Campaigning Through the WEZ: CJADC2 Is More than Kill-Chains
Disputing an adversary’s control of the sea in a future conflict may see U.S. naval and coalition armed forces facing a contested, “fortified” theater of operations.
Land-based weapons and air platforms have longer range and deeper magazines than seaborne forces. These weapon ranges have expanded exponentially. Nevertheless, naval forces will have to maintain important sea-lines-of- communication under these and other threat conditions that come with such highly contested environments.
This requires more resilient and covert technologies to enable unhindered operations, a requirement which is compounded when applied to archipelagic geography in the close fight coupled with extended lines of communication to home ports and bases. The ability for re-supply, force generation, mobility, and sustainment will constantly be under threat and modern commanders will have to “campaign through the WEZ.”
Success in an archipelagic fight will hinge on the ability of disparate, expeditionary forces to maneuver as a coordinated joint and coalition force to protect critical lines of communication that set the conditions for larger joint forcible entry operations. The synchronized command and control (C2) of that initial joint force, to include logistics, is paramount to ensure broader favorable operational conditions for follow-on forces to control key terrain when and where needed.
It’s a lesson learned from the Dutch East Indies campaign of 1941-1942. The coordinated operations by the attacking Japanese force compared to the American-British-Dutch-Australian (ABDA) Command’s competing objectives and subsequent incoherence make a clear case that combat power can be misused quickly and disastrously when it isn’t unified. Policy and divergent objectives were not the only impediments to successful operations. There were diverse forces from diverse nations operating on diverse infrastructure that hindered operations. Even if the policy conflicts were removed, the ability for the commander to coherently command those forces would have been hampered by the differences in control systems.
The modern fight can and will have more opportunity for success
The western Pacific and the archipelagic seas are still the same and there is still powerful competition involved with maintaining open seas. However, there are many more opportunities for success in the modern environment. The U.S and allies’ technologic advantage is still significant. Their practiced doctrine is still superior. And acknowledging challenges is the best harbinger of overcoming them.
However, the early conditions of a future archipelagic conflict would favor potential adversaries. They would be organized for a such a conflict and would be capable of harming and disrupting extended lines of communication. They would have advanced weapon systems and platforms to challenge force projection at significant range. Finally, they would have the “home field” advantage at the theater and operational level.
Therefore, the ability of the U.S. and its allies to effectively maneuver, fight, and sustain available joint and combined forces at the tactical level will provide a key opportunity for advantage. The ability for a commander to sense, make sense, and act using all available force will be key to exploiting that advantage. Navy and Marine Corps forward operating forces, Army Special Operations and assault elements, and Air Force expeditionary and long-range strategic forces will need the capability to perform in a coherent and coordinated manner across all the Joint Warfighting Functions.
The ability to close extended kill-chains and kill-webs is imperative to imposing cost on an adversary. But of equal importance is the ability to mutually protect, sustain, inform, and maneuver through an integrated, resilient battle management system – this is the maturation of Joint All- Domain Command and Control (JADC2).
Our current systems among our services have been developed and matured for efficiencies within the individual service operating environment. This creates operational seams that impede unity at the higher tactical levels where joint agility is required. This also provides the adversary an opportunity to engage in “systems confrontation” to create fog and friction.
Solving this is a complex task, but there are recently prototyped and demonstrated technologies that can improve communications and battle management command and control capabilities and close these operational seams to enable greater interoperability among forces.
Connectivity drives agility in mobility, maneuver, and sustainment
Sustainment, maneuver, and mobility require communications to synchronize. Communication systems, as elements of a battle management network, enable the commander’s command and control of the ships, the bullets, the food, and personnel needed in theater.
From a logistics perspective, prepositioned and tactical resupply ships are vulnerable to exploitation. Losing a link in the communications chain could see logistics become untethered from assault elements in short order. LtCol Brian Donlon, U.S. Marine Corps, and his first-prize essay Logistics 2030: Foraging Is Not Going to Cut It captures well the logistical complexity that must be coordinated and communicated under Force Design 2030.
How many munitions and from what platforms? How long until they’re ready? How long can they be in the fight? Access to the total information required is a feat in and of itself but knowing the “right” information at the right time ahead of threats will be a daunting task.
