| IN THIS ISSUE |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| November 2000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TBMCS SmartBits 2000
Career Opportunities
In the last several months we have welcomed several new testers to 60 division. OSCM Chance Whipple, PNCM Bernie Phillips, EWCS TJ McCutcheon, AGC David Crook, OS2 Jennie Peterson and LCDR Al Pepper. We also commisioned a new Warrant Officer, CWO3 Bill Stocke.
We have also had LCDR Sue Hernandez and LT Rob Garcia transfer from OPTEVFOR to prime jobs continuing their Navy careers.
If you would like to join our team, see the list of career opportunities listed below.
The 69 th MORS Symposium will be held at the USNA in June 2001. The Code 64 analytical team has several projects that we will share with that symposium. We encourage all analysts and testesrs to consider presenting your project at next year's MORS symposium. Volunteering to coordinate a working group, tutorial, composite group or special session can also be a rewarding experience.
|
MISSION STATEMENT COMOPTEVFOR is the Navy's sole independent agent for operational test and evaluation, adding discipline to the Navy's acquisition process. For new or improved capabilities proposed for fleet use we will: - Conduct operational test and evaluation in a realistic environment against the anticipated threat. - Advise the Chief of Naval Operations on operational effectiveness and operational suitability and make recommendations for fleet introduction. - Develop and evaluate tactics and procedures |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Welcome to the second edition of The Evaluator. We had an oustanding response to the first edition. If you would like to be added, or know of someone who should be added, please follow the link below. Our list has grown greatly since the first edition.
The ancient Chinese curse had been visited upon us all, we do indeed live
in interesting times. The systems we have in test, or will shortly test
here at Code 60 in OPTEVFOR are designed to significantly improve the
operations of the fleet.
Theater Battle Management Core System (TBMCS) which completed a
Multi-service Operational Test and Evaluation (MOT&E) in July
significantly decreased the time required to develop the Air Tasking Order
(ATO) and Airspace Control Order (ACO) while improving the accuracy of
both products over those produced with the legacy Contingency Theater Air
Planning System (CTAPS). In spite of shortcomings identified in the
Interim Summary Report (ISR), it is clear that TBMCS provides greatly
increased capability and flexibility to the Joint Force Commander in the
planning and execution of the deep battle and theater air operations.
Automated Digital Network System (ADNS) will expand and improve the
Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) backbone,
essential for IT-21 services, to all ships and deployed units. The
performance of ADNS is key to the success of the Horizontal Integration
(HI) initiative, recently announced by the Commander, Space and Naval
Warfare Systems Command to provide a standardized infrastructure for each
deploying battle and amphibious ready group.
For the shore side, Navy and Marine Corps Intranet will be
revolutionary to the way we procure and field Information Technology (IT).
It also presents a wide variety of testing challenges to OPTEVFOR.
As we test each of these programs, we will keep needs of the fleet
first and foremost in accordance with our mission statement. Which brings
me to you, the individual reading this. In your job today, you probably
used a wide variety of systems. Many of them were of tremendous assistance
to you as you either trained to fight the enemy or worked to provide,
train, and equip forces to fight the enemy. However, there may have been
one or two systems that you spent more time and effort fighting than you
would have had available to deal with an enemy. You may have even asked
yourself "Who let this (provide your own adjectives here) system into the
fleet?" I would like to extend my personal invitation to you to join our
small, elite group of operational testers at Code 60. Several billets will
be opening in the next few months, they are described under "
COMOPTEVFOR Career Opportunities
." If you are interested, please drop me an
e-mail at
freyt@cotf.navy.mil
with the billet you are interested in and a brief biography.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CURRENT TESTING During Desert Storm a mix of independently developed planning tools were brought together to direct the air campaign using Air Tasking Orders (ATO). The combined tools were collectively known as the Contingency Theater Air Planning System (CTAPS). Although the air campaign was successful, it was readily apparent that CTAPS had major limitations. A USAF developed system, the US Navy was not equipped with the UHF-SHF satellite communications to receive the ATO electronically. Aircraft had to fly from the ship to Saudi Arabia nightly to receive the ATO. Soon after the conflict the ATO was made the joint standard and US Message Text Format 95 was created to accommodate ATO distribution. A new requirement was soon made for a new system that would not only help transform the Air Component Commander's war plan into a flyable air plan. Using USMTF 98 it would be usable by US forces worldwide, as well as our Allies. The new system would streamline CTAPS stovepipes, improve interfaces between tools and be more 'user' friendly.The Theater Battle Management Core System (TBMCS) Version 1.0.1 was designed to meet all of the legacy functions of CTAPS. Those are to nominate and prioritize targets, plan and disseminate the daily air battle plan, receive and parse the ABP, monitor and control ABP execution. Each subsequent software increment execution through the evolutionary acquisition process builds upon the functionality of previous releases and adds new and expanded capabilities. Additionally, COE/DII/COP standardization/compliance