Management Project:
1) New System Option:
Available software Jaroslav
The available software depends on the hardware selection. A PDA or laptop
seems reasonable at the battalion level. For each selection communication and operating
system are also very important characteristics to take under consideration for software.
 PDA: A hardened PDA is attractive for field-use thanks to its small form factor.
The small size keeps processor power at a minimal (roughly 200mhz). There are
currently no known applications for working linear optimizations on a PDA
platform, though many software applications have been written to keep track of
inventory or field data. Wireless communication technologies exist that would
enable communication with a distant organizational structure through various
avenues (local networking to a communications server, cellular adapters, or
satellite links).
o Linear optimization software would need to be custom written and
sufficiently limited in scope in order to perform in a timely manner on a
PDA. Complex portions of the software can reside on a more powerful
remote computer if less optimal solutions are acceptable in time intensive
scenarios.
o A custom data-input application can be written that could be dynamically
modified to suit the individual demands of different battalions. This
information can then be used in the optimization software locally on the
PDA, or remotely on another computer (see Communications below).
 Laptop/Tablet: Laptops sacrifice some flexibility for computing power.
Processors on high-end laptops are marginally lower performance than on a
standard desktop computer. Communication options through laptops remain
similar to PDA’s, but more specialized hardware exists to take advantage of a
wider assortment of infrastructures.
o Linear optimization software can be run on the laptop. Custom
applications or an off-the-shelf solutions are viable options since
computing power is analogous to a desktop computer.
o Similarly, input software can be custom built software or templates in
existing applications such as Microsoft Word or Excel.
 Communication: The ideal solution would be using a high-quality encryption
algorithm, such as SSH or PGP, to encrypt communications carried through
wireless media. Such software exists for both hardware choices here, and open
implementations of both exist which provide tested code bases and examples with
liberal licenses. Data files could be encrypted using either algorithm and
transmitted either through a secure communications line (SSH tunnel through
wireless link) or a physical transportation of a storage device (flash based memory
is recommended for its ruggedness).
o SSH is better suited to live communications, but existing libraries lack
communication solutions that would involve physically moving media.
o PGP would be a better solution in this example, and is already used to
encrypt and verify emails (similar in concept).
 Operating Systems: There are four main categories of operating systems that need
to be evaluated.
o Microsoft: This would be the most familiar setup for the target users. A
wealth of rebuilt software exists for the Windows platform, however all
operating systems from Microsoft have regular, serious security flaws
which may render it an unacceptable choice for sensitive information.
o Apple: Also familiar, the most recent operating system from Apple, OS
X, currently provides several security features which effectively protect
sensitive data with little to no extra effort. The limitation of this choice
would be the limited hardware choices and a smaller set of existing
software to choose from.
o Linux: Probably the least familiar of the three major desktop operating
systems, Linux offers the best security features of the three options. The
cost of Linux exists in the setup and maintenance of the software to
perform the specified tasks. Limited software currently exists, but the
majority of optimization and data entry functionality would need to be
custom written.
o Other: There are minor operating systems available for PDAs. These
vary according to manufacturer of the hardware. For each of them the
functionality of all the components needs to be developed.
Training Requirements
The training requirements for a completely new system are extremely extensive. Not
only will the primary users have to be trained, but so will secondary users, and
Information Systems support personnel. The training requirements for completely new
system of this nature would range from 2-3 days for the secondary users to 1-1.5 weeks
for the primary users and support personnel.
Interface/Interoperability with other software Jaroslav
Depending on hardware selection, an array of existing software packages are available
for all aspects of this project.
 GAMS, as well as other commercial optimization software components are
readily available for use. The disadvantages of these systems range from a
limited ability to interface with other programs, expensive per-user licensing, and
increased processor requirements as a result of the general nature of their problem
solving.
 Data entry can be handled by various applications. The Microsoft Office suit of
software provides the ability to develop custom forms, templates, and even
program modules that can perform custom calculations. Analogous systems exist
for Macintosh and Linux with varying levels of custom software development
needed.
 Communications would be the most difficult to incorporate securely with other
applications. The simplest solution is to offer a separate application to handle all
of the communication needs. A simple file format, such as encoding the
information as XML, would allow almost any options for communication to be
viable.
Transmission of data Heather/Scott/Kathy
Costs Group
Army projects often reach astronomical levels of cost during their induction, fielding and
implementation within units. It is therefore unlikely that the costs associated with a
technology of this kind be considered too high. For example, CSSCS program costs were
increased by 21.7% in December of 1998 from $324.6 to $395.1 million. Additionally,
during the production phase of the Force XXI Army initiative in May 2001, TRW, Inc.,
just one of the system producers, was awarded a contract to produce FBCB2 systems for
the Army at an estimated cumulative total of $45,000,000.