As forces further diversify stocks afloat and ashore across individual L-class ships and amphibious ready groups, better communications integration, especially secure and low probability of detection/intercept capabilities, will be necessary to ensure rapid coordination with an already diverse force. Logistics forces need C2 on par with combat forces.
To achieve this, the logistics force must be provided redundancy in connectivity across multiple paths to increase the speed and survivability of joint force sustainment. Key to this is technology that seamlessly integrates communications and data links across platforms in multiple domains. It needs to provide multi-level security and intelligent, autonomous routing to accelerate message distribution to joint and coalition partners.
Integrating directional-line-of-sight communications technology would likewise increase survivability and maintain covert operations within an adversary’s weapon engagement zone by minimizing the targetable profile they present.
Together these two solutions not only improve sustainment, but also the intelligence and C2 functions by coordinating de-centralized intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) information obtained across dozens of assets in theater. These are just two examples of the many technologies Collins Aerospace, an RTX business, has tested and demonstrated in the operationally relevant settings of large force exercises.
Testing new joint capability
Since 2021, Collins Aerospace has matured an advanced intelligent gateway solution through field experiments at Northern Edge 23 and Valiant Shield 22. The platform-flexible technology has consistently bridged greater levels of connectivity between multiple line-of-sight and beyond-line-of-sight networks and has proven itself in accelerating and completing complex kill-chains across multiple, diverse platforms. This technology has also been demonstrated on fixed-wing, rotary and ground mobile units in the Army’s EDGE and Project Convergence evolutions. The inclusion of an agile cross-domain solution ensured the smart and secure flow of information across multi-security levels.
In both phases of Northern Edge 23 experiments, the intelligent gateway distributed sensor data with rich geo-location intel for faster target tracking. Battle managers tested our Solipsys Battlespace Command and Control Center software that, together with the gateway, provided an alternative tactical operations control platform.
Additionally, Collins demonstrated low-cost direct-line-of-sight communications for disadvantaged users (DLOS-D) to provide the capability for covert operation in a contested environment. This technology adds resiliency and covertness required for survivability in fast-paced hostile scenarios.
These experiments demonstrated coordination with Five Eye allies and other coalition partners in simulated mission chains that tested for greater threat awareness from multiple ISR data sources and subsequent distribution of the data for faster targeting and decision cycles. This was accomplished using Intelligent Gateway technologies with certified and tested cross domain solutions. This allowed the required information to move between the relevant forces allowing the commander flexibility in force application. These same principles for information management are applicable across all Joint Warfighting Functions.
Collins is currently expanding the utility of these technologies into the marine environment, both afloat and ashore, working with the Navy and Marine Corps in RIMPAC-24 with the goal of providing coherent C2 capacity in an Emission Control (EMCON) restricted condition. The fundamental aim of every experiment is to present specific solutions ready to meet the joint capabilities and subsequent operational requirements outlined by the Department of Defense’s CJADC2 strategy.
The path to integration into the commander’s operational solutions
These technologies are platform-flexible, with high Technical Readiness Level (TRL). Collins Aerospace software solutions for edge processing and tactical command and control have open architectures for operators and the acquisition workforce to retool and optimize as needed.
Integrating a handful of intelligent gateways across both carrier strike groups and amphibious ready groups, USMC expeditionary forces, and the logistics force would achieve a resilient, redundant capability that enables significantly faster interoperability with joint and coalition forces to outpace, outmaneuver, and overmatch threats despite advantages an adversary possesses in theater.
These solutions open the capability aperture for warfighters and operators as new technologies like attritable drones with mesh networks drive an ever more diverse and agile fighting force.
Collins’ mature, software-defined radios can facilitate the integration of these new entrants. Directional radio configurations will increase the survivability. Integrating these, along with gateways, AI/ML edge processing, and tactical C2 software solutions become the makings of a comprehensive sense, make sense, and act capability framework any service can acquire, share, and refine iteratively to meet joint and combined force mission demands.
JOEL DAVIS
[email protected]
Served in multiple surface platforms, as a Joint Planner for multiple joint commanders, and as C-C4ISR Strategy & Policy resource officer in OPNAV prior to retiring as a captain from the U.S. Navy. He also taught at the U.S. Naval War College in Joint Military Operations. He currently leads CJADC2 integration efforts at Collins Aerospace, an RTX business supporting demonstrations for U.S. Navy & Marine Corps operational and joint requirements.
