Capability Planning and Analysis to Optimize
Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance,
and Reconnaissance Investments





Committee on Examination of the Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Capability Planning and Analysis (CP&A) Process

Air Force Studies Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES



THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Committee on Examination of the Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Capability Planning and Analysis (CP&A) Process Air Force Studies Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This is a report of work supported by Grant FA 9550-11-1-0126 between the U.S. Air Force and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organiza- tions or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-25814-2 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-25814-6 Limited copies of this report are Additional copies are available from: available from: Air Force Studies Board The National Academies Press National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, NW 500 Fifth Street, NW Keck 360 Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 334-3111 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to as- sociate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON EXAMINATION OF THE AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE (ISR) CAPABILITY PLANNING AND ANALYSIS (CP&A) PROCESS BRIAN A. ARNOLD, Raytheon Company, Co-Chair LAWRENCE J. DELANEY, Titan Corporation (retired), Co-Chair COLLIN A. AGEE, U.S. Army MELANI AUSTIN, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company THOMAS J. BURNS, Science Applications International Corporation PAMELA A. DREW, TASC RAND H. FISHER, The Aerospace Corporation KEITH R. HALL, Booz Allen Hamilton LESLIE F. KENNE, LK Associates ROBERT H. LATIFF, R. Latiff Associates TERRY P. LEWIS, Raytheon Company MICHAEL A. LONGORIA, The RAND Corporation PAUL F. McMANAMON, Exciting Technology, LLC MATT L. MLEZIVA, Wildwood Strategic Concepts, LLC GERALD F. PERRYMAN, JR., Independent Consultant JONATHAN M. SMITH, University of Pennsylvania Staff CARTER W. FORD, Study Director GREGORY EYRING, Senior Program Officer SARAH M. CAPOTE, Research Associate ZEIDA PATMON, Program Associate v

OCR for page R1
AIR FORCE STUDIES BOARD GREGORY S. MARTIN, GS Martin Consulting, Chair PAMELA A. DREW, TASC, Vice Chair BRIAN A. ARNOLD, Raytheon Company CLAUDE M. BOLTON, JR., Defense Acquisition University STEVEN R.J. BRUECK, University of New Mexico THOMAS J. BURNS, Science Applications International Corporation FRANK J. CAPPUCCIO, Cappuccio and Associates, LLC DONALD C. FRASER, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory (retired) MICHAEL J. GIANELLI, The Boeing Company (retired) DANIEL E. HASTINGS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology PAUL G. KAMINSKI, Technovation, Inc. ROBERT H. LATIFF, R. Latiff Associates NANCY G. LEVESON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology MARK J. LEWIS, IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute LESTER L. LYLES, The Lyles Group MATT L. MLEZIVA, Wildwood Strategic Concepts, LLC C. KUMAR N. PATEL, Pranalytica, Inc. GERALD F. PERRYMAN, JR., Independent Consultant RICHARD V. REYNOLDS, The VanFleet Group, LLC J. DANIEL STEWART, University of Tennessee REBECCA WINSTON, Winston Strategic Management Consulting Staff TERRY J. JAGGERS, Director MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Deputy Director DIONNA C. ALI, Senior Program Assistant JESSICA R. BROKENBURR, Financial Assistant SARAH M. CAPOTE, Research Associate GREGORY EYRING, Senior Program Officer CARTER W. FORD, Program Officer CHRIS JONES, Financial Manager ZEIDA PATMON, Program Associate MARGUERITE E. SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Program Officer vi

OCR for page R1
Preface Prior to 2009 the U.S. Air Force did not have a comprehensive approach for investing in and acquiring intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) ca- pabilities. In 2009, the Air Force developed and implemented the ISR Flight Plan to focus Air Force needs on future ISR capabilities and has subsequently renamed this approach Capability Planning and Analysis (CP&A), which shares character- istics of, but does not equate to, the Air Force development planning process.1 In 2011, the Air Force requested that the National Research Council (NRC), under the auspices of the Air Force Studies Board (AFSB), undertake a study to improve this process, specifically to provide the Air Force foundational analytics to aid decision making, especially in light of overall future defense spending. In response to this request, the NRC established the Committee on Examination of the Air Force ISR CP&A Process. Biographical information for the committee members is provided in Appendix A. The terms of reference for the study are presented in Box 1-1 in Chapter 1. The AFSB was established in 1996 as a unit of the NRC at the request of the U.S. Air Force. The AFSB brings to bear broad military, industrial, and academic scien- tific, engineering, and management expertise on Air Force technical challenges and other issues of importance to senior Air Force leaders. The board discusses potential studies of interest, develops and frames study tasks, ensures proper project plan- ning, suggests potential committee members and reviewers for reports produced by fully independent ad hoc study committees, and convenes meetings to examine strategic issues. The board members were not asked to endorse the committee's conclusions or recommendations, nor did they review the final draft of this report 1U.S. Air Force. 2010. Development Planning Guide. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base: Air Force Materiel Command Directorate of Intelligence and Requirements. June. vii

