Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2)

Last edited:
jsport said:
breakingdefense.com

DIU's director tried to overcome a calcified defense innovation system. It beat him. Now what? - Breaking Defense

"DoD, through its neglect, is turning its back on the disruptive opportunities from the commercial and non-traditional innovation sector," warns Bill Greenwalt of AEI.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
www.defensenews.com

Pentagon must rethink incentives, outgoing DIU chief says

Brown spoke with C4ISRNET about the future of DIU, the importance of commercial capability integration and the need for resources and support from DoD.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
 
breakingdefense.com

For JADC2, Pentagon must guard innovation through cumbersome acquisition: Report - Breaking Defense

DoD “has had a long history of struggling to capture commercial innovations,” according to a brief from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

In its mark of the fiscal 2023 defense authorization bill, the House Armed Services Committee’s cyber, innovative technologies and information systems (CITI) subcommittee said it wanted an inventory of all JADC2-related development efforts, with descriptions of performance objects, costs and schedules and a list of potential JADC2 capability gaps.

Pushing JADC2 into that model is a mistake because many of the technologies under JADC2 are constantly evolving on a rapid commercial timeline, the brief says.

“That language suggests that the capabilities are finite and that the JADC2 acquisition effort has a notional end date when all of those discrete enablers are acquired and integrated,” according to the brief. “This is how the military traditionally understands and designs acquisition programs, with program managers evaluated on cost, schedule, and performance.”

Likewise, in August, the head of the JADC2 Cross Functional Team (CFT) said she wanted people to start thinking of the effort as an “ecosystem” and that all of the disparate efforts from the services are aligned. The Army has its annual Project Convergence experiments, while the Air Force has its Advanced Battle Management System, and the Navy has its secretive Project Overmatch.

According to the brief, when it comes to the JADC2 CFT, “or whatever ultimate central management function is instantiated,” it “needs to go beyond the management of ‘the plans of actions, milestones, and resourcing requirements’ toward the development of a common understanding and management of the architecture of the innovation ecosystem to achieve the Joint Force C2 [command and control] vision.”

Officials from the Army and Air Force have in the past questioned the JADC2 CFT for not bringing in the level of interoperability DoD needs and Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks has made it clear she wants additional high-level oversight on the effort.

According to CSIS, “centralized JADC2 guidance will be most useful to beat the drum for acquisition innovation, to drive interoperability among service programs and manage the seams between joint and service capabilities… and to serve as an entry point to C2 issues for partners and allies and to address issues of international data sharing.”

But, it warned, the Pentagon shouldn’t set its expectations for real-world JADC2 too high.

“The DoD will likely never be able to meet the goal of connecting every sensor with every effector, especially on a battlefield becoming increasingly sensor saturated and complex,” according to the brief. “That does not mean the DoD should simply surrender. Instead, the DoD should develop meaningful metrics and goals for improvement towards the goal of the technology.”

Why exactly cant JADC2 connect every sensor with every effector?
More peeps tryin p in others cornflakes in order for their service's job justification/proprietary software/personal interest.
 
breakingdefense.com

Aalyria envisions communications revolution for Earth, the Moon and beyond - Breaking Defense

"I think what people will find is that this type of advancement, going from ground-to-space, changes the whole space economy," Aalyria's CEO Chris Taylor said. "I think it's going to be monumental."
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

WASHINGTON — Only recently out of “stealth mode,” ambitious start-up Aalyria is swinging for the stars, literally, with two platforms company officials say will revolutionize communications by enabling rapid land, sea, air and space radio frequency and optical communications out to the Moon and beyond.

Chris Taylor, Aalyria’s CEO, told Breaking Defense in an Oct. 5 interview that the network Aalyria is creating with its Spacetime software is embodying the Defense Department’s concept of Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2) in the manner that the concept was originally envisioned.

“We have created that digital cartilage and autonomous brain that permits a JADC2 concept to exist,” he said.
Click to expand...
 
www.c4isrnet.com

How the Pentagon knows when JADC2 innovations are working

Air Force Brig. Gen. Jeffery Valenzia dismissed the idea that the services aren’t closely collaborating on JADC2, calling it a "convenient argument."
www.c4isrnet.com www.c4isrnet.com

real collaboration would be a miracle. Companies are going use svcs to husband their propritary solutions and code w/o Joint demands to colab.

The five are all among the 40 largest global defense firms ranked by revenue, totaling some $100 billion earned in 2021, according to a Defense News analysis.

