Developing the Armys Battle Management Language Prototype Environment 04SSIW115

1
Developing the Armys Battle Management Language
Prototype Environment04S-SIW-115
2
What Is Battle Management Language (BML)?

• BML is the unambiguous language used to
• Command and control forces and equipment
  conducting military operations, and
• To provide for situational awareness and a
  shared, common operational picture.

3
BML References

• 01F-SIW-067
• Standardizing Battle Management Language - A
  Vital Move Towards the Army Transformation
• Hieb, Kleiner, Carey, Brown
• 02E-SIW-005
• Standardizing Battle Management Language
  Facilitating Coalition Interoperability
• Carey, Kleiner, Hieb, Brown
• 2002 Command and Control Research Technology
  Symposium (CCRTS)
• Development of a C2 Standard of Task
  Representation for C4ISR Systems, Simulations and
  Robotics Battle Management Language
• Carey, Kleiner, Hieb, Brown
• 1998 Winter Simulation Conference
• Communication of Mission-Type Orders to Virtual
  Commanders
• Carey, Kleiner, Beach
• Other papers available in 2004

4
BML Scope
BML Order
C4I
C4I
Simulation
BML Situational Awareness Information
Robotic Forces
5
Past BMLs by Simulations

• Eagle Army Simulation BML and the Command
  Control Simulation Interface Language (CCSIL)
• Very Structured (Good!)
• Need to build on their experience
• Required detailed knowledge of what was needed
  by the simulation
• Not familiar or friendly to the operational user
• Not standardized, specific to application/simulat
  ion
• Aligned to Doctrine, but not to C4I (e.g., JCDB)

But...
6
BML Concept
Data/Object Models
Messages
Doctrine
Validated Doctrinal Terms
XML/ Data Replication
C4I Data Model
BML
7
Essence of Order Resides in the 5Ws
The 5 Ws
WHO which unit is to accomplish the task. -
Normally identified by a Unit_ID. - When
Unit_ID is in doubt, could be identified by
location. - Could be identified by ROLE
(Main Effort, Security Force, etc.)
HOW In mission type orders, how to do a task is
left up to the subordinate. The general how
for the order itself is found in the context of
the Commanders Intent and the Concept of
Operations.
WHAT the task to be accomplished. - Could
be either an operation or ARTEP task. -
Selection maybe dependent on how much the higher
commander wants to limit his subordinate.
The more specific the task the less it
conforms to mission type.
WHERE the location for accomplishing the
task. - Lat/Long, UTM, MGRS, etc. -
Terrain_Feature_ID, Graphic_Control_Measure_ID
WHEN the timing of the task. - Control type
(AT a certain time, NLT a certain time,
EVENT_PLUS_T (D1, H2, etc.) - Parameters
(DTG, Event, Time, Unit_ID, etc..)
WHY the reason for accomplishing the task.
- Purpose term. (Attrit, Defeat, Destroy,
Contain, Clear, etc..) - Parameters
(dependent on the term but required for
clarification Destroy what? Enemy Force,
Terrain Feature)
8
What Code (What_Cd)

• What_Cd is the set of all possible tasks (T) that
  can be assigned to military forces as defined by
  doctrinal manuals.
• A task, T, may be
• An operation as defined by the UJTL (attack,
  defend, etc.),
• A tactical task as defined by FM 101-5-1 (secure,
  clear, seize, etc.), or
• An ARTEP-MTP (AUTL, AFTL, UNTL) task (conduct
  tactical movement, conduct tactical road march,
  occupy an assembly area, etc.)

9
What_CD Who Relationship
Who (Unit) UnitType_Echelon
What_Cd Tasks T1- Ti
X
Ti
10
The Army/SIMCI BML Proof of Principle (PoP)

• BML PoP presented in February 2003 using the
  following components
• BML Graphical User Interface (GUI)
• Develops Digitized Operations Order
• Combined Arms Planning and Execution monitoring
  System (CAPES)
• C4I Component for COA Development
• Multi-Source Database (MSDB)
• Army Standard Database (JCDB) with extensions
  for BML
• OneSAF Testbed (MS Component for COAA)

11
BML GUI Header Information
12
5 W Format in BML GUI
Who
13
BML GUI Task Editor
14
What is the MSDB?

• MSDB Multi-Source Database
• Customized version of the Joint Common Database
  (JCDB)
• Uses existing entities and relationships where
  appropriate
• New entities, attributes, and relationships
  added
• Embeds the BML within the JCDB
• 826 Total tables
• 2 existing tables modified slightly
• 111 new tables added to implement BML

15
The 5 Ws in the MSDB
bml2_plan_activity_assc activity_id doc_indx doc_i
nput plan_version activity_cd_id
bml2_activity activity_id org_id org_input_id wha
t_cd_id when_id where_id
org org_id org_input_id
bml2_what_cd code
bml2_activity_type_cd code
bml2_when when_id
bml2_why why_id activity_id why_cd_id objective_ty
p_id
bml2_where where_id
16
Who-What-Why Associations
Who (Org) Association
bml2_org_type_what_association org_typ_indx orgt_i
nput_id what_cd_id
bml2_activity activity_id org_id org_input_id wha
t_cd_id when_id where_id
bml2_what_cd code
Why Association
bml2_whatcd_whycd_assc what_cd_id why_cd_id
17
CAPES GUI
S3 loads TF 1-118 Task Organization from 218 BDE
Order and Enemy Organization
S3 creates TF 1-118 COA(s) to include T.O.,
routes, tasks, etc.
18
BML GUI
XML BML Parser
C4ISI
Multi-Source Database Augmented with BML
CAPES
OTB
BML Proof of Principle Demonstration2003
19
PoP Results

• Proved the viability of building a BML through
  data representation and relationships
• Demonstrated interoperability between a C4I
  application (CAPES) and a simulation system (OTB)
  using a common representation
• Demonstrated that BML can solve thefree text
  problem
• The effort was exceedingly well received and
  significantly reinforced the need for a BML
  development program

20
FY04 Plans

• Expand the BML beyond the Heavy Brigade Slice
  focusing on
• 101st Airborne Division reset to the Brigade Unit
  of Action (UA) configuration
• OneSAF Objective System (OOS)
• Multi-Service / Joint (Air Force, Navy, Marine
  application)
• Expand message sets (including situation
  awareness)
• Conduct an operational soldier/user assessment

21
Conclusions

• Battle Management Language can
• Increase interoperability between C4ISR systems
  and simulations and future unmanned/robotic
  elements
• Increase preciseness and conciseness of
  communication between human operators
• Embed expert knowledge into C4I and simulation
  systems
• Improve Joint interoperability due to common
  language built into database, linked to doctrinal
  sources