| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. 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 48
4
Meeting Army Needs with Commercial
Multimedia Technologies
This chapter shows how the building block technolo-
gies of Chapter 3 can be used to meet the Army's
operational needs described in Chapter 2. First, the
committee maps the building block technologies onto
the operational needs and functional requirements. The
technologies are also examined in the context of the
multimedia architecture introduced in Chapter 3 as well
as other architectures. The committee then assesses the
prognosis for future development of the building block
technologies and offers recommendations as to whether
the Army should adopt commercial technologies, adapt
commercial technology, or invest in producing its own
technology when drawing upon the building.block tech-
nologies to meet its functional requirements.
For additional clarity in how multimedia technologies
can enhance the capabilities of the Army, the committee
examines how battle command in a typical Army corps
combat operation might be affected by the insertion of
modern multimedia capabilities enabled by the building
block technologies. The chapter concludes with an analy-
sis of the operational example and how it relates back to
the Army's operational needs.
MAPPING ARMY NEEDS TO BUILDING BLOCK
TECHNOLOGIES
The building block technologies discussed in Chapter
3 are listed in Table 4-1. Table 4-2 presents the commit-
tee's view of how the Army's operational needs and
functional requirements will be enabled by these build-
ing block technologies. The numbers in the third column
of Table 4-2 refer to the technologies listed in Table 4-1.
Note that most of the needs and requirements are
enabled by a combination of two or more of the building
block technologies.
Table 4-3 lists the building block technologies and the
associated Army functional requirements they enable.
From Table 4-3, it is clear that most building block
technologies can be used to satisfy multiple operational
needs and functional requirements.
48
One possible approach to meeting the Army's opera-
tional needs would be to develop individual information
systems or domain-specific architectures to match each
of the functional requirements. These systems could be
designed and developed with commercial off-the-shelf
(COTS) technology and made to interoperate through
standard interfaces and data representations. While this
approach may be preferred in some cases (e.g., because
it offers an expeditious path to meet specific functional
requirements), it does not take advantage of generic
building blocks that could help satisfy several require-
ments (for example, see the discussion of middleware
services in Chapter 31.
TABLE 4-1 Building Block Technologies
1. Lightweight, rugged, portable appliances and terminals
2. Storage systems for multimedia information
3.
Communications platforms that support people on the move
4. Information capture technologies
5.
Protocols and related functionality to support communications
Distributed computing environments and operating systems
Information filtering systems
8. Multimedia database management systems
User-friendly multimedia user interfaces
10.
11.
12.
3.
Multimedia information analysis and processing building
blocks and middleware services
Multimedia information access capabilities
Decision support tools, groupware, multimedia
teleconferencing
Multimedia messaging capabilities
Simulation: systems and applications
15. Security technologies
16. Network management systems
17. General purpose languages, tools, development environments
OCR for page 49
MEETING ARMYNEED5 ~777] COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES
TABLE 4-2 Summary of Army Operational Needs, Including Simulation, and Functional Requirements and Their Most
Relevant Enabling Building Block Technologies
Arrny Operational Needs
(Including Simulation)
Functional Requirements
Building Block Technologiesa
A. Improved situational awareness
B. Common, relevant picture of the
battlefield
C. Command on-the-move C1
D. Improved target handoff
E. Battle space expansion
F. Information protection
G. Exploit modeling and simulation
A1 Sensors
A2 Intercept capabilities
A3 Accurate position location
A4 Automated platform monitoring
A5 Interconnected communications
networks
A6 Remotely accessed databases
A7 Decision support aids
AS Scalable data
A9 Flexible graphics
B1 Common distributed database
B2 Ability to access database
Interconnected communications to
transmit imagery, data, voice/selective
access
4
4,10
4,10
4,10
3,5,16
2,3,5,6,7,8,11,16
10,12
2,7,10,11
9
2,3,5,6,8
2,3,5,6,11,15,16
3,5,11,13,15,16
B4 "Eavesdrop" voice capability 3,5,11,12,15
B5 Portrayed graphically/scalable/easily 8,9
understood
Reconfigurable software
C2 Common hardware standards
protocols
C3 Rapid operation/turn-on
C4 Easily accessible networks
D1 Linkage of sensors, computers and
communications
E1 Satellite, fiber, wire, and long-range
wireless communications
E2 Automated systems
F1 Nonjammable communications
F2 Nonpenetrable databases
Unbreakable canto and other
security systems
G1 Distributed interactive simulations
G2 Support exploration of future
requirements
6,17
1,3,5,6,17
1,3,5,6
3,5
3,4,5,6
3,5
2,7,8,9,10,11,12,13
3,15,16
2,15
15
All
All
a There are 17 technologies, represented here by number. The list of 17 appears in Table 4-1.
An alternative approach is to develop a framework for
information system development that leverages the com-
monality across the requirements. This approach, which
emphasizes reuse, modularity, flexibility, extensibility, and
ease of evolution (Franker, 1994; Frankel et al., 1995), is
central to the discussion of architectures that appears below.
ARCHITECTURE
The commercial sector has recognized the considerable
advantages of developing an open architecture based on
49
widely accepted standards and interoperable components
as a framework for new system development (Comer,
1991; International Standard ISO 7498, 1990~. The com-
mercial marketplace has responded with a set of interop-
erable hardware and software that facilitates technology
insertion and mitigates obsolescence. Legacy systems, even
those that are nonstandard, can continue to be used as long
as they have standard interfaces.
The advantages of open architecture are recognized
in the Technical Reference Model (TRM) of the Depart-
ment of Defense (DoD) Technical Architecture for Infor-
mation Management (TAFIM) developed by the Defense
OCR for page 50
50
COMMERCIAL MULlll~EDIA TECHNOlOGI~ FOR -FIRST CE~YA~YBA WHIFF as
TABLE 4-3 Building Block Technologies and the Associated Army Functional Requirements
They Enable
Building Block Technologies
1. Lightweight, rugged, portable appliances and
terrn~nals
2. Storage systems for multimedia information
3. Communications platforms that support people
on the move
4. Information capture technologies
5. Protocols and related functionality to
support communications
6. Distributed computing environments and
operating systems
Information filtering systems
Multimedia database management systems
User-friendly multimedia user interfaces
7.
8.
9.
10. Multimedia information analysis and processing
building blocks and middleware services
11. Multimedia information access capabilities
12. Decision support tools, groupware, multimedia
teleconferencing
13. Multimedia messaging capabilities
14. Simulation: systems and applications
15. Security technologies
16. Network management systems
17. General purpose languages, tools, development
environments
Functional Requirementsa
C2, C3, G1, G2
A6, A8, B1, B2, E2, F2, G1, G2
A5, A6, B1, B2, B3, B4, C2,
C3, C4, D1, E1, F1, G1, G2
A1, A2, A3, A4, D1, G1, G2
A5, A6, B1, B2, B3, B4, C2,
C3, C4, D1, E1, G1, G2
A6, B1, B2, C1, C2, C3,
D1, G1, G2
A6, A8, E2, G1, G2
A6, B1, B5, E2, G1, G2
A9, B5, E2, G1, G2
A2, A3, A4, A7, A8, E2,
G1, G2
A6, A8, B2, B3, B4, E2,
G1, G2
A7, B4, E2, G1, G2
B3, E2, G1, G2
G1, G2
B2, B3, B4, F1, F2, F3, G1, G2
A5, A6, B2, B3, F1, G1, G2
C1, C2, G1, G2
a The letter-numeral designations appearing here are drawn from Table 4-2.
Information Systems Agency and applicable to all military
services (DISA, 1994>. The Army Science Board has
recommended a technical architecture for the digital
battlefield based on the TRM and also on the same
standards-based approach adopted by the commercial
sector (Franker, 1994; Frankel et al., 19953. The Army
Science Board approach defines an open architecture in
terms of standards, protocols, and definitions, and it
provides a means to insert new technology rapidly and
to transition away from legacy systems. The Army Science
Board approach includes a process and an organizational
structure for developing and enforcing the technical
architecture.
The philosophy behind the committee's generic mul-
timedia architecture (introduced in Chapter 3) and the
Army Science Board recommendations for a technical
architecture are similar, with the primary difference being
the level of detail. The committee's multimedia architec-
ture was depicted in Figure 3-2.
On March 31, 1995, the Army issued Version 3.1 of its
evolving C4I Technical Architecture (Department of the
Anny, 19959. This document is part of the ongoing response
OCR for page 51
MEETING ARMY NORMS ~ COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES
to the 1994 Army Science Board recommendations. Ver-
sion 3.1 defines the three-layer Common Operating
Environment (COE) shown in Figure 4-1. The COE layers
can be correlated with layers of the committee's multi-
media architecture as described below.
The top layer of the COE contains "Mission Area
Applications" and Support Applications. These corre-
spond approximately to specific applications (Layer V)
and the generic applications/enablers (Layer IV) of the
committee's multimedia architecture framework. The
middle layer of the COE, called the Application Platform
Entity, corresponds approximately to the functionality in
Layer II and III of the committee's multimedia architec-
ture plus Layer VI (security and network management
functions). The bottom layer of the COE, the External
Environment Interface, includes, mostly by implication,
Layer I of the committee's multimedia architecture.