OCR for page R1
viii Preface before its release, although board members with appropriate expertise may be nominated to serve as formal members of study committees or as report reviewers. The committee thanks the many people who provided it with information for the study, including the guest speakers shown in Appendix B, their organizations, and supporting staff members; and others, including the study sponsors Dr. Steven Walker, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering, and Lt Gen Larry James, Deputy Chief of Staff for ISR, and their staff members. Brian A. Arnold, Co-Chair Lawrence J. Delaney, Co-Chair Committee on Examination of the Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Capability Planning and Analysis (CP&A) Process

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures ap- proved by the National Research Council's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for 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 wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: William P. Delaney, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory, Ronald P. Fuchs, Independent Consultant, Richard L. Garwin, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Mark Lewis, IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute, Anthony Metoyer, The Boeing Company, Thomas E. Romesser, Northrop Grumman Corporation (retired), Peter B. Teets, U.S. Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office (retired), and Alan R. Washburn, U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommenda- tions, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review ix

OCR for page R1
x Acknowledgment of Reviewers of this report was overseen by Julia M. Phillips, Sandia National Laboratories, and Robert J. Hermann, U.S. Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office (retired). Ap- pointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
Contents SUMMARY1 1 INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE CHALLENGES FACING THE AIR FORCE 9 Introduction, 9 Committee Formation and Terms of Reference, 11 Study Approach, 12 Scenarios That May Guide Air Force ISR Force-Planning Processes, 13 Regionally Specific (Traditional) Scenarios, 14 Global (Non-Traditional) Scenarios, 20 Homeland Security-Based Scenarios, 21 Organization of the Report, 23 2 THE CURRENT STATE OF THE AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE INVESTMENT PLANNING PROCESS 24 Introduction, 24 Historical Development of the Air Force ISR Planning Process, 29 The ISR Flight Plan, 31 The Core Function Lead Integrator Construct, 33 The Current Air Force ISR Capability Planning and Analysis Process, 34 The Core Function Lead Integrator Process, 36 Space Superiority and Cyberspace Superiority Core Function Master Plans, 39 xi

OCR for page R1
xii Contents Integration of Air Force Core Function Master Plans, 41 ISR Capability Planning and Analysis and Core Function Master Plan Link with Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution, 41 Linkages Between the Air Force and the Intelligence Community, 42 Findings, 43 Concluding Thoughts, 45 3 EXAMPLES OF PROCESSES EMPLOYED BY GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY FOR PROVIDING CAPABILITY PLANNING AND ANALYSIS 47 Introduction, 47 Examples of Government Processes for Providing Capability Planning and Analysis, 47 U.S. Army, 48 U.S. Navy, 52 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, 55 Examples of Industry Processes for Providing Capability Planning and Analysis, 59 Booz Allen Hamilton, 59 TASC, 61 RadiantBlue, Inc., 67 Concluding Thoughts, 72 4 TOWARD AN ENHANCED AIR FORCE INTELLIGENCE, SURVEILLANCE, AND RECONNAISSANCE CAPABILITY PLANNING AND ANALYSIS PROCESS 74 Introduction, 74 Recommendations, 74 Desired Attributes of an Enterprise-Wide Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Capability Planning and Analysis Process, 77 Proposed Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Capability Planning and Analysis Process, 80 Problem Definition and Approach, 80 Needs Analysis, 84 Multi-resolution Gap Analysis, 86 Solution Analysis, 91 Concluding Thoughts, 94

OCR for page R1
Contents xiii APPENDIXES A Biographical Sketches of Committee Members 97 B List of Committee Meetings, Presenters, and Participating Organizations 106 C Supplement to Chapter 3: Descriptions of Additional Organizational CP&A Processes and Tools 113

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Acronyms A2/AD anti-access/area denial ACC Air Combat Command ACL Achievable Capabilities List AF Air Force AF/A2 Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air Force for ISR AFCS Air Force Corporate Structure AFI Air Force Instruction AFISRA Air Force ISR Agency AFMC Air Force Materiel Command AFROC Air Force Requirements Oversight Council AFSPC Air Force Space Command AOA analysis of alternatives AOC Air Operations Center APPG annual planning and programming guidance ARFORGEN Army Force Generation BA Battlespace Awareness BA CIB Battlespace Awareness Capabilities Integration Board BAH Booz Allen Hamilton BAPA Battlespace Awareness and Portfolio Assessment BCT Brigade Combat Teams BES Budget Estimate Submission BMDS Ballistic Missile Defense System xv

