rowid,image,timestamp,memento,first_capture,last_capture,current_status,text,mime,status,url,urlkey,digest,length,file_path 1,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/1.blob?_blob_column=image,20140304175802,https://web.archive.org/web/20140304175802/http://www.defence.gov.au/28sqn/utw/DOHS%20WHS%20Presentation.ppt,2014-03-04,2014-03-04,404,"Work Health and Safety in Defence • Maximise Capability • Duty of Care and Moral Obligation • Public Profile • Economics • Legal Obligation - the WHS Act WHS – WHY BOTHER? DIRECT COSTS • Injuries to personnel • Rehabilitation • Compensation • Property damage INDIRECT COSTS • Capability losses • Loss of reputation • Decrease in morale • Lost work capacity • Impacts of replacing people • Family of the injured THE REAL COSTS DEFENCE WHS MANAGEMENT APPROACH • WHS Strategy • WHS Policy Statement • WHS Safety Manual – Safetyman • Groups and Service’s individual WHS Policy Statements and Manuals The Commonwealth is Governed by: • Work Health & Safety Act • Regulations • Approved Codes of Practice • Confined Spaces • Transporting Dangerous Goods • Asbestos Management • Fatigue • Vibration • Radiation • Injury and Disease Reporting • Electricity • First Aid • Blood Borne Pathogens APPROVED CODES OF PRACTICE • Work Health and Safety Consultation • How to Manage Work Health and Safety Risks • Noise Management • Manual Tasks • Work Environment and Facilities • Chemical Labeling • Safety Data sheets • Preventing Falls at Workplaces • Plant Code of Practice THE ACT & ITS OBJECTIVES The Act applies to members of the ADF, APS workers, Cadets and Defence contractors. • Secure health and safety of workers • Protect people from hazards and risk from work • Ensure consultation and cooperation occurs between employer and workers • Ensure that expert advice is available on WHS • Ensure workplaces are monitored so as to protect the welfare of workers APPLYING THE ACT TO DEFENCE • Does not permit any action prejudicial to Australia’s security or defence • CDF may request exemption from certain parts of the WHS Act for specified members of the ADF. Members of the ADF • Cannot be elected or selected as a Health & Safety Representative (HSR) • Cannot exercise the right to cease work • Do not need to notify and report incidents while involved in operational deployments or deployments in support of the UN. Note: Organised sporting incidents must be reported via AC563 to Defence and Comcare if serious. EXEMPTIONS TO THE ACT • States, territories and the Commonwealth have agreed to work cooperatively to harmonise their Work Health and Safety (WHS) laws. • As a result, the WHS Act takes effect 1 Jan 2012 and replaces the OHS Act 1991 • COMCARE is the regulator for the Commonwealth jurisdiction (Defence) HARMONISATION CHANGES UNDER THE WHS ACT There are significant changes: • Everyone holds duties and responsibilities under the WHS Act 2011. • Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking (PCBU), ‘Officers of the PCBU’ and workers are all duty holders. DUTY HOLDERS • Defence , as an organisation (as a group of separate enterprises within Defence) will be considered the PCBU. • The Heads of Groups and Service Chiefs are ‘Officers of the PCBU’. • Employees are now workers and include the Secretary, CDF, APS, ADF, cadets, contractors, trainees and volunteers. WHO / WHAT IS A PCBU? • The Defence PCBU comprises of the Department of Defence Portfolio (including DMO) and the Australian Defence Force (including Reserves). • PCBU’s have a prescribed primary duty of care under the WHS Act, and must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers. REASONABLY PRACTICABLE • Likelihood of hazard or risk occurring • Degree of harm • What the person knows or should know about the hazard or risk • Ways to minimise the risk • Cost WHO IS AN OFFICER? • Within the Defence model, due to its size and complexity, initially Group Heads and Service Chiefs are ‘Officers of the PCBU’ • A person’s duties may imply that the person is an ‘Officer of the PCBU’ (e.g. personnel in Command positions including a unit Commander or a ship’s Captain depending on the circumstances) • Officers are to exercise due diligence to ensure compliance with the Act. DEFINITION OF DUE DILIGENCE • Knowledge of WHS matters • Nature of operations and associated risks and hazards • Resources and processes • Timely response to incidents • Process for legal compliance WHO IS A WORKER? All individuals working as part of a business or undertaking are ‘workers’. In Defence this includes the Secretary, CDF and all people working in or for Defence. WORKERS RESPONSIBILITIES Workers must: • Take reasonable care for their own health and safety • Take reasonable care that their acts don’t affect the health and safety of others • Comply with any reasonable instruction given by a PCBU • Cooperate with any reasonable policy or procedure of a PCBU Only civilian workers of Defence are eligible to become a HSR HSR’S (that have completed appropriate training) have the power to:  Inspect workplaces  Represent WHS issues to management  Investigate complaints  Issue PINS  Stop work in an unsafe situation HEALTH & SAFETY REPRESENTATIVES (HSR) OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE ACT • Defence has a range of obligations to its people • Your management has obligations to their workers • Defence workers have obligations to Defence and each other to….. AS A DEFENCE WORKER YOU MUST… • Take care of yourself and other’s health and safety • Use equipment properly • Comply with management to: – follow Defence WHS directives – follow safe work practices – use PPE provided and as directed – report safety incidents & hazards – follow emergency procedures Defence Work Health and Safety Governance The DOHSC was formed in March 2003 and is a sub-committee of the Defence Committee. The DOHSC was established to oversee Defence-wide OHS/WHS initiatives and the development of the Defence OHS Strategy. http://ohsc.defence.gov.au/StrategicOHSGovernance/DOHSC/default.htm DEFENCE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY COMMITTEE The primary role of the DOHSC is to monitor and improve the Work Health and Safety of Defence personnel. DOHSC ROLE DEFENCE OHS STRATEGY 2012 • Developed by the DOHSC • Aligns with the National OHS Strategy 2002-2012 • Defines strategic objectives to deliver high standards of OHS/WHS performance. CONSULTATION & COMMUNICATION Effective implementation of Defence WHS policy, procedures and practices, within a consultative framework is vital to meet legislative requirements and is enforceable under the WHS Act. DEFENCE WHS IN OPERATION WHS INCIDENT REPORTING WHS INCIDENT REPORTING Immediate notification to COMCARE (or ARPANSA as applicable) and WHS Branch for notifiable incidents via phone or fax Notifiable incidents are: death, serious injuries, or dangerous incidents Report to WHS Branch, but not Comcare: • Any injuries to ADF personnel serving with the United Nations • Any injuries to ADF personnel that occur while on operations (Government declared) • Minor injuries such as bruises & cuts EXEMPTIONS FROM NOTIFICATION RISK MANAGEMENT Is a 4-step planned & systematic process: 1. Hazard identification 2. Risk assessment 3. Risk control 4. Monitoring and reviewing RISK MANAGEMENT RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS Risk Management Model AS/NZS ISO 31000 WORKPLACE HAZARDS • Quick workplace examination • Systematic workplace hazard inspection • use checklists conduct regularly inspect workplaces other than your own IDENTIFYING HAZARDS • Systematically identify hazards • Get them properly evaluated • Implement suitable control measures • Systematically monitor effectiveness of controls MANAGING WORKPLACE HAZARDS CLASSIFYING HAZARDS There are 6 categories of hazards: 1. Physical 2. Chemical 3. Ergonomic 4. Radiation 5. Psychosocial 6. Biological • Eliminate the hazard • Substitute for something less hazardous • Isolate the hazard from the worker • Develop Engineering Controls • Employ Administrative Measures • Issue Personal Protective Equipment HIERARCHY OF HAZARD CONTROL OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Occupational health is the promotion and maintenance of the highest degree of physical, mental and social wellbeing of workers in all occupations by preventing departures from health, controlling risks and the adaptation of work to people, and people to their jobs. International Labour Organization/World Health Organization 1950 WHAT IS OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH? WHY OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH? • Prevent and control occupational diseases and accidents • Eliminate occupational factors and conditions hazardous to health and safety at work • Develop and promote healthy and safe work environments • Enhance physical, mental and social well- being of all Defence people WHAT CAN YOU DO? • Know the environment you work in • Be alert to the air quality, noise, light and chemicals you interact with at work • Monitor your own health and fitness WHAT CAN YOU DO? (cont.) • Seek advice from your health care centre if you feel your health is being affected by your work or workplace environment • Report health or safety incidents using the AC563 Incident Report • Some hazards may have long term health effects that may not become apparent for many years WHAT CAN YOU DO? (cont.) • Look out for your mates and encourage them to monitor their own health • Look out for hazards in the workplace and report these when identified • Make sure these are taken seriously and are followed up if necessary. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH IN DEFENCE • The aim of occupational health is to secure the health of Defence personnel • By doing this, occupational health contributes towards maintaining the highest level of preparedness and combat capability of the Australian Defence Force (ADF). OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SURVEILLANCE • The gathering and analysis of appropriate data from patient encounters • Classifying encounters in terms of effects and probable causes • Analysing and investigation of trends • Using the data to conduct investigations and design ways to improve the health of the ADF • Supervisors/Commanders • Group Safety Coordinators • Regional WHS Coordinators • Health and Safety Representatives (HSR’s) • Defence Work Health and Safety Manual • WHS intranet website http://ohsc.defence.gov.au • Defence Centre for Occupational Health • Australian Standards, Codes of Practice • Chem Alert NEED MORE INFORMATION? WHS BRANCH Provides the tools and expert advice to enable Defence to manage safety effectively Intranet: http://ohsc.defence.gov.au/ Internet: http://www.defence.gov.au/dpe/ohsc/default.htm Email: ohsc@defence.gov.au QUESTIONS? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/28sqn/utw/DOHS%20WHS%20Presentation.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/28sqn/utw/dohs%20whs%20presentation.ppt",KDGS2P62GCBZE7AEAKMK4WC2EAMFZRQI,1779585,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-28sqn-utw-dohs-20whs-20presentation-ppt-20140304175802.ppt 2,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/2.blob?_blob_column=image,20140214050230,https://web.archive.org/web/20140214050230/http://www.defence.gov.au/adc/docs/cdf_conf2010/CDFConf_101125_COIN_Dr_TX_Hammes.ppt,2014-02-14,2014-02-14,404,"Traditional Spectrum Train/Advise/Assist Relief Operations Show of Force Peacetime & Crisis Low-Intensity Conflict Mid-Intensity Conflict High-Intensity Conflict Frequency Peace Enforcement Acts of Terrorism Nationbuilding Selective Strike Civil War Limited War Major Combat Global War Noncombatant Evacuation Major Combat Operations Crisis Response Humanitarian Assistance… Counterinsurgency… Figure 1 Lethality Relief Operations Show of Force Peacetime & Crisis Low-Intensity Conflict Mid-Intensity Conflict High-Intensity Conflict Frequency Peace Enforcement Selective Strike Major Combat Global War Noncombatant Evacuation Humanitarian Assistance Lethality Train/Advise Terrorism Nationbuilding Civil War COIN Terrorism Most Likely, More Complex and Increasingly More Lethal Hybrid War Spectrum Hybrid War Spectrum Figure 2 Relief Operations Show of Force Peacetime & Crisis Low-Intensity Conflict Mid-Intensity Conflict High-Intensity Conflict Frequency Peace Enforcement Selective Strike Major Combat Global War Noncombatant Evacuation Humanitarian Assistance Train/Advise Terrorism Nationbuilding Civil War COIN Terrorism Potential Spectrum Potential Spectrum Lethality Bio-Terror Figure 3 Component Shares of DoD Budget Chart 1: Source - Statement of Cindy Williams before Senate Budget Committee, Feb 23, 2010, http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/testimony/2010/SBC_Williams_022310.pdf. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/adc/docs/cdf_conf2010/CDFConf_101125_COIN_Dr_TX_Hammes.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/adc/docs/cdf_conf2010/cdfconf_101125_coin_dr_tx_hammes.ppt",QXHFTGPLXNXETWBNAZD7WXHVFBTHRUC3,2504579,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-adc-docs-cdf-conf2010-cdfconf-101125-coin-dr-tx-hammes-ppt-20140214050230.ppt 3,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/3.blob?_blob_column=image,20140214045900,https://web.archive.org/web/20140214045900/http://www.defence.gov.au/adc/docs/cdf_conf2010/CDFConf_101214_COIN_LtGenMulholland.ppt,2014-02-14,2014-02-14,404,"Full Spectrum Capabilities ?ARSOF ?Formations and Core Tasks ?Post 9/11 Activities ?Full Spectrum Capable ?Unconventional Warfare (UW) ?Foreign Internal Defense (FID) ?Afghanistan ?Post 9/11 Unconventional Warfare Operations ?Today – Support to COIN through FID Activities ? US ARMY NAT'L GUARD USASOC 1 SFG 3 SFG 5 SFG 7 SFG 10 SFG 19 SFG 20 SFG 1SWTG 1SWTG USASFC USASFC 95th 95th CA BDE CA BDE 160 160th th SOAR SOAR 528th 528th SUSTAINMENT SUSTAINMENT BDE (A) BDE (A) 75 75th th RGR RGR RGMT RGMT 44th th MISG MISG SOMTG SOMTG USAJFKSWCS USAJFKSWCS Core Tasks Unconventional Warfare Foreign Internal Defense Counter Terrorism Direct Action Special Reconnaissance Civil Affairs Military Information Support SOUTHCOM 13 COUNTRIES 22 MISSIONS EMBASSY SPT 12 MISSIONS NORTHCOM 1 COUNTRY 2 MISSIONS EMBASSY SPT 1 MISSION EUCOM 12 COUNTRIES 25 MISSIONS EMBASSY SPT 1 MISSION CENTCOM 12 COUNTRIES 45 MISSIONS EMBASSY SPT 12 MISSIONS UNCLASS/FOUO AFRICOM 10 COUNTRIES 13 MISSIONS EMBASSY SPT 22 MISSIONS PACOM 13 COUNTRIES 21 MISSIONS EMBASSY SPT 17 MISSIONS 5,606 ARSOF SOLDIERS 128 Missions 61 Countries 5,606 ARSOF SOLDIERS 128 Missions 61 Countries Unconventional Warfare and Foreign Internal Defense Army Special Operations Core Tasks ARSOF Unconventional Warfare and Foreign Internal Defense Army Special Operations Core Tasks Coerce, Disrupt or Overthrow a Government or Occupying Power - Through, by, with indigenous forces and infrastructure Improve a Nation State’s Security Apparatus - Train, advise, assist - COIN environment U.S. Army Special Operations Forces provide our Nation with unique capabilities to support a range of policy options re: supporting or countering an insurgency, enabled and/or partnered with GPF, Joint, Interagency, Interdepartmental and Multinational (JIIM) capabilities • Dec 1979 – Soviet 40th Army invasion • 1970/80’s – Volatile political situation • Feb 1989 – Soviets depart • Spring 1994 - Taliban movement forms in Kandahar •Taliban systematically gain control of the country • 1997 – Anti-Taliban Northern Alliance formed • 2000 - Civil War in Afghanistan • 9/9/2001 – Massoud assassinated • 9/11/2001 – United States attacked • Oct 2001 – US commences combat operations in Afghanistan •Initiated by an Unconventional Warfare campaign • • Sep 2001 - 5th SFG forms CJSOTF-N (TF- Dagger) •C2 of SOF operations • Oct 2001 - TF-Dagger base established at K2 airbase in Uzbekistan • 16 Oct 2001 – Combat Operations commence •Two SF ODAs and Rangers inserted into Afghanistan •Two key Northern Alliance warlords, Rashid Dostum and Fahim Khan engaged •ODA 595 supports Dostum, ODA 555 supports Khan •CDR TF Dagger deploys two Bn CDRs – advisors to warlords: “Control the Political Battlefield” • ODA 595 Dostum ODA 555 Fahim Khan Kabul TF-Dagger K2 Airbase OBJ Gecko OBJ Rhino Rangers • Operational Summary: •Rapid movement and success •10 Nov 2001 – Dostum with 10-15K fighters, seizes Mazar-e-Sharif •Six ODAs supporting efforts of distinct tribal faction counterparts fighting throughout the country •07 Dec 2001 – ODA 574 supports Hamid Karzai, ODA 583 supports Gul Aga Sherzai -- drove the Taliban out of Kandahar and seize control of Kabul •10 Dec 2001 – US Embassy reopened in Kabul •Jan 2002 – Taliban overthrown by SF- supported Northern Alliance • Feb 2002 - 3rd SFG replaces 5th SFG as CJSOTF • SF transitions to FID mission • Australia TF 64 ODA 595 Dostum ODA 555 Fahim Khan Kabul TF-Dagger K2 Airbase Kandahar ODA 585 Burilla Khan ODA 534 Mohammed Atta ODA 574 Hamid Karzai Australian TF 64 ODA 534 Mohammed Atta ARSOF OEF Disposition 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 5 1 5 1 9 2 0 RC East RC West RC South RC North RC SW 2 4 Full Spectrum Application CT - Threat Network Destruction PN Capacity Building & Professionalization Intelligence Fusion Unconventional Warfare FID – Capacity Building Threat Network Destruction ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/adc/docs/cdf_conf2010/CDFConf_101214_COIN_LtGenMulholland.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/adc/docs/cdf_conf2010/cdfconf_101214_coin_ltgenmulholland.ppt",Q6KAOGLUXCC3VMI4IYRXSZUWMUOCMBU3,11602196,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-adc-docs-cdf-conf2010-cdfconf-101214-coin-ltgenmulholland-ppt-20140214045900.ppt 4,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/4.blob?_blob_column=image,20100920114203,https://web.archive.org/web/20100920114203/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/adfheas/docs/ADFHEAS%20TSS%20Nov%2009.ppt,2010-09-20,2014-02-14,404," ADF Higher Education Advanced Standing (ADFHEAS) Scheme  Defence Education and Training, resulting in Cert III and above qualifications, may be accepted as advanced standing or credit towards certain university qualifications at 25 universities around Australia.  Available to both Officers and Other Ranks in Post graduate and Undergraduate education ADF Higher Education Advanced Standing (ADFHEAS) Scheme Check:  ADF Higher Education Advanced Standing Scheme website http://www.defence.gov.au/adfheas/  ADF qualifications website http://www.defencequals.edu.au/  Click on your “Service badge”  ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/adfheas/docs/ADFHEAS%20TSS%20Nov%2009.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/adfheas/docs/adfheas%20tss%20nov%2009.ppt",UQB5EXV6IAU5LCEO5AXEMV3LESTTNDDO,236668,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-adfheas-docs-adfheas-20tss-20nov-2009-ppt-20100920114203.ppt 5,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/5.blob?_blob_column=image,20070221102959,https://web.archive.org/web/20070221102959/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/army/3_4CAV/docs%5CRegistrationForm.ppt,2007-02-21,2007-07-09,404," B Squadron 3rd/4th Cavalry Regiment 40th Birthday Celebrations Townsville 21 -25 June 2006 Registration Form Full Name…………………………………………………… Preferred Name………………………………………………. Postal Address Details…………………………………………………………………………………………….. Phone:………………………………………..Mobile………………………………….. E-Mail……………………………………………………….. RSVP: WO2 Mark Café SSM : E-mail mark.café@defence.gov.au , or CPL Haydn Penola TRG SGT E-mail haydn.penola @ defence.gov.au Will you be attending the following planned activities:(Circle Required) 1. Meet and Greet Townsville RSL Club, Wed 21 Jun 6:00pm (Cost Involved ) Y / N 2. Military Tour Display,Thu 22 Jun 8:30 am Y / N 3. Lunch Officers / Sgt’s Mess, Thu 22 Jun 12:30 pm (Cost Involved ) Y / N 4. Diggers vs NCO Rugby League Match Thu 22 Jun 2:00 pm Y / N 5. Happy Hour Scorpion Club Thu 22 Jun 4:00 pm Y / N 6. Live Fire Demonstration TFTA Fri 23 Jun 9:30 am Y / N 7. Family BBQ Scorpion Club Fri 23 Jun 5:30 pm (Cost Involved ) Y / N 8. Golf & Lawn Bowls Comp Sat 24 Jun 7:30 pm (Cost Involved ) Y / N 9. Ceremonial Parade Sat 24 Jun 12:30 pm Y / N 10.Gala Ball Sat 24 Jun 6 :30 pm (Cost Involved ) Y / N E-mail mark.café@defence.gov.au ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/army/3_4CAV/docs%5CRegistrationForm.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/3_4cav/docs\registrationform.ppt",QILNAO5ZU6DNNPV3FOBPF3UWRLZ4NCXG,854566,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-3-4cav-docs-registrationform-ppt-20070221102959.ppt 6,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/6.blob?_blob_column=image,20091030170056,https://web.archive.org/web/20091030170056/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/apa/docs/APA_ARes_Resettlement_Apr_08.ppt,2009-10-30,2009-10-30,404," ARMY RESERVE ARMY RESERVE ARMY RESERVE ARMY RESERVE Transition Seminar Transition Seminar 2008 2008 Transition Seminar Transition Seminar 2008 2008 The role of the Army Personnel Agency–Adelaide, a regional element of Career Management–Army, is to provide effective officer and soldier career management for the Army Reserve in Central Region in order to contribute to the delivery of the reserve personnel dimension of capability to the Army . Army Personnel Army Personnel Agency-Adelaide Agency-Adelaide A key task of APA-A is to facilitate the transfer of skilled Regular Army personnel into the Standby or Active Reserve . This contributes greatly to Reserve capability and provides members with benefits and options. Army Personnel Army Personnel Agency-Adelaide Agency-Adelaide Scope of Presentation Scope of Presentation Organisational overview APA / ANSRA / ASSG Army Reserve overview Army benefits of Reserve Service Army Reserve members’ responsibilities CCMA BRIG J.Simpson APA X 8 CMA EXEC DRMC-A COL P.Wightman APA-Adelaide APA-Brisbane APA-Darwin APA-Hobart APA-Melbourne APA-Perth APA-Sydney APA-Townsville ANSRA Mrs N. Damen ASSG COL L.Reynolds SCMA COL Murray DOCM-A COL G. Reynolds APA-Adelaide DAPA – COL C.McCarthy DDAPA – MAJ P. Rosenzweig APA-Brisbane DAPA – COL D. O’Hagan DDAPA – LTCOL D. Ausling APA-Darwin DAPA – LTCOL R. Stevenson DDAPA – MAJ L. Darragh APA-Hobart DAPA – COL S. Carey DDAPA – MAJ M. Lowe APA-Melbourne DAPA – COL R. Marsh DDAPA – LTCOL M. Buck APA-Perth DAPA – COL M. Page DDAPA – MAJ I. McDonagh APA-Sydney DAPA – COL P. Jones DDAPA – LTCOL J. Findlay APA-Townsville DAPA – COL A. Overell DDAPA – MAJ S. Gepp Reserve Service Reserve Service Active Reserve (AR)  High Readiness Reserve (HRR)  Reserve Response Force (RRF) Standby Reserve (SR) Army Personnel Agency Army Personnel Agency (APA) (APA)  Managed by ARA, AR and APS members  Career Manage Reserve members  to the rank of Major and WO1  Implement the Army Induction Mgt Process  Manage the Reserve Army's personnel asset  Contribute to the improvement of Army career and personnel management practices Army National Standby Army National Standby Reserve Agency (ANSRA) Reserve Agency (ANSRA)  Managing the Army component of SR  Communicate and re-engage members into the Army environment  Manage/Admin for all SR members  Maintain annual contact with SR members  Supplement ARA and AR vacancies Active and Standby Staff Active and Standby Staff Group (ASSG) Group (ASSG)  Establishment of Officers and Senior NCOs with extensive military skills  Ranks range from CPL to BRIG  Currently a national pool of 250 Reserve members  Projects available long or short term Active Reserve (AR) Active Reserve (AR)  Parading commitments:  minimum 20 days per year  potentially up to 100 days per year  with a possible additional 50 days  Tax free pay $$$  Efficient service entitlements includes  $600 Health Support Allowance  Defence Assistance Study Scheme (DASS)  Defence Home Ownership Assistance Scheme (DHOAS) High Readiness Reserve (HRR) High Readiness Reserve (HRR)  $10,000 bonus – 2 year completion  $2,500 Health Support Allowance  Min 32 days and Max 50 days obligation  AIRN compliant and ARA competencies  Meet the Medical and Dental requirements  A HRR position available DI(A) PERS 79-6 Management of High Readiness Reserve Personnel within the Army Reserve Response Force (RRF) Reserve Response Force (RRF)  20 days training obligation  $700 bonus – annual completion  $600 Health Support Allowance  AIRN compliant  Meet the Medical and Dental requirements  Must be an available RFF position DI(A) PERS 79-7 Management of Reserve Response Force Personnel within the Army Standby Reserve (SR) Standby Reserve (SR)  Pool of trained Army Reserve members  Tax free pay $$$  No AIRN compliance  No parading / training obligations  Compulsory transfer post 01 Jul 03  DA50(4) work available (project work)  Continuous Full Time Service (CFTS) may be available DI(A) PERS 173-4 Management of the Australian Army Standby Reserve (DRAFT VERSION ONLY) Employer Support Payment (ESP) Employer Support Payment (ESP) Scheme Scheme  Financial support for employers of Reservists  Employer may be entitled to $1070.40 p/w  Who is eligible to claim ESP  Government organisations  Public and proprietary companies  Private employers  Self-employed Reservists  Further info:  ESP contact number - 1800 803 485  www.defencereserves.com Do I want to transfer? Do I want to transfer? Considerations: • Do I want to leave the door open to transfer back to the ARA? • Will I be able to meet DFR enlistment standards on re-entry/re-enlist? • Will I be able to pass the pre-entry fitness assessment (PFA) on re-entry/re-enlist? • Will I be able to return at my current rank? • Can I make a genuine commitment to the Army Reserve? • What are my options! Approving Authority Approving Authority Transfer Considerations Transfer Considerations Considerations: • Current employment policy • Member’s current MEC • AIRN compliancy • Service needs and vacancies • Member’s service record and qualifications Reserve Member Responsibilities Reserve Member Responsibilities Responsibilities: • Notification of change of personal details • Advise of skills and or qualifications up-dates • Advise of any Medical status changes • Interest in DA50(4), CFTS, transfer to AR/HRR/RRF/SR/ARA POSTING OPPORTUNITIES POSTING OPPORTUNITIES Brigade units: • HQ 9 BDE (Keswick) • 9 CSSB (Warradale & Port Lincoln) • 10/27 RSAR (Keswick, Port Augusta, Port Pirie, Whyalla, Kadina, Mt Gambier, Berri, Broken Hill, Noarlunga) POSTING OPPORTUNITIES POSTING OPPORTUNITIES Brigade units: • LWC-SA (Hampstead) • AUR (Hampstead) • 144 SIG SQN (Keswick) • 48 FD BTY (Keswick) • 3/9 LH (SAMR) (Smithfield) • 3 FD SQN (Warradale, Noarlunga) POSTING OPPORTUNITIES POSTING OPPORTUNITIES Non-Brigade units: • 16 AD REGT (Woodside) • 3 HSB (Keswick) • JMCO Adelaide (Keswick) • DFDO-A (PSS-A) (Keswick) • AAB-A (Warradale) POSTING OPPORTUNITIES POSTING OPPORTUNITIES Non-Brigade units: • DFR (Adelaide) • APA-A (Keswick) • AFSU CR/NR Det (Keswick) • 34 MP Pl (Warradale) How about Army Cadets! How about Army Cadets! You will need: • a genuine interest in youth training • a high level of maturity • high moral standards • be physically and medically fit • be prepared to attend an induction course to learn how to appropriately supervise cadet activities How about Army Cadets! How about Army Cadets! Benefits: • Transfer your experience to Australia’s youth • Pay is comparable with Reserves • No AIRN • Superannuation benefits • Commitment - one night a week, one weekend a term How about Army Cadets! How about Army Cadets! Benefits: • Depots available - Metro Adelaide (7 units), Pt Lincoln, Pt Augusta, Port Pirie, Broken Hill, Berri, Clare, Whyalla, Roxby Downs and Mt Gambia • Why not become an Officer of Cadets (OOC) or an Instructor of Cadets (IOC)? • Call Army Cadet Bde HQ: • Freecall 1800 671 638 (All Hours) • 08 8305 6263 (Tue 1900 – 2200 hrs) Contacts Contacts All career management agency contacts can be obtained from the CMA webpage – http://www.defence.gov.au/army/cma Call: 1300 DEFENCE 1300 333 3623 ARMY PERSONNEL AGENCY-ADELAIDE ARMY PERSONNEL AGENCY-ADELAIDE Building 34A, Keswick Barracks Building 34A, Keswick Barracks KESWICK SA 5035 KESWICK SA 5035 Telephone contacts: – Officer Career Management – Mr John Potts (08) 8305 6377 – Soldier Career Management – WO1 Phil Zillmann (08) 8305 6390 – Admin Section – Mrs Roz Janzow (08) 8305 6373 ?? QUESTIONS ?? ?? QUESTIONS ?? References References DI(A) PERS 79-6 Mngt of the High Readiness Res (HRR) DI(A) PERS 79-7 Mngt of the Res Response Force (RRF) DI(A) PERS 79-8 HRR Training Scheme DI(A) PERS 149-7 Tfr Between the Forces of the Army DI(A) PERS 173-4 Management of the Australian Army Standby Reserve (DRAFT ONLY) DI(A) PERS 173-6 Continuous Full Time Service (CFTS) DI(A) PERS 174-4 Employer Spt Payment (ESP) Scheme ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/apa/docs/APA_ARes_Resettlement_Apr_08.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/apa/docs/apa_ares_resettlement_apr_08.ppt",YBN6STHJ3VT3W47FBMKGIRGJNTDMDC2Q,440937,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-apa-docs-apa-ares-resettlement-apr-08-ppt-20091030170056.ppt 7,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/7.blob?_blob_column=image,20070909123108,https://web.archive.org/web/20070909123108/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/cal/documents/CAL%20Overview%20for%20Internet%20site.ppt,2007-09-09,2007-09-09,404,"• What CAL is • What are lessons • Characteristics • Organization • Process • What is in it for the Army Vision CAL will become the medium through which Army shares the knowledge of its people. It is not just a place where experience and ideas are captured but a domain for discussing experiences and for learning Mission To collect, analyse, store and disseminate Army lessons in order to enhance war fighting capability • A repository for Army lessons and link to pertinent Army and professional knowledge • Its primarily focused on tactical knowledge • Assists current and future capability development • The web presence will reside in the Defence Restricted Network initially • Link to other lessons systems • There to satisfy client organizations • There to induce and promote a learning culture within Army by sharing knowledge What they are not A pattern observed from multiple occurrence of lessons Could be lessons learnt Recognised sound TTP Analysed observation Placed in full and general context A change to TTP that rectifies a shortfall  Just that  In individual context with a specific incident or action  Important to help complete a wide picture What they are Currently captured within Army Learnt Anecdotal  Lessons  In full context Trends Lessons Observations • Collects observations and lessons • Analyses observations to produce credible lessons • Maintains a web-based interface • User-friendly web portal • Individual customisable settings • Very powerful intelligent search • Collaboration tools • E-mail/web notifications on lessons updates. • Interacts with other knowledge systems • Provides a tool to assist: • Better planning • Better team collaboration • Operational analysis • Force Development • Produces • hard copy publications • Electronic media • Focused reports • Maintains a knowledge warehouse Passive collection • anyone can raise an item (entry) using: • Defence Intranet forms • Email • Fax • Phone • Units choosing to use FACE methodology • All PAR sent to CAL for processing • Trawling coalition systems Active collection (FACE) • sponsor raises item and gives authority • CAL forms SMA team from across Army personnel • Collection, analysis and release of lessons live by team • referred to change agencies CAL PUBLICATIONS INTRANET FOCUSED ANALYSIS USER SUBJECT MATTER ADVISOR RELEASING OFFICER Collect Analyse Disseminate Store • Junior leaders – TTP • Ops and other staff – planning training and ops • Force developers – provide analytical data and knowledge informing development • Units - on operations seeking SMA advice (via standard Internet) when confronted with the unexpected • Researchers • ABCA members • Better operational planning • A research tool • No requirement to input lessons from reports, we’ll do that • Accessible Insights and lessons on the DRN • Analysis of observations by advisers with expertise in subject matter • Ability to focus CAL collection on relevant areas • Another asset to use for research through web presence / DSE • A partner in the research community wanting to work with you • A means of disseminating findings • An approved storage and management system • A medium for assisting to change culture within Army • Key operations / exercise pers debriefs • Active collection from operations and exercises planned • AEF support • LOAT DSTO trends Analysis • ADF and ABCA liaison • CAL is gaining momentum • CAL presents a sounding board for all of Army to share experiences • There is a draft policy being worked • The first publication has been very well received by Army at all levels (especially in units) • SMA are critical for the success of the plan • Aim to be fully online by mid 02 (was Feb 02) • CAL is a service provider – what you need with minimal overhead ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/cal/documents/CAL%20Overview%20for%20Internet%20site.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/cal/documents/cal%20overview%20for%20internet%20site.ppt",PFXMWNHTJPDAWIYFYGNACSNQT636EAKU,783577,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-cal-documents-cal-20overview-20for-20internet-20site-ppt-20070909123108.ppt 8,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/8.blob?_blob_column=image,20091222023528,https://web.archive.org/web/20091222023528/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/Army/docs/rca_www.ppt,2009-12-22,2009-12-22,404,"Problematic use of Alcohol Courage, Initiative, Teamwork Army newspaper 14 May 09 “The “hidden enemies” of alcohol … [they] are a scourge on Army’s reputation and are contrary to the intent of Army’s values and ethos”. CA address to Commanders “I have recently made clear my extreme concern at the number of serious incidents within Army that are linked to alcohol misuse… Yet again, I feel compelled to raise this issue with you. I am not convinced that our commanders and people are getting the message.” “As commanders we have a responsibility to do as much as we can to reduce the number of these incidents. It involves actively seeking to change the thinking and culture that supports the idea that our people can drink excessively without consequence. It involves actively encouraging responsible drinking both in the workplace and when our people are off-duty. It involves commanders at all levels actively and regularly educating our people of the far reaching consequences of irresponsible drinking.” 20 Oct 2009 Recent DUI civilian offences 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sep Oct 1 BDE 3 BDE 7 BDE FORCOMD AIMS DUI data Total 33 2009 is defined in DI(G) PERS 15-1 Alcohol Use Within the Australian Defence Force as use: “…which leads to an individual’s misconduct, unacceptable social behaviour, impairment of health, financial responsibility or personal relationships, or interferes with performance of duty or with safety or security.” Problematic use of alcohol • The problematic use of alcohol is NOT CONDONED. • Members identified as using alcohol in a problematic way will be counselled and given treatment and rehabilitation as appropriate. • Commanders and junior leaders at all levels are to exercise their command responsibilities by ensuring members are aware of the consequences of their alcohol use, particularly. • The Army will not retain members who repeatedly misuse alcohol, members who refuse treatment for alcohol misuse, or members who fail to complete an alcohol counselling or rehabilitation program when ordered. Problematic use of alcohol The risks associated with short-term harm can include immediate health and social problems, such as: • damage to reputation • injuries from violence (as a perpetrator, a victim, or a witness) • pedestrian and road accidents (death/severe injury) • drowning • trauma related admissions to hospital emergency departments • alcohol poisoning • social and personal consequences such as the impact on families and social embarrassment • loss of valuable items ie phone or wallet • having unprotected sex and placing yourself at greater risk of a sexually transmitted infection (STI) and/or an unwanted pregnancy Short term harms Long-term harms Risky and high risk drinking may also have serious longer- term consequences, including: • social problems, such as spending more time drinking than pursuing other interests • brain damage, including the inability to learn and remember things • depression and suicidal thoughts • the development of chronic disease, including some cancers and heart disease • cirrhosis of the liver • dependence on alcohol Signs of problematic alcohol consumption • Using other activities as an excuse to drink heavily (e.g. sporting events) • Alcohol related charges • Missing work or planned activities due to the effects of a hangover • Blackouts or memory loss • Denying or understating use • Abusive episodes (verbal and physical) when intoxicated • On a single occasion of drinking, the risk of alcohol-related injury increases with the amount consumed. • For healthy men and women, drinking no more than four standard drinks on a single occasion reduces the risk of alcohol-related injury arising from that occasion. • For healthy men and women, drinking no more than two standard drinks on any day reduces the lifetime risk of harm from alcohol-related disease or injury. • For women who are pregnant, planning a pregnancy or breastfeeding, not drinking is the safest option. Reducing the risk of injury Alcohol Consumption Guidelines February 2009 National Health and Medical Research Council • Watch out for your mates • Set limits for yourself, and stick to them • Drink within low-risk alcohol consumption guidelines • Be aware of and manage high risk times (stress and boredom) • If you plan to drink, don’t drive (remember that following a heavy night you may still be over the limit the next morning) • Consider the impact on meeting your responsibilities (i.e. work and family) Tips for the responsible use of alcohol Where to get help • Chain of Command is a primary resource that can provide advice, referral and support • Medical centre • Psychology Support Section/Team • Defence Community Organisation • Chaplains Alcohol Intervention and Training Framework Services and Resources • The Family Information Network for Defence (FIND) (1800 020 031) • ADF All-hours Support Line (ASL) (1800 628 036) • Veterans and Veterans’ Families Counselling Service (VVCS) (1800 011 046) • Lifeline (131 114) • DMH Website www.defence.gov.au/health/DMH/i-dmh.htm ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/Army/docs/rca_www.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/docs/rca_www.ppt",YMNDFVQM7CRKVHJC4A3ZKJQFJCVUAMRV,398266,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-docs-rca-www-ppt-20091222023528.ppt 9,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/9.blob?_blob_column=image,20100415022712,https://web.archive.org/web/20100415022712/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/ARMY/docs/rca_www.ppt,2010-04-15,2010-07-14,404,"Problematic use of Alcohol Courage, Initiative, Teamwork Army newspaper 14 May 09 “The “hidden enemies” of alcohol … [they] are a scourge on Army’s reputation and are contrary to the intent of Army’s values and ethos”. CA address to Commanders “I have recently made clear my extreme concern at the number of serious incidents within Army that are linked to alcohol misuse… Yet again, I feel compelled to raise this issue with you. I am not convinced that our commanders and people are getting the message.” “As commanders we have a responsibility to do as much as we can to reduce the number of these incidents. It involves actively seeking to change the thinking and culture that supports the idea that our people can drink excessively without consequence. It involves actively encouraging responsible drinking both in the workplace and when our people are off-duty. It involves commanders at all levels actively and regularly educating our people of the far reaching consequences of irresponsible drinking.” 20 Oct 2009 Recent DUI civilian offences 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sep Oct 1 BDE 3 BDE 7 BDE FORCOMD AIMS DUI data Total 33 2009 is defined in DI(G) PERS 15-1 Alcohol Use Within the Australian Defence Force as use: “…which leads to an individual’s misconduct, unacceptable social behaviour, impairment of health, financial responsibility or personal relationships, or interferes with performance of duty or with safety or security.” Problematic use of alcohol • The problematic use of alcohol is NOT CONDONED. • Members identified as using alcohol in a problematic way will be counselled and given treatment and rehabilitation as appropriate. • Commanders and junior leaders at all levels are to exercise their command responsibilities by ensuring members are aware of the consequences of their alcohol use, particularly. • The Army will not retain members who repeatedly misuse alcohol, members who refuse treatment for alcohol misuse, or members who fail to complete an alcohol counselling or rehabilitation program when ordered. Problematic use of alcohol The risks associated with short-term harm can include immediate health and social problems, such as: • damage to reputation • injuries from violence (as a perpetrator, a victim, or a witness) • pedestrian and road accidents (death/severe injury) • drowning • trauma related admissions to hospital emergency departments • alcohol poisoning • social and personal consequences such as the impact on families and social embarrassment • loss of valuable items ie phone or wallet • having unprotected sex and placing yourself at greater risk of a sexually transmitted infection (STI) and/or an unwanted pregnancy Short term harms Long-term harms Risky and high risk drinking may also have serious longer- term consequences, including: • social problems, such as spending more time drinking than pursuing other interests • brain damage, including the inability to learn and remember things • depression and suicidal thoughts • the development of chronic disease, including some cancers and heart disease • cirrhosis of the liver • dependence on alcohol Signs of problematic alcohol consumption • Using other activities as an excuse to drink heavily (e.g. sporting events) • Alcohol related charges • Missing work or planned activities due to the effects of a hangover • Blackouts or memory loss • Denying or understating use • Abusive episodes (verbal and physical) when intoxicated • On a single occasion of drinking, the risk of alcohol-related injury increases with the amount consumed. • For healthy men and women, drinking no more than four standard drinks on a single occasion reduces the risk of alcohol-related injury arising from that occasion. • For healthy men and women, drinking no more than two standard drinks on any day reduces the lifetime risk of harm from alcohol-related disease or injury. • For women who are pregnant, planning a pregnancy or breastfeeding, not drinking is the safest option. Reducing the risk of injury Alcohol Consumption Guidelines February 2009 National Health and Medical Research Council • Watch out for your mates • Set limits for yourself, and stick to them • Drink within low-risk alcohol consumption guidelines • Be aware of and manage high risk times (stress and boredom) • If you plan to drink, don’t drive (remember that following a heavy night you may still be over the limit the next morning) • Consider the impact on meeting your responsibilities (i.e. work and family) Tips for the responsible use of alcohol Where to get help • Chain of Command is a primary resource that can provide advice, referral and support • Medical centre • Psychology Support Section/Team • Defence Community Organisation • Chaplains Alcohol Intervention and Training Framework Services and Resources • The Family Information Network for Defence (FIND) (1800 020 031) • ADF All-hours Support Line (ASL) (1800 628 036) • Veterans and Veterans’ Families Counselling Service (VVCS) (1800 011 046) • Lifeline (131 114) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/ARMY/docs/rca_www.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/docs/rca_www.ppt",72CFF7HVLAKFZSGXVZKOOURUL4SALRSS,398019,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-docs-rca-www-ppt-20100415022712.ppt 10,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/10.blob?_blob_column=image,20070911062017,https://web.archive.org/web/20070911062017/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/battlegroups.ppt,2007-09-11,2007-09-11,404," Battlegroups and Combat Teams - the combined arms approach HNA Battlegroup HQ available: Combat Team Manoeuvre elements based on: BOS support limits: - Engineers: 2 Battlegroups rotating - Artillery: Up to 3 Battlegroups rotating - Combat Service Support designed for 2 Battlegroups + Cav Sqn rotating ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/battlegroups.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/hna/docs/battlegroups.ppt",OEHUK2TNT777XS2WN7DVYZ7UU7ZFOU5A,65535,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-hna-docs-battlegroups-ppt-20070911062017.ppt 11,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/11.blob?_blob_column=image,20070911062046,https://web.archive.org/web/20070911062046/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/HNA%20General%20Presentation.ppt,2007-01-24,2007-09-11,404,"THE HARDENED AND NETWORKED ARMY THE HARDENED AND NETWORKED ARMY The Requirement The Requirement • High Operational Tempo • Era of Strategic Uncertainty • Proliferation of Lethal Weapons • Complex Battlefields • Army’s Current Size Outcomes Outcomes • Increased Options for Government • Best use of the Defence Capability Plan • Enhanced Survivability • Improved Sustainability • Higher Readiness Outcomes Outcomes • A Network Enabled Army • A Relevant and Capable Army Reserve • Better joint and coalition interoperability • Increased Capability and Versatility • Improved geographic disposition Enhanced Army Reserve Enhanced Army Reserve Active Reserve HRR Standby Reserve Battlegroups and Combat Teams - the combined arms approach Battlegroups and Combat Teams - the combined arms approach Battlegroup Headquarters available: Combat Team Manoeuvre elements based on: Increased Capability and Versatility Increased Capability and Versatility 1st Brigade 7th Brigade 3rd Brigade 3 RAR (Mech) Improved Geographic Disposition Improved Geographic Disposition Major Changes Major Changes • 1,485 Regular Soldiers • 123 Public Service Personnel • Re-role the 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment • A move to Adelaide • Refocused Army Reserve • Modification of Unit Structures ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/HNA%20General%20Presentation.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/hna/docs/hna%20general%20presentation.ppt",SW3ROXIAIR7A7OOBKEQG6VYGDDGKVSWD,786973,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-hna-docs-hna-20general-20presentation-ppt-20070911062046.ppt 12,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/12.blob?_blob_column=image,20070901172922,https://web.archive.org/web/20070901172922/http://www.defence.gov.au/ARMY/HNA/docs/HNA%20Reserve%20Presentation.ppt,2007-09-01,2007-09-01,404," THE ARMY RESERVE - RELEVANT AND READY ‘To provide specified individual and collective capability to support, sustain and reinforce Army’s operational forces.’ HNA RESERVE COMPONENTS • High Readiness Reserve • Active Reserve • Standby Reserve management • Force Structures • Implementation Plan • Training • Remuneration HIGH READINESS RESERVE • Regular Army units will seek High Readiness Reservists in accordance with their unit establishments via ACMS. • High Readiness Reservists will sign a two year contract. • They will be managed and administered regionally by their parent Army Reserve unit. • They are substantively posted to their supported Regular Army unit. • They will provide 32-50 days on mandated training per year including one continuous exercise annually with their supported Regular Army unit (or formation for Force Protection Company Group members) and the remainder with their parent Army Reserve unit. • Must be available for voluntary deployment when called for. • Must possess all Regular Army competencies for their employed position (until the HNA training model review is complete- whereby exceptions may be made) ACTIVE RESERVE • Active Reservists will enable the High Readiness Reserve through support and reinforcement. • The Active Reserve will provide the Reserve Response Force, previously known as the High Readiness Reserve. • Active Reservists will still have the opportunity to be selected for operations, although this opportunity is decreased with the raising of the High Readiness Reserve. STANDBY RESERVE • The Standby Reserve management systems are being reviewed with a view to enhancing the utility of this latent capability. FUTURE FORCE STRUCTURE FUTURE FMN STRUCTURE HRR DEVELOPMENT SEQUENCE Mid-2006-End 2008 Round out the following orgs: 16 AD HQ 6 ESR 19 Engr Wks HQ LSF 1 MP Bn DJFHQ 6 RAR 1 CSSB HQ 1 Bde HQ 7 Bde B Sqn 3/ 4 Cav Regt 2/14 LHR 1 Fd Regt 16 Avn Bde 1 Psych Unit Two HRR FPCG Start 2009-End 2012 Round out the following orgs: 17 Constr Sqn 21 Contsr Sqn 7 Sig Regt 131 STA Regt 1 JSU 3 RAR 1 Armd Regt 2 Cav Regt 8/12 Mdm Regt 1 CER 5/7 RAR 3 CSSB 4 Fd Regt 3 CER 1 RAR 2 RAR DFSU LSF Sig Sqn 10 FSB HQ FSG 1 HSB 2 HSB 1 Int Bn HQ 3 Bde 1 CSR 3 CSR 1 Topo Survey Sqn 9 FSB SOCOMD Four HRR FPCG HRR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PHASE ONE (Mid 2006-End 2008): • Develop the approximately 1100 individual and collective reinforcements; • Identify additional capabilities required to be developed within the Army Reserve; and • Review C2 at regional and command level. HRR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PHASE TWO (Start 2009-End 2012): • Develop remaining 1700 individual and collective reinforcements; TRAINING • The HNA Training Model currently under development will: − Maintain the common competency model for ARA and ARes − Reduce the training requirement for AR by reducing the number of competencies required − Identify and develop gap training to enable Reservists to transition from AR to HRR REMUNERATION • HRR will receive: − $10,000 Tax Free completion bonus for two years HRR service − $2,500 health benefit per annum • AR and HRR will receive: − New pay rates that are competency based − A Reserve disability allowance (akin to service allowance) − Health support assistance ""….Army Reserve forces can now be concentrated on providing full capability as part of operational forces, and to provide the subsequent reinforcement and rotation of deployed forces. Expansion and mobilisation will remain an Army task, but the priority in the future will clearly be on meeting more immediate military needs."" Lieutenant General Peter Leahy CONCLUSION LINKS and REFERENCES • Intranet (DRN) http://intranet.defence.gov.au/armyweb/sites/HNA/ • Internet: http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/ • Implementing Directive for the Hardened and Networked Army Reserve DCA Directive 18/05 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/ARMY/HNA/docs/HNA%20Reserve%20Presentation.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/hna/docs/hna%20reserve%20presentation.ppt",3ALAHBM3E323M7DFZA4NMK7KSCVWQSM7,549003,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-hna-docs-hna-20reserve-20presentation-ppt-20070901172922.ppt 13,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/13.blob?_blob_column=image,20070911062324,https://web.archive.org/web/20070911062324/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/HNA%20Short%20Intro.ppt,2007-01-24,2007-09-11,404,"HNA Overview HNA Overview SCOPE SCOPE • Why do we need HNA? • HNA Construct • Avenues of Approach • Questions HNA Overview WHY WE NEED HNA? WHY WE NEED HNA? • HNA aims to address: – Government Requirements – The Complex Battlefield – Army’s Current Situation HNA Overview GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS “Government plans to structure the Army to sustain a brigade deployed on operations for extended periods, and at the same time maintain at least a battalion group available for deployment elsewhere”. “That focus will be broadened to meet a wider range of possible contingencies, both on Australian territory and beyond.” “ . . priorities to take account of the new strategic environment, changes which will ensure a more flexible and mobile force, with sufficient levels of readiness . . “ ”. . government recognises the need for a new phase in the development of the Army to create greater combat weight. . increase the size of Army, its weight and mobility, and provide a new force structure of combined arms battle groups. .” HNA Overview THE COMPLEX BATTLEFIELD THE COMPLEX BATTLEFIELD Physical Environment Mogadishu Mogadishu Complex Human Terrain Fleeting surprise engagements Proliferation of lethal weapon systems HNA Overview CURRENT SITUATION CURRENT SITUATION • Army is not optimised to absorb the DCP • Army has a sub-optimal disposition and old facilities. • There is hollowness across capabilities • Individual training capacity is under pressure • The Army Reserve is declining • Need for a long term approach HNA Overview WHAT HNA IS NOT WHAT HNA IS NOT • HNA is not the tank. • HNA is not a plan to transition Army to a heavy armoured force capable of high intensity conflict. • HNA is not a radical development plan. • More than capability change from Motorised Battalion transitions to a Mechanised Battalion. HNA Overview HNA CONSTRUCT HNA CONSTRUCT HNA is also based on the Concept-led, capability- based construct. The force has been designed on the task organisable combined arms philosophy. Tenets • Mobility • Firepower • Survivability • Communications Close Combat HNA Overview Force Structure Force Structure Current Situation HNA Battlegroup HQ available: Combat Team Manoeuvre elements based on: HNA Overview AVENUES OF APPROACH AVENUES OF APPROACH • Equipment • Organisation • Doctrine and Training • Army Reserve HNA Overview 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 DOCTRINE & TRAINING HNA Training Mode Development Australian Soldier 21st Century HNA Training Model Implementation ARMY RESERVE FPCG 1 FPCG 2 FPCG 3 FPCG4 FPCG 5 FPCG 6 High Readiness Reserve RRF ORGANISATION & STRUCTURE 1ST MECH BN 2ND MECH BN STA REGT B SQN IMV 1ST CAV REGT 2ND CAV REGT 1ST LIGHT BN 2ND LIGHT BN 3rd LIGHT BN ARH REGT EQUIPMENT Networking Hardening M113AS3/4 M1A1 AIM LAND121 TUAV JP2072 FBCB2 LAND 75 LAND17 Fires BMS MRH 90 HNA Overview For more information: http://www.army.gov.au//HNA/ HNA meeting the threat. Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/HNA%20Short%20Intro.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/hna/docs/hna%20short%20intro.ppt",3L2BFCB7YXAZOB2YGJZ73NPEBNFQKSRM,1260826,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-hna-docs-hna-20short-20intro-ppt-20070911062324.ppt 14,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/14.blob?_blob_column=image,20070911061846,https://web.archive.org/web/20070911061846/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/NCW%20Model.ppt,2007-09-11,2007-09-11,404," BG TG / Bde DJTF Plt/Sqn BG CP TG CP Tactical Data JP2072 Voice JP2072 Lower TI SATCOM JP2008 Voice JP2072 Range Ext JP2072 Upper TI Plt Comd - Tp Ldr AS Land NCW Model BACKBONE (DRN/DSN/VIDEO) DJFHQ UAV Sect HC DATA JP2072 BVTC JP2072 Coy/Sqn Gp VOICE L125 DATA L125 DBMS L125 SPR GPS ARH BMS L75 DIV TROOPS GCS GMMC L17 CSS CP Platform VOICE JP2072 DATA JP2072 BMS L75 GPS BCSS L75 SERVICES: HC Data Voice Secure Voice UNCLAS BVTC Messaging BCSS & BMS DRN & DSN BMS L75 BCSS L75 G G SERVICES: HC Data Voice Secure Voice UNCLAS BVTC Messaging BCSS & BMS DRN & DSN JCSS JP2030 SERVICES: HC Data Voice Secure / UNCLAS BVTC & Messaging BCSS & BMS DRN & DSN ACSS & MCSS PMKeys & SDSS ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/hna/docs/NCW%20Model.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/hna/docs/ncw%20model.ppt",V5TWFYZBZRJ4MQNHOS3BZ6YOSRBVOBWC,1350457,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-hna-docs-ncw-20model-ppt-20070911061846.ppt 15,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/15.blob?_blob_column=image,20050719214757,https://web.archive.org/web/20050719214757/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/LWD1/LWD1.ppt,2005-07-19,2008-08-23,404,,application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/LWD1/LWD1.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/lwd1/lwd1.ppt",SBNHQUY3SWZIDXLVTUKUOUTPVJZIQW2J,709531,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-lwd1-lwd1-ppt-20050719214757.ppt 16,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/16.blob?_blob_column=image,20100613142316,https://web.archive.org/web/20100613142316/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/army/raamc/docs/longtan.pps,2010-06-13,2010-06-13,404," You are about to view a PowerPoint presentation. (PowerPoint version 2003 or later) Some slides have a built-in timing but in most cases a slide will wait for a ‘click’ before proceeding. However, please note that you can also use PowerPoint’s own navigation. At the lower left of the screen display you will see: to return to the start of the previous slide. to see a submenu from which you can go to next or previous slides, pause the presentation or end the show. to go to the start of the next slide. Click on Click on Click on Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 1 50 THE BATTLE OF LONG TAN A dotPPT PowerPoint Animations presentation Featuring Maps by Dave Sabben, Click to start the presentation… Animation by dotPPT PowerPoint Animations (visit the website: www.dotPPT.com ) and Excerpts from the book “The Battle of Long Tan as told by the Commanders to Bob Grandin” (Allen & Unwin, 2004, ISBN 1 74114 199 0) SLIDE OF 2 50 The Long Tan Cross (pic taken ANZAC Day 2005), at the site of the 11 Platoon action of 18 Aug 1966 In 1966, Australia increased its commitment of troops in South Viet Nam to a two-Battalion “Task Force” plus appropriate support units. Prior to this, Australia had military advisors scattered throughout the South The new Task Force took over responsibility for Phuoc Tuy Province, on the coast to the south east of Saigon. and a Battalion Group operating out of Bien Hoa with the US 173rd Airborne Brigade (Separate). SLIDE OF 3 50 Click to proceed… Click to proceed… Hat Dich 40 50 40 65 70 45 50 P H U O C T U Y P R O V I N C E Nui Dat (2) Nui Nghe Nui Dat Hoa Long Long Phuoc Binh Ba 2 Scale: approx 5 Kilometre grid Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 N 70 65 45 35 55 2 75 75 Long Tan The new Task Force took over responsibility for Phuoc Tuy Province, on the coast to the south east of Saigon. and a Battalion Group operating out of Bien Hoa with the US 173rd Airborne Brigade (Sep). In 1966, Australia increased its commitment of troops in South Viet Nam to a two-Battalion “Task Force” plus appropriate support units. 1APC Squadron and 5RAR occupied the base site in late-May to early-June 1966 and were joined by the Task Force HQ, Artillery, supporting units and 6RAR in June and July. … and their Operational Base (1ATF) around a small hill (“Nui Dat”) near the centre of the province… The Australians set up their Logistics Base (1ALSG) near the sea port of Vung Tau... Prior to this, Australia had military advisors scattered throughout the South SLIDE OF 4 50 Click to proceed… By mid-July, the base was fully manned, but development was slow… Click to proceed… Hat Dich 40 50 40 65 70 45 50 P H U O C T U Y P R O V I N C E Nui Dat (2) Nui Nghe Nui Dat Hoa Long Long Phuoc Binh Ba 2 Scale: approx 5 Kilometre grid Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 N 70 65 45 35 55 2 75 75 After first setting their perimeter… This was “Line Alpha” – the line inside which the enemy could direct aimed fire into the base. they began to clear out to a notional line 5 kms out from the base. Long Phuoc and Long Tan villages were deserted… By mid-August, the area within 5 kms of the base was well patrolled but still not secure… The area within Line Alpha needed to be kept clear but, at first, villagers often entered the area. but Hoa Long and Binh Ba were populated. Long Tan SLIDE OF 5 50 June 1966 Click to proceed… Click to proceed… By mid-July, the base was fully manned, but development was slow… … It is well documented that the base itself was not very secure in the first few months… Page 72 - …an attack on the base was not considered a probability and therefore it was poorly defended. There was little barbed wire of note out the front of the FDLs, and no anti-personnel minefields. It was preposterous to suggest the base might be in danger. We believed that the local VC were not about to take on a two-battalion Task Force with its supporting artillery regiment, mortars and armour, and with US Air Force fighters and bombers not far away… Page 16 - “Brigadier Jackson was well aware, 1ATF was now at its weakest. Not only was the base camp in its beginnings, but most of the soldiers and officers were inexperienced.” In fact – there was even the expectation of an enemy reaction to the establishment of an Australian base… Click to proceed… The Battle Of Long Tan Lex McAulay (April 1986) Page 75 - “Intelligence had tentatively located a second regiment of VC to the north of Nui Dat, possibly moving to hook round and approach Nui Dat from the west.” Page 321 - “The defences (were) incomplete...” Page 361 - “...physical defences at Nui Dat in the first eleven weeks were undeveloped...” Page 413 - “(at its establishment) The task force ... could not even obtain such stores as wire and mines for its own defence...” The VC also knew the layout of the Task Force base… Page 361 - “The Viet Cong would have an accurate general picture of the layout of the base from observation from Route 2.” (For example, a note 15 on Page 561 shows that the VC had estimated 1ATF artillery at 21 guns - actually, 24 when all were within the base) The Battle Of Long Tan as told by the Commanders to Bob Grandin (Aug 2004) To Long Tan Ian McNeill (1993) (The official history of Australia’s involvement in S E Asia conflicts 1948-1975) By mid-August, the area within 5 Kms of the base was well patrolled but still not secure… Page 62 – It wasn’t long before the VC worked out that they could take on the lone battalion at Nui Dat (in June). Information filtered through to the ARVN and to the United States intelligence networks that the VC were planning a regimental attack on Nui Dat within a few days. Page 72 – Information was available that two VC regiments could assemble anywhere in the province in 24 to 48 hours, but the gravity of the threat was not stressed. Glossary: FDLs = Forward Defensive Lines (the perimeter) VC = Viet Cong - the Australians’ enemy in Viet Nam ARVN = Army of the Republic of Viet Nam - the Vietnamese soldiers fighting for South Viet Nam A VC Regiment had between 2500 and 3000 soldiers. SLIDE OF 6 50 June and July 1966 Page 249 - “After some days (early June) the reconnoitring (of the Task Force perimeter) stopped and it seemed very likely that the enemy was finalising preparations to attack.” Page 249 - “Intelligence warning of a four-battalion attack on the base hastened plans for the call-forward of 6RAR ... on 14 June instead of by 23 June as initially arranged.” Page 309 (refer map Page 310) - “... the radio station (275’s HQ set) started to move west towards the task force. ... the radio set associated with 275 Regiment (was) approaching Nui Dat at a rate of a one-kilometre grid square each day.” “... two days before the mortaring (ie, 14 Aug) ... enemy radio traffic indicated 275 Regiment (‘s radio) to have reached 5000 metres east of the base.” 47 46 45 44 43 48 49 66 67 68 69 65 47 46 45 44 43 48 49 66 67 68 69 65 Long Tan Long Phuoc Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 In the early hours of 17 August, the VC bombarded the Australian base at Nui Dat….. 2 Weir Destroyed Bridge Scale: approx 1000 metre grid Mortars RCLs Field Gun TASK FORCE BASE N Song Cau Suoi Da Bang Nui Dat 2 Nui Dat XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX __________ XXXX _____ __________XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXX _____ XXXX _____ XXXX _____ XXXXXXXX __________XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXX _____ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ Task Force HQ, SAS, ARU, Artillery and Engineer lines were hit. There were 24 casualties….. TARGET AREA 1 Fd Sqn Engineers SAS & ARU Task Force HQ 103 Fd Bty Artillery Fire was returned from the Task Force artillery batteries and the enemy fire quickly stopped. Indeed, the enemy reaction came in mid-August….. Click to proceed… Glossary: RCL = lightweight Recoilless Rifle that fires a heavier projectile than would be possible with a recoiling weapon HQ = Head Quarters – the command element of any unit SAS = Special Air Services – a specialist infantry unit ARU = Australian Reinforcement Unit – holding soldiers who will reinforce other units needing more troops SLIDE OF 7 50 17 Aug 1966 Pre-dawn Click to proceed… CLICK INSIDE THIS BOX TO UNDERSTAND HOW MILITARY UNITS ARE SHOWN: IN THIS PRESENTATION A 6RAR 47 46 45 44 43 48 49 66 67 68 69 65 47 46 45 44 43 48 49 66 67 68 69 65 Long Tan Long Phuoc 2 Weir Destroyed Bridge RCLs TASK FORCE BASE N Song Cau Suoi Da Bang Nui Dat 2 Nui Dat XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX __________ XXXX _____ __________XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXX _____ XXXX _____ XXXX _____ XXXXXXXX __________XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXX _____ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ XXXXXXXX __________ Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid Meanwhile, a B/6RAR patrol Mortars Field Gun Task Force HQ, SAS, ARU, Artillery and Engineer lines were hit. There were 24 casualties….. …and on the 18th, the RCL & Gun positions. All exit tracks headed north east and east….. D/6RAR D 6RAR left on the morning of 17th Aug and located the mortar baseplate positions... was sent out at noon 18th Aug to take over from B/6RAR and continue the search….. B 6RAR SLIDE OF 8 50 17 and 18 August 1966 Glossary: “exit tracks” = the tracks left by the enemy as they left the firing position. Click to proceed… At the time of the bombardment, A Company, 6RAR, was on a 3-day patrol north of Nui Dat 2. During the early hours of the 17th, they heard noises – likely some of the VC withdrawing. On the 16th they had had three contacts……now thought to be VC moving in to bombard the base. A/6RARs task had been to sweep down Line Alpha towards Long Tan, before returning to base. On 17th August, A/6RAR was re-tasked to move west and search for the VC teams and their tracks. As they moved to their new task, they had another contact – on the northern slopes of Nui Dat 2. Click to proceed… Fire was returned from the Task Force artillery batteries and the enemy fire quickly stopped. Click to proceed… Click to proceed… Click to proceed… 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR B and D Companies met at 1:00pm and discussed the situation. The follow-up task was transferred to D/6RAR. As B/6RAR headed back to base, D/6RAR shook out and started to follow the cart tracks heading east… 12 D 11 D 10 D D 6RAR After 200 metres the cart tracks split, both still leading eastwards… D/6RAR changed formation: 10 Platoon to follow the north track, 11 Platoon forward to follow the south track. SLIDE OF 9 50 18 Aug 1966 1300-1540 hrs (1pm-3:40pm) As they talked, they could hear the sounds of the Task Force’s first concert tuning up and getting under way… View of the concert area – on the lower east slope of Nui Dat hill. The rubber plantation in the left distance (1000 metres away) was the “home” of 6RAR in 1966-67. The rubber plantation in the right distance (5000 metres away) is where the Battle of Long Tan was fought. Click to proceed… Click to proceed… 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR 12 D 10 D D 6RAR 11 D When 11 Platoon (with two sections forward) reached the road, it started an obstacle crossing drill. The two leading sections crossed the road and secured the other side, then platoon HQ started to cross. 48 C O N T A C T SLIDE OF 10 50 18 Aug 1966 1300-1540 hrs (1pm-3:40pm) Click to proceed… CONTACT: 18 Aug 1540hrs. - D Coy - Contact with 6 to 8 enemy dressed in greens at grid reference YS478673, Where 11 Platoon crossed, the track sloped slightly down hill to the north, our left, and the hill crested some 75 to 100 metres to the right. It was a gentle slope, limiting our visual distance to the south. When about ten metres from the fence I suddenly saw five or six VC, casually walking, with their heads down, along the track from the right. They had come over the rise just after the others in Platoon HQ had crossed the track and moved into the rubber. The VC had missed seeing them by a few seconds. Without hesitation, I raised my rifle and fired two quick shots at a VC. He dropped as I had hit him with both rounds. The other VC took cover. The 11 Platoon Commander requested permission to give hot pursuit. I agreed - there were 5 or 6 VC, at least one of whom was at least wounded - a Platoon was well able to handle that task. With 11 Platoon pushing ahead, I ordered 10 Platoon to maintain its direction and rate of advance. Company HQ and 12 Platoon would advance behind 10 Platoon. I reported the contact to 6RAR HQ: possibly wounding one. Remainder fled east. One AK-47 (assault rifle) retrieved. No own casualties. Sergeant Bob Buick - 11 Platoon, D/6RAR Major Harry Smith - OC Delta Company, 6RAR Click to proceed… C O N T A C T SLIDE OF 11 50 18 Aug 1966 1540 hrs (3:40pm) Glossary: OC = Officer Commanding – for a Company, usually a Major; for a Platoon, a Lieutenant (Lt) or a Second Lieutenant (2Lt). Not to be confused with “CO” = Commanding Officer, applying to Battalions and larger units. CLICK INSIDE THIS BOX TO UNDERSTAND HOW GRID REFERENCES ARE USED IN THIS PRESENTATION 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR 12 D 10 D D 6RAR 11 D The enemy fled east, followed by 11 Platoon, as the Company closed up and followed at a slower pace. Clearing the hut, 11 Platoon lost sight of the enemy patrol, but kept following the blood trail eastwards… Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 12 50 18 Aug 1966 1540-1600 hrs (3:40 to 4pm) 6 Until the first contact, the Company had been in an older part of the rubber plantation, but as 11 Platoon chased the small enemy force they – and the Company – moved into a younger plantation, similar to this… Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 13 50 18 Aug 1966 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid 12 D 10 D D 6RAR At this stage, the Company was following the contact, so the tracks they had been following were forgotten. B- 6RAR 11 Platoon continued the pursuit. Suddenly they were stopped by massive fire from their left-front (north east). 11 D SLIDE OF 14 50 18 Aug 1966 1600-1610 hrs (4 – 4:10 pm) CLICK INSIDE THIS BOX TO SEE WHAT DELTA COMPANY DIDN’T KNOW – WHERE THE VC WERE: 6 Click to proceed… CONTACT: 18 Aug 1610 hrs. -11 Platoon under heavy fire from grid 487674 (southern slopes of Nui Dat 2). Without warning, two enemy machine guns fired from the left front (north) – from the scrub and creek line at the southern base of the Nui Dat 2 feature. The left man of 4 Section was about 75 metres from the enemy. Sharp immediately placed his platoon in an ‘L’ shape to bring maximum fire to bear, then called for artillery. While the fire-fight to the north was developing, a group of about 80 VC attacked from the east… 11 Platoon was suddenly in a very difficult predicament. Harry (Smith) and I had already agreed on the grid reference of our location. He approved the request from Gordon Sharp for artillery fire support, which we considered might have been useful even if I directed the fire at some distance from 11 Platoon’s known position. Initially, I engaged with my own 161 Battery, but the situation deteriorated rapidly. Within minutes the first artillery shells were dropping on the slopes of the hill and being adjusted closer… 2Lt Gordon Sharp, OC 11 Platoon, D/6RAR (an excerpt from the book “The Battle Of Long Tan as told by the Commanders” to Bob Grandin”.) Captain Morrie Stanley 161 Bty, RNZArtillery Attached as forward artillery observer (FO) to D/6RAR Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 15 50 18 Aug 1966 1610 hrs (4:10 pm) 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid 12 D 10 D D 6RAR On this news, the CO ordered the B/6RAR patrol to halt and await orders to go to reinforce D/6RAR. At 1615 hrs, Smith advised his CO, Colonel Townsend, that 11 Platoon was fighting an estimated VC company. The initial 11 Platoon estimate was an enemy platoon… As the VC poured fire into 11 Platoon… 11 D Meanwhile, at the Task Force base… B- 6RAR 30 100 I while D/6RAR was in contact at Long Tan and B/6RAR waited to return… Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . Two choppers sat on the 1ATF helipad waiting to take the concert A/6RAR returned to base after a 3-day operation to the north east; A 6RAR B- 6RAR D 6RAR 3Tp 1APC 9Sqn RAAF The APCs were at the concert, on other duties or in the workshop; CO = Commanding Officer – the officer commanding a Battalion (a Lieutenant Colonel [LtCol]) or a larger unit. Click to proceed… … the VC mortared the rest of D/6, which moved 100 metres north. party back to Vung Tau; SLIDE OF 16 50 18 Aug 1966 1610-1620 hrs (4:10-4:20pm) …but this was quickly revised to an enemy company. Glossary: RAAF = Royal Australian Air Force – 9 Squadron flew the “huey” helicopters in Viet Nam. APC = Armoured Personnel Carrier – a lightly armoured tracked vehicle capable of transporting about twelve soldiers. 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid 12 D 10 D D 6RAR B- 6RAR As the enemy continued to engage 11 Platoon… …10 Platoon was sent forward to support the withdrawal of 11. 12 Platoon took over CHQ defence. After about 300 metres, 10 Platoon hit another formation of enemy. Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 17 50 18 Aug 1966 1620-1630 hrs (4:20-4:30 pm) Glossary: CHQ = Company Head Quarters 30 11 D 100 I “I told the platoon to drop their packs. We started off, two-up in extended line, towards the sound of the firing…” “The skies opened up and rain was bucketing down” “We went on probably another 150 metres… … the sound of the firing up front was enormous”. 2Lt Geoff Kendall OC 10 Platoon, D/6RAR Major Harry Smith OC D/6RAR “We saw a line of troops moving across our right front in what looked like assault formation. I was a little concerned that they could be part of 11 Platoon, so kept the guys going until it was obvious they were enemy“. “The closest of them would only have been twenty-odd metres away but they still hadn’t seen us. I ordered my guys to fire… …we knocked over the whole right-hand element.“ “We continued but moved only a few metres before we were hit with a hail of fire from our left front.” “At 1615 hours I’d reported 11 Platoon’s enemy as an estimated platoon. At 1626 I upped that to a company” “When 10 Platoon hit VC, I knew we were up against a force larger than our own.” “I again asked for the B Coy patrol of about 48 men to come to us, but that was again not approved.” “Up to now we’d been supported by a single artillery battery (6 guns). I now called for the full regiment (24 guns). After a time, permission was granted and we were able to fire at different targets concurrently.” “We would also need reinforcement. The quickest way to get them to us was by chopper. My request was turned down – no choppers, no secured LZ. I was told reinforcements would be sent by APC.” “Until then, we were on our own. Time was against us – it would be dark in two and a half hours! And then the 10 Platoon radio went off the air…..” Click to proceed… As the enemy continues to flank 11 Platoon… …10 Platoon is sent forward to support the withdrawal of 11. 12 Platoon takes over CHQ defence. After about 300 metres, 10 Platoon hits another formation of enemy. SLIDE OF 18 50 18 Aug 1966 1620-1630 hrs (4:20-4:30 pm) 47 10 D 49 67 48 D 6RAR 12 D 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid 11 platoon now estimated VC on the hill as a battalion B- 6RAR A D/6 signaller, Pte Bill ‘Ýank’ Akell, rushed alone from CHQ to 10 Platoon to deliver the spare radio set. 10 Platoon reported machine gun fire from the hill in support of the enemy they were in contact with. At about 1645 hrs, a monsoon rain storm advanced across the battlefield. The rain was torrential. 30 100 Ix 600 11 D At 1640 hrs, Smith passed on the VC battalion information – just before the 10 Platoon radio went off the air. Visibility under the rubber canopy was halved. Within minutes, a knee-high mud mist covered the ground. Pte Bill ‘Yank’ Akell D Company Signaller Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 19 50 18 Aug 1966 1630-1645 hrs (4:30-4:45 pm) and reported company sized assaults from their east. 100 I This photo demonstrates the “mud mist” effect. This is the Long Tan cross as it was some years ago, before being developed as shown in the title slide of this presentation. Please note the red staining at the lower end of the cross vertical. It is mud splashed up from the bare ground during the monsoon rainstorms. Once the ground below is saturated, the raindrops hit the mud with such force that the splash forms a red “mist” up to twenty inches (to 50cm) high and thick enough lower down to hide a person laying on the ground. The soldier’s uniforms were also stained red, adding to the camouflage effect. 47 10 D 49 67 48 D 6RAR 12 D 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR Meanwhile, at the Task Force base, both the APCs and Alpha Company of 6RAR were put on standby… 2Lt Gordon Sharp OC 11 Platoon, D/6RAR KIA Long Tan 18 Aug 1966 30 11 D x 600 100 I Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . The two choppers were still at the 1ATF helipad but the crews A/6RAR was placed on standby to board the APCs for Long Tan; A 6RAR B- 6RAR D 6RAR 3Tp 1APC 9Sqn RAAF 3 Troop 1APC was placed on standby and told to go to A/6RAR; had moved to Task Force HQ to find out what’s happening. Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 20 50 18 Aug 1966 1645-1700 hrs (4:45-5 pm) At about 1650 hrs, 11 Platoon’s Sgt Bob Buick reported that 2Lt Gordon Sharp had been killed. Buick assumed command of 11 Platoon. It had been just an hour since he’d fired the first shots of the battle. 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid 11 Platoon was still receiving fire from north and heavy assaults from the east. They also saw VC to their south. B- 6RAR While 10 Platoon’s radio was off the air – before the spare arrived - 11 Platoon’s radio had its aerial shot off. For a time, CHQ lost contact with both Platoons. Worse – neither Platoon could direct their artillery requests. formation, comms were restored with 10 Platoon, which advised that they had casualties and were withdrawing. Smith prepared CHQ and 12 Platoon to move south east, towards both 10 and 11 Platoons. As they shook into With new artillery requests and the need to prepare a Company Aid Post (CAP) for the 10 Platoon wounded, CHQ settled back down into defence, retaining a Section of 12 Platoon to man their perimeter. The rest of 12 Platoon was tasked to go to 11 Platoon and support their withdrawal back to CHQ. At this stage, D 6RAR 12 D SLIDE OF 21 50 18 Aug 1966 1700-1710 hrs (5:00-5:10 pm) Click to proceed… 10 D 30 x 600 11 D Reinforcements 100 I The VC were now within 50 metres of 11 Platoon and artillery falling some 100 metres from their perimeter. 30 30 “I heard on the radio net Brig Jackson gave approval in principle only for the APC force to move, but Alpha and the APCs waited … for the executive order.” “My anger grew with each passing delay. I recall being told the APCs were again delayed in leaving. I retorted … ‘If they don’t hurry up and get out here then they might as well not come at all’.”. 2Lt Dave Sabben OC 12 Platoon, D/6RAR Sergeant Bob Buick Now commanding 11 Platoon “My orders were to put two sections in front of CHQ and one behind, and to start an advance towards 11 Platoon. 10 Platoon would meet up with us en route.” “The plan changed when Harry had to stop to form a firm base. He kept my third section and ordered me to proceed with two sections to go get 11 Platoon.” “There were just twenty of us…”. “We withdrew to CHQ by a couple of backward fire and movement leaps. This got us out of the area being blanketed by enemy fire and must have been out of their sight because we were able to get back to Harry’s location without further casualties. On arrival the OC ordered me to put my platoon down in defence facing toward the 11 Platoon fire-fight area.” “The platoon signaller, Vic Grice, replaced the short antenna that had been shot off the radio with the long antenna. With communications re-established, we adjusted the artillery closer.” ”The aerials, the noise of the firing and the storm were not the only problems with the radio – the enemy began to interfere with and jam the radio frequency.” By now, the company was divided into four groups, each with its own tasks and priorities… 2Lt Geoff Kendall OC 10 Platoon, D/6RAR Major Harry Smith OC D/6RAR IN THE RUBBER Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 22 50 18 Aug 1966 1700-1710 hrs (5:00-5:10 pm) 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid …then turned and started east towards 11 Platoon, avoiding the enemy following up the 10 Platoon withdrawal. B- 6RAR As 10 Platoon returned to CHQ with its casualties, the two sections of 12 Platoon headed south to the hut… The platoon had been there for an hour, had about 50% casualties and was running out of ammunition… 11 Platoon, still heavily engaged, watched the VC circling to their south to ‘close the door’ on them. At CHQ, the 10 Platoon casualties were passed by the CSM, Jack Kirby, to Cpl Phil Dobson in the CAP. The rest of 10 Platoon was placed to defend the CAP and Company HQ from the enemy moving in from the east. D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D 12- D WO2 Jack Kirby CSM, D/6RAR Cpl Phil Dobson Medic, D/6RAR Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 23 50 18 Aug 1966 1710-1720 hrs (5:10-5:20 pm) Glossary: CSM = Company Sergeant Major – A Warrant Officer Class 2 [WO2] - the senior non-commissioned officer in an Infantry Company. CAP = Company Aid Post – the place where wounded are treated first before evacuation to hospital. Cpl = abbreviation for Corporal. 30 x 600 11 D Reinforcements 100 I 30 30 30 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid …where they ran in to the probes trying to flank 11 Platoon. B- 6RAR At 1710 hrs, Smith requested an ammo resupply, asking that it be dropped from choppers overhead. He also As the enemy began to probe the CHQ defences… asked for an air-strike on the enemy’s depth positions, and that the Bravo Company patrol be sent to assist. 30 30 10 10 SLIDE OF 24 50 18 Aug 1966 1720-1730 hrs (5:20-5:30 pm) 10 30 D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D … 12 Platoon advanced towards 11 Platoon… Click to proceed… By 1730 hrs, all three platoons were in contact. 