The committee's multimedia architecture should be
viewed as a conceptual (as opposed to detailed) speci-
fication of architectural layers and interrelationship of
components, fully consistent with the technical architec-
ture currently being created by the Army. When viewed
as a conceptual architecture, it becomes apparent that
many underlying technologies (Layers I through IV and
Layer VI) can and should be shared across the common
51
Army-specific applications that exist at Layer \. Further,
as discussed below, building block technologies that may
require Army-specific developments appear primarily in
the bottom and top layers of the multimedia architecture,
while the middle-layer technologies are more generic.
This arrangement suggests that, in general, COTS tech-
nology should be preferred when implementing the
middle layers of future information systems.
APPLICABILITY OF COMMERCIAL TECHNOLOGY
TO ARMY NEEDS
In this section, the committee makes recommenda-
tions as to whether the Army should adopt commercial
technology (C), adapt commercial technology (M), or
invest in producing its own technology (A) when draw-
ing upon the building block technologies to meet its
functional requirements. Because each building block
technology is, in actuality, a collection of closely related
enabling technologies, and because COTS technology
may satisfy some Army requirements, but not others, the
committee recommends a combination of C and M in
four cases; a combination of C and A in two cases; and
"Mission Area" Applications l
Multi-Media
Multi-Media Support,
MCG & I
Communications
Message Processing,
Communications
Support Applications
Business
Processing
Office
Automation
Environment
Management
On-Line Spt,
Executive Mgr,
Alert Service
Database Engineering
Utilities | Support
Database,
Admin,
Correlation
System Communications Information Human/Computer
Services ~ Services ~ Services ~ Interaction Services Application
Interface (API)
Application Platform
Software User Data Data Graphic .
Engineering Interface Management Interchange Services
Services Services Services Services
Developer's File Mgmt Svcs, Data Interchange
Kit Database Mgmt Services .
Operating System Services, Distributed Computing Services
Distributed Computing Services
Security Services, System Management Services,
Security Admin Network Admin, System Admin
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ External
fir _
Environment
Network
Services
Network Services
~ Communications Services
~ ~ Information Services
_ ~ ~ ~ ~
Human/Computer Interface (EEI)
Interaction Services
-
Communications |
Information Exchange I Users
TRY Functional Area Groupings
GCCS COE Functional Areas
FIGURE 4-1 Common Operating Environment (COE) Architecture. Source: Department of the Army, 1995.
OCR for page 52
52
COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES FOR 7.WENTY-FIRST CE~YARMYBA 1'11~IF-~OS
a combination of C, M, and A in three cases. The
committee recommends C only in the remaining eight
cases. As will be discussed below, even where the
committee recommends C only, it is recognized that the
Army will need to adapt these technologies to take into
account Army-specific security needs. Representing se-
curity needs in Layer VI of the committee's multimedia
architecture as a vertical layer is meant to indicate that
security concerns are embedded in all layers of the
architecture and should not be used as justification for
Army-produced building block technologies where there
is a large commercial sector market pull for the develop-
ment of the same technologies. A more detailed defini-
tion of C, M, and A follows.
.
The designator C indicates that the commercial
market pull is so great that industry will develop
these technologies faster than the Army could. More
explicitly, the commercial sector is already or will
soon be investing tremendous resources to develop
the technology. The Army should adopt these
technologies off-the-shelf to meet its needs because
it will not likely be able to create a competitive
advantage for itself by pursuing Army-specific
development.
The designator M indicates that the committee
recommends the Army modify or adapt commercial
technologies to meet its requirements. Where this
is the case, it is advisable that the Army consider its
requirements with a view toward commercial prod-
uct availability. In some instances it will be possible
to change the requirement with little or no compro-
mise in functionality, in order to more readily adapt
commercial technologies. In other instances, work-
ing with industry as a partner or creative first user
will foster the smoothest adaptation of commercial
products.
· The designator A indicates that the technology is one
in which the Amity should invest. In this case the
committee believes that some of the Army require-
ments are unique and that industry will not develop
this technology on the time scale the Army needs. It
is through these investments that the Army can gain
a competitive advantage over its adversaries.
A summary of the committee's recommendations is
given in Table 4-4. It is interesting to note, with reference
to Figure 3-2 and Table 4-4, that the recommended Army
investment is heavily focused at the bottom layer and top
layer of the architecture and on security technology in
Layer VI. For the most part, the middle-layer technologies
should be acquired through commercial sources. With
respect to security concerns, isolating Army-specific se-
curity requirements by using standard interfaces between
security functionality and the Layers I-V building blocks
will best allow the Army to keep up as commercial
building block technologies evolve.
An explanation of the individual recommendations is
given throughout the rest of this section. To support these
recommendations, it is helpful to refer to the discussion
of systems in Chapter 3. As with the discussions of Chapter
3, the recommendations are ordered according to the
layers of the committee's generic architecture (Figure 3-21.
For example, when the committee looked at the existing
and emerging applications of cellular and wireless systems
in Chapter 3, it noted that users of these systems require
lightweight, easy-to-use appliances with long battery life-
times (between charging) and that they expect to be able
to move freely while on foot and in vehicles. They also
expect their communications to be secure from unauthor-
ized interception and to be reliable in terms of both the
integrity of the information communicated and the de-
pendability of the applications they use.
The committee sees a great deal of overlap between
these commercial user needs and those of soldiers and
commanders in the field. It is recognized that there are
also some special requirements on the battlefield, includ-
ing the need to deploy a supporting infrastructure of cell
sites (or functional equivalent) as the battle unfolds and
special concerns with respect to low-probability-of-
detection of wireless emissions.
When the committee looked at electronic commerce
applications in Chapter 3, it saw major concerns by
commercial users with regard to security and network
integrity to guarantee high availability of applications.
These concerns overlap substantially with those of bat-
tlefield applications.
The discussions of emerging commercial intelligent
transportation systems in Chapter 3 illustrate the similarity
of these applications with the Army's needs for situational
awareness (discussed in Chapter 2~. Both intelligent
transportation systems and the battlefield applications
involve broadcast information that must be suitably
filtered, and in some cases specifically formatted and
routed, to meet the needs of multiple recipients. Both
involve the achievement of a common view of a complex
situation. Both will require that stringent reliability re-
quirements are met.
Finally, the discussions of residential-information-serv-
ice applications underscored the importance of ease of
use in mass market commercial applications. Ease of use
is also of critical importance in battlefield applications.
RECOMMENDATIONS
(LAYER ~ PHYSICAL PLATFORMS)
Building block technologies discussed under
Layer I Physical Platforms of the generic architecture
OCR for page 53
53
¢ ~
-
._
sot
o
C:
o
._
Cal
o
,
-
o
To
-
._
-
._
Cat, ~
V ~ :r, SC <~ V
C ~ C ~ ·= ~ C
G ~ ~ ; , V ~
C ~ ~ _ ~ it ,lC _- - ~ ~ C U ~ VC
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~ ~ ~ ~ us ~ ~ Oo ~ O ~ ~ ~ Or us ~ ~
~ 1_ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 S 5
rat
.=
.s
·C
5,
OCR for page 54
j4
COI~MERCIAT MULLEN ~CHNOLOGI~ FOR -FIRST CE~YA~YBA CHINS
(Figure 3-2) include lightweight, rugged, portable appli-
ances and terminals; storage systems for multimedia
information; communications platforms that support peo-
ple on the move; and information capture technologies.
Lightweight, Rugged, Portable Appliances and Terminals
The component hardware technologies underlying
portable computing devices (e.g., laptop computers and
personal digital assistants) include processors, volatile
memory, long-term storage such as disks and flashcard
memory, batteries, and displays. As evidenced in Chapter
3, commercial research and development (R&D) has
produced remarkable technological advances in all of
these areas, with continued advances forecast for the
future. Processor speeds are increasing; memory storage
densities are increasing; ever-improving (larger, higher
brightness, better resolution) display technologies are
appearing; lightweight batteries are offering increased
energy densities and improved ruggedness. Perhaps most
remarkably, these advances are occurring while prices
for the new technology continue to fall. Given these
positive trends and the expenses involved in developing
... There is a large perceived commercial market for
these technologies and creating manufacturing facilities
multimedia applications. Gaps between the needs of
for them the Army should leverage commercial efforts
' these multimedia applications and the capabilities of
in component hardware technology.
For example, whereas the Army and, more generally,
the Defense Department have pioneered in such tech-
nologies as virtual reality displays and heads-up displays,
commercial counterparts that are appearing in the mar-
ketplace can be employed in applications such as hel-
met-mounted displays and components of gunsights.
These technologies will also enable an embedded train-
ing capability for soldiers that can be utilized in both
training and battlefield environments.
