these impacts, the consortium developed contracting guidelines and a complemen- tary business architecture to reduce the risk of migrating to the FACE standard.


Past failures resulted from trying to employ a one-size-fits-all technical solu- tion via a constrained, schedule-driven approach that mandated that all sys- tems had to come together at the same time to test as a Common Operating Environment (COE)-ready capability set, without regard to the impacts on individual program costs, schedule and risk. Tat meant more work for program offices to determine how to obtain waivers from commonality, or to develop prohibi- tive cost models that would prevent them from meeting the unfunded requirement for commonality.


Te PEO Aviation team’s timing in join- ing the FACE consortium was nearly perfect, as the team was confronting the challenge of developing a plan to meet the Army’s mandate to migrate to a common operating environment. Te COE, man- aged by the System of System Engineering and Integration (SOSE&I) Directorate in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Tech- nology, is aimed at developing a more agile, rapid and cost-effective process of fielding capabilities to the Soldier.


ENABLING INTEGRATION SOSE&I identified six unique comput- ing environments (CEs): command post; mobile handheld; mounted; sensors; data center/cloud; and real time, safety critical and embedded (RTSCE). As the Army’s lead for the RTSCE CE, PEO Aviation quickly realized the value that FACE would bring as one of the four real-time integration framework (RTIF) enablers.


Te eight project offices within PEO Aviation represent more than 50 member


THE STRUCTURE OF COLLABORATION


The FACE advisory board consists of senior representatives from the Army, Navy, industry and academia. The board advises the steering committee, which sets the direction for the consortium and works with The Open Group to manage the working groups and subcommittees. (Image courtesy of PEO Aviation)


systems in the RTSCE CE, including ground vehicles to sensors, smart muni- tions, missiles, training systems and helicopters with unique mission require- ments. Te team identified the distinctive requirements of these systems and deter- mined that a standards-based approach would be necessary.


Te group created the FACE RTIF enablers with the mandate


that they


focus on (1) standards, (2) open archi- tectures, (3) software development kits and, most importantly, (4) a “do-no- harm” approach to building the RTSCE COE. Tis approach emphasizes


integration of the COE based on each program’s scheduled upgrades, enhance- ments and modifications to current platforms or systems. Previous attempts to introduce common architectures also introduced significant cost and sched- ule risks that prompted program offices either to ignore the commonality man- date or to obtain waivers for exemption. FACE standards provide the foundation that meets the first three mandates, and PEO Aviation’s approach of incorporat- ing FACE-based capabilities in program modernization, upgrades and new starts rounds out the fourth.


ASC.ARMY.MIL


89


SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY


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  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172