Concept to reality: implementing the architecture - Special Feature

As the Air Force transitions to a more expeditionary force, combat support command and control (CSC2) will have an essential role. The responsiveness required by today's operational forces can be achieved better through a CSC2 construct that is focused on creating operational effects. CSC2 is a subset of the overarching command and control (C2) within the operational planning and execution process, developing integrated operations and CSC2 processes. It is the means through which a designated commander plans, assesses, directs, and controls CS forces and resources to achieve operational effects. This article will lay the groundwork for taking the CSC2 operational architecture from a concept to a reality. The CSC2 concepts and an analysis of the required processes drive an assessment of required changes in doctrine, organization, training and education, materiel, leadership, and personnel (DOTMLP). Some of these changes are already underway and evolving from lessons learned in Operations Noble Anvil and Enduring Freedom.

To implement this work in a constructive fashion, we have set up an implementation team that has been patterned after the approach taken in the Chief's Logistics Review and Spares Campaign. It will be their charge to take the operational architecture; solicit comments from Air Force component commands, Air Staff, and major commands (MAJCOM); and integrate lessons learned from previous and ongoing operations to develop and refine an executable implementation plan. This plan will be time phased and focus on specific objectives. There will be a roadmap with associated metrics to indicate current status and progress toward capability-based goals. We intend to assess the progress at regular milestones. Where appropriate, we will leverage Air Force-wide efforts in command and control and communicate the status to MAJCOM commanders and at Corona conferences. All Air Force elements will be informed of the CSC2 implementation plan. In this article, I will briefly outline some of the specifics of our plan.

Changes in DOTMLP

The joint services framework for analyzing processes and implementing new concepts in both material and nonmaterial solutions has been applied to the CSC2 operational architecture. This framework, DOTMLP, is a tool to manage the evolutionary changes required to meet operational requirements and is designed to be a comprehensive assessment of all applicable aspects of the process or concept. We have used it to assess changes required to enable core CSC2 processes (Figure 1). From this analysis, we believe there are several broad areas in which change is required. It is imperative that CS planners become active participants in operations planning processes and that the CS capability is integrated into all planning cycles, from early campaign planning to air tasking orders. In all cases, we should be able to interject timely CS capability information in operationally relevant terms. We also must codify a standing organizational framework to facilitate the process of resource arbitration at various command levels when triggering events identify competing requirements. Further, we need to strengthen our communications processes between supporting and supported functions. Finally, we must further develop closed-loop feedback and control processes to incorporate execution results and forward-looking assessments into the CS decision cycle--often called CS battlespace awareness.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

These core CSC2 process changes will serve as guiding principles as we develop transition plans to implement a CSC2 operational architecture.

Doctrine

Part of the implementation plan will be to institutionalize best practices and evolve organizations through doctrine. A couple of examples of best practices are the logistics sustainability analysis process, validated during the preparations for Operation Iraqi Freedom and led by the Air Force Combat Support Center Agile Combat Expeditionary Support Analysis Team, and the centralized intermediate-level repair facility (CIRF) test. These planning, assessment, and execution processes are being written into doctrine to capture and institutionalize lessons learned. We also have initiated a review of current Air Force doctrine and policy and started revisions to reflect the core processes and required organizational framework for CSC2. Changes are already in work with the revision of Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 2-4, Combat Support. Further, as AFDD 2, Organization and Employment of Aerospace Power; AFDD 2-6, Air Mobility Operations; and AFDD 2-8, Command and Control, come up for revision, we will be deeply involved in incorporating revised CSC2 concepts into these documents as well. Air Force policy and procedures also will be written or modified in Air Force instructions in tactics, techniques, and procedures format, where appropriate, to further detail the doctrinal concepts.

Organization

The organizational framework is an important part of the implementation plan. We endorse the CSC2 nodal construct found in An Operational Architecture for Combat Support Execution Planning and Control, RAND Project Air Force Report MR-1536, 2002. A reader familiar with the report will notice that we have modified some of the names and grouped functions somewhat differently than those outlined in the report. The alignment of C2 responsibilities must be clearly defined and assigned to standard CS nodes.

