ARMY AL&T
then together work on a funding strategy for every increment. It was a great part- nership.”
Advice for rapid prototyping: “It starts with the user. Te rapid approach is really a team sport, and the users are the critical piece on that team.”
THE PROJECT MANAGER THEN:
COL. MARTY HAGENSTON (USA, RET.)
“Commanders are severely limited in what they can bring to the electromagnetic spectrum fight. Tese limitations and lack of options are driving the operational need for EW capabilities.” Te operational needs statement (ONS) from U.S. Army Europe “became part of the larger mate- riel development strategy by design. It provided a mechanism from which to rapidly equip forward presence and rota- tional forces with initial capabilities, then iterate those based on direct user feedback.
“Te ONS provided a superb venue for risk reduction for projected programs, some of which were years away from starting. Not only did the Army benefit from a mate- riel standpoint, but the effort also drove doctrine, training, organizational design, and tactics, techniques and procedures.” Te entire spectrum of doctrine, organi- zation, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities and policy benefited, Hagenston said. Likewise, the ONS greatly benefited from programs of record that were underway. Tese included the Electronic Warfare Planning and Management Tool; Prophet Enhanced; Duke; and Versatile Radio Observation and Direction Modular Adaptive Trans- mitter, developed by the Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate of what is now the U.S. Army Combat Capabil- ities Development Command’s C5ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Combat Systems, Intelli- gence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) Center. “Te team was able to leverage these programs, which helped our veloc- ity by providing a critical foundation for the ONS.”
The key to success: “Te real force behind the success of this effort was the team- work, leadership support, stable resources and direct access to the customer. Te approach itself was simple. First, we took what we had and adapted it to the opera- tional problem. Tis served as Phase 1, or
the minimum viable product. Once we deployed Phase 1, 12 months from receiv- ing resources, we were able to take the direct user feedback and prototype some- thing closer to what the units wanted. Tis served as Phase 2. Trough all of the phases, the capabilities evolved based on direct user feedback. Our team carefully listened to the feedback and worked in those changes. In many cases it was done on the spot, while other changes were saved to the next logical insertion point.”
Advice for rapid prototyping: “First, get intimate with the operational prob- lem. Second, get the minimum viable product out quickly and really listen to the direct user feedback. Finally, iterate as fast as possible based on the direct user feedback. Velocity is the real advantage.”
THE PROJECT MANAGER NOW: COL. KEVIN FINCH
“ Perfection is the enemy of ‘good enough’ ”
and the endless pursuit of perfection will always be a hindrance to getting the required capabilities to the end user.
“Rapid prototyping will have a very posi- tive effect on the long-term POR. It also shows us the current state of industry. Specifically, in the EW specialty, rapid prototyping coupled with quick reac- tion capabilities [QRCs] has effectively informed the community on possible inno- vative solutions that help the U.S. pace the threat. Te QRCs we are currently field- ing to the force have enabled the program office to determine if innovative solutions are viable for long-term PORs. In FY20, PM EW&C will use the lessons learned
https://asc.ar my.mil 13
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
