search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ARMY AL&T Using the AETF events to help integrate and synchronize


Programs of Record prior to deployment will give us the ability to incrementally upgrade the network capability sets, reflect changes in technology, and bring in the best of industry to help support this effort.


Record and other technical solutions in a holistic network that mirrors the com- plexity in theater today. Structured tests for record such as Limited User Tests will be synchronized, while ongoing Brigade Combat Team Integration Exercises (BCTIEs) will serve as integration evaluations for tactical network develop- ment. BCTIEs allow Soldiers, through the Army Evaluation Task Force (AETF) at Fort Bliss, to provide valuable doc- trinal feedback to combat and materiel developers before the network capability is integrated into the operational force. The 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division has the AETF mission to evaluate about 20 candidate systems during the exer- cises this summer.


The AETF will now serve as the net- work’s primary test unit with a twofold intent: to remove the integration bur- den from the operational units and to provide an operational venue to evaluate new technologies and network capabilities before they are fielded. The new capabilities that Soldiers inte- grate and assess will ultimately provide the impetus for future acquisition and equipping decisions.


“We’re going to do a bunch of evalua- tions of capability using the AETF. We are talking about bringing software and computers together to provide net- work capabilities,” said COL Michael Williamson, Deputy Program Executive Officer Networks within Program Executive Office (PEO) Integration. “These BCTIEs are not tests for record, but instead an evaluation and integra- tion process with Soldier input. We have a series of exercises and evaluations


APRIL –JUNE 2011 23


in 2011 and 2012, with a culminating event in late 2012, which will allow the Army to make decisions about what capability gets deployed.”


The evaluations will also help the Army shape tactics, techniques, and proce- dures, said Morrison.


“These are not just technical evalu- ations, but they are also operational assessments designed to get feed- back from Soldiers. By putting these


capabilities into their hands, we expect to see product improvements com- ing out along with tactics, techniques, and procedures. This is a fundamental shift, because now at the front end and throughout the entire process, Soldiers will be touching the equipment, giving the acquisition community an indica- tion of whether they are headed in the right direction,” Morrison said.


“The quicker we get a candidate system in Soldiers’ hands,” through collabo- ration among Soldiers, engineers, materiel developers, and industry, “the sooner we will get a bad idea out [of the running] or get a good idea going,” Walker said. Evaluations of this scale and scope cannot be done through sim- ulation or modeling, he noted.


The BCTIE approach allows more flex- ibility during the acquisition process


Soldiers monitor input from the TOC at White Sands Missile Range during the 2010 Limited User Test. The Army is planning several network integration tests and evaluations in 2011 to further define the emerging tactical network. (U.S. Army photo.)


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88