the reality of simulation-based acquisition — and …product development programs with an...

The Reality of Simulation-Based Acquisition

121

TUTORIAL

THE REALITY OFSIMULATION-BASED ACQUISITION

— AND AN EXAMPLE OFU.S. MILITARY IMPLEMENTATION

Randy C. Zittel

Information technology is creating more realistic, more capable, and morediversified simulation tools. These tools have been applied to a range of ongoingproduct development programs with an increasing diversity of applications.Phenomenal reductions in development time, life-cycle costs, and improvedsystem quality are reported from these new opportunities.

In contrast to simply networking more and more computers and softwaretogether in ever-increasing capability, entirely new approaches are emerging.One overarching approach within the Department of Defense (DoD) issimulation-based acquisition (SBA). It is the proactive use of simulation andinformation technologies to rapidly advance all elements of the productdevelopment process. It is capturing more elements of industry every day andhas the potential to revolutionize product development all over again.

Here we will examine one powerful example of simulation-based acquisitionimplementation in the American and British Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft Program.

participation from industry, DoD has de-fined SBA as “an acquisition process inwhich DoD and industry are enabled byrobust, collaborative use of simulationtechnology that is integrated across acqui-sition phases and programs” (Modeling &Simulation Acquisition Council [MSAC],2000).

Literally hundreds of enterprises havedocumented improved performance: shor-tened development schedules, reduced

Natural market forces are driving allindustries to find better ways tocouple information technology and

thus improve business processes. Simu-lation technology is a large part of thisrevolution. The concept of SBA was begunin DoD in 1996 as an initiative to capital-ize on the increasing integration of infor-mation and simulation technologythroughout business and product devel-opment. In conjunction with major

Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE 2001 2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2001 to 00-00-2001

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE The Reality of Simulation-Based Acquisition - And an Example of U.S.Military Implementation

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Defense Systems Management College ,9820 Belvoir Road,Fort Belvoir,VA,22060-5565

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Acquisition Review Quarterly, Summer 2001

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as

Report (SAR)

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

12

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

Acquisition Review Quarterly — Summer 2001

122

cost, and improved system quality (Zittel,1999; Sanders, 1997). Reported improve-ments include a 3000 percent reductionin unique processes and a 50 percent re-duction in overall development time. Suchsignificant improvements have naturallystimulated the increased use of informa-tion and simulation technology to furtherreduce development and market costs.

Development programs in the U.S.military are increasingly implementing theconcepts of SBA, but to different degrees,depending on how far along they are intheir development, when they started, andhow aggressively they are approaching theconcept. Many have been trailblazers —leading the greater use of information andsimulation technology in new areas. Thisis one of the difficulties: to implementsuch technologies when they are matureenough to be helpful, but not so mature asto be obsolete and unsupportable. With in-formation technology, there is very little

gap betweenthese two ex-tremes. Olderprograms arefrequently con-strained by theneed for con-siderable in-vestment in ex-

isting (legacy) processes and supportingtools, and it becomes an issue of howmuch to change and when. The youngerprograms can better implement newertechnology at lower cost and benefit im-mediately, with less updating of legacysystems. This applies to all elements ofinformation technology, but its use can beexpensive. If not planned properly, it canbe far more expensive and time consum-ing than the more manual process, since

the complexity of advanced simulationsusually makes them a development projectin themselves. As they integrate, are in-terconnected, or use increases, the invest-ment and applications become more ex-tensive and obviously more complicated.The requirement to treat them as projectssupporting the primary development be-comes more vast and must be plannedand managed even more carefully.

WHAT IS SBA?

Table 1 shows the principles of SBAsummarized from the recent policy state-ment released by the DoD MSAC, the ex-ecutive simulation policy-planning groupfor the four military services (MSAC,2000).

The SBA vision is to increase opportu-nities for the Services to benefit from in-tegrated simulation technology. The prin-ciples are structured in relatively broadterms, with the application left to the spe-cific opportunities of the project. Withsimulation technologies, the opportunitiesto improve dramatically the development(acquisition) process are a strong incen-tive. Second, specific opportunities ofachieving earlier decisions across the sys-tems engineering structure of design,manufacturing, support, and utilization(employment) are expected. Third, theability to improve system performancewith better balance of total life-cycle orownership costs has been demonstrated,but the need to establish digital standardsacross the simulations is fundamental.