There are, however, some areas in which Army-spe-
cific requirements may not be met by existing and
emerging commercial technology. Improved ruggedness
and environmental tolerance of appliances and terminals
may be needed to meet Army requirements. Commercial
products are built with the bumps, drops, and foul
weather encountered by a business person in mind a
significantly more benign environment than would be
found on the battlefield. Even when COTS technology
can be used, ruggedness concerns may dictate that the
Army choose a more expensive COTS technology over
another (e.g., flashcard memory for long-term storage
rather than disk drives with movable parts). Improved
input devices (e.g., a replacement for a mouse or a
trackball) may also be needed since these devices will
be operated in stressful environments (e.g., in a moving
tank or by a soldier in motion). Battlefield environments
may expose physical equipment to nuclear radiation and
to electromagnetic pulse (EMP) effects resulting from the
high altitude detonation of a nuclear device. There may
also be Army-specific requirements for low probability
of intercept (LPI) and low probability of detection (LPD),
that is, for limiting or controlling electromagnetic radia-
tion from physical equipment that might be received and
utilized by eavesdroppers or might disclose the presence
and location of the equipment. All of these requirements
may necessitate customized physical enclosures into
which COTS physical computing technologies are incor-
porated. In extreme cases these requirements may neces-
sitate the selection of one COTS technology over another
(e.g., some COTS technology may be more susceptible
to EMP or may radiate more detectable radiation than
another, above and beyond what can be compensated
by physical enclosure design). Finally, any data stored in
a computing device may be subject to capture and hence
should be appropriately protected.
Recommendation: C, M
Storage Systems for Mliltimetlia Information
commercial storage systems are being filled by a large
commercial R&D effort. Although Army investment in
research on promising new storage technologies (e.g.,
multilayer optical disks) may be appropriate, it is unlikely
that Army-specific development of storage systems could
close gaps between Army needs and commercial capa-
bilities any faster than commercial R&D activities will
close those gaps. The Army should adopt commercial
multimedia storage and server technology, using custom-
ized packaging (when required) to meet unique Army
requirements with respect to shock and vibration resis-
tance, ruggedness in general, low emissions of radiation
to protect against intercept and detection, and nuclear
radiation and EMP resistance. In addition, some physical
packaging and other modifications may be required to
protect stored information in the event of capture of a
storage system.
Recommendation: C, M
Communications Platforms That Support
People on the Move
The commercial platforms described in Chapter 3 to
support mobility do not, in general, meet traditional
military specifications for anti-jam, LPI, LED, nuclear
radiation and EMP resistance, and rapid deployment in
OCR for page 55
MEETING ARMY NEEDS WITH COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES
battlefield environments. Nonetheless, several of the
emerging commercial low-earth-orbit satellite systems
should be of interest to the Army because they are (a)
truly global-coverage systems; (b) targeted for small,
inexpensive information appliances that could be used
by individual soldiers and on small vehicles; and (c)
all-digital systems to which military-grade encryption
subsystems could easily be added. These systems may
be useful to the Army for maneuvers, rescue, day-to-day
operations, and as a backup in wartime applications. The
Army should study the capabilities and limitations of
these systems and consider adding desirable Army-spe-
cific modifications to planned commercial terminal
equipment. Since these systems have multinational part-
ners, the Army should expect that it may be politically
difficult to add Army-specific "hooks" into system infra-
structures.
For local, mobile communications, the Army should
approach commercial vendors of cellular, cordless, and
personal communication systems to add unique Army
needs to those already being considered for commercial
markets. In particular, some components (e.g., handsets,
subsystems) of the low-cost commercial systems being
considered for rapid deployment in developing countries
may be adaptable to Army needs, particularly if unique
Army requirements are incorporated into their designs.
Requirements for rapidly deployable and survivable cell
sites (or functional equivalents in such forms as un-
manned aerial vehicles) to serve battlefield environments
are far less likely to be met by commercial products. It
is here that the Army should develop Army-specific
technology for its competitive advantage.
As discussed in Chapter 3, in addition to providing
links from wireless nodes to end users, a communications
platform to support soldiers on the move must include
backbone and feeder transmission and switching facili-
ties to connect cell sites or their equivalent. In the
commercial arena, these facilities often consist of fixed
fiber optic, copper cable-based, and microwave facilities.
The microwave facilities may be deployed on highly
stable towers or buildings. In the battlefield, physical
cables can be used in some situations, but often wireless
facilities will be required to implement backbone and
feeder links. In the battlefield, towers that support anten-
nas may be relatively unstable, and LPI considerations
may lead to the need for special adaptive antennas to
project signals properly. As discussed in Chapter 3,
standards are emerging in the commercial arena to
support the transport of asynchronous transfer mode
(ATM) signals over error-prone environments, and thus
the use of battlefield wireless systems to carry ATM will
likely be enabled by these COTS standards.
Recommendation: C, M, A
55
information Capture Technologies
As with many of the building block technologies,
much of the Army's gain comes from exploiting those
technologies in its systems in which the commercial
world has taken a lead. For example, the dramatic
advances in video and image camera technologies (e.g.,
camcorders and cameras associated with multimedia
personal computer applications) discussed in Chapter 3,
as well as the associated technologies for digitally encod-
ing and processing image and video information, repre-
sent COTS technologies that should be applied to Army
battlefield applications with only minor modifications to
address such issues as ruggedness.
There are, however, image and video capture tech-
nologies in which the Army has traditionally been far
ahead of commercial applications and which have pro-
duced key differentiating advantages for the Army over
its adversaries, particularly in the area of low-light image
intensifying sensors and infrared sensors.
Some infrared sensors have found widespread com-
mercial use, such as the infrared motion detectors used
in motion detector lighting systems and burglar detection
systems. These systems differ from those required for
Army use. Army systems must be more sensitive than
justified by economic considerations for consumer de-
vices, as the opponent must be presumed to be actively
engaged in concealment. Army sensor systems may be
chosen to operate in a purely passive mode, rather than
emitting energy in a feedback mode, to preserve operator
stealth. Finally, Army sensor systems must be presumed
to operate in far harsher environments than consumer
technologies.
Many of these goals can be achieved with modifica-
tions of commercial products, such as infrared motion
detectors. Telerobotic sensors, some with commercial
analogs, will play a key role in enabling and facilitating
remote operations, reconnaissance, and intelligence-
gathering on future Army battlefields. Systems with no
commercial analog may be Army-specific. Examples
include infrared binoculars and low-light amplification
gun sights. Very specialized examples include active
antennas in the electromagnetic spectrum, such as syn-
thetic aperture radar (SAR).
Commercial technology plays a role in the signal
processing tasks associated with many advanced sensors.
In particular, advanced digital signal processing tech-
nologies can aid in separating useful information from
chaff across the electromagnetic spectrum. The wide use
of these chips in consumer multimedia applications has
resulted in rapidly improving price and performance, but
the same technology can be, and is being, used in signal
recovery in a militaIy environment. Army use of informa-
tion capture technologies also tends to be more sophis-
OCR for page 56
56
COMMERCIAL MULL ~CHNOLOGI~ FOR -FIRST C~YA~YBA BLIPS
ticated than consumer use since the goal is gathering
location, size, movement rate, and other pertinent data
about an opponent taking active steps to conceal these
characteristics (e.g., by moving at night, in the rain, under
cloud cover, in radio silence, or using other forms of
sensory camouflage). Sensory data in this setting must be
combined for decision-making purposes, meaning that
the sensors must be integrated with other information
collection and distribution mechanisms, such as the
Army's communications networks.
An important sensor capability that is now widely used
commercially, although it emerged from DoD require-
ments, is the Global Positioning System (GPS). A constel-
lation of satellites generates signals which allow receivers
on the ground to determine their longitude, latitude, and
elevation. The accuracy with which this determination
can be made depends upon whether the signals trans-
mitted by the satellites have been intentionally degraded
by varying their underlying timing precision and by
broadcasting incorrect orbital position information. This
"selective availability" degradation is used to deny mili-
tary adversaries the higher accuracy that can be obtained
by receivers capable of receiving an encrypted signal that
bypasses the degradation.
With selective availability activated to the extent typi-
cally employed today, commercial GPS receivers can
achieve an accuracy of 100 meters horizontally and 156
meters vertically with 95 percent probability. If selective
availability is not activated, GPS receivers can achieve an
accuracy of 20 meters horizontally and 30 meters
vertically.
In addition, the use of a method called differential
GP~which depends on correction signals that are
broadcast from locations which are in positions known
to a high degree of accuracy—can allow receivers to
determine their locations to accuracies of less than a
meter. GPS receiver technology is being employed in
consumer devices costing several hundred dollars, with
costs declining along the usual trend curves associated
with electronics technologies. These commercial GPS
technologies and products can be employed in Army
battlefields.
Recommendation: C, M, A
RECOMMENDATIONS
(LAYER II - YSTEM SOFTWARE)
Building block technologies discussed under
Layer II- System Software of the generic architecture
(Figure 3-2), include (a) protocols and related function-
ality to support communications, and (b) distributed
computing environments and operating systems.