Costs associated with our two options are likely to be vastly different. In the first option,
the introduction of a new technology on new platforms, costs are likely to be competative
with those associated with the Army’s Force XXI initiative. If, however, the choice is
made to piggyback our technology on the existing Force XXI systems, costs would be
significantly lower focusing primarily on fixing communications issues between the
systems, adding the necessary software capabilities and on training personnel on the
system upgrades.
System Durability Kathy
The durability of the system is strongly related to the hardware choices. With smaller
and more flexible devices more protection is needed. Larger devices are easier to be
hardened, but the cost to flexibility may exclude these choices.
 Desktop:
 Laptop/Tablet:
 PDA:
Levels of Implementation within organization Heather/Scott
The level at which this technology should be implemented depends on the method of
pursuit. If optimization is chosen, the lowest level at which it should be incorporated is
brigade-level, in the Forward Support Battalion where brigade logistics flow is
controlled. Levels subordinate to the brigade such as battalion and company would be
equipped with a means of transmitting logistics requests and receiving updated statuses
but would not implement optimization at their organizations.
However, since demand survey results show a need for logistics tracking and not a need
for optimization of supplies, the software should be employed at all levels from the
individual vehicle console to the company commander where data would be compiled
and sent up to battalion, brigade, etc… In this manner, consoles would be continuously
updated with supply requests. Organizations controlling those items would then have the
ability to review and comply with the need or respond that the request couldn’t be
supported by their organization and what further action was being taken in near real-time.
As parts were sent forward to meet requests, systems would be updated, thereby allowing
constant oversight of the supply to the customer.
Use as a planning tool or can we make it dynamic (time sensitive) Scott
The current optimization technology exists solely as a planning tool and is not stochastic.
The model can be altered to become dynamic, but at great expense to the solving time
and complexity of the optimization. In a highly stochastic, wartime situation however, a
flexible model would be most desirable and applicable. As such, the current model can
be, and should be, improved to take time into account. From a feasibility aspect the most
effective way to accomplish this task would be to treat time as discrete blocks of time,
such as the common 24 hour replenishment periods.
Solving Time Jaroslav
I need more information about the optimization algorithm to accurately give feedback
about this point. In general, desktop computers and powerful servers would be the
quickest, laptops would be slightly weaker, and PDAs would be the slowest and most
limited in terms of solving the problem.
User Interface Jaroslav/Kathy
The interface is very dependant on the hardware selection. All selections below should
provide a streamlined interface that combines the data entry, communication, and
optimizations in a simple process preferably in a single application.
 Desktop: An interface for this environment can take advantage of the fact that the
users would be stationary and seated for use. A standard application similar to
other popular systems may be the best option. Positive transfer and system-wide
conformity are features that are easy to achieve and can help greatly with the
usability of the software.
 Laptop/Tablet: The semi-mobility of these solutions presents a challenge. In the
case of a laptop keyboard navigation provides a distinct advantage over a track
pad, mouse-nub, or external mouse when the user has neither the location or the
time to settle down. A tablet can take advantage of its direct input technology and
should minimize any UI features that would require anything other than penbased input.
 PDA: These highly mobile devices lack mice or keyboards. The only real input
method is the pen-based direct input, and interfaces need to provide the ability to
navigate the entire process without a keyboard or mouse. In order to limit
scrolling on the smaller screen, the interface should display relevant options
(future input options are based on past inputs, e.g. if the user selects a certain
battalion, ammunition that battalion can be hidden) where possible while allowing
access to all options through advanced interfaces, and the interface should
segment the process into steps.
2) Existing System Option:
Course of Action Analysis Software/ Decision Support Tools (Combined Arms
and Services Staff School) Heather
Existing decision support tools are complex making them not user friendly at soldierlevel. Although they can be implemented by ORSA officers, it is likely they won’t
solve the existing problems at Brigade-level and below. This results from the fact
that one ORSA officer is assigned per division, therefore databases would have to be
compiled by the user, placing weights on those items that are considered of greater
importance. It would be difficult to get an unbiased viewpoint and it is quite possible
similar problems to the IASEB case would be realized during and after their use.
Combat Service Support Control System (CSSCS)
Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below (FBCB2)
Mission of CSSCS:
"Provide timely situational awareness and force projection information to support
current operations and sustain future operations as a key logistical enabler for the
Army Transformation."