Specific organizations will be designated to fulfill the responsibilities of each of the nodes. The organizational template allows for variations in organization assignments by theater, while retaining standard grouped responsibilities. It may serve as a guide to configure the C2 infrastructure, based on the current requirements. Along with the template, having standing CSC2 nodes that operate in both peacetime and wartime can ease the transition from daily operations to higher intensity operations and allow us to train and work the way we intend to fight.

We have made several decisions on the names for standing CSC2 organizations and the chains of communication between them and identified initial responsibilities and information flows to better facilitate integrated operations. Our TO-BE CSC2 architecture outlines changes in three key organizations: the commander, Air Force forces (COMAFFOR) operations support center (OSC), commodity control points, and Air Force Combat Support Center.

Within the MAJCOMs, operations support centers have evolved as a matter of necessity for handling day-to-day contingency support. Air Combat Command has an operations support center, United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) calls its organization the USAFE Theater Air Support Center, and Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) has the PACAF Operations Support Center. These organizations are at various stages of evolution, and we will work with each of the MAJCOMs to institutionalize the roles and responsibilities of combat support within their operations support centers. We have made progress in the spares area by establishing C2 capabilities in the regional supply squadrons. The C2 features of the regional support squadron can be accessed virtually by the OSC CS personnel on the A4 staff. As an example of the process of resource arbitration, there is a success story from Noble Anvil with the CIRFs in USAFE. CIRF operations in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Noble Anvil were directed from the regional support squadron, which, during Enduring Freedom and Noble Anvil, was acting as envisioned in the TO-BE architecture as a virtual component of the operations support center. As an illustration, the regional support squadron would direct the next serviceable asset repaired at the CIRFs to the unit that would best maximize the warfighting capability. CIRF operations will provide further capability as they become a standardized part of the CSC2 nodal construct with automated tools to prioritize repairs and distribute serviceable assets. Work is underway to formalize roles and responsibilities for the CIRFs as a part of the CSC2 organizational framework.

RAND's operational architecture report addresses organizations designed to manage the supply of resource commodities to supported forces. Commodity control points (called virtual inventory control points in the report) exist within different organizations, but their processes remain the same. According to maintenance concepts of operation, spares management is being organized along weapon system lines by a commodity control point at Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC). This function is being aligned with weapon system supply chain managers. Thus, supply chain managers will manage their resources until they cannot resolve competing demands. Then resource arbitration will be elevated to the supported operations support center or further to the Air Force Combat Support Center, if required. In practice, the Combat Support Center, located in the Pentagon, is making arbitration decisions for allocations among competing areas of responsibility and COMAFFORs when demands exceed supply. The Combat Support Center allocates resources in accordance with theater and global priorities. Some of these decisions may be aided by information systems that carry combatant commander priorities and priorities among the various combatant commanders. Some of this logic has been worked into the centralized Execution and Prioritization of Repair Support System algorithms being run at the AFMC commodity control point; that is, the AFMC Supply Management Division. In light of the global nature of air and space expeditionary forces, worldwide commitments, and limited resources, other commodities should be considered for management in the same manner.

Training

As organizations and their C2 responsibilities become institutionalized, they must be staffed with highly effective CSC2 personnel who have been purposefully developed through training, leadership, and education opportunities. This can be done through expanding CSC2 training objectives in operations-focused wargames and exercises. These training objectives should reinforce revised CSC2 doctrine and policy, as well as address recent C2 lessons learned. We will take advantage of joint services logistics wargames (for example, the Focused Logistics Wargame) to evaluate new concepts and expand training in tactical-level venues (for example, Eagle Flag). There will be an education working group, as part of the implementation team, to address the development and enhancement of formal education programs. The Advanced Maintenance and Munitions Officers School at Nellis AFB, Nevada, already has implemented significant C2 instruction in its curriculum. Additional opportunities will exist as we develop the Expeditionary Combat Support Executive Warrior Course and Advanced Logistics Readiness Officer Course and expand the Air Command and Staff College curriculum to include an Agile Combat Support specialized study course. We also can develop job performance aids for CS personnel who routinely step into one-deep positions at a numbered air force, a MAJCOM, or the Air Staff. The curriculum in both the operations and CS disciplines should be updated to address the impact of combat support in operations planning.