Protocols and Related Functionality
to Support Communications
With millions of computers worldwide running In-
ternet protocols, there is a large base of installed ma-
chines and commercial enterprises to support and
develop technology based on Internet standards. Internet
protocols are being extended to support real-time multi-
media applications. Importantly, Internet protocols were
designed with military applications in mind; several
Internet protocols have status as military standards. The
Internet standards body, the Internet Engineering Task
Force, has an ongoing effort to develop protocols to
support communication in a mobile environment an
effort that should be of considerable interest to the Army.
Since the Internet standardization process is an open one,
the Army should participate in this process to ensure that
emerging and planned Internet standards adequately
address Army needs.
The asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) protocols are
still in the process of being "fleshed out" but are antici-
pated to be of considerable importance in the future. The
committee notes that there are several ATM test beds
within the DoD. A rapid standardization process is being
pursued by the ATM Forum. The Army can play an
important role as an active participant in the ATM Forum
and other ATM standards development activities. In
particular, wireless ATM has received little attention in
the Forum to date, and the Army's needs would be an
excellent driver for wireless ATM.
Given the documented success and scope of the
Internet, the widespread industry support for ATM, and
the level of commercial effort being expended to expand
the capabilities of both, it is unlikely that defining and
developing a new or proprietary Army-specific commu-
nications protocol suite could provide the Army a com-
petitive advantage, as opposed to adopting and adapting
COTS technology.
Recommendation: C
Distributed Computing Environments
and Operating Systems
The DoD's need for better-integrated information shar-
ing within and between the Armed Forces can be well
served by commercial distributed computing technolo-
gies and operating systems. Rather than developing new
operating systems or environments, the Army should
adapt the commercial technologies by adding multilevel
security, special character sets for multinational language
support, and other unique capabilities.
The effective use of distributed computing environ-
ments and operating systems is closely tied to the need
OCR for page 57
MEETING ARMYNEEDS WITH COMMERCIAL MUL TIMEDk4 TECHIVOLOGI~
for an Army "enterprise-wide," logical information-shar-
ing architecture. Army efforts to create a technical archi-
tecture, which were discussed earlier, represent an
excellent start. Two challenges accompany using such a
model. First, the model is inherently computing-centric.
While this is appropriate for sharing text, images, and
other forms of data, the use of the model for voice
communications is not so clear. A fully integrated multi-
media information system requires that voice not be
handled separately. Second, full implementation of the
model will go beyond what can reasonably be included
in hand-held or other small information appliances. The
details of the architecture must be designed so as to allow
small-scale implementations of portions of the
architecture.
Recommendation: C
RECOMMENDATIONS
(LAYER 111 MIDDLEWARE)
Building block technologies discussed under Layer
III Middleware of the generic architecture (Figure 3-2)
include information filtering systems; multimedia data-
base management systems; user-friendly multimedia user
interfaces (e.g., speech, graphical user interfaces); and
multimedia information analysis and processing building
blocks and middleware services.
Information Filtering Systems
Because information filtering capabilities are critical to
the success of the commercial applications envisioned
for an emerging advanced national information infra-
structure, there are large commercial R&D efforts under
way to develop new and better approaches for indexing
and storing information in electronically accessible form,
searching through heterogeneous distributed databases,
and filtering arriving information according to user needs
and preferences. Much of this existing and emerging
technology should be directly applicable to Army needs
and should be used off-the-shelf. There may be some
modifications required to handle multilevel security con-
cerns. However, the Army should (a) endeavor to influ-
ence commercial technology to put in the "hooks"
required to meet the Army's security needs, or (b) adapt
its own requirements to be compatible with commercial
security capabilities, rather than attempting to develop
Army-specific information filtering systems, which have
counterparts in the commercial domain.
The committee recognizes the fact that the Army has
traditionally been at the forefront in technologies that
57
enable machine interpretation of images and specialized
types of data fusion. In these areas, Army-specific R&D
can lead to unique, competitive capabilities. Finally, the
Army should continue to fund promising research in
information filtering to accelerate the emergence of
commercial capabilities that meet Army needs.
Recommendation: C, A
Multimedia Database Management Systems
For commerce, advertising, education, and entertain-
ment, the commercial potential for multimedia database
management systems is overwhelming. In most cases,
commercial R&D in this area will progress much more
quickly than it would with Army-specific development
programs. For its needs, the Army should experiment
with emerging multimedia database technologies as any
large commercial customer would. Some examples of
large-scale, ongoing trials using multimedia databases
include the Library of Congress and digital libraIy efforts
noted earlier in Chapter 3. One Army-specific concern in
multimedia database technology not addressed in these
ongoing efforts is the issue of data security and authen-
ticated user access.
Recommendation: C
User-Friendly Multimedia User Interfaces
Administrative and logistical functions in the military
could adopt speech recognition on standard desktop
systems having suitable processor performance and nec-
essary sound-card functionality. Applications would fall
into the same categories in use in the commercial sector
(e.g., speech-enabled forms processing) as well as non-
frontline military applications such as supply and equip-
ment maintenance. Combining COTS speech recognition
capabilities with mobility through the use of COTS
portable computing systems could be of significant value
in rear-area activities. However, the effect of background
environmental noise in some of these applications on the
accuracy of current speech recognition systems needs to
be quantified.
The value of current speech recognition systems in
combat environments is doubtful. In such life-and-death
situations, accuracy and response time are critical. To-
day's systems are not accurate and responsive enough in
such environments. Nevertheless, significant progress in
voice recognition technologies may result in advances
that overcome the limitations of these technologies in
combat environments. Such breakthrough advances are
difficult to predict, and the Army should continue to
OCR for page 58
58
COMME:RCLA1 MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES FOR TWEN7~Y-FIRST CEN7V2YARMYBA7TL~EFIF9)S
closely monitor progress in the field of speech recogni-
tion, both at universities and at industrial laboratories. in
order to detect breakthrough advances as they emerge
in their earliest stages and prepare to be an early adopter
of such advances in battlefield applications.
Because of the large and growing commercial R&D
investments in improving speech recognition accuracy to
meet the needs of commercial applications, it is unlikely
that Army-specific speech recognition technology devel-
opments could produce a competitive advantage for the
Army. The base technologies for speech recognition are
available immediately on the commercial market or will
be maturing into the mainstream within the next few
years. Expenditures by the military should be leveraged
off these COTS technologies, with little modification or
customization for systems used in the administrative
applications.
For its high-noise applications like equipment main-
tenance, the Army should leverage the rapidly moving
commercial market, which is currently pursuing speech
recognition in adverse environments (e.g., a heavy equip-
ment operator on a factory floor). The Army should also
stay abreast of the commercial advancements for possible
future opportunities to use speech recognition in more
robust ways.
As with speech input and recognition technology,
multimedia presentation (e.g., graphical user interfaces
(GUIs)) and COTS input technologies (e.g., mouse and
pen-based devices) would be applicable in Army rear-
area activities. These technologies would also be appro-
priate in other nonstressed Army environments where the
worker-at-a-desk model for which these technologies
were developed is applicable.
In combat environments, however, there are addi-
tional considerations that may require that the Army
adapt COTS multimedia user interface technology. For
example, the weight and ruggedness of input devices will
be Army concerns. In a stressful battle scenario, a soldier
may have limited ability to view or choose among
information, making the multiwindowed, multi-icon GUI
typically found in COTS desktop or laptop multimedia
computers inappropriate. Also, the soldier on the move
(whether on foot or in a vehicle) may have difficulties
with desk-based pointing devices, such as a mouse,
trackball, or other device requiring fine motor control.
This concern was noted by Army personnel during the
committee's visit to Fort Gordon.
Although the committee believes that the Army should
adopt and adapt COTS user interface technology, one
important area that should receive further attention is
research on human perception and performance in
highly complex, temporally sensitive, information rich
environments representative of battlefield situations. A
vast amount of scientific data has been collected and is
being collected (e.g., in the commercial deployment of
residential information services, as discussed in Chapter
3) that will impact both commercial (entertainment and
industrial) and military applications. Work in these areas
includes visual, auditory, and other sensory acquisition
of information. This type of work is particularly pertinent
to (a) enabling commanders to convey their intentions
and distribute information in the most effective manner,
and (b) enabling subordinate commanders and individ-
ual soldiers to receive the information and understand
the commander's intentions.
Recommendation: C' M
Multimedia Information Analysis and Processing Building
Blocks and Middleware Services
Because of the importance of multimedia information
analysis and processing building blocks and middleware
services in commercial multimedia applications, as well
as the large size of the commercial multimedia applica-
tion marketplace, commercial R&D efforts to advance
these technologies will be great and driven by many
firms. The committee believes that gaps between com-
mercial technology capabilities and unmet commercial
and Army needs will be closed much more quickly by
commercial R&D activities than they would be by Army-
specific R&D.
The Army may find it advantageous to participate in
commercial activities to influence these trends in ways
that support Army-specific requirements and to fund
promising research efforts that can produce new dual-use
technologies. There may be some special middleware
building blocks that are needed for Army applications
and have no commercial counterparts. These would
require Army-specific development.
