8/10/2019 JANUS 2

1/6

A Near Real-Time Tactical Land C4I Assessment Capability

Fred Bowden, Paul Gaertner and Peter Williams

Land Operations Division, Defence Science and Technology Organisation

P.O BOX 1500SALISBURY, SA 5108

Keywords:

C4I, synthetic environment, Army, wargame, simulation, modelling

ABSTRACT:The tactical land command, control, communications, computer and intelligence structure is essentially

an array of complex and dynamic systems of systems. In this paper we address a capability deficiency in the

identification and analysis of critical information requirements, flows and processes to support decision-making within

this tactical structure. We accomplish this by incorporating modelling, simulation and wargame technology to create anenvironment whereby military users, analysts and developers can interact to provide near real-time analysis of tactical

command control, communications, computer and intelligence systems, and combat tactics, techniques and procedures

during command post exercise activities. The usefulness of the study environment stems from its ability to provide acontrolled experiment setting to support the development and analysis of both current and future information

management and dissemination technologies aimed at assisting the tactical commanders decision-making process. We

demonstrate the environment via a battle group digitisation experiment.

1. Introduction

Subjective analysis at command post exercises (CPX)

has traditionally been the method used to study the

effectiveness of command, control, communications,

computer and intelligence (C4I) systems and structures.The deficiency in this type of analysis is that the results

are often not reproducible and the analysis is usually

unable to focus on the major determinants ofeffectiveness. Since the actions of a military C4I system

obviously exert strong influences on mission

accomplishment, the value of an objective method for

measuring the effectiveness of C4I functions and

processes is self-evident.

To aid in the provision of an objective effectivenesscapability, Land Operations Division (LOD) hassuccessfully completed the initial coupling of the Janus

brigade level wargame and elements of the real-world

Army tactical Battlefield Command Support System

(BCSS). The coupling, which was completed with the

aid of Information Technology Division, the BCSSProject Office, Command System Incorporated, Integra

and CelsiusTech Australia, provides the modelling and

simulation infrastructure of the LOD Tactical Land C4IAssessment Capability (TLCAC).

2. Tactical Land C4I Assessment

CapabilityThe TLCAC forms part of the analysis component of

the LOD Synthetic Environment Research Facility

(SERF). Its aim is to enhance Armys ability to supportthe development and implementation of future tactical

C4I systems. It does this by creating an environment

whereby military users, analysts and developers can

interact using real and experimental C4I infrastructureto address issues such as, insertion of new technology

(for example information systems, automation, decision

aids, communication links, etc), and changes to C4I

systems and organisational structures. Essentially, theTLCAC is able to assist in answering questions such as

What should be done to improve the effectiveness ofthe tactical headquarters (HQ)?

The Janus/BCSS coupling removes the requirementto manually transfer tactical unit locations from the

wargame to the Command Support Systems (CSS). This

realistically stimulates and stresses the C4I systembeing evaluated. The wargame provides an artificial

environment representing entities which commanders

control from their respective operational CSS terminals

(Figure 1). Information Technology DivisionsDistributed Interactive C3I Effectiveness (DICE)

simulation [1] acts as a GPS position server,

receiving tactical positions from the wargame andtransmitting them to the CSS terminals. The position

server has the task of arranging information from thewargame into a format consistent with that of the CSS

host. From the CSS host, information can be

automatically disseminated to CSS terminals.Commanders use the information presented to them via

their CSS terminals to assist in determining actions to

be taken. These actions are passed to wargameoperators acting as a lower/higher control organisation

under the control of a white umpire. Individual

commanders send their commands, either via radio orthe CSS, to operators who implement them in the

wargame (see Figure 1). Radio communications are

monitored using a Digital Speech Time Recorder(DSTR) which allows near real time analysis of the use

of up to two radio networks.

In summary, the TLCAC provides:

A capability that can be deployed at Brigade and

below level CPX activities, providing a mechanism

to automatically collect C4I and manoeuvre data,which can be quickly turned into information to

assist in after action reviews.

8/10/2019 JANUS 2

2/6

A reconfigurable environment that can be tailored

to emulate existing tactical C4I systems and form abasis for investigating implementations of new

concepts and technologies.