Fourth, simulation technology can nowachieve concurrent multiple system evalu-ations throughout the intended utilizationrange or mission area. Developing such

“The SBA visionis to increaseopportunities forthe Services tobenefit from inte-grated simulationtechnology.”


123

tools while achieving more diverse andextensive decisions requires better col-laboration of the massive and many typesof information, and this is achievedthrough reusability of simulations withgreater interoperability and capability.Finally, these technologies have achievedsuch great advances in computing powerthat we can now make these better-in-formed decisions more quickly — that is,in near real time. This sharing of simula-tion benefits from a foundation of prod-uct design information is called a distrib-uted product description. It is well knownhow capable computer-aided design andmanufacturing tools (CAD/CAM) havebecome (Zittel, 1999). These tools mustnow be based on a common technicalarchitecture using open data interchange

standards. The more they rely on the com-mercial standards, the more they will beable to use the broader range of toolsdeveloped in response to the massive mar-ket forces of the digital age. With reducedbudgets but increased system complexity,the military can no longer afford their ownunique one-of-a-kind tools, so commercialtechnology is the only option.

Figure 1 graphically shows the SBAprocess as an integration of informationand simulation technologies used through-out the systems engineering developmentprocesses. SBA is not a single stand-alonenew computer tool, but a tremendous blend-ing of previously stove-piped applications,along with new applications as the tech-nology advances, and where beneficial, isintegrated to benefit from a common data

• A dramatically improved acquisition process enabled by the application ofadvanced information technology (IT).

• Earlier and better informed decisions and reduced risk by more accuratecomprehensive assessments of design, manufacturing, support andemployment.

• The early optimization of system performance versus total ownership cost(TOC).

• Lower TOC and standards-based reuse of information and software tominimize their cost.

• More optimal program investments enabled by system of systems missionarea assessments.

• Enduring collaborative environments, reusable, interoperable tools andsupporting resources.

• Automated near real-time sharing of relevant information among all person-nel with a need to know (distributed product description, DPD) through acommon technical architecture; and open, preferably commercial, datainterchange standards.

Table 1. Principles of SBA


124

repository (distributed product descrip-tions). Although SBA is described by theprinciples listed earlier, it is very impor-tant to note that all such simulation tech-nology need not be integrated only into atotal collective. One major Army programis using more than 150 different simula-tions across its parallel activities and serialdevelopment life cycle. Some simulationsare mini-projects in themselves, address-ing issues of test, design, system employ-ment, etc., across such a wide spectrumthat it would be impossible to make allfully interoperable. However, an increas-ing number of simulations are being inte-grated to work together. Such a group iscalled a federation. Furthermore, SBA isnot only achieved when all principles arefully accomplished, but is evolutionary inits move toward achieving more capabili-ties, since these are not building blocks.

They are massive simulations currentlybeing used in a specific application, whichcan further benefit from more collectiveuse, but specific increased synergism thatcan be defined, planned for, and used atthe time needed in the development cycle.

Increasing SBA implementation bringsincreasing benefits — it’s not all or noneand never static, but dynamically evolv-ing exponentially, with advancing digitaltechnology. An extensive description ofSBA, including obstacles and implemen-tation potential, is documented in “ARoadmap for SBA,” from which the sevenprinciples were developed (Joint SBATask Force [JSBATF], 1998).

The report describes the variety of op-portunities, as well as the many obstaclesinherent in increased simulationinteroperability and connectivity. Theseprinciples describe the need for careful

Figure 1. Broad SBA Concepta

aFrom Frost (1999).


125

“The whole worldis going digital,but suffering underthis revolutionwhich violates allof yesterday’sbusiness andplanning practices.”

planning to identify where increased useof simulation is possible, what synergism,common database, and new uses can besought. So, with many applicationsalready achieved, but in a stove-pipedfashion, the dimensions of planning in-crease to using older simulations withnewer applications, some for short-termuse, some for longer-term use, and somefor multiple uses.