Recommendation: C
RECOMMENDATIONS
(LAYER IV - ENERIC APP[ICATIONS~NABLERS)
Building block technologies discussed under Layer IV
Generic Applications/Enablers of the generic architecture
(Figure 3-2) include multimedia information access capa-
bilities; decision support tools, groupware, multimedia
teleconferencing; and multimedia messaging capabilities.
Multimedia Information Access Capabilities
With the remarkable growth of the World Wide Web
last year, 1994 will likely be marked as the year that
OCR for page 59
MEETING ARMY NFFr)S WITH COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES
net~vorked-multimedia-information access (particularly,
access and display of stored, combined text and images)
became a reality. Commercial ventures in this area are
just beginning to appear with products such as enhanced,
networked multimedia viewers (e.g., Mosaic,
Netscape~. World Wide Web growth, the quick startup
of commercial ventures, and the level of interest in both
the technical and popular press indicate future significant
commercial interest in this area. Research efforts in
multimedia information access are also ongoing in nu-
merous industrial, government, and university research
labs.
Regardless of whether the World Wide Web and its
protocol become the future standards, it is almost certain
that the underlying multimedia data will be represented
in the standard formats discussed in Chapter 3. It is crucial
that the Army maintain its data in such formats (or be
able to convert data to and from such formats) if it expects
to leverage fully commercial efforts in the area of multi-
media information access.
Recommendation: C
Decision Support Tools, Groupware, Multimedia
Teleconferencing
As evidenced in our discussion of the decision support
technology in Chapter 3, many commercial products
have been announced that support collaborative, group-
oriented communication and information sharing. Unfor-
tunately, products from one company will likely not
interoperate with those from another company. This
reflects the lack of accepted standards in the area and a
technology that is not yet fully mature. Nonetheless, the
need to interoperate is a compelling one, and open
standards will emerge over time. The significant number
of currently available commercial products, combined
with ongoing research efforts in industrial, government,
and university research laboratories, indicates that this is
an area in which the Army will be able to significantly
leverage commercial technology. Once again, security
considerations are one area where industrial efforts may
fail to meet Army-specific needs.
Recommendation: C
Multimedia Messaging Capabilities
The need to transmit, store, and display multimedia
messages will be a common requirement of all future
networked systems, whether commercial or military. The
already pervasive use of text-based electronic mail today
will evolve into the multimedia electronic mail of tomor-
59
row as network users continue to acquire multimedia-ca-
pable computers.
Standards for multimedia mail have already been
defined both for the Internet and Open Systems Inter-
connection (OSI). Given the large installed base of
Internet and OSI-compliant protocols, it is likely that
future commercial multimedia mail systems will conform
to these standards. If multiple standards exist, it is likely
that mail programs will be able to convert between
standard formats, since interoperability is of critical
importance.
Recommendation: C
RECOMMENDATION
(LAYER V - PECIFIC APPLICATIONS)
General Observations
This section addresses Layer V of the generic architec-
ture of Figure 3-2. As discussed in Chapter 3, the factors
that determine whether an application should be devel-
oped on a customized basis or be adopted or adapted
from off-the-shelf software are the perceived uniqueness
of the needs that the application must meet, whether or
not the organization or individual who will use the
application aspires to obtain a competitive advantage by
optimizing the application to meet its needs, and whether
or not the organization or individual has a realistic
expectation of being able to produce a customized
application that will be better than what it can purchase
off-the-shelf in the time frame that customized applica-
tion would be available and used.
For example, it seems self-evident that the Army
would develop customized application software to man-
age target acquisition, tracking, and associated weapons
assignment and fire control. This is a collection of related
applications with which the Army would seek to obtain
a competitive advantage over its adversaries, and where
it is not likely that analogous commercial applications, to
the extent they exist, would cause the creation of COTS
application software that is better than what the Army
could produce on a customized basis. However, as
stressed throughout this report, the Army should utilize
COTS building block technologies to the maximum
extent possible in creating such applications in order to
leverage the rapid pace of technological improvements
that these building blocks enjoy; and the Army should
create such applications in the context of an overall
technical architecture to achieve the benefits of building
block reuse, interoperability, and the ability to insert new
technologies, as discussed earlier and in Chapter 6 of this
OCR for page 60
60
COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES FOR 7-WE~IY-FIRST CEN7-URYARMYBA 77.LEFIEI~DS
report. It is far less clear that the Army would need to
create customized word processing or spreadsheet appli-
cations rather than use those that are available off-the-
shelf commercially.
Thus, the committee will make no general recommen-
dations regarding whether the Army should adopt or
adapt COTS application-level software or whether it
should develop Army- specific application-level soft-
ware, other than to urge the Army to adapt or adopt COTS
software whenever its needs are not unique and it does
not expect to gain a significant competitive advantage
from that application software. Also, the committee urges
the Army to utilize COTS building blocks in the context
of a technical architecture when creating customized
applications.
The committee has focused specifically on simulation
systems and simulation applications because of the em-
phasis that has been placed on simulation by the repre-
sentatives of the Army who met with the committee. The
committee's recommendations with respect to simulation
systems and applications follow below.
Simulation: Systems and Applications
Commercial simulation software is moving toward
more integrated support of the modeling and simulation
enterprise, including support of software development,
database management, model specification, model-to-ar-
chitecture mapping, and multiple resolution levels. Such
methodological tools are necessary for the development
of the large virtual and live simulations of major interest
to the Army. Commercial simulation software that sup-
ports visualization, such as computer-aided design and
manufacturing software, should have application to bat-
tlefield visualization of complex two- and three-dimen-
sional objects, including the battlefield itself. Commercial
simulation software used in medical imaging applications
has already been shown to have application to tele-
medicine on the battlefield.
Therefore, the Army should employ COTS develop-
ments along these lines where they exist and encourage
their development where they do not. For example,
through the "federated" laboratory concept, the Army
could solicit work toward the objective of integrating
commercial (or commercializable) simulation environ-
ments into the design and management of distributed
simulations. The actual implementation of distributed
interactive simulation for virtual and live training appli-
cations is very much Army-specific and will not be
HA concept for extending the capabilities of the Army Research
Laboratory by using civilian laboratory resources.
developed commercially on any significant scale without
Army participation.
Recommendation: C, M, A
RECOMMENDATIONS
(LAYER Vl- MANAGEMENT/SECURITY)
Building block technologies discussed under
Layer VI Management/Security of the generic architec-
ture (Figure 3-2) include security technologies; network
management systems; and general purpose languages,
tools, and development environments.
Security Technologies
As discussed in Chapter 3, there are increasing con-
cerns regarding the security of commercial networks in
terms of their vulnerability to eavesdropping, protection
of information from unauthorized access, vulnerability of
networks and servers to major outages caused by acci-
dents, denial-of-service attacks, and other problems.
These concerns will grow as the vision of a national
information infrastructure emerges in the form of in-
creased usage of networks to conduct all aspects of
commerce, health care, government services, personal
business, and other civilian activities.
On this basis, one could argue that commercial appli-
cations will produce a very large market pull leading to
the creation of effective security technologies that can
readily be adopted and adapted to meet Army needs.
Commercial technology in the area of security is evolving
rapidly, particularly in areas related to electronic com-
merce such as digital signatures, digital time stamps, and
electronic cash. The desire for privacy has been strong
enough that credible systems (such as the "Pretty Good
Privacy" system) are in widespread use on the Internet
worldwide. Freely available Digital Encryption Standard
(DES) software can operate at or near Ethernet LAN
speeds.
On the other hand, defense and intelligence applica-
tions have traditionally been the driving force behind the
creation of many of the most advanced and the most
powerful security technologies, some of which have
subsequently been adapted for commercial use. The
DoD, Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), and
the National Security Agency are currently playing a key
role in helping to promote the creation and proper use
of security technologies in commercial applications. On
this basis, one could argue for a continuing strong role
of the Army, DoD in general, and the intelligence com-
OCR for page 61
MFFTING ARMY NFFr)S WITH COMMERCIAL MUL 77MEDIA TECHl)JOLOGIES
munity in the creation of security technologies that
produce a competitive advantage over adversaries.
As mentioned earlier in this report, it is well to view
security as a journey rather than a destination. New and
more sophisticated threats continually emerge, based on
the availability of more sophisticated computing tech-
nologies, more efficient algorithms, and other advances
by talented hackers, criminals, and terrorists. This sug-
gests that true security in the Army sense will always
involve more than can be provided by routine application
of off-the-shelf technologies.
Thus, it is not clear at this time whether the Army and
DoD in general will continue to lead in the creation of
the most powerful security technologies, whether they
will transition toward the use of COTS for essentially all
of their applications, or whether they will pursue some
combination of these.
The committee believes it is likely that at least some
large classes of Army security applications can be satis-
fied by COTS security technologies, even if there remains
a significant residual set of applications that must be
served by Army-specific developments. It should be
pointed out that the committee did not have access to
classified information that might allow a more thorough
assessment regarding the extent to which COTS technol-
ogy could be applied to the broad range of Army security
applications.
With all of the above as background, the committee
decided to make the recommendation that the Army
adopt and adapt as much emerging COTS security tech-
nology as possible, while still engaging in Army-specific
development of those security technologies needed to
meet truly unique Army requirements. The Army, and the
DoD as a whole, can stimulate the development and
accelerate the use of robust security protocols built on
publicly available technologies. This approach has the
advantage that these protocols will then be embedded in
next-generation COTS that the Army can purchase and
embed in its systems. Examples of this process include
ARPA's stimulation of better network and protocol secu-
rity mechanisms in the next generation Internet Protocols
and the desirable participation of the Army or DoD in
evolving a secure Hypertext Transfer Protocol (H'l'l~.
This process should continue as threat models change
over time.
Even with all of the caveats and ambiguities described
above, the committee expects that the percentage of
Army security applications that can be satisfied with
emerging COTS security technologies will be substan-
tially larger in the future than in the past.
In addition to issues related to algorithms, key man-
acement. and system administration to ensure that secu-
r~ty requirements are met, the Army may have
requirements with respect to electromagnetic emissions
O ,
61
(LPI and LPD) and with respect to nuclear radiation and
EMP effects (various denial-of-service threats including
loss or destruction of data) that are more stringent or
more compelling that those associated with most com-
mercial applications. This was discussed earlier in this
chapter under the heading Layer I Physical Platforms,
where the need for Army-specific physical packaging and
the careful selection among alternative COTS technolo-
gies was pointed out. Finally, the Army, and DoD in
general, may have requirements for bulk encryption of
very high speed data signals (i.e., encryption of the entire
multiplexed signal, rather than its lower speed tributary
signals) which cannot be met by using general purpose
microprocessors to execute encryption algorithms ex-
pressed in software. This may lead to the requirement
for Army-specific hardware modules, which can be add-
ons or appliques to COTS equipment which implement
very high speed encryption algorithms using custom
hardware-based methods.
Network Management Systems
Recommendation C, A
Because of the importance of network management
in commercial applications and the large R&D efforts
under way to create network management products for
commercial information networks, the Army should
adopt commercial network management technologies
and systems off-the-shelf for its network management
applications. There will probably be some Army-specific
modifications required to deal with specific security
requirements and concerns regarding multiple, simulta-
neous failures of network elements. However, many of
these concerns also exist in commercial applications
involving commerce, health care, air traffic control, and
so on.
The committee recognizes that, when given a more
detailed analysis of Army requirements, the Army may
conclude that battlefield conditions are so stressful with
respect to failures of systems and subsystems, movement
of systems and subsystems, and recovery requirements
that commercial network management technologies,
even in modified form, cannot meet all of the Army's
battlefield requirements. In that case, Army- specific
development will be required. However, the committee
recommends that the Army start out with the mind set
that it will adopt and adapt commercial network man-
agement technologies, and that it consider Army-specific
developments as a fallback strategy to be avoided if at
all possible.
Recommendation: C, M
OCR for page 62
62
General Purpose Languages, Tools, Development
Environments
COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES FOR TWEN7Y-FIRST cEN7~yARMyBAl7ZEFIFrDs
The development of a general purpose computer
programming language and its acceptance within the
software development community (as evidenced by its
use by software developers) is an extremely lengthy
process. Ada is a case in point. Even after the issuance
of an Ada standard and almost two decades after the Ada
effort was first conceived, there exist very few unqualified
Ada success stories. More recently, the situation has
improved as indicated by success stories (many in com-
mercial applications) reported by the Ada Joint Program
Office. It is important to note, however, that whatever
success the language has achieved has come 20 years
after its inception and has had the strength of the Ada
mandate behind it.
Because there are several existing general-purpose
computer programming languages (such as Ada and
C++) that were designed to meet the needs of reliable,
real-time systems and embody the principles of modern
software engineering, there would appear to be little
reason for the Army to pursue anything but pure COTS
technology in the general-purpose computer program-
ming language area. Even if deficiencies in existing
languages are uncovered, the time frame for developing
an accepted language is too large. A more fruitful path
would be to influence and extend existing languages
through the standards process.
Recommendation:
AN OPERATIONAL EXAMPLE
c
Having presented the above recommendations, the
committee now moves to an example of how multimedia
information technologies could be used by the Army for
battle command in the future.
Battle Command in the Twenty-First Century
In Chapter 2, the committee discussed the Army's
operational needs to achieve battlefield success in the
information age. These needs were described in terms of
functional requirements from the user's perspective.
Chapter 2 also indicated that the Army recognizes the
potential military advantages that can be gained by
leveraging the power of information distribution technol-
ogy. To realize these advantages, Army leaders have
initiated a series of battle laboratory experiments, analy-
ses, and field trials aimed at finding optimal approaches
to digitize the battlefield. The Army's strategy for change,
described variously within the context of "Force XXI," the
"Enterprise Strategy," "joint Venture," and the "Louisiana
Maneuvers," also recognizes that the application of mul-
timedia information distribution technologies will lead to
fundamental changes in organization, doctrine, training,
and all the activities associated with how the Army
prepares for and executes combat operations (Army
Director, Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force, 1995 and
Department of the Army, 19939.
While all the ramifications of how military organiza-
tions and warfare could change in the next century may
not be clear, the goal of applying the technologies
through digitization of the battlefield is to achieve over-
whelming battlefield success rapidly and with few casu-
alties. The expectation is that advanced automation and
multimedia technologies will lead to a dramatic reduction
in uncertainty, significant improvements in shared
knowledge, and the practical elimination of misunder-
standing between and among all the involved command-
ers and cooperating organizations on the battlefield.
When a commander knows with certainty where all his
units are (and their status) and knows with equal cer-
tainty the location and status of the enemy; when that
information is shared by all subordinate, adjacent, and
senior commanders, regardless of their location; when
battlefield information and its meaning can be rapidly
disseminated to all who need it; and when all of this can
be done unambiguously in real time and in a format
useful to each commander, the result is a dramatic
improvement in battlefield performance and the ability
of the commander to control the pace and tempo of the
battle.2 These capabilities define operationally what im-
proved situational awareness and a common picture of
the battlefield mean to a commander in battle. They
constitute the essential underpinnings for success
throughout an expanded, fast-paced, mobile battlefield.
Although it is not the committee's intent in this chapter
to predict new tactics or how commanders may execute
future battle command, it is clear to the committee that
the application by the Army of the information technolo-
gies available now or by the turn of the century can have
far-reaching effects. If information is shared more quickly
and if it is more accurate and timely, it should permit
commanders to extend their span of effective control.
Organizations may be flatter, with smaller support staffs
and fewer levels of command. Actions can be coordi-
nated over wider areas and synchronized more precisely,
which may permit innovative tactics for concentrating
combat power with fewer forces because of the more
20f course, it is equally important that a commander know with
certainty that his battlefield information is not available to the enemy
and that the enemy has neither destroyed nor modified it.
OCR for page 63
MEk-77NG ARMY 1!lEEDS WITH COMMERCIAL MUL TIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES
efficient use of that power and the confidence that it is
being applied effectively.
Army Commanders, the Battlefield, and
Multimedia Technology
The committee recognizes that the Army has extensive
plans for the operational evaluation of the application of
information technologies as part of its efforts to digitize
the battlefield. While doctrinal and organizational deci-
sions will evolve from these evaluations, it is useful at
this point to describe how commanders in a particular
combat operation might use the technologies identified
in Chapter 3 to meet the functional requirements outlined
in Chapter 2.
The committee's description takes the form of the
hypothetical scenario at some point early in the next
century. In that scenario, it is postulated that an Army
corps is deployed to a theater of war as part of a joint
command that will conduct combat operations against
an armed enemy. The scenario follows.
As the Corps commander begins to plan for offensive
operations, his focus is on securely gathering information
about the enemy and the environment within the area of
operations while ensuring that the units within the Corps
are prepared, trained, and supported. Explicit require-
ments for the commander are to preauthorize who may
share the information and to have an effective crypto-
graphic key management scheme.
The initial warning order to subordinate commands is
initiated over a protected broadcast network. Shortly
thereafter, the Corps commander briefs and leads a
discussion of the upcoming operation with all the in-
volved commanders via video teleconferencing. Subor-
dinate commanders participate from their own command
posts with the necessary staff present to listen, under-
stand, and take part in the discussion. Images of the
objective areas and routes of advance are called up from
stored files or in real time from satellites, aircraft, or
ground sensors for all to view simultaneously. The map
images at each command post are identical, and the
Corps commander is able to explain his intent, point out
specific items of importance, and sketch pictorially the
options being considered. This process uses encrypted
data transfer over low-probability-of-intercept, anti-jam
communications.