Material

The implementation of a responsive CSC2 operational architecture must include a review of the material, in this case information systems, required to support it. The CSC2 implementation effort will be fully integrated with our Future Logistics Enterprise and other CS enterprise architectures. We will develop systems and technical architecture views, as shown in Figure 2, that are Enterprise Architecture Initiative compliant.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Within the systems architecture will reside the CSC2 tools that provide responsive capability analysis and decision support for the resource arbitration process, CS execution feedback (equivalent of battle damage assessment for operators), and forward-looking assessments. These tools should strengthen communication channels between supporting and supported functions. Air Force CS functional communities will work together to integrate CSC2 architectures and the Future Logistics Enterprise to build the foundation for making combat support truly agile.

Leadership and Education

As indicated earlier, the key to actualizing this vision is leadership. The success of CSC2 will rest on the shoulders of those tasked to implement the concepts. Efforts toward implementing the concepts already have begun through the Air Staff-led implementation team. They cannot operate in a vacuum; every one of you touched by these processes has an obligation to help. At the Air Staff, we are well aware there is much to be done, and we appreciate the work RAND and others have done to help us start down this path.

Managing the Way Ahead

As discussed, achieving the required capabilities of the TO-BE CSC2 architecture will require significant changes in DOTMLP. We have chartered a formal change management team in the Air Force Planning, Doctrine, and Wargames Division to oversee and manage these changes. The process we will use is shown in Figure 3. We have designed this process to be open to input and will begin with working groups that have MAJCOM representatives to refine process changes contained in the operational architecture. Specific milestones and actions have been identified for these working groups, and they include validation and refinement of the TO-BE processes to ensure corporate buy-in of the end states. The end states will be used to establish specific plans for changing processes, organizational changes, doctrine, and system architectures. The ACS Colonels Advisory Group has representatives from across the Air Force and is chaired by the Chief, Planning, Doctrine, and Wargames Division. The Colonels Advisory Group will advise and direct the issue working groups and elevate appropriate decisions to the Executive Steering Group, which is composed of general officers and Senior Executive Service personnel. The Executive Steering Group, chaired by the Director of Logistics Readiness, with broad ACS representation, will review issues and recommendations before they are sent to the Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics for approval. As necessary or desired, actions and issues will be sent to the Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics for approval to present to Air Force senior leaders at Corona conferences or other forums. CSC2 is increasingly important for creating and sustaining Air Force capabilities. The implementation process will remain a high priority as we continue to build consensus, assign resources, and guide the implementation work groups toward our desired end state. It will take all of us to get there.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

Major General Sullivan

Major General Kevin J. Sullivan is Commander, Ogden Air Logistics Center, Air Force Materiel Command, Hill AFB, Utah. At the time of this study, he was Director of Logistics Readiness, Office of the Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff, Installations and Logistics. The directorate is responsible for organizing, training, and equipping 33,000 people worldwide in the Air Force logistics readiness career field and for ACS concepts and doctrine.

He was commissioned through the Air Force ROTC program following graduation from the University of Connecticut in 1974. He has held various assignments with Tactical Air Command, Strategic Air Command, Pacific Air Forces, US Air Forces in Europe, Air Force Materiel Command, and Headquarters Air Force. His responsibilities covered aircraft and munitions maintenance operations, management, and policies, as well as depot-level maintenance production and major weapon system acquisition activities.

COPYRIGHT 2003 U.S. Air Force, Logistics Management Agency
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group