PLANNING IS EVERYTHING

Effective planning has become thegreatest requirement in using informationand simulation technology, with its con-tinuous upgrades, changing capabilitiesand quick obsolescence. The whole worldis going digital, but suffering under thisrevolution which violates all of yester-day’s business and planning practices.Simulation technology is just informationtechnology applied to replicating thephysical world and its physical laws in-stead of managing business information.(Of course, there are business simulations,such as cost and risk models, which fol-low economic laws instead of physicallaws. And, some are integrated with physi-cal simulations, so as to track cost whenmaterials change.) Information technolo-gies are capable of doing this, but the workculture, business practices, strategic plan-ning procedures, and corporate and gov-ernment policies are hobbling fasterimplementation. The digital revolution ismoving so fast that people can’t under-stand emerging opportunities fast enoughto capture them before new opportunitiesemerge, preempting the technology justbeginning to be understood. The speedwith which the Internet is evolving is

today’s classical example. Only computerexperts in narrow fields understand thespeed in which their field is changing, butthe business advantages are coming fromall of these individual computer technolo-gies changing, separately, collectively, andin near chaos.

This speed and our inability to captureit has been described by various digitalpioneers who forecast such changes. Suchforecasts predict computer processingpower is dou-bling every 18months; net-work utility isincreasing bythe power oftwo; communi-cations band-width for net-working anddata transfer is tripling; and, finally, newsimulation applications are emerging bya power of four, all approximately every18 months at constant cost. For thesereasons, we must have more effective,dynamic, and proactive planning tocapture these elements of a widening andmore diversified use of informationtechnologies.

TYPICAL PROGRAMS USING SBA

Some development programs that areimplementing elements of SBA to differ-ent degrees and provide good examplesare the American-British Joint StrikeFighter (JSF) aircraft, Crusader advancedself-propelled howitzer, Comanche recon-naissance and attack helicopter, Raptor F-22 tactical fighter, Virginia-class attacksubmarine, Navy advanced amphibious


126

transport ship (LPD-17), the advancedamphibious assault vehicle, Apache attackhelicopter, and the next-generation Navywarship (DD-21).

These programs are in different stagesof development, and therefore, in differ-ent stages of SBA implementation. TheF-22 and Comanche are well-establishedprograms in final design, having begunin the early 1980s. Their use must con-sider older simulations more. Youngerprograms may have fewer legacy systemsto consider, but earlier long-term plan-ning is now an opportunity for greatersimulation opportunities. But, can they beplan-ned for, to the extent envisioned?Only time will tell, as, young or old, eachhas been able to capture increasinglymore information and simulation technol-ogy capability from their respectivebeginnings.

In the same vein, commercial compa-nies such as Boeing Commercial Aircraft,Daimler-Chrysler Automobiles, IBM,Pfaltzgraff China, and Samsonite Luggageare a few of thousands that have re-sponded to market forces, promoting theincreasing development and incorporationof better and better simulation-based tools.

In this article we’ll focus on JSFdevelopment to demonstrate SBA.

SBA — NOT JUST TECHNOLOGY

It can be seen from the SBA principlesthat SBA is not just technology. People,policies, and processes must collectivelysupport this approach. It’s effectivelycoupling those that will bring a greaterspecific, defined benefit, enabling thedesigners, users, and supporting staffs todo more — exchanging information faster,

easier, and accurately, and with morepurpose. This can only be achieved if thefollowing elements change as well:

Culture. There must exist an evolvedacquisition culture of people familiar withthe advancing tools, new capabilities, andopportunities to do things faster, easier,and in newer ways. This requires continu-ous education at the pace of the chosentechnologies.

Process. An iterative design processwith faster electronic data exchange,allowing for rapid evaluation of multipledesign options, must be in place. Peoplemust be able to do this effectively with thetechnology provided, while continuallychanging and evolving.

Environment. An integrated advancedengineering and management enterpriseis essential. This requires collaborativedistributed engineering and effectiveseamless integration of the engineeringdisciplines. It may require an informa-tion data repository that achieves user-transparent web-style access (Frost, 1999).

PROVEN SIMULATIONS AREJUST THE BEGINNING

As the separate applications improve,so does the understanding, albeit at aslower rate. Forward-thinking managersare moving in this direction to capturemore capability faster, and SBA is theencompassing approach to it.

THE JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER

The JSF Aircraft is one of the newestmajor programs in DoD, and for thatreason, it has been designed specifically


127

to be an SBA pilot program. Because ofthe tremendous cost of building a com-pletely new aircraft, this program used

many nontraditional approaches. To un-derstand the far-reaching nature of thisdeparture is to understand what the JSF

The AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter sits ready to perform a QRF(Quick Reaction Force)


128

must do. It was intended from the begin-ning to evaluate cost against user perfor-mance constantly and earlier than ever. Itis developing a family of aircraft to sup-port five military services, and probablyis the last fighter aircraft ever to be builtin America. It is to be an immediate re-placement for three Navy carrier-capableaircraft, two Marine short-takeoff aircraft,three Air Force aircraft, and is to replacethe British Royal Navy Sea Harrier air-craft. This extensive list of aircraft capa-bility demands a complex ability to tradeoff performance and cost in order to pro-vide the most affordable aircraft in worldhistory.