At the conclusion of the initial briefing and warning
order, intelligence collection systems begin to focus on
the most likely courses of action. Support organizations
63
conduct electronic queries of the participating units to
determine personnel and logistical status and to assess
available materiel stocks. Automated processes deter-
mine requirements in accordance with the commander's
announced priorities. Necessary replacements, equip-
ment, and supplies are delivered to the appropriate units
or identified for later delivery based on predicted con-
sumption and battle intensity.
The Corps commander runs a quick check of unit
status. Applying established criteria and standards, the
commander is alerted automatically to any unit whose
status has fallen below the predetermined standards.
These may be adjusted once the battle begins. The Corps
staff reviews uncompromised, accurate data on enemy
units within the area of operations, directs additional
collection efforts, and employs automated processes to
analyze terrain, estimate time and distance implications,
compute probable consumption rates, and compare al-
ternatives. Computers conduct the repetitive, computa-
tional tasks, store information for rapid retrieval, provide
prompts and alerts based on preset criteria, and continu-
ously update the databases, maps, and individual status
displays. Use of the computers leaves the staff and
commanders free to think, consider options, and apply
the human perspective to preparing for the operation.
Employing an interactive simulation, the staffs rapidly
compare courses of action, modify conditions and as-
sumptions, and complete their assessments.
The Corps commander calls up a satellite image of the
objective area, then follows in real time an unmanned
aerial vehicle as it takes still or video images over the
objective area, the approaches to it, and enemy units that
could affect the operation. The commander conducts a
personal reconnaissance of as much of the area as
feasible, but he remains in contact with his own head-
quarters and subordinate commanders as the plan is
developed.
Once the commander selects a course of action, the
staff completes the plan. Secured information is shared
electronically and through voice communications with
the staffs of all the organizations involved in the opera-
tion to permit simultaneous parallel planning. When
complete, the briefing and discussions once again are via
video teleconference. Detailed questions are answered
and precise coordination effected so that all clearly
understand the intent and concept of the operation. The
Corps commander employs a simulation at this point (or
possibly later) to review the plan, actions at critical
phases, and contingencies to meet unexpected enemy
action or potential opportunities.
At lower levels, commanders and their staffs are
involved in similar activities. Intelligence information is
received continuously from theater and Corps assets as
well as those controlled by subordinate commanders.
r ~ r 1
OCR for page 64
64
Preset filters determine the information to be received
and stored in the local unit database and the security level
to be assigned to the information. The filters are deter-
mined by geographic boundaries, types of enemy units,
enemy activity, or time frame. Each commander sets
specific filter requirements and also establishes criteria
for special alerts or prompts.
Throughout the planning process, information is
shared between supporting Air Force and Navy units, as
well as adjacent Army and Marine Corps maneuver
headquarters. Standards, protocols, and operating envi-
ronments common to all services permit the automated
retrieval of relevant information from the databases of all
the organizations involved in the operation, regardless of
service, and prevent unauthorized modification to the
data. Other protections involving user codes, bulk en-
cIyption, and physical and electronic hardening prevent
penetration or destruction of the shared databases by the
enemy.
The lead combat maneuver formations involved in the
initial penetration of enemy defenses conduct extensive
reconnaissance and training for the operation. Overhead
photography and imaging, scout helicopters, foot patrols,
and implanted sensors collect information on specific
weapons and positions. Commanders at these levels
establish precise criteria for alerts concerning the posi-
tions of single weapons, the possible construction of new
obstacles, and indications of the movement of tactical
reserves. They are assisted in the determination of the
precise locations of equipment and soldiers by location
reports enabled by the GPS.
Shortly before execution of the attack, the penetration
force conducts a rehearsal supported by a simulation that
feeds enemy activity into the intelligence system. The
units and soldiers involved participate with their actual
weapons and equipment. Data ports on the armored
vehicles and electronic imaging systems transform them
into simulators operating in a virtual reality, as seen on
their thermal imaging devices, vision blocks, and sights.
Follow-on units rehearse similarly, with unexpected situ-
ations introduced to force commanders at the lowest
levels to execute immediate action drills and contingency
plans.
On the evening prior to the attack, patrols infiltrate to
positions where they can observe the area selected for the
penetration. The joint surveillance and target attack radar
system OSTARS) maintains deep surveillance, watching
for the movement of operational reserves. Unmanned
aerial vehicles and scout helicopters confirm the locations
of tactical reserves and artillery. After arriving in position,
one of the patrols detects the movement of tanks into
forward defensive positions. Using thermal viewers and
miniature cameras, the patrol takes several pictures and
contacts the lead unit commander. The images are trans-
COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES FOR 7.WENTY-FIRST CEN7V2YARMYBA TTLEFIELDS
misted securely with precise time and location tags. The
commander (a) directs the fire support officer to coordi-
nate artillery and attack helicopter fires to commence 30
minutes prior to the attack, and (b) forwards the images
to his commander. This transmission automatically trig-
gers transmission to the adjacent commanders, senior
commanders, and the Corps commander, all of whom
have preset automatic alerts for information of tank
movements in the area of the penetration.
The attack begins with artillery fire on known enemy
positions and the precision attack of selected targets. The
attack helicopters make contact with the patrol leader,
who employs his laser designator on each of the tanks
and hands off the targets to the engaging helicopters.
The lead combat elements launch a violent attack.
Dismounted soldiers and engineer vehicles clear the
mines and obstacles, overmatched by supporting tanks
and fighting vehicles. Artillery fire is called for and
adjusted by forward observers with automated handoff
of targets to the fire direction centers. The location of
each tank and combat vehicle and the dismounted
elements attacking the enemy position are displayed in
each vehicle and on displays at the controlling headquar-
ters, fire support units, and fire direction centers. This
information is protected against enemy access. Auto-
mated combat identification codes distinguish between
friendly and enemy combat vehicles and heavy weapons.
Identified targets that cannot be engaged by one tank are
handed off automatically to another tank or supporting
weapon. Commanders operating from mobile armored
vehicles or helicopters follow the battle by listening on
the command nets of subordinate and adjacent units and
through visual observation. Their display screens provide
rolled-up information on the center of mass location of
units and their status.
After clearing the position, follow-on forces begin to
roll through. The senior commanders request the status
of the lead units with automated queries to respective
databases; the responses are transparent to the subordi-
nate commanders. Logistical units conduct similar que-
ries on ammunition and fuel status that has been rolled
up from the sensors on each combat vehicle in the lead
units. Resupply and medical support begin to move
forward before the units sense the need and without a
request on their part. At this point, the Corps or other
senior commanders adjust the plan slightly, based on unit
locations and status and the success achieved. The
changes in objectives, routes, and missions are encrypted
and sent to all commanders involved. Control measures
are depicted on all map displays automatically. Alerts are
provided electronically and over a protected broadcast
network. If necessary, the commander describes his
intent graphically in real time to ensure full under-
standing.
OCR for page 65
MEETING ARMY :IEEDS WITH COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDL4 TECHNOLOGIES
As the attack picks up speed and more units move
through the penetration, traffic jams are avoided by
constant updates to unit commanders, to the controlling
military police, and to engineers supervising the passage.
Speeds are adjusted and assembly areas occupied and
vacated at appropriate times to ensure continuous rapid
forward movement.
The Corps commander moves forward. While the
commander is airborne, sensors emplaced by special
operations forces indicate the movement of a large
tracked vehicle force. The Corps commander is alerted
by an airborne communications system. At the same time
A_ . _ ~ . ., _ . . .
Ib lAKb resorts a similar movement. calling UD the
. _ . . . . .
J~ 1 AKS track on his display, the Corps commander
determines that it is probably a tank brigade previously
identified in the area. He directs aerial surveillance and
overhead imagery to confirm. The artillery commander
and aviation commander are directed to coordinate an
attack with long-range tactical missiles, an attack helicop-
ter battalion, and tactical air strikes. Control measures are
established to provide for troop safety and adequate
separation distances; these are broadcast to all organiza-
tions in the Corps. The database is automatically updated
and maps posted electronically. Scout helicopters oper-
ating with the armored cavalry units leading the attack
are alerted electronically. Their on-board displays depict
the enemy targets and the planned attack. Following the
attack, the scout helicopters conduct battle damage as-
sessment, providing imagery and direct readout to the
Corps commander and all other involved commanders.
Surviving enemy targets are handed off electronically to
supporting artillery or other weapons that can engage.
Units converging on the battlefield are alerted to each
other's presence automatically as the database is updated
from position location sensors on combat vehicles and
the radios of dismounted units. Battlefield combat iden-
tification sensors respond with coded identification of
friendly vehicles when in the heat of battle they are
spotted by the laser range finder of another friendly
weapon. Targets are handed off from tank to tank or to
attack helicopters, artillery, or close support aircraft.
As the attack proceeds deeper into the enemy, the
situation becomes more complex and confusing. Vehi-
cles break down or are damaged. Enemy units are
bypassed. Unarmed support vehicles move forward to
resupply or refuel the combat vehicles. Units deviate
from planned routes as a result of combat, obstacles, or
changes in plans. Automated position location provides
continuous updates to the database and keeps units
informed of unit locations. Commanders and supporters
conduct automated queries without distracting the ele-
ment being queried. Automatic coded identification sig-
nals minimize the likelihood of fratricide between
friendly units. Commanders at each echelon determine
65
what information they need and set predetermined
criteria for alerts and prompts to avoid information
overload.