VICE ADMIRAL BRIAN BROWN
[email protected]
Retired Navy Information Warfare Officer whose assignments included commander, Naval Information Forces. As a subject matter expert on joint and maritime space operations, tactical networking, command and control, and battle space awareness, he serves as consultant to Collins Aerospace, an RTX business.
Check out more sponsored articles.
![Collins Aerospace An RTX Business](/sites/default/files/Collins_PRO_02-2024_logo.jpg)
Training for Shipboard Emergencies as a Pier Service
FIRE
A near-aboard torpedo explosion starts fires and flooding in a Virginia-class submarine operating at periscope depth. In the auxiliary machinery room, the CO2 scrubber is in flames, spewing thick black smoke. Nearby sailors hit the cutoff switch and then quickly strap oxygen tanks on their backs and spray fire extinguishers, putting out the electrical fire. But the blaze has spread to the lagging, and it’s moving quickly.
The sailors unreel a hose, pull back the bail on the nozzle to test the water flow, and then advance on the fire. They feel the hot wind from the flames, and smell the acrid smoke. The sound of the fire, echoing in the small room, is deafening. The sailors struggle to control their emotions, and do the job they were trained to do.
All this is taking place inside a 40-foot shipping container on a pier next to the sailors’ actual submarine. The sailors are wearing headsets that are creating a virtual-reality machinery room on fire. The cutoff switch, oxygen tanks, fire extinguishers, hose and nozzle are all physical props that the sailors can manipulate. The hot wind they feel is created with heat lamps and fans, and the smell of smoke is artificial. The roaring sound of the fire is in their headsets.
Only the sailors’ emotions are real.
This is a type of “mixed reality,” combining VR images and physical props that users can “see” in their headsets and actually touch. Because it is a multi-user environment, sailors can physically work together, and learn from each other, as they train.
Recent advances in immersive technologies—which create simulated environments that users can participate in—are helping to make this kind of training both feasible and cost-effective for the joint forces.
Mixed reality does not replace schoolhouse training. Rather, it gives sailors and others the opportunity to increase their training “reps and sets” in a realistic environment that can essentially be a portable pier service. The shipping containers can be placed on a pier next to a submarine or a ship, with the props inside the container configured to the individual vessel— and any number of training scenarios.
FLOOD
The torpedo explosion has damaged the submarine’s seawater flanges, and the water pressure from an intake valve has cracked a 10-inch pipe in the forward lower level of the engine room. Water is spewing from the pipe, quickly flooding the room. Sailors activate the flood-control switch, but that system has been damaged as well.
The sailors grab a flooding repair patch kit and gloves. With water spraying in their faces, they press the patch to the pipe, just off the rupture, and hold it down with a chain and chain wrench. Fighting the intense water pressure, they roll the patch over the rupture, and then quickly apply the strapping and ratchet it down with a bandit kit.
All this is taking place in another part of the shipping container. Once again, the sailors are wearing headsets, maneuvering in a simulated, VR- created environment with props. The gloves and tools in the patch kit are real, and the cracked pipe is made of real metal—though the water rushing from it is created by VR. Intense air pressure in the pipe simulates the water pressure, making it difficult for the sailors to apply the patch. Small nozzles spraying mist and compressed air give the sailors the feel of water on their faces. Thanks to an advanced immersive technology known as “pass-through,” the sailors can actually see their gloved hands, the pipe, patch and tools, in the simulated scene.
Also once again, the intense sensory environment—and the physical struggle to get the patch on the pipe quickly—is triggering the sailors’ emotions. For some, the stress is making them less efficient, and more prone to the kinds of mistakes that can slow things down.
One of the advantages of mixed reality training is that sailors can go through the drill again and again, learning how to control their emotions and remain calm as they work quickly. In addition, sailors can be equipped with wearable devices, such as watches or chest straps, that measure stress. Data from the wearables might indi- cate, for example, that sailors who are experiencing heightened stress have slower reaction times, or less working memory, or perhaps mental tunnel vision, in which they’re focusing on a single threat or goal without seeing the larger picture. When sailors are wearing oxygen tanks, devices can tell whether the sailors are so stressed they’re using up their oxygen too fast, taking them out of the fight.
