AFMC Command News

Conference speakers say users' needs matter most

  • Published
  • By Chuck Paone
  • 66 ABW/PA
NEW CASTLE, N.H. --  Speakers at the sixth annual Network Centric Operations Conference held here Sept. 22 offered various perspectives on the pathways to achieving "net-centricity," but all agreed on the goal.

It's about better serving the people whose missions -- and sometimes lives -- depend on receiving timely and accurate information, they said.

Navy Rear Adm. Elizabeth Hight, the acting director of the Defense Information Services Agency, began her briefing with a chart that showed the "net" part of net-centricity crossed out. In its place, she'd inserted the word "user."

"Net-centricity isn't really about a network," she said. "It's about the user in the joint fight."

The conference was sponsored by the Patriot Roost Chapter of the Association of Old Crows and the Electronic Systems Center, whose commander, Lt. Gen. Ted F. Bowlds, delivered the keynote address. In it, he said making data accessible to those who need it is what matters most.

"Exposing the data that's out there to many, many people, and getting away from stove-piped systems and programs, is the way that the Air Force, the Department of Defense and the joint fight is going," he said.

He noted that the last 10 to 15 years have produced major information-sharing advances in the command and control of air operations. He also described a to-be state in which air operations center personnel will be able to count on more reach-back capability and on an even more standardized, less ad hoc operating environment.

Others presenters spoke about civil and commercial needs, as well as military ones.

Charlie Leader, the federal executive charged with leading the United States' Next Generation Air Transportation System, mentioned several enhancements he expects better networking to provide. He cited the insertion of data links, now commonly used in military aviation, into commercial cockpits as an important example.

"Flight plans have to be filed well in advance of takeoff, and very conservative estimates have to be made about where the weather is going to be at a time going forward," he said. "If you've got a data link, obviously you can change your flight plan in route, or at the last minute before leaving, based on accurately known conditions."

Simulations have shown that, on bad weather days, an average flight can save 10 minutes and 27 miles, he said. "That may not sound like a lot, but when you think of all the bad weather days and multiply that by all the flights in a given day, it really becomes a dramatic impact."

Several speakers discussed the costs associated with incorporating new technologies. Dave Tillotson, who currently serves as deputy chief of Warfighting and Integration and deputy chief information officer for the Air Force, proposed a cost-benefit analysis.

"If it's going triple or quadruple my costs but make my mission capability 10 times more effective, it may be worth doing," he said. "If it's going to cost me more and provide a 1 percent mission improvement, then I'm not so excited."

General Bowlds suggested a model of "constant experimentation." Just as individuals can try out freeware on their home computers, he'd like the Air Force and DOD to be able to try products out under near-operational conditions. This would not only help determine value, but also it would add a speedier alternative to an acquisition system that often fails to keep pace with the lightning speed of information technology advances.

Rich Byrne, a vice president within the MITRE Corporation's command and control center, picked up on that point with strong words of caution.

"Don't build last generation's products," he said. "Huge shifts (in technology) are happening right beneath our feet."

He spoke of "mash-ups" and other Internet-based tools that are combining information services in new ways, suggesting that these and other advances offer great potential for military users. Combing such commercial technology with tools conceived specifically for military use will offer even greater potential, he said.

Nearly all the speakers acknowledged that all this additional information sharing does create additional risk. The main question is how to deal with it.

"I don't think the answer is to build bigger walls," General Bowlds said. "I don't think you can build a wall high enough or thick enough to give yourself 100 percent assurance that you're going to be safe. It's going to happen, and just like with a military or kinetic engagement, when the first bullet or bomb drops, you don't throw up your hand and say, 'game over.' We're going to have to learn to fight through it."

He said U.S. warfighters may also need to decide what data, or information infrastructure, needs to be protected at all costs and what can be exposed more routinely, because in general, "more control means less sharing. "Some data will be like pawns, whereas other data will be treated like a queen or a king."