10 30 x 600 11 D Reinforcements 100 I 12 D Brigadier Jackson was concerned at denuding the base of too many troops and APCs. He was worried about the whereabouts of the other VC Regiment, the 274th. 5RAR was only now returning from its Binh Ba operation, its perimeter defended by assorted small units 6RAR had three Companies out, with Charlie Company defending the whole 6RAR perimeter. Flt/Lt Bob Grandin Pilot, 9 Sqn., RAAF Lt Adrian Roberts OC 3Troop, 1APC Sqn “The artillery just kept firing so the pilots went to the TFHQ Ops tent to see what was happening. When Smith asked for an ammo resupply by helicopter, Gp Capt Raw knew that such a flight was against Canberra’s policy at the time. Riley stepped forward and said he would go. I suggested it was a suicide mission. Frank just responded ‘You don’t have to come’.” “We rushed over to the pad”. When Major Noel Ford, the OC of the Bravo Company patrol, asked if they could move towards Delta Company, Townsend told him to remain in his location and await further orders. Meanwhile, with Delta requesting an ammo resupply, Major O’Brien and RSM Chinn started to coordinate the delivery of the spare ammo to the 6RAR “Eagle Farm” chopper pad. “I took ten Carriers – 3 Troop and 2 Section, 2 Troop – to A/6RAR’s lines. Once there, I went to 6RAR HQ for a briefing. Major Passey, the 6RAR Ops Officer, ordered me to ‘Pick up Alpha Company and get to Delta Company and break up the attack’. He said 6RAR’s CO would join us later by helicopter. I rushed back to the Carriers. But the order to move did not come”. Lt.Col. C. Townsend CO 6RAR Brigadier O. D. Jackson CO 1ATF AT THE BASE …and things were no less busy at the Task Force base… SLIDE OF 25 50 18 Aug 1966 1720-1730 hrs (5:20-5:30 pm) Glossary: OC = Officer Commanding (the Company Commander) RSM = Regimental Sergeant Major – the senior non- commissioned officer in an Infantry Battalion, amongst whose responsibilities is ammo resupply. TFHQ = Task Force Head Quarters – Ops = Operations. Click to proceed… 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR The 12 Platoon contacts quickly escalated as the enemy probes sought to flank their new target. As two other helicopters flew the concert party to Vung Tau, US jets were called to Long Tan for the air-strike. Meanwhile, at the Task Force base… …the ammo resupply process started and the reinforcements waited… SLIDE OF 26 50 18 Aug 1966 1730-1740 hrs (5:30-5:40 pm) The same thing happened at 10 Platoon – the enemy was trying to gauge the limits of the Australian positions. Unknown to the Australians, large groups of the enemy were flanking them out of sight of the defenders. Click to proceed… 30 30 10 10 D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D x 600 30 100 I 10 30 ? ??? 12 D 11 D 10 ? ??? ? ??? Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . The two crews raced to their helicopters and flew from the Task B- 6RAR D 6RAR 9Sqn RAAF 3 Troop 1APC, with 2 Section of 2 Troop, were now at A/6RAR; Force helipad to the 6RAR helipad to collect the ammo. However, permission to load and go had not yet been given; 3Tp 1APC A 6RAR 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid At 10 Platoon, the enemy – having found a solid target - withdrew to consolidate and prepare their attack. B- 6RAR Overhead, the jets arrived… At 11 Platoon, it was obvious they couldn’t hold out much longer. Sgt Buick prepared the survivors to withdraw. At 12 Platoon, the VC continued to send out flanking probes, trying to define the extent of this new force. SLIDE OF 27 50 18 Aug 1966 1740-1750 hrs (5:40-5:50 pm) enemy opposing 11 Platoon. Instead, they dropped bombs and napalm a thousand metres further east. Still unknown to Delta Company, the columns of VC soldiers moved westwards to outflank the Australians. Click to proceed… 30 30 10 10 Reinforcements D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D x 600 30 100 I 10 30 ? ??? 11 D 10 12 D 10 ? ??? ? ??? 10 …Due to the thick cloud cover, they couldn’t identify the target, which was to be the Super Sabre F100 D 47 10 10 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR With artillery and small arms fire suppressing the enemy, the 11 Platoon men pulled back in a 150 metre dash… And still the enemy’s wide circling of the Company continued. SLIDE OF 28 50 18 Aug 1966 1750-1800 hrs (5:50-6 pm) D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D 12 D They carried with them all the known wounded but were forced to leave behind 15 known or believed to be dead. The enemy reaction was to bypass the original position but to follow up the withdrawal from the flanks. 12 Platoon still engaged VC patrols to north and south which sought to cut off the 11 Platoon withdrawal. 30 At CHQ and 10 Platoon, the VC launched a series of platoon-sized attacks from the east to test the defences. 30 ? ??? 11- D [13 men] Meanwhile, at the Task Force base… Click to proceed… 30 30 x 600 Reinforcements 30 30 100 I 10 12 D ? ??? 10 ? ??? 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] 11 D 47 Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . The two helicopters, loaded with ammo, left the 6RAR pad and the other flew to Long Tan village to get a visual fix. flew into the storm clouds. One circled over the rivers as 3 Troop and A/6RAR still awaited the order to go to Long Tan….. B- 6RAR D 6RAR 3Tp 1APC A 6RAR9Sqn RAAF 9Sqn RAAF 9Sqn RAAF 47 10 10 ? ??? 30 30 x 600 10 ? ??? 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid The chopper crew called “Orange”. “Wrong; we’ll throw again”. D/6 threw another Red – the crew called “Red”. B- 6RAR At about 1800 hrs (6pm) the first helicopter approached Delta Company’s location. Red smoke was thrown. The second chopper was called in and the ammo was thrown out at treetop height “right into the CSM’s lap”. SLIDE OF 29 50 18 Aug 1966 1800-1810 hrs (6 - 6:10 pm) D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D 11- D [13 men] The VC assaulting the CHQ & 10 Platoon position then pulled back to reorganise. Their fire-fight died down. 11- D [13 men] 10 30 ? ??? 12 D 9Sqn RAAF 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] 9Sqn RAAF 30 Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . B- 6RAR D 6RAR 9Sqn RAAF 9Sqn RAAF As the helicopters returned to base, The CO 6RAR had said he’d follow by chopper, so the 10 APCs the APCs and A/6RAR to leave. Alpha Company boarded. sped to the nearest gap in the perimeter wire… B/6RAR again sought permission to go to D/6RAR: now approved. 3Tp 1APC A 6RAR Click to proceed… the order was finally given for The two helicopters, loaded with ammo, left the 6RAR pad and the other flew to Long Tan village to get a visual fix. flew into the storm clouds. One circled over the rivers as 3 Troop and A/6RAR still awaited the order to go to Long Tan….. The helicopters arrived back at the base just as the APC and A/6RAR reinforcement column were leaving... “After we delivered the ammo we returned to the Task Force helipad and thence to the Operations Tent – Frank [Riley]’s idea of staying involved and maybe seeing some more action. We reported that we had not seen anything of note during the mission. It had been our first taste of action, yet the talk was mostly about the weather. As the squadron commander, Wing Commander Ray Scott, was on his way with the rest of the squadron, we were sent back to the helipad to await further orders. Our thoughts turned to the possibility of an attack from the north east and how vulnerable we would be with the whole squadron sitting side by side on the helipad. The sound of the artillery firing repeatedly and continuously kept us intact with the raging battle happening less than five kilometres away.” “Within the 1ATF perimeter there were only a few places APCs could enter and exit. Arriving at the engineer’s wire, I was horrified to discover that the gap had been changed. The new gap was so well concealed that I had to send a runner to the engineers to get some one to open it. That took about ten minutes – ten minutes that we really couldn’t afford. Thinking ahead, my experience on earlier operations was that the only place I could get the Troop across the Suoi Da Bang [river] was upstream from a concrete dam south of the Long Tan road. I would make for that after getting past the wire. It was a big diversion but entry to and exit from the river any further north in the wet season was simply not possible.” The constants at the base were the rain and the intense rate of fire sustained by the 24 guns of 1 Field Regt. Click to proceed… SLIDE OF 30 50 18 Aug 1966 1800-1810 hrs (6 - 6:10 pm) Flt/Lt Bob Grandin Pilot, 9 Sqn., RAAF Lt Adrian Roberts OC 3Troop, 1APC Sqn Glossary: Helipad – the area set aside for helicopter landings. 1 Field Regt – First Field Regiment (artillery) – the parent unit for all the artillery at Nui Dat, comprising 6 guns each from 102 and 105 Australian Batteries, 161 NZ Battery and Battery A, 2 Battalion, 35th Artillery, US Army (of M109 Medium [155mm] self-propelled guns). 47 100 I 100 I? ??? 30 30 x 600 10 ? ??? 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid B- 6RAR SLIDE OF 31 50 18 Aug 1966 1800-1810 hrs (6 - 6:10 pm) 9Sqn RAAF D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D As the 11 Platoon survivors started their withdrawal, they lost radio comms. They were pulling back “blind”. 12 Platoon threw a yellow smoke grenade. The group saw the smoke and came in to the 12 Platoon position. As the VC continued their encircling moves… …a group formed up facing the known CHQ/10 Platoon location. 11- D [13 men] Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . B- 6RAR D 6RAR 9Sqn RAAF As the helicopters returned to base, The CO 6RAR had said he’d follow by chopper, so the 10 APCs the APCs and A/6RAR to leave. Alpha Company boarded. sped to the nearest gap in the perimeter wire… B/6RAR again sought permission to go to D/6RAR: now approved. 3Tp 1APC A 6RAR Click to proceed… the order was finally given for 10 10 12 D 10 ? ??? 10 30 30 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] At 12 Platoon, more assaults from north and south were eliminated – the firefight died away. 10 Platoon could look down the rubber tree avenues and see the VC forming up in the distance to their east. 60 Several groups of six to 10 VC followed them in, while more enemy were seen to move past to the south. 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 47 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid The group formed up and started an advance towards CHQ. B- 6RAR CHQ and 10 Platoon were then attacked from south-east and east by groups of about platoon strength. SLIDE OF 32 50 18 Aug 1966 1810-1820 hrs (6:10-6:20 pm) 100 I ? ??? 10 10 D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] 100 I 30 30 30 30 12 D 11- D [13 men] The VC continued their encircling move, They were ambushed and stopped by 12 Platoon. x 600 ? ??? as Bravo Company approached and the APCs cleared the base wire. 12 D 11- D [13 men] 60 20 30 6:40 6:50 Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . As the helicopters return to base… The CO 6RAR had said he’d follow by chopper, so the 10 APCs APCs and A/6RAR to leave. Alpha Company climbs aboard. speed to the nearest gap in the perimeter wire… B/6RAR again seeks permission to go to D/6RAR – now approved. the order is finally given for the B- 6RAR D 6RAR The APCs waited for the gap in the wire to be opened, when… Sending two carriers back for CO 6RAR, the other eight carriers to protect the crossing and started to cross, one at a time. sped through the gap… They continued to the weir, deployed 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR Click to proceed… Lt Adrian Roberts OC 3Troop, 1APC Sqn with A/6RAR on board. “I was informed through 1APC Squadron that the CO of 6RAR now wished to move with the APCs to Delta Company and wanted my force to return to collect him. I was aware that Delta Company was in dire straits at Long Tan. What to do? I opted to send back two carriers … while I pushed on to the river crossing … with the other eight carriers. I believed that [the two carriers returned for the CO’s party] would catch up with me at the crossing where I knew we would be delayed.” A water crossing is a dangerous move for APCs. The vehicle floats with only a foot or so (30cm) of space between the water and the top hatch. (This picture shows the APC beginning to climb out of the water, so the front is raised.) The crossing to get to Long Tan took place when the river was swift and swollen, it was raining, within an hour of full darkness, and with the real threat of an enemy ambush. Click to proceed… 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 10 48 D 6RAR 9 12/D 10 D 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] 100 I N 68 100 I 67 10 ? ??? x 600 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid The survivors of the ambush moved south. 12 Platoon and the 11 Platoon group made their way back to CHQ where they took up perimeter positions. The VC attacks on 10 Platoon failed - the VC pulled back to reorganise. They were reinforced with fresh troops. 12 D 11- D [13 men] 20 ? ??? The enemy encirclement proceeded, out of sight of the Australians and unknown by them… 30 50 Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . B- 6RAR D 6RAR SLIDE OF 33 50 18 Aug 1966 1820-1830 hrs (6:20-6:30 pm) 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x Bravo Company was mortared as it made its way to Delta Coy. There were no casualties and they were soon on their way again. At 6RAR HQ, the CO’s party boarded the returned APCs and they Meanwhile, the APCs crossed the swift-flowing river one at a time. 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR prepared to leave the base. For the first time in over two hours, there was a lull in the fighting. 47 Composite Section 11 Platoon 9 Section, 12 Platoon CAP CHQ Section 7 & 8 Sections, 12 Platoon 1, 2 & 3 Sections, 10 Platoon CHQ & FOO Approx. 100 metres Once the company assumed its final defensive position the placements of the sub-units didn’t change. At that time the average strength of a Section was 5 or 6 able men. The brunt of the fighting for the next 30 minutes was in the arc from north clockwise to south west. Glossary: CAP = Company Aid Post – first aid for the wounded. CHQ = Company Headquarters FOO = Forward Observation Officer - the officer and his signallers who controlled the artillery firing – in this case, Captain ‘Morrie’ Stanley of 161 Bty, RNZA. Click to proceed… “The company had had no time to dig in … Fortunately, the position at which we had chosen to stop was on a slight reverse slope and therefore the enemy machine- gun fire mostly went just over our heads, with only the fire of the upright VC assaulting waves getting right into our area.” “The VC continued to launch assault waves on the 10 and 12 Platoon area. Machine- gun fire poured in from out near the slopes of Nui Dat 2. Preceded by bugle and whistle calls ... the enemy assault waves continued relentlessly.” Captain ‘Morrie’ Stanley FO 161 Bty, Attached to D/6RAR the battle proper ceased the tremendous din gave the effect of a continuous violent thunderstorm.” “Generally, the situation was very frightening with the rain, sound and shock of shell and small arms fire. I think the incessant violence and confusion caused us to draw mainly on instincts that we had developed from training and previous experience.” Morrie Stanley had been walking the artillery in from all sides, carefully avoiding the original 11 Platoon position. By the time of the final assaults, artillery was falling about 100 metres out from the perimeter – and was still being called in closer. The company – then with about 60 men effective - was finally in the position from which it would not withdraw. Major Harry Smith OC D/6RAR “The artillery was closed in to 100 metres. We could see the shells land. We could feel the concussion through the sodden earth and we could smell the explosive. Best for us, we could see the damage it was doing as it protected us from the VC masses.” Throughout much of the battle, especially after the defensive position had been established, Morrie Stanley had ordered almost continuous artillery fire in a series of regimental fire missions with adjustments. “One effect of all this gunfire was the noise. From the time fire commenced at about 1600hrs until about 1900hrs when Near-continuous artillery fire formed a screen of destruction between the Australians and the VC. SLIDE OF 34 50 18 Aug 1966 1830 hrs (6:50 pm) MEANWHILE, BACK WITH DELTA COMPANY… Click to proceed… 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid As the VC circling move continued…. The VC quickly followed up the 12 Platoon withdrawal. Soon they probed the south edge of D/6RAR in strength. SLIDE OF 35 50 18 Aug 1966 1830-1840 hrs (6:30-6:40 pm) … Bravo Company advanced and both groups of APCs were on the move. 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] 100 I? ??? ? ??? D 6RAR 10 D 12 D 11- D [13 men] 30 30 x 600 50 100 Ix 600 x 600 Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . B- 6RAR D 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x Bravo Company moved into the rubber after the mortaring… With the CO 6RAR party aboard, the two APCs sped to the At the river, Roberts left one APC to guard the crossing point gap in the wire and exited the base… and lead his 7 remaining APCs towards Delta Company… 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR Click to proceed… The enemy to the east, then estimated at a battalion… …started company-strength assaults from the east. SLIDE OF 36 50 18 Aug 1966 1840-1850 hrs (6:40-6:50 pm) 47 ? ??? | 100 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid As they were beaten off, company-plus assaults came in from south east, then south, then east again. The enemy to the south of the company consolidated as the first of the major assaults from the east came in. B- 6RAR 100 I 100 I 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] D 6RAR 10 D 12 D 11- D [13 men] The enemy circling Delta Company reached the road in the rubber plantation. they were focussed on the battle raging to the north of them rather than watching their left (southern) flank… It is was still raining heavily, and | 100 Click to proceed… The inner VC encirclement group appears to have been in a cut-off position near the crossroads… At the sound of the APC contact to their south, they appear to have decided to return to the east. 100 I 100 Ix 600 x 600 x 600 50 Weir MEANWHILE, AT THE TASK FORCE BASE . . . B- 6RAR D 6RAR The seven APCs charged into the rubber plantation and followed the axis of the road northwards – right into the circling VC. crossed and, with the third APC, raced to join the others. As the APCs were in contact, the two others reached the river, Meanwhile, Bravo Company reached the road where 11 Platoon had had its first contact. 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x Lt Peter Dinham OC 2 Platoon, A Coy, aboard the APCs and dismounted on contact. “When the firing started, my sergeant, Frank Alcorta, rolled off the APC, followed by Ron Brett, and engaged the VC. I quickly got the rear ramp of the APC lowered and we all debussed – platoon HQ and Lou Stephens’ section – about 12 of us in total. We formed an extended line and, with the APCs’ .50cals firing support, we engaged about 100 enemy to our front. The firing was intense but lasted only a minute or so before I ordered the group to remount the APC. We estimated later that we’d inflicted some 40 casualties with no casualties to us.” After the battle, a POW said that this was a company from D445 Battalion sent to “close the door” on the Australians. The other companies of D445 were in the area but did not come under fire from the APCs. 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 SLIDE OF 37 50 18 Aug 1966 1840-1850 hrs (6:40-6:50 pm)) The company experienced its heaviest attacks from 6:35 to 6:50. Enemy assaults came in “human waves” - “Despite the repeated assaults and the scarcity of ammo, the company stood – or rather, laid on - its ground. There was no thought of withdrawal from this place. It did not occur to me that we would not survive. I guess I was too busy to worry, exploring every past experience to seek guidance in what we might do to repel the enemy. I would have given quids for a few Vickers machine guns… Maybe the mind and body accepted what was happening and regardless of the uncertainty and danger, you just did the job and that was all that mattered.” “After the defensive position had been established, [I] ordered almost continuous artillery fire in a series of fresh regimental fire missions with adjustments. I was able to take advantage of the rain and intense gunfire that caused the area to be shrouded in smoke, steam and fog. This helped me because my judgement of distance was assisted by the observation (or lack of it) of flash against this screen. The enemy and some of our own boys were also silhouetted to us. Because of the rain, I had to keep remarking our position on my map, and to keep the map oriented so that I did not make mistakes with the grid lines.” Artillery was called in from 100 metres out, to 50 metres out and finally to only 25 metres from the perimeter… Captain Morrie Stanley 161 Bty, RNZArtillery Attached as FO to D/6RAR Click to proceed… Major Harry Smith Officer Commanding Delta Company, 6RAR SLIDE OF 38 50 18 Aug 1966 1850-1900 hrs (6:50 - 7 pm) 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid As they approached the crossroads, they hit another company-sized VC unit who were moving west to east. Breaking through the contact on the north-south track, Roberts’ seven APCs again sped north. B- 6RAR 10 D 12 D 11- D [13 men] | 100 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR Click to proceed… 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x 47 100 I 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] D 6RAR 10 D 12 D 11- D [13 men] 100 Ix 600 100 I 100 I x 600 The CO 6RAR ordered Roberts to pursue. The APCs turned east and chased the VC into the gathering darkness. In the few minutes of this contact, the remaining three APCs caught up with the first seven. The VC fled east. By now, artillery was landing within 25 yards of the Delta Company perimeter. The assaults ceased at 7:00pm. In the last few minutes of fading light, the VC launched their last desperate assaults on the company position. The defenders could see the headlights of the approaching APCs flickering through the trees to their south. As the last shots of the battle echoed into the now-dark rubber plantation, the B Company group arrived. 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x | 100 x 600 SLIDE OF 39 50 18 Aug 1966 1900-1910 hrs (7 - 7:10 pm) 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid After a ten-minute wait in silence, it was apparent that the VC had withdrawn from the immediate battlefield. On arrival, the B Company troops were placed on the south-west to west arc of the company perimeter. Click to proceed… 47 B- 6RAR 10 D 12 D 11- D [13 men] D 6RAR 10 D 12 D 11- D [13 men] x 600 x 600 At about 7:10pm, the APCs arrived. They and A/6RAR were deployed by OC D/6RAR in a screen to the east. The artillery was stopped for the APC approach but ordered to remain laid on last-fired targets – just in case. It was totally dark. The rain had stopped. It was silent… The Battle of Long Tan had ended . 3Tp - 1APC A - 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x 3Tp - 1APC A- 6RAR HQ - 6RAR x B- 6RAR D- 6RAR The CO of 6RAR, Lt Col Townsend, then dismounted the APC and assumed command of the force. 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] x 600 SLIDE OF 40 50 18 Aug 1966 1910-2400 hrs (7:10pm to midnight) “During this time, movement and moaning could be heard to the east. Hopeful that it might have been some of our own wounded. A Coy’s WO2 Jack Roughley and Cpl Ross Smith made three separate attempts between them to crawl forward, but the sounds ceased when the source was approached. These were acts of heroism that were never fully recognised.” Lt Adrian Roberts OC 3 Troop, 1APC Sqn. Lt Peter Dinham OC 2 Platoon, A Coy, 6RAR “We loaded the dead onto 2Lt Ian Savage’s APC, the rest of D Coy onto the others and left the battle area at 2245hrs. We moved out with convoy lights on and the leading vehicle using headlights. At the edge of the rubber, I had the troop stop, turn outwards and form a hollow square. With hatches open and internal lights on, we defined the dustoff LZ.” “Bravo Company led the way from the battle area on foot to the new APC LZ, followed by Alpha. It was a case of blind navigation on a compass bearing – you couldn’t see your hand in front of your face. We stopped numerous times after falling over or running into a tree. We made the rubber’s edge about an hour or so later. I never liked night navigation ever again.” “I was not happy when Colonel Townsend [CO 6RAR] ordered a withdrawal of everyone back to the edge of the rubber to dustoff the casualties. I argued heatedly with the CO that I wanted to stay and sweep through the area in APCs at first light to where 11 Platoon had been. We could have made an LZ by having the APCs push over a few rubber trees.” With no threat of an enemy counterattack, Townsend ordered the whole force to move to the edge of the Cpl Robin Jones 5 Platoon, B Coy, 6RAR Major Harry Smith OC D Coy, 6RAR 7:10 pm to Midnight Click to proceed… Glossary: WO2 = Warrant Officer Class 2 – the senior NCO in a Company – the Company Sergeant Major (CSM). “Dustoff”= the code name for a helicopter casualty or medical evacuation flight. LZ = Landing Zone for helicopters rubber plantation to evacuate the dead and wounded: D Coy on the APCs; A and B Coys to follow on foot. SLIDE OF 41 50 Overnight 18 Aug to dawn 19th 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid At 2245hrs (10:45pm) the APCs with CO 6RAR and Delta Company aboard moved to the edge of the plantation. Bravo and Alpha Companies moved by foot and secured the area around the APCs and the LZ. Click to proceed… 47 There, they formed an open square and called for US and Australian helicopters to evacuate the casualties. At midnight, the Delta Company “Operation Vendetta” ended and a new “Operation Smithfield” was started. The helicopters flew in and took the casualties direct to the hospitals at Vung Tau (15 minutes flying time). 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] A- 6RAR B- 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC HQ - 6RAR x D- 6RAR “Smithfield” was a Task Force operation formed to follow up the enemy forces withdrawing from Long Tan. 9Sqn RAAF 1 sortie USArmy I SLIDE OF 42 50 Dawn 19 Aug to evening 21 Aug 1966 47 49 67 48 49 68 46 48 N 68 67 47 Nui Dat 2 Suoi Da Bang Copyright Dave Sabben 2007 Scale: approx 1000 metre grid At dawn 19th August, D Company, 5RAR, was flown in to the APC LZ and “Operation Smithfield” began. The rest of the force returned to the area of Delta’s final stand, where they split to their own tasks: Click to proceed… 47 D/5RAR swept through the battle area to ensure there were no ambushes laid, and secured the eastern limit. The APCs and Delta Coy platoons moved to the areas of their own contacts and started to clear the battlefield. A and B Coys cleared to the edges of the battlefield and, with D/5RAR, started to follow up the VC withdrawal. 11- D [15 men M.I.A.] A- 6RAR B- 6RAR 3Tp - 1APC HQ - 6RAR x D- 6RAR 9Sqn RAAF (Various) USArmy I I 11 Platoon found two of their missing 15 still alive, though wounded. They were casevac’d immediately. D 5RAR B- 6RAR A- 6RAR APC 1 APC 2 10 Pl 11 Pl 12 Pl Whole Company Artillery In depth The two 11 Platoon soldiers found on the battlefield on the 19th - Barry Mellor and Jim Richmond - were medivac’d to hospital. Both recovered from their wounds. Perhaps it is fitting to allow the commander of the battle to have the last word… Click to proceed… My Company was sent out briefed to find an enemy force expected to be about a platoon strong – perhaps 30 men. We did not know at the time, but Task Force HQ had dismissed reports of at least one VC Regiment in the area of Long Tan in the days after mid-August 1966. How was it then, that we were able to withstand a prolonged engagement with perhaps up to 2000 NVA and VC over a three hour plus period? Each of my three well-trained but inexperienced platoons in their individual actions, and then the company in defence, fought tenaciously against the overwhelming VC forces. Our initial wide dispersement and flanking moves, the regimental artillery support and the RAAF ammunition resupply were all to our advantage. The timely arrival of reinforcements on APCs as the enemy withdrew from the battlefield may have prevented a possible counterattack after dark. But if not for the outstanding leadership at section and platoon levels, practiced application of basic Infantry, weapon and fieldcraft skills, gallantry, courage and determination on the battlefield, we would not have survived. Some of my minimal recommendations for honours and awards were downgraded and others were not forwarded to higher HQ for processing. The company was later awarded the US Presidential Unit Citation (PUC) but other USA and GRVN medals offered in 1966 were rejected by Canberra. The lesser Australian Imperial awards approved for Delta Company were, to quote the Official History, To Long Tan (Page 564, endnote 74), “…little short of insulting for the heroism displayed…” for the now-iconic battle of the war. I remain very proud of my officers and men and am saddened by those we lost. CLICK INSIDE THIS BOX TO GO TO THE END OF THE PRESENTATION SLIDE OF 43 50 Major Harry Smith OC D/6RAR Roll of Honour – Long Tan 2781465 2Lt G C Sharp 1234567 Cpl P Clements (1APC) 2781847 L/Cpl J Jewry 55120 Pte R A Aldersea 1730929 Pte G A Drabble 1730941 Pte K H Gant 3411673 Pte E F Grant 1730947 Pte V R Grice 43893 Pte J M Houston 2781704 Pte P A Large 1730993 Pte A F McCormack 1730994 Pte D J McCormack 1731013 Pte W D Mitchell 1731040 Pte D J Salveron 38712 Pte D J Thomas 1200265 Pte F B Topp 216559 Pte M R Wales 3787607 Pte C J Whiston They shall grow not old, as we who are left grow old. Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn. At the going down of the sun, and in the morning, We shall remember them. Lest we forget. CLICK INSIDE THIS BOX TO SEE THREE OTHER SLIDES: •The VC/NVA version; • Was Long Tan a VC ambush? • Long Tan’s legacy. THE VC AND NVA VERSION OF THE BATTLE OF LONG TAN A few days after the battle, Radio Hanoi and Radio Peking each broadcast a version of the battle at Long Tan. Excerpts include: “... wiped out 500 (Australian) mercenaries...” “... set fire to three M113 armoured cars...” “... shot down one of the US aircraft that went to the rescue...” “... captured a large quantity of arms and ammunition.” “The day before, 17 August, the LAF ... wiped out one hundred Australian mercenaries.” The official history of the (so-called) liberation of the South was published in 1986. In it, the description of the battle bears no similarity to the Australian version. Several high awards are listed as being bestowed on participants of the battle. No mention at all is made of casualties inflicted upon VC or NVA forces. It wasn’t until July 2006 that, in a “60 Minutes” interview on camera, a senior VC/NVA commander admitted to two Long Tan veterans, Bob Buick and Dave Sabben, that the Australians had, in fact, won the battle. SLIDE OF 44 50 Click to proceed… WAS LONG TAN A VC / NVA AMBUSH? It wasn’t until the late 1980s that a theory gained temporary popularity that suggested the battle at Long Tan was the result of a carefully laid VC / NVA ambush and that Delta Company stumbled into the trap, surviving only by pure luck. The evidence speaks against the Battle having been a planned and prepared VC ambush: 1. There were no pre-positioned battlefield communications; 2. The VC had no pre-dug positions on or within small arms range of the Battlefield; 3. The first contact was initiated by the Australians; 4. The initiation of the main action does not indicate an ambush. First one then two machine guns, firing at a range somewhere between 150 and 250 yards; 5. The idea of an ambush is to force those ambushed to have to assault the ambushers. It was the reverse at Long Tan – the enemy had to go looking for those “ambushed”; 6. The VC did not use command detonated devices (ie, Claymore-style devices), nor were any being carried by the VC; 7. There was no VC force to hit the APCs at the river crossing – an obvious place to stop them; 8. The VC had to spend three hours trying to find the Delta Company Platoons and to define their perimeters within their own so-called ambush killing zone; 9. A planned ambush has a planned withdrawal - the actual withdrawal was described as “shabby”; 10. The VC in their assaulting waves were still carrying crew-served weapon ammunition and unprepared grenades in pouches; 11. The VC had grenades and satchel charges, but there were no reports of them being used against Delta Company; 12. Since then, no VC paperwork cut before the event (orders etc.) to indicate that an ambush was planned have come to light. The theory that Long Tan was an ambush is untenable. SLIDE OF 45 50 Click to proceed… LONG TAN’s LEGACY… The battle at Long Tan was not the largest battle the Australian or ANZAC forces experienced in Viet Nam. It did not have the most troops involved, nor did it last the longest time. However, the stakes involved were the most critical to the Australian and New Zealand involvements, and the results in proportion to the ANZAC forces involved were the greatest. After Long Tan, the enemy, both VC (local forces) and NVA (North Vietnamese Army) never again sought to “take on” the Task Force forces in the province. The Task Force base was never again under threat of attack. All subsequent battles took place at or outside the province borders, or when enemy forces were trapped in towns. By the end of the first year of the Task Force, unarmed vehicles moved unescorted along the main access roads. Long Tan was not feted in Australia, and was not accorded “icon” status until the Viet Nam Veterans themselves chose its date – 18 August – as national Viet Nam Veterans’ Day. The date was ratified by the government and all Viet Vets now honour Long Tan Day as “their” day for remembering those who served, were wounded or died in the Viet Nam campaign. For the record – 105 men of Delta Company, 6RAR, moved into the rubber plantation, along with a three-man New Zealand artillery party. 17 of the Delta men died and 21 were evacuated wounded. One APC man was wounded and later died of his wounds. A Company experienced several lightly injured but these were not serious enough for evacuation. The enemy lost 245 plus men by bodycount, with captured documents and POWs later affirming that over 800 had died and some 1400 had been wounded in the battle. In 2006 a Chinese General speaking informally with an Australian ex-Brigadier suggested that the actual number of troops lost (dead and severe amputees) was in excess of 2500. SLIDE OF 46 50 Click to proceed… A dotPPT PowerPoint Animation presentation THE BATTLE OF LONG TAN Click to end the presentation. This presentation is distributed free, but is copyrighted and may not be used by others for profit. dot PPT PowerPoint Animations acknowledges the valuable contribution of excerpts from the book “The Battle of Long Tan as told by the Commanders to Bob Grandin” (Allen & Unwin, 2004, ISBN 1 74114 199 0). This presentation took hundreds of hours to research and develop. If you have enjoyed it or learned from it, and would like to contribute to its development, please consider a deposit of a small amount (say, $5 or $10?) to (Australian) Westpac bank account BSB# 733 000, Account# 853 546 (branch = 360 Collins St, Melbourne), or (Australian) CBA bank account BSB# 063 550, Account# 1024 7640 (branch = Hampton, Victoria), either account in the name of David Sabben. Your anonymous contribution to costs will be much appreciated. Who knows? This may enable other similar presentations to be developed in the future. Thank you. Any comments or feedback on this presentation may be directed to the “contact” email address in www.dotPPT.com Thank you for watching ERRATA The following mistakes or enhancements have been advised and may be fixed or added in the next version of this presentation (no target date). (1) The number of dots above the APC symbol – I have used three dots to indicate a Troop of 10 vehicles, two dots to indicate 2 vehicles and one dot to indicate 1 vehicle. However, in slide 32 and the early part of 33, the 2 vehicles are shown with three dots. (2) APC and Infantry movements on 19 Aug – Slide 42 is roughly correct but not accurate in detail. C/6 came out to the plantation as did the rest of 1APC Squadron. I need to get the sequences and movements a bit better than they are here. _____________________________________________________________ If you have feedback, please go to website www.dotPPT.com, select ‘contact’ and send me your feedback / corrections. (I offer good intentions but no guarantees!) Click to proceed… THE END Enemy units will not have the same “staff” and “flag” symbol. They will have red location disks to show location but, since size of unit, name, parent unit and type of unit are not known, the standard symbols used In this presentation will be: for a section or squad, for a platoon, for a company and for a battalion. Where the size of the enemy force has been estimated by an observer, that number is included within the disk but these are estimates only. However, since the numbers roughly match our units, the appropriate size symbol will be placed above the disk. A 6RAR x = Battalion – over 600 soldiers | = Company – about 100soldiers = Platoon – 30-35 soldiers = Section – 7 to 10 soldiers = single man/group or vehicle MILITARY SYMBOLS FOR UNITS AS USED IN THIS PRESENTATION SLIDE OF 48 50 LESSON: Military Unit Symbols. 100 I 30 10 x 600 on the map. Blue for our units; red for enemy. more than one unit in that location. If there’s more than one flag, then there’s the type of unit. We’ll show X for infantry, of the unit – in this case, A (Company). parent unit – in this case, 6RAR. Above the flag, a small symbol will show the size of the unit - for armour and for helicopters. meaning that the unit is not at full strength.) A coloured disk shows the location of the unit Above it is a ‘staff’ - like a flagpole. On the staff there’ll be one or more ‘flag’s. Inside the flag there’ll be a symbol to indicate On the left of the flag is the name or number On the right will be the name of the unit’s (Sometimes there will also be a minus sign - x = Battalion – over 600 soldiers | = Company – about 100soldiers = Platoon – 30-35 soldiers = Section – 7 to 10 soldiers = single man/group or vehicle CLICK THIS BOX TO RETURN Nui Dat 2 A standard grid reference is a 6-digit number used to identify a location on a map. On maps (and in these map-diagrams) there are numbered vertical and horizontal lines… These are called ‘grid lines’. We’ll use them to identify the location of the hut in the plantation: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE USE OF GRID REFERENCES ON MAPS 68 47 48 68 67 48 67 47 The first two digits indicate the vertical line to the left (west) of the location to be identified = 47 The next digit is the number of tenths from it to the next vertical line to the right (east) = 7 The next two digits are the horizontal line below (south of) the location to be identified = 67 The last digit is the number of tenths from it to the next horizontal line above (north of) it = 3 The grid reference for the hut in the plantation is therefore 477673 (Where a grid reference has two letters before the digits, the letters identify the map.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 8 SLIDE OF 49 50 LESSON: Grid References CLICK THIS BOX TO RETURN WHAT DELTA COMPANY DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT ENEMY DISPOSITIONS Source: ‘To Long Tan’ the official history of the Australian Army and the Vietnam War 1950-1966, and other histories. The course of the battle and searches on the day after the battle confirmed the locations of some of the battalions and of the 275 Regt HQ position. To Long Tan, Page 371: [The enemy troops] appear to have consisted of: the full strength [three battalions] of 275 Regiment, In theory, up to 3500 VC troops were in the area on 18 Aug 1966. However, it is thought that not more than 1500-2000 became involved in the battle. xx 400 x 600 x 600 x 600 x 600 10 possibly augmented by one NVA battalion. In the vicinity [at Long Tan] was D445 Battalion. A VC battalion was usually 500-600 and up to 850 strong. Regt HQ was from 300-500 depending on support units operating with them at the time. While in defensive positions, the VC battalions had constant screen patrols out to secure their positions. One of the battalions took the high ground on Nui Dat 2, the others remaining outside Line Alpha. x 600 SLIDE OF 50 50 LESSON: Enemy Dispositions It was one of these patrols which 11 Platoon contacted at 1540 hrs (3:40pm). 10 Click to proceed… CLICK THIS BOX TO RETURN ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/army/raamc/docs/longtan.pps,"au,gov,defence)/army/raamc/docs/longtan.pps",O3A2R5MWB3BL3427HFN57SK7XN2XHUES,2101988,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-raamc-docs-longtan-pps-20100613142316.pps 17,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/17.blob?_blob_column=image,20070916114733,https://web.archive.org/web/20070916114733/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/rmcband/docs/musician.pps,2007-09-16,2008-08-20,404,"Musicians in the Australian Defence Force What we’ll cover today • What role do Musicians play? • What instruments are played? • Why join the ADF as a Musician? • How long am I committed to? • Where will I work? • What training is undertaken? • The entry requirements • The selection process • What’s in it for me? • Reserves • Questions What is the role of an ADF Musician? • Music is an important part of military life, with bands having a strong tradition of performing at ceremonies, parades, concerts and festivals. • Musicians will also perform in operational and peace-keeping environments in support of ADF troop morale initiatives. What kind of music would I play? ADF Musicians not only perform traditional style marches and classics, but also Jazz, Popular and Rock in situations as varied as concert halls, parade grounds and overseas deployments. Navy Instruments Positions available each year vary. It’s best to check with your Defence Recruiter. • Flute & Piccolo • Oboe & Cor Anglais • Clarinet • Saxophone • Bassoon • Cornet/Trumpet & Bugle • Trombone • Euphonium • French Horn • Tuba • Double Bass & Bass Guitar • Percussion • Piano • Voice & Guitar Army Instruments • Flute & Piccolo • Oboe • Clarinet • Saxophone (Alto, Tenor, Baritone) • Bassoon • Cornet/Trumpet • Trombone • Euphonium • French Horn • Tuba • Bass Guitar and Guitar • Percussion tuned and un-tuned • Piano/Synth • Male and Female vocalists Positions available each year vary. It’s best to check with your Defence Recruiter. Air Force Instruments • Flute & Piccolo • Oboe • Clarinet • Saxophone (Alto, Tenor, Baritone) • Bassoon • Cornet/Trumpet • Trombone • Euphonium • French Horn • Tuba • Percussion tuned and un-tuned • Piano/Synth/Keyboard • Guitarists • Male and Female vocalists Positions available each year vary. It’s best to check with your Defence Recruiter. Why join the ADF as a Musician? • The variety is second to none - from formal ceremonies to sporting events • Mateship • Travel opportunities • Unique environments • Civilian Accreditation • It’s the best gig in town! How long am I committed to? As a Musician in the Navy, Army or Air Force your Initial Minimum Period of Service is 3 years. After this you can continue as part of the Band for as long as you like. Navy Postings • Sydney • Melbourne On occasions, you may be temporarily attached to a ship at sea for ceremonial duties. Army Postings • Townsville or Brisbane • Canberra • Melbourne • Sydney • Wagga Wagga Air Force Postings • Melbourne • Sydney Air Force Musicians usually serve their whole career with one band. Where will I work? What Navy Training Is Undertaken? • Military Training - 11 Weeks • Employment Training - 1 Week of Sea Survival & Ship Safety The Navy also offers the Tertiary Musician Entry Scheme (TMES). This is a sponsorship of your final year Bachelor of Music (Bmus) performance degree. What Army Training Is Undertaken? • Military training - 80 days • Employment Training - Up to 15 months to qualify as Musician Grade 1 • Followed by up to 12 months on-the-job training to qualify as Musician Grade 2 • Initial Employment Training is conducted at the Defence Force School of Music located in Melbourne What Air Force Training Is Undertaken? • Military training - 10 weeks and 2 days Entry Requirements • Must be an Australian citizen or permanent resident undertaking citizenship • Minimum age is 17 and maximum age is 51 • Minimum Year 10 education with passes in English & Maths • Medically and Physically fit • Pass an Audition Navy Education Requirements • Non-degree Entry - A standard commensurate with, but not exclusively aligned to AMusA • Degree Entry - Hold a degree from a recognised institution • Tertiary Musician Entry Scheme - For students who have completed their second year of a three year Bachelor of Music degree Army Education Requirements As a guide, the minimum acceptable audition standard for entry is comparable to Australian Music Examination Board (AMEB) Grade 7 (or equivalent). Air Force Education Requirements You need to be: • Proficient in one or more of the prescribed instruments or voice • Pass an instrumental/vocal audition at the equivalent standard of the AMEB Associate Diploma level or higher • Perform as part of an ensemble under direction • Sight read at a professional standard The Selection Process 1. Apply through 13 19 01 or www.defencejobs.gov.au 2. Attend a Job Options Evaluation Session (JOES) 3. Referred to the Service Band Master where you will sit an audition 4. Upon recommendation of the Band Master you’ll proceed to an assessment day where you’ll undergo: • Psychological Interview • Defence Interview • Fitness Test • Final Medical 5. Enlistment What’s In It For Me? • Starting salary of $45,000p.a. after training • Navy seagoing allowance of $9,000p.a. • Free Medical & Dental • Subsidised accommodation • Travel opportunities Reserves • Part Time positions are also available in the ADF • Receive tax free pay and challenges like no other For More Information Call 13 19 01 www.defencejobs.gov.au Defence Recruiter ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/rmcband/docs/musician.pps,"au,gov,defence)/army/rmcband/docs/musician.pps",Q7KEVO57BVKUSX574FBJCWXOQ53PDMMC,5711646,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-rmcband-docs-musician-pps-20070916114733.pps 18,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/18.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200648,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200648/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/AABC_files/ECN240(Musician).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 240 MUSICIAN R C C CIVIL QUALIFICATION MUSICAN MIN 12 MTHS AS BANDSMAN SUBJECT 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJECT 1 SGT (GRES) MIN 24 MTHS AS BANDSMAN MIN 12MTHS IN RANK OF SGT GROUP LEADER CSE (GRES) MIN 12 MTHS IN RANK OF SUBSTANTIVE CPL SUBJECT 1 WO SECTION LDR CSE (GRES) DRUM MAJOR CSE (GRES) CPL SECTION LEADER (GRES) SGT GROUP LEADER (GRES) WO BAND MASTER (GRES) BANDSMAN ECN 240 BAND WO CSE (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/AABC_files/ECN240(Musician).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/aabc_files/ecn240(musician).ppt",J4CDTLB7JZSTG7S5AI56UTJSJGZHLJWL,6771,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-aabc-files-ecn240-musician-ppt-20050721200648.ppt 19,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/19.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200856,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200856/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/AACC_files/ECN084(Cook).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 084 ENLISTMENT STANDARD INITIAL COOK CSE (PT) ECN 084-1 SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) OJE SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 4 (WO) CATERING SPVR ARMY CATERING ECN 372 (WO) ON COMPLETION OF COURSE - ACCEPTANCE INTO AACC 2 YEARS AT RANK OF CPL 200 TRG DAYS AS ECN 084-1 MUST HAVE WORN RANK OF SGT FOR 4 YEARS OJE SUBJ 4 (CPL) COOK (PT) ECN 084-2 COOK CPL (GRES) SUBJ 4 (SGT) COOK (PT) ECN 084-2 COOK SGT (GRES) SUBJ 1 WO ECN 073 CATERING WO (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/AACC_files/ECN084(Cook).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/aacc_files/ecn084(cook).ppt",F4DJKWQJM7XPKFWEDDKAAG37ZKZQ2YT2,6702,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-aacc-files-ecn084-cook-ppt-20050721200856.ppt 20,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/20.blob?_blob_column=image,20070917024452,https://web.archive.org/web/20070917024452/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/docs/AERR_Design-.ppt,2007-09-17,2007-09-17,404," 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2yrs worn Rank – $10K 2yrs worn Rank – $10k 4yrs worn Rank – $30K 4yrs worn Rank – $30K Entitled mbrs: 2007 Bonus - Those CPL/SGT promoted on or before 01 Mar 05 2008 Bonus – Those CPL/SGT promoted on or before 01 Mar 06 Mbrs not entitled: Those CPL/SGT promoted after 01 Mar 06 CPL and SGT Entitled to AERR 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 3yrs worn Rank – $10K 3yrs worn Rank – $10k 4yrs worn Rank – $30K 4yrs worn Rank – $30K Entitled mbrs: 2007 Bonus - Those CAPT/MAJ promoted on or before 01 Mar 04 (Cohorts 03/02 etc) 2008 Bonus – Those CAPT/MAJ promoted between 01 Mar 04 and 01 Mar 05 (Cohort 04) Mbrs not entitled: Those CAPT/MAJ promoted after 01 Mar 06 (Cohorts 05/06/07) CAPT and MAJ Entitled to AERR Entitled mbrs: - Mbr undertaking 2 years ROSO at entitled date can receive entire package, completes 12 months plus additional 3 years once ROSO completed. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $20k. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, undertakes a further year then has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $20. * Note – Service must be complete by 30 Jun 2012 to receive entire $20k. Impact for Mbrs on ROSO in 2007 10 3yrs worn Rank – $10K 4yrs worn Rank – $30K 4yrs worn Rank – $30K 06 07 08 09 11 12 Entitled mbrs: - Mbr undertaking 2 years ROSO at entitled date can receive entire package, completes 12 months plus additional 3 years once ROSO completed. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $10k. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, undertakes a further year then has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $10. * Note – Service must be complete by 30 Jun 2012 to receive entire $10k. Impact for Mbrs on ROSO in 2008 10 3yrs worn Rank – $10K 4yrs worn Rank – $30K 06 07 08 09 11 12 AERR MSBS OPTION 1 MSBS taken 06 06 12 07 08 09 10 11 Serves 12 mths AERR Obligation AERR 01 Mar 07 take up $10k offer A member who is already taking an MSBS UFFS will be entitled to sign on for the $10k bonus. On completion of their 5 years MSBS UFFS they will be required to complete the 12mths AERR obligation. They will not be entitled to receive the $30k for the final 3 years completion element. AERR MSBS OPTION 2 AERR 01 Mar Take up $10k offer 06 12 07 08 09 10 11 Serves12 mths AERR Obligation Elect MSBS or see out AERR A member who signs on for the $10k AERR bonus and becomes eligible to receive the MSBS retention benefit during the four year period of AERR can: 1. Opt to serve out the four years and receive $30k, or 2. Opt to take MSBS Retention benefit and not receive the $30K AERR completion element. Regardless of when MSBS is due a member must complete their initial 12mths AERR. This will result in additional service being completed at the end of MSBS UFFS. Helpful Hints • Contact a Financial Advisor if you are unsure of which bonus would suit your current situation. • Contact a Financial Advisor if you have any financial issues that may impact on you or your family when accepting an offer. • If you elect to discharge for personnel reasons, pro-rata payments back to government will be at the pre-tax rate. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/docs/AERR_Design-.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/docs/aerr_design-.ppt",CNV5SIS7PO346FMM4EFLHYLJNX2B4IMM,19209,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-docs-aerr-design-ppt-20070917024452.ppt 21,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/21.blob?_blob_column=image,20080823034429,https://web.archive.org/web/20080823034429/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/docs/AERR_Design-.ppt,2008-08-23,2008-08-23,404," 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 2yrs worn Rank – $10K 2yrs worn Rank – $10k 4yrs worn Rank – $30K 4yrs worn Rank – $30K Entitled mbrs: 2007 Bonus - Those CPL/SGT promoted on or before 01 Mar 05 2008 Bonus – Those CPL/SGT promoted on or before 01 Mar 06 Mbrs not entitled: Those CPL/SGT promoted on or after 02 Mar 06 CPL and SGT Entitled to AERR 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 3yrs worn Rank – $10k 3yrs worn Rank – $10k 4yrs worn Rank – $30k 4yrs worn Rank – $30k Entitled mbrs: 2007 Bonus - Those CAPT/MAJ promoted on or before 01 Mar 04 (irrespective of Cohort) 2008 Bonus – Those CAPT/MAJ promoted on or before 01 Mar 05 (irrespective of Cohort) Mbrs not entitled: Those CAPT/MAJ promoted on or after 02 Mar 05 (irrespective of Cohort) CAPT and MAJ Entitled to AERR Entitled mbrs: - Mbr undertaking 2 years ROSO at entitled date can receive entire package, completes 12 months plus additional 3 years once ROSO completed. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $20k. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, undertakes a further year then has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $20k. Note: Service must be complete by 30 Jun 12 to receive entire $20k. Impact for Mbrs on ROSO in 2007 10 3yrs worn Rank – $10k 4yrs worn Rank – $30k 4yrs worn Rank – $30k 06 07 08 09 11 12 Entitled mbrs: - Mbr undertaking 2 years ROSO at entitled date can receive entire package, completes 12 months plus additional 3 years once ROSO completed. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $10k. - Mbr completes initial 12 months, undertakes a further year then has 2 years ROSO imposed will be entitled to $10k. Note: Service must be complete by 30 Jun 12 to receive entire $10k. Impact for Mbrs on ROSO in 2008 10 3yrs worn Rank – $10k 4yrs worn Rank – $30k 06 07 08 09 11 12 AERR MSBS OPTION 1 MSBS taken 06 06 12 07 08 09 10 11 Serves 12 mths AERR Obligation AERR 01 Mar 07 take up $10k offer A member who is currently serving a 5 year MSBS UFFS is entitled to accept the $10k Retention bonus. On completion of their 5 year MSBS UFFS they will be required to complete all, or any unserved part of their 12mths AERR obligation. Members with a current 5 year MSBS UFFS obligation are not entitled to receive the $30k for the 3 year AERR completion element. AERR MSBS OPTION 2 AERR 01 Mar Take up $10k offer 06 12 07 08 09 10 11 Serves 12 mths AERR Obligation Elect MSBS or see out AERR A member who accepts the $10k AERR bonus and becomes eligible to receive the MSBS retention benefit during the four year period of AERRC may: 1.Opt to serve out the three year completion period and receive $30k; or 2.Opt to take MSBS Retention benefit instead of the $30k AERRC completion element. Note: The MSBS UFFS must be completed prior to the AERR ROSO. On completion of their 5 year MSBS UFFS they will be required to complete all, or any unserved part of their 12 mths AERR obligation. Helpful Hints • Contact a Financial Advisor if you are unsure of which bonus would suit your current situation. • Contact a Financial Advisor if you have any financial issues that may impact on you or your family when accepting an offer. • If you elect to discharge for personnel reasons, pro-rata payments back to government will be at the pre-tax rate. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/docs/AERR_Design-.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/docs/aerr_design-.ppt",2JJVJNRSUPZTNERVNAFOCF7T7TX5TUS7,20215,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-docs-aerr-design-ppt-20080823034429.ppt 22,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/22.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721194539,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721194539/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAA_files/ArtyFlowChart.ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," RAA ECN 162 / ECN 254 1 Operator CP Stream Gun Number Stream Advanced Gun Cse Prom LBDR GNR GDE 1 162-1 Specialist Comms Cse Subj 1 CPL (GRES) Gun Cse GNR GDE 3 162-3 Gun Det Cmdr Prom BDR OPCP OS 1 254-1 OJE OJE GNR GDE 2 162-2 JOST MOD 2 Supervisor Offensive Support Cse & TTO Training Subj 4 SGT OPCP Basic Cse Initial Competency Trg Detachment Comd Cse Subj 4 BDR ADV OPCP CSE Subj 4 BDR Subj 1 CPL (GRES) OPCP OS 2 Prom BDR JOST MOD 1 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAA_files/ArtyFlowChart.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raa_files/artyflowchart.ppt",4DS3W47VESRUU32ZZ5FBOQDTLUVMLVV6,7707,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raa-files-artyflowchart-ppt-20050721194539.ppt 23,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/23.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721194533,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721194533/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAC_files/ECN064(CrewmanM113A1).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 064 1 ECN 064-1 CMAN M113 CREWMAN GRADE ONE COMPETENCY LOG ECN 064-2 CMAN COMD M113 CREWMAN SPECIALIST ECN 069-0 SPEC DISMNT ECN 064-0 CREWMAN PROVISIONAL SUBJECT 1 CPL SUPERVISOR TROOP OPERATIONS M113 SUBJ 2 SGT SUBJ 4 SGT TRADE TESTING OFF. (PHASE 1) M113A1 SUBJ 4 SGT TRADE TESTING OFF. M113A1 D&S SUBJ 1 WO SUPERVISOR SQUADRON OPERATIONS SPVR TP OPS SGT ECN 425 CMAN COMD M113 CPL ECN 094 SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) WO REGT INSTR ECN 026 (GRES) SPVR SQN OPS WO2 SSM ECN 428 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAC_files/ECN064(CrewmanM113A1).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raac_files/ecn064(crewmanm113a1).ppt",WAEFSNKOTKHIH7MDH3K27WZXP5MX5IAZ,7790,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raac-files-ecn064-crewmanm113a1-ppt-20050721194533.ppt 24,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/24.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721194518,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721194518/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN074(ClerkAdmin).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," CLK ADMIN IET PTE CLK ADMIN GDE 1 ECN 074-1 PG 2 SUBJECT 1 CPL SGT SPV CLK ADMIN GDE 2 ECN 074-2 PG 2 OJE 12 MTHS SPV CLK ADMIN CSE FINANCE MODULES CPL SPV CLK ADMIN GDE 2 ECN 074-2 PG 3 SUBJECT 2 SGT SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 2 WO WO 1 MNGR CLK ADMIN GDE 3 ECN 074-3 WO2 MNGR CLK ADMIN GDE 3 ECN 074-3 PG 3 ECN 074 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN074(ClerkAdmin).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raaoc_files/ecn074(clerkadmin).ppt",KZLRQ4GVBIFA5ARVGFOSC6KXEVFGXCW6,5790,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raaoc-files-ecn074-clerkadmin-ppt-20050721194518.ppt 25,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/25.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200707,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200707/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN269(PetrolHandler).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"OP PETRL MOD1 IET OP PETRL ECN 269-0 PAY GP 1 OP PETRL COMPLETE IET OP PETRL ECN 269-1 PAY GP 2 2 YR OJE OP PETRL ECN 269-2 PAY GP 3 SUBJECT 1 CPL RAAF FQCCENTOP CSE PT PETRL TECH CSE 3YR OJE CPL ECN 269-2 SUBJECT 2 SGT SUBJECT 1 SGT SGT ECN 269-3 PAY GP 4 PT ADV PETRL TECH CSE SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 2 WO WO2 ECN 269-4 SGT ECN 269-4 PAY GP 4 COMPLETE OJE/OJT COMPETENCIES WO1 ECN 269-5 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN269(PetrolHandler).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raaoc_files/ecn269(petrolhandler).ppt",AV2OPBRVXU2S6U5XFBVCPZ73RSSGQJBJ,8387,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raaoc-files-ecn269-petrolhandler-ppt-20050721200707.ppt 26,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/26.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200909,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200909/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN282(PetroleumHandler).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 282 1 *NOTE MOD 1 COMPLETED BY BOTH OP PETRL FT AND PT UNIT NEEDS -F/LIFT -BASIC DVR CYCLIC 3 YR REFRESHER TRG COMMENCES ON COMPLETION OF MOD 1 OP PETRL IET MODULE 1 SAFETY IN A WORK ENVIRON/ 40MM GRND OPS PETRL HANDLER GDE 0 MODULE 2A BASIC BFT CONFINED SPACE ENTRY UNIT NEEDS MACK CONV CSE 2 WKS - L3) SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 2 CPL SUBJECT 1 CPL PETRL HANDLER GDE 0 PTE PAY GP 1 PETRL HANDLER GRADE 1 PAY GP 2 ASST SPV PETRL HANDLER CPL ESSENTIAL TRG -DG PACK CSE (2 WKS - L3) - RAAF FQC CSE (1 WK) SUBJECT 2 SGT SPV PETRL HANDLER PAY GP 3 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN282(PetroleumHandler).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raaoc_files/ecn282(petroleumhandler).ppt",AV3HYCTQHYHT5EOMTWVJVGZEVCN2IYFJ,9200,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raaoc-files-ecn282-petroleumhandler-ppt-20050721200909.ppt 27,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/27.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200949,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200949/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN294(OperatorSupply).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," OPERATOR SUPPLY CSE ECN 294 1 YR OJE CPL SUBJECT 4 SGT SPV CSE SUBJECT 2 LOG SGT CSE MNGR SUPPLY SPT ECN 294-4 SUBJECT 4 MNGR UNIT RES CSE SGT SPV UNIT RES ECN 296-0 SGT SPV CBT SUP ECN 297-0 SGT SPV TECH SUP ECN 298-0 SUBJECT 2 LOG WO CSE SUBJECT 2 LOG WO CSE SUBJECT 2 LOG WO CSE MNGR WO2 UNIT RES ECN 296-1 MNGR WO2 CBT SUP ECN 297-1 MNGR WO2 TECH SUP ECN 298-1 OP SUP GDE 1 ECN 294-1 PAY GP 2 OP SUP GDE 2 ECN 294-2 PAY GP 2 PAY GP 3 PAY GP 3 SSGT SPV UNIT RES ECN 296-0 SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 1 CPL OP SUP GDE 2 ECN 294-3 PAY GP 3 OPERATOR SUPPLY ECN 294 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAOC_files/ECN294(OperatorSupply).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raaoc_files/ecn294(operatorsupply).ppt",QNML63BDI6JWZQSRPTSVO6IPAYVXEKEB,7950,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raaoc-files-ecn294-operatorsupply-ppt-20050721200949.ppt 28,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/28.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200609,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200609/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAPC_files/ECN076(PayClerk).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," CLK PAY IET CSE CLK PAY ECN 076 PAY GP 3 SUBJECT 1 CPL CPL ECN 076 PAY GP 3 SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 4 SGT SGT ECN 076 PAY GP 3 SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 4 WO WO2 ECN 076 PAY GP 3 WO1 ECN 076 STAFF OFFR FINANCE CSE ECN 076 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAAPC_files/ECN076(PayClerk).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raapc_files/ecn076(payclerk).ppt",BTKM4DICYNH2ODHCOOP2Q5YAFFBS4ELD,5226,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raapc-files-ecn076-payclerk-ppt-20050721200609.ppt 29,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/29.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721194543,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721194543/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RACT_files/ECN109(Driver).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"# �� ###>################ #ࡱ �� � #################3###########6####### ���� ####4###������������������������������������������������������������������������ �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� R#o#o#t# ���������������������������������������� #E#n#t#r#y################################################# ##### d O # �������� �� � � � # # ) ############ R[ #############P#o#w#e#r#P#o#i#n#t# � � � � ���� � #D#o#c#u#m#e#n#t###########################(########### ##################### ���� ################### 5########S#u#m#m#a#r#y#I#n#f#o#r#m#a#t#i#o#n################ � ###########(####### ######################################## #########D#o �������� � #c#u#m#e#n#t#S#u#m#m#a#r#y#I#n#f#o#r#m#a#t#i#o#n###########8### ##### ������������ ################################### ########### ######################## � ��� ### ####### ################################################################## 2### �������� ###!###""#######$###%###&###'###(###)###*###+###,###-###.###/###0###������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ## #'##### #( ������������������������������������������������������������������� � � ### ###`### ### ####### � � � ##################### #####/# # � � ###0# ########### #L##### #D###T#i#m#e#s# #N#e#w# � � � #R#o#m#a#n### ## ##̳## #0 ###### ##~ #0###### ######### � � �� � � � � ### ############### # � � ######### ##@# #n##### ?###"" ##d#######d#########@######### ##### ############ # � �� ��� ������ #########@#@#########`#`######### # #########h###### `###### 8###########7###### � � � � ############# ############################## #### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ## � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ##### ##### � � � # ####### ##### ##### ##### ##### # # ##### #### � � � � � ��� � � A#### #### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### # � �� � � � � � � � � � � � � #### ##### ##### ##### #### ##### ##### ##### ##### ####@ ##### ##### ##### # � � � �� � � � � � � � � � �� # #### � � ##### A#### #### ##### ##### ##### ##### #5%## ##### ##### ##### #### ##### # � � �� � � � � � � � � �� � � ################## ###### ########8c####8c############## ��� ##### ########### ##################################? ##### ##### ##### ##### # 1## ##### # ## ##### # ### #### � � � � � � � �� � � � � ##### ##### ##### #d### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #0u## # ### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � 0 #@T # ## ## ## ###y #2### # ��� � � � � ���� �� � N## #P ## ##### ##'## #p ## # > ##### ##'## #p ## ###########A# )##B#####C#### � � � � � � � � ��� � � � � � #D#| ##E#####ࡱ##### #| ## ##### #| � � � � � ## #####@## ################ ##### ####### #################### ###### # ##### � � � � � � � � � � #g##### ########## #4###d###d###d###d### ##~ #0 ######f### � � � � � � ##@ ####p# #########0 ������ � ##p# #########p##### ######### � � ###############?# #8##### #######+### #####E#C#N# #X#Y#Z# # #####E#C#N# � � � � #X#Y#Z#O# #""##### #######3### #####E#C#N# � � � #X#Y#Z### ####### #########################/# ####### ########################## � � � � # ####### #u##### ############ � � � ################`# # � ### ##### ######̙#33 # # #`# # ##### # ##### ## ### # ### #`# # ��� ��� � �� ��� � � ��� �� �� �� � ��� � ### #####ff3# ##3 3# ####3 # f#`# # ### #####333##### # #MMM# #`# # ��� �� � � � �� � ��� ��� ��� ��� � ### ##### ##### f### # # # #`# # ### ##### ##### ##f # #### ##`# # ��� ��� �� � � � ��� � ��� ��� ��� � � � � ### ##### #####3 # # # # ### #>##### ?###"" ��� ��� �� ��� � � ��� � �� ##d#######d#########@######### ##### ,######### #|##### ?###"" ��� ������ � �� ##d#######d##### ###@######### ##### ####### #### # ####### ###"" � ��� ������ � � � #@####### #### #`####### ### ### ##### # #n##### ?###"" � � � � � � � �� ##d#######d#########@######### ##### ��� ������ ########### # #########@#@#########`#`######### # #####P# #R######## � � � ############### ###### ######## ######@######## ######`######## ###### #####`# # � � ###############p# #>############################################################ � ##### # #>################################################################### � � # ###### ### ## ############### c###### (##### � �� � � � ###################### � ############### ##### � �� ######### � ## ## 6###ࡱ##### # # ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ### � � � �� � � � � � � ########## ####+#D# #;#### ###### ############### T##### ########### # � � � � � � � ###Click to edit Master title style## #####!####### # � � ###!############ ###### � ######### � ## ## 0###ࡱ##### #d # ##### ##### ##### ##### ### � � � � � � � � � ########## ######D# # #### ###### ############### � � � � � ##### ########### #R###Click to edit Master text stylesSecond levelThird level � � � Fourth levelFifth level## #####!########## � ########## ####### # � ###S############ ##### � ######### � ## ## 0###ࡱ##### # # ##### ##### ##### ##### ### � � � �� � � � � � ########## ####5#D# # #### ###### ############### � � � � � =##### ########### #####*## ########################### ############ ##### � � � � � � ######### � ## ## 0###ࡱ##### ## # ##### ##### ##### ##### ### � � � � � � � � � ########## ####5# ### #### ###### ######### � � � � � ##### ? � ##### ########### #####*## ############################# ############ ##### � � � � � ######### � ## ## 0###ࡱ##### # # ##### ##### ##### ##### ### � � � �� � � � � � ########## ####5## � # #### ###### ############### ? � � � � � ##### ########### #####*## ############################# ############ H##### � � � � � ######### � ## ## 0### ##### ##### # � � � � � ࡱh# ##@ # ##### ####### � � � � ###?####### # � ### ##### ######̙#33 # # ### #(##### ######## ## ��� ��� � �� ��� � � � 0## # ###### ###@## ######### � �� � ##### x###### (##### � � ###################### � ##### � ######### ##### � ##### � ### ##### l###ࡱ##### #T### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ########P# � � � � � #### ###### ######### � � ##### Y##### ########### #####*## ####################### � � � � ### ########### ############################ ###### � � � ##### � ### ##### l###ࡱ##### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ###### � � � � � � # � #### ###### ############### � � [##### ########### #####*## ######################### � � � � ### ########### ############################ ##### � � � ##### � ### ## ## N###ࡱ##### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####ࡱ##### ##### ### � � � � � � � � � � � � � #? #####ࡱ######## #### # #\# � � � ### ###### ################ R##### � � � ##### � ### ##### l###ࡱ##### ##### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### � � � � � � @# # #### ###### ############### ##### ########### #R###Click to edit Master � � � � � � � text stylesSecond levelThird levelFourth levelFifth level## #####!########## � ########## ####### # � ###S############ ##### � ##### � ### ##### l###ࡱ##### #t### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########? � � ##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####`###P# #### ###### ######### � � � � � � ##### Y##### ########### #####*## ####################### � � � � ### ########### ############################ ###### � � � ##### � ### ##### l###ࡱ##### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####`# � � � � � � # #### ###### ########### ### � � � � � [##### ########### #####*## ######################### � � � � ### ########### ############################ H##### � � � ##### � ### ## ## 0### ##### ##### # � � � � � ࡱh# # # ##### ####### � ��� � � ###?####### # � ### ##### ######̙#33 # # ### # ##### ��� ��� � �� ��� � � # ###### ###0## ############### ####### (##### � � � � � ############ (####### � �� ############### ##### � �� ######### � ##### l###ࡱ##### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ########P# � � � � � #### ###### ######### � � ##### =##### ########### #####*## ####################### � � � � ### ############ ##### � �� ######### � ##### l###ࡱ##### #4### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ###### � � � � � � # � #### ###### ############### ? � � � ##### ########### #####*## ######################### � � � ### ############ ##### � �� ######### � ##### l###ࡱ##### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########? � � ##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####`###P# #### ###### ######### � � � � � � ##### =##### ########### #####*## ####################### � � � � ### ############ ##### � �� ######### � ##### l###ࡱ##### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ### ##### ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####`# � � � � � � # #### ###### ############### ? � � � � � ##### ########### #####*## ######################### � � � ### ############ H##### � � ######### � ## ## 0### ##### ##### # � � � � � ࡱh# # # ##### ####### � ��� � � ###?####### # � ### ##### ######̙#33 # # ### # ##### #################### ########## #8### ��� ��� � �� ��� � � � � � ## #######+### #####E#C#N# #X#Y#Z# # #####E#C#N# #1#0#9### � � � #H###### @###### ####""### ###### ###### (##### � � � �� � ###################### � ############### ##### � �� ######### � ##### f### # # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � �� � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### ### # ### G##### ########### ####SUBJECT 1 � � � � � � � � CPL## ######################## � ############ ##### �� ######### � ##### f### #D # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### ### # ### G##### ########### ####SUBJECT 1 � � � � � � � � � SGT## ######################## � ############ ##### �� ######### � ##### f### # # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � �� � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####p#@# # ### F##### ########### # � � � � � � � � ###SUBJECT 1 WO## ################ � ####### ############ ###B# � ####9#### � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #p#p# #### ### # � � � � � �� � ####N#### � ##### f### #D # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ###### # � � � � ### E##### ########### #####ECN � � � � 109## ##### � ################### ############ ### # �� � ####Y#### � ##### f### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####p# # # ## I##### ########### #####TPT MNGR � � � � � � � CSE## ######################### � ############ ### # �� � ####[#### � ##### f### #t### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####p# � � � � P ## K##### ########### #####B VEHTTO CSE## ######################### � � � � ############ ##### �� ####\#### � ##### f### ##### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #P# � � � � ### ?##### ########### # � � � � ###SUBJECT 4 CPL## ######################### � #### ###R# �� ####_#### � ##### f### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####0# # ### 9##### ########### #####ECN � � � � � � � � 274## ######################### � #### ###2# �� ####h#### � ##### f### # ### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #` � � � �� `### A##### ########### #####CPL � � � ECN109/274## ######################### � #### ###2# �� ####ࡱ#### � ##### f### #t### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ###### #` � � � � ### =##### ########### #####SGT � � � � ECN 381## ##### � ########### ####### #### ###""# �� #### #### � � ##### f### #4### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### # # � � � � � p### E##### ########### #####SUBJECT 2LOGISTICS## ######################### � � � � #### ###""# �� #### #### � � ##### f### ## # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### # # p### R##### ########### # ###SUBJECT 2 � � � � � � � � � LOGISTICSPHASE 2 RACT## #####!###########!####### � #### ###2# �� #### #### � � ##### f### # # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � �� � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####`# #` � � � � @### =##### ########### #####WO2 � � � ECN 381## ##### � ########### ####### #### ###B# � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### # � � � � � � #### ###B# � � #### ### � � � ##### l### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####p#p#p###### ###B# � � � � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### # � � � � � # #### ###B# � � � #### ### � � � ##### l### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####@#p#p# #### ###B# � � � � � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####0# #p#0#### ###""# � � � � �� #### #### � � ##### f### ## # # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ###### � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � #####?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #P# � � � � � P ## ?##### ########### ####SUBJECT 4 SGT## ######################### � � � � #### ###B# � #### ###@ � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #p# #### ###B# � � � � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### # #p# #### ###B# � � � � � � � #### ### � � � ##### l### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #p#p###### ###B# � � � � � � #### ### � � � ##### l### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####`#p#p# #### ###B# � � � � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### p#p# ### ###B# � � � � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### # � � � # ### ###B# � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### p## � � � � ### ###B# � � #### ### � � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ######p#p#p#### ###B# � � � � #### ### � � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####### � � � # p#### ###B# � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ######p## � � � ##### ###B# � #### ### � � � ##### l### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####P � � � � p#p# ### ###B# � � #### ### � � � ##### l### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ###########?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## #### #p#p# #### ###B# � � � � � � � #### #### � � ##### f### # _## #ж## # _## #ж## ##### ##### #####D#####ࡱ##### ##### ##### ##### � � � � � � � � � � � � � ######?##### ##### #####ࡱ######## ####@# #p#@#### H##### � � � � � ######### � ## ## 0### ##### ##### # � � � � � ࡱh# ##@ # ##### ####### � � � � ###?######## ###### # � � ### ##### ######̙#33 # # ### # ##### ########### ��� ��� � �� ��� � � � 0## # ###### x###P## ############### ####### (##### � � � � � #### ####### ######### � � � ############### R##### � � ######## ###3## #### ##### ######## � � � � ##### #### # #\# � � � ### ###### ################ ~##### � � � ######## ###C## #### # ### ##### ######## � � � � � � ##### #### � � @# # #### ###### ######### � � � � ##### ###### ########### # � � � ################ H##### � ######### � ## ## 0### ##### ##### # � � � � � ࡱh# # # ##### ####### � ��� � � ###?####### # � ### ##### ######̙#33 # # ###r#######`#####/### ### ### ###| ��� ��� � �� ��� � � � 3#### ######### #######D5####################################################### � � ###########################################################################C#u#r #r#e#n#t# #U#s#e#r############################################# ############### ������������ #########################&###################################################### ##################### ############################################### ������������ #####################################################################����������� ############################################################################### � ##################################### ############################### ������������ ################# ########################### ࡱ.## ##+, D#### ࡱ.## ##+, ### �� �� �� � �� �� � # ########### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ### � � � � � � � � ### ### � ### ####################################### ######(### � ###j####### ###########A4 Paper (210x297 mm)#No########Department of � Defence#No#### 5##############################################1################# � ##############################Times New Roman#####Default Design#####No Slide Title# ###############Fonts Used#################Design Template################Slide T ########################## Oh# ##+' 0### ### �� ��� �� �� � #######h#######p####### ####### ### � � ### ####### ### � � ### ####### ### � � ### ###### ############### � � ####### ###########No Slide � Title##########Cotton#e########Hausman#########17#s########Microsoft PowerPoint##P#@###########@### # [6 #@### #{D? #@###P O`6 #####- �� � � � � �� � ###G### ""## ######Z#o##### � ���� ###N#####,#########&##### ############ ### ### ���� � � ###&##### ########&##### ####TNPP## #0########D ####### ���� ���� �� � ###&### #TNPP#### # � ###&##### ########&#####TNPP## ���� ########################### # # ############## ### #######-####### ###############-#######-### � � � ��� � #####! # # # #########-####### ### #######-####### ####### ###############- � � � � ��� � � #######&##### ##1###j### ### #######&##### ###### ######################## ���� � � ���� � ##### | w | w g w## � � � � � � ## #####-####### ################### # ###### #########Times New Roman# | � � � � w g w_# � � � ## � #####-####### ####### � ###################.###################2 #;#####15/10/00 � ##### ##### #######.#############################&##### ## ###j### ### #######&##### # ���� � � � ���� ##### ################### ###################.###################2 #,#####ECN 109# � # # ##### # #####.#############################&##### ## ###j###h### #######&##### ### ���� � � ���� ### ################### ###################.############### ###2 #U#####1# � #####.#############################&##### ##P### ### ### ####### ############ ���� � � � � ###-####### ### #######- � ��� ###(###$###X# #S# #R# #Q# #Q# #R# #S# #U# #X# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � # #####-####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � � ���� ################### # ###### #########Times New Roman# | w g w## � � � � � � � ## #####-####### ####### � ###################.###################2 #Z####SUBJECT 1 CPL### � ###########################.#############################&##### ##P###&### ## ���� � #^####### ###############-####### ### #######- � � ��� ###,###$###X#'#U#(#S#)#R#+#Q#.#Q#U#R#W#S#Y#U#[#X#[# #[# #[# #Y# #W# #U# #.# #+# � � � � � � � � #)# #(# #'#####-####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � � � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 F#]####SUBJECT 1 SGT### ################### #######.#############################&##### ##X###_### ### ####### ########## ���� � � � #####-####### ### #######- � ��� ###,###$###_#`#]#a#[#b#Z#d#Y#f#Y# #Z# #[# #]# #_# # # # # # # # # # # # #f# #d# � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � #b# #a# #`#####-####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � � � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 ~#b# ###SUBJECT 1 WO## ################# # #####.#############################&##### ##8###d###;###g####### ############ ���� � ###-####### #############-#######%###9#e#9#e#####-####### #######- � � #######&##### ######&##### ########## ###[####### ###############- ���� ���� � � ####### ### #######-#######$###2#####7#2#Y#f#Y# #7#f#######-####### #######- � ��� � � ####### #######&##### ###### � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 @#5#####ECN 109##### #############.#############################&##### ## ### ### ���� � � ########### ###############-####### ### #######-#######$### # # # # ### ### � � ��� � � � � � � # # # #####-####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � � � � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 # #####TPT MNGR########## � � # #######.################### ###################.############### ###2 # #####CSE ##########.#############################&##### ## ### ########### � � � ���� � � #### ###############-####### ### #######-#######$### # # # # ### ### � � ��� � � � � � � # # # #####-####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � � � � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 # #####B VEH##### � � ### #####.################### ###################.###################2 # #####TTO CSE##### � � #############.#############################&##### ######z###| ���� ### ####### ###############-####### ### #######-###,###$###'#{#$#|#""#}#!#ࡱ# � � � ��� # # # #!# #""# #$# #'# #q# #t# #w# #x# #y# #y# #x#ࡱ#w#}#t#|#q#{#####- � � � � � � � � � � � � ####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 #!####SUBJECT 4 CPL### � ###########################.#############################&##### ##! ���� ### ###}########### ###############-####### ### #######- � � � ��� #######$###4# #i# #{# #i###4###""# #####-####### #######- � � � � � ####### #######&##### ###### � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 #8#####ECN 274##### � #############.############################# ### #######- � ��� ####### ###############-#########_#r#""#'#####-####### #######-####### ####### � � � ################### ###################.###################2 =#3#####CPL ECN############# #####.################### ###################.###################2 L#8#####109/274###################.############################# ### #######- � ��� ####### ###############-#########0#r# #'#####-####### #######-####### ####### � � � � ################### ###################.############### ###2 ##A#####SGT ## � #######.################### ###################.###################2 ##5#####ECN 381##### #############.#############################&##### ###### ### ### ####### #### ���� � � � � ###########-####### ### #######-###,###$###$# # # ### ### ### ### ### ### # � ��� � � � � � � � � # #$# #u# #y# #}# #ࡱ# # # # # #ࡱ# #}# #y# #u# #####-####### #######- � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ####### #######&##### ###### � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 #.# � ###SUBJECT 2### ###################.################### ###################.###################2 #-# � ###LOGISTICS##### #################.#############################&##### ## ### ### ���� � � %### ####### ###############-####### ### #######- � � � ��� ###,###$### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ### ### ### #!# #""# #""# #! � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � # ### ### ### #####-####### #######-####### #######&##### ###### � � � � � � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 # # � � ###SUBJECT 2### ###################.################### ###################.###################2 # # � � ###LOGISTICS##### #################.################### ###################.###################2 # # � � ###PHASE 2 RACT## # ############# #########.############################# ### #######- � ��� ####### ###############-#########Z#r###'#####-####### #######-####### ####### � � � ################### ###################.############### ###2 1#?#####WO2� # #######.################### ###################.###################2 @#5#####ECN 381##### #############.#############################&##### ##x### ###{### ####### #### ���� � � � ###########-#######-#######%###y# #y# #####-####### #######- � � � #######&##### ######&##### ##G### ###R### ####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � #######%###L# #L# #####-####### ####### #############-### � � � � ###$###Q# #L# #H# #####-#######- � � � ####### #######&##### ######&##### ##ࡱ### ### ### ####### ###############- � ���� ���� � � � � #######-#######%### # # # #####-####### #######- � � � � � #######&##### ######&##### ##G###X###R### ####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � #######%###L# #L#`#####-####### ####### #############-### � � � ###$###Q#b#L#Y#H#b#####-#######- ####### #######&##### ######&##### ## ###}###N### ####### ###############- � ���� ���� � � � #######-#######%### #~#L#~#####-####### #######- � � #######&##### ######&##### ######S### ### ####### ###############- ���� ���� � � � ####### ### #######-###,###$###+#T#'#U###W#!#[# #_# # #! � ��� � # ### #'# #+# #u# #y# #}# #ࡱ# # # # #_#ࡱ#[#}#W#y#U#u#T#####-####### #######- � � � � � � � � � � � � ####### #######&##### ###### � ���� ################### ###################.###################2 y#$####SUBJECT 4 SGT### ################### #######.#############################&##### ##K### ###$### ####### ########## ���� � � � #####-#######-#######%###""# #L# #####-####### #######- � � � #######&##### ######&##### ## ### ###N### ####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � � #######%### # #L# #####-####### #######- � � � � #######&##### ######&##### ##G### ###R########### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � #######%###L###L# #####-####### ####### #############-### � � � ###$###Q# #L# #H# #####-#######- � � � ####### #######&##### ######&##### ##G###]###R###}####### ###############- � ���� ���� � #######-#######%###L#{#L#e#####-####### ####### #############-### � � ###$###Q#g#L#^#H#g#####-#######- ####### #######&##### ######&##### ## ####### ########### ###############- � ���� ���� � � � #######-#######%### ### #######-####### #######- � � � #######&##### ######&##### ## ####### ########### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � #######%### ### #######-####### #######- � � � #######&##### ######&##### ## ####### ########### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � #######%### ### #######-####### #######- � � � #######&##### ######&##### ## ### ### ### ####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � � � #######%### # # # #####-####### #######- � � � � � #######&##### ######&##### ## ### ### ### ####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � � � #######%### # # # #####-####### #######- � � � � � #######&##### ######&##### ## ### ### ### ####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � � � � #######%### # # # #####-####### #######- � � � � � #######&##### ######&##### ##G### ###R###$####### ###############-#######- ���� ���� � � #######%###L#""#L# #####-####### ####### #############-### � � � ###$###Q# #L# #H# #####-#######- � � � ####### #######&##### ######&##### ##G###.###R###V####### ###############- � ���� ���� � #######-#######%###L#T#L#6#####-####### ####### #############-### � � ###$###Q#8#L#/#H#8#####-#######- ####### #######&##### ######&##### ## ###D###N###G####### ###############- � ���� ���� � � #######-#######%### #E#L#E#####-####### #######-#######&##### ######-#######- � � ���� ####### ######### ########""System#w #f ## ### � � � � � ####### ### � #####-####### #######&#####TNPP## � ############# ###&##### ########################################################## ���� ### ###����������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� itles ��������������������������������������������������������������������������� ########### ########### #######6#######>########### � ###_PID_GUID##### ###A###N###{#D#3#7#B#3#0#1#9#-#8#3#1#1#-#1#1#D#4#-#8#4#C#E#- � #0#0#0#0#2#9#0#D#0#0#9#0#}################################# #########_ h5#### # � �� � ## Cotton#######ll############################################################# �� ################################################################################ ################################################################################ ########################################################R#o#o#t# #E#n#t#r#y################################################# ##### d O # �������� �� � � � # # ) ############ ##. #############P#o#w#e#r#P#o#i#n#t# � � � � �� �� #D#o#c#u#m#e#n#t###########################(########### ##################### ���� ################### 5########S#u#m#m#a#r#y#I#n#f#o#r#m#a#t#i#o#n################ � ###########(####### ######################################## #########D#o �������� � #c#u#m#e#n#t#S#u#m#m#a#r#y ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RACT_files/ECN109(Driver).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/ract_files/ecn109(driver).ppt",PI6DOA7A6QCOGTUSYFTBILNJNL5TB4YY,6398,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-ract-files-ecn109-driver-ppt-20050721194543.ppt 30,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/30.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200812,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200812/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN072(Carpenter).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 072 1 SUBJ 2 CPL RAE SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) CPL CARPENTER ECN 072-3 R C C CIVIL TRADE CARPENTER CBT ENGR MOD 1 CBT ENGR MOD 2 CBT ENGR MOD 3 RPL CIVIL TRADE BUILDING SUPERVISORS CSE/MODULES SUBJ 4 (SGT) WORKS SPVR SUBJ 2 (SGT) RAE SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SGT SPV BLDG ECN 374 SUBJ 4 (WO) WORKS SPVR SUBJ 2 (WO) SM SUBJ 1 (WO) ECN 374 SPVR BUILDING (WO) SPR CARPENTER ECN 072-1 OJE SPR CARPENTER ECN 072-2 SUBJ 4 CPL CONST FOREMAN’S CSE SSGT SPV BLDG ECN 374 ELECTIVE QUAL ECN 358 SM ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN072(Carpenter).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rae_files/ecn072(carpenter).ppt",PI44PQN6WSZYR5EHT2H6YHX4TRQIZBUK,8667,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rae-files-ecn072-carpenter-ppt-20050721200812.ppt 31,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/31.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200945,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200945/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN096(CombatEngineer).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 096 1 CBT ENG MOD 3 ECN 096-1 BOAT BRIDGE ERECTION OPERATOR CSE (SPEC SKILL) ECN 096-2 CBT ENGR GD 2 SUBJ 2 CPL RAE BASIC DRIVERS GS (SPEC SKILL) ECN 096-3 CBT ENGR GD 3 SUBJ 4 FE (GRES) SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) ECN 122 ASST SPV ENGR PL OPS (CPL) CBT ENGR MOD 1 ECN 096 CBT ENGR MOD 2 ECN 096-1 19/05/20 ECN 096 2 DEMOLITION SPVR (SPEC SKILLS) FLOATING SUPPORT BRIDGE INSTRUCTOR (SPEC SKILLS) SUBJ 4 SGT FE (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT RAE SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) ECN 123 SPV ENGR PL OPS (SGT) UNIT NBCD SNCO SEARCH ADVISER MINE WARFARE INSTR LOC BRIDGING INSTR INSTR COUNTER SURV SPEC SKILLS TWO OF FIVE CSES REQ FOR PROM QUAL ECN 124 SPV ENGR OPS (WO2) SUBJ 4 WO SM (GRES) SUBJ 2 (WO) SM SUBJ 1 WO ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN096(CombatEngineer).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rae_files/ecn096(combatengineer).ppt",66KNGUBTGHGNUFVC4XRGO5ZSQ5J42TS7,7407,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rae-files-ecn096-combatengineer-ppt-20050721200945.ppt 32,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/32.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200641,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200641/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN125(Electrician).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 125 1 SUBJ 2 CPL RAE SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) CPL ELEC ECN 125-3 CBT ENGR MOD 1 CBT ENGR MOD 2 FIELD POWER GENERATION CSE RCC CIVIL TRADE ELECTRICAL FITTER SPR ELEC ECN 125-1 OJE SPR ELEC ECN 125-2 SUBJ 4 CPL CONST FOREMAN’S CSE ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN125(Electrician).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rae_files/ecn125(electrician).ppt",IVVBDGJ4NTNDCUMKFIBJANU6JWWDQ6ET,6420,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rae-files-ecn125-electrician-ppt-20050721200641.ppt 33,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/33.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200638,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200638/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN314(Plumber).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 314 1 SUBJ 2 CPL RAE SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) CPL PLUMBER ECN 314 R C C CIVIL TRADE PLUMBER CBT ENGR MOD 1 CBT ENGR MOD 2 SPR PLUMBER ECN 314-1 OJT SPR PLUMBER ECN 314-2 SUBJ 4 CPL CONST FOREMAN’S CSE ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAE_files/ECN314(Plumber).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rae_files/ecn314(plumber).ppt",BTA26CY4SCKFD2IAJFJ2QCFHQFBPAV44,6158,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rae-files-ecn314-plumber-ppt-20050721200638.ppt 34,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/34.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721194514,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721194514/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN146(FitterArmament).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 146 FITTER ARMAMENT ECN 146 CPL (GRES) FITTER ARMAMENT ECN 146 SGT (GRES) ECN 006 ART MECH WO 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 1 WO 2 R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION FITTER TRADES FITTER ARMAMENT MAINTENANCE TECHNIQUES P/T FITTER ARMAMENT ECN 146-1 CFN (GRES) FITTER ARMAMENT ECN 146-2 CFN (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL (RAEME) UNIT NEEDS CSES; SPT WPNS MAINT TECHNIQUES MISC EQUIP MAINT P/T FLD ARTY MAINT TECHNIQUES MDM ARTY MAINT TECHNIQUES OUTBOARD MOTOR MAINT BASIC DRIVERS CSE DRIVER MII3A1 (NON RAAC) C/C M113AI SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) ORDNANCE EXAMINER COURSE SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ARTIFICER MECHANICAL ECN 013 ART GND WO1 (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN146(FitterArmament).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn146(fitterarmament).ppt",CIUEAK6OMDQLLIBVFXNZH5OOKPGX5UWX,7724,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn146-fitterarmament-ppt-20050721194514.ppt 35,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/35.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200936,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200936/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN226(MechanicRecovery).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 226 ECN 226 MECH RECOV CPL (GRES) ECN 226 MECH RECOV SGT (GRES) ECN 226 MECH RECOV WO2 (GRES) BASIC DRIVER GS MACK HR 2 ECN 226 BASIC RECOV PHASE 1 (GRES) ECN 226 MECH RECOV CFN ECN 226 MECH RECOV PHASE 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL RAEME SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS SUBJ 1 WO 2 OPTIONAL CSES: DVR M113A1 (NON RAAC) ARVL RECOV OP C/C M113A1 SUBJ 4 CPL RECOVERY PLEASE NOTE: THESE CSES WILL BE TRANSITIONAL FOR THOSE NOT YET COMPETENT AS CFN MECH RECOV ECN 226 PHASE 1 & 2 OJE ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN226(MechanicRecovery).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn226(mechanicrecovery).ppt",JY57VOKBF6YQ275DEWSJN7CGIDIACLEO,7731,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn226-mechanicrecovery-ppt-20050721200936.ppt 36,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/36.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200917,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200917/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN229(VehicleMechanic).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 229 VEHICLE MECHANIC ECN 229 CPL (GRES) VEHICLE MECHANIC ECN 229 SGT (GRES) ECN 006 ART MECH WO 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 1 WO 2 R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION VEHICLE / PLANT MECHANIC TRADES VEHICLE MAINTENANCE TECHNIQUES P/T VEHICLE MECHANIC ECN 229-1 CFN (GRES) VEHICLE MECHANIC ECN 229-2 CFN (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL (RAEME) UNIT NEEDS CSES; LIGHT A VEH MAINT TECHNIQUES C VEH MAINT CSE KOMATSU C VEH MAINT CSE BASIC DRIVERS CSE MACK HR2 DRIVER MII3A1 (NON RAAC) C/C M113AI SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ARTIFICER MECHANICAL ECN 013 ART GND WO1 (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN229(VehicleMechanic).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn229(vehiclemechanic).ppt",RVGCODLX7SEJFSMLFM7MNLNTZE2GQUQY,7424,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn229-vehiclemechanic-ppt-20050721200917.ppt 37,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/37.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200700,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200700/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN235(Metalsmith).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 235 M/SMITH ECN 235 CPL (GRES) M/SMITH ECN 235 SGT (GRES) ECN 006 ART MECH WO 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 1 WO 2 R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION METALSMITH TRADES METALSMITH CONVERSION COURSE M/SMITH ECN 235-1 CFN (GRES) M/SMITH ECN 235-2 CFN (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL (RAEME) UNIT NEEDS CSES; METALSMITH CONVERSION BASIC DRIVERS CSE DRIVER MII3A1 (NON RAAC) C/C M113AI SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ARTIFICER MECHANICAL ECN 013 ART GND WO1 (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN235(Metalsmith).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn235(metalsmith).ppt",LC2XDUPQ6GWRGYH4OEWIXDNB6PRPHVDL,7198,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn235-metalsmith-ppt-20050721200700.ppt 38,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/38.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200734,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200734/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN418(TechElectrical).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 418 TECH ELEC ECN 418 CPL (GRES) TECH ELEC ECN 418 SGT (GRES) ECN 007 ART ELEC WO 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 1 WO 2 R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ELECTICALFITTER TRADES FIELD GENERATOR EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE CSE P/T TECHNICIAN ELECTRICAL ECN 418-1 CFN (GRES) TECHNICIAN ELECTRICAL ECN 418-2 CFN (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL (RAEME) UNIT NEEDS CSES; AUTO ELECT EQUIP MAINT P/T DOMESTIC REFRIG EQUIP MAINT P/T COMMERCIAL REFRIG EQUIP MAINT P/T BASIC DRIVERS CSE DRIVER MII3A1 (NON RAAC) C/C M113AI SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ARTIFICER ELECTRONIC ECN 013 ART GND WO1 (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN418(TechElectrical).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn418(techelectrical).ppt",WIIK3SCRP3KSXQZAL2LPVFOBEOEU7MWB,7341,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn418-techelectrical-ppt-20050721200734.ppt 39,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/39.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200955,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200955/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN420(TechElecTelecom).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 420 TECH ELEC TELECOM ECN 420 CPL (GRES) TECH ELEC TELECOM ECN 420 SGT (GRES) ECN 007 ART ELEC WO 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 1 WO 2 R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS TRADES COMBAT NET RADIO LIGHT REPAIR TECH ELEC TELECOM ECN 420-1 CFN (GRES) TECH ELEC TELECOM ECN 420-2 CFN (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL (RAEME) UNIT NEEDS CSES; RAVEN HF UNIT REPAIR CSE. VICS HARNESS CSE. RAVEN FIELD REPAIR FACILITY SPVR CSE. FURTHER TELECOM CSES T.B.A. BASIC DRIVERS CSE DRIVER MII3A1 (NON RAAC) C/C M113AI SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ARTIFICER ELECTRONIC ECN 013 ART GND WO1 (GRES) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN420(TechElecTelecom).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn420(techelectelecom).ppt",F7XDNAOXCUFC52HJOMN22OJN5OKAXYFT,7555,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn420-techelectelecom-ppt-20050721200955.ppt 40,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/40.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200620,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200620/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN422(TechElecSys).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 422 TECH ELEC SYSTEMS ECN 422 CPL (GRES) TECH ELEC SYSTEMS ECN 422 SGT (GRES) ECN 007 ART ELEC WO 2 (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS PHASE 2 RAEME SUBJ 1 WO 2 R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS TRADES TECH ELEC SYSTEMS ECN 422-1 CFN (GRES) TECH ELEC SYSTEMS ECN 422-2 CFN (GRES) SUBJ 2 CPL (RAEME) UNIT NEEDS CSES; FURTHER TELECOM CSES T.B.A. BASIC DRIVERS CSE SUBJ 1 CPL (GRES) SUBJ 2 SGT (RAEME) SUBJ 1 SGT (GRES) SUBJ 2 WO LOGISTICS R C C CIVIL ACCREDITATION ARTIFICER ELECTRONIC ECN 013 ART GND WO1 (GRES) ON THE JOB PACKAGE APPROVED BY CO/CI MSD ALTC ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAEME_files/ECN422(TechElecSys).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/raeme_files/ecn422(techelecsys).ppt",BOY7LYZ236LGSMRPWXF65ZUPBOBMKXNE,7464,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-raeme-files-ecn422-techelecsys-ppt-20050721200620.ppt 41,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/41.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200843,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200843/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAINF_files/ECN343(Rifleman).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404,"19/05/20 ECN 343 1 RIFLEMAN PT (IET ECN 343) MODULE 1 RIFLEMAN PT (IET ECN 343) MODULE 2 RIFLEMAN PT ECN 343-0 IET CSE REGIMENTAL CLERICAL LOGISTICS 343 - RIFLEMAN 386 - SUPERVISOR INF OPS (PL) 387 - SUPERVISOR INF OPS (COY) 350 - RSM 244 - PIPER/DRUMMER/BUGLER 245 - DRUM MAJOR 246 - PIPE MAJOR 071 - COMBAT CLERK (PRIMARY ECN 343 TO CPL ECN 386 SGT ECN 387 WO) 332 - COMBAT STOREMAN (PRIMARY ECN 343 TO CPL ECN 386 SGT ECN 387 WO) *NOTE: When being considered for promotion/promotion courses, soldiers are assessed with their peers within the same CEG. Within each CEG soldiers may be employed in positions that have an ECN other than their primary ECN, some these ECN’s are as follows: 005 - RECRUITER 109 - DRIVER 019 - PIONEER 238 - MORTARMAN 026 - INSTRUCTOR 361 - SIGNALLER 028 - ASST ADMIN 19/05/20 REGIMENTAL 2 SUBJECT 1 CPL (GRES) SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPERATIONS CSE (PLATOON) ECN 386 SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPS SECTION CPL(GRES) OJE CPL 3 YRS Trainees must have successfully completed F88 and F89conversion cse prior to attending cse. SUBJECT 1 SGT (GRES) SRI Qualification Must obtain before progression to SGT OJE SGT 3 YRS SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPERATIONS CSE (COMPANY) ECN 387 SUBJECT 1 WO OJE WO 3 YRS ALL CORP RSM CSE ECN 350 005-RECRUITER 019-PIONEER 026-INSTRUCTOR 028-ASST ADMIN 109-DRIVER 238-MORTARMAN 361-SIGNALLER ECN 343 CPL ECN 386 SGT ECN 387 WO ECN 350 RSM ANN EX D TO CHAP TER 3 TO 2 DIV TRG HANDBOOK 19/05/20 ECN 244 PIPER/DRUMM ER/BUGLER 3 PIPER/DRUMMER BUGLER BASIC CSE SECTION INFANTRY OPERATIONS CSE SUBJECT 2 GRES SUBJECT 1 CPL SUBJECT 1 SGT SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPERATIONS CSE COMPANY SUBJECT 2 SGT OJE SGT 3YRS SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPERATIONS COURSE COMPANY SUBJECT 2 WO BUGLER BASIC CSE PIPER/DRUMMER ELEMENTARY OJE CPL 3 YRS SUBJECT 1 WO PIPER/DRUMMER INTERMEDIATE PIPE MAJOR ECN 246 CPL ECN 244 PDB SGT ECN 244 PDB PIPER/DRUMMER ADVANCED 19/05/20 CLERICAL 4 BASIC CLERK ADMIN ALL CORP SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPS SECTION CPL(GRES) SUBJECT 1 CPL (GRES) OJE CPL 3 YRS SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPERATIONS COURSE SGT SUBJECT 4 ADVANCED CLERICAL SUBJECT 1 SGT (GRES) OJE SGT 3 YRS SUBJECT 1 WO SSGT Min 12 mnths TIR after qual SGT CBT CLK CPL ECN 071 CBT CLK SGT ECN 071 CBT CLK WO ECN 071 19/05/20 LOGISTICS 5 BASIC STOREMAN CSE ECN 331 SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPS SECTION CPL (GRES) OJE CPL 3 YRS SUPERVISOR INFANTRY OPERATIONS CSE (PL) SGT SUBJECT 1 SGT (GRES) OJE SGT 3 YRS SSGT Min 12 mnths TIR after qual SGT ADVANCED STOREMAN ECN 365 QMS CSE SUBJECT 4 SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 1 CPL (GRES) CBT STMN CPL ECN 332 CBT STMN SGT ECN 322 CBT STMN WO ECN 332 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RAINF_files/ECN343(Rifleman).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rainf_files/ecn343(rifleman).ppt",BAG4QJISXCL6TU46LXIQ76YBUWIQ6T4N,16632,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rainf-files-ecn343-rifleman-ppt-20050721200843.ppt 42,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/42.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200808,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200808/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN256(CmdSysSpt).ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 256 OP COMD SPT SYS 2 ECN 256-2 12MTHS OJE WO2 SGT SIG CPL GRAD DIP INFO TECH AS REQUIRED ENLISTMENT STANDARD OP COMD SPT SYS 1 ECN 256-1 BASIC COMD SPT SYS SIG CBT 2 SIG CBT 1 CCT SUBJECT 1 WO SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 1 CPL SPV COMD SUP SYS ECN 256-4 DET COMD COMD SUP SYS CSE ECN 256-3 COMMS NODE SPV TECH MOD 1 INT COMD SUP SYS TECH MOD 1 ADV COMD SUP SYS COMMS OPS ADV COMMS OP WO1 MNGR COMD SPT SYS ECN 256-5 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN256(CmdSysSpt).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rasigs_files/ecn256(cmdsysspt).ppt",IPUT4Y3A2BU4CFHVG44ZBBEKBB36L4OD,7477,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rasigs-files-ecn256-cmdsysspt-ppt-20050721200808.ppt 43,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/43.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200614,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200614/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN266DIA.ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 266 ENLISTMENT STANDARD ECN 266-1 OP SPEC COMMS GRADE 1 CPL SUBJECT 1 CPL ECN 266-2 OP SPEC COMMS GRADE 2 ECN 266- 3 DET COMD COMMS ECN 266-4 SPV COMMS ECN 266-5 MNGR COMMS SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 1 WO MIN 12 MTHS ECN 266-2 CIPHER CSE SIG ECN 266-2 DET COMM CSE ECN 266-3 COMM NODE SPV CSE ECN 266-3 INTER SPEC COMM CSE SGT WO2 WO1 COMM OPS CSE ECN 266-4 ADV SPEC COMMS ECN 266-5 ADV COMM OPS CSE ASST/MNGR SPEC COMMS ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN266DIA.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rasigs_files/ecn266dia.ppt",RQL2DDDHCSLIRPEODVTAIWPUQH6DRXIE,6839,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rasigs-files-ecn266dia-ppt-20050721200614.ppt 44,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/44.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200726,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200726/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN346DIA.ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 346 ENLISTMENT STANDARD SIG ECN 346-1 OP COMMS BEARER SYS ECN 346-2 DET COMD BEARER SYS COMMS RIGGER ECN 346-4 MNGR COMMS BEARER SYS ECN 346-3 SPV COMMS BEARER SYS SUBJECT 1 CPL SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 1 WO SGT WO2 CPL SIG CBT MOD 1 SIG CBT MOD 2 DET COMD CSE SIG CBT COMMS NODE SPV INTER COMMS BEARER CSE PARAKEET ADV RIGGER COMMS OPS ADV BEARER SYS ADV COMMS OP CSE PARAKEET SYSCON ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN346DIA.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rasigs_files/ecn346dia.ppt",RR6P3DCW5WXGAM4JIXPAB53PZA5V5YKF,7018,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rasigs-files-ecn346dia-ppt-20050721200726.ppt 45,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/45.blob?_blob_column=image,20050721200930,https://web.archive.org/web/20050721200930/http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN405DIA.ppt,2005-07-21,2005-07-21,404," ECN 405 CERT V ELECTRONICS AT ALTC BY RCC FOR GRES SGT CPL SIG ADV SYSCON COMMS OP CSE SPV SPEC TECH TELE SYS ECN 405-3 COMMS NODE SPV CSE ASST/DET COMDTECH TELE SYS ECN 405-2 TECH CIPHER DET COMD CSE ECN 405-2 TECH TELE SYS ECN 405-1 TEEC PARAKEET EM ECN 405-1 SUBJECT 1 SGT SUBJECT 1 CPL MNGR TELE SYS ECN 405-5 ADV COMMS OPS CSE ASST/MNGR TECH TELE SYS ECN 405-4 SUBJECT 1 WO DIP ENGR ELECTRONICS WO2 SSGT WO1 ECN 204-2 INT SYSCON CSE ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/army/stayarmy/RASIGS_files/ECN405DIA.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/army/stayarmy/rasigs_files/ecn405dia.ppt",UEMUHDHK7ETGB4ZX6ZO2OWBEUDGU3W5T,7207,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-army-stayarmy-rasigs-files-ecn405dia-ppt-20050721200930.ppt 46,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/46.blob?_blob_column=image,20120505233621,https://web.archive.org/web/20120505233621/http://www.defence.gov.au/Capability/_home/cdaf/Five%20year%20Process%20slide%20.ppt,2012-05-05,2014-02-14,404,"The Needs Phase Capability Development Revise and Update Emerging Priorities FIVE YEAR CYCLE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 White Paper White Paper Strategic Guidance Capability Force Structure Review DCP DPG Starting Point Force 2018 Starting Point Force 2023 Force Structure Review DCP (adjust if reqd) DPG DPG DPG Programming Adjustments Force-in- Being Force-in- Being DPG DCP Defence Capability Plan (DCP) • White Paper provides strategic guidance – DCP developed in concert with White Paper and Defence Planning Guidance (DPG) • Scope, budget, Year of Decision & In-Service Date • Public and Classified Editions • Ten Year financial program – Owned by National Security Committee of Cabinet – Fits some 140 individual projects or phases of projects into Government long term financial guidance. – Gives each project’s scope, budget, YOD and ISD – Dynamic • As Government priorities change • As financial circumstances and technology change • As lessons are learned on operations – If a project is not in the DCP it won’t happen • Industry Input: – Forward looking thinking – Advice useful for broad indicative scoping, costing, scheduling – Capability Development Advisory Forum – CTD and RPD&E ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/Capability/_home/cdaf/Five%20year%20Process%20slide%20.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/_home/cdaf/five%20year%20process%20slide%20.ppt",UUGZDQYWXV5VO2VTMAFNDD35ECSM2E2D,39700,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-home-cdaf-five-20year-20process-20slide-20-ppt-20120505233621.ppt 47,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/47.blob?_blob_column=image,20070919153130,https://web.archive.org/web/20070919153130/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/ADSON1_Sim_Interoperability_05.ppt,2007-09-19,2007-09-19,404," Simulation Interoperability - “Progress and Challenges Downunder” SimTecT 2005 Darren Mc Farlane Capability Development Group Australian Defence Simulation Office Topics • Introduction • Current Activities and Challenges • Future Activities Secretary and Chief of Defence Force ADSO is a Branch within CDG located in R1, Russell Offices Mr Cliff White DGSIM LTGEN David Hurley Chief CDG Capability Development Group (CDG) Defence Committee Australian Defence Simulation Office • Roles – policy direction – co-ordination – collaboration • DGSIM - Chair DSF (Defence Simulation Forum) reporting to Chief CDG who leads Governance • Influence Defence investment in Simulation • Manage Simulation Minors Program “. . advancing the use of computer-based modelling and simulation . . "" “. . to help people across Defence gain and sustain knowledge by using simulation” Defence Simulation Manual Volume one Part 6: Simulation And Defence Capability Part 6: Simulation And Defence Capability Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Part 8: Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Guide Part 8: Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Guide Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Part 14: Simulation Training and Education Part 14: Simulation Training and Education Part 15: Defence Current & Future Simulation Projects Part 15: Defence Current & Future Simulation Projects Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Part 17: Defence Simulation Workforce Guide Part 17: Defence Simulation Workforce Guide Defence Simulation Manual Volume two Part 1: Simulation Support to Capability Life Cycle Part 1: Simulation Support to Capability Life Cycle Part 2: Simulation Support to Analysis Part 2: Simulation Support to Analysis Part 3: Simulation Support to Training Part 3: Simulation Support to Training Part 4: Simulation Support to Conduct Of Operations Part 4: Simulation Support to Conduct Of Operations Introduction • What is Interoperability? • What is simulation interoperability? • What degree of simulation Interoperability is required? Interoperability Interconnectivity • Interoperability: The ability of systems, units of forces to provide services to and accept services from other systems, units or forces and to use the services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively together. • Interconnectivity: The linking together of interoperable systems. Interconnectivity “Two simulations passing data” Interoperability “A new simulation meeting a new capability need” Simulation Interoperability Models Data Communications Management System Operation Models Data Communications Management System Operation Includes Meta Data Includes Meta Models DEVELOPMENT Scanners Format Converters File Importers Terrain Generators 3D Modellers Imaging Tools Geometry Tools Feature Tools Culture Tools Verification Tools Sensor Database Visual Database Map Database 3D Models Photos Maps/Charts Digital Archives Descriptive info Other Databases Proprietary Image Generator Format Models Models Models Data Data Data Communications Communications Communications Management Management Management System System System Operation Operation Operation Interoperability establishes ‘fair fight’ & seamless simulation. Degree of Interoperability • Depends on: – User need, – Available Resources, – Safety limitations, – Security limitations. • Degree of Interoperability must be determined and designed for. • Able to be communicated to others. US LISI IT Model C r o s s - d o m a i n i n f o r m a t i o n a n d a p p l i c a t i o n s s h a r i n g A d v a n c e d c o l l a b o r a t i o n ( I n t e r a c t i v e C O P u p d a t e , e v e n t - t r i g g e r e d g l o b a l d a t a b a s e u p d a t e ) S h a r e d d a t a b a s e s S o p h i s t i c a t e d c o l l a b o r a t i o n ( C o m m o n O p e r a t i o n a l P i c t u r e ) H e t e r o g e n e o u s p r o d u c t e x c h a n g e B a s i c c o l l a b o r a t i o n ( A n n o t a t e d i m a g e r y , m a p s w / o v e r l a y s ) H o m o g e n e o u s p r o d u c t e x c h a n g e ( F M v o i c e , t a c t i c a l d a t a l i n k s , t e x t fi l e s , m e s s a g e s , e - m a i l ) M a n u a l G a t e w a y ( d i s k e t t e , t a p e , h a r d c o p y e x c h a n g e ) 4 E n t e r p r i s e I n t e r a c t i v e m a n i p u l a t i o n S h a r e d d a t a a n d a p p l i c a t i o n s 3 D o m a i n S h a r e d d a t a “ S e p a r a t e ” a p p l i c a t i o n s 2 F u n c t i o n a l M i n i m a l c o m m o n f u n c t i o n s S e p a r a t e d a t a a n d a p p l i c a t i o n s 1 C o n n e c t e d E l e c t r o n i c c o n n e c t i o n S e p a r a t e d a t a a n d a p p l i c a t i o n s 0 I s o l a t e d N o n - c o n n e c t e d T e l n e t , F T P , E - M a i l , C h a t t e r H T T P , N I T F , . . . N I D R , C o m m o n D i s p l a y s , S h a r e d A p p l i c a t i o n s & D a t a , . . . A p p l i c a t i o n s D a t a U S P A C O M F E M A R O K H Q N C A G l o b a l I n f o r m a t i o n S p a c e I n f o r m a t i o n E x c h a n g e L e v e l C o m p u t i n g E n v i r o n m e n t TENA LISI Model Current Activities & Challenges Enablers Common Architecture Common Understanding VV&A Limiters Security Regulations Safety Regulations Infrastructure Applications Sim. to Sim. Sim. to Real National to International Resources Simulation Interoperability Enabler - Common Architecture • Activities: – Glossary – Standards (Extremely important) – Meta Data • Challenges – Defining Defence Simulation Architecture – Standards interoperability (M&S, C2, IT) – Development of open standards Enabler - Common Understanding • Activities: – Defence Simulation Manual (SPG, DS) – Project specific documentation • Challenges: – Common understanding of environment – Common Doctrine – Cultural/language Differences Enabler - VV&A • Activities: – VV&A Policy – VV&A Guide • Challenges – Common process/language – Tools – Resources Enabler/Limiter - Resources • Activities: – Defence Simulation Manual (SPG, SBG, CLC) – Workforce Development – Tools • Challenges: – Currency – Simulation: greater slice of Budget pie – People Skills development – Configuration Management Limiter - Security Regulations • Activities: – Defence Simulation Manual (Simulation Security Guide) • Challenges: – Larger Defence simulations (net, coalition) – Differing security regulations between nations – Drive for increased ‘realism’ (vulnerability vs usefulness) Limiter - Safety Regulations • Activities: – Defence Simulation Manual (Simulation Safety Guide) • Challenges: – Drive for increased ‘realism’ (vulnerability vs usefulness) – Complexity of hazard identification Limiter - Infrastructure • Activities: – Simulation Infrastructure Study – Defence Simulation Plan • Challenges: – Move to ‘Net based Sim’ eg US GIG – Raising profile of sim – Increased Bandwidth/Reduced Latency Application - Sim to Sim • Activities: – Defence Approved Australian Technology Standards List (ATSL) – Defence Simulation Manual • Challenges: – Simulation Standards Interoperability – Development of Open Standards/tools – Common Meta Data and Data – Certification of Simulations Application - Sim to Real • Activities: – JSC & JCTC – ATSL – Defence Simulation Manual • Challenges: – Sim to C2 – Sim to range instrumentation – Sim to IT (eg US GIG) Shared Solutions Processes For Alignment and Migration Common Data/Object Models Reusable Component Interfaces Alignment of Architectures Interoperability of Legacy and Future Systems M&S C4ISR Common Standards & Tools Source: SISO C4ISR/Sim Technical Reference Model Sourcebook ‘House Diagram’ for Interoperable Shared Systems C4ISR System Simulation System Simulation Control Module Visualization Module Simulation & Models Module Behavior Models Physical Models Communication Models Environmental Models Simulation Engine Run-Time Framework Simulation DB Scenario DB Simulation Service Interactions Simulation Metadata Execution Control Visualization Data Collection Simulation Effects Non-Persistent Data Orders Reports Imagery Tracks Unit Data Persistent Data Mission & Plan Information Communications Plan Weather Data Terrain Specification C4ISR System Service Interactions System Health/Heartbeat/Status Component Service Protocols Source: SISO C4ISR/Sim Technical Reference Model Sourcebook TRM Functional Interface Graphic Application - National to International • Activities: – Collaboration – JSC & JCTC – Allied Data Publication 34 (ADATP 34) • Challenges – Enablers and limiters Future Activities • Defence Simulation Architecture • Distributed Simulation Study to explore common requirements • Tool Development/licensing • JCTC • JSC Questions? Interoperability: Let’s make headway Darren Mc Farlane 02 6265 4797 darren.mcfarlane@defence.gov.au Distributed Simulation Commonality RTI? Defence Framework RPRFOM RPR-FOM 1.0 (DIS 1995) RPR-FOM 3.0 (????) RPR-FOM 2.0 (DIS 1998) IEEE 1516 DMSO (V1.3) HLA ALLIED SIMULATION ENVIRONMENTS COALITION SIMULATION ENVIRONMENTS Army Simulation Environment Navy Simulation Environment Air Force Simulation Environment Joint Synthetic Environment DSTO Simulation Environment Meeting 9 Application areas Largely Common Foundation Allow Common tools Allow Reuse Standard documentation Compliancy TENA JOC J7 PACOM J7 Training Objectives and Ex Design JCTC “Box” Simulation Architecture & Integration Range 1 Range 2 ADFWC PWC Single Service ranges and simulations Training Audience CTF JTF MC LC AC SFC Constructive Simulation wrap PWC JNTC ADSO Simulation & Range Integration C2 Stimulation Ex Des Ex Coord Ex Con Sim Con Ex Eval Training system development JP 2098 Focus Joint Simulation Capability (JSC) • Support to operations (decision support and mission rehearsal) • Support to joint training (individual and collective) • Support to Concept Development & Experimentation (CD&E) • Defence wide interoperability ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/ADSON1_Sim_Interoperability_05.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/adso/docs/adson1_sim_interoperability_05.ppt",DEGNIJU6FRXDK33DZVGBSLDWFUZQN5PC,2648494,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-adso-docs-adson1-sim-interoperability-05-ppt-20070919153130.ppt 48,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/48.blob?_blob_column=image,20070919153048,https://web.archive.org/web/20070919153048/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/ADSON1_SIMMAN_05.ppt,2007-09-19,2007-09-19,404," Defence Simulation Manual “SIMMAN” SimTecT 2005 Darren Mc Farlane Capability Development Group Australian Defence Simulation Office Topics • Introduction • SIMMAN Contents • Current SIMMAN Guides • Future Development Secretary and Chief of Defence Force ADSO is a Branch within CDG located in R1, Russell Offices Mr Cliff White DGSIM LTGEN David Hurley Chief CDG Capability Development Group (CDG) Defence Committee Australian Defence Simulation Office • Roles – policy direction – co-ordination – collaboration • DGSIM - Chair DSF (Defence Simulation Forum) reporting to Chief CDG who leads Governance • Influence Defence investment in Simulation • Manage Simulation Minors Program “. . advancing the use of computer-based modelling and simulation . . "" “. . to help people across Defence gain and sustain knowledge by using simulation” Relationship of DSE to DE Defence Simulation Environment Defence Simulation Vision Defence vision and strategy Recommend simulation capability input into Defence capability process Simulation subset “To Fight & Win” Simulation vision and strategy Simulation subset •Enhance capability •Save resources •Reduce risk Policy/Guidance •Defence Simulation Policy •Defence Simulation Manual Future Planning •Defence Simulation Plan •DIE Plan (simulation infrastructure) Management •Defence Simulation Forum •ADSO •Groups Defence Simulation Governance Future Planning: Simulation Capability •Defence Simulation Capability Strategy 2014 (defines strategy and identifies gaps) Planned Simulation Capability •DCP simulation capability acquisition •Minors simulation capability acquisition •Other Defence capability acquisition Current Simulation Capability •Simulation capability within Groups and inservice Management •Defence Simulation Forum •CDG Defence Simulation Capability Defence Simulation Capability Management Simulation Support to Fundamental Inputs to Capability Defence Environment Defence Governance Policy/Guidance •Department/Defence Instructions •Department/Defence Manuals Future Planning •Defence Plan •Defence Management & Financial Plan Management •DC Defence Capability Management Fundamental Inputs to Capability (FIC) •Collective Training •Facilities •Organisation •Supplies Future Planning: Defence Capability •White Paper (and updates) •Australia’s Military Strategy •Defence Planning Guidance •Defence Capability Strategy Planned Defence Capability •DCP 2004-2014 capability acquisition •Minors capability acquisition •Other Defence capability acquisition Current Defence Capability •Defence capability within Groups and inservice Management •DC •DCIC Defence Capability •DCC •CDG Some simulation FIC elements Simulation is used to support real operations “To Simulate Defence” •Command and Management •Major Systems •Personnel •Support • Intended to provide ‘one stop shop’ for Australian DOD simulation policy & guidance. • Software based. • Available to all in Defence simulation community (soon on WWW) • All suggestions for additions & alterations welcome. Defence Simulation Manual SIMMAN Contents Volume one Part 6: Simulation And Defence Capability Part 6: Simulation And Defence Capability Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Part 8: Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Guide Part 8: Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Guide Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Part 14: Simulation Training and Education Part 14: Simulation Training and Education Part 15: Defence Current & Future Simulation Projects Part 15: Defence Current & Future Simulation Projects Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Part 17: Defence Simulation Workforce Guide Part 17: Defence Simulation Workforce Guide SIMMAN Contents Volume two Part 1: Simulation Support to Capability Life Cycle Part 1: Simulation Support to Capability Life Cycle Part 2: Simulation Support to Analysis Part 2: Simulation Support to Analysis Part 3: Simulation Support to Training Part 3: Simulation Support to Training Part 4: Simulation Support to Conduct Of Operations Part 4: Simulation Support to Conduct Of Operations Current SIMMAN Guides Part 6: Simulation And Defence Capability Part 6: Simulation And Defence Capability Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Part 8: Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Guide Part 8: Simulation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Guide Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Part 14: Simulation Training and Education Part 14: Simulation Training and Education Part 15: Defence Current & Future Simulation Projects Part 15: Defence Current & Future Simulation Projects Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Volume 1 Part 1: Defence Simulation Policy • Defence Simulation Policy DI(G) OPS 42-1 VISION STATEMENT “Defence exploits simulation to develop, train for, prepare for and test military options for government wherever it can: – enhance ADF capabilities, – save resources – reduce risk ” • Defence Simulation VV&A Policy (Draft) • Defence Policy on Computer-Based, commercial military simulations and Games (Draft) Volume 1 Part 2: Defence Simulation Planning • Defence Simulation Plan Supporting & Technical Plans Policy Vision, Issues, Strategies Plan (Part 1) Result Areas Tasks & Responsibilities Plan (Part 2) Single Service Plans Specific Activities DI(G) OPS 42-1 The Defence Simulation Plan Strategies Investment in Simulation Application Areas Defence Outcomes Policy Direction Coordination Collaboration Manage Effectively Increase Use Combine For Benefit Personnel Expertise Life Cycle Support Access Data Training Force Assessment Experimentation Research & Devt. Acquisition Life-Cycle Mgmt. Enhance Capability Save Resources Reduce Risk Crisis Mgmt. & Planning Mission Rehearsal Operations Volume 1 Part 3: Introduction to Simulation Purpose: Provides a basic introduction to non-simulationists on simulation terms and concepts. It is a clear and simple guide to simulation that includes user friendly pictures and diagrams to aid in the understanding of simulation in the Defence environment. Volume 1 Part 4: Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Purpose: Assists Defence by: • Providing assistance and guidance to the broader Defence community for them to justify the investment in more specific simulation activities. • Providing useful case studies and examples that Defence may be able to re-use. • Identifying limitations and risks, such that users don’t try and use simulation inappropriately. Define/ understand purpose of simulation Identify & define benefits Classify benefits Estimate Simulation benefits Define base from existing system Compare existing situation against simulation Preparing benefits information for inclusion in a business case for acquisition Business Case Benefits of simulation Identify and define limitations Main Focus of Defence Simulation Benefits Guide Volume 1 Part 5: Defence Simulation Glossary Purpose: Provides a source of simulation acronyms, terms and definitions used in the Australian Department of Defence. Volume 1 Part 6: Simulation & Defence Capability Purpose: Explains the contribution of simulation to Defence capability. Volume 1 Part 7: Defence Simulation Proposal Guide Purpose: Assists the developers of simulation proposals, and those reviewing and assessing those proposals, to establish clearly how the simulation will enhance capability, save resources or reduce risk to develop, train for, prepare for and test military options for Government. Opportunity to enhance capability, save resources or reduce risk. Leading to a definable purpose and role for simulation Value of the Simulation Value of the Simulation Investment Investment Value of the Simulation Value of the Simulation Investment Investment Risk of the Simulation Risk of the Simulation Investment Investment Risk of the Simulation Risk of the Simulation Investment Investment Cost of the Simulation Cost of the Simulation Investment Investment Cost of the Simulation Cost of the Simulation Investment Investment User requirements Costs/Benefits Data Representations Technology Confidence Building Enhances capability Saves resources Reduces risk To develop, train for, prepare for and test military options for Government A coherent contribution to Defence Investment & Expenditure Proposals… And then determine the critical points in reviewing & refining the proposal. 4 Why the proposal should be considered. What issues the proposal should discuss. How the proposal establishes value, costs and risk. User to ensure conformance with specific requirements of the approval authority Other guidance may apply 3 SPG is designed to help users understand and explain … 1 2 Input to overall life cycle costs Input to overall risk of procurement Volume 1 Part 8: Simulation VV&A Guide Purpose: Assists the Acquirers, Developers, Managers, Users, and Supporters of simulations in giving an understanding of the concepts of Verification, Validation and Accreditation for simulations and to provide guidance on its effective application in establishing the fitness for purpose of Australian Defence simulations. Accreditation Process Accreditation Plan Accreditation Assessment Accreditation Report Validation Plan Conduct Verification Validation Report Conduct Validation Verification Plan Verification Report Validation Assessment Validation Process Verification Assessment Verification Process Legacy Simulation or Federation to be Modified New Simulation or Federation Verification, Validation and Accreditation Process Managed by User Managed by Acquirer Managed by Developer Conduct Accreditation Accreditation Decision Configuration Management Process Data Verification, Validation and Creditation Process Volume 1 Part 9: Distributed Simulation Guide Purpose: Assists the Acquirers, Developers, Managers, Supporters and Users of Simulations in giving an understanding of the concepts of Distributed Simulation technology and to provide guidance on its use in combining Australian Defence Simulations. It also provides guidance on Simulation Interoperability with our allies and coalition partners. Volume 1 Part 10: Simulation Data Guide Purpose: Assist the Acquirers, Developers, Managers, Supporters and Users of simulation systems in gaining an understanding of the many issues and challenges associated with simulation-related data. Key Data Standards RASTER VECTOR VPF Compliant WVS, DCW VMAP, UVMap, RPF Compliant Images GeoTIFF DIGEST DTED SEDRIS DEM ADRG, CADRG CIB NITF Compliant NITF Compliant IHO-S57 DFAD OpenFlight RASTER VECTOR VPF Compliant WVS, DCW VMAP, UVMap, RPF Compliant Images GeoTIFF DIGEST DTED SEDRIS DEM ADRG, CADRG CIB NITF Compliant NITF Compliant IHO-S57 DFAD OpenFlight Volume 1 Part 11: Defence Simulation Standards Purpose: – lists and categorises simulation standards and their status; – provides an overview of the main simulation standards used by defence; – defines the process by which simulation standards are managed in the ADO; – identifies key local and international standards bodies; and – provides details of sources of support and further information. Levels of Standards S i m u l a t io n U s e r s S i m u la t i o n U s e r G r o u p A u s t r a l i a n D e f e n c e G r o u p L e v e l O t h e r S i m u la t i o n U s e r G r o u p s O t h e r A D O G r o u p s A u s t r a l i a n D e f e n c e L e v e l O t h e r C o a li t i o n F o r c e s C o a l it i o n L e v e l A u s t r a li a n ( N a t i o n a l) I n t e r n a t io n a l D a t a S t a n d a r d s F id e l it y S t a n d a r d s R e p r e s e n t a t io n s S im u la t io n P r o t o c o l S im u la t io n A r c h it e c t u r e S im u la t io n C o m m u n ic a t i o n D a t a E x c h a n g e D is t r ib u t e d L e a r n in g D is t r ib u t e d S i m u l a t i o n s V V & A R e g u la t o r y / C e r t if i c a t i o n C o n f i d e n c e B u i ld in g S W D e v . S t a n d a r d s S i m H W S t a n d a r d s V is u a l D B S t a n d a r d s S y s t e m E n g S t a n d a r d s S im u la t i o n E n g in e e r in g D a t a M a n a g e m e n t C o n f i g u r a t i o n M a n a g e m e n t S e c u r i t y M a n a g e m e n t S a f e t y M a n a g e m e n t R i s k M a n a g e m e n t S im u la t io n M a n a g e m e n t D e f e n c e S im u l a t io n S t a n d a r d s C a t e g o r i e s Volume 1 Part 12: Simulation Safety Guide Purpose: Assists the acquirers, developers, managers, users, and supporters of simulation in understanding how to manage Safety Risk in the acquisition, development, management, support and use of Simulation. Volume 1 Part 13: Simulation Security Guide Purpose: Assists the Acquirers, Developers, Managers, Users, and Supporters of simulations in understanding the concepts of Security for simulations and to provide guidance on its effective application in establishing the appropriate and effective security of Australian Defence Simulations. Volume 1 Part 14: Simulation Training & Education Purpose: Provides a listing of known available simulation education and training activities that can be undertaken to develop simulation expertise. Volume 1 Part 15: Defence Current and Future Simulation Projects Purpose: Provides a listing of Defence Current and Future Simulation Projects with their status and points of contact. • 79 Major Capability Project entries • 27 Minor Capability Project entries • 101 DSTO entries Volume 1 Part 16: Defence Industry Simulation Capabilities Purpose: Provide potential simulation users within Defence with access to a list of companies with simulation skills and capabilities. Future Development • Simulation Support to Capability Life Cycle • Simulation Workforce Guide • Simulation Support to Analysis • Simulation Support to Training • Simulation Support to Conduct of Operations • Updates Feedback Darren Mc Farlane 02 6265 4797 darren.mcfarlane@defence.gov.au Australian Defence Simulation Manual Prepared by: Australian Defence Simulation Office Department of Defence, Canberra http://intranet.defence.gov.au/cio/ Capability Life Cycle • Simulation Application Guide – to assist Defence staff to: Understand where and how simulation can be applied in the course of their work (eg developing military strategies, undertaking capability gap analysis, performing fleet management, developing and validating doctrine, etc.) • Simulation Costing Guide – assist Defence staff to: Understand where and how cost estimation techniques can be applied when determining Life Cycle Costs (LCC) for potential investment in simulation. Sim Support to CLC 1 2nd Pass Template 2nd Pass Template 1st Pass Template 1st Pass Template 2nd Pass Simulation Support Plan 2nd Pass Simulation Support Plan Capability Planning & Systems Life Cycle Mgt Capability Planning & Systems Life Cycle Mgt Defence Simulation Policy and Vision Defence Simulation Policy and Vision Defence Simulation Manual (SIMMAN) Defence Simulation Manual (SIMMAN) Simulation Support: Needs Phase Guide Simulation Support: Needs Phase Guide Simulation Support: Requirements Phase Guide Simulation Support: Requirements Phase Guide Simulation Support: Acquisition Phase Guide Simulation Application Guide Simulation Application Guide Simulation Benefits Guide Simulation Benefits Guide Informs Benefits and Limitations Simulation Costing Guide Simulation Costing Guide Guides Costing and Cost / Benefit Trade-offs Informs where simulation can be applied What issues & considerations address the policy criteria to make the business case Simulation Support Strategy for CLC 1st Pass Simulation Support Business Case 1st Pass Simulation Support Plan Acquisition Simulation Support Business Case Acquisition Simulation Support Plan General Reference Guides Simulation Proposal Guide Simulation Proposal Guide CLC Guides Simulation Support: Inservice Phase Guide In-Service Simulation Support Plan In-Service Simulation Support Business Case Needs Simulation Support Business Case Needs Simulation Support Plan ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/ADSON1_SIMMAN_05.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/adso/docs/adson1_simman_05.ppt",2CC4OPMG7ZQHJ3CS3EGJGOWIPGY34IXI,4291349,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-adso-docs-adson1-simman-05-ppt-20070919153048.ppt 49,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/49.blob?_blob_column=image,20070919153206,https://web.archive.org/web/20070919153206/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/NMSG_conference_06_Australia_final.pps,2007-09-19,2007-09-19,404," 1 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Australian Defence Simulation - Status Darren Mc Farlane NATO MSG Conference 5 October 2006 Australian Defence Simulation Office (ADSO) 2 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Graduates of Army Pilots’ Course No.4 wait patiently for their turn in the simulator 3 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Outline • Overview of ADO and outcomes • Australian Simulation Governance • Current & Future Simulation Activities • Australia and NMSG Relationship • Australian Simulation Challenges • Contacting ADSO 4 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Iraq Middle East - UN Israel, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan - UN Sinai - MFO Sudan - UN Afghanistan East Timor Solomon's Current Operations 5 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Who’s the Customer & What do they want? 6 Capability Development Executive - ADSO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE RUSSELL OFFICES - CANBERRA “To provide leadership in simulation, CCDE has responsibility for simulation governance in Defence” “CJOPS has responsibility as the Joint Simulation Capability Manager” “The Service Chiefs have responsibility as Environment Simulation Capability Managers” 7 Capability Development Executive - ADSO ‘Developing the Force’ ‘Employing the Force’ CCDE CJOPS Capability Development •Strategic policy •Capability development •Acquisition and through life support •Stewardship of resources •Advice to Force Employment Simulation Champion Defence Functions Supported JOC, Navy, Army, Air Force, I&S DSTO, CFO, DSP, CIO, DPE CDE, DMO Strategy Defence Outcomes Command of Operations •Planning •Performance •Manage ADF commitments •Preparedness Industry Other External Organisations Capability Management •Raise •Regulation •Advice to Force Development •Train •Sustain Capability Management •Raise •Regulation •Advice to Force Development •Train •Sustain Stakeholders 8 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Defence Simulation Capability Capability Represented by the integrated set of Fundamental Inputs Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment 9 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Australian Simulation Governance 10 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Secretary and Chief of Defence Force ADSO is a Branch within CDE located in R1, Russell Offices Dr Ed Kruzins DGSIM LTGEN David Hurley Chief CDE Capability Development Executive (CDE) Defence Committee 11 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Australian Defence Simulation Office • Roles - DI(G) OPS 42-1 – policy direction – co-ordination – collaboration • DGSIM - Chair DSF (Defence Simulation Forum) reporting to Chief CDE who leads Governance • Influence Defence investment in Simulation • Manage Simulation Minors Program • Manage Defence Simulation Panel “. . to help people across Defence gain and sustain knowledge by using simulation” “. . advancing the use of computer-based modelling and simulation . . 12 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Defence Simulation Policy - DI(G) OPS 42-1 Vision: • Defence exploits simulation to develop, train for, prepare for and test military options for government wherever it can – enhance capabilities – save resources – reduce risk 13 Capability Development Executive - ADSO ADSO’s Roles The Defence Simulation Plan Strategies Investment in Simulation Application Areas Defence Goals Policy Direction Coordination Collaboration Manage Effectively Increase Use Combine For Benefit Personnel Expertise Life Cycle Support Access Data Training Force Assessment Experimentation Research & Devt. Acquisition Life-Cycle Mgmt. Enhance Capability Save Resources Reduce Risk Crisis Mgmt. & Planning Mission Rehearsal Operations 14 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Defence Simulation Roadmap 2006 Capability Represented by the integrated set of Fundamental Inputs Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment Current DSC Future DSC 5 year 10 year 15 year • Target States • Risk Defence Simulation Roadmap Defence Outcomes •‘Developing the Force’ •‘Employing the Force’ •Know Why •Know What •Know How •Know When Capability Represented by the integrated set of Fundamental Inputs Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major System s Personnel Support Org Comm and & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major System s Personnel Support Org Comm and & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major System s Personnel Support Org Comm and & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment 15 Capability Development Executive - ADSO ‘SIMMAN’ - The Defence Simulation Manual Volume 1: Defence Simulation Management Volume 2: Defence Simulation Application 16 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Convince the leadership • Deliver Defence-related examples from Australia and overseas that show clearly how simulation has indeed: – Enhanced Capabilities – Saved Resources – Reduced Risk 17 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Simulation “Return on Investment” • ADSO has been collecting ROI information through industry and Defence • Simple, one page with four areas • Information requested – Description of Simulation Project/Component – Defence Capabilities Enhanced – Resources Saved – Risks Reduced 18 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Current and Future Simulation Activities 19 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Cumulative Future Investment in Defence Simulation 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year A$million Future spend (but is this enough?) “X44 For relativity with US” 20 Capability Development Executive - ADSO ADO Simulation Precincts Perth - Hawk Tactical Weapons Training System -Submarine Training Support Centre -ANZAC Ship Support Centre Darwin -Battle Simulation Centre Tindal -Hornet Operational Flight Trainer - Integrated Maintenance Training System Townsville -Battle Simulation Centre -Combat Training Centre - JCTC Simulation Site (Talisman Sabre 07) Brisbane & Amberley -Battle Simulation Centre - F-111 Operational Flight Trainer -F-111 Weapons Systems Support Facility Oakey -Blackhawk Operational Flight Trainer -Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Simulator Newcastle -ADF Warfare Centre -Hornet Operational Flight Trainer -Hawk Tactical Weapons Training System -Avionics Systems Support Facility -AEW&C Operational Flight Trainer -Air Defence Ground Env Sim Sydney -Navy Simulation Office -Bridge Training Facility -Maritime Warfare Training Centre -Air Lift Group Simulator Complex -Land Command Battle Laboratory -DSTO MOD Annex Nowra -Air Warfare Systems Centre Melbourne -DSTO AOD Puckapunyal -Army Simulation Wing -Battle Simulation Centre - Indirect Fire Observer Trainer -Artillery Indoor Range System -Armour Driver and Gunnery Trainers Adelaide -DSTO Simulation Hub -DSTO -AP-3C Flight & Mission Simulators Canberra -Australian Defence Simulation Office -DSTO DSAD -RPD&E 21 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Defence Science and Technology Organisation DSTO LOD - SERF DSTO C2D - FOCAL DSTO MOD - VIRTUAL MARITIME SYSTEM DSTO AOD – AIR OPERATIONS SIMULATION CENTRE DSTO SIMULATION HUB Other DSTO Divisions Defence Experimentation Initiative 22 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Navy HMAS Watson – Bridge Simulator HMAS WATSON - ANZAC & FFG Ops Simulators Navy Systems - Computer Modelling Group HMAS ALBATROSS - Air Warfare Systems Centre Maritime Warfare Training System Exercise RIMPAC HMAS STIRLING – Collins Submarine Simulator 23 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Air Force RAAF Base Tindal and Williamtown – FA18 Simulator RAAF Base Williamtown - Air Defence Ground Environment Simulation RAAF Base Richmond - C130J Simulator RAAF Base Edinburgh – P3 Simulator Exercise Pitch Black 2008 24 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Army Land Command Battle Laboratory Townsville - Combat Training Centre Battle Simulation Centre - WTTS Facility Oakey – Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Simulator 25 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Joint Operations Command • JTLS • JSAF • Introducing simulation into warfare courses • JCTC Simulation System will transition to JOC for exercises: Talisman Sabre Vital prospect 26 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Defence • Canberra Based Simulation Centre • Defence Synthetic Environment • Joint Combined Training Centre (JCTC) 27 Capability Development Executive - ADSO JCTC Vision ‘Enhanced high-end, bilateral training in order to increase and measure operational capability and preparedness, improve interoperability, and facilitate capability development.’ USJFCOM UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED 6 May 04 Key Regional Communications Hub Type 1 (Persistent) Site Cp Lejuene Eglin Ft Bliss Keesler JWFC Kirtland Hurlburt Western Region Eastern Region Ft Huachuca Ft Polk Davis-Monthan NTC, Ft Irwin CAX, 29 Palms Nellis TTGL Ft Bragg Dam Neck Col. Springs (JNIC) GCCC / NH95 Miramar PACOM Hawaii JCTC Australia JNTC Link JNTC Node JCTC – JNTC Implementation Concept FY04 JNTC CONUS Type 2 (Non-persistent) Site 28 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Australia and NATO Simulation 29 Capability Development Executive - ADSO MSG : Exploiting Commercial Games for Military Use • Australia has considerable experience – Commercial Games Policy (see web) – Currently utilise at least 8 Games products (VBS, Steel beasts, Uncommon Valour, Decisive Action, TACOPS, Combat Mission, Harpoon3, MS Flight Simulator) – Some used for mission readiness for operational troops – Continually reviewing others – Still areas to be exploited – leadership, medical, first responders • Australia has been a committed member of this working group since 2004 • Australia will be a participant in an unclassified gaming activity with The Netherlands, Sweden and Canada utilising VBS and Steel Beasts. 30 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Adaption of Military Games -Training from Historical Campaigns 31 Capability Development Executive - ADSO In 1997, NATO established a Specialist Team on Simulation Based Design & Virtual Prototyping to develop guidance (ANEP 61) on the use of simulation to support ship design In 2001, ‘Subgroup 61’ was established to formulate technical standards (STANAG) & a VS MOU to enable delivery of Virtual Ship technology to reduced timescale, risk & cost NATO SG61 – Virtual Ships 32 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Future Australian Involvement • MSG-027 Pathfinder • MSG-030 Simulation Based Acquisition • MSG-031 Cost effectiveness of M&S • MSG -032 Urban Combat • MSG-046 M&S for NEC • Joint sim for training and planning support 33 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Australian Simulation Challenges • Culture • Resources • Coordination • Data • Geography • Certification and accreditation 34 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Contacting ADSO darren.mcfarlane@defence.gov.au http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO Darren McFarlane ADSO Navy 1 Vacant ADSO Army 1 WGCDR Tom Wickham ADSO Air Force 1 John Loughhead ADSO Joint 1 David Oliver ADSO Cap Dev 1 Dr Ed Kruzins DGSIM I/ITSEC Booth 2277 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/NMSG_conference_06_Australia_final.pps,"au,gov,defence)/capability/adso/docs/nmsg_conference_06_australia_final.pps",ALDFOBXPLBLRPBOUWTAZA46O4KXOLKJV,2321666,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-adso-docs-nmsg-conference-06-australia-final-pps-20070919153206.pps 50,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/50.blob?_blob_column=image,20070919153011,https://web.archive.org/web/20070919153011/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/Roadmap_Release_DGSIM_presentation.pps,2007-09-19,2007-09-19,404," Introduction to the Defence Simulation Roadmap Ed Kruzins, Director General, Simulation Roadmap Release 28 Nov 2006 Capability Development Executive - ADSO Capability Development Executive - ADSO Defence Simulation Organisations Chief Capability Development Executive Defence Simulation Forum Australian Defence Simulation Office CIO Group DMO Intelligence & Security DSTO Industry Academia Defence Simulation Executive Air Force Australian Defence Headquarters International Partners Other Government Departments and Agencies Vice Chief of the Defence Force Defence Simulation Community Other Defence Groups Army Note: Australian Defence Headquarters comprises Joint Operations Command, Capability Development Executive, Strategy Executive, Personnel Executive and Finance Executive. Capability Development Executive - ADSO A guiding Roadmap Current Defence Sim Capability Defence Outcomes •‘Developing the Force’ •‘Employing the Force’ Defence Simulation Roadmap •Know Why •Know What •Know How •Know When 5 year 10 year 15 year • Target States • Risk Future 14 ADSO Capability Development Executive - ADSO Roadmap Purpose  This roadmap sets the course for achieving Defence’s vision for simulation over the next 5, 10 and 15 years.  Purpose: to stimulate a process of continual improvement to guide actions and decision making on governance, development and employment of simulation that will achieve coherence and synchronisation of simulation activities and capabilities across Defence. Capability Development Executive - ADSO Providing the Bridge from Strategy to Development Defence Simulation Roadmap Ch 1: Introduction Ch 2: Target States Ch 3: Current State Ch 4: Gaps Ch 5-8: Initiatives Ch 9: Simulation Development Path Ch 10: Continuous Improvements PMDE PMSA Defence Capability Strategy Defence Simulation Strategy Defence Simulation Policy Future Operating Concepts for Simulation and Simulation Support 0 ---- 5 ---- 10 ---- 15 (Years) Defence White Paper Defence Plan Strategic and Operational Intent Capability Simulation Plans JOC Maritime Land Air ADSO Concept Tech Demos CTD A CTD B  …n R&D Plans Land task 1 Mar task 2  …n Defence Capability Plans Major Project A Minor Project B  … n Enabling Support Technology Architecture Standards etc Other FIC plans: Personnel Facilities Systems etc RPDE Sim Tasks Task 1 Task 2  …n Functional Support Plans Experim- entation NCW  …n Defence Simulation Manual Policy & Planning Capability Development Executive - ADSO Part 1: Context for the Defence Simulation Roadmap 1. Introduction 2. Target States for Defence Simulation 3. Current State of Simulation 4. Gaps in Simulation Support Services Capability Development Executive - ADSO Part 2: Initiatives to Achieve the Simulation Vision 5. Initiatives for Simulation Support to Capability Managers 6. Initiatives for Simulation Support to the Command of Operations 7. Initiatives for Simulation Support to Developing the Force 8. Initiatives for Simulation Governance 9. Simulation Development Path 10. Continuous Improvements for the Simulation Roadmap Capability Development Executive - ADSO Support Capability Manager Raise SIM recruitment aids Workplace visualisation Plan, Recruit, Retain Strategy / quick wins CTD AED AED program: Build experiential pre-workplacement tools Integrate SIM spt for workforce planning & management Education (Colleges & distributed learning) Strategy Trial Implementation Program Operationalise Ongoing iterative development and upgrade to meet user requirement Train TS07 VP08 TS09 VP10 TS11 VP12 TS13 Joint / Combined Training Review Review Review Full-scale multi-modal, SIM support capability for Joint & Combined Training LVC Battlespace Development CTD AED of LVC; AAR Establish full capability Mod/Upgrade Ongoing iterative development and upgrade to meet user requirement Sustain Defence Logistics Transformation Strategy Integrate SIM strategy & tools to support DLTP Review Online support to conducting the sensitivity analyses and predictive analyses Operational support planning SIM for DLTP Experimentation & spiral development of operational planning support tools Ongoing iterative development and upgrade to meet user requirement Maintenance support CTD Mainten'ce Spt AED: M'tce Spt Defence Simulation Roadmap Chart Draft - November 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2020 2021 Vision 2011 Vision 2016 Vision 2021 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support Comd of Operations Plan High-level analysis of situational awareness Continously optimise courses of action for all operations (incl. asymmetric) SIM Planning & Development Strategy Experimentation & spiral development of operational planning support tools Ongoing iterative development and upgrade to meet user requirement Joint planning CTD spt to J4 AED: Spt J4 CTD: Spt J2/J3 AED: J2/J2 Establish full capability Rehearse Urban Environments Immediate AAR and replay capabilities Pre-deployment and in-theatre rehearsal capabilities SIM Planning & Development Strategy Experimentation & spiral development of simulation support tools Rehearsal Note: Trg AAR tools delivered CTD: Rehearsal AED: Rehearsal Ongoing iterative development and upgrade to meet user requirement Execute ‘Plan while execute’ role Trial Measure Practiced capacity Assess/modify in real/near-real time SIM Planning & Development Strategy Research Program Experimentation & spiral development of simulation support tools Spt to operations CTD: Plan/Execute AED: Plan/Execute Ongoing iterative development and upgrade 2015 2020 2021 Vision 2011 Vision 2016 Vision 2021 2016 2017 2018 2019 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Draft - November 2006 Defence Simulation Roadmap Chart Develop the Force Strategy & Needs Strategy & Needs WargamingPilot Integrate wargaming with simulation Requirements IOC Develop, test, visualise military options for Govt SIM Planning & Development JDSC Establish full joint decision support capability Continuously optimise military options Requirements Integrated support to 1st-Pass & 2nd-Pass processes Validate integration of current/future requirements Integrated decision support Knowledge management Strategy CDE Pilot Strategy Acquisition Integrate Preparedness Robust cost, benefit, risk trade-off Ongoing experimentation Acquisition Ongoing test and evaluation Tender evaluation Test and evaluation Strategy CTD: T&E AED: Core T&E Spt CTD: 'End-to-end' testing AED: 'End-to-end' Testing Defence Simulation Roadmap Chart Draft - November 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2020 2021 Vision 2011 Vision 2016 Vision 2021 2016 2017 2018 2019 Experimentation & spiral development of simulation support tools Capability Development Executive - ADSO Key Roadmap themes  Simulation is widespread and simulation is about people  Some technical challenges but these are not insurmountable  Big simulation issues are not technological  Culture of Defence regarding simulation has to change to maximise its value  Increased engagement of industry and academia required to develop Defence simulation. Capability Development Executive - ADSO Cumulative Future Investment in Defence Simulation 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year A$million Future spend (but is this enough?) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/Roadmap_Release_DGSIM_presentation.pps,"au,gov,defence)/capability/adso/docs/roadmap_release_dgsim_presentation.pps",E3STYBCSB7FVO2AY6RW54MEIQIJBUNNW,3483324,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-adso-docs-roadmap-release-dgsim-presentation-pps-20070919153011.pps 51,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/51.blob?_blob_column=image,20070919153328,https://web.archive.org/web/20070919153328/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/Roadmap_Release_DSG_presentation.pps,2007-09-19,2007-09-19,404," Overview and Implications for Industry Darren Mc Farlane, ADSO Defence Simulation Governance Roadmap Release 28 Nov 2006 Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters  Current Industry Involvement.  Roadmap Overview for Industry.  What does Defence need from Industry?  Summary. Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Current Industry Involvement Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters ADO Simulation Precincts Perth - Hawk Tactical Weapons Training System -Submarine Training Support Centre -ANZAC Ship Support Centre Darwin -Battle Simulation Centre Tindal -Hornet Operational Flight Trainer - Integrated Maintenance Training System Townsville -Battle Simulation Centre -Combat Training Centre - JCTC Simulation Site (Talisman Sabre 07) Brisbane & Amberley -Battle Simulation Centre - F-111 Operational Flight Trainer -F-111 Weapons Systems Support Facility Oakey -Blackhawk Operational Flight Trainer -Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Simulator Newcastle -ADF Warfare Centre -Hornet Operational Flight Trainer -Hawk Tactical Weapons Training System -Avionics Systems Support Facility -AEW&C Operational Flight Trainer -Air Defence Ground Env Sim Sydney -Navy Simulation Office -Bridge Training Facility -Maritime Warfare Training Centre -Air Lift Group Simulator Complex -Land Command Battle Laboratory -DSTO MOD Annex Nowra -Air Warfare Systems Centre Melbourne -DSTO AOD Puckapunyal -Army Simulation Wing -Battle Simulation Centre - Indirect Fire Observer Trainer -Artillery Indoor Range System -Armour Driver and Gunnery Trainers Adelaide -DSTO Simulation Hub -DSTO -AP-3C Flight & Mission Simulators Canberra -Australian Defence Simulation Office -DSTO DSAD -RPD&E Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Current Simulation Industry role within Capability Strategic Assessment Future Concepts Needs Requirement's Capability Management Acquisition Management In Service Management Disposal Least Support Greatest Support Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters  Strong relationship with the Simulation Industry Association of Australia (Especially for SimTecT).  Industry membership on Defence Simulation Forum (SIAA Chairman).  Simulation Minors program.  Major and other Minor Projects.  Estimate at least $3b invested in simulation. Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters What Does Industry Expect of Defence? • Vision, development path, clarity of needs • Chance to orient themselves to apply hard- won resources effectively to defence questions • Stronger simulation role across the spectrum of defence activities • Coherence and sustained opportunities Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Roadmap Overview for Industry Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Defence Simulation Capability Capability Represented by the integrated set of Fundamental Inputs Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt ADHQ Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSTO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Navy Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Air Force Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Army Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Intel &Sec Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt DSG Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt CIO Simulation Capability Facilities Supplies Collective Training Major Systems Personnel Support Org Command & mgt Facilities Supplies Collecti ve Trainin g Major System s Person nel Suppor t Org Comm and & mgt Defence Synthetic Environment Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Simulation Enabling Functions Management Technical Support Strategy 1: Manage simulations effectively. Strategy 2: Increase the use of simulation in Defence processes. Strategy 3: Combine simulations for greater benefit. Strategy 6: Secure access to data to support simulations. Strategy 4: Ensure adequate personnel Strategy 5: Ensure simulation life cycle support Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters ‘Developing the Force’ ‘Employing the Force’ CCDE CJOPS Capability Development •Strategic policy •Capability development •Acquisition and through life support •Stewardship of resources •Advice to Force Employment Simulation Champion Defence Functions Supported JOC, Navy, Army, Air Force, I&S DSTO, CFO, DSP, CIO, DPE CDE, DMO Strategy Defence Outcomes Command of Operations •Planning •Performance •Manage ADF commitments •Preparedness Industry Other External Organisations Capability Management •Raise •Regulation •Advice to Force Development •Train •Sustain Stakeholders Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Key Roadmap themes  Simulation is widespread and simulation is about people  Some technical challenges but these are not insurmountable  Big simulation issues are not technological  Culture of Defence regarding simulation has to change to maximise its value  Increased engagement of industry and academia required to develop Defence simulation. Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Developing the Force Employing the Force Governance Capability Management Command of Operations Needs Phase Raise Plan Manage Requirements Phase Train Rehearse Use Acquisition Phase Sustain Execute Combine Personnel Life Cycle Data Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters What does Defence need from Industry? Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters • Your hearts and minds • Your role in whole of nation defence • Engage collaboratively, early in requirements exploration • Provide suitable products to support decision making for: – Employing the force – Developing the force • Consistency and Coherence • Your innovation • Feedback (Update 12 mths) Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Simulation Sub Sector Plan? Source: Defence Electronics Systems Sector Strategic Plan Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Summary  ADSO internet website for external access  Roadmap success is dependant on you to:  Understand the intent of the shared Defence objectives it describes, and  Shape actions to improve the consistency and coherence of your simulation activities within its broad guidance.  Stronger industrial voice in collaborating and shaping defence simulation.  Expect at least $1.2b investment in simulation over next ten years. Australian Government Department of Defence Australian Defence Headquarters Contacting ADSO INTERNET: http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO Darren McFarlane ADSO DSG Vacant ADSO CM WGCDR Tom Wickham ADSO O&T John Loughhead ADSO DSC David Oliver ADSO CCD Dr Ed Kruzins DGSIM INTRANET: http://intranet.defence.gov.au/cde/Sites/ADSO/ ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/ADSO/docs/Roadmap_Release_DSG_presentation.pps,"au,gov,defence)/capability/adso/docs/roadmap_release_dsg_presentation.pps",NXVCNC6LEH5XLCCB2HKUKQANNYI3B3SH,675408,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-adso-docs-roadmap-release-dsg-presentation-pps-20070919153328.pps 52,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/52.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908132254,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908132254/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/CDAF_CRITICS_powerpoint.pps,2007-09-08,2011-06-02,404,"1 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study Chris Holloway Dep. Director Capability Guidance 2 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study BRIEFING FLOW  Background  Overview of CRITICS  Desired outputs of Current Phase  Industry involvement 3 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study  CRITICS deals with the technological elements of military capability in the years out to 2030. It thus goes beyond the current DCP.  WP2000: “The primary challenge is to select and acquire expertise and capability in those technologies that offer the most advantages in gaining and maintaining the knowledge edge.” 4 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study  CRITICS goes beyond simply selecting and acquiring technologically-advanced capability.  It is a study designed to identify and prioritise gaps in the ability of the Australian industrial base to support military capabilities in the period 2015 to 2030.  It is closely engaged with the ideas of ‘self- reliance’ and ‘operational sovereignty’. 5 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study BACKGROUND – US STUDIES Defence Industry Baseline Capability Studies  A series of studies that collectively cover all US military capability.  Each capability is mapped to a required or desired future technology / support mode. 6 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study DIBCS CRITICS US to be largely independent in acquiring and supporting US military capabilities Australia seeking an appropriate level of self- reliance for priority strategic tasks Focus on technologies to invest in & where monopolies or dependence on foreign support might occur Focus on industry capability to acquire and support the future force Extensive mapping of capabilities to technologies / support / industries Greater reliance on subject matter experts and refinement over time Many US$m & many staff years of effort Very modest levels of investment 7 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study BACKGROUND – HOW DOES CRITICS FIT IN? Industry Strategies 2015 2030 CRITICS Sector Plans Def Capability Plan Defence Capability Strategy Defence 2015 Defence 2030 CDG DMO 8 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study Phase 1: workshop and scoping study Phase 2: indicative gap analysis and report Phase 3: release to industry (CDAF) for consultation Phase 4: risk mitigation – so what do we do about the gaps? This is where we need your help. Phase 5: establish ongoing review process 9 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study  ‘Operational sovereignty’ - the maintenance of an appropriate degree of sovereignty over industrial skills, capacities, capabilities and technology to ensure operational independence across the range of contingencies that Australia may face.  Future iterations of CRITICS will provide longer-term guidance as to which of these capabilities will need to be maintained in Australia, thus assisting industry’s strategic and investment decisions. 1 0 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study  CRITICS is not Defence’s industry policy.  Taken with the endorsed sector plans and the outcomes of Government’ review of industry policy, CRITICS provides the current thinking on critical capabilities required in support of the ADF, and it will continue to evolve. 1 1 Critical Defence Industry Capability Study QUESTIONS? Contact: Chris Holloway Deputy Director Capability Guidance Russell Offices (R1-3-B064) Ph. 02 6265 1198 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/CDAF_CRITICS_powerpoint.pps,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/cdaf_critics_powerpoint.pps",XDRZUBWBD7ENVS3ZXY2BAQPM75PBLM3O,181755,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-cdaf-critics-powerpoint-pps-20070908132254.pps 53,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/53.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908091325,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908091325/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/DLCD_Status_Report_LEWG_Jun_06_Master.ppt,2007-09-08,2007-09-08,404," Land Development Branch Major Projects Land Combat Development Lieutenant Colonel Tim Griggs 1 Land Development Branch Scope • General update on Unapproved Projects • Cost, Schedule and Scope (in accordance with DCP 06-16) • Projects approaching RFT • Defence priorities and concerns • Opportunities for Australian Industry Land Development Branch Directorate of Land Combat Development 3 COL Tony Luke DLCD (02) 626 53985 Special Ops MAJ Colin Blyth (02) 626 DD Combat LTCOL Bernie Richards DD Close Combat LTCOL John Baird DD Combat Spt LTCOL Tim Griggs DD Integration LTCOL Martin Griffiths LAND 106 LAND 112-4 LAND 116-3 LAND 907 LAND 400-1 LAND 40-2 LAND 53-1BR LAND 91-6 LAND 125-3 / 4 LAND 132 JP 141 / 2087 JP 199 JP 2042-3 JP 2088 LAND 17 LAND 58-3 LAND 19-6 LAND 19-7 LAND 53-1E LAND 146-1 LAND 146-2 LAND 75 JP 2097 SF ADRHIB LAND 53-1F LAND 53-2B JP 2072 Land Development Branch Close Combat Section LTCOL John Baird Deputy Director Close Combat LAND 40 Ph 2 Direct Fire Support Weapon LAND 53 Ph 1BR Project NINOX Night Fighting Equipment Replacement LAND 91 Ph 6 Life of Type Extension F88 Steyr LAND 125 Ph 3 Soldier Combat System Land Development Branch LAND 40 Ph 2 Direct Fire Support Weapon 5 • Project Aim - Seeks to provide a range of direct fire support weapons for use by ARA infantry battalions. • Project Status: Pre 1st Pass • YOD: 07/08 • ISD: 08 - 10 • DCP guidance: $150 - 200m • Issues for Industry: – RFT release for DFSW and 84mm (M3) SRAAW Night Sight released early 07. – Competitive evaluation of weapons; e.g, 25mm cannons, 40mm AGLs. – Seeking ‘smart’ ammunition, eg. airburst, enhanced blast, fire control systems. – Seeking vehicle mounting options e.g, RWS, soft and flexible mounts. • Contact: MAJ Lachlan Mercer (+61 2 6265 4349) 0m 400m 800m 1200m 1600m 2200m 2600m 3000m 3400m 3800m Small arms, 5.56mm / 40mm GLA MDFSW, 84mm SFMG, 7.62mm CAPABILITY GAP 1100m - 2000m range DFGW, Land 40 Phase 1 INFANTRY BATTALION DIRECT FIRE WEAPONS RANGES Land Development Branch LAND 53 Ph 1B/R - Project NINOX Night Fighting Equipment Replacement • Project Aim: Seeks to replace/refurbish existing night fighting equipment systems. • Project Status: Pre 1st Pass (Project Definition Stage) • YOD: 2008/09 to 2010/11 • ISD: 2010-2012 • DCP Guidance: $150m - $250m • Issues for Industry: – Technology maturity • Innovations in Image Intensification (FOV; resolution; weight; power) • Short Wave IR and Long Wave IR solutions entering the marketplace • Uncooled TI performance (weight; range; resolution; power) • Fused technology options (TRLs in project timeframe; costs; reliability; weight; power). – Human factors • integration; useability (particularly weight and dimensions); impact on the soldier. – Comparison Trial early/mid 2008 • Contact: LTCOL John Baird (+61 2 6265 1554) Land Development Branch LAND 91 Ph 6 Life of Type Extension F88 Steyr 7 • Project Aim: To extend the life of ADF small arms, such as the F88 Steyr and F89 Minimi. Previous phases of LAND 91 introduced the F88 into service in 1988 and the F89 in 1989. • Project Status: Pre 1st Pass • YOD: 08/09 - 10/11 • ISD: 2010-12 • DCP guidance: $30 - 50m • Issues for Industry: – Integration with Fire Control Systems – Integration with LAND 125 – Partial upgrade of entire fleet (12 -14K of 72K). – Employment of non-lethal and less-than-lethal force weapons and ammunition. • Contact: MAJ Lachlan Mercer (+61 2 6265 4349) Land Development Branch L125 Ph 3 Soldier Combat System 8 • Project Aim - Land 125 seeks to optimise the performance of the ADF’s close combat force through the selective application of leading edge technologies. • Project Status: Pre 2nd Pass • Project Deliverables: – Phase 2A Project Definition Study - Complete – Phase 2 B ISD 05/06. Soldier Enhancement Version 1. – Phase 3 ISD 07/09. Soldier Enhancement Version 2. – Phase 4 ISD 10/12. Soldier Enhancement Version 3. • Phase 3 YOD: 06/07 • Phase 3 DCP guidance: $450 - 600m • Issues for Industry: – Combined Land 125 and Land 75 RFT Release for BMS-M and BMS-D. – ADF seeking primes for sub-systems where feasible. – S&T plan seeking industry engagement for Phase 4 and beyond, DSTO to lead. Contact: CAPT Adam Rankin (+61 2 6265 2810) Land Development Branch Combat Support Section LTCOL Tim Griggs - Deputy Director Land 17 Artillery Replacement Project Land 58 Ph 3 Weapon Locating Radar LOTE Land 19 Ph 7 RBS-70 Enhancement/Replacement 9 Land Development Branch LAND 17 - Artillery Replacement Project 10 • Project Aim: To modernise the Army’s fire support system through the acquisition of a networked Battle Management System – Fires (BMS-F), Artillery PGM and replacement of the Hamel Gun and M198 Howitzer fleet. • New howitzer fleet based on ARA requirement for 6 batteries: – Not less than 2 batteries of protected SP, and – Not more than 4 batteries of Lightweight Howitzer. • Cost: $450-600m • Schedule: – YOD: 08/09 – ISD: 2011 • Issues for Industry: – RFT release 4Q 2006 • Contact: MAJ Mat Taylor (+61 26265 1734) Land Development Branch LAND 58 Ph 3 Weapon Locating Radar LOTE 11 • Project Aim: To extend the Life of Type of the ADF AN/TPQ-36 Weapon Locating Radar until 2015. • Tender Evaluation Complete • Capability Proposal Second Pass and Acquisition Business Case are under consideration. • Pending DCC endorsement, Second Pass Approval from Government in 2006 • Issues for Industry: – Post 2015 … Land 58-4 ? • Contact: MAJ Paul Randall (+61 26265 4441) Land Development Branch LAND 19 Ph 7 RBS70 Replacement/Enhancement 12 • Project Aim: To enhance or replace the existing GBAD system. It may include new technologies and weapon systems that are also capable of countering Rockets, Artillery, Mortars and Missiles (CRAMM). • Project Status: Pre 1st Pass (Project Definition Phase) • YOD: 2015/16 – 2017/18 • ISD: 2018/2020 • DCP Guidance: $750 – 1000m • Issues for Industry: – JAMD Study strongly supports scope of LAND 19 Ph 7 – RBS70 LOT is 2015 – CRAMM could be cannon, Directed Energy Weapons etc – Countering threat force air-delivered stand-off hyper-sonic munitions ? – Sensor data fusion between GBAD and STA sensors – Collaborative Engagement Capability ? – Surface launched missiles • Contact: MAJ Paul Randall (+61 26265 4441) Land Development Branch Combat Section LTCOL Bernard Richards Deputy Director Combat LAND 112 Ph 4 ASLAV Enhancement LAND 400 Ph 1 Survivability of Ground Forces Land Development Branch LAND 112 PHASE 4 ASLAV ENHANCEMENT • Phase 1 acquired 15 USMC LAVs for trial. • Phase 2 acquired 113 ASLAV to equip 2 Cav Regt. • Phase 3 is acquiring 144 vehicles for 2/14 QMI. • Phase 4 is the proposed fleet enhancement. – Project Aim. This phase will upgrade the fleet of Australian Light Armoured Vehicles (ASLAV). • Improvements. Integration of electronic and mechanical systems including: • Mine protection; • Battlefield management; • Signature management; • Spall liners; • Engine retrofit; and • Ballistic protection. • Status. Pre-1st Pass. Updated CABSUB in progress. • YOD (TBC): 2010/11 – 2012/13 • ISD (TBC): 2012-2014 • DCP Guidance: $200m-250m. • Contact: CAPT Dorian Serfontein (+61 2 6265 4360) Land Development Branch LAND 400 PHASE 1: SURVIVABILITY OF GROUND FORCES • Project Aim. To enhance the survivability of land forces in combat operations through the provision of new warfighting systems. Will incrementally replace the Army’s current combat, combat support and some combat service support systems. • Status. Pre-1st Pass. Options review committee planned for mid-07. Proposed 1st Pass FY08/09. • YOD: 2011/12 – 2013/14 • DCP Guidance: $1 - 1.5 b • Contact: LTCOL Richards (+61 2 6265 4918) and CAPT Adam McIntosh. ? ? ? ? ? ? Land Development Branch Special Operations Section MAJ Colin Blyth & CAPT Joel Deans Separate brief to be provided by MAJ Blyth. Land Development Branch Integration Section LTCOL Martin Griffiths Deputy Director Integration Land 146 Combat Identification Land 75 Battlefield Command Support Systems Land Development Branch LAND 146 - Combat Identification 18 • Project Aim. The project aims to enhance the operational effectiveness of the ADF’s Land Forces whilst also decreasing the risk of fratricide. • Phase 1. - Scope. Acquiring the US Joint Combat Identification Marking Systems (JCIMS) capability for a deployable BG in 1 BDE. - Status. FOC by EOY 06. • Phase 2. - Scope. Proposes extending the Phase 1 capability to the wider Land Force and introducing a specialist BMS for the co-ordination of Close Air Support. - Status. Pre-1st Pass. - YOD: 2007/8 - ISD: 2009-11 - DCP Guidance: $100 - 150m. • Phase 3. - Scope. To acquire the ‘next generation’ CID capability. - Status. Pre-1st Pass. - YOD: 2015/16 - 2017/18 - ISD: 2019-21 - DCP Guidance: $200 - 250m. Contact: SQNLDR Jim Godfrey (+61 2 6265 1101) Land Development Branch 19 LAND 75 Battlefield Command Support Systems • Project Aim - Seeks to: – C2: Increase the accuracy and tempo of C2; – Situational Awareness: Promote Situational Awareness (SA) through providing a Common Operating Picture in an appropriate and timely manner; and – Information Management and Distribution: Improve management and distribution of information within and between tactical headquarters and subordinate units. • LAND 75 provides five key capabilities: – The Battlefield Command Support System (BCSS), or similar; – The Battle Management System; – Define the Land Common Data Environment (LCDE), within the Joint Command Support Environment (JCSE); and – Training products and delivery of these. • YOD: Ph 3.4 07/08 & Ph 4 09/10 • ISD: Ph 3.4 2008-09 & Ph 4 2010-12 • DCP guidance: Ph 3.4 $75 - 100m, and Ph 4 $200 - 250m Land Development Branch Questions 20 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/DLCD_Status_Report_LEWG_Jun_06_Master.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/dlcd_status_report_lewg_jun_06_master.ppt",EWROKHTFFVHBTNBLHWKRYUJ5A6IWLMQM,2148626,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-dlcd-status-report-lewg-jun-06-master-ppt-20070908091325.ppt 54,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/54.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908091446,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908091446/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/DLSD_Status_Report_LEWG_22_Jun_06.ppt,2007-09-08,2007-09-08,404," Director General Land Development Land Support Development Update Colonel Steve Kinloch 1 Director General Land Development Context • Defence’s plan to grow future capability will require access to the skills, products and infrastructure provided by industry. Keeping you informed of our plans is critical. • DCP 06-16 rolls the 04-14 plan forward in the context of Australia’s evolving strategic circumstances. There are no wholesale changes. • The LEWG is focussed on enriching this information in order to enhance your ability to engage in the business of delivering and sustaining land force capability. Director General Land Development Aim • For Land Support projects, provide: – Introduction – Updates in accordance with DCP 06-16 – Defence priorities and concerns – Identify opportunities for Australian Industry Director General Land Development 4 Scope • Land 121 – Field Vehicles, Modules and Trailers • Land 144 – ADF Countermine Capability • Joint Project (JP) 126 – Joint Theatre Distribution • JP 2060 – ADF Deployable Health Capability • JP 2077 – Improved Logistic Information Systems • Other potential opportunities Director General Land Development Land 121 – Project Overlander Field Vehicles, Modules and Trailers • Seeks to provide field vehicles, modules and trailers to meet the mobility requirements of the ADF: – Ph 3A: commence the replacement of current fleets in high readiness Army and RAAF units (YOD 06/07, $450-600m) – Ph 3B: will extend the replacement across the remainder of the fleet (YOD 08/09-10/11, $2.0-2.5b) • Ph 3A RFT responses due over next couple of weeks • Interdependencies with many other projects • Potential opportunities for Australian industry • Contact: LTCOL Robin Petersen, MAJ Jason Williams Director General Land Development Land 144 Phase 1 – ADF Countermine Capability • Seeks to provide high readiness units with an enhanced counter-mine capability based on proven COTS/MOTS solutions: – Protected mine clearance vehicles – Improved hand held detectors – An explosive lane clearance system • YOD 07/08, $20-30m • ITRs have recently closed • Opportunities for Australian industry may follow in integration, training and sustainment • No follow-on phases identified in DCP 06-16 • Contact: LTCOL Steve Salvestro Director General Land Development Joint Project (JP) 126 Phase 2– Joint Theatre Distribution System • Seeks to acquire equipment to improve the ADF’s capability to deliver logistic support to forces on operations: – Rough Terrain Container Handlers – Container Side Loaders – Container Roll-Out Platforms – Cranes, etc • YOD 06/07, $100-150m • RFTs to be released for some specific capabilities over next few weeks • In addition to the provision of the prime capability, opportunities for Australian industry may follow in integration, training and through-life maintenance/support. • No follow-on phases identified in DCP 06-16 • Contact: MAJ Jacque Kopievsky Director General Land Development JP 2060 Phase 3– ADF Deployable Health Capability • Seeks to improve the ADF’s deployable health capability for prevention, treatment and evacuation of casualties. The project will address each of the Health Operating Systems: – Preventive health – Treatment – Evacuation – Health information systems – Health services logistics • YOD 11/12 to 13/14, $250-350m • Studies in 06/07 will define the end-Ph2B baseline • Contact: MAJ John Salter, MAJ Jacque Kopievsky Director General Land Development JP 2077 – Improved Logistics Information Systems • Phase 2B seeks to improve the information management support available to the ADF (will be submitted for Govt approval in two sub-phases - 2B.1 and 2B.2, YOD 06/07, $150-200m) • Phase 2C (already approved) is delivering a consignment tracking capability based on active RFID technology • Ph 2D seeks to rationalise, upgrade, replace and introduce additional logistics IT systems (YOD 07/08, $350-450m): • Separate brief to be provided by Mr Selby Dyer Director General Land Development 10 Other potential opportunities • We are beginning to think about: – Force protection issues (Counter IED, EWSP, CBRN, NLW capability) – Combat Service Support development post-JP126 • DLSD ATSOC Team Projects: – Personnel Tracking and Management – Manoeuvre Support in Complex Terrain • The CTD Program (more on this this afternoon) – Round 11 bids close 7 July 2006 Director General Land Development Land Support Development Update Colonel Steve Kinloch 11 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/DLSD_Status_Report_LEWG_22_Jun_06.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/dlsd_status_report_lewg_22_jun_06.ppt",LVCBUCHAZAVCMG72Y7JRM4VQ5LRYOE3X,195422,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-dlsd-status-report-lewg-22-jun-06-ppt-20070908091446.ppt 55,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/55.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908091512,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908091512/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_-_DG_Draft_Brief1_Jun_06_v2.ppt,2007-09-08,2007-09-08,404," Director General Land Development Land Environmental Working Group 22 June 2006 Brigadier Stephen Dunn 1 Director General Land Development Scope • Outline of the Day • Recognition of Participants • Industry Feedback from 23 Jun 05 LEWG • DCP 2006 – 16 2 Director General Land Development Outline of the Day • 0835 – 0900 hrs Opening Remarks • 0900 – 1000 hrs Directors Status Reports • 1000 – 1030 hrs Morning Tea • 1035 – 1115 hrs Land 400 Phase 1 Update • 1115 – 1130 hrs Project Redfin & SO Capabilities • 1130 – 1200 hrs Improved Log Info Systems • 1200 – 1230 hrs Networking the Land Battlespace • 1230 – 1330 hrs Lunch Director General Land Development Outline of the Day • 1330 – 1350 hrs CTD Program • 1350 – 1410 hrs Land Future Research Areas • 1410 – 1430 hrs Army Minor Projects • 1430 – 1500 hrs Afternoon Tea • 1500 – 1700 hrs One –on–One with DDs/DOs Director General Land Development LEWG Participants Defence Participants • Capability Development Group – Desk Officers • Defence Science & Technology Organisation – Land Operations Division – Weapons System Division • Defence Materiel Organisation – Land System Division SPOs – Land Weapons System Division SPOs – Land Engineering Agency – Industry Division Embassy Participation • France –Military Attaché • Army Programs Manager, U.S. Defence • Material Attaché Director of Material, British High Commission International Participants • Germany – MAN • Norway – Kongsberg • South Africa - Denel / ADS • UK - Oxley Director General Land Development •More on the Army Minor projects •Some interest in unapproved projects •Inclusion of Joint projects with Land attribution •Linkages between projects •Better information on Projects with shorter lead times such as those projects approaching RFT •Clearer outlines of sub-system requirements •Advice on specific studies of papers which inform projects, i.e the OCD •Insight into Defence thinking about things such as priorities, concerns or potential shifts Industry Feedback Director General Land Development •Update for Capability & Technology Demonstrators (CTDs) program •Current lists of contact details/ responsibilities •Time allocated for One-on-One meetings with Desk Officers •More specific information on perceived Industry involvement - especially for SMEs •Linkages between S&T priorities and capability projects Industry Feedback Director General Land Development Defence Capability Plan • Development plan for Australia's military capabilities • Rolling 10 year focus • Updated annually as part of the budget process • Public version is released regularly to inform industry of Defence’s capability needs Director General Land Development Defence Capability Plan 2006-16 • Financial Aspects – Continuation of 3% funding growth beyond 2010/11 • adds over $2 billion up to 2015/16 • Costs – DCP 2006-16 total cost over $51 billion – $31 billion to be spent on next 10 years on DCP projects – together with approved projects around $45 billion to be spend on Defence capabilities over the next decade • Changes since DCP 2004-14 – new projects, – increased project provisions, – reductions/deletions, and – timing changes Director General Land Development New Projects in DCP 2006-16 24 new Projects/Phases worth $7.4 billion including: • Land 19 Phase 7 - GBAD – RBS 70 Enhancement or Replacement $750m – $1000m • Land 75 Phase 5 – Army Battle Management System $200 – $250m • Land 91 Phase 7 – Small Arms LOTE (Remainder of the Fleet) $150m - $200m • Land 146 Phase 3 – Combat ID for Land Forces $200m - $250m • JP 2072 Phase 4 – Battlespace Communications System (Land) $200m - $250m • JP 2076 Phase 1 – Psychological Operations Production Systems $30m - $50m • JP 2077 Phase 2 D – Improved Logistics Information Systems $350m - $450m Director General Land Development Cost Increases & Reductions to Existing Projects • Increases include: – JP 2077 Phase 2B Logistics Information Systems now $150m - $200m – Land 58 Phase 3 Weapon Locating Radar LOTE now $30m - $50m – Land 144 Counter Mine Capability now $20m - $30m • Reductions include: – Land 17 Artillery Replacement now $450m - $600m (from $600m - $750m) Director General Land Development Delays to YOD or ISD • Land 17 Artillery Replacement – Delay of 3 years to YOD and ISD • Land 40 Direct Fire Support Weapon – 1 year delay to YOD • Land 58 Phase 3 Weapon Locating Radar LOTE – 1 year delay to YOD • Land 112 Phase 4 ASLAV Enhancement – 3 year delay to YOD and ISD • Land 121 Phase 3A & 3B Overlander – Field Vehicles and Trailers – Up to 3 year delay to YOD • Land 144 Counter Mine Capability – 2 year delay to YOD and ISD Director General Land Development Land Environmental Working Group 22 June 2006 Brigadier Stephen Dunn 13 Director General Land Development An Industry Perspective Mr Grant Hollingsworth 14 Director General Land Development Land Environmental Working Group 22 June 2006 15 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_-_DG_Draft_Brief1_Jun_06_v2.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/lewg_-_dg_draft_brief1_jun_06_v2.ppt",5EIU74CFBJZU2KGELPIPGWAYJ35ACJJ2,201838,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-lewg-dg-draft-brief1-jun-06-v2-ppt-20070908091512.ppt 56,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/56.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908091611,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908091611/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_-_NCW06.ppt,2007-09-08,2007-09-08,404," Director General Land Development Networking the Land Battlespace Lieutenant Colonel Martin Griffiths Deputy Director - Integration 1 Director General Land Development Presentation Outline – Definitions – Theory – Networking in the Land Environment – The Land Approach – High Payoff Areas – Industry Opportunities Director General Land Development Land Networking Definition “The method of operation in which the automatic and rapid transfer of information enables the most effective use of combat power. NCW takes place when the force operates as a federated network.” Objective Force C2 Paper May 2003 Director General Land Development Land Definition of NCW (draft) • Is the ability of the Land Force to execute more complex operations at the same or lower risk through enhanced decision making enabled by shared SA, under- pinned by robust networks, professional mastery and mission command. Director General Land Development Network Advantage Complexity Risk Army 2006 Networked Army 2015 1. The 2015 Networked Army can deal with the same level of complexity as the 2006 Army with less risk; or 2. For the same level of risk as the 2006 Army, the 2015 Networked Army can deal with a more complex environment. (complexity ) (risk ) Current Capability Director General Land Development NCW Theory Key Tenets: • A robustly networked force improves information sharing. • Information sharing and collaboration enhance the quality of information and shared Situational Awareness. • Shared Situational Awareness enables ‘self synchronisation’. • Provides increased mission effectiveness through enhanced lethality, improved survivability, and responsiveness Director General Land Development Networking in the Land Environment • Sharing information to achieve a warfighting advantage • Three primary dimensions: – Network – Human – Information Management Director General Land Development Networking Premises for Land • Mission Command is an effective philosophy • Able to share information if C2, ISR and Engagement nets are connected • Professional Mastery is essential • Robust networks and professional mastery allow the ADF to collaborate and share SA • Shared SA enables self synchronisation Director General Land Development Command and Control • If we embrace Mission Command – More information to lower levels – Knowledge edge – Empowerment to act • Opportunity for command functions to be focused on orchestrating / planning • Opportunity for control functions to be focused on self-synchronisation • Impact on Headquarters structures Director General Land Development Army’s Broad Approach • Joint Focus with an eye on coalition partners • Digitise the Network – Land 125 – Land 75 – JP2072 • Automation of processes • ‘Learn by Doing’ Director General Land Development NCW Roadmap • Launched at Land Warfare Conference 2005 • Declared Milestones 2009 – Interim Networked Land Combat Force 2012 – First Networked Brigade 2014 – Second Networked Brigade 2015 – Networked Joint Task Force Director General Land Development NCW Generations Current Force Interim Force NCW Enabled NCW Transformed S SY D Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Gen 3 S SY D S SY D S SY D • Manual COP • Extant doctrine & structures • Voice only C2 system integration • Limited C2 Grid (analogue) no BMS • Voice only Engagement Network (No BMS for Fires) • Limited, stove piped Log system • Semi auto COP • BG structures & doctrine revised • Limited C2 system integration (BMS & BCSS) • Limited C2 Network (digital) • Limited Engagement Network (incl of BMS Fires) • Limited log system • Auto COP • BG structures & doctrine evolved • C2 systems integrated (incl limited joint & coalition) • C2 Network (digital) fully implemented • Engagement Network BMS Fires implemented • Log and C2 Integrated • Seamless joint and coalition COP • BG structures & doctrine transformed • C2, Fires and Log systems fully integrated (incl joint & coalition) • C2, Engagement and Log transformed Director General Land Development Land NCW Development Methodology • Three Development Blocks – Block 1 - 2006-2010 – Block 2 - 2008-2013 – Block 3 - 2011-2016 • Four NCW Milestones – Milestone 1 (2009) - Networked Battle Group – Milestone 2 (2012) - Networked Brigade 1 – Milestone 3 (2014) - Networked Brigade 2 – Milestone 4 (2015) - Networked JTF Director General Land Development Milestone 4 JTF+ DIV Spt Gen 2 Milestone 1 BG Eagle Gen 1 Milestone 2 1 Bde Gen 2 Milestone 3 3 Bde Spt Elm Gen 2 Land NCW Generations, Development Blocks & Milestones 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 NCW Dev Block 1 NCW Dev Block 2 NCW Dev Block 3 Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 HNA Army in Being Force elements capable of more complex tasks at less risk Gen 0 Current Force Director General Land Development NCW Development Block 1 • Timeline – 2006 - 2010 • Milestone – Cavalry Battle Group from 1 Bde • Generation Goal – Gen 1 force • Key Projects: – Land 75 – JP 2072 – Land 125 – Land 907 Director General Land Development High Payoff Areas • C3 – Digital Backbone - Section to Brigade (Voice & Data) – Analytical tools - commanders’ decision aids with real-time updates – Combat ID for Land Forces within a Joint environment – Automated information and resource management – Network planning and management tools • ISR – Distribution of sensor data – Geospatial data integration – Geospatial dissemination systems Director General Land Development High Pay Off Areas • Engagement – Automated digital C2 for Joint Fires • Logistics – Load tracking – Logistic management efficiency – Automated logistic information flows • Fuel / ammunition states • Vehicle health usage and monitoring Director General Land Development Industry Opportunities • Many of the major projects are functional options which are largely equipment independent • Significant focus on: – Integration of legacy platforms and networks – Support contracts – Training – Doctrine development Director General Land Development Networking the Land Battlespace Lieutenant Colonel Martin Griffiths Deputy Director - Integration 19 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_-_NCW06.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/lewg_-_ncw06.ppt",BC66GGJWW7YAS2I5PIF4YPTLWMIBVXM5,209134,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-lewg-ncw06-ppt-20070908091611.ppt 57,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/57.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908091359,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908091359/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_-_SAA_06.ppt,2007-09-08,2007-09-08,404,"Land Force Research Area Dr Nick Beagley Scientific Advisor - Army DSTO’s Land Program • DSTO’s role • Develop new defence capabilities • Help the ADF to be a smart buyer • Enhance existing capabilities • DSTO 05/06 Budget of $340m • Land Force Research Area (FRA) of $32m • Research Program tailored to Army’s S&T Requirements • Annual cycle of requirements gathering, planning & review • Research supporting the full capability lifecycle • Needs, Requirements, Acquisition, In Service Support, Disposal • Increasing role in Requirements Definition and Acquisition • Technical Risk Assessment Industry Involvement • DSTO collaboration with Industry and Universities • Project Development & Delivery • In-house research capabilities • Technical maturity R&D • Innovative concepts • Engineering capabilities • Niche consultancy • International links & knowledge network • Concept Technology Demonstrators Army – S&T Process • Annual Cycle of S&T Requirements Gathering, Planning & Review • Army’s S&T Requirements & Priorities (ASTRAP) • Gathered by Battle Operating System (BOS) • Prioritised across the capability lifecycle • Army’s R&D Requirements Committee (ARDRC) • Endorsement of ASTRAP & Coverage plan • Operationally Urgent S&T Support Requests • Additional Research • Concept Technology Demonstrators • Long Range Research • Direct Contract S&T Gathered by Capability Battlespace Operating Systems • Manoeuvre • Offensive Support • Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance • Command, Control and Communications • Mobility and Survivability • Combat Service Support • Ground Based Air Defence Force Research Area Capabilities • Special Operations • CBRN • Health & Human Performance • Operations Analysis S&T Priorities - Special Operations • Tactical Surveillance • Support to acquisition • Training Land 132 – Full Time Commando Capability JP 2042 Ph 3 & 4 – Enhanced CT Capability JP 2097 – Redfin (Special Operations Enhancement) S&T Priorities - Manoeuvre (Land) • Urban Operations • Soldier Combat System • Land Vehicles • Ballistic protection • Power Generation Land 40 Ph 1 – Direct Fire Guided Weapon Land 40 Ph 2 – Direct Fire Support Weapon Land 125 Ph2B, 3 & 4 – Soldier Combat System Land 400 - Future Combat Vehicle System Land 116 Ph 3 – Bushranger Land 907 – Main Battle Tank Land 106 – M113 Upgrade S&T Priorities - Manoeuvre (Air) • Support to acquisition • Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter • Troop Lift Helicopter • Air crew situational awareness • Training • Workload Air 87 – Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Air 900 Ph2 – Troop Lift Helicopter Air 9000 Ph 5A – Chinook Engine Replacement Air 9000 Ph 5B – Chinook Mid Life Upgrade Air 9000 Ph 4 – Blackhawk Mid Life Upgrade S&T Priorities - Offensive Support & Ground Based Air Defence • Support to acquisition • Artillery replacement (105mm & 155mm) • Munitions • Training • Safety Land 58 Ph 3 – Weapon Locating Radar Land 17 – Artillery Replacement MARAP - Medium Artillery Replacement Ammunition Land 19 Ph 7 – Air Defence System S&T Priorities - Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance • Geospatial capabilities • Sensors for complex terrain • Night Fighting Equipment • Information processing Land 53 Ph1B-R – Ninox Night Fighting Equipment S&T Priorities - Command, Control & Communications • Network Centric Warfare • Support to acquisition • Combat Identification • Battlefield Command and Control System • Military Appreciation Process Land 146 Ph 2 – Combat ID Land 75 Ph 3.4 & 4 – Battlefield Command & Control System S&T Priorities - Mobility & Survivability • Improvised Explosive Device Detection & Defeat • Ballistic Protection • Signature Management • Support to acquisition • Robotics Land 144 – Counter Mine Capability S&T Priorities - Combat Service Support • Support to acquisition • Joint distribution • Field Vehicles and trailers • Logistics Simulations • Maintenance JP 2077 – Logistic Information System JP 126 Ph 2 & 3 – Joint Theatre Distribution System Land 121 Ph 2A, 3A & 3B – Overlander Vehicle & Trailers S&T Priorities - Chemical Biological & Radiological Defence • Individual protective equipment • Decontamination • Threat detection and modelling • Training JP 141/2087 – CBR Response & Incident Response Regiment S&T Priorities - Health & Human Performance • Physical competencies • Injury Prevention • Thermal stress • Load Carriage • Nutrition • Preventative Health • Training JP 2060 Ph 3 – Deployable Medical Capability S&T Priorities - Operations Analysis • OA Support to deployed forces • Army concepts experimentation • HNA • Objective Force • NCW • Training and skill retention • Force preparedness ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_-_SAA_06.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/lewg_-_saa_06.ppt",E2ADQT5ASCCAJ325DDHAYUQ3UFHM52EI,1213698,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-lewg-saa-06-ppt-20070908091359.ppt 58,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/58.blob?_blob_column=image,20070908091640,https://web.archive.org/web/20070908091640/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_SOSO_Slides.ppt,2007-09-08,2007-09-08,404," Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group JP 2097 & Special Operations Capability MAJ Colin Blyth Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group JP2097 (REDFIN) • Project Aim: To ensure that the ADF Special Operations capability maintains an edge over emerging threats. • Phase 1: Focus on Land Mobility, Force Projection & Networking • YOD: 07/08 • ISD: 10 -12 • DCP guidance: $350 - 450m • Contact: CAPT Joel Deans 2 Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group JP 2097 - Land Mobility • Priority 1: Special Operations Vehicle – Replaces SASR’s Long Range Patrol Vehicle • Priority 2: Special Operations Vehicle – Commando – Light – Logistics Aim: Land Manoeuvre of TG size elements Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group • Capabilities being considered – Air to Air Re-fuelling – Light Utility Helicopter – Maritime insertion Vessel • Small/medium craft • Sea Plane Aim: Rapidly insert and extract Special Operations elements JP 2097 – Force Projection Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group • Network SO tactical, operational and strategic C4ISR assets Aim: Network Special Operation Task Groups JP 2097 – Networked TG Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group Approved Major Projects • JP 199 - Raise SOCOMD • JP 2088 - Raise Tactical Assault Group – East • LAND 132 - Full Time Commando Capability (4 RAR) • JP 2087 - Raise Incident Response Regiment Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group Minor Projects Approved • MWS – M4 (ITR) • Special Reconnaissance Information Capture and Transfer System • High Altitude Parachute Operations Unapproved • Extended Range Sniper System • Parachute Replacement • Night Capable Long Range - Range Finder Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group Incremental SO Improvement • C4 Systems – long and short range communications suites, communications relays, geospatial and mapping systems, and strategic Communications interfaces. • Special Reconnaissance – Light weight electro optics, range finders, tactical UAV, image capture and transfer systems • Force Protection – Incidence response, personal armour, ballistic protection systems and electronic protection systems • Lethality – Personal and sniper weapons systems, joint terminal air control and entry/demolitions systems • Mobility – Land vehicles, Aircraft and Maritime craft • Sustainment – TLS of current material, R&D support and doctrine development Land Development Branch – Capability Development Group Questions 9 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/common/docs/LEWG_SOSO_Slides.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/common/docs/lewg_soso_slides.ppt",VRV2JZRKVAKHAFM6GX6A53WIRVQCNRWJ,186788,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-common-docs-lewg-soso-slides-ppt-20070908091640.ppt 59,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/59.blob?_blob_column=image,20110319163159,https://web.archive.org/web/20110319163159/http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/LEWGBRIEFS/docs/2_LEWG_II_ELF_Brief.ppt,2011-03-19,2011-06-03,404,"Army Headquarters 1 Enhanced Land Force Presentation to the LEWG Colonel Tony Luke 23 Oct 2007 Army Headquarters 2 THE ENHANCED LAND FORCE Overview • Increase combat capacity in order to sustain operational commitments and provide concurrency • ELF grew out of HNA, thus the linkage • Defence wide, complex one-off opportunity to grow: •Army Estab 2007: 25000 •Army Estab 2016: 30500 (includes HNA, ELF growth component approx 3000) Army Headquarters 3 Overview Continued • 1st Bn (7 RAR in Adelaide) and key spt elements raised 06/07 • 2nd Bn (8/9 RAR in Brisbane) agreed by Govt 04 Oct 07 • 1st Bn deployable 2010 • 2nd Bn deployable 2011 • Overall Cost $10 Billion • Approx $4b each to Stage 1 and 2 and $2b for recruiting and retention Initiatives. Army Headquarters 4 LAND PROJECTS IMPACTED BY ELF • LAND 116 • LAND 121 • LAND 144 • LAND126 • LAND 2077 • LAND 40-1/2 • LAND 53 • LAND125 • LAND146 • LAND75/125 • JP 2072 Army Headquarters 5 Army Force Structure 2007 5 RAR 7 RAR 1 RAR 2 RAR 3 RAR 6 RAR 2 CAV REGT Cavalry 2/14 LHR (QMI) Cavalry 1 ARMD REGT Armour / tank 2 Artillery Batteries 2 Engineer Subunits 2 Combat Service Support teams Signals support Brigade HQ 3 Artillery Batteries 2 Engineer Subunits 2 Combat Service Support teams Signals support Protected Mobility (Bushmaster) lift for 2 companies Brigade HQ 2 Artillery Batteries 1 Engineer Subunit 1 Combat Service Support team Signals support Brigade HQ 1st Brigade 3rd Brigade 7th Brigade Light Infantry (Para) Mechanised Infantry Motorised Infantry Deployable Joint Force Headquarters Divisional specialist units (e.g. Air Defence, Electronic Warfare etc) 16 Brigade (Aviation) 17 Combat Service Support Brigade 2nd Division 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th, 11th & 13th Brigades Training Command – Army 15 major establishments, regional reserve and university training estabs Units shown contribute to combined arms battlegroups – each formation also contains a range of command, combat support and combat service support units. 1 AVN REGT Armed Reconnaissance Newly raised Army Headquarters 6 Army Force Disposition 2007 3rd Brigade (-) DJFHQ 7th Brigade 16 Brigade (Aviation) (-) 17th Combat Service Support Brigade 3 RAR Battlegroup 1st Brigade Army Headquarters 4th Brigade 9th Brigade (-) 9th Brigade (-) 13th Brigade 11th Brigade 5th Brigade 8th Brigade Special Operations Command Special Operations Command Headquarters Special Operations Command TC-A (regional units) Major TC-A Schools TC-A (regional units) TC-A (schools and regional units) TC-A (schools and regional units) TC-A (regional units) TC-A (regional units) TC-A (regional units) TC-A (schools and regional units) Army Headquarters 7 Force Structure and Disposition - Future • Hardened and Networked Army (HNA) - increased capability • Task organised combined arms philosophy – operating a mix of capabilities (infantry, armour, engineers, logistics etc) from different areas brought together for a specific mission Tenets • Mobility • Firepower • Survivability • Communications Changes • Larger Army (1,485) • 2nd Mechanised Infantry Battalion • Adelaide base • Best use of the capabilities in the Defence Capability Plan • Enhanced Land Force (ELF) - increased capacity • Two additional Battalion groups plus Joint & Defence enabling capabilities Tenets • Increased sustainability and concurrency • Larger capacity for regional security & stabilisation • Support wider national interests Changes • Both battalions approved: •First Battalion funded and being implemented •Once first in place Govt approached to fund 8/9 RAR • Grow 2,600 Army, up to 3,000 across Defence • Additional equipment, including additional Bushmasters Army Headquarters 8 Army Force Structure 2016 5 RAR 7 RAR 1 RAR 2 RAR 3 RAR 6 RAR 8/9 RAR 2 CAV REGT Cavalry 2/14 LHR (QMI) Cavalry 1 ARMD REGT Armour / tank 2 Artillery Batteries 2 Engineer Subunits 2 Combat Service Support teams Signals support Brigade HQ 2 Artillery Batteries 2 Engineer Subunits 2 Combat Service Support teams Signals support Protected Mobility (Bushmaster) lift for 1 Battalion Brigade HQ 2 Artillery Batteries 2 Engineer Subunits 2 Combat Service Support teams Signals support Brigade HQ Deployable Joint Force Headquarters Divisional specialist units (e.g. Air Defence, Electronic Warfare etc) 16 Brigade (Aviation) 17 Combat Service Support Brigade 2nd Division 4th, 5th, 8th, 9th, 11th & 13th Brigades Training Command – Army 15 major establishments, regional reserve and university training estabs 1st Brigade 3rd Brigade 7th Brigade Light Infantry Mechanised Infantry Motorised Infantry 1 AVN REGT Armed Reconnaissance Units shown contribute to combined arms battlegroups – each formation also contains a range of command, combat support and combat service support units. Additional capabilities or undergoing re-role / re-location Army Headquarters 9 7 RAR Battlegroup 3rd Brigade (with 3 RAR) DJFHQ 7th Brigade (incl. 8/9 RAR battlegroup) 16 Brigade (Aviation) (-) 17th Combat Service Support Brigade 3 RAR Battlegroup 1st Brigade (-) Army Headquarters 4th Brigade 9th Brigade (-) 13th Brigade 11th Brigade 5th Brigade 8th Brigade 9th Brigade (-) Army Force Disposition 2016 TC-A (regional units) Major TC-A Schools TC-A (regional units) TC-A (schools and regional units) TC-A (schools and regional units) TC-A (regional units) TC-A (regional units) TC-A (regional units) TC-A (schools and regional units) Special Operations Command Special Operations Command Headquarters Special Operations Command Army Headquarters 10 Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/capability/LEWGBRIEFS/docs/2_LEWG_II_ELF_Brief.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/lewgbriefs/docs/2_lewg_ii_elf_brief.ppt",GXPVTCHQUZH3GFCO7WVJMGKOMNC3LEAC,648229,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-lewgbriefs-docs-2-lewg-ii-elf-brief-ppt-20110319163159.ppt 60,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/60.blob?_blob_column=image,20110626043021,https://web.archive.org/web/20110626043021/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/capability/LEWGBRIEFS/docs/3_Final_LEWG_2007_DLCD_.ppt,2011-06-26,2011-06-26,404," Land Development Branch Major Projects Land Combat Development Colonel Tony Luke 1 Land Development Branch Scope • General update on Unapproved Projects • Cost, Schedule and Scope • Projects approaching RFT • Defence priorities and concerns • Opportunities for Australian Industry Land Development Branch Directorate of Land Combat Development 3 COL Tony Luke DLCD (02) 626 53985 Special Ops LTCOL Anthony John DD Combat LTCOL Bernie Richards DD Close Combat LTCOL John Baird DD Combat Spt LTCOL Tim Griggs LAND 106 LAND 112-4 LAND 116-3 LAND 907 LAND 400-1 LAND 40-2 LAND 53-1BR LAND 91-6 LAND 125-3 / 4 LAND 132 JP 141 / 2087 JP 199 JP 2042-3 JP 2088 LAND 17 LAND 58-3 LAND 19-6 LAND 19-7 LAND 53-1E LAND 146-1/2 JP 2097 SF ADRHIB LAND 53-1F LAND 53-2B Land Development Branch Combat Support Section LTCOL Tim Griggs - Deputy Director Land 17 Artillery Replacement Project Land 146-1/2 Combat ID Land 19 Ph 7 RBS-70 Enhancement/Replacement 4 Land Development Branch LAND 17 - Artillery Replacement 5 • Project Aim: To modernise the Army’s fire support system through the acquisition of a networked BMS-F, Arty PGM and replacement of the Hamel Gun and M198 Howitzer fleet. • New howitzer fleet based on ARA requirement for 6 batteries: – Not less than 2 batteries of protected SP, and – Not more than 4 batteries of LW155. • Schedule: – YOD: 09/10 – ISD: 2011-13 • Issues for Industry: – SP Howitzer RFT release: 26 Sep 07 – LW155 ITR release: 26 Sep 07 – AFATDS ITR release: 26 Sep 07 – BMS-F(FO) / LAND 146-2 ITR 26 Sep 07 • Contact: MAJ Adam Fehlberg, (+61 26265 1734) Land Development Branch LAND 19-7 – RBS-70 Enhancement/Replacement 6 • Project Aim: Enhance the current GBAD system which may include new technologies and systems that are also capable of countering rockets, artillery and mortars. • Status: Pre-first pass, with first pass currently scheduled for 2012, YOD of 2015 and ISD of 2018 – 20. • Undergoing scoping activities, which may include a market survey. Development of the POCD will commence in 2008. • Issues for Industry: – Integrated Capability Team workshop participation and market survey – Integration within the ADF Air Defence System and coalition allies • Contact: CAPT Marc Bryant (+61 26265 4441) Land Development Branch LAND 146 - Combat Identification 7 • Project Aim. The project aims to enhance the operational effectiveness of the ADF’s Land Forces whilst also decreasing the risk of fratricide. • Phase 1. - Scope. Acquiring the US Joint Combat Identification Marking Systems (JCIMS) capability for a deployable BG in 1 BDE. - Status. FOC by EOY 06*. • Phase 2. - Scope. Proposes extending the Phase 1 capability to the wider Land Force and introducing a specialist BMS for the co-ordination of Close Air Support. - Status. Post 1st Pass. - YOD: 2009/10 - ISD: 2011-12 - DCP Guidance: $100 - 150m. • Phase 3. - Scope. To acquire the ‘next generation’ CID capability. - Status. Pre-1st Pass. - YOD: 2015/16 - 2017/18 - ISD: 2019-21 - DCP Guidance: $200 - 250m. Contact: SQNLDR Jeff Peterson (+61 0421 687 738) Land Development Branch Close Combat Section LTCOL John Baird Deputy Director Close Combat LAND 40 Ph 2 Direct Fire Support Weapon LAND 53 Ph 1BR Project NINOX Night Fighting Equipment Replacement LAND 91 Ph 6/7 Life of Type Extension ADF Small Arms LAND 125 Ph 3 Soldier Combat System Land Development Branch LAND 40 Ph 2 Direct Fire Support Weapon 9 • Project Aim - Seeks to provide a range of direct fire support weapons for use by ARA infantry battalions. • Project Status: Pre 2nd Pass • YOD: 07/08 • ISD: 09 - 10 • DCP guidance: $150 - 200m • Issues for Industry: – RFT release for DFSW, 84mm (M3) Carl Gustaf, and Improved CG Sight System (ICGSS) released early 07. – Competitive evaluation of weapons; e.g, 40mm AGLs and fire control systems. • Contact: MAJ Matt Richardson (+61 2 6265 4349) 0m 400m 800m 1200m 1600m 2200m 2600m 3000m 3400m 3800m Small arms, 5.56mm / 40mm GLA MDFSW, 84mm SFMG, 7.62mm CAPABILITY GAP 1100m - 2000m range DFGW, Land 40 Phase 1 INFANTRY BATTALION DIRECT FIRE WEAPONS RANGES Land Development Branch LAND 53 Ph 1B/R - Project NINOX Night Fighting Equipment Replacement • Project Aim: Seeks to replace/refurbish existing night fighting equipment systems (NVG, NWS and NAD). • Project Status: Pre 1st Pass (Project Definition Stage) • YOD: 2008/09 to 2010/11 • ISD: 2010-2012 • DCP Guidance: $150m - $250m • Issues for Industry: – Technology maturity • Innovations in Image Intensification (FOV; resolution; weight; power) • Short Wave IR and Long Wave IR solutions entering the marketplace • Uncooled TI performance (weight; range; resolution; power) • Fused technology options (TRLs in project timeframe; costs; reliability; weight; power). – Human factors • integration; useability (particularly weight and dimensions); impact on the soldier. – Comparison Trial early/mid 2009 • Contact: LTCOL John Baird (+61 2 6265 1554) Land Development Branch LAND 91 Ph 6/7 Life of Type Extension ADF Small Arms 11 • Project Aim: To extend the life of ADF small arms, this includes the F88 IW, the F89 LSW and MAG-58 GSMG. • Project Status: Pre 1st Pass • YOD: 08/09 - 10/11 • ISD: 2010 to 2021 • DCP guidance: $50m- • Issues for Industry: – Integration with LAND 125 IW solution. – Selection of new sight. – Selection of other ancillaries for LSW and GSMG. – Reduction in weight for MAG-58 without loss of capability. • Contact: MAJ John Snell (+61 2 6265 1863) Land Development Branch L125 Ph 3 Soldier Combat System 12 • Project Aim - Land 125 provides enhancements to the close combatant within small combat units of the ADF’s close combat force to achieve combat overmatch and ensure a high chance of success and survival. • Approach: Currently employing a multi-phase spiral development and acquisition approach coupled with Service minor and rapid acquisitions. • Project Status: Pre 2nd Pass • Project Deliverables: – Phase 2A Definition Study - Complete – Phase 2 B ISD 05/06. Complete – Phase 3 ISD 09/10. Soldier Enhancement Version 2. – Phase 4 ISD 10/12. Soldier Enhancement Version 3. • Phase 3 YOD: mid-08 • Phase 3 DCP guidance: $450 - 600m • Issues for Industry: – C4I - combined L125 and L75 BMS RFT closing soon. – Survivability - body, eye and hearing protection RRFT closed. – Lethality - Interim/Full systems under-development. – ADF seeking primes for sub-systems where feasible. – DSTO to lead science and technology engagement for Phase 4. Contact: MAJ Thomas Basan (+61 2 6265 2810) Land Development Branch Combat Section LTCOL Bernard Richards Deputy Director Combat LAND 112 Ph 4 ASLAV Enhancement LAND 400 Ph 1 Survivability of Ground Forces Land Development Branch LAND 112 PHASE 4 ASLAV ENHANCEMENT • Phase 1 acquired 15 USMC LAVs for trial. • Phase 2 acquired 113 ASLAV to equip 2 Cav Regt. • Phase 3 acquired additional 144 vehicles. • Phase 4 is the proposed mid-life upgrade with a focus on survivability. - Project status. First Pass approval achieved 10 Oct 06. Currently embarking on a prototyping activity to build and test the enhanced ASLAV prior to Second Pass. - Improvements. Integration of electronic and mechanical systems including: • Enhanced mine protection; • Battlefield management; • Signature management; • Enhanced ballistic protection; and • Engine upgrade. • Status. Pre-Second Pass. YOD: 2010/11 – 2012/13. • ISD: 2012-2014. • DCP Guidance: $A200m-250m. • Contact: CAPT Dorian Serfontein (+61 2 6265 4360) Land Development Branch LAND 400 PHASE 1: SURVIVABILITY OF GROUND FORCES • Project Aim. To enhance the survivability of land forces in combat operations through the provision of new warfighting systems. Will incrementally replace the Army’s current combat, combat support and some combat service support systems. • Status. Pre-1st Pass. Options Review Committee briefed in March and July 2007. Work will shortly commence with Army to develop an agreed Defence position on Army’s future force structure in order to underpin capability options for Phase 1 and total project. Concurrent work underway to specify in more detail the future mechanised, cavalry and mounted infantry battle group requirements to support cost and priorities for Phase 1. The RFI conducted in 2006 has been critical to identify the likely total cost of the project. • YOD: 2011/12 – 2013/14. • DCP Guidance: $A1b - 1.5b. • Contact: CAPT Adam McIntosh (+61 2 6265 6707). ? ? ? ? ? ? Land Development Branch Special Operations Section LTCOL Anthony John, MAJ Paul Bassett & CAPT Joel Deans Separate brief to be provided by CAPT Deans Land Development Branch Questions 17 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/capability/LEWGBRIEFS/docs/3_Final_LEWG_2007_DLCD_.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/capability/lewgbriefs/docs/3_final_lewg_2007_dlcd_.ppt",YHN4VP5JRMXOQAVUJ562VXBF6L4EO5II,3649689,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-lewgbriefs-docs-3-final-lewg-2007-dlcd-ppt-20110626043021.ppt 61,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/61.blob?_blob_column=image,20100215193740,https://web.archive.org/web/20100215193740/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/capability/LEWGBRIEFS/docs/LAND%20400%20UPDATE.pps,2010-02-15,2010-02-15,404," LTCOL B.A. Richards, Deputy Director Combat SCOPE • Government guidance • Justification • Development concepts • Current intent • Conclusion SURVIVABILITY OF GROUND FORCES • Enhance the survivability of land forces in combat operations through the provision of new warfighting systems • Incrementally replace the Army’s current combat, combat support and some combat service support systems GOVERNMENT GUIDANCE • Life of type of current land fighting vehicle systems (M113AS3 and ASLAV) is about 2020 • Commence replacement of some elements of the system from about 2015 • Year of decision: 2011-14 • Estimated budget: $A1B-1.5B STRATEGY Land 400 Phase 1 will commence replacement of the ADF’s combat team systems from 2015 to support a more survivable, capable and interoperable range of land combat options, with reduced operating costs and sustainable Australian content, to ensure the Australian Army remains above regional capabilities and continues to meet Government expectations JUSTIFICATION • Achieve ADF strategic tasks • Meet future close combat capability requirements • Control net personnel and operating costs COMPLEX WARFIGHTING • Enhance ground combat force survival: – below the detection threshold – when the enemy seeks to hide in complex terrain – in penetrating complex terrain to win close combat – to create, support, request and/or coord recon-fire actions – when operating in small groups Retain/Rebuild M1A1? FLEET TRANSITION 2005 M1A1 & M88A2: 66 LEO: 103 ASLAV: 257 ASLAV: 257 BUSHMASTER: 299 BUSHMASTER: 299 LAND 121 PH3A LAND 121 PH3A LAND 121 PH3B LAND 121 PH3B B VEH B VEH 2015 2020 2010 M113: 766 M113: 766 M113AS3/4: 350 M113AS3/4: 350 LAND 400 LAND 400 PHASE 4 ENHANCEMENT PHASE 4 ENHANCEMENT (Yet to be approved) (Yet to be approved) PHASES 2-3? PHASES 2-3? LAND 400 PHASE 1 LAND 400 PHASE 1 Capability Definition Documents Prelim Functional Performance Spec Prelim Test Concept Document Concept 1st to 2nd Pass PMP 2nd Pass to FOC PMP CSIR Part 1 Workforce Sketch Technical risk assessment Project risk assessment 1st Pass IPT or Sub-IPT Refine Requirements Refined Options for Government Refine Options Initial Business Cases Intro Into Service Acquisition System (platform) Force Structure System of Systems Cost Analysis FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OPTIONS ANALYSIS Operational Concept Document ENDORSEMENT Feasibility Analysis IPT or Sub-IPT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT Land 400 Combat System Encompasses all CVS in the land output their platforms, integrated attribute sub-systems and hosted weapons, sensors and knowledge systems allocated to combined arms teams Phase 1 introduces priority CVS, establishes system ILS Introduces an advanced Training system Platforms Individual Combat Vehicles including unmanned systems Hosted Sub- Systems Mor, AD, AT, EW, Mob, CtrMob, C4, Attribute Sub- Systems Mob, surv, Knlge, Leth, Sustain SYSTEM NEED STATEMENT LAND 400 will deliver a future combat vehicle system consisting of network capable manned and unmanned ground and air platforms from 2015 with a superior balance of survivability, knowledge, lethality, mobility and sustainability that can survive and win combat in open and complex terrain within a wide range of environments, in order for Army to continue to present viable land combat options to Government. KEY REQUIREMENTS • Under development • Key areas: – deployment and mobility – survivability – lethality – command, control and ISR – support and sustainment SENIOR GUIDANCE • More analysis needed to pass Troika and 1st Pass committees • Understanding required about Army’s shape and rotation posture • Total scope of LAND 400 important • Assessment. Need to find balance between Army structures, project options and stakeholder preferences WAY AHEAD 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 1 1ST PASS? 2 2ND PASS? REQTS & OPTIONS BUSINESS CASE COMMITTEE TENDER BUSINESS CASE 0 OPTIONS 2005 2012 COMMITTEE CONCLUSION • LAND 400 will enhance the survivability of land forces in combat operations through the provision of new combat systems • It will require a sophisticated balance between Army structures, project options and stakeholder preferences ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/capability/LEWGBRIEFS/docs/LAND%20400%20UPDATE.pps,"au,gov,defence)/capability/lewgbriefs/docs/land%20400%20update.pps",JCBIY73KZEZAY55EES47Q4UMB7AR7H3I,2867595,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-capability-lewgbriefs-docs-land-20400-20update-pps-20100215193740.pps 62,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/62.blob?_blob_column=image,20080803211621,https://web.archive.org/web/20080803211621/http://www.defence.gov.au/cio/_lib/doc/ADIESA_3_Jun_08.ppt,2008-08-03,2008-11-24,200,"CIO Presentation to ADIESA Mr Greg Farr Chief Information Officer 23 May 08 Defence Management Review 8.7 BCG observed that Defence’s ICT was characterised by: • inadequate systems and network functionality to meet business needs; • systems developed in functional silos (although operational capability development was considered adequate); • insufficient interoperability between key systems and poor data management leading to inadequate data quality; • high levels of complexity, fragmentation, duplication and redundancy leading to systems performance and reliability issues; and • lack of adequate network performance and capacity management. Defence Management Review 8.8 The recommendations of the study were to: • enforce greater end-to-end, single point accountability for Defence ICT planning, development and delivery; • provide a more holistic customer focus, enterprise business-driven, perspective of ICT needs, priorities and architectures; • provide greater process, cost and performance measurement transparency and discipline; and • enable the effective implementation and management of the enterprise process owner model and the Defence capability management principles and processes. Defence Business & ICT Strategies ICT Portfolio Management Direction Enterprise Architecture Project Delivery ICT Management, Governance & Organisation ICT Operations & Sustainment Confirmation Engagement Objectives & Targets Constraints Priorities Key Deliverables Benefit Realisation Sourcing & Vendor Management • Business • Applications • Data • Technical • Security An ICT Operating Model was used to assess current capabilities and future ICT requirements • The ICT Strategy will shape and enable the Stakeholder’s Strategies • Defence and ICT work together to define requirements and constraints • Understand the degree to which the environment will impact the ICT Strategy • Investment prioritisation decides how to create a balanced portfolio of projects • The progress of key deliverables is monitored for exceptions to ensure successful delivery of the project portfolio • Sponsors are held accountable to deliver project benefits • Prioritised projects are managed end to end with a focus on time and on budget delivery • Effective handover to operations is important • Appropriate project governance • Successful delivery provides value to the organisation and builds confidence in the ICT team • Influence the direction of Defence and ICT strategies • Confirm project portfolio will migrate technology base toward the target architectures • Engage at a project level to ensure projects are designed in line with target architectures and technical standards Enterprise architecture should: Key Components of a holistic ICT Operating Model • Appropriate handover will set up ICT Operations for success • Disciplined approach to ICT operations and sustainment ensures reliability • Adherence to architecture standards helps to ensure robustness and minimise ongoing maintenance costs Making the ICT Operating model work depends on: • Effective ICT Management • Ensuring appropriate ICT Governance • Deploying skilled resources through the right organisational structures • Measuring their performance • Communicating goals and results to the whole organisation • Vendors are managed with a focus on service delivery • Appropriate mechanisms are in place to validate vendor cost effectiveness and invoice accuracy • Formal feedback structures are in place to improve service delivery throughout contract life Completing the Defence ICT Strategy requires a structured, business-back approach – stakeholder engagement is key 1. Baseline 1. Baseline 2. Envision 2. Envision 3. Prioritise 3. Prioritise 4. Plan 4. Plan ICT Strategic Planning Approach Understand Defence Strategic Imperatives Understand Defence Strategic Imperatives Assess ICT Current State Assess ICT Current State Understand External Trends & Drivers Understand External Trends & Drivers Identify Future ICT Capabilities, Outputs and Services Required Identify Future ICT Capabilities, Outputs and Services Required Establish the ICT Strategic Plan and Roadmap Establish the ICT Strategic Plan and Roadmap Determine the supporting Investment Plan Determine the supporting Investment Plan Prepare the Risk Management Plan Prepare the Risk Management Plan Assess Gap between ICT Current State and Future Vision Assess Gap between ICT Current State and Future Vision Define Strategic Imperatives & Key Strategies Define Strategic Imperatives & Key Strategies Determine potential Constraints and Assumptions Determine potential Constraints and Assumptions Identify Strategic Projects & Activities Identify Strategic Projects & Activities Stakeholder Engagement & Communication Dates Execute Execute Once the strategic direction has been set, the organisation should periodically review progress, revalidate and re-align as appropriate ICT Strategic Planning as an Iterative Process Illustrative Illustrative Define and refine sub-strategies 3-4 months 2 months 3-6 months July 08: Draft Defence ICT Strategy (60%) October 08: Completion of High-Level Defence ICT Strategy (80%) Oct/Nov 08: Completion of sub- strategies (100%) Refine strategic imperatives, define strategies and high-level implementation plan Set Direction and Identify Imperatives Mid-July Mid-October Defence Business & ICT Strategies ICT Portfolio Management Direction Enterprise Architecture Project Delivery ICT Management, Governance & Organisation ICT Operations & Sustainment Confirmation Engagement Objectives & Targets Constraints Priorities Key Deliverables Benefit Realisation Sourcing & Vendor Management • Business • Applications • Data • Technical • Security Source: Booz Allen Hamilton Defence Business & ICT Strategies ICT Portfolio Management Direction Enterprise Architecture Project Delivery ICT Management, Governance & Organisation ICT Operations & Sustainment Confirmation Engagement Objectives & Targets Constraints Priorities Key Deliverables Benefit Realisation Sourcing & Vendor Management • Business • Applications • Data • Technical • Security Source: Booz Allen Hamilton Five workstreams to develop the Defence ICT Strategy Business / ICT Alignment Business / ICT Alignment ICT Projects, Sourcing & Operations ICT Projects, Sourcing & Operations ICT Mgt, Governance & Org. ICT Mgt, Governance & Org. Enterprise Architecture Enterprise Architecture 11 22 44 33 11 22 33 44 Stakeholder Engagement and Comms Stakeholder Engagement and Comms 55 Rationale Rationale Stream 1: Business / ICT Alignment Understand stakeholder ICT requirements and impacts on future ICT environment Translate objectives into considerations for prioritising ICT investments and ensuring traceability between ICT activities and strategic goals Stream 2: ICT Projects, Sourcing & Operations Cradle-to-grave ICT solution considerations including how ongoing operational considerations can be addressed during solution design Consideration of industry engagement options for solution development and ongoing ICT delivery Stream 3: ICT Management, Governance & Organisation Focus on identifying and resolving ICT governance and people considerations, including roles, accountabilities & decision rights Stream 4: Enterprise Architecture Focus on building understanding of existing ICT architectures, guiding principles and considerations for target architectures Stream 5: Stakeholder Engagement & Communications Ensure consistent approach followed across all work streams Support and co-ordinate engagement to align messages and prevent over-engagement Stream 1: Business / ICT Alignment Understand stakeholder ICT requirements and impacts on future ICT environment Translate objectives into considerations for prioritising ICT investments and ensuring traceability between ICT activities and strategic goals Stream 2: ICT Projects, Sourcing & Operations Cradle-to-grave ICT solution considerations including how ongoing operational considerations can be addressed during solution design Consideration of industry engagement options for solution development and ongoing ICT delivery Stream 3: ICT Management, Governance & Organisation Focus on identifying and resolving ICT governance and people considerations, including roles, accountabilities & decision rights Stream 4: Enterprise Architecture Focus on building understanding of existing ICT architectures, guiding principles and considerations for target architectures Stream 5: Stakeholder Engagement & Communications Ensure consistent approach followed across all work streams Support and co-ordinate engagement to align messages and prevent over-engagement By mid-July it is expected the ICT strategy document will be ~60% complete for input to the Defence White Paper Section Expected Content in Draft Strategy Overall Completeness Defence Strategic Drivers • Understanding of Defence strategy, required outputs and key capabilities, and ICT considerations ~70-80% Current State ICT Baseline • Baseline of current state assessment of ICT, including – ICT vision and mission – Current ICT capabilities – Stakeholders – Governance structures – ICT Portfolio Management framework – Enterprise architecture – Output and service requirements ~70-80% Key Trends • Identification of trends affecting Defence across the dimensions of Industry, technology, government and externally ~70-80% Constraints and Assumptions • Identification of barriers, and assumptions underlying the Defence environment • Identification of cultural limitations and obstructions to implementing new Defence ICT strategy ~80% Future ICT Organisation • Establishment of future direction of ICT within Defence, including – ICT vision and mission – Future ICT capabilities – Stakeholders – Governance structures – ICT Portfolio Management framework – Enterprise architecture – Output and service requirements ~50-60% Strategic Imperatives & Key Strategies • Comparison of gaps between current and future ICT baseline • Preliminary identification of strategic imperatives and key strategies • Not prioritised or fully validated ~50-60% Strategic Projects & Activities • First pass at identifying supporting projects and activities • Not prioritised or fully validated ~25% ICT Strategic Roadmap • To be completed in next phase Investment Plan • To be completed in next phase Risk Management Plan • To be completed in next phase We propose to use a Wargaming workshop as a tool to expedite the process, and test key assumptions STRATEGIC INPUTS Past History and Trends Potential Discontinuities Predetermined Developments Critical Uncertainties STRATEGIC INPUTS Past History and Trends Potential Discontinuities Predetermined Developments Critical Uncertainties STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT Scenario Planning Trade-off Analysis Impact Analysis Risk Assessment STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT Scenario Planning Trade-off Analysis Impact Analysis Risk Assessment SELECTED STRATEGY SELECTED STRATEGY TRADITIONAL ANALYSIS STOPS HERE Competitor Actions Customer Response Fatal Surprises Unexpected Friction Evolving Future Wargaming Lets participants: Challenge assumptions Recalibrate perceptions Think the unthinkable Simply thinking about the future more often than not fails to convince us to change Sourcing Strategy - Key Measures of Project Success 1. Deliver an ICT sourcing strategy that creates substantial value for Defence – Aligned to achieve business outcomes – Flexible to respond to business change ie, facilitates rapid time-to-market – Enables Defence to focus on what is core to the ‘business of Defence’ – Provides greater access to skills and innovation – Driving cost reductions 2. Able to articulate the ICT sourcing strategy clearly to the market 3. Key Defence business and IT stakeholders understand, support and endorse the ICT sourcing strategy – Bought into the process, consulted and agree with the outcomes 4. Produce a plan that can be implemented by Defence ICT sourcing strategy must address six key questions Sourcing strategy framework and key questions Bundling and contract models 2. What are the ICT sourcing principles? 3. What ICT services should Defence consider for outsourcing? 3. What ICT services should Defence consider for outsourcing? 4. How should Defence source ICT services from the market? 4. How should Defence source ICT services from the market? 5. How should Defence be organised to best leverage sourcing relationships? 1 5. How should Defence be organised to best leverage sourcing relationships? 1 Core / non-core activities Value proposition Risk Market and vendor capabilities Approach to market testing Capabilities and organisational structure Procurement / sourcing organisation Processes 1. What are the business drivers? • Business context / ICT strategy • Stakeholder interviews • Industry trends • Local market overview and case studies • Current state baseline 6. What is the case for change • Economics • Risk assessment • Roadmap 1. Initial strategy will include a high-level view on procurement model options. Detailed evaluation to be conducted in subsequent phases of work Five project deliverables will be created Current state diagnostic • Current business context – including consolidated findings from the stakeholder interviews • An agreed set of enterprise ICT sourcing principles • Current ICT sourcing landscape • Current sourcing organisation, including procurement and governance functions • High-level economic model Industry trends and market capabilities report • Overview of global and local sourcing markets – Selected case studies • Review of key industry trends – Industrialisation of IT service delivery – Increasing sophistication of sourcing customers • Review of key market capabilities with assessment of relative strengths and weaknesses IT sourcing bundling and contract model options report • Bundling trends and selected case studies • Structural models for bundling • Discrete bundling options • Target bundling strategy – Drivers of benefits and risks • Contract model options for each bundle • Target contract model strategy – Drivers of benefits and risks Approach to market recommendation report • Recommended sourcing strategy • Project plan – Key activities and milestones – Required resourcing • Potential issues and constraints – Defence ability to execute • Key procurement model implications – Internal structures, processes, tools Business case • Indicative cost/benefit and risk assessment for the recommended sourcing strategy 1 2 3 4 5 High Level Timeline 0. Project Management Project management (setup and execution) Conduct project planning workshop and finalise project management plan 1. Current state diagnostic Develop ICT sourcing baseline Conduct interviews, understand and document business context Consolidate initial findings and conduct workshop with key stakeholders Construct high-level economic baseline Finalise Current state diagnostic Report 2. Market Trends and Industry Capabilities Identify and assess ICT sourcing trends Identify context for potential market testing Finalise Market Trends and Industry Capabilities Report 3. IT Sourcing Bundling and Contract Model Options Develop initial hypotheses and conduct workshop with key stakeholders Identify and assess trends and approaches taken by similar organisations Iterate and refine hypotheses and workshop options Develop and issue preliminary draft Report Finalise IT Sourcing Bundling and Contract Model Options Report 4. Approach To Market Recommendation Identify target state sourcing strategy Develop initial hypotheses and conduct workshop with key stakeholders Identify procurement model implications Develop and issue preliminary draft Report Finalise Approach to Market Report 5. Business Case Indicative cost/benefit and risk assessment Event Project Governance Meetings Workshop Steering Committee Meeting Deliverable Week 1 May 19 Week 2 May 26 Week 3 June 2 Week 4 June 9 Week 5 June 16 Week 6 June 23 Week 7 June 30 Week 0 May 12 Week 8 July 7 Week 9 July 14 Week 10 July 21 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/cio/_lib/doc/ADIESA_3_Jun_08.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/cio/_lib/doc/adiesa_3_jun_08.ppt",53QQNGXEX4WUVHHMMHFXZ65LV7YDSDFG,404320,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-cio-lib-doc-adiesa-3-jun-08-ppt-20080803211621.ppt 63,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/63.blob?_blob_column=image,20081124211157,https://web.archive.org/web/20081124211157/http://www.defence.gov.au/cio/_lib/doc/Defence_Watch_141008.pps,2008-11-24,2008-11-24,200,"Defence Watch Mr Greg Farr Chief Information Officer Department of Defence 14 Oct 08 We began to look at ICT as a Capability - acceptance of a Single Defence Information Environment (DIE) Conventional warfare will demand integrated operations, shared situational awareness, faster decision cycles, and interoperability • End-to-end business processes across the war fighter, intelligence, and business/support communities • Increased collaboration and self- synchronisation • Integrated information environment across all security levels • Enterprise-wide information management • Converged sensors, engagement, combat systems & supporting ICT • ICT supporting ‘safety of life’ situations • Cyber operations - defensive • Persistent surveillance across broad areas of operation • Seamless collaboration across coalition (particularly the US GIG), OGO ’s and industry Features Characteristics of a Single DIE Propositions • The ICT portfolio will be managed holistically by the Defence ICT Committee (DICTC) and subsequently split into 4 sub-portfolios - Intelligence, Warfighter, Corporate and Infrastructure • The CIOG organisational structure will matrix 3 stakeholder focused units (Infrastructure is an internal, CIOG portfolio) with functional units, namely Chief Technology Office, Solution Development, Service Delivery and Chief Operating Office • Defence will drive towards a ‘Single Network’ concept • Our ICT ‘Strategy on a Page’ will provide our focus going forward A new ICT Organisation Model has been proposed which will enable CIOG to deliver this Strategy Secretary / CDF (via DICTC) - Strategic J6 Roles - Stakeholder engagement teams ICT Investment Sub- portfolios managed by stakeholders, coordinated by Chief Operating Office Corporate Sec, PS&P, DMO, DSG, SCG, DSTO, CFO Warfighter VCDF, CJOPS, Navy, Army, Air Force Intelligence IS&IP Business Engagement & Analysis COO Office of CIO, Business Management, Portfolio Management Office, Governance, Monitoring, Compliance, Reporting, HR, Quality, Finance, ICT Sourcing, Risk Management Business Engagement & Analysis Business Engagement & Analysis J65 ICT Service Management ICT Service Development Requirements, Solution Architecture, Development, Testing, Project Delivery ICT Strategy, Enterprise Architecture, Policy and Standards, Information Assurance CTO Development Division Operations Division Corporate Intelligence Warfighter Infrastructure Portfolio J6 J63 J66 CIO Interoperability Corporate Mission Imperatives Warfighter Intelligence Lead the integrated design, cost effective delivery and sustained operation of the Defence Information Environment Four Strategic Imperatives 2 Closer Stakeholder Alignment b. Align ICT organisation with stakeholders c. Become easier to work with a.Improve understanding between Defence & ICT d. Design solutions collaboratively with stakeholders e. Implement Defence-wide ICT Governance 4 Strengthen ICT Capability f. Leverage scale and effective resource planning & management d.Update career model & required skills c. Improve processes and tools e.Leverage vendors & sourcing b.Strengthen ICT leadership a. Energise the culture 3 Provide Agreed, Priority Solutions e. Create and adopt an Enterprise Architecture for ICT in Defence a.Stabilise and secure ICT c.Address new ICT requirements b.Standardise and optimise ICT d. Leverage emerging technologies to address new business needs Optimise Value of Defence ICT Investment 1 a. Improve ICT cost transparency & stakeholder communication b. Prioritize for effective ICT spend c. Optimise project and operations efficiency Reform progress to date against ICT Strategic Imperatives • The Defence ICT Committee (DICTC) has been established Sec, CDF, CIO, CFO, SCG & CEO DMO. • Ensure Strategic ICT alignment with Defence priorities • ICT Strategy in final phase – prioritised implementation schedule being discussed • DIE Work Plan - ICT Investment and Prioritisation, govern resource and monitor delivery • Comprehensive Executive Stakeholder Engagement occurring with Defence Committee members and regular partnering forums with DSG, DMO, CFO and PSP • CDF J6 review and new Directive issued • ICT Organisation & Stakeholder Engagement & Analysis Team Model - proposed Optimise Value of Defence ICT Investment Closer Stakeholder Alignment Reform progress to date against ICT Strategic Imperatives • The Chief Technical Officer Division - new CTO • Business Solutions • Acceptance of a Single Technical Authority for the DIE • Acceptance of the need for an Enterprise Architecture • COTS/GOTS • Standardisation Provide Agreed Priority Solutions Reform progress to date against ICT Strategic Imperatives • The Chief Operating Officer Branch stand up 7th Oct. • The Chief Technical Officer Division – new CTO arriving • The ICT Operations Division has been reshaped • New ICT Business Request - Work Take on Process • ICT Sourcing Strategy • ICT Cost Model • Workforce Planning and Skilling Framework • First ICT Region transitioned seamlessly from DSG to CIOG - end to end service delivery • A Defence Spectrum Management Office created Strengthen ICT Capability Defence ICT has evolved in the absence of an Enterprise Architecture resulting in duplication & interoperability issues…  Large number of disparate and duplicate systems and technology platforms  Large number of disparate and duplicate systems and technology platforms  Defence Capabilty Plan and investment planning does not consider architecture or integration  Defence Capabilty Plan and investment planning does not consider architecture or integration  Systems are often highly customised and not aligned to Whole-of-Defence  Systems are often highly customised and not aligned to Whole-of-Defence  Data is highly siloed and not effectively managed to support the business  Data is highly siloed and not effectively managed to support the business  Poor accountability for implications of architectural decisions and poor alignment of IT initiatives with business strategy and processes  Poor accountability for implications of architectural decisions and poor alignment of IT initiatives with business strategy and processes 1 3 6 5 4 7 8 Today  Architecture currently developed to support specific projects  Architecture currently developed to support specific projects  No target architecture or future state defined across Defence - inability to link planned programs and investments to a “bigger picture”  No target architecture or future state defined across Defence - inability to link planned programs and investments to a “bigger picture”  No single baseline “whole-of- Defence” architecture view exists today  No single baseline “whole-of- Defence” architecture view exists today 2  Fragmented decision making and planning has limited the ability to deliver interoperability and collaboration with allies, coalition partners and Whole-of- Government  Fragmented decision making and planning has limited the ability to deliver interoperability and collaboration with allies, coalition partners and Whole-of- Government 9 Key initiatives to improve the Architecture have been identified to realise the key strategies Build & deliver the target architecture (Section 1: Target Architecture) Architectural Improvement Initiatives Interoperability Business & Government Support Optimise Value of Defence ICT Investment 1 a. Improve ICT cost transparency & stakeholder communication b. Prioritise for effective ICT spend c. Optimise project and operations efficiency 2 Closer Stakeholder Alignment 3 Provide Agreed, Priority Solutions 4 Strengthen ICT Capability b. Align ICT organisation with stakeholders c. Become easier to work with a.Improve understanding between Defence & ICT d. Design solutions collaboratively with stakeholders e. Implement Defence-wide ICT Governance e. Create and adopt an Enterprise Architecture for ICT in Defence a.Stabilise and secure ICT c.Address new ICT requirements d. Leverage emerging technologies to address new business needs a. Energise the culture f. Leverage scale and effective resource planning & management d.Update career model & required skills c. Improve processes and tools e.Leverage vendors & sourcing b.Strengthen ICT leadership Mission Imperatives b.Standardise and optimise ICT Warfighter Capability Intelligence & Security Services Enable Defence Capability Through ICT Manage information as an asset (Section 3: Information Management Strategy) Integrate, secure and enhance the network (Section 2: Integrated Information Environment) Further definition of other initiatives is required to fully support the key strategies Outcome: Target Architecture is the primary alignment vehicle for ICT investments decisions and planning Outcome: Effective Information Management has enabled improved access, accuracy and currency of information • enables secure access to authorised Defence information through a single user interface • can dynamically grow, adapt and respond to changing demands and circumstances in a timely manner • is based on reliable and attack resistant infrastructure that minimises accidental and malicious service interruption Outcome: An Integrated Information Environment that: These initiatives are explored in further detail in the respective sections of this document ICT Strategic Imperatives 3 Provide Agreed, Priority Solutions e. Create and adopt an Enterprise Architecture for ICT in Defence a.Stabilise and secure ICT c.Address new ICT requirements d. Leverage emerging technologies to address new business needs Imperatives b.Standardise and optimise ICT Target Architecture is the primary alignment vehicle for ICT investments decisions and planning - example Build and deliver the target architecture DEFENCE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE: • linkage Defence Capability Plan to the target architecture. • how these major programs and capabilities contribute to the overall target architecture. • Re-prioritisation, sequencing based on the target architecture. IMPROVED BUSINESS-ICT ALIGNMENT: • target architecture vision to support interoperability and future business requirements. • Articulation of a ‘top-down’ business architecture highlight key business functions/lines-of-business, processes and services across Corporate, Warfighter and Intelligence business areas. • COST EFFECTIVENESS: • opportunities to reduce duplication and redundancy within Defence reduce ongoing sustainment costs. • A target architecture enables the re-use of assets (i.e. build once, use many) as a key priority to reduce capital costs WITHIN 2 YEARS WITHIN 10 YEARS DEFENCE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE: • Defence Capability Plan includes the target architecture. IMPROVED BUSINESS-ICT ALIGNMENT: • Trusted and active participation and contribution in Global Information Grid and other major allied architectures. • Target architecture fully realised and operational. COST EFFECTIVENESS: • Optimal balance of efficiency and effectiveness from ICT investments. IMPROVED IT DELIVERY: • Consistent and transparent delivery of services through fixed and deployed locations. Strategy Imperative: Provide Agreed, Priority Solutions WITHIN 5 YEARS DEFENCE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE: • Traceability. support of the target architecture - key component of the capability development process. IMPROVED BUSINESS-ICT ALIGNMENT: • Core services architecture defined and driven from the business architecture. • Underlying technical architectures (infrastructure, security, data) defined. • Proactive identification of gaps and overlaps between business-IT. COST EFFECTIVENESS: • IT systems and technology are being proactively managed systems are upgraded or decommissioned. • Significant reduction in point-point interfaces, technology platforms resulting in lower sustainment costs. IMPROVED IT DELIVERY: • Services architecture promotes re-use of assets, system- system connectivity, information sharing, interoperability allies, industry partners. • Delivery of selected core services to deployed locations. Draft Integrate, secure and enhance the Network WITHIN 2 YEARS WITHIN 5 YEARS WITHIN 10 YEARS USER EXPERIENCE:  Consistent user experience across fixed and deployed systems  Separate personal and role based repositories and electronic addresses.  A single credential for accessing all Defence online accounts and applications. E.g. password, smart card PIN or biometrics.  Authenticated Defence messages and notifications relevant to them.  Deployed and remote users  Single help desk for all their DIE and ICT problems. IMPROVED CAPABILITY  Information and applications are selectively provided to users based on their profile details, including: user group, roles, level/rank, location, location type, & clearance.  Information only needs to be updated in one place, and business owners have more confidence in the accuracy of their information.  There are no duplicate applications for similar purposes. e.g. online applications for domestic and international travel approval. IMPROVED DELIVERY  Robust cost estimates for future capabilities can be provided.  Standardised interfaces for connecting to the strategic network.  Standardised network monitoring, measuring and reporting capabilities are used to ensure performance meets business needs and Defence outcomes USER EXPERIENCE:  Users can access all key online services through one user interface from a single online location for each security domain.  Users can search for enterprise information for each security domain, and share information with other Defence users across the enterprise.  Users only need carry one mobile device (Eg. Secure GSM, Blackberry, mobile).  Users can use automated systems to do most account/network administration functions. IMPROVED CAPABILITY  Less training is required to use Integrated Defence Architecture services.  Business owners understand their network requirements.  Business owners are able to use a quick approval process for introducing new capabilities into service. IMPROVED DELIVERY  Improved automation of network services has reduced the time doing support.  There are fewer manual user account tasks, such as password resets and account unlocks to perform.  Consistent standards & processes and increased interoperability between Defence systems as a result of greater controls. USER EXPERIENCE:  Users only have access to information that is allowed by their user profile, physical environment and user device  Users only need one user interface to access all DIE and Allied/  Coalition applications and information.  Users use a single device to securely access any DIE systems (form factor differing for each physical environment. e.g. laptop, desktop, ruggedised terminal).  A common set of DIE capabilities are accessible to all users  IMPROVED CAPABILITY:  Decision makers can quickly and easily integrate information across all security levels from a single user interface.  Defence provides services to WoG, including emergency services, law enforcement, and civil agencies. e.g. Connectivity, logistical support.  Defence can field ICT for regional coalitions IMPROVED DELIVERY:  Only one environment needs to be managed and sustained.  Defence is able to cope with security incidents and network component failures without service interruptions.  Infected or attacked segments of the network are quarantine to isolate and minimise damage. The Integrated Information Environment enables secure access to authorised Defence information through single user interface in a timely manner - example IT Strategy Imperatives: Provide Agreed, Priority Solutions Draft Manage Information as an Asset USER EXPERIENCE: • Faster access to information from multiple sources through indexing and search capabilities • One user interface can be used to search for enterprise information for each security domain • Provision of records and content management tools and training to replace and augment current unstructured and fragmented toolsets and practices • Wider range of toolsets to promote collaboration such as Wiki’s/ blogs/ folksonomies • Ability to report and track business performance through defined metrics that are linked to business outcomes IMPROVED CAPABILITY • Improved situational awareness in the battlespace through the timely provision of information • Consolidation of data that supports business processes to reduce duplication and fragmentation • Improved ability to analyze business functions through business intelligence • Standardization of business processes that lead to consistent execution and efficiency • Consistent standards and increased interoperability between Defence systems • Compliance with audit requirements Effective Information Management has enabled improved access, accuracy and currency of information WITHIN 2 YEARS WITHIN 10 YEARS USER EXPERIENCE: • Ability to respond to threats faster and more effectively through a highly connected network that links the warfighter capabilities • Fine grained control over all information, information can be searched, accessed and secured at a granular level • Information can be accessed based role and context of the user independent of device • Users can search for information across all security levels from one user interface (subject to security) • IMPROVED CAPABILITY • Ability to fuse multiple sources of information from allies, other government agencies and stakeholders to predict threats and obstacles • Decision makers are able to use a wider range of information • Decision makers get supporting information faster • Seamless data sharing and collaboration with allies • WoG information capability interoperability is continuously maintained IT Strategy Imperative: Provide Agreed, Priority Solutions WITHIN 5 YEARS USER EXPERIENCE: • A collaborative culture where information is shared freely and the need to know is balanced with the need to share and the need to inform • Faster, more accurate searches driven by metadata that furnishes the user with the reliable information from trusted source and provides guidance on how that information can be used • High bandwidth devices and enable content to be captured and shared within Defence • Better alerting capabilities for intelligence users that trap events of interest earlier • Business users have increased confidence in the quality of data and information used for decision making IMPROVED CAPABILITY • Further improved situational awareness through better quality information to inform decision makers • Automation of business processes to reduce cost and increase agility and reduce cycles • Information only needs to be updated in one place • Auditability and non-repudiation of actions • Improved predictive modeling and simulation capabilities • Improved quality and reliability of information Draft ICT Sourcing Strategy must address six key questions Sourcing Strategy framework and key questions 3. What ICT services should Defence consider for outsourcing? 3. What ICT services should Defence consider for outsourcing? Core / non-core activities Value proposition Risk Approach to market testing Bundling and contract models 4. How should Defence source ICT services from the market? 4. How should Defence source ICT services from the market? Market and vendor capabilities 5. How should Defence be organised to best leverage sourcing relationships? 1 5. How should Defence be organised to best leverage sourcing relationships? 1 Capabilities and organisational structure Procurement / sourcing organisation Processes 2. What are the ICT sourcing principles? 1. What are the business drivers? • Business context / ICT strategy • Stakeholder interviews • Industry trends • Local market overview and case studies • Current state baseline 6. What is the case for change • Economics • Risk assessment • Roadmap Scope boundaries between bundles must be clearly defined DWACN z Internet Gateway PABX PSTN Gateway Int’l links Coalition WGS Satellite (KU and X band) Deployed - fixed 3 Terrestrial communication s z DRN Encryptors Routers z DSN Encryptors Routers z DTSN Encryptors Routers HF Mod Gateway Network Operation Centre UHF Satellite Satellite terminal Gateway Gateway Tactical Interface Centralised Data Centre Mainframe Midrange Storage Base and office locations MFDs Printers Mobile devices Service desk 1Distributed computing 2 Centralised processing End user Regional server rooms File & Print App servers Local server rooms File & Print App servers 1. Consolidation of local and regional server rooms into a centralised data centre must be defined as part of detailed bundle scoping and before bundles are offered to market Source: Business interviews; Potential rationalisation and centralisation of local and regional servers1 Key aspects of the deployed environment supported through the other bundles Potential inclusion of some gateways or specialist communications platforms in Terrestrial Communications – depending on architectural considerations and vendor value proposition Draft Approach to Sourcing ICT The future state sourcing approach will represent a step change in the role of sourcing ICT for Defence and its Service Suppliers - Strategic partnerships with a smaller number of vendors - Aligned incentives between the Defence and vendors to achieve excellent service and innovation - Active vendor contribution to Defence achieving its strategic goals - Outcome focussed contracts - In-built flexibility to respond to changing requirements and technologies - Actively support our major change and transformation programs - Vendors will be expected to work together and with Defence internal teams to deliver integrated service outcomes High level process - considerations • We will issue to Austender an EOI that we will seek your response • We will conduct an evaluation process and we will shortlist • We will then invite those short-listed organisations to participate in some workshops • In the expression of interest we will inform you about our environment and our objectives • We’ll be asking you to bring your best teams to enter into those discussions with us. • Workshops with the Business, Industry and ICT - Strong interface between the Business, ICT and Vendors prior to RFT • RFT Issued • Successful and unsuccessful vendors will be debriefed 3. Partnering for Outcomes Relationships that harness specialist capabilities to enable delivery of Defence ICT business outcomes 4. Sustainable business Delivery of reliable and efficient support of business operations ICT Sourcing Framework and Scorecard will be Business Outcomes focused – 1. Supporting Business Change Technology solution and planning that supports Defence business outcomes and technology direction 2. Ongoing Business Value Improved efficiency for comparable ICT expenditure Examples Only Thank you. Questions? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/cio/_lib/doc/Defence_Watch_141008.pps,"au,gov,defence)/cio/_lib/doc/defence_watch_141008.pps",OBK74DPPJSXEUGOOMFS7YQRX5DAE6ZJ7,1027006,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-cio-lib-doc-defence-watch-141008-pps-20081124211157.pps 64,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/64.blob?_blob_column=image,20161020194111,https://web.archive.org/web/20161020194111/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/DASP/Docs/Regulations/DefenceAviationRegulationSet/Module1IntroductiontoEMARs.ppt,2016-10-20,2016-10-20,404,"European Military Airworthiness Requirements (EMAR) - Background Introduction to EMAR May 2016 Introduction to EMAR • EASA and EDA • EMAR Structure • Key Definitions • Resultant Organisational Approvals • Future Direction of EDA and/or EMAR Framework • Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe Scope European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) • What is EASA? • EASA responsibilities include: – Expert advice to the EU for drafting new legislation – Implementing and monitoring safety rules, including inspections in the Member States – Type-certification of aircraft and components, as well as the approval of organisations involved in the design, manufacture and maintenance of aeronautical products – Authorisation of third-country (non-EU) operators – Safety analysis and research Introduction to EASA and EDA EDA Overview • European Defence Agency (EDA) formed 2004 – Primary Role: To foster European defence cooperation – Created Military Airworthiness Authorities (MAWA) 2008 • Develop an EU military regulatory framework – All EU member states take part in EDA except Denmark – Non-EU participation • Norway (non EU member) granted an opt-in to participate in EDA programmes – Provide no oversight or approvals Introduction to EASA and EDA European Military Airworthiness Requirements (EMAR) • Requirements vs Regulations – Responsibility of each member state (such as Aust Defence) to implement the requirements into own national military airworthiness regulations • Derived from EASA – ~95% common – Contemporary ICAO based – Hazard / Outcomes based – Positively promotes interoperability (mutual recognition) – Designed for multi-nation adoption EMAR EMAR Structure MAWA Basic Framework Document Engineering & Maintenance Stream Maintenance Training & Authorisation Stream Initial Airworthiness Continuing Airworthiness EMAR 21 EMAR M EMAR 145 EMAR 66 EMAR 147 Airworthiness Definition • EMAR definition of airworthiness – The ability of an aircraft, or other airborne equipment or system, to operate in flight and on ground without significant hazard to aircrew, ground-crew, passengers (where relevant) or to other third parties. • Derived from UK MOD JSP 553 Military Airworthiness Requirements • Consistent with EASA use of this term and ICAO definition of “Airworthy” – The status of an aircraft, engine, propeller or part when it conforms to its approved design and is in a condition for safe operation Initial Versus Continuing Airworthiness • Initial Airworthiness: – Type Design – Certification – Production – Design changes post initial type certification • Continuing Airworthiness: – All of the processes ensuring that the aircraft: • complies with airworthiness requirements • is in condition for safe operation EMAR Structure EMAR Structure MAWA Basic Framework Document Engineering & Maintenance Stream Maintenance Training & Authorisation Stream Initial Airworthiness Continuing Airworthiness EMAR 21 EMAR M EMAR 145 EMAR 66 EMAR 147 European Harmonized Military Airworthiness Basic Framework Document • History / rationale of EMAR • Defines role and functions of Military Airworthiness Authority (MAWA) forum • Defines commitment of national military airworthiness authorities • Implementation requirements • Airworthiness • Recognition EMAR Structure MAWA Basic Framework Document Engineering & Maintenance Stream Maintenance Training & Authorisation Stream Initial Airworthiness Continuing Airworthiness EMAR 21 EMAR M EMAR 145 EMAR 66 EMAR 147 EMAR Structure EMAR 21 • Initial Airworthiness – Scope: Includes aircraft (or other airborne equipment or system) and related products, parts and appliances – Design (cradle to grave concept) – Certification of new type – Major / Minor change to existing type design – Airworthiness Instruments – Production – Organisational approvals for design and production EMAR Structure MAWA Basic Framework Document Engineering & Maintenance Stream Maintenance Training & Authorisation Stream Initial Airworthiness Continuing Airworthiness EMAR 21 EMAR M EMAR 145 EMAR 66 EMAR 147 EMAR Structure EMAR M • Continuing Airworthiness Requirements – Develop, control and coordinate a maintenance programme including any reliability program – Ensure that all applicable airworthiness directives and operational directives with a continuing airworthiness impact, are applied – Ensure identified defects are corrected – Manage and archive all continuing airworthiness records and/or operator’s technical log. • Ensure ongoing validity of individual aircraft certificate of airworthiness – Notify occurrences of unsafe condition to the Authority, Type Certificate Holder EMAR Structure MAWA Basic Framework Document Engineering & Maintenance Stream Maintenance Training & Authorisation Stream Initial Airworthiness Continuing Airworthiness EMAR 21 EMAR M EMAR 145 EMAR 66 EMAR 147 EMAR Structure EMAR 145 • Requirements for Maintenance Organisations –To conduct maintenance of aircraft and components EMAR Structure MAWA Basic Framework Document Engineering & Maintenance Stream Maintenance Training & Authorisation Stream Initial Airworthiness Continuing Airworthiness EMAR 21 EMAR M EMAR 145 EMAR 66 EMAR 147 EMAR Structure EMAR 66 and EMAR 147 • EMAR Pt 66 - Military Aircraft Maintenance Licensing – Establishes education requirements and training for aircraft maintenance personnel • EMAR Pt 147 - Aircraft Maintenance Training Organisations – establishes the requirements to be met by organisations seeking approval to conduct aircraft maintenance training and examination. EMAR Structure Full EMAR doc suite • European Harmonized Military Airworthiness Basic Framework • European Military Airworthiness Document – Recognition (EMAD R) – Defines recognition processes • European Military Airworthiness Document – Definitions and Acronyms Document (EMAD 1) – Defines key terms • Initial Airworthiness – EMAR Part 21 – European Military Airworthiness Certification Criteria • Airworthiness Code (based on MILHDBK 516B) • Continuing Airworthiness – EMAR Parts 145 / M / 66 / 147 EMAR Structure Full EMAR doc suite • European Harmonized Military Airworthiness Basic Framework • European Military Airworthiness Document – Recognition (EMAD R) – Defines recognition processes • European Military Airworthiness Document – Definitions and Acronyms Document (EMAD 1) – Defines key terms • Initial Airworthiness – EMAR Part 21 – European Military Airworthiness Certification Criteria • Airworthiness Code (based on MILHDBK 516B) • Continuing Airworthiness – EMAR Parts 145 / M / 66 / 147 EMAR Structure EMAR – Section A and B Requirements • Section A – Pertains to the regulated community • Section B – Pertains to the regulator (eg DGTA) – Purpose is to facilitate easy interoperability (mutual recognition) between nations using EMAR and with civil aviation (EASA and FAA based) • Regulatory audience – both EMAR and TAREG have a different audience and therefore perspective • EMAR: Written to ‘the Authority’ (eg. DGTA) for implementation • TAREGs: Written by DGTA for the regulated • Regulatory latitude – EMAR have ‘built in’ flexibilities – TAREGs have an ‘exemptions regulation’ EMAR Structure EASA/EMAR- Acceptable Means of Compliance & Guidance Material • Regulations are binding • AMC and GM considered “soft law” • Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) – non-exclusive means of demonstrating compliance with airworthiness codes or implementing rules – Provided for each EMAR part (21, 145, M, 66, 147) • Guidance Material (GM) – assist in the understanding of the regulation, and certification standards – Provided for each EMAR part (21, 145, M, 66, 147) EMAR Structure Organisational Responsibilities • Part 21J – Design Organisation – Initial design and changes to type design – Provide approved designs to CAMO • Part 21G – Production organisation – Production of aeronautical product – Maintain production organisation in conformity with approved data and procedures – Provide statement of conformity • Part M - Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation (CAMO) – Individual aircraft Configuration Management – Fleet maintenance planning – Management/approval of modification / repairs onto individual aircraft – Maintenance system – including Release to Service – Airworthiness reviews – product configuration sampling • Part 145 - Maintenance Organisation – Maintenance of aircraft and components (inclusive of repair embodiment) Resultant Organisational Approvals Key Definitions • Airworthiness • Airworthiness Codes • Authority • Airworthiness Directive (AD) • Certificate of Release to Service • Certification • Continued (design) airworthiness • Continuing airworthiness • Derogation • Exposition • Fit for Flight Key Definitions • Military Type Certificate (MTC) • Military Restricted Type Certificate (MRTC) • Military Supplemental Type Certificate • Products, Parts and Appliances • Repair • Special Conditions • Type Certification Basis • Type Certificate Holder • Type Design Future Direction of EDA and/or EMAR Framework • EMAR M – released without AMC or GM October 2015 – DASR M includes AMC and GM: DGTA-ADF derived from EASA • Intended implementation of Safety Management into EMAR145/147/M • Intended implementation of Safety Management and Human Factors (beyond what is embedded within airworthiness certification codes) into EMAR 21 • Auditing for effectiveness • Performance Based Oversight • Other EDA supported projects – Remotely Piloted Air System (RPAS) Future Direction Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe • Prefer adoption (rather than adaption) of EMAR by participating member states • Maintain and maximise consistency (alignment) with EASA during EMAR evolution process • Recommended extension of EMAR framework to cover: – Air Traffic Management – Flying Operations – Operational Suitability Data – Operation of Military Aircraft by Civil Organisations in both Development and Service Environments – Safety Management System in order to cover the overall scope of military aviation regulations, – Accident and Incident Investigations and – The Management of Safety Commercial Influence Current Defence AMO Current Defence AEO Service Bulletins Request for designs Designs that impact TC 16 AVN BDE HQFAA FEG/WING DASR 21 J (MTCH) Design Organisation HOD (DAR) Ø Aircraft Maintenance Programme Ø Effectiveness of AMP (Reliability Programme) Ø Accomplishment of maintenance (contracting) Ø Airworthiness Directives Ø Occurrence reporting (analyse defect reporting) Ø Quality System Ø Accomplishment of maintenance Ø Management of defects Ø Coordinate scheduled maintenance Ø Aircraft continuing airworthiness record system Ø Weight and balance Ø Occurrence reporting Ø Pre-flight inspection (maintenance pers component) Ø Symmetry checks Ø Aircraft technical log Ø Maintenance check flights Ø Quality system designs Any approved Design Organisation may apply for approval of a minor change to a type design DASR M Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation DASR 145 Responsible Manager (RM) (SMM) Part 21 Part 21 Indicative responsibilities of CAMO, 21J Design and 145 AMO against TAREG AEO and AMO Part 145 Base Maint. (DM Facility) Part 145 Base Maint. (DM Facility) DASR 145 Base Maint. (DM Facilities) Props Engines Components Part 145 Line Maint. (away base support) Part 145 Line Maint. (away base support) DASR 145 Line Maint. (away base support) DASR 21J Organisations Ø Mods and repairs (manage accomplishment) Ø Pre-flight inspection (aircrew component) Ø Airworthiness review (not conducted under TAREG) International Military Airworthiness Regulation Conference Melbourne, Australia. 14-15 November 2016 Presentations from Key Airworthiness Authorities and Industry on the benefits offered by an emerging global convention on military airworthiness regulation. Questions/Discussion? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/DASP/Docs/Regulations/DefenceAviationRegulationSet/Module1IntroductiontoEMARs.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dasp/docs/regulations/defenceaviationregulationset/module1introductiontoemars.ppt",HTRBEUBDET4SEG3CO4TJE45JJSOCE22F,4929984,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dasp-docs-regulations-defenceaviationregulationset-module1introductiontoemars-ppt-20161020194111.ppt 65,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/65.blob?_blob_column=image,20070710065650,https://web.archive.org/web/20070710065650/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dgta/Documents/AMIP%20Documents/AMIP%20data/AMIP%20Presentations/AMIP%20Brief%20for%20SMM%20Conference%202006.ppt,2007-07-10,2007-09-18,404,"Aircraft Maintenance Improvement Project AMIP AMIP – 2006 in Review Where to From Here? CMDR Scott Lockey - OIC AMIP AMIP Why AMIP?  The Problem:  An increasing adverse trend in the State aircraft maintenance workforce’s compliance with maintenance standards inherent in the aircraft maintenance regulations.  Aim:  Identify potential causes of this problem and assist action agencies to identify and implement corrective actions. AMIP A M I P Achieving Measurable Improvements in Performance of Aircraft Maintenance The AMIP Vision A State aircraft maintenance organisation whose workforce culture and competence, supported by appropriate systems and resources, ensures consistent and effective compliance with the maintenance practices and standards inherent in the aircraft maintenance regulations in order to deliver safe, airworthy aircraft. What were we trying to achieve? AMIP AMIP Scope AMIP  X Maintenance Culture ‘The Way Things are Done Around Here’  Inappropriate Attitudes and Behaviours  Poorly documented maintenance  Failing to use or follow approved maintenance procedures  ‘Must Do’ attitude  Perception of a ‘blame free’ culture where personnel commit violations with no fear of reprisal  Desirable Attitudes and Behaviours  Working within the established maintenance regulatory framework at all times  Changing the system if it is wrong to ensure that it is right for others in the future  Reporting all maintenance incidents and ‘near misses’  Establishing and maintaining a ‘Just Culture’ AMIP AMIP Posters Reinforcing Desirable Behaviours AMIP AMIP Mousemats Reinforcing Desirable Behaviours AMIP Human Factors and Maintenance Error Mgt AMIP Human Factors and Maintenance Error Mgt Op Tempo Inappropriate workforce attitudes Technical Leadership Supervision HF Regulations Poor comms / handovers AMIP HF/MEM Initiatives  DI(G) 31-xxx ADF Human Factors and Aviation Maintenance Error Management  4 hour dedicated HF instruction during IET  Mandated annual requirement for HF/MEM education  Mandated HF/MEM training during promotion courses  ADF AA Policy Statement – ‘Just Safety Culture’  ADF Maintenance Human Factors Working Group  Generic Incident Investigator Training Package AMIP HF/MEM Education - Maintenance Incident Case Studies AMIP HF Support Tools – AVMED Fatigue Calculator Employee 1: SGT A Employee 2: CPL B Fatigue Score Diagrams Week 1 - Fatigue Scores Week 1 - Fatigue Distribution Week 2 - Fatigue Scores Week 2 - Fatigue Distribution 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 10/7 10/7 10/7 11/7 11/7 11/7 12/7 12/7 12/7 13/7 13/7 13/7 14/7 14/7 14/7 15/7 15/7 15/7 16/7 16/7 16/7 Date Score 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Standard Moderate High Very High Extreme Score 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 17/7 17/7 17/7 18/7 18/7 18/7 19/7 19/7 19/7 20/7 20/7 20/7 21/7 21/7 21/7 22/7 22/7 22/7 23/7 23/7 23/7 Date Score 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Standard Moderate High Very High Extreme Score Week Date 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 ######## 48 43 44 38 39 38 39 36 37 34 35 35 39 1 ######## 56 49 51 43 44 43 44 41 42 39 39 40 44 1 ######## 64 56 58 49 50 49 50 46 47 43 44 44 49 1 ######## 72 63 65 55 56 54 55 51 52 48 48 49 54 1 ######## 80 70 71 60 61 60 61 56 57 52 53 53 59 1 ######## 1 ######## 2 ######## 48 43 44 38 39 38 39 36 37 34 35 35 39 2 ######## 56 49 51 43 44 43 44 41 42 39 39 40 44 2 ######## 64 56 58 49 50 49 50 46 47 43 44 44 49 2 ######## 72 63 65 55 56 54 55 51 52 48 48 49 54 2 ######## 80 70 71 60 61 60 61 56 57 52 53 53 59 AMIP HF Support Tools – Safety Health of Maintenance (SHOME) AMIP HF/MEM Education Tools – Safety DVDs AMIP Leadership, Management and Supervision Support AMIP Leadership, Management and Supervision Support Inappropriate workforce attitudes Inadequate staffing Technical Leadership Supervision Technical mastery Competency development AMIP Leadership, Management and Supervision Support AMIP Fliers  Leadership  Management  Supervision  Mentoring  Integrity  Inspections  Perception Management  Assertiveness  Inner Voice  Managing the Generations  SHOME Tool  AVMED Fatigue Management Tool  Safety DVDs TEN PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP  Be proficient  Know yourself and seek self-improvement  Seek and accept responsibility  Lead by example  Provide direction  Know and care for your subordinates  Develop the potential of your subordinates  Make sound and timely decisions  Build the team and challenge its abilities  Keep your team informed LEADERSHIP Introduction So you have just been promoted - you are wearing your extra stripe or hook with much pride. Although you probably won’t admit it to your mates, you are actually very proud of achieving this career milestone. Your family certainly knows what it means to you and they are proud of your efforts. Whether you are a Corporal, a Leading Seaman, a Sergeant or a Petty Officer, you are now in a highly privileged position. You are in a position of leadership. Through your actions, you can shape the destiny of your workplace. You can make your team, shift or flight the envy of all others within your unit. You can make your unit the one that everyone else wants to be part of. You can be an important influence in making your service the best in the ADF. And you can help the ADF remain an employer of choice within our country. All it takes is inspirational leadership. The task of leadership is not to put greatness into people, but to elicit it, for the greatness is there already What is Leadership? Every person’s concept of leadership will be different, and leadership requirements will vary across different work areas. However, a consistent definition of what leadership entails is ‘providing a vision and influencing others to realise that vision through non-coercive means.’ A true leader serves - serves people, serves their best interests, serves the organisation. In so doing a true leader will not always be popular, they may not always impress. But because true leaders are motivated by concern rather than a desire for personal glory, they are willing to pay the price. A true leader has the confidence to stand alone, the courage to make tough decisions, and the compassion to listen to the needs of others. He or she does nto swt out to be a leader, but becomes one by the quality of their actions and the integrity of their intent. Leadership and Ethos Ethos can best be described as an intangible force – it can only be observed indirectly. It is the concept that binds people together and moves them to give up their own time and effort for the sake of the aims of their unit. Good management coupled with strong, inspirational leadership is critical to the establishment and nurturing of an appropriate ethos within our work teams. Management skills allow for appropriate goals to be set, but it is front line leadership that promotes the attitudes and behaviours necessary to achieve those goals. Leadership is about setting up an environment that encourages the necessary attitudes and behaviours – and therefore leads to the ‘right’ ethos within a workforce. This can only be achieved through personal example. Every leader’s action – or lack of action – is observed by the led. Leadership and Values For subordinates to be fully committed to organisational goals and values, they must see that their leaders are examples of commitment to those same values and goals and live those values in their daily lives. Values are the expectations we have about how we are treated, and how we should treat one another. Values shape our behaviour – they do not rule our behaviour. Values-based behaviour builds trust between individuals, and between individuals and the organisation. Defence Values represent the culture that our senior leaders are seeking to achieve – the appropriate attitudes and behaviours encapsulated in a few words. Those of us in a leadership role must uphold these values every day, in everything that we do. The leader is one who mobilises others toward a goal shared by leaders and followers. Leaders, followers and goals make up the three equally necessary supports for leadership. Why do we need good leaders? Our workforce has struggled over the last decade or so to come to terms with the changing environment in which we work and operate. Our recruiting and retention has suffered against a backdrop of strong competition to obtain and retain what is becoming a scarce resource – good quality technicians, supervisors and engineers. The military sometimes struggles to market itself as an employer of choice against other industries and professions. However, a return to the basics of good management and strong, inspirational leadership, coupled with the myriad of other retention initiatives, can place us back at the top of the ‘employer of choice’ list. It all starts with you. AMIP Leadership, Management and Supervision Support Technician’s Pocket Book AMIP Leadership, Management and Supervision Support Personal Work Standards Checklist AMIP AMIP Posters Targeting Specific Problem Areas AMIP ADF Aviation Maintenance Safety Week AMIP Maintenance ‘Knock if Off’ Program ASSERTIVENESS Introduction Effective communication is an essential tool for the exchange of information in any situation. Sometimes, though, a breakdown in communication occurs when a person is unable to confidently and effectively express their opinion. Stating your position in the face of an adverse opinion, or communicating an idea that goes against what a group believes, is not something that comes easily to many people – it requires a level of assertiveness that for some people is uncomfortable. Research has shown that aircraft technicians are not generally very good at speaking up or being assertive. This article is intended to provide some thoughts on assertiveness and give some tips about how you, as an aircraft technician, can be more assertive in your work environment in the interests of ensuring aircraft safety and airworthiness. What is Assertiveness? Some people confuse assertiveness with aggression, and think that to assert yourself you must stand your ground and argue a point without compromise. However, being assertive means communicating your needs, wants, feelings, beliefs and opinions to others in a direct and honest manner, without intentionally hurting anyone's feelings. It is helpful to imagine assertiveness as the middle ground between a ggression and passivity. Assertive communication is when you are not afraid to speak your mind and you are not afraid to attempt to influence others, even if your opinion goes ‘against the grain’ Why be Assertive? Acting assertively will allow you to feel self-confident and will generally gain you the respect of your peers and workmates because they will see that you have the power of conviction to state your case even if they do not agree. In an aircraft maintenance environment, stating concerns about a technical issue assertively can be the difference between action being taken to rectify a problem and the problem going unaddressed. Assertiveness can improve the strength of working relationships, and it will help you to feel in control of events that may have previously just happened around you. Improving Your Assertiveness Successful assertiveness, including handling the emotive and defensive reactions that you sometimes get from people you are communicating with, is a skill that requires practise. Knowing when and how to be assertive in the work environment is a constant learning curve. When effective assertiveness is achieved, the result can be a strengthening of working relationships. To improve your assertiveness, start by dealing with practical situations and things you feel you are able to do. Over time, achieving small personal victories will boost your confidence and lead to improved assertiveness. Other tips for improving your assertiveness include:  Making a conscious decision to be assertive rather than aggressive or passive  Thinking about a recent conflict and imagining how you could have handled it in a more assertive way  Practising talking in an assertive way  Taking a problem-solving approach to conflict, and trying to see the other people as your collaborators rather than your opposition  Using assertive language such as 'I feel' and 'I think', rather than aggressive language such as ‘You don’t understand…’ or ‘You have no idea…’  Not interrupting other people when they are talking, and trying hard to listen and understand their point of view  Suggesting that you brainstorm ways to solve the problem together  If the exchange doesn't go well, learning from the experience and plan how you will do things a little differently next time. Be Assertive - Call Knock it Off Knock it Off is a concept that can be used at an organisational level to call a halt to maintenance activities when any technician sees any unsafe practise occurring or a maintenance error about to occur. When Knock if Off is called, it requires the entire maintenance team to Stop what they are doing, Assess the problem, Find a solution, and then Execute the solution. By applying the SAFE acronym, the maintenance task can then be completed safely and the aircraft returned to an airworthy state. If you see that something is wrong with the maintenance task you are currently undertaking, or if you are concerned about the quality of the job you have just completed, for whatever reason, be assertive with your team and call Knock it Off. Apply the SAFE checks and, if necessary, seek additional time from your maintenance manager to complete the task correctly. Do not hide behind the passive excuse that you do not have time to call Knock it Off. After all, if you haven’t got time to make sure the task is correct now, when will you have time to conduct the defect rectification and the LISTENING TO YOUR ‘INNER VOICE’ Introduction Have you ever had that feeling that something just wasn’t quite right? You know, that niggling feeling that you have forgotten to lock the back door, that you have forgotten to put the dog out, or that you have left the oven on. How often have you been proved right? You come home to find your house has been burgled, the dog has relieved itself on your new lounge, or your kitchen is on fire. You wish that you had acted on that feeling and avoided the tragic consequences, but for some reason you didn’t listen to that inner voice. Aircraft maintenance activities are not a lot different. Some technicians talk of an inner voice or gut instinct that guided them back to a job that they were doing, only to find an oil cap insecure, a nut not lockwired, or a tool left in an engine bay. Others regret not listening to that inner voice and seeing their aircraft return early to the lines following an in flight problem caused by a maintenance error. Listening to your inner voice is important in maintaining aircraft in an airworthy state. This short article looks at how you can improve your intuition and what actions you can take when your inner voice speaks. Listen to Your Body’s Signals Sometimes your body senses a threat or danger before your mind does. Your breathing or pulse rate may change, or you might feel a sudden chill on your skin when the realisation that something is amiss first occurs. Pay attention to whether you feel peaceful or prickly around certain situations and you'll be able to make better decisions about when to double check the work you have just performed. Tune Into Your Environment When you are fully focused on a maintenance task it is easy to miss subtle warning signs of problems around you. However, if you work on increasing your situational awareness you can begin to pick up important clues. For example, you might be working in an engine bay but sense that there is a fault in the adjacent compartment. Take the time to follow your hunch and check the adjacent compartment – you never know what problem you may avert by looking beyond your immediate environment. Any maintenance environment contains messages of potential problems, or latent defects, just waiting to be found. If you tune into your environment and increase your situational awareness, you will begin to better sense when there is a problem that needs rectification. Challenge your hunches Trust your intuition, question it and test its accuracy by running your gut instincts past workmates. Test your sixth sense by going back to check the work you just completed if that is what your inner voice tells you to do. In the beginning, with intuition sometimes you're right and sometimes you're wrong. With practice, though, you'll naturally gain a better sense of when to listen to your inner voice. Call a Personal Knock it Off Knock it Off is a concept that can be used at an organisational level to call a halt to maintenance activities when any technician sees any unsafe practise occurring or a maintenance error about to occur. When Knock if Off is called, it requires the entire maintenance team to Stop what they are doing, Assess the problem, Find a solution, and then Execute the solution. By applying the SAFE acronym, the maintenance task can then be completed safely and the aircraft returned to an airworthy state. If your inner voice tells you something is wrong with the maintenance task you are currently undertaking, or a task that you have just completed, call a personal Knock it Off. Apply the SAFE checks to your own work. If necessary, tell your supervisor you need a bit of extra time to complete the task correctly. And don’t use the excuse that you do not have time to double check – if you haven’t got time to double check your work now, when will you have time to rectify it if something is wrong? Above all else, do not ignore that inner voice. More Information If you want to learn more about listening to your inner voice or increasing your situational awareness in a maintenance environment, check out these articles: ‘Gut instincts’, Approach Magazine, July-August 2004 http://www.safetycenter.navy.mil/media/approach/issues/julaug04/GutInstincts.htm ‘Situation Awareness’, Focus Magazine, 2005 http://defweb.cbr.defence.gov.au/dfsadf/Focus/focus105.htm ‘Gut Instinct’, Touchdown Magazine, December 2002 http://intranet.defence.gov.au/navyweb/Sites/AVNFEG/docs/Touchdown_Vortex_03_of_02.pdf AMIP Maintenance Regulation and Compliance Assurance AMIP Maintenance Regulation and Compliance Assurance Barely compliant MMSs Inadequate FEG QMSs Inadequate regulations Inadequate compliance Inadequate FEG oversight AMIP Where to from here? Initiatives to Continue  Maintenance incident case studies (AMNTREG)  Updates to AMIP web pages (AMNTREG)  Exchange of good practices between AMOs (AMNTREG)  ADF Aviation Maintenance Safety Week (DDAAFS)  Knock it Off program (DDAAFS)  ADF MHFWG (DDAAFS)  AMIP Communication Material (DGTA & DDAAFS)  Posters  Crew Room Booklet  Calendar AMIP Where to from here? What AMIP did not address  Improved analysis, trending and feedback on ASORs  Improved safety climate surveys  Responsiveness of AEOs to AMOs  Engineering decisions by AMO personnel  Regulating maintenance training  Publication support  Ongoing Project Vulcan initiatives Aircraft Maintenance Improvement Program AMIP THE FUTURE IS IN YOUR HANDS The future is not a result of choices among alternative paths offered by the present, but a place that is created – created first in the mind and will, created next in activity The future is not some place we are going to, but one we are creating The paths are not to be found, but made, and the activity of making them changes both the maker and the destination ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dgta/Documents/AMIP%20Documents/AMIP%20data/AMIP%20Presentations/AMIP%20Brief%20for%20SMM%20Conference%202006.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/amip%20documents/amip%20data/amip%20presentations/amip%20brief%20for%20smm%20conference%202006.ppt",6PKGXIS6L33JO6EQLPUTYGQKETNUWOV6,7207585,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-amip-20documents-amip-20data-amip-20presentations-amip-20brief-20for-20smm-20conference-202006-ppt-20070710065650.ppt 66,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/66.blob?_blob_column=image,20070710044754,https://web.archive.org/web/20070710044754/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dgta/Documents/Changes%20to%20the%20TAMM.ppt,2007-07-10,2007-09-18,404,"Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Changes to AAP 7001.053 Technical Airworthiness Management Manual Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Latest TAMM Issue AAP 7001.053(AM1) AL 0 release date 06 AAP 7001.053(AM1) AL 0 release date 06 Jan 05 Jan 05 Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering TAMM Section 1 - Introduction and Policy Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Section 1, Chapter 2  Paragraphs 14 16 added on Design ‑ Paragraphs 14 16 added on Design ‑ Acceptance Certification within Project offices. Acceptance Certification within Project offices.  Paragraph 25 and all reference to Type Paragraph 25 and all reference to Type Certification removed - topic now covered in Certification removed - topic now covered in S3 Chp12. S3 Chp12. Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering TAMM Section 2 - Regulation Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Annex A to Regulation 1 Annex A - Identity and Authority of COEs Annex A - Identity and Authority of COEs Annex B - Special Qualifications Required of Annex B - Special Qualifications Required of ASRs ASRs  Annexes A and B organisation titles updated and Annexes A and B organisation titles updated and the ARDU SD&D qualifications changed to reflect the ARDU SD&D qualifications changed to reflect the position being for a DSDE. the position being for a DSDE. Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Regulation 3.3.2 3.3.2 Personnel 3.3.2 Personnel  Regulation 3.3.2.a(2) ‘must be accepted by the Regulation 3.3.2.a(2) ‘must be accepted by the TAR as SDE’ inserted. TAR as SDE’ inserted.  Regulation 3.3.2.b ‘must be accepted by the TAR Regulation 3.3.2.b ‘must be accepted by the TAR as DSDEs and’ inserted. as DSDEs and’ inserted. Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Regulation 3.5.9 3.5.9 Aircraft Stores Configurations 3.5.9 Aircraft Stores Configurations  Regulation 3.5.9 rewritten. Regulation 3.5.9 rewritten. Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Regulation 3.5.11 3.5.11 Special Technical Instructions (STIs) 3.5.11 Special Technical Instructions (STIs)  Regulation 3.5.11.b(14)(i) and (ii) added. (STIs Regulation 3.5.11.b(14)(i) and (ii) added. (STIs must be tracked for incorporation by the issuing must be tracked for incorporation by the issuing AEO). AEO). Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering TAMM Section 3 - Changes to the Guidance Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Section 3, Chapter 1 Section 3 - AEO Guidance Section 3 - AEO Guidance Chapter 1 - Introduction and Guidelines to Chapter 1 - Introduction and Guidelines to becoming an AEO becoming an AEO  Table 1-1 updated. (Regulation to Guidance cross- Table 1-1 updated. (Regulation to Guidance cross- reference) reference) Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Section 3, Chapter 15 ASCENG’s, DOS’s and GWEO’s role in ASCENG’s, DOS’s and GWEO’s role in Design Acceptance and Service Release of Design Acceptance and Service Release of Aircraft/Stores Configurations Aircraft/Stores Configurations  New chapter 15 added ‑ New chapter 15 added ‑ ASCENG’s, DOS’s and ASCENG’s, DOS’s and GWEO’s Role in Design Acceptance and Service GWEO’s Role in Design Acceptance and Service Release of Aircraft/Stores Configurations Release of Aircraft/Stores Configurations.. Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering TAMM Post Pages - Glossary  Definitions for Authoritative Airworthiness Definitions for Authoritative Airworthiness Advice, Aircraft Store, Aircraft Stores Advice, Aircraft Store, Aircraft Stores Configuration, Incorporation Approval, Stores Configuration, Incorporation Approval, Stores Suspension Equipment, and Technical Suspension Equipment, and Technical Airworthiness Directives added. Airworthiness Directives added. Airworthiness Regulation - DGTA Directorate of Aircraft Engineering Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Questions? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dgta/Documents/Changes%20to%20the%20TAMM.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/changes%20to%20the%20tamm.ppt",B2OCODT7DBFXEFBHEZMXYWZLTFXM3KVL,303406,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-changes-20to-20the-20tamm-ppt-20070710044754.ppt 67,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/67.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507033842,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507033842/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Agnositc%20Hazard%20(McCormick).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"1 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard The agnostic hazard Frank McCormick frank.mccormick@certification.com CERTIFICATION SERVICES, INC. aSCSa 2008, Canberra 3 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard A distinctive contrast • Aircraft: little or no discretion – Safety assessment and design assurance driven by comprehensive, transparent standards, notably SAE ARP4761, DO-178B, DO-254, DO-160x • Publicly owned and operated infrastructure on ground and in space: wide discretion – Safety assessment and design assurance varies greatly by contract 4 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard SAE ARP4761 • Society of Automotive Engineers is active in aerospace standards • “Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment” – Functional Hazard Assessment – Preliminary System Safety Assessment – Failure Modes and Effects Analysis – Failure Modes and Effects Summary – Zonal Safety Analysis – Particular Risks Analysis – Common Mode Analysis – System Safety Assessment 5 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Example: Particular Risks Analysis • Fire • Rotor burst – Engine – APU • High pressure bottles • High pressure air duct • High temp air duct • Leaking fluids • Hail, ice, snow • Bird strike • Tire burst, flailing tread • Wheel rim release • Lightning strike • HIRF • Flailing shafts • Bulkhead rupture 6 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Publicly owned CNS/ATM • MIL-STD-882x? • Safety case? • IEEE 12207? MIL-STD-2167A or -498? • CMMI? • Other? • ADF worth noting: 7001.054, “Airworthiness Design Requirements Manual”, more comprehen- sive and prescriptive than public-sector average 7 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Treatment in practice • Private sector – Requirements for civil airborne network device – Handling of failure of cockpit display • Public sector – Use of software-intensive COTS hardware – Handling of UAV crash 8 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Assurance of digital component in airborne data bus needed for dispatch • HW & SW planning: certification issues, safety assessment, development, verifi- cation, CM, QA, special considerations • HW & SW verifica- tion: reviews, analyses, testing, inspections • HW & SW develop- ment: requirements, design, implementa- tion, integration • HW & SW CM • HW & SW QA • HW & SW cert liaison • HW & SW accomp- lishment summaries 9 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Private avionics • Failure of primary display • Prompt FAA response in Airworthiness Directive – Flight Manual update – Dispatch prohibition – MMEL update – Software change – Functional test – Flight Manual reversion 10 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Public COTS • Network control aboard International Space Station and Space Shuttle for primary data link between ground and orbit • Black-box only – Functional testing – Performance testing • Later serves as baseline or authoritative reference for CNS/ATM systems 11 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Unintentionally autonomous • UAV: General Atomics, Predator B – Loss of contact and subsequent crash near Nogales, Arizona: 25 April 2006 – Wingspan: 66 feet (approx. 20 meters) – Weight: 10,000 lb (approx. 4500 kg) – Speed: 220 knots – Ceiling: 50,000 feet (approx. 15,200 meters) – Endurance: 30 hours 12 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Report of the National Transportation Safety Board • COTS software • Weekly “lockups” • Two lockups just before accident flight • Confusing operator controls (same lever can be engine thrust or camera position, depending on mode) 13 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard NTSB recommendations • Better transponders on UAVs • Communications recorded • Periodic meetings between UAVers and ATC • Manned-aircraft emergency procedures applied to UAVs • Manned-aircraft reporting requirements applied to UAVs • FAA to consider recommendations 14 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Other examples • Closure of Problem Reports via “procedural mitigations” that were never implemented • Use of bogus parts in maintenance of state aircraft • Reductions in assigned criticality levels based on budget constraints or absence of data due to COTS status 15 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard The contrast revisited • Do as I say… – Highly structured – Detailed – Mandatory – Transparent • …Not as I do – Flexible and malleable – Broadly sketched as goals or intentions – Discretionary – Obscure 16 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard A single assurance standard • FAA Designees support development and operation of digital systems in aviation • Work often spans public and private sectors • Would greatly prefer a regime in which assurance is determined by the nature of the hazard rather than who owns the gadgetry 17 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard RTCA / DO-264 Guidelines for Approval of the Provision and Use of Air Traffic Services Supported by Data Communications 18 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard DO-264 extends SSA • No longer talking about what happens to a stricken individual airplane • Failure of CNS/ATM infrastructure can affect many aircraft simultaneously • 4761-style safety assessment inappropriate • Larger environment and players must be considered 19 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Core contributions of DO-264 • OSED: Operational Services and Environment Description • Approval processes and plans • SPR: Operational, Safety, and Performance Requirements • INTEROP: Interoperability Requirements • Large additional supporting framework 20 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard System vs Operations • Fly-by-wire flight controls – Single thread? – Dual channel? – Triple channel? – Dual-dual? • SSA: Can judge flight-controls suitability for manned aircraft but not for UAVs • OSA: Most relevant issue is mission profile 21 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard “Communications error wreaks havoc in Los Angeles air control system” • IEEE Spectrum: November 2004 • “Lost Radio Contact Leaves Pilots On Their Own” • Primary failure, then failure of backup one minute later • 800 flights disrupted, five close calls, many TCAS alerts • UNIX-to-Windows switch? • 30-day reboots required? • FAA blames its personnel • Little information shared publicly 22 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard “FAA grounds unknown number of flights” • MSNBC: September 25, 2007 • Loss of all communications • “Major telephone line…went out” • World’s busiest cargo hub, >4m tons/year • All traffic cleared within 250nm radius of Memphis center • Little information shared publicly 23 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Lone rat kills rail traffic • April 5, 2008 • Stockholm Central Station • One rat in signal box • Three-hour standstill – Intercity – Commuter – Subway 24 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard Whither the automobile? • Automotive Engineering International, August 2008 • The digital car – Steering – Brakes – Engine control – Automatic navigation – Much more 25 CSI Copyright © 2008 Certification Services, Inc. aSCSa 2008: The Agnostic Hazard The goal • Unified, uniform standard for evaluating safety of system that poses risks to public • Policy support and enforcement mechanisms • “Early warning system” for attempts to solve technical problems through political or administrative means • Protection of internal critics and whistleblowers • Make it easier for public servants to do the right thing ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Agnositc%20Hazard%20(McCormick).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/agnositc%20hazard%20(mccormick).ppt",YG2AGDRJWQHM22CEPK5OXDEX7SDNGLOF,6301767,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-agnositc-20hazard-20-mccormick-ppt-20120507033842.ppt 68,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/68.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507040927,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507040927/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/An%20Approach%20to%20Software%20Dependability%20Evaluation%20(Uzunov).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"Software Dependability Evaluation Kiril Uzunov Airborne Mission Systems Air Operations Division 08 8259 5824 kiril.uzunov@dsto.defence.gov.au ADF Software Symposium’08 - RAAF Williams, Laverton ""Software Support Agencies – Assuring the Continuing Dependability of Software"" Dependability is a generic term including: • reliability, • availability, • maintainability, • safety, and • integrity Also known as RAMSS Agenda • Software quality and software architecture • Evaluation of Software Architectures • Quality attributes of Airborne Mission Systems • AMS_BN model • Questions Trends • The challenge is to meet the quality expectations, not the functionality • Software architecture coming into the limelight as a framework for capturing all major decisions • Increased role of software architecture during system evolution • Quality attributes are restrained by architecture to a large extent • Increased use of quantitative assessment of quality • Need for predicting quality • “Testing by itself does not improve software quality. Test results are an indicator of quality, but in and of themselves, they don't improve it. Trying to improve software quality by increasing the amount of testing is like trying to lose weight by weighing yourself more often. ... If you want to improve your software, don't test more; develop better.” – Code Complete, Steve McConnell Rob.Bogue@ThorProjects.co m Quality framework • Management oriented view of quality • Software oriented attributes • Quantitative measures of these attributes Quality Factor Metrics Quality Criteria McCall 1994 no Functional Requirements Requirement Specification Application Architecture Functionality-based Architecture Design OK Evaluate Quality Factors Architecture Transformation Quality Requirements yes Architecture evaluation techniques Bosch 2001 Architecture Evaluation Architecture oriented (review based) Quality attribute focus (3+1 techniques) Scenario-based Experience-based reasoning Modeling/metrics Simulation Specifics of AMS • Complexity • Long development time • Long term of deployment – technology ageing • Safety critical • Mission critical • System-of-Systems – Interoperability Our goals • Identify quality factors, project and product characteristics • Identify metrics for them • Make assessment/prediction concerning the project health and project risks Our approach Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Quality Factors vs. Criteria Reliability Maintainabilit y Safety Security Organisational capability X X X X Robustness X X X Testability X X X Openness X Scalability X Modifiabiity X Modularity X X Criterion - Organisational capability • Process maturity {high (level 4,5), nominal (3), low (1,2)} • Skill retention {high (<5% turnover), medium, low (>20%)} • Management {high (>7 years), low } • Architecture quality – Team experience {high (>5 years), low (<3)} – Requirements quality {high, low} – Relevant standards {yes, no} Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Criterion - Robustness • Memory management • Error propagation • Cohesion • Task management Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Criterion - Testability • Complexity • Technology independence • Interfaces • Modularity – Coupling – Change propagation – Technology Independence Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Criterion - Scalability • Interfaces • Capacity margins • Technology independence • Hardware isolation from software • Scheduling • Architecture style Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Criterion - Modularity • Technology independence • Change propagation • Coupling Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Criterion - Modifiability • Capacity margins • Technology independence • Modularity • Architecture style • Views documentation • Complexity Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Criterion - Openness • Interfaces • Technology independence • Capacity margins Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes Attribute capacity margins - checklist • CPU capacity – Usage is below defined maximum under worst case tasking – Prototype been built to demonstrate processor capacity • Memory utilization under worst case tasking • Interconnection margins • Execution threads meet deadlines under worst case load • Database size/storage – Is DB enough for pre-loaded flight info – Can DB record everything that occurs during mission • Nr of tracks a system can support/process • Data links capacity – type, loads • Power margins – should be in excess of current max demand • Etc. Quality Factor Guidelines Quality Criteria Metrics Checklists People, Process & Architecture attributes AMS_BN model connectivity Organisation_Capability Architecture_Quality Information_Assurance Robustness Security FaultTolerance Complexity Modifiability Modularity Coupling Change_Propagation Skill_Retention Management Process_maturity Experience Quality_of_Requirements Safety Testability Maintainability Reliability Capacity HW_Isolation Scheduling Architecture_Style Scalability Technology_Independence Error_Propagation Cohesion Task_Management Interoperability ViewsDoc Interface OpenArchitecture Relevant_Standards Fault_prevention Memory_Management High Low 0.7 0.3 Quality of Requirements Experience Arch_Quality High Arch_Quality Low High High 0.9 0.1 High Low 0.6 0.4 Low High 0.6 0.4 Low Low 0.1 0.9 Upper management and staff experience contribute 120 percent to productivity. Effective methods/processes contribute only 35 percent. Staff inexperience: negative 177 percent; Ineffective methods/processes: negative 41 percent. (Jones C., 2000) CMMI 2006 Architecture_Quality High Low 73.8 26.2 Organisation_Capability High Low 70.0 30.0 Management High Low 80.0 20.0 Process_maturity Level 3 5 Level 1 2 60.4 39.6 Experience High Low 80.0 20.0 Quality_of_Requirements High Low 70.0 30.0 Bayes’ theorem P(A,B) = P(B,A) = (P(B|A)*P(A))/P(B) To recapitulate • We described a quality framework • “Customized” this framework to AMS software architectures • Selected suitable evaluation method (Bayesian Belief Networks) for predicting dependability • Described the topology of the model • Further development References • Avizienis et al. 2004 - A.Avizienis, J. Laprie, B.Randell, C.Landwehr “Basic Concepts and Taxonomy of Dependable and Secure Computing”, IEEE Trans. On Dependable and Secure Computing, Vol.1, No1, pp.11-33, Jan-Mar 2004 • Bosch 2001 - J.Bosch, Presentation on Software Architecture Assessment, Summer School on Software Architecture, Turku Centre for Computer Science, Finland, August 2001 • CMMI 2006 – Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI®) Version 1.2 Overview, SEI CMU, 2006 • Fenton et al. 2007 – M.Fenton, M.Neil. D.Marquez Using Bayesian Networks to Predict Software Defects and Reliability, The 37th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, DSN 2007, Edinburgh 2007 • Gurp 2003 - J.Gurp, SAABNet: Managing Qualitative Knowledge in Software Architecture Assessment, from “On the Design & Preservation of Software Systems”, PhD Thesis, pp.73-88, 2003 • Jones 2000 - Jones, C., Software Assessments, Benchmarks and Best Practices, Addison-Wesley, 2000 • McCall 1994 - J.A.McCall, Quality Factors, In „Encyclopedia of Software Engineering”, vol.2 O-Z, John J. Marciniak ed., John Wiley & Sons Inc., pp. 958-969, 1994 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/An%20Approach%20to%20Software%20Dependability%20Evaluation%20(Uzunov).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/an%20approach%20to%20software%20dependability%20evaluation%20(uzunov).ppt",IVJSPKEN5BFZTFJX3I7IITKTKP5OBPK2,1110267,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-an-20approach-20to-20software-20dependability-20evaluation-20-uzunov-ppt-20120507040927.ppt 69,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/69.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507035606,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507035606/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Considerations%20in%20the%20Preference%20for%20and%20Application%20of%20RTCA_DO-178B%20in%20the%20Australian%20Military%20A.ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404," 1 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Considerations in the Preference for and Application of RTCA/DO-178B in the Australian Military Avionics Context SQNLDR Derek Reinhardt Systems Certification and Integrity (SCI) Directorate of Aircraft Engineering (DAIRENG) 2 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Overview • Introduction to criticisms of RTCA/DO-178B • Background and structure of DO-178B • Criticisms that RTCA/DO-178B is insufficient • Criticisms that RTCA/DO-178B is too onerous • ADF’s preference for RTCA/DO-178B • Application issues of RTCA/DO-178B in the Australian Military Avionics Context 3 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Introduction • RTCA/DO-178B is the centre of much debate or criticism – insufficient, too onerous, etc • Avoidable software failures have already been responsible for aircraft mishaps – cockpit displays go blank – engines throttle back during takeoff – contradictory airspeed readings • This presentation/paper – examines these criticisms – how do they influence the ADF’s preference for and application of RTCA/DO-178B 4 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness ADF Preference for RTCA/DO-178B • RTCA/DO-178B is the ADF’s preferred software assurance standard for safety critical and safety related airborne software development – Refer AAP7001.054 Airworthiness Design Requirements Manual • ADF recognises the FAA processes and standards – widely used and accepted by many international airworthiness authorities • Many military aviation systems have a civil heritage with software developed under RTCA/DO-178B – AEW&C B737, MRTT A330, etc 5 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Background of RTCA/DO-178B • 14 CFR 25.1309 – often referred to as FAR 25.1309 – SAE ARP 4754 and SAE ARP 4761 • aircraft level FHA, FTA • system level FMEA, FTA, etc. • common cause analysis – PRA, ZSA, CMA – RTCA/DO-178B for software design assurance – RTCA/DO-254 for hardware design assurance • Five failure condition severities are assigned design assurance levels (DALs) – Catastrophic (A), Hazardous / Severe Major (B), Major (C), Minor (D), No Effect (E) 6 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Structure of RTCA/DO-178B • 66 objectives in 10 tables – + several implicit objectives – satisfaction tailored by software level – several prescriptive objectives • statement coverage, decisions coverage, modified condition decision coverage • Lifecycle phases – planning, development, requirements, design, coding and integration, verification • Integral processes – configuration management, quality assurance • Certification Authority liaison • RTCA/DO-248B, FAA Order 8110.49, CAST5 7 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Intricacies of DO-178B • Common misconception that RTCA/DO-178B completely specifies the process and activities • Yes – objectives are coupled to the software lifecycle • Yes – they don’t distinguish between requirements – functional, software safety, etc • Fidelity of the objectives presents challenges for COTS and PDS • With exception of 3 objectives – flexibility is permitted in how the objectives are satisfied • Objectives can be broadly classified as contributing to requirements validity, requirements satisfaction, and requirements traceability 8 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Criticisms of RTCA/DO-178B • Divided into several positions – those that believe RTCA/DO-178B is insufficient • academics, researchers, or consultants – those that believe RTCA/DO-178B is too onerous • development contractors with cost and schedule driven imperative • Criticisms are at odds with each other – central to the criticisms, then is it about right? • Widely accepted by FAA, EASA – NTSB reports that it is effective in those contexts • How does the ADF address the criticisms? 9 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness RTCA/DO-178B is Insufficient • Absence of mandatory formal methods • Absence of mandatory static code analysis • Ineffectiveness of MC/DC testing • Absence of specific requirements or objectives relating to software safety analysis and software safety requirements • Assumptions underlying the design assurance level definition are questionable 10 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Absence of Mandatory Formal Methods • Does not prohibit formal methods – acceptable method to satisfy objectives • Application to problem domain – not universally applicable to problem domains and technologies used in critical systems – only partially applicable to problem scope – are closed languages, no inherent real world meaning, natural language is still required • Formal methods and safety – does not address significant sources of error WRT the safety of systems – little evidence that it would prevent a number of mishaps attributable to software • Complementary to testing – testing is required to demonstrate real world behaviours, on real hardware, in the target environment • Formal methods is not the ‘silver bullet’ for safety software 11 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Absence of Mandatory Static Code Analysis • Does not prohibit static code analysis – it is an acceptable method used to satisfy objectives • Static analysis won’t find all the faults (requirements and implementation) most related to the safety of the software • Permits greater focus on those activities related to identifying requirements validity and satisfaction problems affecting safety – prevents developers being overwhelmed in code reviews and testing identifying inadvertent implementation problems, which static code analysis tools readily detect • Limitations to applying static analysis retrospectively 12 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Ineffectiveness of MC/DC Testing • Exercise each data flow that directly affects a control flow to identify as many faults as possible • Widely debated objective – studies confirm that MCDC does find faults that other DO- 178B testing approaches do not find – other studies found “no significant difference” • RCDC address some of these limitations • MCDC not finding additional faults is not the concern – if normal and robustness testing has been comprehensive, then it is possible that the gap in MCDC will be small, and NOT safety related – adequacy of normal and robustness testing 13 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Absence of Specific Requirements or Objectives Relating to Software Safety Analysis and Software Safety Requirements • Is not explicit in objectives relating to software safety analysis and software safety requirements – but they are not absent! – number of objectives contribute to requirements validity, including that of safety requirements • However, systematic software safety analysis are not always proposed to show that the identified and allocated set of software safety requirements is complete and correct • DGTA recommends an IEEE1228 Software Safety Plan be used to document the planned software safety activities – and their outcomes – or the RTCA/DO-178B PSAC can be used 14 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Assumptions Underlying the Design Assurance Level Definition are Questionable • Issues with integrity/assurance levels – little evidence that software of different integrity levels does have failure rates of integrity level order – debate regarding the philosophy and rules for allocating integrity levels • significant differences in the processes recommended by standards • Inconsistent application – misunderstanding of the differences between reviews versus analyses • some objectives being presumed to be satisfied solely by reviews • intent is combination of analysis and reviews of the outputs – variable • normal and robustness testing • software architecture is appropriate – avoids design constructs that would not comply with system safety objectives • software safety requirements are identified/allocated • Apportionment and adequacy of objectives – objectives fundamental to the validity and satisfaction – from Level C – Level A and B provide additional evidence - trustworthiness 15 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness RTCA/DO-178B is Too Onerous • Excessive requirements specification and traceability fidelity requirements • Excessive verification requirements 16 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Excessive Requirements Specification and Traceability Fidelity Requirements • RTCA/DO-178B motivation for fidelity – each behaviour that constitutes the requirements at level of abstraction is systematically accounted for – design tool to assist developer produce a good design • Why should all the behaviours be accounted for? – evidence that all behaviours of the software are acceptable – do not lead to unacceptable failure conditions – all the behaviours of the software should be disclosed – permits reasoning about their suitability for the safety of the system – arguing non-interference with the behaviours that are important to the safety of the system • Questionable disagreements – Intellectual Property constraints – software development is a creative process, not itself compatible with such rigour requirements 17 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Excessive Verification Requirements • Testing will always be required to gain confidence in the behaviour of software on the target hardware in the intended operating environment • Completion of testing – defensible engineering argument as to why testing is complete – with evidence to support it • Not based on the following factors: – cost and schedule – consensus of program managers – broad consensus of the programmers and testers – any other non-engineering based arguments • RTCA/DO-178B provides a defensible argument as to when testing is complete by specifying: – requirements completeness criteria – requirements coverage criteria • extent of normal and robustness tests • extensiveness of requirements based low level testing – coupled with additional implementation related coverage criteria (structural coverage) to elicit certain properties 18 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Application of RTCA/DO-178B • RTCA/DO-178B is not applied in isolation • Test coverage objectives • Use of RTCA/DO-178B as a benchmark for assessing software assurance practices • COTS with RTCA/DO-178B • Migrating to RTCA/DO-178B 19 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Not Applied in Isolation • System Safety Program - MIL-STD-882C or FAR 25.1309 • Key Issues – A Software Safety Program (SwSP) should be established to coordinate hazard identification and mitigation efforts for hazards with software-related causal factors. • IEEE1228 Software Safety Plan • Software Safety Analysis, Generic Software Safety Requirements – A Software Assurance standard is required for the development of all software that is safety related – Software process standards should be applied to the development of software for airborne and related systems • An assessment of the applicant’s software development capability, including domain knowledge, should be conducted as part of the tender evaluation and contract negotiation process – examines the safety culture – determine if non-systematic (experience) activities can be trusted 20 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Test coverage objectives • Some organisations believe that DGTA does not require structural code analysis – by default – THIS IS NOT TRUE! • In cases where DGTA has not required it – additional activities to ensure that the coverage is comprehensive • fidelity of requirements • explicitness of traceability • extent of normal and robustness testing • additional activity to identify dead and deactivated code – often exception related code – mission systems, with no series hazards – extenuating circumstances – legacy constraints • Negotiate through the PSAC –expect to have a compelling argument if you are going to proposed not doing it 21 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Software Assurance Benchmark • Assess software products and their development practices – software agencies that do not use RTCA/DO-178B – confused that DGTA is applying DO-178B where not contracted • RTCA/DO-178B objectives help with the assessment of – requirements validity, satisfaction, and traceability • RTCA/DO-178B provide clear measures of – fidelity in the specification and traceability of requirements • no gap between required behaviours and executable code • all software behaviours are appropriate with respect to safety – extent of test based verification of requirements and implementation on the target computer in the intended environment – development and review rigour • independence and oversight • assures that the evidence presented contains an acceptably small number of faults 22 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness COTS with RTCA/DO-178B • COTS fall under the scope of PDS • PDS criteria are demanding, but not excessive – but often the evidence is just not available • Alternate proposals for use of COTS • Provide evidence to demonstrate the following types of properties – Partitioning (containment and/or mediation) – Non-Interference – Acceptable Behaviours 23 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Migrating to DO-178B • Acquired where no software assurance standard applied – DOD-STD-2167A, MIL-STD-498, IEEE12207 • Two options – transition to RTCA/DO-178B or develop a Software Assurance Task Matrix • FAA guidelines – Notice 8110.49 Chapter 10 – Intended for systems developed to RTCA/DO-178 and RTCA/DO-178A – Careful management of the scope of retrospective production of software assurance evidence is required – DGTA has assessed the approach as acceptable 24 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Summary • Introduction to criticisms of RTCA/DO-178B • Background and Structure of DO-178B • Criticisms that RTCA/DO-178B is insufficient • Criticisms that RTCA/DO-178B is too onerous • ADF’s preference for RTCA/DO-178B • Application of RTCA/DO-178B in the Australian Military Avionics Context – RTCA/DO-178B applied within the ADF framework addresses relevant criteria for producing safety software systems 25 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Considerations%20in%20the%20Preference%20for%20and%20Application%20of%20RTCA_DO-178B%20in%20the%20Australian%20Military%20A.