RADIO NET

BCSSLAN

CNR

Bde/BnHQ

RADIO NET

Janus LAN

BCSSLAN

LOCON

HICON

DSTR

ServerModified

BCSS

Janus Host

DICE

Position Server

EXCON

SIMCON

OPFOR

CGF

Comms

C2

Acoustic

Intell

Figure 1:TLCAC Configuration

An improved ability to constrain the level ofhuman participation within a particular study torelevant components of the command and staff

team and so reduce the extent of the deployment

requirement mentioned above. The eventual goal in

this area is to provide an appropriate closed model

of the C4I system under investigation and so permitmore complete quantification of performance

within any particular study.

An ability to interface military users and analysts tosimulation based activities within other application

areas such as training or mission planning.

Provide a controlled environment in which to runexperiments on C4I systems, both current and

future.

3. Performance Measures

Evaluation provides the most detailed insights into

information activities. The primary performancemeasures used for assessment of information activities

are in terms of time consumed and accuracy. Measures

of a systems behaviour must therefore be reduced tomeasures based on time, accuracy, or a combination

that may be interdependent. Time based measures are

usually quantitative, while accuracy measures may bequantitative and qualitative. It is important to realise

that time-based and accuracy-based measures often bear

an inverse relationship, implying a tradeoff betweenspeed of performance and accuracy of performance.

Speed of performance must be specified in terms of

minimum desired accuracy or completeness, and

accuracy measurements in terms of time available.

Therefore the specification of threshold or standards for

metrics must be referenced in terms of imposedconstraints.

The performance measures quantify the degree towhich an organisation or system meets its requirements.

Essentially, measures of effectiveness are quantities that

result from the comparison of the system and mission

attributes. They reflect the extent to which the system is

matched to the mission In order to assess theeffectiveness of an organisation, the organisations

measures of performance are compared to the

organisations requirements. Measures of effectivenessare quantities that result from this comparison. They

can be computed in the decision strategy space by

identifying all decision strategies that satisfy therequirements. In addition, the TLCAC includes a

rigorous set of methods and procedures for applying

measures to exercises, and for analysing the results.

These fall into three broad categories:

Processmeasures that describe how command staff

seek and use information, arrive at decisions, and

coordinate among themselves and with other

commands;

Performancemeasures that describe how well the

internal HQs processes are carried out in terms of

accuracy, timeliness, consistency, and completeness;and

Effectiveness measures that gauge whether or notHQs accomplishes it mission.

Applying the analysis capability to experiments andexercises result in the assignment of values to these

measures.

4. Application of TLCAC

Experimentation involves the testing of one or more

hypotheses by repeated trials or automated wargamesunder controlled conditions. Hypotheses are often

framed in terms of the operational benefits of some

change in a system that is tested through statisticalanalysis of the results. Exercises involve the resolution

of issues critical to an operational command or defence

agency. They cannot be replicated and their results areless generalised. Exercises however, provide richer

operational contexts, and can thereby bring to light

factors that need to be examined more carefully.

4.1 Battle group experiment

The TLCAC was demonstrated during a battle group

experiment held at LOD Salisbury Between August 23 -

- 27. The objective of the experiment was two-fold.

Firstly, to demonstrate a fully working assessmentcapability and to present it as an analysis tool. The

second was to gather data on the effect of battlefield

digitisation on a HQ.The laboratory networks together the Janus wargame

and BCSS within an electronic environment which isideal for data gathering. The wargame represents the

movement and actions of entities on the battlefield. It

generates positions of all the entities involved in thescenario being played, which is then relayed to the army

tactical Command Support System. Other aids, such as

Petri Nets, were incorporated to provide more detailedrealism to the experiment.

The BCSS(OPS) tool is the Australian Armys

Operations component of BCSS and it provides

Situational Awareness (SA) and messaging capabilitiesas well as simple intelligence functions. DICE is used to

8/10/2019 JANUS 2

3/6

link the Janus wargame and BCSS together so that they

may communicate and interact with each other. DICEalso has capability to represent a complete C4I

environment as described in [2].

There are a number of other tools linked to DICE thatenhanced the experiment. Some of the more important

tools are now considered.

The Collection Plan Management System (CPMS) isa tool that provides the commander with a surveillance

plan based on the information requirements and the

available resources.

A sound model was created using Petri nets (PN) to

simulate the ability of certain Blue units to detect theapproximate locations of certain Red forces by acoustic

detections. Though currently very crude, it is seen as a

very valuable asset and with some work in the futurewill attain a high level of fidelity.

Finally, a DICE Human Player screen was used to

inform the players of Blue detections of Red in Janus

and any detections made by the sound model. Thisinterface displayed formatted text messages that were

then input manually into BCSS(OPS).

4.2 Experiment Design

The experiment utilised a scenario based on the area

defence of a vital asset. A battle group (BG) was

deployed to protect the asset from possible attack. The

BG was divided into four combat teams (CT), onedeployed to the south of the asset (CT South), one to the

north (CT North), one protecting the asset (CT Asset)

and a quick reaction force (CT Actuate). The force wasarrayed with a concentration of observation posts,

berms, screens and sensors on the base perimeter. Away

from the perimeter the CTs aggressively patrolled while

static patrols and electronic sensors were used to controlapproaches to the base. CTs would deal with any enemy

in their Area of Operations. If the enemy force provedto be too large the CT was instructed to fix the enemyand wait for additional support from CT Actuate. The

problems facing the BG in each experiment would be

similar. Variations were largely the result of changes in

the Red force initial deployment and allowing relativelyunrestricted play by the Red commander.

The experiment was run over a five-day period. Two

variations of the BG HQs were considered so as toinvestigate the effect of digitisation (in this case the

inclusion of BCSS(OPS)) on a CT HQ. The variations

were:

All information is transmitted via radio and

recorded manually.

Blue force locations are updated automatically onthe BCSS(Ops) terminals. Blue detections of Red

force entities are placed manually on theBCSS(OPS) network.

The experiments and their associated success rate isas follows:

Monday Variation 2 (rehearsal)Tuesday Variation 1 (successful)

Wednesday Variation 2 (unsuccessful)

Thursday Variation 1 (successful)

Friday Variation 2 (successful)

The two sets of data gathered for Variation 1 allowed

the impact of external factors such as learning, boredom

or fatigue from running four very similar scenarios oversuch a short period of time, to be estimated.

4.3 Player Layout

The TLCAC experiment consisted of four interacting

cells. Each cell represented a different element of thereal C3I system. Figure 2 shows the links between the

four cells.

Figure 2: The four cells of the C4I system.The main focus of the experiment was CT South in

which the CT HQ was simulated with commandersplayed by Subject Matter Advisors (SMA), a radio

logger and a BCSS operator when necessary. CT

Souths link to lower level units on the battlefield camethrough the LOwer CONtrol cell (LOCON). While

links to higher commander came from HIgher CONtrol

(HICON). The links to LOCON and HICON were viaradio and for the second variation also via BCSS(OPS).

LOCON comprised a SMA, a Janus operator and two

BCSS(OPS) operators. The SMA had two roles. Thefirst required representing the elements of CT South.

This meant acting as the CTs low level elements on the

radio (and BCSS(OPS) for variation 2) to receivecommands and make reports. Commands were passed

to a Janus operator who implemented them as actions inJanus. To assist in this a BCSS(OPS) operator was also

place in LOCON to send reports and read commands

sent via this means. The other role of LOCON was toact as the other CTs, in particular CT Actuate if the

main body of the enemy force was located. The second

BCSS(OPS) operator watched the DICE human player

interface for Janus Blue detections of Red and outputsfrom the sound model, these were placed on the

BCSS(OPS) network.

HICON contained three personnel. The HICON cellhad access to the Red and Blue Janus pictures, a BCSS

terminal, the BG combat radio net and the CPMSsoftware. HICON was required to fill in gaps about out

of exercise information or if one cell was not receivingthe information they should. This also meant ensuring

that the Red player did not do anything that was

unrealistic. Another role of HICON was to liaisebetween all the other cells (including the observers and

data gatherers) to ensure the scenarios ran smoothly and

the goal of the experiment could be achieved, that is, to

act in an exercise controller capability. The final role ofHICON was to assist in the deployment of sensor assets

using the CPMS tool.

CTSouth

HICON

LOCON Red HQ

8/10/2019 JANUS 2

4/6

Opposing CT South and its support forces was the

Red force, commanded entirely through Janus by anSMA accompanied by a Janus operator.

4.4 Equipment Required

The equipment required to represent the C4I system

used in the experiment was as follows:

Four Janus terminals.

A Red terminal for the Red commander, a Blue

force LOCON terminal, and two terminals forHICON (displaying Red and Blue forces

separately).

Four BCSS terminals.

One for CT South, one for HICON and LOCONrequired two BCSS terminals.

DICE-BCSS computer.

A computer running a copy of BCSS that wasmodified to allow DICE to send it Blue positions.

Two DICE terminals.

Both a controller and a human player screen were

needed. The human player screen allowed for

detections of Red by Blue from Janus to be

displayed as well as messages from the SoundModel PN.

One CPMS terminal.

Five radio headsets.