“The rationale behind it is a consortium-based approach, which is not to go to a single vendor who develops a solution set that sometimes comes with some restrictions on how you can scale it in the future,” Valenzia said. “Instead, it’s to take these high-performing companies — who have the resident expertise in the complexity of what we’re trying to do — to drive a collaborative, transparent infrastructure approach, so that we not only can deliver the warfighting capability today, but we can scale it into the future.”
 
Last edited:
www.federaltimes.com

Pentagon urged to kill alternate pay plan for Army Futures Command lab

The Pentagon claims in its proposal that the demo project gives it an advantage in recruiting a skilled workforce that is in high demand.
www.federaltimes.com www.federaltimes.com

personnel management matters also for overall jadc2.

The demonstration project would include pay banding, performance-based compensation, flexible hiring and a “modern approach to career progression and assignments,” according to the department.

Demos that use pay banding have been relatively successful in the past, said Steve Lenkart, executive director of the National Federation of Federal Employees.

“Usually it’s higher than the GS scale, so people want to do it,” he said. “And it gives hiring managers the flexibility, so it’s not so rigid.”

Demos can cause problems, Lenkart said, if employees feel that they’re competing within a pay band against others who have less experience or expertise but are similarly compensated.

Some other STRLs, of which there are 21 in DoD, have adopted supplemental pay flexibilities that are based on the OPM special salary rate tables that provide for higher salaries than the General Schedule tables. This supplemental pay flexibility permits STRLs to independently establish supplemental pay rates based on market conditions.


“Competing with private sector compensation is particularly challenging, especially in emerging mission areas such as hypersonics, autonomy, cybersecurity and data science,” according to a May notice by the DoD.

How does proposed system differ from GS schedule?​

Occupations with similar characteristics would be grouped together into one of three career paths with pay bands designed to facilitate pay progression. Inspired by the GS schedule, each career path will be divided into three to five pay bands with each covering the same pay range now covered by one or more GS grades.

The pay-for-performance system uses annual payouts that are based on the employee’s total performance score rather than within-grade increases, quality step increases and performance awards. In addition, each pay band will have its own pay ceiling, just as grades do in the GS system.

“Measuring and docking individuals in a performance measurement system every time they make a mistake, or evaluating them based on a ‘bell curve,’ is the best way of destroying morale and reducing productivity, enthusiasm, creativity and collaboration,” Kelley said.

The proposal also said competitive service positions will be filled through merit staffing, direct-hire authority, delegated examining, or other non-competitive hiring authorities.

Such a personnel management system is needed, the Pentagon argues, because STRL oversees organizations with workforces that differ in mission and have capabilities that require a more tailored approach to pay, promotion and hiring.

Components of STRL are also geographically dispersed to areas where the competition for talent is steep.

The GS won’t cut it because it’s too rigid in its job descriptions and promotions, and too slow to respond to changes in the work itself, which in STEM fields is often rapidly evolving, according to DoD.

“Modern employees expect careers that include frequent company changes, new challenges, and work-life balance fluctuations that do not require staying with a single employer,” the proposal said.

AFGE’s Kelley said the demo proposal “provides conclusory rationale without supporting analysis, contains incoherent rationale, and in some cases exceeds statutory authority.”

Pay banding is not the only solution to attracting the best talent in highly specialized occupations, and the GS already addresses issues these alternative plans are designed to solve, the union said.

“There are a lot of unused talent and abilities in our country that we do not fully harness because we write off people through performance measurement rather than lead them into excellence and achievement,” it said.
 
breakingdefense.com

At Project Convergence, data management is Army’s biggest challenge - Breaking Defense

“A few years ago, we wouldn't have had that problem because we wouldn't have been talking to each other and our machines certainly wouldn't have been talking to each other," said Air Force Lt. Gen. Clint Hinote." And so that's a huge step forward is the fact that we are all sharing data right...
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

“Because what’s going to happen in the future is that at some point, that machine is going to be so intuitive, it’s not going to make a decision, but it’s going to have the ability to wake me up at two in the morning, and say, we have 20 aircraft on the ground and Scott Air Force Base,” he said. “It has a routine conveyor belt shipment of food going into theaters. It’s going to say, Charles, you got three options…you can down load those 20 aircraft in about five hours…[or] it could say, I’m gonna do a hybrid, I can offload only 10 and put 10…But through machine learning and artificial intelligence is going to give you those options.”

That’s a big difference from how that process is done now, according to Hamilton, who said he’d have to have at least three or four meetings to get to a decision.

“That’s not fast,” he said. “ We’ve got to be that fast and that good.”
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom