Demonstration of the StrikeLinkA Solution in the CAS Environment 18 Nov 08

1
Demonstration of the StrikeLink/A Solution in
the CAS Environment (18 Nov 08)
2
Overview

• Background
• Understanding the Strikelink(A) Solution
• 18 Nov 08 Demonstration Overview
• Test and Test Conditions
• Results
• Conclusions and Recommendations

3
Background
4
Background of VMF Interoperability Problem

• VMF message standards only define the mandatory
  and optional fields within the message set
• Optional fields allow for innumerable
  combinations and permutations
• Platforms have failed to fully or accurately
  implement to the standard
• They do it their way / to the degree that their
  requirements and funding lines allow
• Message threads are not fully defined or
  universally implemented
• VMF has been implemented across service platforms
  without regard to protocol revisions, causing a
  disjoint in interoperability

5
Understanding the Strikelink(A) Solution
6
StrikeLink/A Solution as Demonstrated in the
F/A-18C/D and AV-8B

• StrikeLink/A box was placed between the ARC-210
  radio and Mission Computer (MC)
• VMF messaging was passed from the ARC-210 to the
  StrikeLink/A
• StrikeLink/A forwarded data via 1553 bus to MCs
  which was then displayed

7
StrikeLink/A Solution as Demonstrated in the
AH-1W(Receive ONLY until CCU is completed)

• StrikeLink/A box was similarly placed between
  the ARC-210 radio and the CDNU
• VMF messaging was passed from the ARC-210 to the
  StrikeLink/A
• StrikeLink/A forwarded data via 1553 bus to the
  CDNU which was then displayed

8
Advantages to this Implementation

• Pilot-Vehicle Interface (PVI) remains unchanged
• Establishes a baseline of interoperability
• StrikeLink/A is the same modem/software used in
  TLDHS/ StrikeLink used by the FAC.
• VMF Protocols on all platforms can be updated in
  lock-step to the most current protocol (required
  for interoperability across all services) without
  changing OFP. INTEROPERABILITY will no longer be
  reliant on OFP schedules.
• Note Full capability of updated VMF protocols
  may not be useable until update of Mission
  Computer OFP, however interoperability will still
  be guaranteed.

9
Overview
10
Purpose of the StrikeLink/A Demonstration
The purpose of the demonstration on 18 Nov 2008
was to demonstrate MAGTF digital-interoperability
through StrikeLink/A implementation.
11
Expectations for the Demonstration

• Execute a series of CAS mission threads using
  the full approval and reporting cycle
• Communicate with doctrinal CAS nodes using full
  VMF capability as implemented on each platform
• Demonstrate digital interoperability on current
  and future VMF protocols

12
Demonstration was NOT

• NOT a test of the StrikeLink/A capabilities it
  was a demonstration. In depth detail and
  analysis were limited to the assets and mission
  threads demonstrated during this 2-hour
  evolution.
• NOT intended to establish TTPs or to determine
  how VMF would be implemented in actual CAS
  missions.
• NOT a guarantee that this solution will be
  implemented in the F/A-18 C/D
• NOT a solution that offers zero changes to the
  aircraft OFP

13
Test Test Conditions
14
StrikeLink/A Demonstration
F/A-18F
(Airborne)
LtCol Grouper Mattei Mr. Axel Alvarez
Capt Famine Leonard Mr. Jason Miller
Maj Riddler Fails
AV-8B Lab Mr. Chris Beattie Mr. Ted Dubroff
Capt Bookie Mitchell CDR Scoop Swenson
AV-8B Lab Lt Michelle Kemp Mr. Chris Bates
UHF Network
VHF Network
Demo Directors Mr. John Gabler Mr. Paul
Davey Mr. Terry Maidment
AV-8B Lab AO Maj Trigger Ashford FSC MGySgt
Piper
AV-8B Lab Operator Maj Newbs Newbold
15
Ground Nodes and Operators
John Gabler and Paul Davey from Stauder Tech
assisting.
16
Airborne Nodes and Operators
17
Aircraft Operating Areas
Baker Range
AH-1W
AV-8B F/A-18F
NAWS China Lake (KNID)
18
CAS Mission Threads Demonstrated
(Ground Power)
(Ground Power)
(Simulation)
Note Threads 5, 8, 12 were not demonstrated
19
VMF Message Sets Demonstrated
Messages K01.1 FTXT K02.28 CAS BDA (XMIT
only) K02.33 CAS Aircrew Briefing K02.34 Aircr
aft On Station (OSR) K02.35 Aircraft Depart
Initial Point (DPIP) K02.57 Aircraft Position
TGT Designation( XMIT only) K02.58 Aircraft
Final Attack Control (RCV only) K02.59 Request
APTD (RCV only) K04.17 Image
20
VMF Address Assignments
21
VMF Protocols Used in the StrikeLink/A
Demonstration
22
Limitations to Scope

• F/A-18D used current VMF mechanization during the
  Rev B threads.
• The F/A-18D remained on deck because StrikeLink/A
  implementation on the F/A-18C/D has not yet been
  approved for flight.
• Aircraft to aircraft digital communication was
  cut due to several anomalies that occurred during
  the rehearsal 17 Nov. Availability of assets and
  personnel limited trouble-shooting and
  investigation of the anomalies.
• CAS mission threads did not include
  aircraft-to-aircraft digital communication.
• E-2C simulated through use of TLDHS/PRC-117F.
• JSF was simulated through laptop software (IDM
  workbench) and Harris 5800 Falcon II radio.
• All aircraft were on deck during the future
  (Rev D Ch 1) mission threads, due to time
  constraints.