Recognizing the massive set of require-ments, a technology development programwas conducted beforehand to define andadvance special technologies essential forJSF. The entire management process was

built around user involvement and theability to simulate the system, on a cam-paign level, long before final requirementswere locked in. Each of these elementsrequired a tremendous amount of planningand implementation. Just keeping all thetraditionalists from finalizing the require-ments was a major feat, and some claimeda counter-productive one. But that is whatJSF is all about — a dynamic develop-ment process that keeps the focus on life-time affordability while achieving moreaircraft capability and battle managementinformation processing than ever before,and by a single pilot, with no secondelectronics operator to assist.

JSF’s “continuum of modeling andsimulation (M&S) tools supporting thelife cycle of weapon system” operatethrough a Delphi process, Quality FunctionDeployment (QFD) analysis, constructive

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� !��

��"�#��

��" ��$#��

��$#��"% &�� !��

��

Figure 2. JSF Virtual Strike Warfare Environmentb

bFrom Faye (2000).


129

simulation, interactive digital simulations,and virtual environments, ultimately lead-ing to flight testing, training, and then arepeat of the process (Faye, 2000).

The JSF program carefully structuredits design process to use simulation atevery step to determine the next step, andin more collective ways than ever before.This required dozens of new ways to usesimulations: more interconnected andbetter understood than before. To under-stand these far-reaching opportunities, theJSF virtual strike warfare environment(VSWE) beautifully demonstrates thepower and complexity of SBA. VSWE isan evolving interoperable collection ofsimulations to allow for the balancing ofdifferent performance requirements in theharshest man-made environment in theworld.

Since the early 1990s, VSWE hasevolved into the interoperable series ofsimulations shown in Figure 2. From acentral simulation which generates thejoint information virtual scenarios, allother simulations had to provide their vir-tual representations to it, and respond toits activity. VSWE involves the completehierarchy of simulations, from engineer-ing to campaign wargame simulations.Virtual and constructive simulations areinvolved to achieve a broad range ofcapabilities, including:

• broad wargame activities;

• whether a group of JSF aircraft changethe battle as needed; and

• man-in-the-loop applications to deter-mine whether a single pilot can handleall the flying requirements while alsomanaging the battle information from

so many C4I (command, control, com-munication, computers, and intelli-gence) sources.

Around the central JIMM simulation,Figure 2 shows seven supporting simula-tions, all necessary to achieve the massiveamount of formerly disparate activitiesnow intended to be handled by a singlemachine.

Joint Interaction Mission Model(JIMM). This is the core simulation —basically all of the interactions from allthe other models run through here. Itprovides the mission scenarios.

Extended Air Defense Simulation(EADSIM). This simulation models thefriendly Command and Control (C2), in-cluding elec-tronic intelli-gence aircraft,u n m a n n e daerial vehicleswith infraredand Radio Fre-quency (RF)sensors, and communications networks. Itprocesses that data into the JSF cockpit.

Missile Defense Space Tool (MDST).This models the space-based infrared sat-ellite system as another source of off-air-craft info. This information is sent to theEADSIM, fused together with the othermodels’ information, and then sent intothe JSF aircraft.

Digital Integrated Air Defense Sys-tem (DIADS). The system models allenemy C2 radars and assigns incomingJSF going through this scenario to par-ticular surface-to-air missile (SAM) sites,as well as the SAM sites; their targettracking radars and the actual fly-outtrajectories of those SAM missiles.

“As the separateapplicationsimprove, so doesthe understanding,albeit at a slowerrate.”


130

Fighter Requirements EvaluationDemonstrator (FRED). Four such actualman-in-the-loop cockpit flight simulatorsprovided actual immersion of real pilots,from the three U.S. aerial services, includ-ing test and combat pilots. Cockpits wereequipped with heads-down displays, nor-mal flight information, plus moving situ-ational maps, radar images, targeting in-frared images and cockpit out-the-windowscreens of three different test ranges inCalifornia.