Two separate radio nets were used in the

experiment. The first was the BG combat net (thehigher level net). Three radios were placed on this;

one each for the HICON (representing BG HQ),

CT South HQ and LOCON (CT Actuate HQ). Thesecond net, the CT South combat net required

radios to be placed in the CT South HQ and

LOCON (representing the lower level units).

Figure 3 and Figure 4 show how this equipment was

connected.

Figure 3: The communications links between cells.

Figure 4:Links between Janus, DICE and theremaining components.

4.5 Analysis Layout

The main advantage of running the above experiment

in TLCAC is that it provides a controlled environmentin which data could be gathered. In order to gather data

on the effect of BCSS(OPS) on a CT HQ and todemonstrate the capability for the TLCAC to be used as

an analysis tool, observers and data gatherers were usedduring the experiment to complement the data gathered

automatically. The observer layout is shown in Figure5.

The first area of interest was to observe the decision-

making of the CT South commander, which was doneboth remotely and locally throughout the experiment.

The second area of interest was to monitor the radio

communications between the different elements of theexperiment.

Local to CT South, observers were placed to directly

observe human factors aspects of the commanders

tasks and decisions. One of the foci of theseobservations was looking at how the commander used

the tools he had available to him. These types ofobservations are useful for a wide range of data

gathering. The types of information that can be

collected depend mostly on how the scenario isscripted. For example, individual resources can be

tracked and the amount of consideration a commander

gives to them can be seen from close proximity.Alternatively, the effects of stress or sleep deprivation

on decision-makers can be monitored by human factorsexperts.

JANUS SERVER

HICON JANUS

TERMINAL

(x2)

RED JANUS

TERMINAL

DICE

BLUE JANUS

TERMINAL

(LOCON)

CPMSSOUND

MODEL

HUMAN PLAYER

INTERFACEBCSS LOCON (x2)

BCSS HICONBCSS

CT SOUTH

HICON

LOCONCT South

Red HQ

CT South CNR

BG CNR

BCSS Links

Phone Link

8/10/2019 JANUS 2

5/6

Observations were also performed remotely. An

analysis bay was set up and video, audio and BCSSinformation were automatically piped to it. The video

cameras were placed in CT South focused on the

commander and his main source of SituationalAwareness (map or BCSS as appropriate). From the

observation room, C2 modellers could monitor the

workings of the CT HQ and confer with SMAs openlywithout interrupting the exercise. In addition, a

microphone was placed in the remote observation cell

to record comments from the SMAs.

The radio net communications were monitored from

a remote room by using a DSTR in conjunction withother observation software. A single data gatherer was

able to record information on the volume and

information type of all radio communications.

Figure 5:Observer layout for the TLCAC experiment.

Finally, automatic data logs were also stored at theend of each experiment. This included BCSS(OPS)

message logs, DICE message logs and Janus data.

Analysis tools have been used to look at this data inpost exercise analysis.

5. Future Work for the TLCAC

Although the BG experiment proved the TLCAC to

be operational and effective, it is currently far fromoptimal. Much work needs to be done in order to gain

the most benefit from the capability. The main areas ofconcern are now covered.

The current link to BCSS(OPS) is very limited. It

only allows Blue entity positions to be fed into thesystem. It is hoped that this interface can be enhanced

so that more information can be sent automatically into

BCSS(OPS). Of particular interest are Blue contactreports. This would further automate the representation

of lower level units during experiments reducing the

staff required to operate LOCON. It would also bedesirable to develop a link from BCSS(OPS) to DICE.

This would allow messages sent from BCSS to be

received by DICE nodes and sent to other entities

linked to DICE. This would allow artificial agents inDICE [3] to be used to represent entities with which

BCSS(OPS) communicates.

In addition to adding to the current BCSS(OPS) linkit is hoped that links can be made to other BCSS

modules including: BCSS(INT), BCSS(ENG) and

BCSS(GIS).Janus generates other information about the

battlefield that is not currently sent to DICE. Some of

the information generated by Janus that is being

considered to output includes:

Fall of indirect fire, including fall of fire, type offire and information about the entity that fired.

Artillery firing data, including the start and end of

artillery fire as well as the type of fire andinformation about the entity that fired.

Casualty reports, including current strength,

ammunition and fuel.

Reports on the elimination of entities. Thisinformation can be used to reflect the existence of

hulks on the battlefield.

Reports of obstacle detections.

Currently LODs land situation awareness (SA) tools

are the only advanced SA tools included in the TLCAC.