The information can be sent to trainers, and also to the sailors them- selves—in real time—so they can try to bring down their stress levels
through various techniques, improving their efficiency and conserving their oxygen. For example, sailors might do some quick deep-breathing exercises, or might recall times when they performed well in other high-stress training situations—giving them confidence they can do it now.
SUBMARINE ESCAPE
Despite the efforts of the sailors, fire and flooding are spreading throughout the submarine. The captain gives the order to abandon ship. Sailors move quickly to the logistics escape trunk and don their submarine escape immersion equipment (SEIE). The first three sailors climb in the escape trunk and the hatch is sealed. It’s pitch black, so they crack open chem lights.
In the half-darkness, they turn the valves that let seawater in up to their waists, and then—amid the deafening sound of rushing water, and water splashing in their faces making it hard to see—they turn other valves that equalize the pressure inside the chamber and outside the submarine so the escape hatch can be opened. The high stress and sensory deprivation are almost overwhelming. But the sailors must work fast, and they can’t make even a minor mistake in lining up the valves—otherwise, they may disable the escape trunk not only for themselves, but for the 125 other sailors on the sub waiting for their chance to survive.
This scene is taking place in still another part of the shipping container on the pier. The escape trunk is a mock-up of a real one, with the valves as props, and the sailors’ headsets providing VR images of the rising water, the darkness, and the increasingly obscured vision.
Then the training exercise is over, and another set of sailors enter the ship- ping container. The next day, the submarine heads back out to sea, and the shipping container is moved to another pier, where the props—and the VR scene—are reconfigured for another submarine, and another crew.
Commander Eric Billies ([email protected]), is a retired surface warfare officer who leads Booz Allen’s business in the Pacific Northwest helping DoD clients chart innova- tive approaches to immersive (VR/AR/XR) training.
Maj. Nick Zimmer ([email protected]) is a retired Army infantry officer and Green Beret NCO who has led Booz Allen’s Seattle Immersive Studio, developing immersive training solutions for DoD clients.
Fire Control Technician Chief Petty Officer Joe Reck ([email protected]), is a retired Navy chief who spent 24 years on submarines and was a master training specialist. As a senior lead engineer at Booz Allen, he helps develop innovative immersive training solutions for Navy clients.
Check out more sponsored articles.
![Booz Allen Hamilton](/sites/default/files/BAH%20logo_1.png)
How Well is an Officer Handling the Pressure of Battle? Wearables May Be Able To Tell
What if, during a battle at sea, the commanding officer on a ship could tell whether a key officer, such as the TAO, is crumbling under stress—and may start making bad decisions—based on that officer’s heart rate, blood pressure, galvanic skin response and other stress measures?
While wearable devices are commonly used to improve performance in sports, the joint forces may soon have the opportunity to use wearables—along with AI—to determine whether officers and others are both mentally and physically sharp in critical situations.
Because this information can be presented to the commanding officer on a laptop, he or she could, from anywhere on a ship, tell whether the CIC watch officer, for example, was in danger of making a serious mental error in battle, and perhaps would need to be quickly replaced.
Wearable data and AI can aid in peacetime as well, helping to make sure officers can stay focused on preventing potential disasters, such as collisions, fires, flooding, and man overboard—and can quickly make the right decisions if such a situation occurs.
How Wearables Measure Stress
The latest wearable devices—including watches, chest straps, rings, headbands and earpieces—can generate a host of metrics to show a person’s stress levels. For example, some devices measure a person’s heart rate variability—the time between each heartbeat—which fluctuates during the day. Heart rate variability can show whether a person’s nervous system is in fight-or-flight mode, which indicates stress, or is leaning more toward recovery and healing.
Other devices estimate stress levels by measuring galvanic skin response, which can indicate when sweat glands are triggered by emotions—even in small ways we may not be aware of. These and other metrics, such as resting heart rate and blood pressure, are combined to create a full picture of how well a person is coping with stress.
The Role of Training
The key question, of course, is not whether a person is stressed—which could be the case with anyone in battle—but whether the stress is interfering with his or her ability to perform mission tasks, and could lead to poor decisions. There are several steps to determining this.
