaired by cyber attack

Cyber

 

 

6

12:00

• Delayed coordination with local authorities and Neotonian government

All IoP

23.4.25

• Cyber Unit and Neotonian cyber defense assets manage to regain effective control over affected networks

Cyber

Cyberspace

Virtual

7

15:00

Private

23.4.25

• NATO Rapid response forces arrival complete

Army, Airforce, Maritime

Land, Air, Maritime

Physical

8

22:00

• A Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) equipped with armored vehicles, helicopters, and VTOL Aircrafts

​

• A Multinational Brigade (MNB) equipped with armored vehicles, attack helicopters and one mobile C-UAS system including dedicated sensors and effectors.

23.4.25

• DECISION: Eliminate identified enemy threats to NATO air assets ranked by threat level; achieve total air superiority

​

Air, Land

Physical

9

23:45

• Information: Satellites data relayed to air command to identify the air defense systems of the insurgents (ISR)

Airforce, Space

​

• Information: ISR and additional intel data to be used by air command to conduct BDA (Battle Damage Assessment)

 

​

 

 

​

• RESULT: Air campaign commences to neutralize insurgent AA assets in Kadri

 

Company General Use

16 of 19

Analysis of vignette 3

  • Using SAS 143 Harmonisation options

​

16

Company General Use

17 of 19

Vignette 3: Insights

  • Recognitions:
    • each step requires the interaction of multiple, different stakeholders aiming to impact different domains for effects in different dimensions
    • demonstrating the dynamic nature of the interactions involved in even a single step of an MDO scenario.

​

17

Company General Use

18 of 19

Conclusions

  •  Implications based on this analysis of the MDO space in the scenario:
    • Necessity for an efficient data transfer mechanism to maintain a COP between all relevant stakeholders.
    • Conducting a gap analysis regarding data transfer between the different stakeholders
    • Consequently: necessary to establish standardized interoperability mechanisms with the necessary level of security.

​

  • SAS-IST-171 is also presenting an architectural concept for a Service Oriented Architecture for MDO usage (Paper 021, 29th ICCRTS) (next presentation)

​

18

Company General Use

19 of 19

Way Ahead

  • Implementing this scenario (transferring the scenario from operational to executable) using simulation techniques
  • Executing an experiment with the involvement of military SMEs.

​

In order to:

​

  • Better understand the military stakeholder needs and assess the number of services.
  • Validate or test the technical solutions (to be designed)

​

19

Company General Use