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/considerations%20in%20the%20preference%20for%20and%20application%20of%20rtca_do-178b%20in%20the%20australian%20military%20a.ppt",GDC2THWRIGUGO6DZ25KMTBKV3PTB25HQ,68372,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-considerations-20in-20the-20preference-20for-20and-20application-20of-20rtca-do-178b-20in-20the-20australian-20military-20a-ppt-20120507035606.ppt 70,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/70.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507034705,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507034705/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Electronic%20Flight%20Bags%20(SQNLDR%20Reinhardt).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"Electronic Flight Bags 1 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Electronic Flight Bags AAP7001.054 Sect 2 Chap 22 SQNLDR Derek Reinhardt Systems Certification and Integrity (SCI) Directorate of Aircraft Engineering (DAIRENG) Electronic Flight Bags 2 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Overview • EFBs are being used in more challenging and potentially hazardous ways – host functions previously only available by dedicated aircraft instrumentation and systems • Increasing imperative to assure EFB systems are of an appropriate integrity for their intended function or application – AND relevant technical and operation considerations are addressed • New - AAP7001.054 Sect 2 Chap 22 Electronic Flight Bags 3 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Scope of Chapter • Provides guidance for the technical approval, service release and management of EFBs on ADF aircraft • Primarily focuses on technical issues • Provides suggestions for operational management where necessary to complement the technical requirements • Based on the FAA approach to EFB approval – number of important differences Electronic Flight Bags 4 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness FAA Approach • FAA Documents on EFBs – AC120-76A – Guidelines for the Certification, Airworthiness, and Operational Approval of Electronic Flight Bags Computing Devices – AC20-159 – Obtaining Design and Production Approval of Airport Moving Map Display Applications Intended for Electronic Flight Bag Systems • Defines 3 Types of Software Applications – Type A, Type B, Type C • Defines 3 Classes of EFB Hardware – Class 1, Class 2, Class 3 Electronic Flight Bags 5 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness ADF Hardware Classes • Portable EFB Hardware – COTS hardware – considered a portable electronic device (PED) – may be connected to a mounting device, arm mounted, kneepad – designated means of storage when not mounted – connected to aircraft power through a SPO approved power interface, that may be also used to recharge internal batteries – read only data connectivity to other aircraft systems through SPO approved interface – requires quick disconnect from power and data for ground egress – compatible with ejection (if required) – may receive/transmit data connectivity – host Type A and B applications – host Type C applications under special circumstances only – SPO approval for hardware environmental and interface requirements to aircraft, applications and operating system Electronic Flight Bags 6 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness ADF Hardware Classes • Integrated EFB Hardware – installed aircraft system – requires design approval and acceptance as per any other flight display or aircraft instrument – must meet relevant aircraft standards – designed and built to a level of integrity commensurate with the system safety assessment findings – host Type C applications – flight displays and moving maps – co-host Type A and B applications • provided specific considerations are addressed Electronic Flight Bags 7 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Software Applications • Type A – pre-composed manuals and procedures, references – forms, logs, training applications • Type B – calculations, charts, electronic checklists (non-interactive with aircraft systems), data services, video • Type C – primary flight displays, secondary flight displays, navigation displays, moving maps, airport moving maps, airborne collision avoidance, cockpit display of traffic information, electronic checklists (interactive with aircraft systems) • Refer to Annex A to the chapter Electronic Flight Bags 8 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Type A Applications • Not required to meet software assurance ‘key issues’ of section 2 chapter 7 • Should be demonstrated to meet their intended function, be sufficiently robust and do not provide confusing or misleading information • As the majority of these applications will be COTS, the intended function and use of these applications on the EFB should be documented, and a verification program (functional and robustness) conducted. • The verification program should pay particular attention to opportunities for confusing or misleading information to be presented. • The verification program should seek to assess the accuracy, availability and timeliness of the EFB applications, and should address the following robustness criteria: – interaction with other applications and the COTS OS hosted on the EFB during worst case loading conditions (memory usage, disk usage, device driver interaction, etc.) should be analysed to determine the acceptability of potential interactions – displayed resolution, legibility, true representation (e.g. correct layout and positioning of document objects and text) and navigation of pre-composed static documents during worst case zoom and resize conditions should be analysed to determine the acceptability of information presentation – any other robustness criteria that the safety assessment determines may contribute to the accuracy, availability, and timeliness of information/functions provided should be analysed Electronic Flight Bags 9 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Type B Applications • Should address the software assurance “Key Issues” identified in Section 2 Chapter 7 • Safety assessment is required to assess the required software assurance level – typically require assurance commensurate to DO-178B Level D – required flight information will be presented for each applicable phase of flight – operating system and hosted applications should be demonstrated to meet their intended function, be sufficiently robust and to not provide confusing or misleading information • Many Type B applications will be based on COTS applications – high level software requirements for the use of these applications on the EFB should be documented – verification program (functional and robustness) • pay particular attention to opportunities for confusing or misleading information to be presented • assess the accuracy, availability and timeliness of the EFB applications • robustness • Type B applications may be hosted on Portable or Integrated EFBs • Loading flight or mission data from a standard Mission Planning System onto the on-board system via the aircraft interface. – should be limited to Integrated EFBs - Portable EFB hardware should only have read-only data connectivity during flight to other aircraft systems through a SPO approved interface – should not include executable code – should ensure that there is a means to establish that the correct information is loaded into the FMS or MC – ensure the correct information has been entered into the MPS prior to upload – portable EFB hardware can be used to load flight or mission data from a MPS prior to flight • provided it can be demonstrated that this mode cannot be exercised during flight Electronic Flight Bags 10 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Type C Applications • Address the software assurance “Key Issues” identified in Section 2 Chapter 7 • Safety assessment - to assess the required software assurance level – typically required assurance commensurate with DO-178B Level C through A • Safety program should ensure that the required flight information can be presented for each applicable phase of flight • Operating system and hosted applications should be demonstrated to meet their intended function, be sufficiently robust and to not provide false or hazardously misleading information • Type C applications are hosted on Integrated EFBs, and Portable EFBs only as specifically only in special circumstances. • Further advice should be sought from DGTA regarding hosting Type C applications on Portable EFBs, as these will be critically assessed on the basis of rigorous system and software safety assessments. Electronic Flight Bags 11 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Co-hosting Type C with Type A & B • Hardware and/or software partitioning should be established – protect Type C applications from Type A and B applications, the COTS computing platform and COTS operating system – containment and mediation, including detection and fault handling • Preferred approach – dual microprocessor system – first microprocessor hosts the COTS OS and Type A and B applications, – second microprocessor hosting an appropriately assured DO-178B Real Time Operating System (RTOS) and Type C applications. • Numerous commercially available EFB systems • Other approaches using software partitioning are also possible, however DGTA should be engaged on any proposal to adopt a software partitioning approach • FAA partial TSO for AMMD software applications Electronic Flight Bags 12 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness EFB System Design Considerations • Use of Aircraft Electrical Power Sources • Batteries • Environmental Hazard Identification and Qualification Testing • EFB Mounting Device • Human Machine Interface (HMI) • COTS Operating Systems • Aeronautical Information Databases • Source Documents • Security • Additional System Safety Considerations • EFB Configuration Control • Instructions for Continued Airworthiness Electronic Flight Bags 13 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Operational Considerations • Cockpit procedures, references, emergency checklists, etc. are typically developed during the initial development and certification of an aircraft, and in support of subsequent modifications. • Many implicit relationships to assumptions (e.g. availability, accuracy, and completeness of information) made in the system safety program accompanying aircraft development and/or modification – vital that they are captured • Operations Issues – training, human factors (HMI and workload), currency, procedures • Procedures Electronic Flight Bags 14 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Transitioning to Paperless Cockpit • Operational Evaluation – minimum 6 month operational evaluation is recommended • SPO Obligations – all system safety assumptions (availability, accuracy, completeness) associated with all paper-based procedures and references used in the cockpit are identified and addressed by their EFB replacement – the design supports the required availability, accuracy and completeness of information – separate and backup power sources as necessary are provided to meet safety objectives – multiple redundant and/or diverse EFBs are provided to mitigate sources of common mode failures – factors relating to employment in single versus multi-crew aircraft, associated workload and availability of information have been assessed – if required as a mitigation for potential design related failure conditions, that paper products are carried by selected aircrew members, or a complete set of sealed paper backups stored within reach of the cockpit Electronic Flight Bags 15 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Managing Deficiencies Against EFB Design Requirements • Issue Paper is the preferred means – an ADF application does not neatly fall into the defined application types – an ADF application does not meet the relevant software safety and assurance requirements for its type, but the OAA considers the improvement in operational safety or capability to be worth retaining the residual risk – any other circumstances where technical shortcomings of the EFB system against the criteria of this chapter require operational mitigations (usually procedures) to retain an acceptable level of safety • TAA’s firm expectation is that ADF engineers will strive to achieve the benchmark level of safety widely accepted in the civilian domain. • Only where significant technical issues or an urgent operational imperative prevent full compliance with the requirements of this chapter, will the TAA propose to the OAA that a lesser level of safety be accepted. – factors such as rapid acquisition and cost, would not normally be considered adequate justification for short cuts in engineering rigour Electronic Flight Bags 16 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Summary • Provides guidance for the technical approval, service release and management of EFBs on ADF aircraft • Primarily focuses on technical issues • Provides suggestions for operational management where necessary to complement the technical requirements • Released ready for use – 054 amendment coming soon Electronic Flight Bags 17 DGTA-ADF Directorate General Technical Airworthiness Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Electronic%20Flight%20Bags%20(SQNLDR%20Reinhardt).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/electronic%20flight%20bags%20(sqnldr%20reinhardt).ppt",RNWAIASIDB3GJGSXAUS4AVLYFGQUBC36,65657,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-electronic-20flight-20bags-20-sqnldr-20reinhardt-ppt-20120507034705.ppt 71,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/71.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507034834,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507034834/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Evolution%20of%20Complex%20Safety%20Critical%20Avionics%20Systems%20in%20an%20NCW%20Environment%20(Simmonds).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"Evolution of Complex Safety-Critical Avionics Systems in an NCW Environment Scott Simmonds, BAE Systems Sergey Nesterov, CEDISC 1 Introduction • The evolution of complex military platforms over substantial lifetimes is becoming recognised as a challenging problem • A factor being the complexity of the mission systems that are integrated onto the platforms • To be successful in undertaking this evolution, there is a need for • specialist methodologies, • processes, • tools, • techniques and • technical knowledge. • BAE Systems Australia Defence, and the Centre of Excellence in Defence & Industry Systems Capability (CEDISC) at the University of South Australia have entered into a collaborative research agreement to conduct Research and Development into safety and mission critical avionic systems in the Australian defence environment. • BAE Systems is funding a portion of the research program, with contribution from the South Australian Government. 2 Research Program • The research program includes • efforts to understand the historical background to avionic and weapons safety critical practices in Australia; • the discovery and analysis of the technical issues associated with system and software safety in evolving network enabled military avionic systems; • identification of international best practice in this area of interest; • proposing and validating Australianised methods, tools and practices to mitigate the issues previously identified; and • implementing selected proposals to reduce industry and Defence risk in conceptualising, acquiring, producing and operating evolving military avionic systems in an NCW environment. • This presentation provides an overview of the research program being undertaken and a summary of progress to date. 3 Background • In broad terms, there are two phases to the life of a complex military platform, • the acquisition of the platform from the platform vendor • foreign government military sale, • commercial acquisition from an Original Equipment Manufacturer or consortium, or • in country development • the sustainment phase • maintaining the capability over the platform lifetime and • introducing ""small"" capability increments commensurate with a maintenance of capability philosophy. • Defence acquisitions are typified by long acquisition cycle times. • Two pass Kinnaird process meant to mitigate risk, however it introduces considerable lag into the acquisition process • The effect of this lag is typically that the proponents of the original need identification have often long since departed • and the validation of the system being delivered to meet the need is often conducted by those with little knowledge of the history of the early part of the program. • It is the early part of the program however which defines the rationale for decisions and assumptions that have been made. • This of course provides plenty of opportunity for the claim of ignoring or overturning decisions made ""Before My Time"" ! • This leaves the build up of corporate knowledge on the platform to the OEM or system integration contractor. 4 Background • During transition to the sustainment phase, the effect of knowledge loss is often magnified • there is no guarantee that the system integrator or OEM will be engaged under contract to provide sustainment services. • the opposite is frequently the case, with third party organisations being engaged to provide these services. • Planning and execution of transition to sustainment is therefore of key importance to ensure no capability gap is introduced between delivery of the platform, and the ability to actually support it. • Sustainment of mission systems beyond the acquisition phase also has a unique set of problems, particularly where the planned life of a system is 25-30 years, • actual life having a tendency to extend well beyond this period. 5 Complexity of Military Systems • Mission and avionics systems of ADF aircraft can be described as complex, long lifetime, robust and ""expensive"" to acquire and maintain. • ""Expensive"" is a relative term, in the context of Australian defence acquisition, close attention is paid to the Value for Money argument in justifying the expenditure of government funds. • While the numbers sound large, they are generally comparable with other high budget programs such as major civil works and big budget movie productions. • The ability to maintain and augment capability in defence mission systems is one of the largest consumers of capital funding in the ADF • In recent years, issues with performance and integration of mission systems has plagued acquisitions projects driving schedules out and costs up • Collins Combat System, Wedgetail 6 Complexity of Military Systems • Methods and techniques to improve the maintainability and augmentationability of defence mission systems have the potential to significantly impact the consumption of capital and sustainment expenditure and funding. • A case study, the Project Air 5276 Phase 2A upgrade of the P-3C Orion Maritime Patrol Aircraft on the Mission Systems Architecture is considered at various times in the research program • Issues arising during the acquisition phase and issues arising through the sustainment of the platform are considered. • PA5276 put in place a Mission Systems Architecture that was standards based and flexible enough to allow adaptation to evolving roles and the necessary capability increments to support them that were envisaged for the AP-3C. • To support this adaptation, additional mission and support system hardware and software was procured and installed in purpose built facilities, the Edinburgh based Integration Test & Training Facility • A number of factors have impacted the adaptation of the mission systems to the evolving role of the platform • There are many reasons for this and include: • The perception of the difficulty in modifying software and systems, and • Continuing funding challenges to development of changes to a well defined but complex system 7 Complexity of Military Systems • Other considerations include • Application of COTS Software and System • Legacy systems • Disposal and Replacement • Ongoing Technical Airworthiness Management 8 Work conducted to date • Study of software safety issues related to the development of mission- critical avionics systems • Identification of modelling and simulation techniques for evolutionary systems development • Review of best practice in the evolving airborne mission systems 9 Study of software safety issues related to the development of mission-critical avionics systems • This work has reviewed addressing practical problems and issues associated with software safety in mission critical systems in all phases of the life cycle. • The review presents topics on: • Current defence acquisition and contractual practices dealing with software safety issues, based on the relevant standards and regulations • Issues in the application of software safety standards • Issues in measuring safety • Safety case development issues • Application migration and safety issues • CMMI extension for safety • COTS and Safety issues • Issues and recommendations to come out of this work so far, • The introduction of safety case into the current software support practices. • This provides the following benefits: • Extended maintenance capabilities • Software modules classification based on safety criticality leads to more effective (targeted) testing practices 10 Study of software safety issues related to the development of mission-critical avionics systems • Clear safety critical software component isolation is likely to be a basis for a safe experimentation program in system/software upgrades • Issues with the Safety Case implementation are that it requires understanding (by all stakeholders) of how the safety case works within a standards based framework. • Safety issues from Management, Contractual and Regulatory perspective have also been considered 11 Identification of modelling and simulation techniques for evolutionary systems development • Modelling and simulation are key techniques to mitigate risk in acquisition projects • Typically, models are not maintained once the implementation or realisation phase of acquisition projects is reached • At this point, the model (which may or may not be machine realisable, or executable) starts to diverge from the actual implementation • the implementation becomes the focus of development and integration activity – the maintenance of the model is left, either • abandoned completely, or • revisited as a last project cleanup effort to capture the final element of contractually deliverable documentation • In either case, the model's utility as an accurate representation of the system under development that can be further used for analysis and improvement is unlikely, • only ""accurate"" model remaining of the ""as implemented"" system is held in the minds of OEM engineering staff • Techniques were examined and proposed that would assist in the transition and maintenance of the ""as implemented"" model into the community of practise responsible for system sustainment. 12 Techniques for Software Evolution • Techniques for software evolution examined include a variety of modern (and slightly older) software modelling and development paradigms, including • Domain Map • Structured Analysis, • Application of the Unified Modelling Language • Architectural Analysis and Design Language (AADL), • Model Based Integration of Embedded Systems (MoBIES), • Embedded Systems Modelling Language (ESML), • Automatic Integration of Reusable Embedded Software (AIRES), • Mission Orientated Architectural Legacy Evolution (MORALE), which contains a number of phases, including • Scenario based Inquiry Cycle (ScenIC), • Model based Evolution in Software Agents (MESA), • Synchronised Refinement and finally • Software Architecture Analysis Method. • The selection considered appears to either be appropriate to the context, or have significant potential for application within the target domain. • It could be observed that there are too many approaches to choose from, and that this is an indication of the pervasiveness and complexity of the problem • No final recommendations as to which of the selected approaches is better suited to the Aerospace and Defence context. • Further research, particularly by means of a trial is probably most appropriate. 13 Review of best practice in the evolving airborne mission systems • This work to date has reviewed a number of practises in airborne mission system evolution. • The aim is to • determine international best practice in this area, • make a determination based upon experimentation as to whether the practises reviewed are ""best practise"" and • formulate or otherwise develop process, tools and techniques that are able to be applied to the evolution of airborne mission systems. 14 Challenges and Issues • Systems in general are increasingly dependent on software • The trends are: • An increased emphasis on users and end value • Increasing software-intensive systems criticality and need for software dependability • Increasingly rapid change in technology and user needs • Increasing software-intensive systems globalisation in development and need for interoperability, including national standards • Increasingly complex systems of systems interaction on software level • Increasing needs for COTS, reuse and legacy software-intensive systems integration 15 Relevant Practices and Approaches • Leveraging COTS Components • Network Data Buses • Software and Software Obsolescence • Open Architectures • Integrated Modular Avionics • Obsolescence Management • Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages • Maintaining Legacy Software • Other Practices and Approaches 16 Leveraging COTS Components • The cost and complexity of attaining the capability of modern airborne mission systems that can operate as part of a bigger system of systems pose challenges. • These challenges are being met by new practices and approaches in systems development, sustainment and integration. • The main responses are: • An increasing reliance on commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) products • An emphasis on open architectures • Introduction of Industry Standards based architectures – e.g. Integrated Modular Avionics • Reliance on COTS products has also driven new practices to manage the obsolescence issue • This is becoming more severe because of the shortened product life cycles of COTS components 17 COTS Adaptation • Development of software has overtaken the development of hardware as the major design effort and • The highest costs that arise in the replacement of obsolete hardware are the effort and cost in the adaptation of the application software with increasing COTS usage, • the hardware will come to represent relatively low value 18 Porting Legacy Software • In practice, porting source code to a new system will involve recompilation to a new target using a new software development environment. • The executable binaries generated will not be physically identical (although semantically equivalent). • Testing therefore needs to be conducted to requalify and certify the software for safety and mission critical application. • If the programming language of the source code is no longer “popular” in software development terms, (e.g., Ada83, OCCAM, and Fortran), software engineering tools may not be available for current generation hardware, and • software developers will be more difficult to engage compared with programmers for other, more modern languages such as C++, Java and C#. • Rewriting the software in a current programming language is comparable to the original task of development. • An open architecture can provide some insulation of the impact of hardware changes on software • software applications do not directly access hardware resources but work through a standard application programming interface, • examples being ARINC 653, Service Oriented Architecture and Data Distribution Service 19 Porting Legacy Software • In a particular case study, modifications were made to address Ada83 to Ada95 language conversion, compiler specific extensions, and vendor libraries that required strong data types. • It has been found that about one per cent of the legacy software required modifications to accommodate for differences in compilers. • An abstraction layer (essentially a set of software wrappers) was introduced to emulate the required interfaces so that the legacy software could be hosted on different operating systems such as Solaris, Windows and VxWorks. • This allowed the original optimisation in the legacy software to be retained. Future work • Identify technical tools, techniques and practices that need to be introduced or enhanced to improve airborne mission system outcomes • Identification of appropriate processes, practices and tools for the evolution of airborne mission systems • Review of domain expertise required to perform the managed evolution of airborne mission systems • A study of human factors in mission and safety-critical software- intensive systems • Risk mitigation and resolution techniques for software in evolving mission-critical avionics systems 21 Summary • This presentation has outline the scope of work and activities undertaken to date in the Cooperative Research Agreement between the Centre of Excellence in Defence Industry Systems Capability and BAE Systems Defence. • The work conducted so far has examined some of the issues related to the acquisition and sustainment of complex mission and safety critical avionics systems, • in particular the acquisition and transition to sustainment of the upgraded AP-3C Orion Maritime Patrol Aircraft • Consideration of best practice in the application of COTS, the issues with COTS software, the use of open architectures and modular architectures. • The examination of • methods, tools and processes to mitigate industry and Defence risk, • identification of processes, practises and tools related to the evolution of airborne mission systems and • the relationship of human factors in mission and safety critical mission software intensive mission systems are planned as a future component of this research activity. 22 Questions ? 23 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Evolution%20of%20Complex%20Safety%20Critical%20Avionics%20Systems%20in%20an%20NCW%20Environment%20(Simmonds).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/evolution%20of%20complex%20safety%20critical%20avionics%20systems%20in%20an%20ncw%20environment%20(simmonds).ppt",3F6SPG7M3KX2EBVXF7QIFXUPFIVQWYLE,96226,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-evolution-20of-20complex-20safety-20critical-20avionics-20systems-20in-20an-20ncw-20environment-20-simmonds-ppt-20120507034834.ppt 72,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/72.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507040004,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507040004/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Failure%20to%20Transition%20(Feodoroff).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"Page 1 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Failure to Transition Continued Airworthiness in the context of Software Maintenance and Support of AP-3C Weapon System Page 2 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Topics • Introduction • Revision of previous analysis on DMO Category of Support requirements • Revision on Technical Frameworks for SM&S • DT&E and IT&E across the Transitional boundary • Supportability analysis of Software, SAE Supportability Concepts et al • Program v Project Risk Management – who pays, who is left holding the bag Page 3 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Introduction Page 4 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Introduction • The Contractor Support Facility (CSF) supplying Software Maintenance and Support (SM&S) services for the AP-3C Weapon System is housed in the Integration, Test and Training Facility (ITTF) at RAAF Edinburgh. • The 3rd Party Non-Associative Software Support Agency (SSA) working within the ITTF is utilising capability delivered into the CSF under Project AIR 5276 to provide Indigenous Support of the AP-3C Weapon System. • The Support Concept out of Project AIR 5276 included requirements for DMO Category Support Level 3 which is described by the AEO for the SSA as: – Fault Rectifications, and – Minor Enhancements • Project AIR 5276 was pre-TAMM which now pushes Continued Airworthiness requirements onto SM&S activities. Some latitude is taken to interpret this also as Mission Worthiness and Business Worthiness as the SSA has to deal with Mission Criticality and Business Criticality in addition to Technical Airworthiness (X-Worthiness). Page 5 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Revision of previous analysis on DMO Category of Support requirements Page 6 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE DMO Category of Support requirements overview • The Category of Support (CATSUP) is a DMO vehicle for specifying, at a high level, the degree of capability and the extent of the capacity required to provide software support. • Four categories [1..4]. • Main Capability themes of the Category of Support model are: – Control and maintain configuration; – Validate installation; – Provide data; – Provide capability to modify software; – Provide capability to analyse, integrate and test modifications to software; and – Monitor or predict performance. Page 7 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Themes allocated per Category of Support level • The inauguration of capability maps to the CATSUP levels in the following manner: – Category 1 • A) Control and maintain configuration • B) Validate Installation • C) Provide data – Category 2 • D) Provide capability to modify software • E) Provide capability to analyse, integrate and test modifications to software – Category 3 • F) Monitor Performance – Category 4 • G) Predict Performance Page 8 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Example aggregations of themes under CATSUP levels • For example Category 2 will provide the following: – A) Control and maintain configuration (from CATSUP 1) – B) Validate Installation (from CATSUP 1) – C) Provide data (from CATSUP 1) – D) Provide capability to modify software – E) Provide capability to analyse, integrate and test modifications to software • While Category 3 would provide the following – Category 3 • A) Control and maintain configuration (from CATSUP 1) • B) Validate Installation (from CATSUP 1) • C) Provide data (from CATSUP 1) • D) Provide capability to modify software (from CATSUP 2) • E) Provide capability to analyse, integrate and test modifications to software (from CATSUP 2) • F) Monitor Performance Page 9 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE CATSUP provided in CSF by CoA • The table above captures the exec summary of coarse audit of SM&S capability owned by the CoA within the CSF. • The most notable omission is Column F or Monitor Performance (Column G is not relevant as the CSF was supposedly targeting CATSUP 3). This is a relatively large omission given it is the core capability that distinguishes CATSUP 3 from CATSUP 2. • Note the impact of the lack of a Performance Monitoring framework may be a Capability Capping of the CSF to CATSUP 2 which is colloquially Fault Corrections rather than Minor Enhancements. Mission System CATSUP 1 2 3 4 A B C D E F G Intercommunications Subsystem    See later slides   Navigation Subsystem      Radar Subsystem      Acoustic Processing Subsystem      Acoustic Trainer Subsystem      Data Management Subsystem      Page 10 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Capability verses Ability • To tackle the confusion that reigns between Capability and Ability: – The SSA has the Ability to do, say, performance monitoring because engineers can (through best endeavours) exercise their engineering prowess. They have the Ability to use the equipment to carry out performance monitoring because it can run software, they can instrument software, they can collate data, they can analyse data. – The Performance Monitoring Capability would have been infrastructure, plans, tools, data, issue management etc; delivered into the CSF as part of the technical frameworks. • The scope of Technical Framework artefacts will include the following artefacts: – Planning artefacts. – Specification artefacts. – Construction artefacts. – Execution artefacts. – Analysis artefacts. – Reporting artefacts. – Problem resolution artefacts. • No Technical Framework resembling system or sub-system level Performance Monitoring exists with the SM&S capability owned by the CoA nor has the SSA been tasked to develop such a Capability. Some tools exist and there are reporting artefacts out of Project AIR 5276 coffers but no substantive framework to support impact assessment to the system or software architecture of modifications. Page 11 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Circular Warrantee problem • The Circular Warrantee problem arises when CoA requires the SSA to warrant delivery of CATSUP 3 services utilising Capability supplied CoA owned CSF. – The problem for the SSA arises when the CoA warrantee does not stand up to close scrutiny, or the CoA do not warrant the GFM. – Note, GFI is not literally warranted but is bundled under the implied warrantee that the CSF is fit for purpose. • Using the effects of Capability Capping (and the missing Performance Monitoring framework as an example) there are risks to Continued Airworthiness/Mission Worthiness/Business Worthiness (X-worthiness) if modifications to the Weapon System affect software or system architecture. • Continued X-worthiness may be defended by capping modifications to Minor Enhancements or below (untenable); or tasks may be required to redeem Capability (requires non-Operational funding stream); or terminate Indigenous Support and pass back to OEM (NAV, ACO, RADAR). Page 12 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE TAMM Category of Support requirements in comparison • Rectification may be interpreted as a deliberate or an accidental capping of Development through capping of Capability. • Note absences of “Full design disclosure and IPR” clause against Rectification. Rectification. Capability to analyse and rectify faults. The necessary tools to make a software change shall be included, however, testing and other related activities may require the direct use of aircraft. Development. A full development and test capability similar in scope to the initial development environment, that can produce significant software changes to the system. The capability to do off-aircraft DT&E and provide simulated stimulus for testing purposes shall be provided. Full design disclosure and IPR shall also be provided. Enhancement. A full development environment with additional simulation, modelling, and analysis tools that would allow significant enhancement of system operation. The development and test environment shall allow analysis of actual system performance using appropriate tools and techniques. The testing facilities shall enable environment testing of real time performance where appropriate to the systems. Full design disclosure and IPR shall also be provided. Page 13 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Revision on Technical Frameworks for SM&S Page 14 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Scope covered by Technical Frameworks • The scope of AEO for the AP-3C Weapon System SSA currently is the following (with Resultant Change Capability and CATSUP mapping): – Fault Correction ( ≡ Rectification or CATSUP 2) – Minor Enhancement ( ≡ Development or CATSUP 3) – Integration Support ( ≡ Rectification or CATSUP 2) • Note no Enhancement or CATSUP 4 • The technical frameworks required to support this scope are the following: – System Software Qualification Framework – Software Integration Test Framework – CSCI Test Framework – Unit Test Framework – Software Construction Framework Page 15 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Goals of Technical Frameworks • Recapping: the scope of technical framework artefacts to support these goals will include the following artefacts at each level: – Planning artefacts. – Specification artefacts. – Construction artefacts. – Execution artefacts. – Analysis artefacts. – Reporting artefacts. – Problem resolution artefacts. Technical Framework Components Rectification (Integration Support and Fault Correction) Goals Development (Minor Enhancement) Goals System Software Qualification Framework REPRODUCTION Problem reproduced at System Interface? QUALIFICATION Did we build the right thing? Software Integration Test Framework LOCALISATION Offending CSCI discovered? ASSEMBLY Did the system components go together correctly? CSCI Test Framework CHARACTERISATION Behaviour of offending CSCI determined? CHECKOUT Is the component sound? Unit Test Framework INSTRUMENTATION What does it look like under the microscope? VERIFICATION Did we build it right? Software Construction Framework RESOLUTION Construct solution! RESOLUTION Construct solution! Page 16 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Exec Summary of coarse audit of Technical Frameworks at CSF AP3C Weapon System - Mission System A B C D E Intercommunications Subsystem  SEL    Navigation Subsystem  SEL [1]   Radar Subsystem  SEL RSDL [2]  Acoustic Processing Subsystem  SEL [3]   Acoustic Trainer Subsystem  SEL [4]   Data Management Subsystem  SEL  [5]  KEY: A) System Software Qualification Framework B) Software Integration Test Framework C) CSCI Test Framework D) Unit Test Framework E) Software Construction Framework SEL) Provides Ability, dearth of Technical Framework artefacts related to Software Integration Testing from PA5276 NOTES: [1] SDE with CSF has less capability than full SDE within OEM. [2] RSDL can be utilised for CSCI and UNIT testing support. [3] OEM utilised separate hardware rigs for CSCI and UNIT testing that were not delivered. The mission box can be utilised for these activities but with restricted access because of SEL resource utilisation clashes and also with reduced throughput due to restrictions in interfaces with box internals. Hardware obsolescence has also broken the capability to connect the mission system to a high speed LAN. [4] OEM utilised separate hardware rigs for CSCI and UNIT testing that were not delivered. The mission box can be utilised for these activities but with restricted access because of SEL resource utilisation clashes and also with reduced throughput due to restrictions in interfaces with box internals. Hardware obsolescence has also broken the capability to connect the mission system to a high speed LAN. Page 17 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE High level Technical Framework discussion System Software Qualification Framework Using the AP-3C as the example, the experience is that system software qualification frameworks are part of sell off to customer so are generally available. The delivered soft copy test procedures are often out of sync with the as-run test masters but the data is generally available – though not as ‘re-useable’ an asset as some would proffer. Regardless, the high level qualification data is available. Software Integration Test Framework The ITTF SEL is the software integration test facility; however, very few of the other technical framework artefacts related to a software integration test framework has been delivered. The SEL was delivered “assembled” and so much of the data reflects the destination rather than the journey. CSCI Test Framework, Unit Test Framework In most cases, the OEM will deliver the mission boxes with at least a serial port and claimed this covers CSCI and UNIT testing. However, none of the other technical framework artefacts related to CSCI or UNIT testing are generally delivered. So the Ability to run software (test or otherwise) exists as a consequence of having mission equipment, rather than a full testing framework as a capability. In terms introduced in the reference material, the CSCU or UNIT testing delivered is generally: • Un-managed • Decentralised • Un-metered Software Construction Framework Some issues exist with capacity of software construction frameworks falling short of requirements of the relevant CATSUP. Expansion of software construction frameworks to meet CATSUP capacity requirements is problematic where quality goals related to Portability or Maintainability of the SDE are not met, namely: • CHANGEABILITY • ADAPTABILITY • INSTALLABILITY • CONFORMANCE • REPLACEABILITY Many of the SDE were delivered turn key without substantive software installation and configuration planning material that would allow building the capability from vendor media. This coupled with hardware obsolescence (usually realised prior to delivery to the CSF) means that “hardware failures ≡ lost Capability”. This generally makes the process of replicating or expanding the SDE more costly; especially where there may be certification issues. Page 18 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Impact of fractured Technical Frameworks • With the shortfall in the technical framework artefacts delivered that address the CSCI and Unit Testing aspects (columns C and D of table), issues for continued certification arise out of discontinuous DT&E and IT&E across the transitional boundary from Developing agency to Maintenance agency (see next slide section below). • Problems arise from fractured history and missing data (information) related to the journey that the software travelled on its way to delivery. • This is compounded by being expected to work at a higher, or at least different, certification level without the framework artefacts delivered or the redemption of any gap in the frameworks sponsored by customer. Page 19 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE DT&E and IT&E across the Transitional boundary Page 20 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Traditional V&V model Page 21 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE V&V Approaches mapped to Technical Frameworks • The exec summary, continued airworthiness requires DT&E and IT&E, across the transitional boundaries from Developing agency into Maintaining agency and the 3rd Party SSA will generally be disadvantaged unless particular care is place on the supportability requirements on projects to ensure transition of solid DT&E and IT&E frameworks. Technical Framework Components Development & Maintenance Operation A B C D E F G H I J K L M System Software Qualification Framework 6 8 9 9 9 Software Integration Test Framework 1 1 4 5 7 8 CSCI Test Framework 1 1 4 5 7 8 Unit Test Framework 1 5 Software Construction Framework 1 1 1 2 3 4 Key: A) Checklist-based inspection B) Perspective-based inspection C) Fagan-based inspection D) Complexity Measures E) Language Compilers F) Design Measures G) Path Testing H) Scenario-based Testing I) Module Interface Testing J) User Interface Testing K) User Discovered L) System Administration M) Environmental Page 22 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE TAMM Category of Support requirements recapped • Rectification may be interpreted as a deliberate or an accidental capping of Development through capping of Capability. • In terms of Technical Frameworks delivered it can be interpreted to mean incomplete or missing Unit, CSCI and Software Integration testing frameworks. Rectification. Capability to analyse and rectify faults. The necessary tools to make a software change shall be included, however, testing and other related activities may require the direct use of aircraft. Development. A full development and test capability similar in scope to the initial development environment, that can produce significant software changes to the system. The capability to do off-aircraft DT&E and provide simulated stimulus for testing purposes shall be provided. Full design disclosure and IPR shall also be provided. Enhancement. A full development environment with additional simulation, modelling, and analysis tools that would allow significant enhancement of system operation. The development and test environment shall allow analysis of actual system performance using appropriate tools and techniques. The testing facilities shall enable environment testing of real time performance where appropriate to the systems. Full design disclosure and IPR shall also be provided. Page 23 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Supportability analysis of Software, SAE Supportability Concepts et al Page 24 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Support Analysis for Software (SAS) Tailoring • Support Analysis for Software (SAS) has been devised as a consistent methodology that seeks the achievement of system and software supportability throughout requirements, specification and design, in order to define the most cost effective support concept that meets the operational requirements, and to ensure that the necessary support infrastructure is in place before the system enters into service. • The goals of Support Analysis for Software (SAS) are the following: – Evaluate sustainment capability – Demonstrate expansion and growth capacity – Verify logistic management of software – Address operational support of software – Support Concept planning • Such a process (support concept planning and execution) has therefore to: – determine those (support concept) requirements – influence (product) design so that supportability is built into the product – establish the Support Concept and ensure it is implemented be itself validated Page 25 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE SAS – Specification, Assessment, Qualification • It is convenient, in order to ensure software supportability, to frame the management of software supportability around two key components: – Software Supportability Plan: As part of the System Supportability Plan, it describes the activities to be undertaken in order to achieve the software supportability objectives. It also describes activities to be undertaken to demonstrate achievement of those objectives – Software Supportability Case: A written documentation about how product supportability was verified/developed at each stage of software development as per the SW Supportability Plan • These two elements are described in detail the SAE suite of Support Concept Standards: – JA 1004 Software Supportability Program Standard – JA 1005 Software Supportability Program Implementation Guide – JA 1006 Software Support Concept Page 26 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE SAS – Full scope of Specification, Assessment, Qualification • Overall Functional Architecture • Functional architecture at LRU Level • Functional architecture of related ground systems • Expansion and growth capacity information for each LRU • Expansion of data buses • Product Information • Identification Data • Management Data • Process Information • Software Loadable Units • Problem investigation capability • Operational support of Mission, Engineering and Diagnostic Data • Maintenance support indicators • CSCI inherent characteristics • CSCI Maintenance Support Resources • System-Level maintenance support • Proposed maintenance support options • Life-Cycle costs • Documentation Available Page 27 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE CATSUP Tailoring of SAS Page 28 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Technical Framework Tailoring of SAS Page 29 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE SAS4SSA – Vehicle for assessing Supportability • Thus, the modified SAS, coupled with the audit tool for technical frameworks, and the CATSUP tailoring, attempts to provide both a depth and a breadth of support concept expression (covering Specification, Assessment and Qualification) for elements such as the data requirements and the quality of enabling sets (combined as Capability) of utility to the SSA (colloquially SAS4SSA). • Certainly, in the light of changing AP-3C Support Concept requirements, the SSA needs a basis for: – providing guidance to customer and projects in and around support concept specification and sustainment goals; and – vetting (assessment of) delivered products for sustainability (including continuing certification). • In the hands of the SSA, SAS4SSA is a Assessment tool for developing Sustainment risk models based on a Supportability taxonomy. • In the hands of the Acquirer it provides an approach to for Specification and Qualification of a Support Concept. Page 30 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Program v Project Risk Management – who pays, who is left holding the bag Page 31 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE History repeats - tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow … • The root cause of sustainment problems is as much right sizing the support concept, but it is also specifying the support concept deep enough to ensure goals such as maintenance of the certification continuum are assured. • The CATSUP approach to support concept specification has tended to be too high a level of specification and has allowed quite wide ranging interpretations by OEM and Prime Contractors. • The previous paper by the author was a working document which was part of a SSA driven reaction to the support concept fracturing seen in the AP-3C. • Various mechanisms are culpable; the one that the author is trying to address is the lack of software sustainment/maintenance framework understanding – by stakeholders on both sides of the contract. Page 32 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE … and tomorrow • Issues in an around the AP-3C enabling sets, and the quality of the technical frameworks, create a tension between the requirements of the regulatory body of the SGTA and the users of 92WG – with the SSA caught in the middle. • The aging capability is under tension to “grow” from a small software maintenance and support organisation into a new sustainment organisation – but appears to be capped by legacy issues. • Much of the discussion focuses on models gleaned from standards and best practice -all the models being developed by industry as part of the failure mode analysis of software intensive system sustainment. • Continued Airworthiness (X-Worthiness) is, like many of the other goals of the AP-3C Weapon System sustainment organisation, impacted by risks injected from outside the Sustainment organisation. Page 33 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Program Level Risk Management? • Sustainment of a weapon system requires a program level risk management model. • Someone Else’s Problem (SEP): Development Project view of Sustainment Issues. • The techniques to manage the risk fall into one or more of these four major categories: – Avoidance (eliminate) – Reduction (mitigate) – Transference (outsource or insure) – Retention (accept and budget) Page 34 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Someone Else’s Problem • Def: SEP – Support concepts defined at too high a level. – Possibly too small a support facility established. – Too little in the way of significant work passing through the doors to develop and maintain system comprehension or program understanding in a changing resource pool. – Fracturing of AIC by CoA going directly to OEM. – OEM dis-engagement, particularly where OEM is being driven by poor market to product line approaches, rather than managing independent requirements of un-coordinated acquirers. – Un-warranted GFM provided to SSA. – Un-financed changes in support concept. Obsolete enabling toolsets supporting obsolete technology. Un-financed expectations to back fit regulatory frameworks requirements. Page 35 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE DoD speaks … • DoD touts 80% of a system’s cost life is in Operation and Support. • No stats appear to exist to account for the contribution of SEP to that cost. • Best practice approaches offer intuitive notions of cost savings if certain practices are avoided. • As mentioned in the preceding discussion, none of this is new. The standards embodied industry best practice yet lesson learned are un-learned. • The concern is that 80% of the sustainment budget needs to include the fat in schedules for additional V&V effort to cover unwarranted GFM in the CSF; and additional fat in schedules for system comprehension tasks due to shortfalls in the quality of the GFM and lack of tool support to recover information about the system; aimed to back fit the regulatory frameworks. • This is the risk avoided by projects realised. Page 36 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Finale • The imperative however, as always, is to avoid injecting the issues into Sustainment to allow the SSA to provide Development services up to CATSUP 3, where required, and to maintain Continued Airworthiness in that context. • Extant systems and their sustainment issues aside, continued Airworthiness amongst them, with the expectation of future programs within the ADF, can we ever learn to better spend that 80%? Page 37 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Summary • Revision of previous analysis on DMO Category of Support requirements • Revision on Technical Frameworks for SM&S • DT&E and IT&E across the Transitional boundary • Supportability analysis of Software, SAE Supportability Concepts et al • Program v Project Risk Management – who pays, who is left holding the bag Page 38 BAE SYSTEMS IN CONFIDENCE Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Failure%20to%20Transition%20(Feodoroff).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/failure%20to%20transition%20(feodoroff).ppt",QOLGPKLFL44YR3ALYYX4EWHECVCHJXLK,748568,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-failure-20to-20transition-20-feodoroff-ppt-20120507040004.ppt 73,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/73.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507034844,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507034844/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Migrating%20to%20a%20Software%20Assurance%20Standard%20(FLTLT%20Redmond).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"DGTA-ADF Migrating to a Software Assurance Standard 2008 ADF Software Symposium FLTLT Patrick Redmond SCI-DGTA DGTA-ADF Overview • The Problem with Legacy Software • Migrating to a Software Assurance Standard • The Potential Challenges - Bounding the Change - Low-Level Requirements - Traceability - Structural Coverage • Case Study - MIL-STD-498 to DO-178B - Considered throughout. DGTA-ADF The Problem with Legacy Software • Numerous ADF platforms acquired where no software assurance standard has been explicitly applied. • Only MIL-STD-498 or DOD-STD-2167A. • Development standards do not define how well software has to be constructed. • During development, somebody made the decision to stop testing. - Why? • During development, somebody made the decision to review source code. - Why? • To what extent should the ADF rely on this software? • To what extent does the ADF rely on this software? DGTA-ADF Migrating to a Software Assurance Standard • DGTA requires that a software assurance standard be applied to legacy software systems. • All development methods apply a level of assurance, but is that level acceptable? • Applying a software assurance standard to each modification of in-service software progressively increases the integrity. • Applies ‘Cancer Theory’ to Legacy Software • Two methods: - Service History Argument and Application of Recognised Standard  e.g. RTCA DO-178B - Software Assurance Task Matrix  Negotiate a custom software assurance “standard” with DGTA DGTA-ADF How does migration work? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Legacy Software of Unknown Integrity Known Integrity Software of Known(?) Integrity DGTA considers the software to be compliant with the applied software assurance standard from this point forward. Build x Area Impacted by Build x Build y DGTA-ADF Service History Argument / Recognised Standard • Establish a Service History Argument that demonstrates that the current software is acceptably safe. - Need to consider, among others:  Configuration Management  Problem Reporting  Change Control  Relevance of Product Service History  Operating Environments  Safety Related Problems  Design and Code Errors  Error Rates • No need to create a service history argument for in-service software, ADF has already determined that it is acceptably safe. - Only applies to in-service, legacy software. Does not apply to acquisitions. - Does not apply if there is a substantial change of context in which the software is used. • Apply a recognised software assurance standard to the next modification. • DGTA then consider the software to be compliant with that standard. DGTA-ADF Statement coverage. High-level requirements coverage. Software Assurance Task Matrix Design Code Test OFP B OFP C OFP D Source code is verifiable. Source code complies with low-level reqs. Low-level requirements are defined. High-level requirements are defined. Decision coverage. 178B 178B Decision coverage. Negotiate with SCI Statement coverage plus untested code analysis. DGTA-ADF The Potential Challenges • Bounding the Change - How much “re-assurance” needs to be done? • Traceability • Low-Level Requirements • Structural Coverage DGTA-ADF The Easy Ones • Planning • Additional Considerations - Tool Qualification • Development of High-Level Requirements, Source Code and Executable Object Code • Verification of High-Level Requirements • Configuration Management • Quality Assurance DGTA-ADF Bounding the Change • Software assurance standard only needs to be applied to the scope of the modification. • What is the scope of the modification? - The things that are changed, and - The things affected by the things that are changed. • Change Impact Analysis: - Traceability - Memory Margin - Timing Margin - Data Flow - Control Flow - Input/Output - Development Environment and Process - Operational Characteristics - Certification Maintenance Requirements - Partitioning Analysis DGTA-ADF Traceability • Full traceability data was not recorded for many legacy software systems. • Software assurance standards generally require traceability to source code. • When applying a software assurance standard to a legacy software system, how much traceability data needs to be generated? • DGTA Position: Trace down and up once. • Trace down from new or modified high-level requirements to affected and new low-level requirements, to affected and new code. • Trace up from affected and new code to low-level requirements and to high-level requirements. DGTA-ADF Example – MIL-STD-498 to DO-178B • This example will be considered a number of times. • A legacy software system developed to MIL-STD-498 with typical artefacts. • Can cause or contribute to Major hazards. • Migrating to DO-178B Level C objectives. DGTA-ADF HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 Traceability HLR2 LLR4 HLR1 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 SCM5 New High-Level Requirement New Low-Level Requirement Modified Low-Level Requirement New Source Code Modified Source Code DGTA-ADF Low-Level Requirements • Some legacy systems have no low-level requirements. • Others have design descriptions that are not refined enough to be low-level requirements. • Others have design descriptions that do not drive source code development (source code is developed from requirements). • How many low-level requirements need to be defined or redefined? • DGTA Position: Each affected low-level requirement and each low-level requirement identified by the down and up trace. DGTA-ADF Low-Level Requirements HLR1 HLR2 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 LLR4 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 SCM5 HLR2 LLR4 LLR3 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 SCM5 LLR1 DGTA-ADF Low-Level Requirements • Verify that low-level requirements LLR1, LLR3 and LLR4: - Comply with high-level requirements. - Are accurate and consistent. - Conform to standards. - Are traceable to high-level requirements. • Ensure that low-level requirements LLR1, LLR3 and LLR4 are sufficiently refined to be directly translatable to source code. - May need to further refine one low-level requirement into several. • Leave LLR2 as is. DGTA-ADF Structural Coverage • Software assurance standards generally require assessment of structural coverage in order to demonstrate that testing is complete. • Purpose of Structural Coverage Objectives is to: - Identify shortcoming in requirements based test cases or procedures, - Identify inadequacies in software requirements, - Identify dead code, and - Identify deactivated code. • How do these measures apply to modification of legacy software systems? • DGTA Position: - For requirements based measures: each new, modified or affected requirement needs to be tested. - For structure based measures: each new or modified source code module. DGTA-ADF Structural Coverage HLR1 HLR2 LLR1 LLR2 LLR3 LLR4 SCM1 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 SCM5 HLR2 LLR4 LLR3 SCM2 SCM3 SCM4 SCM5 LLR1 HLR1 Statement Coverage Normal Range and Robustness Tests Normal Range and Robustness Tests DGTA-ADF Structural Coverage • Normal Range and Robustness Tests - High-level requirements that have been added or modified. - High-level requirements where a dependent low- level requirement has been added or modified. - High-level requirements where the implementation (source code) of a dependent low-level requirement has been added or modified. - Low-level requirements that have been added or modified. - Low-level requirements where the implementation (source code) has been added or modified. • Structural Coverage Objectives: - Structural coverage of all new or modified source code modules. DGTA-ADF Additional Testing • Also need to consider: - Data Dependencies  Has the change impacted data that other functions rely upon? - Control Flow Dependencies  Has the change inadvertently/adversely disrupted control flow or coupling? - Timing Dependencies  Has the change violated a timing constraint? - Memory Space Dependencies  Has the change violated memory constraints or used memory space assigned to other functions? DGTA-ADF What about bug fixes? • A large part of in-service support is the rectification of bugs. • Bug fixes may not commence at the requirements level, may start with an identified fault in the source code. • To what extent should software assurance standards be applied to bug fixes? • DGTA Position: Trace up from the modified source code. DGTA-ADF LLR7 LLR7 LLR5 LLR5 SCM8 SCM8 HLR4 HLR4 HLR3 HLR3 What about bug fixes? LLR6 LLR8 SCM6 SCM7 SCM9 SCM10 Additional traceability data Structural Coverage Normal Range and Robustness Tests Low-Level Requirements DGTA-ADF Conclusions • DGTA requires the application of a software assurance standard to legacy software systems. • All development methods provide a level of assurance, writing it down can identify gaps. • A software assurance standard can be applied either by: - A Product Service History Argument and application of a recognised software assurance standard, or - A Software Assurance Task Matrix. • The software assurance standard need only be applied to the current modification. - Determine extent through change impact analysis. • For legacy software systems, a large number of assurance objectives are probably already being achieved. • Meeting a recognised software assurance standard will probably require additional effort in the areas of: - Traceability, - Low-Level Requirements, and - Structural Coverage DGTA-ADF Questions? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Migrating%20to%20a%20Software%20Assurance%20Standard%20(FLTLT%20Redmond).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/migrating%20to%20a%20software%20assurance%20standard%20(fltlt%20redmond).ppt",7KIOXP7V6CEKISMQ2JY3SPJHKFDCHGUW,60295,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-migrating-20to-20a-20software-20assurance-20standard-20-fltlt-20redmond-ppt-20120507034844.ppt 74,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/74.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507034749,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507034749/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Requirements%20Management%20with%20Use%20Cases%20(Smith).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"Requirements Management with Use Cases Specification of Functional Enhancements and Fault Corrections for Improved Requirements Management in a Sustainment Environment Linton Smith DMS SME, DMS D/SDE Alex Fawcett DMS Systems Engineer Abstract Sustainment of Software Intensive Systems under the Technical Airworthiness Framework presents unique challenges. The Software Support Agency (SSA) is required to perform sustainment activities such that Design Acceptance activities may be satisfactorily completed by the DAR while the SSA maintains appropriate levels of traceability to design changes and quality of requirements specifications. These challenges are further complicated by the need for rapid and efficient transfer of technology and expertise by the SSA to different systems with widely varying support facilities and which have varying quality of requirements baselines and toolsets. These are challenges that are specific to maintenance environments. They are not necessarily present when specifying a new system acquisition. As such, the specification methods used on new acquisitions are not always appropriate in the software sustainment environment. Furthermore, engineering must produce modified system products in a change focussed environment which is scope limited to the requested changes. BAE Systems, as an AEO and SSA for the AP-3C Mission and Weapon System software, is confronting challenges such as these by addressing the means and methods used to specify functional enhancements and fault corrections to the various elements of the AP-3C Weapon System under the current ITTF Software Support Contract and soon, the Mission System Support Contract. This paper will review some of the issues that can affect the sustainment of software systems. The paper will present Use-Cases as a means for capturing the specification of defect corrections and functional enhancements and their application to successive system engineering activities. Content – Design Acceptance in a Sustainment Environment – Sustainment Challenges – Requirements for a Sustainment RM&E Approach – A Proposal for a RM&E Solution Design Acceptance in a Sustainment Environment Design Approval Certificate Engineering Agency Competency (Compliance assurance) Evidence (Verification of SOR Requirements) ADF Oversight Airworthiness Requirements Specification of Technical Requirements Functional/Performance Requirements – How to Manage Changes to Requirements... – How to maintain SSA competency: – Vs obsolete tools – Vs inconsistent data – Vs documentation issues How to trace design changes from requirement through to test... – How to ensure SSA EMS goals are met... ...In A Sustainment Environment? DA: Specification - Acquisition vs Sustainment – New Product Style – Developer is OEM – Specification is for complete product – Updates managed as engineering deltas to Acquisition Specification (CCP/ECP) – Design is a complete Product. – traceable to the specification of requirements – is derived from the updated specs, tested and delivered – What are the OEMs liabilities: – takes “ownership” of PBL – “lock, stock, and two smoking barrels” – is liable for ALL aspects of the product – includes latent defects – Changed Product Style – Developer is SSA – Specification is for product changes – Updates managed as engineering deltas to the Product – Design is a set of changes to be applied to the Product – traceable to the change specification – is derived from change specs, tested and delivered – What are the SSAs liabilities: – “owns” the changes only – Only liable for defects in resultant product – within the changes – And as a direct result of the changes DA: Competency – SSA must have active AEO delegation – be competent to perform the work – Which really means: – Certified to ISO 9001:2000 – EMS commensurate with CMMI Level 2 – Standards based – ISO 15288, EIA 632, ISO/IEC 12207, etc – For AP-3C SSA this means: – Understands and can apply the GFD Systems Engineering and SW Development Environments to the requested tasks. DA: Verification – Traceability of User Requirements to Design Changes – Implies the need for Requirements Management and Engineering process within the SSA EMS. – Trace Customer requirements to – design artefacts – the modifications of the product baseline. – Without a verifiable traceability, – you might get more or less than bargained for... DA: Certification – The AEO Design Certificate is the final artefact of the engineering process that generates the deliverable product. – It is a document covering the product description documentation – i.e Design Record Index – For it to be valid and effective, the DC must be physically traceable to the SOR. – Good traceability is equated with clear and unambiguous records – Traceability Table or Matrix – Links artefacts with sufficient detail – Eg Test Cases in the test plan linked to requirements in the SOR. SOR Design Certificate & DRI Sustainment Challenges – Work Scope – Sustainment is heavily dependent on the finances available. Pick Two Pick Two Right  On Budget $$ On Time  Sustainment Challenges – Work Scope – Sustainment effort is only expended where it is most needed – to provide an overall balanced capability. – Management shifts focus and $$s to where the need is greatest Sustainment Challenges – TCO: Today or Tomorrow? – The focus is NOT on Total Cost of Ownership – Opportunities for minimising TCO are being missed or ignored – SSA is only tasked to produce deltas to the product baseline – No opportunity for Futureproofing Sustainment Challenges – Tool Support Issues – Dwindling support for obsolete COTS tools – Multiple disparate tools across Multiple Systems = Multiple learning curves – The tools installed in the AP-3C SE Environment are obsolete – Non-standard UI idioms – Expertise is not a readily available commodity – In Use of Tools – In support of Tools Sustainment Challenge – Develop & Maintain SSA Expertise – Developers lack experience with tools – Tool Disparity complicates development of expertise – Tool Complexity – Long Project Lifecycles Sustainment Challenge – Obsolescence... Sustainment Challenge – Applying OEM RM&E – Past DMS sustainment projects have: – applied OEM RM&E methodology, or – attempted to manage changes only – All have “degraded” the requirements and design data to some degree – Sustainment activities accelerate the natural degradation of design data – If left unchecked, the end result is a system that is too expensive to maintain ""A Stitch, in time, saves nine!"" old proverb OEM RM&E Issues - Quality and Consistency of GFD – The design data and requirements, as delivered, do not always totally agree or are ambiguous. – Has a direct effect on cost to repair “You don't know what you don't know... ... until you find out.” OEM RM&E Issues - Poorly Documented RM&E Methods – OEM Documentation tends to be sparse – Quality of transferred knowledge – Does published information communicate the intent? – Tacit Knowledge is, by definition, rarely, if ever, passed on to the SSA. – Information re-discovery relies on Maintainer epiphanies. [Feodoroff, 2006] – A part of a broader issue that affects all SSAs – ""Maintainer's Lament"". [Feodoroff, 2006] – i.e. poor Software Transition – OEM RM&E methods were not well covered in official training delivered to SSA by PA5276 training contractor. – 2x lost tacit knowledge Lost Knowledge OEM Training Sub-Contractor Trainee SSA Conclusion on OEM RM&E – We are not able to avoid the eventual obsolescence of a system – What little time and money is available for sustainment needs to be spent wisely – The RM&E methodology used during acquisition may not be suitable for the sustainment phase for a variety of reasons – The Design Data is a liability through inconsistency, ambiguity, incompleteness. ""Fit the tool to the process... ...Not the process to the tool."" The Challenge – A Summary – Right now in the AP-3C Sustainment environment: – the developers must become experts – On different systems – With different support environments – Quickly with little or no prior experience to rely on – Juniors particularly – even though the basic tasks that make up the systems' lifecycles are essentially the same. – Sustainment activities at the ITTF are heavily constrained by time and cost. – There is no leeway to include activities to perform groundwork for future development activities unless explicitly tasked to do so. Requirements for an RM&E Approach – A single methodology is required – That provides – Transferable Expertise – Transferable Technology – A Future Proofed Solution to RM&E Issues “All animals are to be skinned the same way...” The Approach - Transferable Expertise – Streamline the lifecycle activities for the different systems – Developers need only be trained in RM&E once – Developers build a base set of reuseable skills The Approach - Transferable Technology – Toolset Supported Methodology – Applicable across multiple systems – Amortisable Development and Training Costs The Approach – Need for Future-Proofed Solution – The current work focus is the completion of current planned DMS work. – In Jan 09 the focus shifts to the OMS. – DMS SW development will be scaled back. The Approach – Need for Future-Proofed Solution – What use will DMS specific skills be on OMS? – Different Tools – ReQuire/StP vs System Architect vs RTM – Different SW Architectures – Embedded vs General Purpose – Different Sizes – Single SW System vs System of Systems – Different purposes – Airborne Mission vs Ground Simulator – Both are SW Systems – With Users – With System level behaviour – With Design level behaviour – Needing to be tested “The more things change, the more they stay the same” The Solution – System Independent – Applicable across multiple systems – Complementary data – Enhances existing Requirements & design data – Traceable artefacts – Provides effective traceability throughout a sustainment project – Ease of Use – Easily learnt skills – De Facto Standard – Wide Support – Broad scope applicability – Useful throughout development lifecycle Use Case Use Case Modelling ! Modelling ! The Solution – Use Case Maps – Describe specific behaviours of a system wrt interactions with the environment – Capture behaviour descriptions from system level down to implementation level – Provide support for whole lifecycle – Identification of CONOPS, System Requirements & Functional Requirements – Daniels & Bahill, 2004., Alexander & Zink, 2002. – Identification of Safety Requirements – Wu & Kelly, 2006, Alexander, 2003. – Recording operation of design – Buhr & Casselman, 1996. – Identification of test cases – Ahlowalia, 2002. – Identification of SW Modification Impacts – Shiri, et al. 2007 – Can be used to fill in the gaps in understanding of system operation and design Benefits of Use Cases – Easy to learn & Low Cost. [Cockburn, 2001] – Learn Once - Use Many – Proven and mature technology [Google - ~63M pages in english] – Acquirer - Supplier alignment S/S V&V Viewpoint S/S Reqts Test Cases S/S V&V Viewpoint S/S Reqts Test Cases S/S TE Viewpoint S/S AD/DD Test Cases S/S TE Viewpoint S/S AD/DD Test Cases S/S S/W E Viewpoint S/S Design S/S Functional Reqts S/S Analytical UC S/S S/W E Viewpoint S/S Design S/S Functional Reqts S/S Analytical UC S/S User Viewpoint S/S Context S/S Scenario UC S/S CONOPS/Analytical S/S User Viewpoint S/S Context S/S Scenario UC S/S CONOPS/Analytical Use Cases in the System Lifecycle RA AD SIT FQT RA RA RA AD AD AD/DD SIT SIT IT FQT FQT FQT User Viewpoint System Context Scenario UC CONOPS style SE Viewpoint System Design Functional Reqts Analytical UC S/S User Viewpoint S/S Context S/S Scenario UC S/S CONOPS/Analytical S/S S/W E Viewpoint S/S Design S/S Functional Reqts S/S Analytical UC S/S TE Viewpoint S/S AD/DD Test Cases S/S V&V Viewpoint S/S Reqts Test Cases TE Viewpoint AD Test Cases V&V Viewpoint Reqts Test Cases System Level Sub-Systems Level System Development Use Cases Sub-Systems Development Use Cases Use Cases as Specification – Identification of sustainment activities: – in particular for Fault Corrections. – Fault corrections are rarely requirements changes – Don't treat them as such – incorrectly treated as requirements in the system requirements database results in assorted difficulties – Use cases can specify the expected behaviour – that is not being exhibited by an aberrant system. – Identify System Capability – Identify Change Impacts – Traceable to SOR Use Cases as Design – Use Cases are hierarchical – Upper levels specify operational viewpoint – Black Box view of system behaviour – Lower levels specify behaviour with greater specifics – Incorporate design decisions – White Box view of system behaviour – Support traditional structured design with model based design approach – Provide descriptions of module interactions & macro behaviour – Clear text and graphical descriptions – enhance readability & general system comprehension – increase understanding of extant design documentation – shortens ramp-up time of new engineers to project Use Case as Test Case – Use Case = Test Case – Use cases can be used to develop the Test Cases – Ahlowalia describes a method for extracting Test Cases from the Use Cases using “Path Analysis Technique” [Ahlowalia 2002]. – Use Cases used to identify normal vs aberrant behaviour – basis of test cases to prove implementation of solution – Use Cases used to identify normal use and mis-use processing – basis of test cases to perform tests of error handling. Use Cases and Traceability – Use Cases are specific documented artefacts. – They can and should be uniquely identified – recorded as part of a system's development. – They can provide the glue that links requirements (in System Level UCs) with the Design (in Design UCs) and the Test Cases – Traditional traceability can be extended to include Use Cases in traceability tables. Use Case as User Manual – Use Cases are descriptions of a system's interactions with actors and the environment – They provide input to development of User documentation – For SDRs can be used to capture intended operation – Test Cases from the Use Cases verify the User Documentation User Man Use Cases Fault Analysis Document Update What Next? - More Investigation – UCM Capabilities – as a requirement gathering tool – User Requirement Notation (URN) – Goal-oriented Requirement Language (GRL) – as a design capture tool – as a test case generation tool – as a User Documentation assessment tool – Feasability of UCM application – Deployment Planning – BAES Management buy-in – CoA buy-in – Logisitics – Training development – Process development – Tool Selection and Support – Pilot Trials – Build ground-swell of support In Summary – Use Cases support all phases of the System Engineering Lifecycle. – They are easy to learn – They provide support for identification of requirements – Functional, Safety, etc – They are applicable to any system – That interacts with external entities – That produces observable outputs – Defacto Standard via UML – with broad industry support and application References I – Ahlowalia, Naresh: Testing from Use Cases using Path Analysis Technique, International Conference on Software Testing Analysis & Review, November 2002. – Alexander, Ian, & Zink, Thomas: An Introduction to System Engineering with Use Cases, Institute of Electrical Engineers Computing and Control Engineering Journal, December 2002. – Alexander, Ian: Misuse Cases: Use Cases with Hostile Intent, IEEE Software, January/February 2003. – Buhr, R.J.A & Casselman, R.S.: Use Case Maps for Object Oriented Systems, Prentiss-Hall, 1996. – Cockburn, Alistair: Writing Effective Use Cases, Addison-Wesley, 2001. – Jacobson, Ivar, et al: Object Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach, Addison-Wesley, 1992. – Shiri, Maryam; Hassine, J & Rilling, J: A Requirement Level Modification Analysis Support Framework, Third International IEEE Workshop on Software Evolvability, October 2007. – Wu, Weihang & Kelly, Tim: Deriving Safety Requirements as Part of System Architecture Definition, Proceedings of 24th International System Safety Conference, August 2006. References II – Feodoroff, Ray: Software Maintenance and Support of Missions Systems Assets - Specification, Assessment and Qualification of Enabling Products, 2nd ADF Software Symposium, May 2006. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Requirements%20Management%20with%20Use%20Cases%20(Smith).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/requirements%20management%20with%20use%20cases%20(smith).ppt",BTOBSV2BM4UXHKJ54PEHYTRACLG6JF6Z,1343247,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-requirements-20management-20with-20use-20cases-20-smith-ppt-20120507034749.ppt 75,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/75.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507040939,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507040939/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/RNZDF%20Software%20Intro%20(Hopley).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404," ADF Software Symposium 2008 ADF Software Symposium 2008 Royal New Zealand Air Force Royal New Zealand Air Force Certification & ILS Certification & ILS SqnLdrs Brent Hopley & Harley James SqnLdrs Brent Hopley & Harley James Capital Equipment Capital Equipment Project Overview Project Overview & & Software Acceptance Software Acceptance Certification Certification The Big Picture The Big Picture Central Government Ministry of Defence NZ Defence Force Secretary of Defence Minister of Defence Chief of Defence Policy and Plans Acquisitions Single Services HQ NZDF Joint Force HQ Development Branch Expeditionary Expeditionary in Nature in Nature Compact Compact in Size, comprising: in Size, comprising: 2393 Regular 2393 Regular 25 non Regular 25 non Regular 412 Civilian 412 Civilian 2830 Total 2830 Total Agile Agile in Output, in Output, Maritime Patrol Force Maritime Patrol Force Fixed Wing Transport Force Fixed Wing Transport Force Rotary Wing Transport Force Rotary Wing Transport Force Naval Combat Force Support Naval Combat Force Support RNZAF Overview Here’s the Now Here’s the Now So What’s in the Future So What’s in the Future  Iroquois & Sioux Helicopter Replacement Program Iroquois & Sioux Helicopter Replacement Program  3K Orion, Upgrade Program 3K Orion, Upgrade Program  Boeing 757, Modification Program Boeing 757, Modification Program  C-130, Hercules Life Extension Program (LEP) C-130, Hercules Life Extension Program (LEP) Iroquois Helicopter Replacement Iroquois Helicopter Replacement Program Program Contract signed with NH Industries (NHI) Europe Contract signed with NH Industries (NHI) Europe Eight NH90 Helicopters on order Eight NH90 Helicopters on order Contract signed 31 Jul 06 Contract signed 31 Jul 06 First delivery Nov 09 First delivery Nov 09 NZ$771M NZ$771M T/LUH Project Status T/LUH Project Status  Contract negotiations ongoing with Contract negotiations ongoing with Agusta/Westland Agusta/Westland  Looking to purchase five A109LUH Looking to purchase five A109LUH  Signature date May 2008 Signature date May 2008 First Delivery will be early 2010 First Delivery will be early 2010  Prime contract with L3 Communication Integrated Systems, USA Prime contract with L3 Communication Integrated Systems, USA  Contract signed on 5 October 2004 Contract signed on 5 October 2004  Prototype inducted Sep 05 - returns early to mid 2008. Final Prototype inducted Sep 05 - returns early to mid 2008. Final aircraft delivered 2010-2011 aircraft delivered 2010-2011  ““Contract in” software lifecycle support capability - BECA Applied Contract in” software lifecycle support capability - BECA Applied Technologies, Auckland Technologies, Auckland  NZ$352M for six NZ$352M for six aircraft aircraft P3K Orion, Comms/Nav Upgrade Program Boeing 757, Modification Boeing 757, Modification Program Program  Prime contract signed with Mobile Aerospace Engineering Prime contract signed with Mobile Aerospace Engineering (MAE), Alabama (MAE), Alabama  Contract signed 04 Nov 05 Contract signed 04 Nov 05  First aircraft inducted Feb 07 First aircraft inducted Feb 07  NZ$112M for two aircraft NZ$112M for two aircraft C-130, Hercules Life Extension C-130, Hercules Life Extension Program (LEP) Program (LEP) Prime Contract L3 Communications – Spar Aerospace Prime Contract L3 Communications – Spar Aerospace Canada Canada Contract signature in December 2004 Contract signature in December 2004 Prototype inducted – returns early 2008 Prototype inducted – returns early 2008 Life extension to 2017 Life extension to 2017 NZ$263M for five aircraft NZ$263M for five aircraft What’s the Challenge Then? What’s the Challenge Then? Going from this:- Going from this:- To this:- To this:- All to prevent this: All to prevent this: Software Acceptance Certification Software Acceptance Certification  Boeing 757, Modification Program Boeing 757, Modification Program  C-130, Hercules Life Extension Program (LEP) C-130, Hercules Life Extension Program (LEP)  3K Orion, Upgrade Program 3K Orion, Upgrade Program  Iroquois & Sioux Helicopter Replacement Iroquois & Sioux Helicopter Replacement Program Program Questions Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/RNZDF%20Software%20Intro%20(Hopley).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/rnzdf%20software%20intro%20(hopley).ppt",EB33AIFHLGKLHKOLJECKXIJG2GWGPKED,7622777,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-rnzdf-20software-20intro-20-hopley-ppt-20120507040939.ppt 76,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/76.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507035611,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507035611/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/RNZDF%20Software%20support%20(James).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"1 SQNLDR Harley James Integrated Mission Support Squadron RNZAF 2 • The Good Old Days – P-3K Support • P-3K2 Systems Upgrade Project • P-3K2 Deliverables • Support Structure – Formation of IMSS • Software Development Constraints • Software Development Environment • Contracted Manpower • Software Modification Process • Discussion Points INTRODUCTION / SCOPE INTRODUCTION / SCOPE 3 • Project Rigel – 80’s • Developed Organic Software Support • More recently ‘Operational Software Maintenance Unit’ (OSMU) • Managed by Operators • Continues to develop improvements to P-3K • Valuable utility for modification of P-3K P-3K SUPPORT P-3K SUPPORT 4 • 3 Facets to Systems Upgrade Project - Mission System - Communication System - Flight Deck • L-3 Communications Contracted - Greenville, Texas - NZ4204 been there since mid 05 - Embedded Kiwi’s • RNZAF Software Support P-3K2 PROJECT P-3K2 PROJECT 5 • RNZAF Intellectual Property • Documentation - Full Traceability - All relevant paperwork included • Software - Source Code - Licences • Hardware - Development Equipment - SMS, MPAS, CSIL, SITL, FDT • Obligatory Project Slippage P-3K2 PROJECT DELIVERABLES P-3K2 PROJECT DELIVERABLES 6 • Integrated Mission Support Squadron formed - Direct Support to Operations • Mission Support Flight (Ops) - Intelligence Support - Mission Briefings/Preparation • Software and Simulation Support Flight (Eng) - Software Development for P-3K2 • SMS, CSIL, SITL - Simulation Support – FDT, SITL - Data Management SUPPORT STRUCTURE - IMSS SUPPORT STRUCTURE - IMSS 7 Software and Simulation Support Software and Simulation Support Flight: Facilities Flight: Facilities BAT CSIL SITL FDT MSS 8 9 • RNZAF Software Policy – late 2007 • IMSS Procedures Development - IEEE/EIA 12207 Process - RTCA/DO-178B Assurance + others… - P-3K2 Deliverables - RNZAF Technical Airworthiness Authority • IDEF0 Process Modelling - ‘Wiring’ diagrams… - IMSS Operations Manual - IMSS Standard Operating Procedures SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM SYSTEM 10 • Reviewed L-3 System - Cumbersome, big, complicated…just too hard for us to handle • Established Project to review needs • Reviewed Market Options • Team Foundation Server – Visual Studio Team System + Customisation - Workflow System - Document Management System - Highly Integrated - Comprehensive Reporting SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT 11 • P-3K2 Project Manning Plan • Beca Applied Technologies (BAT) involved in activities in Texas • IMSS Contracted Manpower Resource (BAT) - RNZAF informed customer • BAT Theoretical – Software Development Resource • BAT Practical – Involved in almost all phases of the Project • BAT Management CONTRACTED SOFTWARE CONTRACTED SOFTWARE SUPPORT SUPPORT 12 • Documentation • High Level Requirements (BAT/RNZAF) • TAA Initial Approval to proceed • More Requirements (BAT/RNZAF) • Software Development (BAT/RNZAF) • Integration/Testing (BAT/RNZAF) • IMSS Acceptance • TAA Approval • Embodiment – tea and medals IMSS Software Project IMSS Software Project 13 • Complexity of Software Activities • People, People, People • Education/Training • Tools • Career Management • Organisation Support • Agility • Documentation Discussion Points Discussion Points 14 Questions? … …the end the end Harley James Squadron Leader Flight Commander Software and Simulation Support Flight Integrated Mission Support Squadron RNZAF +64 9 4177000 ext 7919 +64 21 913027 Harley.james@nzdf.mil.nz …feel free to call 15 IMSS: Mission Planning IMSS: Mission Planning MPAS Workstation MPAS Workstation B/W Printer Color Printer FPS Gigabit Ethernet Switch Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Storage Array Tower FPS Laptop Ethernet Scanner Removable Media DSU Receiver External Drive Access Chassis File Server SCSI Fibre Channel / SCSI DSU Receiver External Drive Access Chassis Deployable MPAS External Drive Access Chassis External Drive Access Chassis SCSI SCSI USB Fibre Channel and SCSI Display Projector 16 … …what we are trying to avoid… what we are trying to avoid… ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/RNZDF%20Software%20support%20(James).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/rnzdf%20software%20support%20(james).ppt",TOJPCGSMFMTFR3EG7AYAXZFXLEJTMYYC,11202920,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-rnzdf-20software-20support-20-james-ppt-20120507035611.ppt 77,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/77.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507041156,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507041156/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Software%20Engineering%20in%20the%20DMO%20(Ashford).ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"professionalise | re-prioritise | standardise | benchmark | improve industry relationships and industry performance | lead reform Software Engineering in the DMO: Where to from here? Matt Ashford A/Director of Software Engineering Electronic Systems Division (ESD) Opening Assertions • Defence systems are getting more connected and increasingly software intensive, and software is the critical element • Engineering is fundamental to DMO’s core business, and is essential to successfully acquire, develop and sustain complex Defence systems In my opinion… • The DMO can support its’ software engineers and improve its’ software engineering capability through: – Policy, Procedure & Guidance – Training – Knowledge management & collaboration – Peer networks and communication – Career structures – Functional experts (Grey Beards), mentoring, coaching – Systems & Software Engineering related research & development Across SPO’s, Branches, Divisions and Groups. Directorate of Software Engineering (DSwE) • Mission: – To sustain and improve ESD Software Engineering (SwE) capability and performance • Objectives: – Improve ESD SwE capability via: • ESD Policy, Procedure and Guidance • Knowledge sharing and collaboration • SwE related research & development – Improve ESD SwE performance via: • Direct SwE support to ESD projects and SPOs • Training • Networks and communication – Represent ESD SwE: • ESD Continuous Improvement Group • Across DMO Divisions • DMO Materiel Engineering Council (MEC) • ADF Technical Regulatory Agencies • External groups Proposed Work Plan (08/09) • Policy, Procedure & Guidance – State-of-the-Practice Survey – Software Configuration Management • Training – DAU Software-Intensive Systems Acquisition Management (SiSAM) Training • Peer Networks & Knowledge Sharing • Systems & Software Assurance • Collaboration & Research – Systems and Software Engineering Research Capability State-of-the-Practice Survey • Need to understand current state-of-the-practice of software engineering in ESD, e.g.: – How much and what type of software does ESD acquire & sustain? – Who is doing what software related activities (SPOs, People)? – How well are the current software Policies, Procedures and Guidance being implemented? • Software lists, PSM etc – What are the biggest issues for our software practitioners? • Survey will: – Collect data – Identify improvement opportunities – Drive future DSwE initiatives – Inform future research agenda Software Configuration Management • SCM identified as an immediate, systemic issue – Especially for software-intensive support environments • Broad, high level CM Policy available • Lack of detailed implementation guidance and tool support – Multiple software applications – Different versions across multiple deployment environments – Mixture of COTS and bespoke • SCM task to work with most affected SPO’s to: – Review current Defence & DMO Policy, Procedure & Guidance – Identify SPO SCM needs – Develop implementation level plans & procedures – Develop & roll out ESD SCM Policy, Procedure &/or Guidance • SCM stakeholder group / special interest group? – Contact Matt Ashford if you want to be involved Software Training • Most DSWAR initiated training now discontinued – Australian Software Professional Development Program (ASPDP) – ISO 12207 – Practical System and Software Measurement – SiSAM • DMO Institute – Plethora of Project Management and Logistics training – Very little software related training • DAU Software-Intensive Systems Acquisition Management (SiSAM) training – Planned for Dec 08 • Training Needs Analysis required to develop comprehensive curriculum Peer Networks & Knowledge Sharing • Few (if any?) technically focused DMO peer networks – Are you aware of the “DMO Forum”? • DMO Intranet Home → Tools and Resources → DMO Forum • Very few collaborative knowledge sharing environments (e.g. Wiki) …and even fewer opportunities to interact • Rely on external Centre’s of Excellence – E.g. DGTA SCI • Sometimes peer level support would suffice – We have a lot of smart people – A lot of problems have probably already been solved! • Pockets of excellence already exist in DMO – Just need to find them (when you need them) System and Software Assurance • A definition – The level of confidence or trust that systems are free from vulnerabilities, either intentionally designed into the system or accidentally inserted at any time during its lifecycle and functions in the intended manner (nothing more or nothing less) even in the face of malicious activity. • Exploitable vulnerabilities are an increasing concern: – Outsourcing and Globalisation – Prevalence of COTS, Open Source Software (OSS) and other Software of Unknown Pedigree (SOUP) • 2 types of problems – Unintentional defects or vulnerabilities • Majority of safety space – Intentional, malicious attack or insertion (small minority) • Includes the malicious use of pre-existing (innocent) vulnerabilities System and Software Assurance • The Problem: – Current systems and software engineering and security accreditation processes and techniques may not be adequate to assure the security of modern software-intensive Defence systems – (Perceived) lack of policy, procedure and guidance to address SA over the full system lifecycle – (Perceived) immaturity of SA related tools, technology and methodologies – (Perceived) lack of awareness of potential threats and mitigation strategies (especially with respect to systems operating within the deployed environment) – The multiple stakeholders (including authorities) with poorly defined boundaries (especially with respect to systems operating within the deployed environment) • Defence is not able to confidently state or defend the level of System Assurance (with limited exception) in products, systems or capability currently in acquisition, sustainment or in-service within the deployed environment. • Defence is not able to have a sufficient level of confidence in procured equipment, systems and capabilities with respect to hosting undocumented features. System and Software Assurance • Technical Regulatory Authorities concerned with item’s fitness for service, safety and compliance with regulations for environmental protection. – Lots of focus on safety: relatively mature discipline • System Assurance less mature – Awareness of potential threats, vulnerabilities and mitigation strategies is poor – Lack of coherent policy and regulatory environment • Fixed Vs Deployed • White Vs Black – Immature methodologies • How often does DMO require Vulnerability Assessments or Secure Coding Practices? • Collaborating with US and UK Is this different to System Safety? • Similar methodologies / processes – Different perspectives • Safety and System Assurance Cases both contain – Claims about a product or service (e.g. no exploitable buffer overflows) – Arguments (e.g. use static tool analysis) – Evidence (e.g. test reports) – Both reduce uncertainty, but not to zero • Can be expensive, but best done from the beginning, retrospective fixes are very expensive • Everyone happy to share best practice with safety – Do not always want to publicly share best practice for system and software assurance • Opportunity to leverage (or extend) extant safety practices Rapid Prototype, Development & Evaluation • A RPDE Task is: – A method to formally engage industry to investigate a Defence problem – Around 12 -18 months duration RPDE Steering Gate Process RPDE Operating Model www.rpde.org.au • RPDE is: – a collaborative venture between the Defence and industry RPDE Task 24 – System Assurance • DMO has sponsored a RDPE Task to investigate SA problem – CIOG now co-sponsor • Question: How can Defence ensure that deployable systems and assets have an appropriate level of understood and quantifiable confidence that the systems are assured and remain so and thus will continue to perform in the manner expected even in the face of malice? • Current status: • Contact Matt Ashford for more info or if you want to get involved 12 Aug 08 Discovery Question Development Options Development Solution Development Implemen tation Support Entry Criteria Review SG5 SG1 SG2 SG4 SG3 08 May 08 Systems & Software Collaboration / Research MoD DE&S D-SET DoD DMO HENG DoD AT&L DSSE SISAIG Government US/UK/AUS Software-Intensive Systems Acquisition Improvement Group (SISAIG) • Established circa 2003 • Facilitates information sharing and collaboration across US/UK/AUS Governments • Leverage each Nations’ initiatives, R&D, etc • Aus Sponsor: Ms Shireane McKinnie • Aus Lead: Mr David Marshall • Current Work Streams: – Systems Assurance – Systems of Systems (SoS) / Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) – Software Estimation & Earned Value Management (EVM) Systems & Software Collaboration / Research MoD DE&S D-SET DoD DMO HENG DoD AT&L DSSE SISAIG Government Software Research DMO Systems and Software Engineering Independent Advisory Panel • Established by DMO Head Engineering (Shireane McKinnie) to: – Provide strategic guidance on future trends and challenges for the DMO – Independent expert advice on emerging Systems & Software Engineering issues – Identification of key developmental / emerging technologies – Facilitate technology transfer to the DMO • E.g. NICTA, ACCS, CSSE, SEI, UK SSEI etc • Linkages to academic and research programs • 5 “Core” Members + 2 “Consultative” members DMO SESW Independent Advisory Panel – Core Members Prof. Ross Jeffery Professor of Software Engineering, UNSW Program Leader, Empirical Software Engineering Research Program National ICT Australia (NICTA) Prof. Geoff Dromey Foundation Professor of Software Engineering, Griffith University Director, Software Quality Institute ARC Centre for Complex Systems Prof. Peter Lindsay Boeing Professor of Systems Engineering, Uni of Queensland ARC Centre for Complex Systems Prof. Stephen Cook Director, Defence & Systems Institute Director of Centre of Expertise in Systems Integration University of South Australia Dr Clive Boughton Senior Lecturer, Australian National University DMO SE and SW Independent Advisory Panel – Consultative Members Prof. Barry Boehm TRW Professor of Software Engineering, University of Southern California (USC) Director, USC Center for Systems and Software Engineering. Prof. John McDermid Professor of Software Engineering, University of York Leader of the High Integrity Systems Engineering Group (HISE) Member of the UK MoD Defence Scientific Advisory Council (DSAC) SEI Australia Initiative • Initiative to establish an SEI research facility in Australia • Co-funded by SA Govt and CoA (through SADI) • Outcome of failed negotiations was a recommendation to explore alternate strategies to establish indigenous capability SSE Research Proposal • Premise: – There is a need for greater sponsorship and coordination of Systems & Software Engineering research to improve the acquisition, development and sustainment of Defence systems. – SEI Australia & SESW Panel shows there is a willingness to support such a concept • Consultative workshop conducted 14/15 Aug 08 in Canberra – To elicit information to help develop a proposal to establish a cost effective, indigenous Defence-related systems and software engineering research capability. – Key questions: • What are Defence’s research interests? • What research capability is already available (Domestic / International)? • What models / contract mechanisms can we use? – What are their strengths & weaknesses? – What commercial aspects do we need to address? Workshop Attendees Barry Boehm  TRW Professor of Software Engineering, University of Southern California (USC)  Director, USC Center for Systems and Software Engineering (CSSE) John McDermid  Professor of Software Engineering, University of York  Leader of the High Integrity Systems Engineering Group (HISE)  Member of the UK MoD Defence Scientific Advisory Council (DSAC)  Technical Director, Software Systems Engineering Initiative (SSEI) Rich Turner  Distinguished Service Professor, Stevens Institute of Technology  Visiting Scientist, Software Engineering Institute (SEI) Geoff Dromey  Foundation Professor of Software Engineering, Griffith University  Director, Software Quality Institute  ARC Centre for Complex Systems Ross Jeffery  Professor of Software Engineering, University of NSW (UNSW)  Program Leader, Empirical Software Engineering Research Program, National ICT Australia (NICTA) Stephen Cook  Director, Defence & Systems Institute (DSI)  Director, Centre of Excellence in Defence and Industry Systems Capability (CEDISC)  University of South Australia Clive Boughton  Senior Lecturer, Australian National University (ANU) Gary Millar  Lecturer, University of NSW @ Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) David Marshall  Director General COMMS Branch, DMO/ESD  Deputy DMO Head Engineer Adrian Pitman  Deputy Director HFMOD, DMO/ESD Matt Ashford  Director Software Engineering, DMO/ESD Thea Huber  Director Strategy & Standardisation, DMO/ESD Shari Soutberg  Director Systems Engineering DMO/ESD Stuart Garrett  Project Management Coach DMO/DCEO Thea Clark  Head Future Force Integration, DSTO/Joint Ops Todd Mansell  Research Leader Surface Ship Ops, DSTO / Maritme Ops Clive Wormsley  DSTO Representative, RPDE Outcomes of Workshop • Summarise key outputs of workshop and way ahead. Questions? Matt Ashford A/Director Software Engineering Electronic Systems Division (ESD) R3-3-121 Russell Offices Canberra ACT 2600 Ph: (02) 6266 7054 matt.ashford@defence.gov.au Don’t forget the survey! ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/Software%20Engineering%20in%20the%20DMO%20(Ashford).ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/software%20engineering%20in%20the%20dmo%20(ashford).ppt",ZXYS5CM3AEYNZTFERGQ3EBUL4STEQBQ3,741304,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-software-20engineering-20in-20the-20dmo-20-ashford-ppt-20120507041156.ppt 78,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/78.blob?_blob_column=image,20120507040755,https://web.archive.org/web/20120507040755/http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/SSEI%20Overview%20ADF%2020080805.ppt,2012-05-07,2012-05-07,404,"ADF August 2008 Software Systems Engineering Initiative Sqn Ldr Mike Place Customer Interface Director Prof John A McDermid, FREng Technical Director Contents ■ Establishment of the SSEI ■ Current SSEI Programme ■ SSEI Future Developments ■ Conclusions SSEI and Personal Context DE&S DG Safety & Engineering Systems Engineering & Integration Group Hd Future Technology - Sqn Ldr Mike Place SSEI Customer Interface Director Current Responsibilities Future Technology Programme Management ■ Software Systems Engineering Initiative o www.ssei.org.uk ■ Capability Agility ■ Avionic Systems Standardisation Committee o www.assconline.co.uk ■ European Technology Acquisition Programme Provide first POC for: ■ Software issues ■ Standards – Avionic/software ■ Combat Systems - Maritime SSEI Vision “The SSEI is an MOD-funded strategic initiative intended to enhance through-life capability management for software intensive defence systems, and thus to reduce risks, delays and cost overruns.” Lt Gen Andrew Figgures DCDS(EC) Software Engineering is Different ■ Software is ‘pure design’ o No manufacture, no raw material, no cost to replicate & deliver o Potential for rapid, safe upgrade – not yet realised ■ Software problems are not easily absorbed because of o Complexity – unintended side effects o Integration – extensive side effects ■ Software science, technologies methods and tools are not stable or mature – e.g. aerospace: o 70’s, 80’s – Functional design + assembler + custom h/w o 80’s, 90’s – Object Oriented + HOL + COTS h/w o 90’s, 00’s – Model Driven + COTS o/s, h/w Why Software Engineering is Special ■ Software is inscrutable ■ Potential to be disruptive beyond its cash value ■ Range of development standards ■ Enables increase in system complexity Perception of Defence Software Systems ■ Failure to meet specification ■ Expensive ■ Always late Formation of the SSEI ■ BAE Systems (Military Air Solutions) was selected by MOD to hold the contract on behalf of an industry and academia consortium ■ Consortium formed from an amalgamation of all bidders o IBM, MBDA, AeI, QinetiQ, YorkMetrics, SEIC, EDS, Insyte o Universities of York, Newcastle, Loughborough, Oxford ■ Mixture of basic and applied research tasks plus an enabling contract for ‘additional services’ SSEI Management and Governance Joint Working Group Commercial Management Programme Manager Business Manager Theme Leads Management IPT Joint Advisory Board Management of Software Systems Projects Software and Systems Architectures Integration of Software Systems Development of Dependable Systems Systems Engineering Integration Group BAE SYSTEMS Tony Dawe Customer Interface Director Jane Fenn Mike Place Technical Director John McDermid SEIG Leads Properties of Software Systems Tony Powell Barry White Academic Industry Alan Grigg Alan Brown Steve Riddle John K Davies Tim Kelly Colin McDonald Jim Davies Colin O’Halloran Richard Parsons Mark Hawksfield Research Themes Current Status ■ Initial Research Programme o Understanding the problem o Identifying potential solutions ■ Agreed Technical Strategy o MOD endorsement • SIT, DE&S, DSTL o Industry endorsement Next Steps ■ Call for further research proposals o Based on Technical Strategy o Joint Industry/academia ■ Process for additional services o Trial run of process o Establish credibility/value added • Rapid exploitation of research outputs ■ Growth in SSEI membership o Core o Associates What Will Success Look Like? ■ SSEI has established itself o Centre of Excellence in the UK for Software Systems Engineering • Provides leadership • Coherent Industry and Academic capability • Working beyond Defence • A developing body of case studies o Diversity of funding • MOD • Wider Government • Industry o Recognised body for SSE accreditation • Individuals • Organisations o Expanding range of services offered Contents ■ Establishment of the SSEI ■ Current SSEI Programme ■ SSEI Future Developments ■ Conclusions SSEI Research Programme ■ Programme has five themes o Management, especially evidence based o Architecture, including SoS o Integration o Dependability, e.g. safety and security o Properties Initial three year programme funded, with 13 tasks Engagement possible via Special Interest Groups (SIGs) Current Research Tasks 1. IMS for Adaptive Systems (SEIC) 2. Evidence Based Management (York) 3. Evidence-Based Infrastructure (YorkMetrics) 4. Framework for Distributed Development and Integration (SEIC) 5. Model-Driven Integration of Software Systems (York) 6. Software Safety Cases – Establishing a Systematic Approach (York) 7. Dependability Explicit Metadata (Newcastle) 8. Dependable Use of FPGAs (York) 9. Analytic Techniques for the Predictability of Complex Systems (York) 10. Application of SOA to Dependable Systems (IBM) 11. Software Guidance for 00-56 (QinetiQ/York) 12. Software Language Policy (QinetiQ) 13. Managing the Complexity of FPGA Designs (SELEX) Research to establish an appropriate measurement infrastructure to support decision making, including organisational practices and information sharing. Management Theme Management Theme Task 1: Evidence-based Management Task 2: Evidence-based Infrastructure Task n: …. Principles, Properties Practices, Frameworks Skills, Risk, Forecasting Maturity, Capability, … Special Interest Group MOD, Industry, Academia Success Factors Value Added, Collaboration Research to identify a balanced set of measures to support key decisions in software systems acquisition and trade-off analysis. The initial focus is likely to be on general software process measurement The Problem Engineering Measurement Project Measurement Engineering Measurement Project Measurement • Earned Maturity • Earned Value • Engineering Performance • Project Performance • Proactive • Reactive Evidence-based Evidence-based Management Management The Solution Courtesy Tony Powell In more detail … Engineering Status Causes Consequences Engineering Performance Engineering Capability Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Oct * Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct * Estimate with uncertainty Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Oct * Mar Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct * Estimate with uncertainty Financial Indicators Time BCWS ACWP BCWP £ Time BCWS ACWP BCWP £ Fires Behind schedule, unpredictable Fire alarms Product not maturing fast enough Smoke alarms Performance not meeting plans Sources of ignition Need to monitor drivers and pull control levers Courtesy Tony Powell SSEI and Continued Airworthiness ■ Several relevant tasks o Software Safety Cases – Establishing a Systematic Approach (Task 6) o Software Guidance for DS 00-56 (Task 11) o Dependable use of FPGAs (Task 8) o Evidence-Based Management (Task 2) o …. Software Guidance for DS 00-56 ■ DS 00-56 Issue 4 is goal-based o Admits “appropriate” evidence and argument ■ For continued airworthiness, build on o Evidence of operation (operational data) o Evidence from development (where available) o Evidence of change management o Guidance will address combination, balance, … Other Tasks ■ Software safety cases o Longer term view ■ Evidence-based Management o Informed decision-making, reflecting balance of risk and benefit ■ Dependable use of FPGAs o Including processor replacement Contents ■ Establishment of the SSEI ■ Current SSEI Programme ■ SSEI Future Developments ■ Conclusions SSEI Development ■ Second phase of MoD research funding o Balance between themes o Address omissions o Open call, probably late third quarter ■ Additional services o Technical support, e.g. assurance, mentoring o Initially high integrity and safety critical applications Technical Strategy ■ Comprehensive analysis of o Defence requirements, e.g. defence industrial strategy • “Predictability of development time and cost should be accurate to 10%” • “New systems should be developed in the same time and cost, despite a predicted 5-fold increase in complexity” o Industrial needs, and assessment of industrial software development trends o Capabilities and tasks for each theme Focus for Technical Strategy ■ Technical Strategy comprehensive, but too extensive to fund, hence need for prioritisation ■ So-called “hard-problems” o Challenges which will deliver military benefit, if the research is successful o Identified route through to exploitation o Give focus for work in the five themes Hard Problems ■ Focus on six “problems” (TBC) o Supporting legacy o Secure system interoperation o Safety assurance at military tempo o Assurance of open systems o Model-based development o Integrated engineering management All have a technical and managerial element Fragment of Prioritisation Table Problem Supporting Legacy Secure System Interoperation Success Criteria Ability to preserve operational capability by providing ongoing support for legacy software Ability to assure secure services across different management domains Customers SENTRY, AH DG Air Systems, Ships, Subs Collaborators MODELPLEX ITA, SyIOP , DHS SwA initiative, ESII Management Prediction of Attributes Planning Engineering Management Product Maturity Assessment Prediction of Attributes Requirements Management Planning Engineering Management Product Maturity Assessment Architecture Unplanned Evolution Predictable Design Control Emergent Properties Unplanned Evolution Predictable Design Control Emergent Properties Supporting Legacy ■ Capabilities include o Legacy integration o Control/predicting emergent properties o Dependability/property trade-offs o Assessment and acceptance o Product maturity assessment o Planning engineering management Some new tasks, contingent on next call … Additional Services ■ Offering to be developed, covering o Acquisition support o Training and mentoring o Development of guidance o Specialist input to MoD policy o Assistance with technology transfer of non-SSEI research results (capabilities) Focus on high value-added activities Long Term Objective ■ After initial research programme o Stable independent organisation • Not dependent on core MoD funding o SSEI a key player in a global network • Focus for work in the UK • Arbiter of quality, but not sole source for advice o International collaboration, e.g. DMO o Remit broader than defence, e.g. OGD Contents ■ Establishment of the SSEI ■ Current SSEI Programme ■ SSEI Future Developments ■ Conclusions Conclusions ■ SSEI focused on an important problem o Need for national capability o But must work internationally, e.g. SEI & DMO • Engagement with SSEIAP ■ SSEI has many challenges, especially o Building critical mass o Achieving independent status ADF August 2008 Questions? Contacts: DESSEMS-FT-Hd@mod.uk John.McDermid@ssei.org.uk ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dgta/Documents/DAVENG/Software%20Symposium%20documents/2008/Presentations/SSEI%20Overview%20ADF%2020080805.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/daveng/software%20symposium%20documents/2008/presentations/ssei%20overview%20adf%2020080805.ppt",TCJLJIXIO6PYYDB2E7K6R3OVK2UJWUDM,509795,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-daveng-software-20symposium-20documents-2008-presentations-ssei-20overview-20adf-2020080805-ppt-20120507040755.ppt 79,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/79.blob?_blob_column=image,20140302183425,https://web.archive.org/web/20140302183425/http://www.defence.gov.au/DGTA/Documents/Reform/Bow-Tie%20plus%20Circular%20Histogram%20Analysis.ppt,2014-03-02,2014-03-02,404,"The Product-Behaviour-Process (PBP) Bow-Tie focus on Technical Integrity Research within MR-DREGR and RMIT has a current focus on Left Hand Side of Bow-Tie; Prevention Each is a test point Design Maintenance Product Product Product Behaviour Process Behaviour Behaviour Process Process Bow-tie scoring of test points • This circular histogram is a visualisation of the ADF PBP bow- tie grouped to show the technical item lifecycle activities; Design, Production and Maintenance •It is a scoring of the Technical Airworthiness Framework, each of the test points are radially represented •A score of 0-5 is given based on the level of independence of the person or organisation making the attestation (DGTA-ADF is a 4) •The measure of independence is important to assuring that management pressures do not compromise airworthiness requirements and assessments Production US Army US Navy UK MAA This comparison highlights PBP- Blue is product integrity, red is behavioural integrity and yellow is process integrity. •The US Army places a greater focus on product integrity than on process and behavioural integrity (more dark blue) •The US Army regulator makes regular attestations (regular appearance of dark blue) •The US Navy also have a strong product integrity focus •The US Navy regulator makes few behavioural attestations (only two dark blue) •The UK regulator relies on the management organisations for most attestations (for Defence organisations, Contractors have more MAA interaction) • The ADF regulator mainly sets the standard (TP#.1) and attests to meeting the standard (TP#.5)leaving the rest to the regulated entities. This pattern is replicated in parts of the MAA histogram ADF ADF ADF US Army US Navy UK MAA This comparison highlights DPM - Clockwise, segment 1 is Design, 2 is Production and 3 is Maintenance. •The ADF regulator has a more holistic focus on Design •The ADF does not elevate many Production attestations •The US Navy production oversight only marginally differs in scoring from the ADF •The US Navy regulator makes few behavioural attestations (some regulator process attestations) •The UK regulator relies on the management organisations for most attestations (for Defence organisations, Contractors have more regulator interaction) • The regulator does not interact with Defence maintenance (comes under a CAMO, contractors need Part 145 approvals) ADF ADF ADF ADF US Army US Navy This visualisation: • Enables Fast and accurate comparison of different Military Airworthiness Authorities (MAAs) • Provides an overarching framework-based approach for mutual recognition and increased interoperability between Defence Forces • Identifies deficiencies / strengths of current regulatory frameworks • Establishes approach for harmonisation with Military and Civilian Airworthiness Frameworks Any questions please speak to the Mutual Recognition team in DREGR; Mr Stew Nicol and FLTLT Leon Purton This visualisation: • Enables Fast and accurate comparison of different Military Airworthiness Authorities (MAAs) • Provides an overarching framework-based approach for mutual recognition and increased interoperability between Defence Forces • Identifies deficiencies / strengths of current regulatory frameworks • Establishes approach for harmonisation with Military and Civilian Airworthiness Frameworks Any questions please speak to the Mutual Recognition team in DREGR; Mr Stew Nicol and FLTLT Leon Purton UK MAA ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/DGTA/Documents/Reform/Bow-Tie%20plus%20Circular%20Histogram%20Analysis.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/reform/bow-tie%20plus%20circular%20histogram%20analysis.ppt",GKYOMURCRADONRUZXXKUF27XQML46VWA,7036123,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-reform-bow-tie-20plus-20circular-20histogram-20analysis-ppt-20140302183425.ppt 80,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/80.blob?_blob_column=image,20140302183404,https://web.archive.org/web/20140302183404/http://www.defence.gov.au/DGTA/Documents/Reform/Conepts%20of%20Tiered%20Approach.ppt,2014-03-02,2014-03-02,404,"Concepts of Tiered Approach to Recognition of other MAAs By Mr Stew Nicol, MRM-DREGR-DGTA (Please read notes page associated with each slide) Filed as DGTA-ADF Objective: U4493685 Recognition – When? Product Service Information Foreign military aircraft visits Passenger / crew on foreign aircraft From other MAA or MAA certified agency Interfaces 3 Tiered Approach Tier One Tier Two Tier Three Systems, structure and over sight Services, and Information Type, and specific requirements High level Interfaces Interface (or service) Hundreds of Interfaces, but • only 34 high level interfaces, covering • all possible MAA interfaces Tier 2 / 3 – Service & Type Agreements Direct & Enabling Interface Expectations (Potential) Benefit Interface (or service) Tier 1 - High Level Principles Master Interface List Expectations Direct Enabling Specific Common Tiered Approach Concept Hi Level (Systems) Principles Quest Set Service Agreements Type Agreements Hi Level Process ASIC Capstone Documents National Responses Tier 1 Systems Level Tier 2 Service Level Tier 3 Type Level ASIC AIRSTDs NATO STANAGs MOUs Contracts Recognition documents B I MIL E D E SC Tiered Approach Process - Tier One Tiered Approach Process - Tier 2 & 3 Tiered Approach Features • Tier One not aircraft type specific • All possible MAA interfaces considered • All interface expectations disclosed • One Question set used for all MAAs • All questions answered in self assessments, traffic lights applied and responses disclosed • Other MAA responses reviewed and recognition statements and conditions disclosed • No MAA expected to change systems • Only one desk top audit per MAA at tier one • All participating MAAs must commit to Tier 2 interoperability agreements, eg utilising existing ASIC / NATO interoperability management systems • Compliance audits only at Tier 2 and 3 (service and type) agreements • Standard periodic review of recognition process and documents • Tier one assessment and review only needed once for each MAA • Services and benefits realised through Tier 2 & 3 agreements Hi Level Comparison of Recognition Systems MARQ Recognition Agreements EMARs EDA MAWA MARQ STANAGs Common B/L? Recognition Agreements NATO Recognition System Tier 1 Systems Principles & Ques Tier 2 Service Agreements Tier 3 Type Agreements Tiered App System Generic Services Type IAs? System Req’mnts Indiv MAAs Inter/Op Agreements Recognition Agreements Advantages of Tiered Approach • MAAs retain sovereignty, and not expected to change systems • developing best practice • close alignment with current MAA recognition initiatives • caters for all MAA interfaces not just technical • only 1 Tier 1 systems level review and desk top audit per MAA • allows MAAs to apply and amend overlays on services from other MAAs without need to renegotiate recognition agreements • utilises existing Interoperability management systems and resources • low on-going resource management costs once established • establishes common and enduring requirements • allows for additional MAAs without need for changes • allows for addition of new service level (tier 2) agreements without need to renegotiate recognition agreements • only one set of requirements for each (Tier 2) topic-specific agreement • better visibility of agreements and justification or requirements • enables trust to be placed in cascading decisions made by other MAAs • improved management and accountability associated with foreign aircraft visits • could be used to recognise other MAAs / NAAs outside of ASIC Additional slides Deriving Expectations? Primary Aviation Legislation Specific Operating Regulations Civil Aviation System & Safety Oversight Functions Technical Personnel Qualifications/Training Technical Guidance & Safety Critical Information Surveillance Obligations Licensing, Certification Authorisations & Approvals Resolution of Safety Concerns DEFENCE AVIATION SAFETY PROGRAM DEFENCE AVIATION SAFETY PROGRAM Technical Regulatory System Defence Safety Management Framework Operational Regulatory System CE-1 CE-1 CE-2 CE-2 CE-3 CE-3 CE-4 CE-4 CE-5 CE-5 CE-6 CE-6 CE-7 CE-7 CE-8 CE-8 STATE SAFETY OVERSIGHT SYSTEM STATE SAFETY OVERSIGHT SYSTEM TIER ONE TIER ONE AIRWORTHINESS AIRWORTHINESS MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT TIER TWO TIER TWO AIRWORTHINESS AIRWORTHINESS SERVICES SERVICES • Primary Aviation Legislation • Aviation Regulations • Aviation Organisation • Personnel Licensing and Training • Flight Operations • Airworthiness of Aircraft • Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation • Air Navigation Services • Aerodromes • Explosive Ordnance Barriers Barriers Barriers Design Production Maintenance Distribution Controls Controls Controls Design Production Maintenance Distribution Loss of Loss of Technical Technical Integrity Integrity Loss of Loss of Operational Operational Integrity Integrity Loss of Loss of Integral Integral Support Support UNDESIRABLE UNDESIRABLE OPERATIONAL OPERATIONAL STATE STATE Product Behaviour Process Incident & Incident & Accident Accident Investigations Investigations Product Behaviour Process Product Behaviour Process Product Behaviour Process Product Behaviour Process Product Behaviour Process Technical Integrity Operational Integrity Environment & Security Environment & Security Operational Integrity Technical Integrity - Design - Production - Maintenance and Repair - Distribution and Logistics Systems - Flight Planning - Warning Systems - Flight Authorisations - Flight Navigation Systems - Statements of Operating Intent - Aerodromes - Runway Lighting - Air Loading Systems - Air Movement Systems - Airfield Fire Fighting Systems - Aircraft Rescue/Retrieval Protocols Aviation Risk Management CE - Military CE - Military AIRWORTHINESS AIRWORTHINESS MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/DGTA/Documents/Reform/Conepts%20of%20Tiered%20Approach.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dgta/documents/reform/conepts%20of%20tiered%20approach.ppt",ENZIHLNLOQHQPSSNIBCB6BPDDZUFJAFW,1729568,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dgta-documents-reform-conepts-20of-20tiered-20approach-ppt-20140302183404.ppt 81,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/81.blob?_blob_column=image,20120425014259,https://web.archive.org/web/20120425014259/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/_jlc/pacs/documents/PACS12/10.%20Oniqua%20Data%20Quality%20and%20Standardisation%20Initiatives.ppt,2012-04-25,2012-04-25,404,"www.oniqua.com Data Quality And Standardization Initiatives Within Government Rob Dixon Senior Consultant 2 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting  Data Quality – what is it? – The degree to which our data correlates with factual information based on accuracy, consistency, currency and completeness  Four Measures are – • Accuracy – the measure or degree of agreement between a value (or set of values) and reality. The data is correct for what is being represented • Consistency - the data passes all system edits for acceptability (e.g. format, length, positions) • Currency – The data is up to date and the age of the data is appropriate for the task at hand. • Completeness – The measured data that should have values in them, in fact do so. Input would be based on customer/system needs. 3 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting MASTER DATA AND ITS RELATIONSHIP Once data is shared it becomes an enterprise asset. It does not solely belong to the owners of the data or the authoritative sources. It also belongs to the users of the data. This includes the surgeon in theater, the supply point that orders the item, and the procurement and financial personnel. 4 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting MASTER DATA AND ITS RELATIONSHIP cont… Purchasing Warehousing Finance Production Inventory Design SUPPLY CATALOG User Planning 5 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting The enterprise maturity model The aim is to move up the enterprise maturity model through data quality improvements. 6 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting Root Causes of Poor Data Quality 7 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting From this… 1. 3/4” BOLT, 6IN LONG UNC GRADE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 2. 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD UNC BOLT 3. 3/4” UNC X 6” ZINC PLATED HEX HEAD UNC SCREW 4. 3/4” X 6” HEX HEAD UNC GRADE 5 BOLT 5. 3/4” X 6” HEX HEAD UNC GRADE 5 SCEW ZINC FINISH 6. 6”IN LONG BOLT GRADE 5 3/4”UNC 7. GRADE 5 BOLT BLACK .375” X 6.0” UNF C/W NUT AND WASHER 8. GRADE 5 SCREW BLACK .375” X 6.0” UNF C/W NUT AND WASHER 9. HEX BOLT 3/4 X 5-1/2IN UNC GRADE 5 10. HEX HEAD BOLT UNC 3/4IN X 6IN LG WITH NUT AND WASHER GDE 5 11. HEX SCREW 3/4 X 5-1/2IN UNC GRADE 5 12. HEXAGON HEAD BOLT 3/4”UNC X 6” LONG TO GRADE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 13. UNC BOLT 3/8IN X 6 IN C/NUT AND WASHER BLACK GRADE 5 14. UNC SCREW 3/8IN X 6 IN C/NUT AND WASHER BLACK GRADE 5 …correcting content and layout…: 7. BOLT, .375” UNF X 6.0” GRADE 5 C/W NUT AND WASHER BLACK 9. BOLT, 3/4 UNC X 5-1/2IN HEX HEAD GRADE 5 2. BOLT, 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD 4. BOLT, 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GRADE 5 6. BOLT, 3/4” UNC X 6” LONG GRADE 5 1. BOLT, 3/4” UNC, 6IN LONG GRADE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 12. BOLT, 3/4” UNC X 6” LONG HEXAGON HEAD TO GRADE 5 WITH NUT AND WASHER 10. BOLT, 3/4IN UNC X 6IN LG HEX HEAD GDE 5 WITH NUT AND WASHER 13. BOLT, 3/8IN UNC X 6IN GRADE 5 C/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 8. SCREW, .375” UNF X 6.0” GRADE 5 C/W NUT AND WASHER BLACK 11. SCREW, 3/4 UNC X 5-1/2IN HEX GRADE 5 3. SCREW, 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD ZINC PLATED 5. SCREW, 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GRADE 5 ZINC FINISH 14. SCREW, 3/8IN UNC X 6IN GRADE 5 C/NUT AND WASHER BLACK Data quality improvement: 8 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting …through Standards and Encoding Rules… 9 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting …to this... 9. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 5-1/2” HEX HEAD GDE 5 6. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” GDE 5 1. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 2. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD 4. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 10. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 12. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 13. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNC X 6” GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 14. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNC X 6” GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 7. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNF X 6” GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 8. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNF X 6” GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 11. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 5-1/2” HEX HEAD GDE 5 3. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD ZINC PLATED 5. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 ZINC PLATED 10 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting ... and then this… 9. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 5-1/2” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 12. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 14. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 8. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNF X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 11. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 5-1/2” HEX HEAD GDE 5 5. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 ZINC PLATED • Inventory reduction:- From 14 Stock Numbers (SKUs) to 6 by removing duplications. A further reduction is now possible through rationalization. 11 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com ... and eventually to this. 9. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 5-1/2” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 12. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER 14. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 8. BOLT, MACHINE; 3/8” UNF X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 W/NUT AND WASHER BLACK 11. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 5-1/2” HEX HEAD GDE 5 5. SCREW, MACHINE; 3/4” UNC X 6” HEX HEAD GDE 5 ZINC PLATED • Inventory reduction:- From 14 Stock Numbers (SKUs) to 6 by removing duplications. A further reduction is now possible through rationalization. • This potential is true across your whole inventory. 12 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting NSW HEALTH A daunting task. 13 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting NOTICE: DISBANDMENT OF THE HEALTH PEAK PURCHASING COUNCIL (HPPC) The last twelve years the HPPC has taken a pivotal role in the system wide supply chain reform process. However, notwithstanding these achievements, the amalgamation of AHS, the introduction of new corporate governance arrangements and the move towards implementing statewide shared corporate services, necessitated change. This includes the disbandment of the HPPC with the relevant consultative bodies set-up as part of the Shared Corporate Services Program. The functions and resources of the former HPPC Secretariat were transitioned into Health Support Services. Exceptions are functions transitioned into the Asset and Contract Services Branch, i.e. renewal of state Contracts For further information about the NSW Health Shared Corporate Services Program please click here During the late 90s NSW Health Commissioned an extensive review of their supply chain management... 14 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting The NSW Department of Health will implement a new e-procurement hub to standardise its purchasing processes. The hub is based on Gentran Integration Suite (GIS), an SOA-based platform developed by Sterling Commerce. Sterling Commerce won the tender as part of a consortium that also includes Fusion Management and e-Centric Innovations. With the design stage already having commenced, testing and user acceptance is scheduled for February 2009. The system is due to go live in March 2009. It replaces a previously manual system, Sterling Commerce said in a statement. The new system will keep track of some 30,000 internal items and potentially millions of vendor items purchased annually across the state. Specifically, it will supply the department with the capability to maintain internal data for each product, while enabling receipt and management of vendor data via an on-line interface to the National Product Catalogue (NPC), an online data pool managed by GS1 Australia and administered to NSW Health by the National E-Health Transition Authority (NEHTA). The NPC allows institutions in all States and Territories to obtain essential information about the medicines, medical devices and healthcare products they use, from one electronic source. It also holds information about non-medical products, such as office supplies and food items. Vendors not using the NPC will be able to add their term data directly into a web entry page. This form will enable one by one entry of term and pricing data or new items, changes to existing items and deletion of items, Sterling Commerce said. All new vendor data will be maintained in the vendor catalogue and updated automatically when additions or changes are submitted, the company said. NSW Health users will be able to directly log-in to the catalogue, receive and manage contract data from NSW Commerce, and publish files to other systems, including the NSW Health Oracle ERP system and the Department of Commerce Smartbuy application, it added. NSW Health heads down e-procurement path Article: itnews - Dec 15, 2008 2:39 PM 15 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting 16 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting 17 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting 18 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting 19 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting 20 Driving Asset Performance www.oniqua.com PACS XII Meeting QUESTIONS? Thank you. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/_jlc/pacs/documents/PACS12/10.%20Oniqua%20Data%20Quality%20and%20Standardisation%20Initiatives.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/_jlc/pacs/documents/pacs12/10.%20oniqua%20data%20quality%20and%20standardisation%20initiatives.ppt",L7PQBIIUR3EWW5BZRHW7NZOVM6LGPGH6,1514158,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-jlc-pacs-documents-pacs12-10-20oniqua-20data-20quality-20and-20standardisation-20initiatives-ppt-20120425014259.ppt 82,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/82.blob?_blob_column=image,20120425014305,https://web.archive.org/web/20120425014305/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/_jlc/pacs/documents/PACS12/12.%20DYTECNA.ppt,2012-04-25,2012-04-25,404,"PACS 2010 Lorraine J. Biggs Vice President – Support Solutions (UK) Lorraine.biggs@dytecna.com Subject of Presentation  Implementation and use of ISO Standards 22745 & 8000  Use of information technology to improve the logistics process with the emphasis on military logistics  Data quality & standardisation initiatives within Government  Implementation and use of ISO Standards 22745 & 8000  Use of information technology to improve the logistics process with the emphasis on military logistics  Data quality & standardisation initiatives within Government Contracting for Codification The Life of a UK Contractor Historically  Labour intensive  Time consuming processes  Data quality issues Historically  Labour intensive  Time consuming processes  Data quality issues Dytecna - UK UK NCB – Kentigern House The Life of a UK Contractor Present Day  Pre-screening & evaluation of NSNs  Acquisition & assessment of Source Data – DEFCON 117  Approved Item Naming (AIN)  Codification of an Item of Supply (IoS)  Supply Management Data form (SMD)  Quality Control Present Day  Pre-screening & evaluation of NSNs  Acquisition & assessment of Source Data – DEFCON 117  Approved Item Naming (AIN)  Codification of an Item of Supply (IoS)  Supply Management Data form (SMD)  Quality Control Benefits to UK NCB  Flexible work loadings  Leaner running costs  Full task visibility and management control  Continuity of expertise  Greater representation & support  Quicker turnaround times i.e UORs  Flexible work loadings  Leaner running costs  Full task visibility and management control  Continuity of expertise  Greater representation & support  Quicker turnaround times i.e UORs Problems  Source Data Acquisition  Quality of Source Data  Lack of Codification Awareness  Legacy Data  Source Data Acquisition  Quality of Source Data  Lack of Codification Awareness  Legacy Data The Way Forward New Contract  Achievement of Type 1 Codification  Additional attributes to the NSN Record  ISO 22745 & 8000 New Contract  Achievement of Type 1 Codification  Additional attributes to the NSN Record  ISO 22745 & 8000 CONCLUSION ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU SUPPLYING SOLVING SUPPORTING Lorraine J. Biggs Vice President – Support Solutions (UK) Lorraine.biggs@dytecna.com ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/_jlc/pacs/documents/PACS12/12.%20DYTECNA.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/_jlc/pacs/documents/pacs12/12.%20dytecna.ppt",DZIYROSVQNS36KW2W2YSHDB2ZEJQ5GSF,230065,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-jlc-pacs-documents-pacs12-12-20dytecna-ppt-20120425014305.ppt 83,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/83.blob?_blob_column=image,20080905233743,https://web.archive.org/web/20080905233743/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/asd/c130j/Industry_Brief_12Sep07.ppt,2008-09-05,2008-12-07,500,"RAAF C-130J Hercules Through Life Support Industry Briefing 12 Sep 2007 Ms Beverley Kerr Project Manager C-130J Through Life Support Project Administration • Industry Briefing is Unclassified • Hold all questions until end of presentation • Extracts from the presentation will be posted on the website Disclaimer Industry briefings are conducted for the purpose of providing background information only. Tenderers must not rely on a statement made at the Industry Briefing or during and/or private meetings as amending or adding to the RFT, unless that amendment or addition is confirmed by the COA in writing. The COA may, at it’s discretion and at any stage, terminate or amend the RFT process or participation by any company in the RFT process for any reason. Air Commodore Steve Drury Director General Airlift and Training Systems Welcome to Industry • C-130J provides a globally deployable combat airlift capability • Defence is seeking: – a whole of life support arrangement – the right partner/s – value for money – visibility of cost – contain support costs Ms Beverley Kerr Project Manager C-130J Through Life Support Project Industry Briefing Agenda • RFT Objectives, Structure and Scope • Industry Consultation • Conditions of Tender • Conditions of Contract • Government Furnished Facilities • Docking • Performance Based Contracting • Incentives • Liquidated Damages • Length of Contract • Cost Visibility • Phase In • OEM Specific Services • Schedule • Contact Details • Facilities Site Inspection • Questions RFT Objectives • Whole of life support arrangement for C-130J • The right partner/s – trust and communications • Value for Money solution • COA to understand cost drivers • Containment of support costs • Performance Based Contract/s • Inclusive and responsive COA/Contractor environment Value for Money • Comprehensive assessment that takes into account both cost represented by the assessment of price and value represented by technical assessment in the context of the risk profile presented by the tender. RFT Structure • Two completely separate RFT packages released 31 Aug 07: – RFT 1 ASD 10/2006: Entire TLS package with core engines costed separately and able to be excised, and – RFT 2 ASD 16/2007: Core Engines Maintenance package • The outcome will be either a single prime contract or two prime contracts – one for RFT 1 (Platform Prime) and one for RFT 2 (Engine Prime) • An initial VFM assessment will be made at the tender evaluation stage to determine the support solution. • Equally important will be the continuing assurance of value for money RFT 1 Structure • CD 1: Covering Letter, Conditions of Tender, Conditions of Contract, Cost Model • CD 2: Unclassified reference publications • CD 3: Data pack • CD 4: Lockheed Martin Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) publications • CD 5: Hangar 522 condition appraisal report RFT 2 Structure • CD 1: Covering Letter, Conditions of Tender, Conditions of Contract • CD 2: Unclassified reference publications • CD 3: Data pack RFT 1 Scope IN SCOPE OUT OF SCOPE Recurring Services  C-130J Airframe DM activities  AE2100 (Engine) DM activities  RI's (avionics, propulsions, hydraulics)  Engineering support  Publications and Drawing office  Airworthiness Management  Configuration Item Management  Supply support for DM  OM provisioning for C130J unique items  OM Provisioning for C130H + C130J common items  Project Management capability  GSE certification and management Ad Hoc Services  C-130J operational maintenance support  Incorporation of Block upgrades  Disposal  Surge  Provision for additional Aircraft  Provision for skilling COA staff – technical mastery  Other capability upgrades  C-130H DM activities  All T56 activities  Any support to other platform unique items  Simulator  Supply support for C-130H unique items  Training provided by 285 SQN  C-130J Block Upgrades concept and design  Joint User Group activities  Design Acceptance Representative functions RFT 2 Scope IN SCOPE OUT OF SCOPE Recurring Services • Deeper maintenance of AE2100D3 - core engines scheduled servicing - repair of AE2100D3 core engines • Engine condition reports • Provision of spares for use in Engine contractor facilities • Propeller Gearbox Adhoc Services • Provision for skilling COA staff – technical mastery • Whatever task priced services are in contract • Delivery of engine and propeller gearbox to and from repair venue • Removal and replacement of Quick Engine Change Unit from aircraft • Removal and replacement of engine and propeller gearbox from QEC • Field Service Representative • Propeller • Auxiliary Power Unit • Engineering Services • Spares support to COA (OM) Industry Consultation Feedback Key Elements of Conditions of Tender Contact Officer • The contact officer for RFT1 and RFT2 is the C-130J TLS Project Manager • All communications and questions concerning the RFT to Project Manager in writing: – to C130J.TLS@defence.gov.au or – Facsimile (02) 4587 2868 • No communications with any media, news or publishing organisation without prior COA approval • All submitted questions must be signed by a company representative • The COA may circulate tenderer’s questions and COA answers to other tenderer’s – no attribution Lodgement • Tenders must be lodged on or before noon (Canberra local time) on Thursday 13 Dec 07 at Tender Office in the Canberra Tender Room • COA may consider or exclude any late tenders from consideration • Tenders to remain open for acceptance for a period of no less than 12 months • COA may request an extension of tender validity period • Tenderers must lodge:- – 1x original hard copy – 2x hard copies of tender – 1x electronic copy (read only) in MS Office 2003 and/or MS Project 2000, and – 1x tracked changes version of Conditions of Tender and Conditions of Contract Commercial in Confidence Information • Tenderers must: – treat this RFT as Commercial-in-Confidence – not disclose or use that information except as strictly required for the purpose of developing a tender in accordance with this RFT – not disclose that information to another tenderer unless that tenderer is a member of a consortium which is preparing a tender in accordance with clause 4.10 – return original copies of the Deed of Confidentiality to the COA – ensure all companies to whom you pass any part of the RFT execute the Deed of Confidentiality prior to receipt of the RFT. A copy of the executed deed must be forwarded to the COA – security classified documents cannot be passed to third parties without the express written permission of the COA – Lockheed Martin original equipment manufacturer documents cannot be passed to third parties without the express written permission of the COA • The COA may exclude a tender if it fails to comply with the above guidelines. Use of Former Defence Personnel • Tenderers must seek written approval from the COA to use employees of Defence in the preparation of the tenderer response, if the person: – at any time during the six months immediately preceding the date of issue of this RFT, was an employee of, service provider to, or otherwise engaged by, the Department of Defence or the ADF (Employee of Defence) – at any time during the 12 months immediately preceding the date of issue of this RFT, was an Employee of Defence and: • has been involved in the planning or performance of the project or activity to which this RFT relates • has had access to ALSPO financial information • has had access to C-130J contracts • has audited ALSPO C-130J contracts • was normally employed at ALSPO • has worked on a C-130J contract development or renegotiation activity, or • has developed ALSPO policy – at any time, was an Employee of Defence involved in the preparation of this RFT or management of the RFT process. General Conditions of Tender • Tenderers must notify COA of any conflict of interest • Tenderers must submit unconditional offers • All GFI must be returned to COA by tender closing time • COA will not consider a tender for part of services • COA intends to enter into Contract with a single legal entity • Tenderers must not engage in collusive or anti-competitive conduct Alternative Tenders • COA may at its discretion consider alternative tenders providing tenderers: – have also submitted a compliant tender that conforms to the requirements specified in this RFT – demonstrate that such alternative solution may be more beneficial to the COA than the requirements specified in this RFT and will deliver the outcomes sought by the COA – proposes a solution which satisfies the defence capability requirements including, without limitation, the functionality and any essential requirements contained in Attachment A of the draft conditions of contract – explains in detail the financial impact on the tender price, the schedule impact and any other consequences of the proposed alternative solution – includes sufficient information to allow a comparison of the alternative tender with tenders that fully address the requirements of this RFT (including the draft Contract). – Populate the cost model COA Rights • The COA may: – Terminate further participation in the RFT process by any tenderer for any reason, regardless of whether the tender submitted conforms with the requirements of this RFT – Permit any person to participate as a tenderer in the RFT process prior to the tender closing time – Reduce or amend the scope of both RFT 1 and RFT 2 packages – Accept a tender without prior notice to any other tenderer – Require additional information from any tenderer – Change the structure and timing of the RFT process – Conduct a subsequent procurement process and utilise information gained in this RFT process for that purpose – Request, attend or conduct any site inspections or observe any product, plant, equipment or other demonstration, trial or test – Utilise the services of third party consultants, professional service providers and/or Legal Service Providers (LSPs) to assist in the evaluation of tender responses and conducting contract negotiations. Responsibility for Tendering Costs • Tenderers participation in RFT process is at tenderer’s sole risk, cost and expense • COA will not be responsible for any costs or expenses incurred by any tenderer under any circumstances Screening Criteria • Tender declaration • Cost model • English • Deed of Confidentiality Tender Evaluation Criteria • Tenders that meet screening criteria will be evaluated against: – extent to which the tender meets the technical, functional, operational and performance requirements – extent to which the tenderer is compliant with the conditions of this RFT and conditions of contract and the assessed level of risk relating to the negotiation of a TLS contract acceptable to the COA – extent to which the tenderer is financially viable Tender Evaluation continued… – tendered prices and pricing structure – tenderer’s demonstrated technical and managerial capability – past performance of contractual obligations of the tenderer, any proposed Approved Subcontractors and any Related Bodies Corporate – intellectual property provisions Tender Evaluation continued… – tenderer’s demonstrated managerial capability to meet the Performance Based Contracting (PBC) contracted requirements – extent to which the tenderer proposes a communications strategy which reflects a willingness to enter into a long-term collaborative relationship with the COA and – Provision of an Ethics Letter Negotiations • COA may conduct negotiations with one or more preferred tenderers • COA will advise all tenderers whether they have been selected as a preferred tenderer or not should negotiations with preferred tenderers prove unsuccessful, COA reserves the right to go to the next company on the list • No debriefing of tenderers until after contract signature Key elements of Conditions of Contract (COC) RFT 1 COC • Outcomes focused • ASDEFCON Support template customised for legacy platform • Hangar 522 offered for Contractor to use (not mandated) • Performance Based Contract • Seven year base period and rolling length of contract • 18 month Phase In period • Contract Price: – Phase In milestone payments (no recurring price until OD) – Task price services – Survey and Quote previsions • Embedded COA personnel (Survey and Quote) • No mandated suppliers • GFI provided to tenderers • Docking offered for sale RFT 2 COC • Maintenance of Core Engine and Propeller Gearbox (not Propulsion System) • ASDEFCON support template customised for legacy platform • No GFF • Performance Based Contract • 7 year fixed term contract length • No Phase In period • Contract Price: – Recurring services = annual number of DM arisings X average cost per DM arising – Task priced = Foreign Object Damage (FOD) – Data Item Deliverable milestones – Survey and quote provisions • Tenderers to define FOD • Embedded COA personnel (Survey and Quote) RFT 1 Government Furnished Facilities • Hangar 522 offered for RFT 1 contractor use • No mandated facilities • Single C-130J Deeper Maintenance bay • RFT 1 Contractor responsible for remediation of H522 to Building Code of Australia requirements • Contractor to pay Defence Services Group (DSG) lease costs • DSG currently conducting condition appraisal survey of H522 -completed by Sep 07 • Survey results and lease costs to be provided to RFT 1 tenderers Oct 07 • DSG approval to offer facilities by Oct 07 • RFT 1 tenderers advised of DSG approval early Nov 07 C-130J Docking • 1x C-130J Docking available for purchase by RFT 1 Contractors from the COA • Docking purchased in Feb 07 • Constructed by Jetfield Constructions Pty Ltd • The Contractor is responsible for all costs of pick-up and transport of docking from Canberra Airport to Contractor Deeper Maintenance facility • Tier 1 Metrics (Payment Related Metrics) – Unavailable Aircraft Contractor (UAC) – Minimum Asset Level – Quick Engine Change Assemblies (QECA) – Recurring Failed Priority Demands for Like Items of Supply (RFPD) – Failure to Maintain Warehouse Minimum Levels (MML) – Mean Time Between Critical Failures (MTBCF) • PBC regime effective at contract Operative Date • MTBCF metric introduced at Effective Date + 3 years RFT 1 Performance Based Contract RFT 2 Performance Based Contract • Tier 1 Metrics (Payment Related Metrics) – Minimum Asset Level – Engine Power Section (MAL-EPS) – Minimum Asset Level – Propeller Gearbox Assembly (MAL- PGA) RFT 1 Incentives • UAC – COA will pay incentives payments when Contractor achieves requested performance in excess of the Daily UAC contracted level – No incentive payment will be paid for performance in excess of Daily UAC contracted level, where the COA Representative has not requested such performance • MTBCF – Where the Contractor’s quarterly scored MTBCF achieved performance is greater than the quarterly contracted level MTBCF for all four performance review periods within an annual performance review period, the COA will make an incentive payment to the Contractor. Liquidated Damages • RFT 1: – Unavailable Aircraft Contractor (KPI 1) – Failure to achieve/maintain AEO status – Termination for failure to achieve Operative Date – Remaining contract term has reduced to 3 years • RFT 2: – Failure to achieve/maintain AMO status RFT1 Length of Contract • The PWD for the C-130J is 2030 • Rolling length of contract model • Contract base period of 7 years • Extension of contract is at the sole discretion of COA • Rolling extensions to the contract will be reviewed on an annual basis and must represent VFM to the COA • First VFM assessment = Effective Date + 1 year • Annual Performance Review - Successful: 1 year extension is granted maintaining a 7 year base period - Unsuccessful: extension is not granted, base period is reduced to 6 years, 2x successful Annual Performance Reviews are required for base period to return to 7 years - If base period is reduced to 3 years COA will begin the re-tendering process Essential Annual Performance Review Criteria • PBC Metrics • Risk Management • Contract Management • AEO/AMO • Cost of Ownership • Management Relationships Important Annual Performance Review Criteria • Contract Management • System Health Indicators (SHIs) • Reporting • Quality Management System • Time to Make Serviceable (TMS) Management • Support to Block Upgrades and Modifications • Support to fleet Management • Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) • Performance detractors RFT 1 Cost Model • If airframe maintenance is performed interstate or overseas the COA will factor in the costs of Aircraft delivery to and from Richmond • RFT 1 tenderers to provide two prices: – Engines and propeller gearboxes in – Engines and propeller gearboxes out • Contract price (current day dollars) changes only justified through demonstrable changes to work scope • Cost model used for length of contract and to support Contract Change Proposals RFT 1 Phase In • 18 month Phase In period • 20% “Balloon Payment” for achievement of OD • Other milestones include: – Plans (PHIP, SSMP, RMP and IPP) – First Aircraft Deeper Maintenance Servicing – Implementation: i) OH&S ii) MEA Plan iii) CMP – AEO Certification – AMO Certification – Configuration Item Management – Supply Chain and Inventory Management – Successful First Performance Review – ITAR approvals – Transition complete from current contracts – Operative Date International Traffic In Arms Regulations (ITAR) • Aircraft acquired from Lockheed Martin (Original Equipment Manufacturer) • COA must comply with US ITAR • No transfer of US origin Technical Data (TD) to Third Party Countries or Third Party Nationals without US Department of State approval • COA intends to transfer TD to RFT 1 tenderers • No TD to be transferred to RFT 2 tenderers • Tenderers shortlisted in April 07 to enable COA to seek ITAR approval • TAA amendment submitted to US Department of State on 25 Jul 07 to enable RFT 1 tenderers to access TD. Deeds of Confidentiality • Two Deeds: – 1. C-130J TLS RFT Deed of Confidentiality • All RFT 1 and RFT 2 tenderers • Any other person to whom tenderers wish to pass the RFT – 2. Lockheed Martin (LM) Technical Data Deed of Confidentiality • All RFT 1 tenderers (not LM) • Any other person to whom tenderers wish to pass the LM Technical Data (subject to ITAR and written COA approval) • If tenderer fails to provide executed Deeds, the COA may exclude the tender • Executed Deeds are due to COA by 12 Sep 07 OEM Specific Services • It is COA’s expectation that tenderers will submit a fully costed bid • LM advised it: – will not provide support to other tenderers during tender response period – will negotiate in good faith to provide OEM services to the preferred tenderer(s) when announced in late 2008. • It is COA’s view that it is unlikely that the pricing of OEM services will significantly influence the overall price of tender responses or be a key discriminator in source selection Authorised Maintenance Organisation Status • Authorised Maintenance Organisation (AMO) certification is given to the Prime Contractor only • Prime can use sub-contractors to undertake various maintenance activities, however, the Prime is accountable to the Technical Airworthiness Regulator (TAR) (TAMM Reg 4.4.3.b) • Sub-contractors may well be AMOs for other ADF platforms, however the Prime is fully responsible for the maintenance undertaken by any sub-contractor • The prime is required to include these sub-contractors within its Maintenance Support Network (MSN) • The applicant shall only be certified as an AMO, or retain AMO certification, whilst under contract to the ADF (TAMM Reg 4.2.2.e) Security Classified Documents • The RFTs contain documents security classified as RESTRICTED as defined in the Defence Security Manual. Provision of these documents is conditional on the validation of all security clearances by the COA. Recall of CD 3 • On 31 Aug 07 security classified RESTRICTED documents were inadvertently released by COA to industry • Email of 04 Sep 07 recalled all RFT 1 and RFT 2 CD 3s • New CD 3s issued to industry on 05 Sep 07 • Due 12 Sep 07 – Return of recalled CD 3s – Signed undertaking from industry that all hard copies have been destroyed, all soft copies deleted from IT systems and no copies have been forwarded to third parties Project Schedule • Release of Final RFT 31 Aug 07 • Tender Closing Time 13 Dec 07 (noon) • Tender Evaluation Jan 08 – Mar 08 • Contract Negotiation Jun 08 – Sep 08 • Contract Approval Oct 08 – Nov 08 • Contract Signature Nov 08 • Transition Complete Jun 10 Contacting C-130J TLS • Website: http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/asd/c130j/c130j.htm • TLS email address: C130J.TLS@defence.gov.au In Summary • Defence is seeking: – a whole of life support arrangement – the right partner/s – value for money – visibility of cost – to contain support costs Facilities Site Inspection • Bus to and from Sebel Resort to Hangar 522 • Security passes already arranged • No open-toed shoes • No mobile phones or cameras • Don’t leave the group • No questions until end of tour Questions? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/asd/c130j/Industry_Brief_12Sep07.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/asd/c130j/industry_brief_12sep07.ppt",UKLP4LAEWIWZNG5CA5WGLZ6YLXZSSZ5O,2716496,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-asd-c130j-industry-brief-12sep07-ppt-20080905233743.ppt 84,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/84.blob?