This interface will be further enhanced to allow for

more message types to be sent as well as allow the landSA tools to send information to DICE. Another aim is

to link the TLCAC to other advanced SA tools so that

the effect of different representations of situationalinformation on a HQ can be investigated.

The PN based sound model allows Blue units to

detect Red units acoustically when they come within a

defined range. Though it is still very crude andunrealistic, it is an example of how the TLCAC can

enhance the laboratory environment, making the

analysis more realistic. Improvements to the soundmodel will include allowing only certain types of units

to detect other certain types of units (for exampleinfantry detecting armour while armour can not detect

infantry) over differing distances. Detections ofweapons firing and explosions will also be added and

possibly the effects of the environment.

Clearly, as DICE is a central part of the TLCAC, anychanges to the information sent/received by systems

interfaced in the TLCAC, such as BCSS(OPS) and

Janus, will require changes to their DICE interfaces.

Some work is also being done to include acommunications model in the TLCAC. This model will

influence the flow of information between nodes both in

DICE (which can currently be done) and nodes outsideDICE, such as those in the BCSS network.

There is work being done to look at the use of

computer generated forces representing key decision-makers. This could be done by using the DICE PN or

intelligent agent capabilities.

Work is also planned to enhance the analysis tools

available as part of TLCAC. This includes enhancingthe current message analysis tools and introducing more

tools that can be used to aid in conducting observations.

A further capability of the TLCAC is to providemechanisms for exploiting the benefits offered from

BCSS BCSS

REMOTE

VIDEO/AUDIO/BCSS

OBSERVATIONS

CT SOUTH

REMOTE DSTR

OBSERVATIONS

Local

Observations

8/10/2019 JANUS 2

6/6

new technologies such as advanced systems concepts

and procedures.

6. Summary

Key decision-makers on the tactical battlefield are

already suffering from information overload. This is

likely to become dramatically worse with theintroduction of more capable sensors and information

technology. Therefore the information supplied to auser must also be managed and effectively presented.The benefits of the results of the TLCAC project are

a more flexible and rapid development of command and

control experiments by taking advantage of the object-

oriented model development paradigm. Other benefits

include: Wargaming environment useable for: training,

autonomous assessment of human generated

courses of action (COA) and testing algorithms andautomated command decision software

Reduction in the number of human-in-the-loop

controllers at command post exercises

7.References[1] Fred D.J. Bowden, Carsten Gabrisch and MikeDavies. C3I Systems Analysis Using The DistributedInteractive C3I Effectiveness (DICE) Simulation.

Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE International Conference

on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Orlando, Florida,

USA, October 12-15, 1997, pp. 4326-4331.[2] Carsten Gabrisch, Fred D.J. Bowden, Mike

Davies, Noel A. Haydon and Jim Winkles, Synthetic

Environment Support to Air Asset Visualisation ToolDevelopment, Proceedings of SimTect99, Melbourne,

Victoria, Australia, 1999, pp. 281-288.[3] Fred D.J. Bowden and Mike Davies.

Application of a Role-Based Methodology to Represent

Command and Control Processes Using Extended PetriNets. Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE International

Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Orlando,Florida, USA, October 12-15, 1997, pp. 4348-4353.

Author Biographies

Mr Fred BowdenFred Bowden completed his Bachelor of Science at

Murdoch University in 1989 majoring in Mathematics

and Physics. He joined DSTO in 1990. In 1993 Fred

completed a First Class Honours degree in Appliedmathematics at the University of Adelaide. He is

currently studying for a doctorate for which his area ofinterest is the application of extended Petri nets tomilitary Command, Control, Communications and

Intelligence systems. The focus of Freds work is in the

area of modelling and analysis of military Command,

Control, Communications and Intelligence systems

Dr Paul Gaertner

Paul Gaertner completed his PhD at the University of

South Australia in Mathematics. Paul is currentlyemployed as a Senior Research Scientist at DSTO

working on topics such as: tactical command and

control, intelligent agents, systems dynamics andmathematical optimisation. Dr Paul Gaertner has

worked as a consultant to the South Australian Research

and Development Institute (SARDI), and the USEnvironmental Protection Agency (US EPA).

Mr Peter Williams

Peter Williams graduated from the University of

Adelaide with majors in Applied and Pure Mathematicsand an Honours degree in Applied Mathematics (Fluid

Dynamics) in 1997. His most recent employment has

been at DSTO Salisbury (Land Operations Division)since April 1998. He has worked mostly on Command

and Control and the modelling of vegetation.