begins with Version 1 and is complete at Version 3 to facilitate migration to Global Command and Control System (GCCS). TBMCS was tested by a Combined Test Force (CTF), led by the Air Force with the Navy, Army and Marine Corps in support, under Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and Government Accounting Office (GAO) oversight. MOT &E 1 for TBMCS Version 1.0.1 was conducted from 29 November 1999 to 31 January 2000 at multiple sites including Hurlburt AFB ,Eglin AFB, Hanscom AFB, Langley AFB, SPAWAR at St. Juliens Creek VA, and aboard the USS George Washington. The test was terminated early due to several major system problems. TBMCS was determined to be Not Effective/Not Suitable by COMOPTEVFOR. Corrective actions were taken and subsequent testing was completed during a series of Government In-Plant/Field Development Tests between March – June of 2000. Developmental Test/Operational Test (DT/OT) Dry Run occurred 20 – 22 July 2000 in preparation for MOT&E 2 commencement 25 July after a Go/No GO decision on 24 July. MOT&E 2 for Version 1.0.1 was conducted from 25 – 31 July 2000 at multiple sites including Davis Monthan AFB, Eglin AFB, Colorado Springs CO, Hanscom AFB, Langley AFB, USMCAS Cherry Point, Hurlburt Field and aboard the command ship USS Coronado. The test was conducted as scheduled and determined to be Effective/Not Suitable. At the conclusion of the January MOT&E there was major concern for the TBMCS program survival. The CTF test agencies were unable to come to an agreement on the status of TBMCS and separate reports were written in accordance with CTF charter. Working groups were rapidly formed to evaluate the Deficiency Reports (DR) and categorize them for contractor fixes. Through the months of February to May 2000, extensive contractor/government/developmental testing was conducted to evaluate TBMCS for a July MOT&E. Due to limited fleet asset availability, the schedule was soon schedule driven, vice the agreed upon event driven, and the program risk level increased. As the test date approached all major obstacles were overcome and the test was conducted as scheduled. After the June MOT&E TBMCS was determined to be Effective/Not Suitable. The suitability determination was driven by three issues, outdated shipboard message handling servers, poor system documentation and lack of a sustained training plan. The deficiencies are currently being corrected and tested. Once all three deficiencies have been corrected a cut over date will be determined and TBMCS will be the system of record. Although TBMCS had its share of technical difficulties, it was also beset by documentation issues. TBMCS has no Operational Requirements Document(ORD), which in turn led to a Test and Evaluation Master Plan(TEMP) that did not cover all of the issues sufficiently. Many will argue that since TBMCS is an evolutionary acquisition program that these documents are not needed. Our experience indicated that a lack of these documents resulted in a Test Plan (TP) that did not adequately cover all critical areas of interest (COI's). This left many COIs to be answered in "the operators judgement", vice quantitative measures. Evolutionary acquisition has been deemed the wave of the future for software development. The challenge is going to be writing an ORD/TEMP that will cover all of the COIs, yet flexible enough to allow the rapid growth being seen in software development. The TBMCS CTF is currently engaged in writing a new TEMP for V1.0.3 and beyond. TBMCS has presented some unique challenges to the CTF. With the program under OSD and GAO oversight, TBMCS has suffered from setbacks encountered in all major software development. The TBMCS test team must adapt to the evolutionary acquisition plan and discover new ways to deal with "spiral development" and "timed releases". After the July MOT&E we found that the only way to succeed was to work together closely as a team. As these new challenges approach the CTF will again have to come together to find new ways to overcome them. TBMCS V1.0.1 is considered by all to be a quantum improvement over the current CTAPS software. Future versions will contain new functionality to aid even further in campaign planning. The next version of TBMCS, V1.0.2 is due to go to test in February 2001.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
SmartBits 2000 The increasing role of information technology in warfare and automated information systems presents new challenges to Operational Test Directors. In the past, general knowledge of system functionality coupled with a handful of technicians provided the Operational Test Director with the knowledge base needed to effectively test a system, however, in today's world of automated information systems this isn't enough.Today's market place offers a wide selection of network testing tools but one specifically proven to be a valuable tool when testing systems in an IT environment is Netcom Systems' SmartBits 2000. Smartbits 2000 has become an industry standard for measuring the performance limits of network devices and complex network configurations. The use of SmartBits technology provides system performance metrics (i.e. capacity/utilization, latency, packet loss, and throughput) that measure how a network is truly performing under varying load levels. This network operational data coupled with standard T&E critical operational issues help the Operational Test Director make better decisions regarding the suitability and effectiveness of proposed information systems.