It begins during training. Outfitted with wearables, officers and others go through various drills that mimic battle conditions. As trainers add stressors—such as unpredictable complications and increased tempo—they can monitor how well individuals perform as their stress levels increase.
Data from the wearables might indicate, for example, that individuals experiencing heightened stress have slower reaction times, or less working memory, or perhaps mental tunnel vision, in which they’re focusing on a single threat or goal without seeing the larger picture. All these can lead to poor decisions.
This approach has another benefit, helping to pinpoint whether a person is making mistakes because of stress, or because he or she needs more training. This might be revealed, for example, when an individual is making mistakes during training, but is showing no signs of increased stress.
Bringing in AI
By correlating stress levels and decision-making during intense training, defense organizations can begin to predict how well an individual will perform in real-world conditions. But training alone can’t tell the whole story—it is unlikely to show whether a person can perform every possible mission task at every possible stress level. This is where AI comes in.
Machine learning, a form of AI, has the ability to find patterns in large datasets. The first step is to use machine learning to find patterns in how well an individual performed different tasks at various stress levels during training. Next, defense organizations can bring together the data from large numbers of people who were monitored for stress during training—and look for those individ- uals who showed the same patterns. With enough such individuals, most if not all possible combinations of stress levels and mission tasks will likely be covered. This provides a greater ability to predict how well an individual will perform a particular task at a particular stress level—even if he or she was not in that exact situation during training.
Wearables in Battle
Here’s how this might apply in an actual battle: An officer of the deck, for example, is outfitted with wearables. Data from the wearables show that the officer’s stress levels are skyrocketing. Based on the training data from the officer as well as the relevant individuals in the larger group, a machine learning model might predict that the officer can still handle some critical mission tasks, but is at risk of making serious mistakes with one or two others.
At the same time, the machine learning model can track how an officer’s ability to perform a task is rapidly changing as his stress is increasing. For example, the data might show that a few minutes ago, the officer was doing fine, but now his decision-making ability is suddenly deteriorating.
Such information—on key officers throughout the ship—can be conveyed instantly to the commanding officer and the executive officer through dashboards on their laptops or tablets, enabling them to take timely action.
The information can also be sent to the officers themselves, so that they can try to bring down their stress levels through techniques they learned during training. An officer might do some quick deep-breathing exercises, for example, or he might recall a time when he performed well in a high-stress training situation—giving him confidence he can do it now.
While the technology for such an approach is currently available, several obstacles would need to be overcome to make it feasible. For example, policies would need to be changed to allow TAOs and other officers to use wearables in secure spaces. Infrastructure changes would be needed as well, such as sensors that would enable data to be transmitted across decks and compartments. Ships would also need edge computing with AI to collect and analyze the data.
With this approach, data from wearables is kept private and secure—it is deidentified until it reaches the commanding officer or other authorized person. That way, if the data is intercepted, it can’t be connected with a specific individual.
In addition to its use in wartime, data from wearables can also be valuable in peacetime situations where there is little stress. Data can show, for example, whether officers or others aren’t getting enough regular sleep, or aren’t drinking enough water, or for other reasons may not be mentally sharp and might make mistakes that could endanger the ship or its crew.
Irik Johnson ([email protected]) integrates wearable technologies, data science and virtual reality to improve training and performance for Booz Allen’s DoD clients. As an expert on sports science, he has optimized athletic programs for the NFL, NBA and MLB.
Commander Alan Kolackovsky ([email protected]) is a retired Naval Limited Duty Officer, whose assignments
included Executive Officer NIWC PAC. He leads Booz Allen’s 5G/ CBRS infrastructure deployment, delivering emerging technical solutions including unmanned systems capabilities.
Ken Kryszyn ([email protected]) is a retired Navy Force ISSM who oversaw cybersecurity for all surface ships in the Pacific Fleet. Ken is now a senior lead technologist at Booz Allen, where he has been delivering cybersecurity engineering and RMF automation to the Navy for 20 years.
Booz Allen subject matter experts Commander Jarrod (JRod) Groves,U.S. Navy (Retired) and Maggie Corry contributed to this article.
Check out more sponsored articles.
![Booz Allen Hamilton logo](/sites/default/files/BAH%20logo.png)