23
Results
24
Summary of Results

• Total of 9 CAS mission threads were run
• Total of two anomalies occurred
• 9-Line from DASC not received by AH-1W (thread 6)
• Image from FAC not received by AV-8B (thread 9)
• Observations
• Rev D Ch 1 protocol provides quicker transfer of
  images. However, squelch of data bursts are very
  loud and last approx 2 sec, which will make
  transmissions on other radio frequencies nearly
  impossible to hear during that time. This
  requires the TAD net to be turned down to
  approximately half of the normal volume.
• Images over 2 kB take significantly longer to
  transfer.

25
Results of Individual CAS Mission Threads
26
Thread 1 AV-8B Image JTAR(Rev B)

• Successful
• No issues noted
• Image transfer took approximately 2 minutes

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
27
Thread 2 F/A-18F CAS(RevB)

• Successful
• No issues noted

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
28
Thread 3 F/A-18D CAS(Rev B)

• Successful
• No issues noted

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
29
Thread 4 AV-8B CAS(Rev B)

• Successful
• No issues noted

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
30
Thread 6 AH-1W CAS(Rev B)

• AH-1W never received 9-Line from the DASC.
• Other platforms have the capability to send an
  OSR to the DASC, in which case the DASCs system
  will automatically learn the VMF addressing
  information. AH-1W does not yet have this
  capability.
• Address information was verified by the DASC and
  AH-1W.
• AH-1W switched to the TAD net and 9-Line from
  the FAC was received with no problems.
• Note DASC 9-Line was received by AH-1W during
  the rehearsal the day prior with no issues.

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
31
Thread 7 AV-8B Image JTAR(Rev D Ch 1)

• Successful
• No issues noted
• Image transfer to the FAC took approximately 35
  sec
• Image transfer to the DASC took approximately 60
  sec
• Data burst over the radio during image transfer
  were very loud and lasted approximately two
  seconds in the Rev D Ch 1 protocol volume of
  TAD net had to be turned half-way down for
  aircrew comfort and to discern transmissions on
  the other radio. (from F/A-18D)

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
32
Thread 9 AV-8B CAS(Rev D Ch 1)

• AV-8B received 9-Line, but did not receive the
  annotated image from the FAC, after multiple
  attempts
• During the attempt to transfer imagery data
  bursts over the radio were heard and lasted a
  total 40-60 sec
• All other messages were received and transmitted
  without issues.

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
33
Thread 10 F/A-18D CAS(Rev D Ch 1)

• Successful
• DASC portion omitted for time
• Image transfer took approximately 20 seconds
• F/A-18D is not mechanized to display a VMF image.
  The image was viewed through a laptop that was
  connected to the StrikeLink/A engineering box.

Blue Font - Indicates voice or action that is not
a VMF transmission
34
Thread 11 JSF CAS(Rev D Ch 1)

• Successful
• No issues noted

35
Conclusion Recommendations
36
Conclusion Recommendations

• StrikeLink/A demonstration was largely
  successful.
• Two anomalies were identified and should be
  investigated.
• AH-1W needs at a minimum the capability to
  transmit a broadcast message (such as OSR) in
  order to provide the capability to other nodes to
  automatically learn the AH-1W VMF addressing.
• F/A-18D needs the capability to display images
  passed through VMF.
• A future demonstration should include a focus on
  aircraft-to-aircraft digital communication. This
  should include ample preparation time with
  StrikeLink/A in the aircraft, in order to
  troubleshoot and investigate problems/anomalies.
  
• Future demonstrations should include aircraft not
  present for this demonstration (such as A-10,
  B-52, F-15, F-16 etc).
• Still awaiting buy in from PMA-265 and N-88.
• Demonstration has received a high level of
  attention from both USN and USMC leadership.
  Briefings are in the works.
• Solutions for AV-8B and F/A-18 C/D are not
  funded. Submitted for PR-11

37
Questions?
Capt Robert Famine Leonard, USMC VX-31/
Advanced Weapons Laboratory NAWCWD China
Lake CNI/AVMS Project Officer robert.a.leonard_at_nav
y.mil Comm [phone] / DSN 437-5605
Terry Maidment NAWCWD China Lake Lead - Digital
COM Interoperability terry.maidment_at_navy.mil Comm
[phone] / DSN 437-4788
Sarah Tanner NAWCWD China Lake Deputy -Digital
COM Interoperability sarah.tanner_at_navy.mil Comm
[phone] / DSN 437-1505