OCR for page R1
xvi Acronyms C2 command and control C4I command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence CA&P capability assessment and planning CADD Capability Area Deep Dive CAPE Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation CART Capabilities Analysis Requirements Tool CASA Communications Architecture Systems Assessor CBA Capabilities-Based Assessment CBP capability-based planning CBPfM Capabilities-Based Portfolio Management CDD Capability Description Document CDRUSSTRATCOM Commander, U.S. Strategic Command CET Capabilities Effectiveness Tool CFLI Core Function Lead Integrator CFMP Core Function Master Plan CJCS Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff CJCSI Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CNO Chief of Naval Operations COCOM Combatant Command COINcounterinsurgency COMINT communications intelligence CONOPS concept of operations CoP community of practice COTS commercial off-the-shelf CP&A Capability Planning and Analysis CPM Capability Portfolio Manager CRD Capabilities Requirements Document CRRA Capability Review and Risk Assessment CSA Coalition Situational Awareness CSAF Chief of Staff of the Air Force DAWG Deputy's Advisory Working Group DCGS Distributed Common Ground Station DCR DOTMLPF Change Recommendation DMZ Demilitarized Zone DNI Director of National Intelligence DoD Department of Defense DOTMLPF Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel and Facilities

OCR for page R1
Acronyms xvii DOTMLPF-P Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy DOT_LPF non-material analysis DPRK Democratic People's Republic of Korea DRU Direct Reporting Unit E/CCA Element/Component Characterizations for Analysis EEI essential elements of information EFDS Expeditionary Force Development System ELINT electronics intelligence EMD Engineering and Manufacturing Development EO electro-optical (imaging) ESA electronically scanned array FCB Functional Capabilities Board FOA Field Operating Agency FY Fiscal Year FYDP Future Years Defense Program GAO Government Accountability Office GIISR Global Integrated ISR GMTI ground moving target indicator GOTS government off-the-shelf HAF Headquarters (U.S.) Air Force HLS Homeland Security HIS hyperspectral imaging HUMINT human intelligence IC intelligence community ICD Initial Capabilities Document IED improvised explosive device IPL integrated priority list IRinfrared IROC Intelligence Readiness Operations Capability ISAR Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar ISCA Integrated Sensor Coverage Area ISR intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance ISR-CART ISR Capabilities Analysis Requirements Tool ITW integrated tactical warning

OCR for page R1
xviii Acronyms JBA Joint Battlespace Awareness JCA Joint Capability Area JCIDS Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System JFC Joint Functional Concept JFCC Joint Functional Component Command JOC Joint Operations Center; Joint Operating Concept JROC Joint Requirements Oversight Council JTF Joint Task Force JUON Joint Urgent Operational Need JWICS Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System M&S modeling and simulation MAJCOM Major Command MCO Major Combat Operations MDA Milestone Decision Authority; Missile Defense Agency MGA Multi-resolution Gap Analysis MI Military Intelligence MIP Military Intelligence Program MO Mission Overwatch MOE measures of effectiveness MOP measures of performance MOU measures of utility MRA Multi-Resolution Analysis MSA modeling, simulation, and analysis MSI multispectral imager MTI Moving Target Indicator NCDP Naval Capabilities Development Process NGA National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency NGC Northrop Grumman Corporation NIIRS National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scale NIP National Intelligence Program NMS National Military Strategy NRC National Research Council NRO National Reconnaissance Office NSA National Security Agency NTISR non-traditional ISR OCO Overseas Contingency Operation(s) ORS Operationally Responsive Space OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense

OCR for page R1
Acronyms xix OUSD(AT&L) Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics OUSD(I) Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence PAA Persistent Area Assessment PCL Prioritized Capability List PCPAD planning and direction, collection, processing and exploitation, analysis and production, and dissemination PDA Problem Definition and Approach PED processing, exploitation, and dissemination Pk probability of kill PLA People's Liberation Army POC point of contact POM Program Objective Memorandum PoR Program of Record PP&R Portfolios, Programs, and Resources PPBES planning, programming, budgeting, and execution system QDR Quadrennial Defense Review QRC Quick Reaction Capabilities R&D research and development RCS radar cross section RMD resource management decision ROK Republic of Korea RPA remotely piloted aircraft SAR synthetic aperture radar SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition SCF Service Core Function SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SEAS System Effectiveness Analysis Simulation SECAF Secretary of the Air Force SECDEF Secretary of Defense SETA Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance SID Situation Development SIGINT signals intelligence SIPRnet Secret Internet Protocol Router Network SLRG Senior Level Review Group

OCR for page R1
xx Acronyms SMC/XR Space and Missile Systems Center, Directorate of Development Planning SME subject matter expert SOAP Satellite Orbit Analysis Program SSDR security system dynamically reconfigurable STK Satellite Tool Kit SYSSIM System Simulation TASC The Analytical Sciences Corporation TCPED Tasking, Collection, Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination TOA Total Obligation Authority TOR terms of reference TPED tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination UGS unattended ground sensor UON urgent operational need USAF United States Air Force USCYBERCOM U.S. Cyber Command USN United States Navy USSTRATCOM U.S. Strategic Command VCJCS Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff VCSAF Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force WIP Warfighter Involvement Process WMD weapons of mass destruction Wxweather