After the battle is over, the same communications and
electronic systems assist commanders in reassembling
their units, assessing casualties and battle losses, com-
pleting resupply and repairs, and preparing for follow-on
operations. Data from the battle are called up from the
secure database to permit an assessment of the operation
and lessons learned for future operations.
The committee's analysis of the above scenario is
contained in the following section.
ANALYSIS OF THE SCENARIO
The activities described in the preceding scenario are
essentially the same activities that would be conducted
in any-operation, whether supported by automated sys-
tems and multimedia communications or by manual
systems and messengers. The difference is the speed and
accuracy of the information distribution, the continuous,
automated update of the databases, the ability to coordi-
nate actions simultaneously throughout the battlefield
and inform all of those involved in real time, and the
ability to free commanders and staff from the drudgery
of repetitive and monotonous tasks. The effect on unit
organizational structure and the tactics employed to
leverage the advantages achieved could be dramatic.
Smaller forces, widely separated, will be able to increase
these combat effects simultaneously and at a vastly
increased pace and tempo. Ammunition and logistics
stockage levels can probably be reduced as support units
maintain a real-time accurate knowledge of each unit's
status and deliver the needed supplies on time and
without requests. Smaller staffs employing automated
systems and support aids will be able to coordinate the
operations of more subordinate formations and provide
more. accurate and more timely support to commanders.
As the committee analyzed the scenario depicted
above, it concluded that the gaps between current tech-
nological capabilities and what is needed to realize the
future capabilities, as described, are as follows. The
scenario implies an enterprise information architecture
where data are a corporate resource that is shared by
many applications. This sharing is a goal of many com-
mercial enterprises. The technology challenges lie in
transitioning existing legacy systems; building open and
distributed computing environments that are secure and
OCR for page 66
66
COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES FOR 7~ FIRST CEN7URYARMYBA l lilies
reliable enough; and provisioning and managing the
capacity of information servers, processing resources,
and communications facilities to assure that all needs are
met in a timely way.
These are major challenges that will be addressed
mostly by commercial technology trends. A principal
focus for the Army should be on monitoring these trends
and adopting best commercial practices. In addition, the
Army should focus on creating and deploying an appro-
priate secure communications capability that can support
battlefield needs and is compatible with the functionality
and interfaces of communications capabilities that will
be used in commercial enterprise information systems. A
serious problem for the Army might occur if the battle-
field communications capabilities were not able to sup-
port the communications requirements of higher layer
commercial enterprise information system building
blocks. This might result in the inability to leverage those
COTS technologies and a corresponding major capability
shortfall for the Army. The Army will also have to
influence commercial technology trends to accommodate
its unique security and access control requirements (if
they are unique), as well as the serious network manage-
ment challenges associated with multiple, simultaneous
failures of equipment that can occur in battlefield situ-
ations.3 Finally, the Army must create physical packaging
technologies or influence commercial trends to accom-
modate its unique or more compelling requirements with
respect to emissions of electromagnetic interference,
resistance to nuclear radiation and EMP pulse effects,
shock and vibration resistance, and ruggedness in
general.
The committee emphasizes here the importance of
performing battlefield activities securely, in a fashion that
will protect critical information from the enemy and
ensure that it is not corrupted by the enemy. When
building an effective security environment that protects
information while retaining ready access, it is essential
that security be built into the communication architecture
from the start. There must be a tradeoff between the
speed of sharing information and the effort expended to
protect it. For example, if the criticality of certain infor-
mation will expire in a few minutes, it might be desirable
to use commercial encryption schemes (e.g., the DES
(digital encryption standard)) or other techniques such
3An area that is not amenable to being addressed within the scope
of this unclassified study is that of vulnerabilities of the systems
envisioned In this scenario to major, simultaneous, unrecoverable
disruption. The committee has mentioned such things as nuclear
radiation and electromagnetic pulse (EMP) resistance requirements for
physical equipment and the requirement to protect systems from
various intrusions that can lead to denial of services. The committee
has mentioned the importance of influencing trends In commercial
as frequency hopping. In cases where information must
be absolutely protected for long periods of time, Army-
specific mechanisms may be more appropriate.
This future scenario implies a great deal of automated
information processing and filtering. This is also required
in the commercial marketplace for such applications as
electronic commerce (e.g., electronic shopping and ad-
vertising) and intelligent transportation systems. Technol-
ogy for automatically indexing multimedia information
objects, such as maps to facilitate searching and filtering,
is relatively immature today. Although there are impor-
tant commercial uses for such technology, this is an area
where the Army may wish to invest in R&D to develop
a competitive advantage over its adversaries.
As previously discussed in this chapter, the simulation
capabilities described in the scenario represent an area
of current Army leadership. The Army should continue
to invest in robust simulation capabilities to maintain its
competitive advantage. Also, the sensors, including sat-
ellites and unmanned aerial vehicles utilized in this
scenario, represent areas where the Army (and more
generally DoD) should continue to invest to retain com-
petitive advantage.
Above all, the committee wishes to reiterate that it is
the successful integration of all of these technologies into
end-to-end applications, which work securely and reli-
ably on the battlefield and are easy and intuitive to use
for both commanders and soldiers, that represents the
most important opportunity for the Army to retain its
advantage over its adversaries.
SUMMARY
In this chapter, the committee showed how the build-
ing block technologies can be used to meet the Army's
operational needs and functional requirements. The
building block technologies and the needs and functional
requirements were mapped onto one another. The chap-
ter also outlined why it is desirable to have a technical
architecture. An architecture provides a framework for
information systems development that leverages the
commonality between specific applications. The commit-
tee's multimedia architecture introduced in Chapter 3 was
shown to correlate with the current Army architecture.
network management technologies to accommodate graceful degrada-
tion in the face of multiple, simultaneous failures. However, the
committee feels obligated to point out that much research, develop-
ment, and experimentation is needed to create technologies, system
architectures, operational methodologies, and doctrines that remove,
reduce, and work around major system vulnerabilities associated with
battlefield applications. These vulnerabilities represent major concerns
in commercial applications as well.
OCR for page 67
MEETINGARMYPJEEDS W777I COMMERCIAL MULTIMEDl~4 TECHNOLOGIES
Using the committee's multimedia architecture, the Army-
specific requirements were shown to appear primarily at
the bottom and top layers while the middle is typically
filled with generic components.
The committee assessed each of the building block
technologies and expressed its collective position on
whether the commercial marketplace would drive the
development of the technologies in a manner that would
meet the Army's requirements. The committee's conclu-
sions were offered as recommendations on whether the
Army should adopt commercial technology, adapt com-
mercial technology, or invest in producing its own
technology for each of the building blocks to meet Army
functional requirements.
A rec?~mng observation was that He Army should use
COTS technology wherever possible, even to the extent of
redefining requirements in order to do so. These tech-
nologies are available in the commercial world now, or
they will be available before the turn of the century. They
can be adopted or adapted rapidly and relatively easily
to many Army applications.
To illustrate how using commercial multimedia tech-
nologies could meet Army operational needs and func-
tional requirements, an operational example was given.
This example was followed by an analysis that indicated
some of the challenges that will have to be met in order
to achieve this futuristic state.
By following the approach described in this chapter
and applying the technologies as recommended, the
67
committee is confident that the Army can achieve a large
part of its vision of the future.
REFERENCES
Army Director, Louisiana Maneuvers Task Force. 1995. America's Army
of the 21st Century Force XXI. Fort Monroe, Va. January 15.
Comer, D. 1991. Internetworking with TCP/IP, Vol. 1: Principles,
Protocols, and Architecture. Second edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.:
Prentice Hall.
Department of the Army. 1993. Army Enterprise Strategy The Vision.
July 20.
Department of the Army. 1995. Department of the Army C4I Technical
Architecture. Version 3.1. March 31.
DISA (Defense Information Systems Agency). 1994. DoD Technical
Architecture for Information Management (TAFIM). Vol. 2, Techni-
cal Reference Model. June 30.
Frankel, M. S. 1994. The 1994 Army Science Board Recommended
Technical Architecture for the Digital Battlefield. Army Research,
Development and Acquisition Bulletin. Alexandria, Va.: HQ, U.S.
Army Material Command. November-December.
Frankel, M. S. (Chair), P. C. Dickinson, J. H. Cafarella, W. P. Cherry, G.
D. Godden, I. M. Kameny, W. J. Neal, T. P. Tona, M. B. Zimmerman,
D. C. Latham. 1995. Technical Information Architecture for Army
Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence. 1994 Sum-
mer Study. Washington, D.C.: Army Science Board. April.
International Standard ISO 7498,1990. Information Processing Systems,
Open Systems Interconnection: Basic Reference Model. In McGraw-
Hill's Compilation of Open Systems Standards, ed. H. C. Folts,
2878-3042. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
block technologies