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CURRENT TESTING During Desert Storm a mix of independently developed planning tools were brought together to direct the air campaign using Air Tasking Orders (ATO). The combined tools were collectively known as the Contingency Theater Air Planning System (CTAPS). Although the air campaign was successful, it was readily apparent that CTAPS had major limitations. A USAF developed system, the US Navy was not equipped with the UHF-SHF satellite communications to receive the ATO electronically. Aircraft had to fly from the ship to Saudi Arabia nightly to receive the ATO. Soon after the conflict the ATO was made the joint standard and US Message Text Format 95 was created to accommodate ATO distribution. A new requirement was soon made for a new system that would not only help transform the Air Component Commander's war plan into a flyable air plan. Using USMTF 98 it would be usable by US forces worldwide, as well as our Allies. The new system would streamline CTAPS stovepipes, improve interfaces between tools and be more 'user' friendly.The Theater Battle Management Core System (TBMCS) Version 1.0.1 was designed to meet all of the legacy functions of CTAPS. Those are to nominate and prioritize targets, plan and disseminate the daily air battle plan, receive and parse the ABP, monitor and control ABP execution. Each subsequent software increment execution through the evolutionary acquisition process builds upon the functionality of previous releases and adds new and expanded capabilities. Additionally, COE/DII/COP standardization/compliance begins with Version 1 and is complete at Version 3 to facilitate migration to Global Command and Control System (GCCS). TBMCS was tested by a Combined Test Force (CTF), led by the Air Force with the Navy, Army and Marine Corps in support, under Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and Government Accounting Office (GAO) oversight. MOT &E 1 for TBMCS Version 1.0.1 was conducted from 29 November 1999 to 31 January 2000 at multiple sites including Hurlburt AFB ,Eglin AFB, Hanscom AFB, Langley AFB, SPAWAR at St. Juliens Creek VA, and aboard the USS George Washington. The test was terminated early due to several major system problems. TBMCS was determined to be Not Effective/Not Suitable by COMOPTEVFOR. Corrective actions were taken and subsequent testing was completed during a series of Government In-Plant/Field Development Tests between March – June of 2000. Developmental Test/Operational Test (DT/OT) Dry Run occurred 20 – 22 July 2000 in preparation for MOT&E 2 commencement 25 July after a Go/No GO decision on 24 July. MOT&E 2 for Version 1.0.1 was conducted from 25 – 31 July 2000 at multiple sites including Davis Monthan AFB, Eglin AFB, Colorado Springs CO, Hanscom AFB, Langley AFB, USMCAS Cherry Point, Hurlburt Field and aboard the command ship USS Coronado. The test was conducted as scheduled and determined to be Effective/Not Suitable. At the conclusion of the January MOT&E there was major concern for the TBMCS program survival. The CTF test agencies were unable to come to an agreement on the status of TBMCS and separate reports were written in accordance with CTF charter. Working groups were rapidly formed to evaluate the Deficiency Reports (DR) and categorize them for contractor fixes. Through the months of February to May 2000, extensive contractor/government/developmental testing was conducted to evaluate TBMCS for a July MOT&E. Due to limited fleet asset availability, the schedule was soon schedule driven, vice the agreed upon event driven, and the program risk level increased. As the test date approached all major obstacles were overcome and the test was conducted as scheduled. After the June MOT&E TBMCS was determined to be Effective/Not Suitable. The suitability determination was driven by three issues, outdated shipboard message handling servers, poor system documentation and lack of a sustained training plan. The deficiencies are currently being corrected and tested. Once all three deficiencies have been corrected a cut over date will be determined and TBMCS will be the system of record. Although TBMCS had its share of technical difficulties, it was also beset by documentation issues. TBMCS has no Operational Requirements Document(ORD), which in turn led to a Test and Evaluation Master Plan(TEMP) that did not cover all of the issues sufficiently. Many will argue that since TBMCS is an evolutionary acquisition program that these documents are not needed. Our experience indicated that a lack of these documents resulted in a Test Plan (TP) that did not adequately cover all critical areas of interest (COI's). This left many COIs to be answered in "the operators judgement", vice quantitative measures. Evolutionary acquisition has been deemed the wave of the future for software development. The challenge is going to be writing an ORD/TEMP that will cover all of the COIs, yet flexible enough to allow the rapid growth being seen in software development. The TBMCS CTF is currently engaged in writing a new TEMP for V1.0.3 and beyond. TBMCS has presented some unique challenges to the CTF. With the program under OSD and GAO oversight, TBMCS has suffered from setbacks encountered in all major software development. The TBMCS test team must adapt to the evolutionary acquisition plan and discover new ways to deal with "spiral development" and "timed releases". After the July MOT&E we found that the only way to succeed was to work together closely as a team. As these new challenges approach the CTF will again have to come together to find new ways to overcome them. TBMCS V1.0.1 is considered by all to be a quantum improvement over the current CTAPS software. Future versions will contain new functionality to aid even further in campaign planning. The next version of TBMCS, V1.0.2 is due to go to test in February 2001.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| COMOPTEVFOR Career Opportunities | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| To Subscribe and Unsubscribe | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To be added or removed from
the subscription mailing list, please send an e-mail to
subscribe
or
unsubscribe
.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| All information contained in this newsletter is accurate and valid as of the date of issue. |
COMOPTEVFOR
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||