An Operational Architecture for Improving Air Force Command and Control Through Enhanced Agile Combat Support Planning, Execution, Monitoring, and Control Processes

An Operational Architecture for Improving Air Force Command and Control Through Enhanced Agile Combat Support Planning, Execution, Monitoring, and Control Processes

Kristin F. Lynch
John G. Drew
Robert S. Tripp
Daniel M. Romano
Jin Woo Yi
Amy L. Maletic
Copyright Date: 2014
Published by: RAND Corporation
Pages: 128
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt14bs2k0
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    An Operational Architecture for Improving Air Force Command and Control Through Enhanced Agile Combat Support Planning, Execution, Monitoring, and Control Processes
    Book Description:

    Currently, agile combat support (ACS) planning, execution, monitoring, and control processes are poorly integrated with operational planning processes and have little ability to show how resource allocation decisions would impact planned and potential operations. This report presents a refined architecture based on previous RAND-developed operational architectures that depicts how, in the next 4–5 years, enhanced ACS processes could be integrated into Air Force command and control to provide senior leaders with enterprise ACS capability and constraint information.

    eISBN: 978-0-8330-9003-4
    Subjects: History, Technology

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-ii)
  2. Preface
    (pp. iii-vi)
  3. Table of Contents
    (pp. vii-viii)
  4. Figures
    (pp. ix-x)
  5. Tables
    (pp. xi-xii)
  6. Summary
    (pp. xiii-xxii)
  7. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xxiii-xxiv)
  8. Abbreviations
    (pp. xxv-xxxii)
  9. 1. Introduction, Background, and Motivation
    (pp. 1-4)

    Air Force Doctrine Document (AFDD) 1 states that command and control (C2) of air, space, and cyber power is a core function of the United States Air Force. C2 enables the United States to conduct operations that accomplish specific military objectives. Agile combat support (ACS),¹⁸ another core function of the Air Force, plays an integral role in C2. Often referred to asagile combat support command and control(ACS C2), the planning, execution, monitoring, and control of ACS processes are an integral part of Air Force and Joint C2. Prior Project AIR FORCE (PAF) research¹⁹ found that ACS planning, execution,...

  10. 2. Research Approach and Architectural Framework
    (pp. 5-16)

    In this chapter, we present the research approach used in this analysis. We then discuss the framework used to develop and present this operational architecture.

    There were two key aspects to our research approach for developing the architecture. First, we began this analysis by evaluating previous RAND-developed operational architectures from 2002 and 2006. We reviewed the recommendations of the previous analyses and evaluated Air Force progress in addressing the identified issues. Second, we evaluated how changes in the operational and fiscal environment, including changes in planning guidance and transformational initiatives, affect ACS to determine the applicability of the 2002 and...

  11. 3. The Vision and Scope of the Operational Architecture
    (pp. 17-28)

    The DoD Integrated Architecture Panel definesarchitectureas “the structure of components, their relationships, and the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution over time.”⁴⁷ This analysis develops an operational architecture that includes the inputs, processes, tasks, and outputs for many of the 26 ACS functional capabilities needed to support operations, including training and readiness preparation, conventional contingencies, and irregular warfare. ⁴⁸ We first present the vision this architecture defines, which is broader than just the Air Force. Since we focus on the Air Force in this analysis, we then outline the architecture’s scope and present the products of...

  12. 4. Operational Architecture Products
    (pp. 29-38)

    In this chapter, we discuss in detail the information presented in the OV-5 architecture products we developed during the course of this analysis. We worked with many key stakeholders (see Table 2.1) to document and vet the processes in several functional areas. As mentioned previously, we present the OV-5 architecture both as a Microsoft Visio diagram (shown in Figure 3.3) and in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet format. The Visio diagram is a visual depiction of the overall process. The details of what tasks are required within individual processes and what information is being inputted or outputted are contained in the...

  13. 5. Gaps and Shortfalls Identified Using the Operational Architecture and Recommended Strategies to Enhance Command and Control
    (pp. 39-58)

    This vision for how the Air Force C2 system could work in the future has been well vetted with senior Air Force leadership; however, the current ACS system does not fully support the vision. Using the updated architecture developed as part of this analysis, we performed a DOTMLPF analysis to uncover any gaps or shortfalls that would prohibit achievement of the vision. There are gaps and shortfalls in many areas. This chapter discusses the main process gap, the inability to provide an enterprise assessment of combat support capabilities and constraints, as well as other associated shortfalls in process, doctrine, guidance...

  14. 6. Conclusions and Recommendations
    (pp. 59-60)

    This document defines an operational architecture that maps C2 processes, integrating ACS planning, execution, monitoring, and control across the strategic and operational levels of operations. We document processes at C2 nodes from the President and SECDEF to the unit level and sources of supply. We also assess these nodes across the operational activities, from readiness preparation through planning, deployment, employment, sustainment, and reconstitution. The focus of this analysis is on how enhanced ACS processes can be integrated within the Air Force and joint C2 enterprise. The resulting architecture provides a vision for enhanced C2. We then use that architecture to...

  15. Appendix A. Operational Architecture for Mobility Air Force Maintenance
    (pp. 61-68)
  16. Appendix B. Annotated Bibliography
    (pp. 69-88)
  17. Bibliography
    (pp. 89-96)