Multispectral Database (MsDB). Thissimulator provided the cockpit views out-the-window, as well as the visuals for theterrain, radio frequency and infraredsensors.

Air Force Mission Support System/Common Low Observable Auto Router(AFMSS/CLOAR). These pre-missionplanning simulations actually plan themission route to achieve the objective.

These separate simulations were physi-cally located around the United States, andnetworked requiring massive high-speedsecure data transfer. Some of the simula-tions were older legacy models establishedas the standard for modeling and evaluat-ing warfare activities. Many had to beupdated; others were redesigned to a morecommon architecture and interoperableinterfaces.

VSWE has now evolved to an advancedprocess unto itself. It is operated in three-day sessions of well-scripted activity.Seven sessions have been conducted sinceits inception, each more complicated thanbefore; the last was in June 2000 with thenext is scheduled for this year.

Currently both Lockheed Martin andBoeing are developing competing con-cepts, which have real prototypes in flighttesting. Next year, one will be selected to

go into final development for production.Therefore, planning for determining therequirements evaluating the campaign op-erations of the final design has begun. TheVSWE collection of simulations is inter-operable within a federation set of rulesof a common architecture. Some simula-tions are legacy Service-proven standardsfor certain military activities; others arenew with the JSF. This all must be plannedfor. JSF has other activities based oninteroperating simulations too numerousto discuss here, but the ability to compareand trade off performance against opera-tor capability and against life-cycle costis one.

As we move farther from stand-aloneinformation and simulation tools to inter-operable cohesive simulation suites andto federations of simulations — all coupledwith more aspects of information technol-ogy — SBA emerges as more achievable.“We must take bold and innovative stridesto encourage increased collaboration andleverage available and developing simu-lation technologies between DoD andindustry...In order to capitalize on ourcurrent efforts in this area, I have endorseda joint DoD/Industry initiative…to definea roadmap for SBA”(Gansler, 1998).

CONCLUSIONS

SBA is not a unique idea, but the natu-ral advancement of information and simu-lation technology. Global market forcesdrive corporations and governments to-ward realizing the very benefits these tech-nologies continue to capture. Those whosuccessfully embrace and manage themor (ideally) master them will benefit overtheir competitors.


131

Programs are following the successesto use more integrated simulations. Olderprograms are adding more integratedcapabilities while also upgrading still-valuable legacy systems to work moreseamlessly in the new environment.

Effective planning is obviously morecrucial than ever before. Understandingthe requirements and far-reaching com-

plexities of SBA, such as simulation-integrating architectures, long-rangeprogram planning, expert simulationpersonnel to plan for its development,trained program and industry personnel touse its enabling capabilities, and struc-tured iterative design processes to capturethe synergistic benefits are all vital to SBAimplementation.

Randy Zittel is a professor of systems engineering at the Defense SystemsManagement College. He is the director of the Advanced Systems EngineeringCourse and a lead for simulation-based acquisition curricula. Zittel is a retiredArmy officer and was a program manager for radiation-hardened microelectron-ics, the Very High Speed Integrated Circuit (VHSIC) and Strategic DefenseInitiative (SDI) with 18 years of acquisition experience. He was a co-author forthe American National Standards Institute/Environmental Impact Assessments(ANSI/EIA-632) national standard on systems engineering.

([email protected])


132

REFERENCES

Faye, P. (2000, July). SBA in the JointStrike Fighter program (presentation).Fort Belvoir: Defense SystemsManagement College.

Frost, R. (1999, June). Simulation basedacquisition — an ongoing look. Pro-ceedings of the 1999 INCOSESymposium.

Gansler, J. (1998, March 16). M&S indefense acquisition (DoD memoran-dum). Washington, DC: DoD.

Joint Simulation Based Acquisition TaskForce. (1998, December 8). Aroadmap for SBA. Washington, DC:DoD.

Modeling & Simulation AcquisitionCouncil (MSAC). (2000, August).Simulation based acquisition defini-tion. Washington, DC: DoD.

Sanders, P. (1997, October). Simulation-based acquisition — an effectiveaffordable mechanism for fieldingcomplex technologies. ProgramManager.

Zittel, R. C. (1999, June). Simulation-based (systems) engineering, or col-laborative-based acquisition. Pro-ceedings of the 1999 INCOSESymposium.

the reality of simulation-based acquisition — and …product development programs with an...

Documents