Description of CSSCS:
"The Combat Service Support Control System (CSSCS) is a decision-support system
that assists commanders and their staffs in planning and executing CSS operations.
The CSSCS will rapidly collect, store, analyze, and disseminate critical logistics,
medical, and personnel information."
Mission of FBCB2:
"Provide battle command and situational awareness information from brigade level
down to the soldier/platform level."
Description of FBCB2:
"The Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below (FBCB2) forms the principle
digital command and control system for the Army at brigade levels and below. …
The system features the interconnection of platforms through a communications
infrastructure called the Tactical Internet to transmit situational awareness data."
The results from the Demand survey found that the problem was not necessarily
in the optimization of the distributed logistics, but in the actual process of
distribution. The general notes outlined the need for a networked battlefield and for
the logisticians to have the same communications capabilities as the warfighter. The
Army is currently working towards networking and digitizing the battlefield through
the Force XXI initiative. Both the FBCB2 and CSSCS systems are part of this
program. Both systems work towards sharing information across all levels in order to
maintain situational awareness and increase communications.
The problem lies in the fact that the warfighter has the FBCB2 system for tactical
operations and the logistician has the CSSCS for logistical and support operations.
While both systems were extremely extensive and forward reaching, they are not
currently linked. As such, the warfighter requesting logistics does not see the same
picture as the logistician supporting him, and vice versa. This fact became evident in
the Demand Survey where the common warfighter comment was, "All logistical
nodes need to be outfitted with FBCB2." An additional complication arises in the
target ranks for these two systems. The FBCB2 is currently employed by only
Brigade and below units, while the CSSCS is for Brigade and above units, focusing
mostly on Division, Corps, and Echelons Above Corps units.
These two problems show why the response to Survey was to fix the process over
the long term and not to apply a quick fix such as optimization. While the Feasibility
team outlined an entirely new system above, we also present here a second option.
The current FBCB2 and CSSCS systems could be adjusted and linked to solve the
long term, process problem the Army currently faces. The Army does have plans to
eventually link the two systems, but the option to use existing hardware and software
explores taking this course of action now, before the next conflict.
The FBCB2 and CSSCS systems can both be adjusted to network with each other
allowing units at all levels to network and communicate. In addition to the tactical
screens that the FBCB2 has, new, logistical functions can be added through coding.
Likewise the same can be done with the CSSCS for strategic and GPS information on
tactical units. This change would require little additional cost proportional to the
current budgets of XXXX for FBCB2 and XXXX for CSSCS. This upgrade would
also allow the FBCB2 users to review their request's status, receive confirmation of
the request, and track delivery of their supplies as they requested in the survey results.
Several feasibility issues are eliminated by this option. For example, units are
currently being outfitted with the hardware to run their respective system. This
hardware has already been field tested and accepted by the Army, removing a major
step of implantation. Furthermore, the user interface has proven usable and adaptable
for the Army's uses, meeting open system standards for interoperability. Lastly, the
system management and communications planning have already been established for
wartime use. This planning includes "loading network initialization data, maps,
cryptographic keys, ..., laying out networks, making frequency assignments, and
specifying address/circuit assignments."
One remaining issue while discussing the option of modifying an existing system
is that of training. All users and systems maintenance personnel receive 24-35 hours
of training on the FBCB2 as part of their required Army training. Should an
additional feature be added, the necessary training would only increase by several
hours which could easily be incorporated into the training schedule.
Involvement of Functional Area 49 (Operations Research/Systems Analysis) officers Heather
The Operations Research/Systems Analysis (ORSA) officer introduces quantitative
and qualitative analysis to the processes used throughout the military. The kinds of
techniques ORSA officers apply include probability models, statistical inference,
simulations, optimization, economic models and operational experience. One of the
key functions these officers contribute to the US Army is resource management
during wartime operations. These officers are usually employed at Division-level and
above and are tasked to use the aforementioned methods to underpin decisions made
by leaders and managers within the Army. Based on this skill set, these officers can
facilitate the introduction of new systems to optimize and or track logistics in the
military.
We already know that senior leadership, including the Army’s senior logistics officer,
recognizes the need for change in logistics operations during wartime. Once The
Army Science Board decides the method to pursue, ORSA officers are likely to be
tasked to conduct research regarding the efficiency of existing logistics distribution
systems and to model new technologies to determine which best supports the needs of
the Armed Forces. Introduction of our findings to The Army Science Board may
result in their exploration as feasible changes to the Army’s existing logistics model
for wartime.