_blob_column=image,20090519181444,https://web.archive.org/web/20090519181444/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/speeches/GMP_presentation_v5.ppt,2009-05-19,2009-06-27,500,"professionalise | re-prioritise | standardise | benchmark | improve industry relationships and industry performance | lead reform Delivering projects on time and on budget – A national imperative Presentation to ADM Congress Canberra 17 February 2009 Warren King General Manager Programs Defence Materiel Organisation TODAY’S ENVIRONMENT • Global Financial Crisis – IS REAL – Unprecedented economic challenges – Likely to impact other countries’ budgets – Likely to impact other countries’ supply base • Ongoing international instability • Australia has its own unique challenges • More than ever, Australian taxpayers demand that we maintain a capable, effective military at an affordable cost Budget and schedule obligations: no longer rhetoric THE NATION IS BEING CHALLENGED • Presentation based on three sources of information: – International data – DMO experience – Experience working cooperatively on major projects with close allies • Improvements have been made in Australia, but we have a long way to go • ‘Conspiracy of optimism’ among all parties including Defence, DMO and industry – US experience indicates lowest credible bid, earliest possible deliverable – Australia is seeing a range of responses from industry Requires commitment, action and cultural change BEHAVIOUR AND REWARD MECHANISMS ARE WRONG • Defence industry is unlike commercial companies where customer satisfaction is measured through sales • In the absence of a broad commercial market these incentives are not supportive of the national interest How is the national interest served? INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKING AND A VIEW OF THE FUTURE OF DEFENCE PROGRAMS • A recent study by Deloitte’s examines – Program management challenges – Technical complexities – Talent shortages – Supply chain challenges – Politics • The study spans commercial aircraft, defence and space sectors in USA and Europe • Data shows that over the past 15 years the problem has progressively deteriorated • The analysis forecasts that in 10 years the average cost overrun may exceed 46%. This is up from 26% today Source: Deloitte’s A&D “Can we afford our own future?” INTERNATIONAL DATA ON COST OVERRUNS AND PROGRAM SCHEDULE DELAYS • Analysis of the Major Programs cost data show that cost overruns are increasing by an average of 1.86% points per year • Average schedule delay is 21 months with 29% more than 2 years behind. DMO note: clear correlation between schedule delay and external cost overrun. Source: Deloitte’s A&D “Can we afford our own future?” - Schedule is King! AUSTRALIAN EXPERIENCE IN DELIVERY ON TIME AND ON BUDGET IS BETTER • The Kinnaird two-pass approval process is working • The relationship between Defence and industry is strengthening • Increased ‘professionalisation’ and skilling within DMO and industry are all helping BUT . . . COST ANALYSIS OF CLOSED PROJECTS • After Second Pass Approval (or the previous equivalent) • After correcting for inflation, foreign exchange and Government agreed changes of scope or quantities. • Of the 239 projects that have been closed over the last 10 years worth $27 billion, the total expenditure has been 98% of the total budget for that period. • Of the 239 Projects: – 60% were Under Budget – 23% were On Budget – 17% were Over Budget SCHEDULE IS THE CHALLENGE! WHAT THE DMO IS DOING . . . • Developing understanding of the impacts of the following root causes – Different stakeholders’ agendas across the project life-span – Human Resources constraints i.e. turnover, skills – Undefined scope (lack of definition), immature work breakdown structure, poor risk management practices, insufficient governance, lack of understanding of technical risk, lack of program management techniques • Placing greater scrutiny on tender proposals by not taking them at face value • Using international benchmarking comparisons • Developing lead indicators for schedule slip – EVM – Manning – Work package completion • Prepared to discount or risk rate tenders, if companies under-performing • Applying high-level management view on companies’ performance across projects (Gate Reviews) and industry monitoring (Company Scorecards) Irrespective of constraints, there’s a technological schedule imperative WHAT WE EXPECT FROM INDUSTRY . . . • Establish and provide a realistic and achievable project master schedule from the outset – Schedule must match reality, not design • Use the time and opportunity provided by the Kinnaird process to make sure schedule estimates are realistic • Develop and implement more sophisticated scheduling analysis tools We MUST do better for the national interest ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/speeches/GMP_presentation_v5.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/ceo/speeches/gmp_presentation_v5.ppt",BIQJ6XSGGYI7K32XP7XDMBED3XANZYUR,857311,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-ceo-speeches-gmp-presentation-v5-ppt-20090519181444.ppt 85,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/85.blob?_blob_column=image,20090519181541,https://web.archive.org/web/20090519181541/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/speeches/Head_DEU_presentation_ADM09_v2.ppt,2009-05-19,2009-06-27,500,"professionalise | re-prioritise | standardise | benchmark | improve industry relationships and industry performance | lead reform The Defence Export Unit Strengthening Australia’s defence capability by connecting local industry to global markets ADM Congress February 2009 • Work in Progress • Gaining acceptance through greater awareness • Success through direct involvement – Senior Military Advisers – Military Personnel and Equipment – Use of global network of contacts • Interpretation of requirements to reduce ambiguity REPORT ON PAST 12 MONTHS Partnership of Government and Industry to promote Australia’s innovative defence & defence-related technologies Defence support of Australian industry to supply high quality, sustainable solutions to international clients • Defence Capability goals rely on capacities of Defence industry • Industry closely integrated into support of military capabilities • Self-reliance includes maintaining – Control over skills – Capacities – Capabilities – Technology FOCUSING OUR EFFORTS • Industry needs access to export markets – Directly – Through global supply chains • Leads to – Economies of scale – Exposure to new technology – New market opportunities • Global market for Defence NOT a level playing field • World Military expenditure in 2006 reached US$1204 bn • Represents 3.5% increase since 2005 • 37% increase since 1997 • USA responsible for 80% of increase in 2005 • 15 countries with highest spend account for 83% • US – 46%; UK, France, Japan, China approx 5% each INTERNATIONAL DEFENCE PROGRAM “United Nations committed to preserving peace through international co-operation and collective security” YET the UN’s budget is 2% of world military expenditure • Outcome-based approach • Establish Australian industry brand • Foster growth through closer integration • Defence as a major business opportunity AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE INDUSTRY OBJECTIVES • Australian industry as a recognised brand • International consistency • Collaborating across international boundaries • Need for change in traditional models • Growth requires investment CHALLENGES Evolving model for collaboration based on: Governance - Environment Policy - Rules Technology - Capability Culture - Will Economics - Value • International collaboration program • Commonality of interest • Key long-term challenges: Workforce beyond 2015 Defence and Industry work more closely EXPORT AGENDA • Develop a Business Case incorporating an Export plan • Ensure product or service is export-ready • Understand the commitment required – Time – Resources – Funding • Ensure capacity to deliver PRACTICAL STRATEGIES CONSTRAINTS • Export Licences – Defence Export Control Office (DECO) • Security • Other global constraints • Additional cost FOCUS IN 2009 • Awareness of DEU internally with Defence • Build on knowledge of Australian capability/capacity • Build better view of export opportunities • Greater collaboration/co-operation with external export agencies TO SUCCEED “Develop a concise plan, hire talented people, ensure that you have the financial capacity to fund the initiative. Be patient because it is going to take longer and cost more than you expect” CONTACT DETAILS Al Uzubalis Ph: +61 (0)2 6127 2723 Mob: +61 (0)416 26 56 59 Email: al.uzubalis@defence.gov.au Ken Finlay Ph:+61 (0)2 6127 2740 Email: ken.finlay@defence.gov.au Linus Ryrie Ph: +61 (0)2 6127 2742 Email: linus.ryrie@defence.gov.au LTCOL Stuart Calvin Ph: +61 (0)2 6127 2733 Email: stuart.calvin@defence.gov.au DECO: General Enquiries: 1800 66 10 66 Email deco@defence.gov.au ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/speeches/Head_DEU_presentation_ADM09_v2.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/ceo/speeches/head_deu_presentation_adm09_v2.ppt",THWTU4BN4FWKK5B47A3PZUC6A3YYEM7W,280181,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-ceo-speeches-head-deu-presentation-adm09-v2-ppt-20090519181541.ppt 86,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/86.blob?_blob_column=image,20090519181411,https://web.archive.org/web/20090519181411/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/speeches/HID_ADMC_Conference_vHID.ppt,2009-05-19,2009-06-27,500,"professionalise | re-prioritise | standardise | benchmark | improve industry relationships and industry performance | lead reform Developing Local Industry Capability Kerry Clarke Head Industry Division DMO OUTLINE 1. The importance of strategic industry specialisation  Determining Australia’s strategic capabilities – Linking Defence industry capabilities with the national interest. – How do we identify strategic capabilities. – Why are they important. 2. Local and international procurement.  Maintaining strategic capabilities in our local industry – Which capabilities do we want to keep in Australia? – Which capabilities should we rely on overseas sources? 3. Aligning priority capabilities to future Defence planning – Defence Planning Guidance (DPG) and Defence Capability Plan (DCP). The Importance of Defence Industry Local industry plays an important role in supporting ADF capability. – Provision and maintenance of military equipment – Delivery of support services Government policy is to grow the capacity of local defence industry. – Ongoing investment in skills development (SADI program) – Improved productivity Defence industry policy will target support to priority and strategic capabilities. – Aligning capability to our national strategic interests A Strategic Approach Strategic Capability • Benefit to Australia through: – Strategic advantage – National security Strategic industry capability (SIC) – A capability which confers a national security and strategic advantage by being resident in-country. – If denied, may have an impact on ADF operational capability, could inhibit the accomplishment of military tasks and could inhibit in country procurement projects over the longer term. What Makes a Capability Strategic Strategic industry capability • Assessed according to these criteria – National Sovereignty – Knowledge – Leverage – Guarantee Supply – Regret – Effective and Efficient A select subgroup are identified as PRIORITY Local Industry Capabilities (PLIC) – considered high-risk capability Priority Local Industry Capability (PLIC) – A subset of SIC, these are capabilities which confer a higher degree of strategic advantage and national security. – If denied, may have an adverse impact on ADF operational capability, could inhibit the accomplishment of military tasks and could inhibit in country procurement projects over the longer term. Industry Capability Management Defence Industry Capability • Support to ADF operations. • Force-wide provision of day to day support services and equipment. • Level of management attention - watching over. Defence Industry Strategic industry capabilities (SIC) • Vital to Defence operations. • Mix of off-shore and on-shore acquisition and sustainment. • Seek general SIC outcomes as part of Australian Industry Capability (AIC) Program. Defence Industry SIC Industry Capability Management Priority Industry Capability (PLIC) • A subset of SIC, these capabilities confer a higher degree of strategic advantage and national security. • Will be a focus of Australian Industry Capability (AIC) Program. • Classified. Industry Capability Management Defence Industry SIC PLIC Unhealthy PLIC • An unhealthy PLIC is an industry capability that is unable to meet ADF demand. • Impaired capability poses a significant risk to ADF operations. • Focus of close Government attention. • Government intervention strategies may be invoked as market failure would be detrimental. Defence Industry SIC Industry Capability Management PLIC Unhealthy Interventions Self sufficiency is impractical for a country the size of Australia. To this end, we must prioritise which industry capabilities must be supported in-country based on strategic advantage. – Which capabilities must we keep in Australia? – Which capabilities can we rely on overseas sources? Key Points: • The Government will prioritise support to those in-country industry capabilities that deliver the greatest strategic advantage to Australia. • Where market failure or serious risk to ADF capability exists, focused support and Government interventions will be employed to retain priority local industry capability within Australia. Interventions Intervention may occur where risks exist in these categories: Example: Government Intervention Business Case Issue: Supply constraints / Low infrastructure  Intervention  Federal to State relationship to push investments Key Point: • Government and Defence will make prudent decisions on directing support to priority local Capability, but will not pay a premium for local industry work – unless the costs and risks of doing so are clearly defined and justifiable in terms of strategic benefit. Demand  Uneven cycle in Defence demand Supply  Capacity constraints in skills, IP, infrastructure Value  Excessively high local prices Market Failure  Price fixing Security and Diversity of Supply  Monopolies Delivering defence capability The flow of responsibility within Defence: STRATEGY: Strategic policy and posture - assess the environment and potential threats and devise strategy and policy to guide the ADF’s force structure and capability framework (e.g. Defence White Paper) SERVICE CHIEFS: Identify individual Service and joint capability needs CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT GROUP: Develop the specifications to meet the Service capability requirement DEFENCE MATERIEL ORGANISATION: To either build or acquire capability to deliver the Service requirement on time Why What & When How Defence Planning Guidance (DPG) & Defence Capability Plan 2009-19 (DCP) DPG • The Government will direct Defence to produce strategic advice to identify industry capabilities that will attract priority support. DCP • Outlines Defence capability requirements 10 years into the future. • Reflects changing capability requirements in response to changes in strategic circumstances. • Forthcoming DCP (2009-19) will indicate strategic industry capabilities. • 30 June: 2009 Defence + Industry Conference, Adelaide – Planned Launch of 2009-19 DCP Solutions to increase local industry capacity • DMO will support local industry as much as possible • Through a combination of targeted, specific strategies, including skills development, demand management, productivity improvements and managed growth of onshore procurement  More Off The Shelf work • Defence will develop a skilling program, specifically targeted at improving Australia’s systems integration/engineering skills base • Defence will continue to rely on competition Global Financial Crisis • Government still committed to 3% real growth on average • Defence requires security of supply – Looking for suppliers to be financially viable • Liquidity is the key to thriving and surviving in tough times • Companies improve their liquidity when they: – Monitor and maximise their cash position – Tightly manage customer credit – Aggressively manage working capital – Optimise their financial structure • Inefficient operations also leave companies vulnerable to economic shocks. Efficient companies are characterised by: – Reducing costs and increasing efficiency – Aggressively managing top line – Rethinking their product mix and pricing strategies – Reining in planned investments and selling assets Industry Initiative Implementation • Joint Industry Training Task Force • CTD Extension Program • Joint Industry / Defence exchange and training • Australian Industry Capability Program • DEU performance • Defence procurement documentation • Access to global supply chains • E-Portal • SADI improvement • PLIC and support for unhealthy PLIC • Productivity enhancement SUMMARY  Determining strategic capabilities based on Australia’s national security interests.  Retaining strategic capabilities in Australia with the support of Government interventions, if necessary.  Aligning priority capabilities outlined in the Defence Planning Guidance (DPG) in the Defence Capability Plan (DCP).  Surviving the global down-turn Be in the defence sector! CONNECT dplusi.defence.gov.au Register your company capabilities on the Defence + Industry ePortal website: ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/speeches/HID_ADMC_Conference_vHID.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/ceo/speeches/hid_admc_conference_vhid.ppt",SBBTWFDLHYKCMNAWQKFFCYIPC4NDEYSP,165270,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-ceo-speeches-hid-admc-conference-vhid-ppt-20090519181411.ppt 87,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/87.blob?_blob_column=image,20120405033140,https://web.archive.org/web/20120405033140/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/coo/jp2077/docs/RFP%20Release%20JP2077-2D%2020071206%20Diagrams%20v1.0.ppt,2012-04-05,2012-04-05,500," ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/coo/jp2077/docs/RFP%20Release%20JP2077-2D%2020071206%20Diagrams%20v1.0.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/coo/jp2077/docs/rfp%20release%20jp2077-2d%2020071206%20diagrams%20v1.0.ppt",TJWL6OOULTWLSZ23CQB4DII6ZAEGSKSJ,1354757,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-coo-jp2077-docs-rfp-20release-20jp2077-2d-2020071206-20diagrams-20v1-0-ppt-20120405033140.ppt 88,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/88.blob?_blob_column=image,20060523181331,https://web.archive.org/web/20060523181331/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/evm/EVM_Strategy203.ppt,2006-05-23,2012-04-01,500,"Upcoming Changes in Earned Value Management Materiel Policy & Services Branch October 2003 Defence Materiel Organisation 2 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Comprehensive Change • Why Change? • Application • EVM Requirements & CSSR • Moving to the IBR • Validations & Surveillance • Reporting & Payment • Integrating measures • Products & Stakeholders 3 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation What’s in it for you? • Awareness of upcoming change • Opportunity to question • Opportunity to comment • Input will be considered in the development Chance to have your say !!!!! 4 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Need for Change • Complexity & “experts domain” • Benefits not being realised • Analysis and action missing • “Financial” stigma Improve useability & Increase relevance Incorporate Lessons Learned Risk-based approach 5 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Requirements Application Implementation AS4817 + Defence Supplement EVM Flexibility Lessons Learned Assess risk Nominally > $20m Exclusion with advice Assess known & unknown * No Validations * Risk-based review requirements Assurance “Meets contractual reqts” 3 DEF(AUST) standards specify EVM requirements CSCSC CSSR $ Thresholds: > $200m All types > $60m Develop’t > $20m CSSR Lengthy Validation process Now Future 6 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Application • Policy thresholds for application – > $200m for Production = EVM – > $60m for Development = EVM – > $20m for CSSR • Project Risk Assessment – Where is the risk? – What is the risk type? – What management systems exist? – What are my information needs? 7 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation How? • Internal risk mgt workshops – Pre-contract, in line with SAMS processes • Measurement workshops – Particularly for software-intensive projects • Nominal minimum level for application – Contracts >$20m must apply EVM – Still assess risk for <$20m to ensure EVM not necessary – $ value is not the driver! Risk is the driver. – Exemptions for low risk projects regardless of $ value 8 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation EVM Requirements • Remove all DEF(AUST) standards • Adopt AS4817-2003 – Australian Standards – Various industries involved, wide consultation – Pragmatic, simple approach • Specific Defence reqts – Supplement to AS4817 – New Tendering & Contractual requirements • New Review Guide 9 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation CSSR • CSSR has been eliminated • Not successful • Industry feedback showed no differences in implementation • Original aim not achieved • Industry support for removing CSSR due to better consistency 10 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Integrated Baseline Reviews • Offer definition role • Emphasis is on project responsibility • Technical review by technical staff • Target project risk areas • > emphasis on measurement • Opportunity to review payment schedules after IBR will be built into contracting templates 11 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation And now Validations…. • Previously issued “Validation” of Contractor’s EVMS – Not meeting needs – Providing false confidence – Not assuring ongoing validity • Future – Will no longer issue validations – Assess each contract on a risk basis • previous experience, previous performance/ issues • > deemed risk, > level of review EVMS Validated 12 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation More on validations • Onus upon Contractor to reduce risk of their EVMS – Proactive – Self-correcting systems through management use – Valid, meaningful data = Sound reporting on projects – May seek certification from independent 3rd party • Outcome = EVMS “meets reqts of contract” – i.e. meets requirements in contractually specified standards & Supplement – is therefore “acceptable” but only for this project 13 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation The impact • Project by project assessment • Contractors with sound, existing systems not adversely affected – Provide detail to support their system – Take greater ownership of system & actively reduce risk – Projects can take into account successes of other projects • Encouraging projects to seek info from past projects • Number of EVMS reviews will be proportionate to assessed risk – e.g. an existing system deemed to have low risk may only require an IBR and Ongoing Surveillance 14 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation System Surveillance • Used to have “annual” policy • Move to risk-based policy – Assess risk of the EVMS – Assess data integrity and success of implementation – Target risk areas rather than complete EVMS review – “Assurance” rather than surveillance • Seeking assurance that the system is functional and providing reliable data 15 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Reporting & Payment • Target risk areas – Reporting Variances • seek high risk items not merely high dollar items • reduce tolerance levels for high risk items – WBS level for reporting at level needed to manage risks – Exception reports • Verify claims for payment – Target risk areas – Sample based on risk – Ensure technical staff review accuracy of claimed progress 16 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Integrating Disciplines • Utilising project management disciplines together EVM PSM Risk PM inc. IPSSR 17 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Integrating Disciplines • EVM & Practical Software Measures – Project Performance Management Guide If I see this... It could mean... So I should think about.. 18 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Current Performance What is the project’s status? Behind Schedule, Over Cost Ahead of Schedule, Over Cost Behind Schedule, Under Cost Ahead of Schedule, Under Cost Functional Volatility Basis of Estimate Resource Usage Basis of Estimate Process Adherence Resource Usage Basis of Estimate Behind Schedule & Under Cost Behind Schedule & Over Cost Ahead of Schedule & Under Cost Ahead of Schedule & Over Cost -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% -30% -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% S V % (1) (2) (3) (4) Future Performance Feasibility Recovery Duration Project Status can be expressed in terms of cost and schedule variances. A variance is a difference between what was planned and what is happening. A useful indicator of project status is the Bull’s Eye Chart shown above. This indicator is derived from earned value measures. The Bull’s Eye Chart plots the cumulative cost variance percentage (%CVcum) against the cumulative schedule variance percentage (%SVcum). This provides a point within one of four quadrants for a point in time. Connecting these points provides a trend line over time. Management action is normally required when either the %CVcum or %SVcum are outside a defined threshold, typically 10%. All excursions beyond the set threshold should be investigated as even being ahead of schedule and under cost is not necessarily a good thing. Note: To ensure the accuracy and credibility of earned value measures, WBS elements should use defined, unambiguous, binary criteria, where possible, to determine each milestone or task completion point and to apportion earned value. This requires an thorough understanding of the work and how it is to be performed. The verification of these criteria should be of prime consideration during Integrated Baseline Reviews. Care should also be applied to ensure the majority of earned value is not given until the adequacy and success of testing has been evaluated. 19 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Integrated Training • Analysis training to be developed – WBS, Schedule, Performance Anticipated Completion April 04 EVM IPSSR PSM PM 20 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation EVM Suite to Support Change • Requirements – AS4817 + DMO Supplement • Revised ASDEFCON clauses & handbook • Revised EVMS Review Handbook – Update review practices – Reflect new standards – Reflect risk-based approach to EVM • FAQ on EVM aspects of tender evaluation & contract negotiation Anticipated Completion April 04 21 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Existing Products • IBR Handbook – Currently available via QEMS • Guide to EV Payments – Currently available via QEMS – Recent study findings support use of EV Payments BUT • IBR is paramount • Trained staff are vital • Summary of findings is available - demonstrates key success criteria • Note: These products may undergo minor updates to reflect new terminology/ standards but the principles will remain unchanged. 22 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Conclusion • Wholesale change for the better • Affecting every facet of EVM Goal = Improved use & flexibility 23 A Change in Focus… Risk-based EVM Defence Materiel Organisation Consultation • Stakeholders are invited to register interest with PM-EVM – traci-ann.byrnes@defence.gov.au or (02) 62656928 • Stakeholders will have the opportunity to review and comment upon draft documents ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/evm/EVM_Strategy203.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/esd/evm/evm_strategy203.ppt",O74C4K3EK6G5DNYJOGC7MCEUOFILNLIL,196271,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-esd-evm-evm-strategy203-ppt-20060523181331.ppt 89,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/89.blob?_blob_column=image,20111216065543,https://web.archive.org/web/20111216065543/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/evm/Symp99.ppt,2011-12-16,2011-12-16,500," Developments, Achievements and Reforms Subhash Dang Director - EVM 16 Sept 1999 Background • EVM used in Australia for the last ten years • Used on all major capital equipment acquisitions • Standards and procedures were originally based on US DoD • Number of enhancements and developments undertaken to make EVM more effective. • Acquisition organisation going through major reforms Recent Innovations • Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBR) • Consultants Panel for EV services • Payment by Earned Value • Use of earned value data for Corporate level reviews of Defence projects (DARB) • National Standard on EVM • Review Methodology Reforms Integrated Baseline Review – Policy promulgated – IBR Handbook developed and being used by Projects and Contractors – Training by DAMS staff in place – Proving more ownership by Project Tech Staff – Replacing old Subsequent Appn Reviews (SAR) – Applicable to all new projects and existing projects Consultants Panel for EV Services • Professional Service Providers (PSP) Panel fully operational since Jul 98 • Used extensively for – Training – Studies – System Development – Special workshops – Analysis Support Progress Payment based on EV • A recent initiative • link to JPAC recommendations • EV as the “best estimate” of progress National Standard on EVM – Project approved by Standards Australia – Sub committee established – Development commenced – US Industry ANSI-748 would be used as the basis Reporting to DARB – High-level Project reporting pays a great deal of attention to EV reporting formats – Trend graphs particularly popular – Raises awareness and profile of EVM within DAO EV Payment Models • 100% earned value • mix of EV and milestones Preferred Model • Mixed milestone / EVP used for all contracts • Majority of the price (50-90%) to EVP • Remainder on achievement of milestones • Split varies according to project value, risk, complexity, duration • Offers benefits of both EV and Milestones • Contractors focus on achieving key milestones Advantages • Tangible use of EVM System • Eliminate duplication between company’s EVMS and invoicing systems • Satisfies ANAO • Assist in accurate Cash Flow Forecasting. • Separate presentation on Cash Flow Forecasting Payment by EV Can Work • Initial teething problems being resolved • Mobilisation Payment a key payment milestone • Verification encourages better analysis • DAMS-EVM just released a guidance paper on payment verification Review Methodology • Changed review practices (as used for BAe, RLM and Kaman) • Drivers of reform are: – resource constraints – increased partnering with contractors – change of emphasis from strict enforcement to working & workable management system • Interactive system development and review Enhancements • Shorter reviews with smaller teams - helping both sides • Contractors encouraged to have team members on the review - for better communication • Maximise the participation of Project staff, particularly resident team • Just 2 or 3 external “experts” Enhancements (2) • Use of “in country” resources for overseas reviews – resident team – posted staff – embassy/high commission personnel • Reduced reporting • Providing on-going advice to the Contractor towards implementation Defence Standards • Standards reflect the 1989 policy and procedures • Need to reflect current and proposed practices • Opportunity to amalgamate some of the standards Re-engineering EVM Criteria • Delete supporting functions • Delete LOE • Focus on contractual deliverables • Simplify the reporting elements • Revise thresholds Re-engineering (continued) • Leading the way • Easier to sell to Project Managers • Satisfies ANAO concerns • Payment by EV more meaningful EVM and Evolutionary Acquisition Contracts • EA projects are Software Dev. intensive • EVM quite appropriate • Tailored requirements developed and used on one Project • EVM and PSM quite complementary • Liaison with DSWAR for developing policy and procedures. Australian Innovations - Summary • EVM application continues to evolve • Directions in harmony with US approach • Now working top-down to encourage EVM use through DARB as well as bottom-up through contractor implementation & review ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/evm/Symp99.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/esd/evm/symp99.ppt",ELNYFETIALWSKMQNJBH4NZHQIZMU2MJU,56376,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-esd-evm-symp99-ppt-20111216065543.ppt 90,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/90.blob?_blob_column=image,20060314015046,https://web.archive.org/web/20060314015046/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/jp2072/internet_brief_24oct04.ppt,2006-03-14,2006-03-14,500," JP 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) BC-SPO EWSD DMO • In the Land context, operations will increasingly implement the concept of Network Centric Warfare (NCW)…... – OCD JP 2072 • JP 2072 is a multi-phased project that will progressively provide the ADF with the next generation telecommunications systems of the BCS (L) – OCD JP 2072 JP 2072 BCS (L) JP 2072 History • Project CURRAWONG – YOD 01/02 – $225M • Project PARAKEET Phase 7 – YOD 00/01 – $50M • Government endorsed JP 2072 Ph 1 in Nov 01 – $97M – Priority to fill key capability gaps within Digitised JTF AIRFIELD POE TACTICAL UNITS DJFHQ BDE HQ JP 2072 JP 2072 STRATEGIC INTERFACES STRATEGIC INTERFACES L o c k h e e d P - 3 O r i o n AIR & MARITIME INTERFACES COALITION INTERFACES LSF JP 2072 - Battlespace Communications JP 2072 - Battlespace Communications System (Land) System (Land) Current Systems Local Area Tactical Trunk Combat Radio Current Shortfalls • System Level – Not Integrated - Systems are stovepiped and lack interoperability. – Ineffective/non-existent Network Management. • Combat Radio – Data networking capability for Combat Radio – Data throughput, and thus support to BCSS. – Reliability and capacity of HF Combat Radio. – Approaching system and component LOT. • Tactical trunk – Data switching capability in PARAKEET. – PARAKEET Radio Relay Bearer Capacity and Range. • Local Area – Deployability and mobility of the local area system. BCS(L) Model Local Sub-System Tactical Data Distribution System Tactical Airborne System Overlaid Comms Systems (Inmarsat, IRIDIUM) Combat Radio System Supported Subsystems (BCSS, ACSS, NINOX, SDSS) Strategic Comms System Proposed Sub-Systems Proposed Sub-Systems Tactical Trunk System Allied - Coalition Systems Extant Sub-Systems Extant Sub-Systems BHQ’s CHQ’s BHQ’s Combat Radio Hierarchical Network Low bandwidth (16-64 kbps) Mobile HF, VHF LOS, Tac Sat Tactical Data Distribution System Area Network Bandwidth: 64-512 kbps Transportable UHF LOS BCS(L) Deployed Layout CHQ’s Bde HQ Bde HQ DJFHQ LSF BSG BSG Tactical Trunk Area Network High Bandwidth (1-10Mbps) LOS Radio Relay Transportable Satellite High Comd Link BHQ’s CHQ’s BHQ’s BCS(L) Deployed Layout CHQ’s Bde HQ Bde HQ DJFHQ LSF BSG BSG Control Tactical Airborne Subsystem Aerial Re-trans for TDDS COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE Mobiles Fixed Long Range Deployed Forces Deployed Forces Australia Australia JP2072 - Land MCIMAM SEA 1442 JP2008 MILSATCOM JP2043 HF Mod JP 2047 DWACN Project Inter-Relationships C2 APPLICATIONS BCSS ACSS ISREW JISE BUNYIP NINOX SUPPORT APPLICATIONS SDSS ROMAN PMKEYS CAMM2 JP 2068 DNOC PLATFORMS GBAD AIR 87 AWACS BUSINESS APPLICATIONS JCSS/JCSE LAND 907 JP 129 Indicative JP2072 Interfaces Platforms/Mobiles Applications ARH JISS AIR 9000 Helicopters JCSE M113 BCSS ASLAV CAMM2 Bushranger Joint Theatre Distribution Overlander Improved Logistics Information Systems Abrams SDSS GBAD PMKEYS Combat ID Defence Management Systems Improvement PRR Battle Management Systems Redfin ACCS Bunyip TBMCS Patrol Boats PFPS ANZAC Infrastructure Amphibious Watercraft Parakeet Air Warfare Destroyer Milsatcom AEW&C HFMod MROC DWACN Globalhawk IBS JSF DNOC Tactical Air Defence Radars HGCE Deployable Medical Facility TIE Raven/Wagtail/Pintail/MBITR Combined Information Environment Acquisition Strategy • Prime Equipment and Integrated System – Prime Systems Integrator - Selected on PSI capabilities not a solution proposal. • Maintain successful relationship throughout all phases – System Design Authority, System Integration, IIS and TLS, subcontract mgt. – Strategy characterised by incremental IIS of sub-system capabilities using commercial contracting arrangements with equipment providers • Capability Solution Demonstrator(s) and Phase Definition Study procured separately – Conventional acquisition Phases JP 2072 Phases JP 2072 Phases 02/03 08/09 09/10 14/15 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 Phase One ($97M) 01/02 DCC Phase Two ($350-450M) DCC 1 10/11…. Phase Three ($200-250M) Scoped and funded Unscoped DCC 2 (Correct as at DCP review 03) (Correct as at DCP review 03) Scoped, options not endorsed JP 2072 Phases • Phase 1 - ISD 06* – Complete BCS(L) System Definition and Design – filling high priority capability gaps – COTS/MOTS equipment – Capability Solution Demonstrator(s) – Phase 2 Definition Study • Phase 2 - ISD 09* – rollout to high readiness ADF units, 1 BDE, DJFHQ, LSF, RAAF – option limited Tactical Data Distribution System • Phase 3 - ISD 09* – complete rollout to ADF – TDDS and Tactical Airborne Sub System * commencement of ISD Phase 1 Phase 1 Work • Core Work Contract – Operational Capability Document to Functional Performance Specification development • This deviates from normal contracting model, where the Commonwealth develops the FPS prior to Contract – Traditional System Engineering Activities • System Definition and Design • System and Sub-system Specification development – Trade Study and Orders Implementation Plan • COTS/MOTS Market Survey and Trade-off • Equipment chosen and Orders developed • Separate Orders Contracts ( Combat Radio, Trunking, Local Area ) DETAILED SYSTEM (SUBSYSTEMS) DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION ACQUISITION V&V ILS CORE WORK ORDERS SYSTEM DEFINITION TRADE STUDIES OIP OCD FPS DRAFT SS SS FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS ANALYSIS REVIEWS VERIFICATION SDR ENGINEERING BASELINES FBL PBL ABL SRR2 SRR1 SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL DESIGN OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS DDR PDR V&V JP 2072 PSI CORE WORK AND ORDERS RELATIONSHIP PROJECT MANAGEMENT TIME QUALITY MANAGEMENT INTEGRATED LOGISTICS SUPPORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT Version 2.0 Phase 1 Capability Gap Priorities Phase 1 Capability Gap Priorities • Combat Radio Sub-System – Improved Capacity and Efficiency of Tactical Data Networks – Enhanced Reliability and Capacity of HF Comms – Provisioning / Supportability of Current Fleet • Tactical Trunk Sub-System – Enhanced Bearer Capacity and Range – Improved Network Efficiency and Bandwidth utilisation • Local Network(s) – Wireless Infrastructure to Enhance Mobility – Rationalised Network Infrastructure – Converged Voice and Data Services • Integrated Network Management for BCS(L). DJFHQ HQ JTF 1 HQ JTF 2 CER Arty Bn 1 Bn 2 Armd Coy CER Arty Bn 1 Bn 2 Armd Coy Coy Coy 2072+Raven Raven Coy Coy Coy Coy Pl Pl Pl Pl Pl Pl BMA APOE BMA APOE Sect Sect Sect Sect Sect Sect Ph 1 Endorsed BOP 2003 ( 3 Bde) ( 1 Bde) Tac Avn Tac Avn Phase 1 Procurements • Full BCS(L) System Definition and Design • Provisioning to a Bde-sized JTF (based on 3 Bde), including APOD. – Trunking - upgrade to existing Parakeet equipment – Local Area System - provide for Bde major nodes – CR - Provide data radio to Coy level - for all 3 Bde units and manoeuvre units from 1 Bde – Network Management System • System Integration • IIS and ILS • Subcontractor management Prime Systems Integrator to conduct Phase 1 Indicative Equipment for the JTF • INTEGRATED BCS(L) • COMBAT RADIO – Multi-mode Line of sight / Tactical Satellite Combat Radio – Compact inter section Combat Radio – HF Combat Radio • TACTICAL TRUNK – Trunk Switch (Open Standards) – Radio Relay Line of sight Bearer • LOCAL AREA – Secure converged voice and data switching and networking system – Secure Wireless Local Area Network – Secure Wireless Cellular Telephony • NETWORK MANAGEMENT – Network Management System • TDDS and TASS - Not procured as capability in Phase 1 Phase 1 Capability End State • JTF equipped with: – Enhanced tactical trunk Services at all formation level major comms nodes. – Enhanced local area systems at all formation level major comms nodes. – Digital Combat Radio to provide higher capacity for support of Command Support Systems. • Land Forces positioned for Migration to holistic BCS(L). – Informed of desired TDDS and TASS functionality, performance and Concept of Operations – Confirmed BCS(L) Architecture and system design Enhanced Capability / Interoperability VHF Combat Radio Example Combat Radio (COTS/MOTS) • Analogue • Frequency Range 30-80MHz • Single band (FM) • Single mode (analogue voice) • Max capacity 8kbps • Digital • Frequency Range 30-512MHz • Multi-band, Multi-mode • Software programmable waveforms • Max capacity 64kbps(+) • UHF SATCOM capable • US interoperable In-service Combat Radio (Raven/Wagtail) VHF (AM) VHF (FM) UHF (FM) UHF (AM) VHF (FM) UHF SATCOM (all ground forces) JP 2072 Phase 1 - Indicative Staging JP 2072 Phase 1 - Indicative Staging System Design Design review & Systems Integration Combat Radio Jan 04 Jan 07 Jan 06 Jan 08 Jan 05 Tactical Trunk Local Area System Network Mngt System Ph 2 PDS CSD Phase 2 running out to Mid 2010 ED The Goal 2005-2015 The Goal 2005-2015 • Migration to a mobile, secure and integrated Battlespace Communications System – Evolutionary architecture – Stovepipe systems will be merged – Network-enabled warfare • Advanced decision making • Greater velocity of information exchange – Incremental system development – Command Support Systems will operate seamlessly across all BCS(L) sub-systems. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/jp2072/internet_brief_24oct04.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/esd/jp2072/internet_brief_24oct04.ppt",P5IJEGFP2S3BATWFKAJQKVGZU7BY7PKB,2132870,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-esd-jp2072-internet-brief-24oct04-ppt-20060314015046.ppt 91,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/91.blob?_blob_column=image,20060314015624,https://web.archive.org/web/20060314015624/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/jp2072/wr_industry_brief_16_feb_v1.pps,2006-03-14,2006-03-14,500,"JOINT PROJECT 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) David Marshall Director General Communications Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) LTCOL Andrew Shegog Project Director JP 2072 Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Aim • Overview of the Project and capability requirement • Highlight key aspects of the RFT • Highlight key selection criteria and tender deliverables • Describe full Prime Systems Integrator role • Describe the requirements of the SOW Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Industry Brief Scope • Scope of Project • Acquisition Strategy • User Requirements • Statement of Work • Conditions of Tender • Conditions of Contract • Tender Deliverable Requirements • Open Forum Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Industry Brief Scope • Scope of Project • Acquisition Strategy • User Requirements • The OCD • ASDEFCON Template • Draft Statement of Work Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Industry Brief Scope • Conditions of Tender • Conditions of Contract • Technical Regulation in the Land Environment • Security Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Joint Project 2072 Project Scope Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Project Overview • Multi-phase project – Phase 1 approved Nov 2001 to Dec 07 – Phase 2 YOD 05/06 • Iterative approach to capability development • Minimum development in Phase 1 Phase 1 Approach • Prime Systems Integrator – Define architectural path – Complete Requirements definition and system level design • Prime Equipment Procurement – Provisioning to Bde Sized JTF – Selective solutions to fill current deficiencies • Phase 2 Definition Study • Capability Solution Demonstrators (CSD) AIRFIELD POE TACTICAL UNITS DJFHQ BDE HQ JP 2072 JP 2072 STRATEGIC INTERFACES STRATEGIC INTERFACES L o c k h e e d P - 3 O r i o n AIR & MARITIME INTERFACES COALITION INTERFACES LSF JP 2072 - Battlespace Communications System (Land) JP 2072 - Battlespace Communications System (Land) Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Battlespace Communication Systems (Land) Model Current Current Local Sub-System Tactical Data Distribution System Tactical Airborne System Overlaid Comms Systems (Inmarsat, IRIDIUM) Tactical Trunk System Tactical CNR System Supported Subsystems (BCSS, ACSS, NINOX, SDSS) Strategic Comms System Future Future Allied/ Coalition Systems Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Current Systems Combat Radio Local Area Tactical Trunk Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 1 Capability Gaps • System wide – Not Integrated - Systems are stovepiped and lack interoperability – Ineffective/non-existent Network Management – Joint and coalition interoperability: • Pri 1 - Joint • Pri 2 - US forces • Pri 3 - Other coalition nations – Interfaces to legacy systems as BCS(L) develops Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 1 Capability Gaps • Combat Radio Sub-System – Improved Capacity and Efficiency of Tactical Data Nets – Improved voice and data contention – Increased networking capability (not necessarily hierarchical architecture) – Enhanced confidence in HF through reliability of link and capacity (eg. ALE, ALM) – Embedded geo-location system (Automatic Position Location and Reporting) – Provisioning / Supportability of Current Fleet – Coalition interoperability (JTRS as a potential growth path) Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 1 Capability Gaps • Tactical Trunk Sub-System – Enhanced bearer capacity, range and networking – Improved data switching – Improved Network Efficiency and Bandwidth utilisation – Integration into greater variety of platforms (LR 110 4x4, M113 ACV) Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 1 Capability Gaps • Local Network(s) – Improved deployability and mobility – Rationalised Network Infrastructure – Converged Voice and Data Services • Integrated Network Management – Dynamic bandwidth management – One management system for all sub-systems Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 1 endorsed scope • Digitised Bde-sized JTF • JTF based upon: – HQ 3 Bde and JTF manoeuvre units – Includes LSF HQ, RAAF Elms (APOD) and links to DJFHQ • Trunk, Combat Radio and local sub-systems • Priority is data throughput and management • PDS and CSDs to assist development of future phases (TDDS and TAS) Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 2 • PCOD Nov/Dec 03, COD Mar 05 • Funding and user need dependant (increased data demand from other projects) • Based largely on Ph 1 solution • Technology ‘refresher’ on Ph 1 solution Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Phase 3 • TDDS • TAS and other range extension solutions for TDDS • Continue rollout of BCS(L) in higher readiness units/formations • Technology refresh on earlier phases Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Statement of Work Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) SOW - Document Structure Attachment A - Draft Statement of Work (Part 3) Annex A - Operational Concept Document Annex B- Specifications (TBI) Annex C - Contract Data Requirements List Annex D - List of DMO Checklists Section 2 - General Requirements Section 3 - Project Management Section 4 - Systems Engineering Section 5 - Integrated Logistic Support Section 6 - Configuration Management Section 7 - Verification and Validation Section 8 - Quality Management Program Section 1 - Scope DIDs CHECKLISTS Annex E – Core Work & Orders Annex F – Approved Substances Annex G – PRB TOR Annex H –Trade Studies SOW Annex I – Future Orders Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Statement of Work • Based on ASDEFCON (SM) template • Focuses on Core Work only • Orders specific tasks removed from JP 2072 SOW – Will be included at commencement of first Order Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Prime System Integrator - Core Work • Establishment of Contractor’s Project Management Organisation – operate through the life of the Contract • Management of the project including all reviews • Requirements analysis leading to development of the FPS, SS and SSSPEC • Conduct of the BCS(L) Trade Study • Development of the Orders Implementation Plan Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Prime System Integrator - Orders • IAW Approved Orders Implementation Plan • Issued under the head Contract • PSI SOW amended to include generic clauses • Order specific clauses included as an Annex (I) to the PSI SOW. • Must address shortfalls in the current domains of: – Combat Radio, – Tactical Trunk, – Local Area and – Network Management System Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) BCS(L) Trade Study • Commenced post, or just before, SDR – Separate SOW at Annex H to PSI SOW • Trade Study Plan is a tender deliverable • Develop Trade Study Plan and Trade Study Report DID during Offer Definition Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) BCS(L) Trade Study Outcomes • Provide alternative system solutions with a recommended solution • Provide detailed equipment solution to support the recommended system solution • Provide full costs for implementation of recommended solution • Include life cycle costs trade offs for all solutions studied Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Orders Implementation Plan • Final deliverable prior to issuing Orders • Based upon outcomes of the Trade Study • Gives a proposed plan for the implementation of the entire system solution – detailed proposal for Phase 1 Orders – less detail for Orders proposed for future phases Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) DETAILED SYSTEM (SUBSYSTEMS) DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION ACQUISITION V&V ILS CORE WORK ORDERS SYSTEM DEFINITION TRADE STUDIES OIP OCD FPS DRAFT SS SS FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS ANALYSIS REVIEWS VERIFICATION SDR ENGINEERING BASELINES FBL PBL ABL SRR2 SRR1 SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL DESIGN OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS DDR PDR V&V JP 2072 PSI CORE WORK AND ORDERS RELATIONSHIP PROJECT MANAGEMENT TIME QUALITY MANAGEMENT INTEGRATED LOGISTICS SUPPORT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT Version 2.0 Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Prime System Integrator Project Review Board • PSI Company /Project Authority higher management participation • Provide Commonwealth visibility • Provide PSI ongoing policy guidance from Commonwealth • Conduct of Contract Performance Reviews • Issue resolution outside the Project Authority/ Contractor Project Manager relationship Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) • DID Maintenance Actions – only required when necessary • DID Format – guide only – content is important Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) JP2072 Operational Concept Document MAJ Travis Faure’ JP2072 Phase 2 Project Manager “Providing the future NCW communications architecture for the ADF Land Environment” Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Topics • JP2072 Final Operational Concept Document (OCD) Overview • OCD Changes – Section One: Scope – Section Two: Definitions and References – Section Three: Capability Needs – Section Four: Existing System – Section Five: System Solution – Annex A: Operational Scenario • Summary Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) JP2072 Operational Concept Document Overview • The OCD is classified RESTRICTED • CoA sole document for expressing ‘capability requirements’ for JP2072 Describes • Characteristics of required capability • Facilitates understanding ‘Engineering Speak’ • Detail missions • Fitness for purpose Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section One: Scope • Scope • Capability shortfalls • Acquisition boundaries • Context for the project • Network Centric Warfare (NCW) • Multi Dimensional Manoeuvre Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section One • 1.3.1.13 greater explanation of Obj Force • 1.4.1 Rewritten System acquisition boundaries general • 1.4.3.1.1 – rewritten Mission System Outline general – Inclusion of endorsed scope ‘Digitised JTF’ – Inclusion of Endorsed Scope diagram • 1.4.4.4.2 Rewritten Repair and Maintenance • 1.4.5.1 Rewritten Contract Boundary • 1.4.7.1 Rewritten acquisition Strategy Boundaries Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section 2 -References • All references noted have been included on the RESTRICTED CD Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section 3 • New capability requirements • Tactical information network • Medium Intensity Conflict (MIC) • Military Operations in the Littoral Environment(MOLE) Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section 3 • 3.2.8.3 new para levels of Information systems Interoperability (LISI) and table • Figure 3.2 User Organising Principals modified • 3.3 Changed to personnel interfaces to system • Inserted Figure 3.3 Personnel Interfaces • Inserted 3.3.3 user groups (expanded and developed) • 3.3.6.1.4 reworded Under JTF • 3.3.6.7 other FMA units modified Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section 3 • 3.15 Inserted Figure Brigade Main CP • 3.16 Brigade Main HQ Layout • 3.3.8 Manoeuvre Unit inserted • 3.19 Inserted Figure Unit Command Post (CP) • 3.5.2.1 Inserted Table 3-4 : Top Level Operational Needs • 3.5.3.1 Table :3-7 amended to include additional Operational issue Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section 4 -Existing system Overview • 4.1 Rewritten to include all current in service comms systems: – Single channel Radio • RAVEN • WAGTAIL • MBITR • 4.1.6 Expanded detail of Battlespace Telecommunications Network (BTN) • 4.1.11Rewritten Existing Support system Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Section 5 -System Solution Description • To be developed by architectural studies as Part Systems Integration contract. Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Annex A • Contains – Operational Scenarios – Describe operational business processes – Functional Flow Block Diagrams (FFBD) – Developed using the logical modelling tool CORE Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Annex A • Operational activities and needs amended • Modification/revamping to scenario layouts in Table 1-2 • Identification of Operational needs from activity description. Some examples of the operational needs: – interoperability – collabortive planning – management tools – multi level security – spt voice, data and video – automated position and locating data Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Annex A – Seemless information transfer b/t nodes – Dynamic allocation of bandwidth – Interface ground to air – Real time information transfer – Precedence management – Transmission of large volumes of data – planning of concurrent operations – Deployable by C130 – Modular and scale in terms of function and performance Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Conditions of Tender Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) General Conditions • No partial tenders • No joint tenders Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • Demonstrated understanding of the end user needs – Summary of Operational Requirement – Overview of architectural direction Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • Mature Systems Engineering Processes – Quality of draft documents – Evidence of mature and documented processes – Evidence of a strong link between corporate R&D programs and project staff – Use of modelling and synthetic environments in developing architectures and proposed solutions Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • Suitability of Project Management Proposal – Proposed PM structure – Suitability of draft PMP – Past PM Performance – Identified Key Staff Positions and skill sets identified for Orders – Evidence of mature and documented PM processes Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • Suitability of Project Management Proposal – Proposed plan to meet the EVM of the SOW – Demonstrated ability to manage risk – Adequacy of risk assessment – Evidence of good subcontract management record – Sound Product Evaluation Procedure Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • Australian Industry Involvement – level of AII likely to be achieved with each proposal – key areas in which AII likely to be achieved Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • System Support – demonstrated ability to implement and manage complex system support mechanisms – the maturity and scope of the organisation’s ILS management and processes – evidence of organisational skills in Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis • draft LCC Management Plan Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Selection Criteria • Contractual issues – past performance – compliance with JP 2072 contract conditions • Cost issues – cost of core work components in SOW – rates for personnel for future work – level of overhead applied to future work Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) PSI CONTRACT • Contract Structure • Risk share and performance requirements • Ownership of IP • PSI interaction with third parties • Warranty Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Tender Deliverable Requirements Major Steven Welsh JP 2072 Phase 1 Manager Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Tender Deliverables • A single DOORS 5.2 Project Archive .dpa file ( on CD ) – with supporting external files in softcopy • 6 Paper copies of all modules, OLEs and external files Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) 6 Paper copies each in vol 1-8 in accordance with TDRL • Vol 1 – Overview • Vol 2 – Commercial • Vol 3 – Financial ( no financial information elsewhere in paper copies, it will appear in the DOORS archive with appropriate CoT Annexes ) • Vol 4 – Project Management • Vol 5 – Technical • Vol 6 - AII • Vol 7 – ILS • Vol 8 – Offer Definition Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) DOORS 5.2 References • JP 2072 Tender Response Guidelines v2.0 • JP 2072 Tender Response Diagram v3.0 – Minor change from issued in RFT Package • Available in hardcopy or on 2072 website Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Summary Respond? Response Note to tenderer etc False Tenderers are to specify ……….. True An executive summary and relevance of supporting documents goes in here… Next point …. True Next summary … Next point2 …. True Next summary2 … Next point3 …. True If referring to an External Supporting File, a description of the appropriate section is required ie. Para 1.2.3. All RFT modules that require a response in RESPONSE view RFT JP2072/Conditions of Tender/Supporting Information Folder in DOORS 1. Supporting Information Index 1.1 Doors Modules 1.1.1. Supporting Module Title A brief description of nature and relevance of supporting module. 1.1.2. Next Supporting DOORS Module Title A brief description of nature and relevance of supporting module, in this case a large document. 1.1.2.1. Details of subset1 of large document 1.1.2.2. Details of subset2 of large document 1.2 External Files 1.2.1. Supporting External File Title A brief description of nature and relevance of supporting information, highlighting specific paragraphs that are applicable. RFT JP2072/Conditions of Tender/Supporting Information/Supporting Information Index Supporting Information Folder(s) ( sub-folders if reqd ) 1.1.1. Supporting Information Module (with OLE if reqd) - Module Title (first object in module) - key supporting object (description of OLE relevance ) 1.1.2. Next Supporting Information Module - Module Title (first object in module) - key supporting object(s) The DOORS Links module is to contain all linkset information for all 1st, 2nd level and Indexing links. Formal Module properties should be set to create link module pairings, enabling drag and drop linking. RFT JP2072/Conditions of Tender/Supporting Information/ DOORS Links Next Supporting Information Module ( subset 1) - Subset Module Title (first object in module) - key subset supporting objects Next Supporting Information Module ( subset 2) - Subset Module Title (first object in module) - key subset supporting objects 2nd Level Links From subset supporting objects to main supporting objects. Linkset information to DOORS Links module. 1st Level Links From supporting document objects to RFT objects. Linkset information to DOORS Links module. Indexing Links From subset and main supporting objects, to the applicable object in the Supporting Information Index. Linkset information to DOORS Links module. >5 MB External File <5 MB OLE Embedded Version 3.0 Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Further DOORS Guidance • Switch to DOORS Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Key Tenets • Develop long term relationship • Systems Engineering focus at the outset • Integration skills essential • System design to implementation and support • Broad range of technologies required • Phase 1 focused on available technologies • Management of technology insertion and refresh • Value for money through life Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) PSI Qualities • Architectural design capability and experience • System engineering capability • System integration capability • Objectivity and vendor neutrality • Subcontract management • Introduction into service experience • System support capacity Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Delivery Details • Postal Defence Mail Services Department of Defence CANBERRA ACT 2600 Tender number 03/018ES BCS(L) 12 PM 29 April 2004 • Personal Delivery Defence Mail Services Queanbeyan Annex 6 14-22 Wycombe St QUEANBEYAN NSW 2620 Tender number 03/018ES BCS(L) 12 PM 29 April 2004 Joint Project 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) Communication • www.defence.gov.au/dmo/esd/jp2072 – Unclassified package in DOORS 5.2 and Microsoft Word • RFT questions – Faxed to 02 62652618 – Attn: PD JP 2072 • One on One Question Sessions – Be at R3 Security Desk 10 minutes prior to allocated time JOINT PROJECT 2072 Battlespace Communications System (Land) ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/esd/jp2072/wr_industry_brief_16_feb_v1.pps,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/esd/jp2072/wr_industry_brief_16_feb_v1.pps",3YQN3BMNGD32QWJFC5XORWCVFX2OEKXM,697538,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-esd-jp2072-wr-industry-brief-16-feb-v1-pps-20060314015624.pps 92,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/92.blob?_blob_column=image,20070902155218,https://web.archive.org/web/20070902155218/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/esd/land75/Post_RFT_Industry_Brief.ppt,2007-09-02,2008-12-07,500,"1 Projects Land 75 and Land 125 Battle Management System Industry Brief Bandiana, VIC 22 May 07 2 Project Director Land 75 Lieutenant Colonel Michael Toohey Russell Offices (Canberra) (02) 6266 7432 Project Director Land 125 Lieutenant Colonel Craig Oakley Victoria Barracks (Melbourne) (03) 9282 6486 3 • This Industry briefing is conducted for the purpose of providing background information only and will not be used to provide potential tenderers with information additional to that contained in the request documentation • Potential tenderers cannot rely on a statement made at this industry briefing as amending or adding to the request documentation unless the amendment or addition is confirmed by Defence in writing Defence Procurement Policy Manual, Chap 5.4, para 48 Limit of Briefing 4 Agenda • Introduction • Request for Tender/Conditions of Tender • Conditions of Contract • FPS/OSC • Conclusion 5 Aim • To discuss Request for Tender 06/050 (EWS) • To outline to potential Prime System Integrators (PSI) and sub-contractors key elements of the combined solicitation strategy for the Battle Group and Below Command, Control and Communications (BGC3) capability 6 Follow-on Activities • For those who are bidding as a Prime System Integrator (and their consortium team members) the following activities will also be conducted: – One-on-one discussions to discuss any areas of clarification conducted IAW COT – Vehicle viewing of the M113 family AS4 variants – Photographs of vehicles will be taken by Commonwealth officers and provided to the potential PSI on request. 7 BGC3 System • BGC3 Mission System – Battle Management System (BMS) (L75/L125) • BMS-Dismounted • BMS-Mounted • BMS-Command Post – Combat Radio System (CRS) (L125/JP2072) • BMS data • Local & Higher Command voice – Network Management System (NMS) (L125/JP2072) • BGC3 Support System for all the above 8 Indicative Capability Schedule • Initial Operational Capability – Mid 2009 – A Sub-Unit / Combat Team equipped & trained – Support System operational • Operational Battle Group – End 2009 • Or sooner 9 Request for Tender • RFT 06/050 released 10 May 2007 • Based on ASDEFCON Strategic Materiel • RFT closes 6 Aug 2007 • Release of Information to Tenderers – UNCLASSIFIED – RESTRICTED • ICT Clearance required for E-copy • Technical Data is Commercial-in-Confidence (not RESTRICTED as previously advised) • OSC, SCGD and Military Pamphlets RESTRICTED 10 Matters Concerning Response • The Commonwealth seeks responses using the embedded Microsoft XL Spreadsheets within clause 4 of Annex A to Attachment A of the Conditions of Tender • Certain response volumes seek only limited responses at RFT close, with a full response required only by those invited to participate in the Parallel Offer Definition Activity (PODA) – eg. Response to Annex I to Attachment A - Integrated Logistic Support • The Commonwealth will not consider partial responses 11 Technical Data • Commonwealth has provided Technical Data to enable Tenderers to respond • Requests for additional Technical Data should be directed to the Commonwealth (cf. cl. 5.5.2 in the COT) 12 Conditions of Tender • Note that Annex J to Attachment A is the PODA Deed – Enclosure 1 to the PODA Deed is the PODA Statement of Work • Note that Attachment B is the BGC3 System Demonstration Instruction • Note the Tender Data Item Deliverables (TDIDs) – Combat Radio System Description (CRSD) – Network Management System Description (NMSD) – System Integration Description (SID) – Vehicle Integration – System Software Description (SSD) – Support System Constituent Capability Description (SSCCD) – Proposed Support System Solution (PSSS) 13 Tender Evaluation Demonstrations • Four weeks prior to tender closure the Commonwealth will seek confirmation that potential tenderers are interested in participating in the system demonstrations – IAW the BGC3 System Demonstration Instruction (Attachment B to COT) • The Commonwealth will advise of the timings • Tenderers are to provide software, hardware and communications solutions – Type 1 vs Type 2 radios 14 Tender Evaluation Demonstrations • All demonstrations will be conducted in Canberra, ACT • Demonstrations will be in two parts: – 1. VTT-VMF Compliance test – 2. Bench Top and Range Testing System Demonstration • Initial Screening activity – Failure to pass VTT-VMF Compliance test may lead to Tender being set aside from further evaluation 15 VTT-VMF Compliance • Desktop compliance demonstration utilising a VMF Test Tool • Conducted during the period 14-21 Aug 2007 (immediately following tender closure) • Individual demonstration will take one day 16 System Demonstration • Successful completion of VMF Compliance test is a prerequisite • Bench top and Field (Majura) testing demonstration conducted during the period 6 Sep – 4 Oct 2007 • Individual demonstration will take 5 days • Hardware and personnel requirements are detailed in Attachment B of COT 17 Parallel Offer Definition Activity • At the completion of Tender Evaluation, the Commonwealth intends to enter into a Deed (Annex J to Attachment A to the COT) with one, two or more tenderers to conduct a PODA • The aim of conducting a PODA is to allow selected tenderers to further demonstrate their technical solution to the BMS requirement and refine their offer to the Commonwealth • The Commonwealth will make a “contribution” to costs 18 Parallel Offer Definition Activity • The schedule is the key driver for the PODA – The final activities, including integration and installation of prototypes into vehicles, will depend on Tenderers responses. • The PODA is expected to be of approximately six months duration • PODA is expected to commence NLT 1st quarter of 2008 19 Draft Conditions of Contract • ASDEFCON Strategic Materiel Format with tailoring 20 • Specific activities and milestones during the PODA include: – Achieving Prototype Design Acceptance (PDA) on vehicle interface solutions – Limited GUI modifications to meet ADF requirements – Achieving Design Acceptance on dismounted soldier interface solutions – Successful completion of System Requirements Review (SRR) – Submission of a refined offer based on work conducted during the PODA Parallel Offer Definition Activity 21 Function and Performance Specification 22 23 FPS Clause Reference 24 Elements of the BGC3 System 25 Elements of the BGC3 System: S – System D – Dismounted CP-MP – Command Post Man Packable CP-VM – Command Post Vehicle Mounted M - Mounted 26 Verification Methods: T – Test D – Demonstration A – Analysis I - Inspection 27 Example: CP Node FPS Requirement 4.1.1.4.a BMS Manoeuvre System: Essential Requirement for the BMS-CP MP Essential Requirement for the BMS-CP VM Will be verified by Demonstration during PODA Will be verified by Inspection during Tender Evaluation (or Both) 28 BGC3 System • BGC3 Mission System – Battle Management System (BMS) (L75/L125) • BMS-Dismounted • BMS-Mounted • BMS-Command Post – Combat Radio System (CRS) (L125/JP2072) • BMS data • Local & Higher Command voice – Network Management System (NMS) (L125/JP2072) • BGC3 Support System 29 Battle Management Systems • BMS-Dismounted – Designed for the dismounted Commander from Fire team to and including Battalion Commander • BMS-Mounted – Designed for the mounted Vehicle Commander – Integrated into turreted and non-turreted vehicles, including sub-systems such as Laser Range Finders • BMS-Command Post – Designed for the mounted and dismounted tactical command post. – Sub-unit commander and HQ staff – Unit commander and HQ staff – Other BCSS users up to Div HQ 30 Battlespace Communications System – Land (BCS-L) System of Systems Environment 31 Strategic Communication and Information Systems Other Communications Systems Personal Communications Systems Public and Commercial Terrestrial and Satellite Systems Battlespace Communications System (Land) Network Management System Supported Systems Command Support Systems Sensors Weapons Platforms Information Systems Information Services (Battlefield, Joint and Combined) Tactical Airborne Sub-system Local Sub-system Allied/Coalition Communication and Information Systems Tactical Trunk Sub-system Combat Radio Sub-system Tactical Data Distribution Sub-system Strategic Communication and Information Systems Other Communications Systems Personal Communications Systems Public and Commercial Terrestrial and Satellite Systems Battlespace Communications System (Land) Network Management System Supported Systems Command Support Systems Sensors Weapons Platforms Information Systems Information Services (Battlefield, Joint and Combined) Tactical Airborne Sub-system Local Sub-system Allied/Coalition Communication and Information Systems Tactical Trunk Sub-system Combat Radio Sub-system Tactical Data Distribution Sub-system BCS(L) – SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS ENVIRONMENT 32 Strategic Communication and Information Systems Other Communications Systems Personal Communications Systems Public and Commercial Terrestrial and Satellite Systems Battlespace Communications System (Land) Network Management System Supported Systems Command Support Systems Sensors Weapons Platforms Information Systems Information Services (Battlefield, Joint and Combined) Tactical Airborne Sub-system Local Sub-system Allied/Coalition Communication and Information Systems Tactical Trunk Sub-system Combat Radio Sub-system Tactical Data Distribution Sub-system Strategic Communication and Information Systems Other Communications Systems Personal Communications Systems Public and Commercial Terrestrial and Satellite Systems Battlespace Communications System (Land) Network Management System Supported Systems Command Support Systems Sensors Weapons Platforms Information Systems Information Services (Battlefield, Joint and Combined) Tactical Airborne Sub-system Local Sub-system Allied/Coalition Communication and Information Systems Tactical Trunk Sub-system Combat Radio Sub-system Tactical Data Distribution Sub-system BCS(L) – SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS ENVIRONMENT BGC3 33 GPS Comms Joint Land Coalition Air OS Air OS Maritime OS GBAD CVS ARH ARH AEW&C Op Level UAV Inf IFWS Troop Lift TUAV ISR BGC3 L121 & L75 Ph 4 L19 L17 JP129 A87 A9000 JP2089 JP2089 JP2072 JP2008 BCS(L) – SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS ENVIRONMENT 34 BGC3 Interoperability (SES) 36 37 Essential/Very Important • BMS Manoeuvre System (E) – MIL-STD-2525B - Symbology set. – IPv4; – MIL-STD-6017A with MIL-STD-2045-47001C • Combat Radio System (VI) – Secure and non-secure voice with in-service Combat Net Radio (CNR) equipment specified in Annex B – MIL-STD-188-220B with MIL-STD-188-242 and SINCGARS ESIP waveform. – MIL-STD-188-220B with MIL-STD-188-243 and with HAVEQUICK I/II ECCM waveforms compliant with JIEO 9120A “UHF HAVEQUICK/SATURN Waveform Technical Interface Specification” 38 Important/ Desirable • BMS Manoeuvre System – Dual Stack IPv4 and IPv6. • Combat Radio System – MIL-STD-188-220C with MIL-STD-188-242 and SINCGARS ESIP waveform. – MIL-STD-188-220C with MIL-STD-188-243 and with HAVEQUICK I/II ECCM waveforms compliant with JIEO 9120A “UHF HAVEQUICK/SATURN Waveform Technical Interface Specification” 39 Network Latency • Prime Function – Common Operating Picture (including Blue Force Tracks) • Latency requirements – are specified to meet operational need – are not specified to support any particular network topology/design – recognise that at any instant the COP will have information of varying ‘age’ at different organisational levels within the AO. Bg 1 Coy 1 Coy 2 Coy N Plt 1 Plt 2 Plt N Plt 1 Plt 2 Plt N Bg level Coy level Plt level D A B C F G H E J I Intra-chain-of-command Intra-chain-of-command Intra-chain-of-command 40 Network Management • Open Systems • Scalable • Ability for a NMS Manager to plan, deploy, operate and reconfigure the System from any mounted Node or CP • Automate generation of Army SOIs and CEOIs • Ability to test system plans based on expected Operator requirements, terrain analysis and concept of operations • Shall plan, configure, monitor, and manage interfaces to external systems. • The NMS shall assign and de-conflict frequency assignments for current and future system architectures while monitoring current operation 41 Conclusion • Tender process designed to select a mature BGC3 system • Tender packs for cleared Companies are available in the Foyer after the question time • A L75 WWW Website will be created over the next three weeks – This presentation will be posted on that website • New Land 75 PM BMS – Major Roger Grose (WEF 14 Jun) • Questions may be answered or taken on notice – E-Correspondence bgc3.tender@defence.gov.au 42 QUESTIONS? ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/esd/land75/Post_RFT_Industry_Brief.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/esd/land75/post_rft_industry_brief.ppt",T7P7IAXBHPVQ3UTIRCPF7Q6ZHSY5XIOH,4044835,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-esd-land75-post-rft-industry-brief-ppt-20070902155218.ppt 93,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/93.blob?_blob_column=image,20130503132153,https://web.archive.org/web/20130503132153/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/aic/Introducing_AICprogram_28May12.ppt,2013-05-03,2014-03-11,500," THE AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRY CAPABILITY PROGRAM Australian Industry Capability Directorate COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION The Australian Industry Capability Program • Introducing the AIC Program • Industry Requirements • AIC Plans and Deeds • AIC Program Templates • For Tenderers • Waivers • Audits • Key Contacts and Resources COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Introducing the Australian Industry Capability Program • Defence strategy, the capability needs of the ADF and the requirement to achieve value for money determine Defence’s investment priorities and the need for any specific in-country industry capabilities. • The Defence and Industry Policy Statement (DIPS) 2010 aims to ensure the ADF receives the materiel, systems, and support it requires on a value for money basis and sets out the policy requirements to be implemented under the AIC program that will enable this objective to be achieved. • Under DIPS 2010, the AIC program aims to: – provide opportunities for Australian companies to compete on their merits – influence foreign companies to deliver cost effective Defence solutions – facilitate transfer of technology – encourage investment in Australian industry COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Introducing the Australian Industry Capability Program • Unlike its predecessor, the Australian Industry Involvement (AII) program, the AIC program is not a percentage-based framework. Rather, it aims to create opportunities for Australian industry to compete for Defence work on a value for money basis. • Accordingly, the AIC program works through contracts – or their equivalent - with Australia’s domestic industry capability requirements addressed via AIC Plans and AIC Deeds. • AIC Plans and Deeds proposed in Tenders and negotiated and agreed under respective contracts – or their equivalent - record the specific industry arrangements that will deliver the desired industry outcomes. • To represent value for money, tendered solutions should describe how the proposed approach will enhance Defence industry capability and capacity. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Introducing the Australian Industry Capability Program • AIC Program requirements apply to all eligible procurements progressed under the Capability Lifecycle: – Needs – Requirements – Acquisition – Through-Life Support – Disposal COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Introducing the Australian Industry Capability Program • Within DMO’s Commercial Group, an AIC Directorate has been established to facilitate implementation of the AIC program • The AIC Team informs development of and promotes Defence’s AIC policy settings and engages across Defence (including CDG), DMO and industry. • The AIC Directorate also facilitates integration of other Defence industry programs, where appropriate, including: – Global Supply Chain (GSC) Program – Concept Technology Demonstrator (CTD) Program – Rapid Prototyping, Development and Evaluation (RPDE) – Priority Industry Capability Innovation Program (PICIP) – Skilling Australian Defence Industry (SADI) Program – Defence Industry Innovation Centre (DIIC) – Defence Materials Technology Centre (DMTC) COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Industry Requirements • Industry Requirements define the activities, tasks, or work packages in Tenders – or equivalent - that Tenderers are to respond to. • Industry Requirements are specific to individual procurements but in each case address relevant: – Priority Industry Capabilities (PIC); – Strategic Industry Capabilities (SIC); and – Project / Product Specific Industry Capabilities (PSIC). • Procurement officers should seek assistance from the AIC Directorate when developing Industry Requirements. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Industry Requirements • Priority Industry Capabilities (PIC) are those industry capabilities deemed to confer an essential strategic advantage by being resident within Australia, and which, if not available, would significantly undermine defence self-reliance and ADF operational capability. The PICs are discussed in DIPS 2010. • Strategic Industry Capabilities (SIC) are industry capabilities that provide Australia with enhanced Defence self-reliance, ADF operational capability, or longer term procurement certainty. The SICs are discussed in DIPS 2010. • Project / Product Specific Industry Capabilities (PSIC) are those industry capabilities determined by the Project or Product Sponsor that aim to enhance or improve the capability delivered through inclusion of Australian companies. • Local Industry Activities (LIA) are those industry activities proposed in tender responses that address the Industry Requirements. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Building Industry Capability Through Industry Requirements COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Industry Capability Needs Analysis Industry Industry Solution (Included in Tender Response, or equivalent, and carried into the Contract) Systems Engineering Design Training Electronic Warfare System of Systems Integration Protection of Comms etc Training Data Mgt PIC 1 PIC 2 SIC 1 PSIC 1 Industry Requirements (for inclusion in Tender, or equivalent) Planning and management of upgrades to the battle and communication systems to ensure compatibility with XYZ capabilities in the Network Centric Warfare Environment. Provision of subject matter expertise for the development of manuals and training delivery as a result of each system upgrade. Industry Requirement 1 Industry Requirement 2 Local Industry Activity 1 Local Industry Activity 2 Local Industry Activity 3 Industry Requirements • Industry Requirements are expected to be refined over time as the Project / Product progresses through the procurement lifecycle. • Procurement officers need access to the respective Statement of Work (SOW) and Functional and Performance Specification (FPS) to develop the Industry Requirements. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Stage DCP Entry RFT Release Contract Industry Capability Needs PICs: EW; MSCS SICs: RMUFRWA PSIC: Training Industry Requirements Industry Requirement 1 Industry Requirement 2 Industry Requirement 3 Industry Requirement 4 Local Industry Activities AIC Plan AIC Schedule Local Industry Activities/ AIC Deed Opportunities AIC Plans and Schedules • AIC Plans – An AIC Plan must be sought for all Defence procurements, including Government to Government, Foreign Military Sales, and Direct Commercial Sales (US) procurements, where the value of the tender is expected to exceed $20 million; or – The procurement will impact upon a Priority Industry Capability (PIC). COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION • AIC Program Requirements for Contract Change Proposals AIC Plans and Schedules COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Prime Contract =>$20m AIC Plan AIC Schedule Required CCP 1 CCP 2 CCP 3 LIAs to be Identified Survey & Quote Survey & Quote Survey & Quote Summed & Captured in AIC Plan Annually Local Industry Activities captured AIC Report Submitted AIC Deeds • Government to Government and FMS procurements are not exempt from the AIC program requirements and are addressed through AIC Deeds. • AIC Deeds – An AIC Deed formalises Defence’s expectation that international Primes will market test and engage Australian industry, where cost effective to do so. – The requirement for an AIC Deed is to be underpinned by a business case. – The likelihood of success in achieving AIC program requirements is influenced by access to the relevant Technical Data and Intellectual Property. – AIC Deed Annexes are contract deliverables. – It is anticipated that the majority of AIC Deeds will be agreed for the provision of Through-Life Support services. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION AIC Deeds COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION ADF US DoD FMS Program Office US Company Australian Industry LOA LOR Market Test & Contract Deliverables AIC Deed AIC Annexes Deliverables $ $ $ DEFMAT (W) AIC Program Templates • Examples – AIC Plan – AIC Deed COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION AIC Plan AIC Schedule LIA Description AIC Progress Report AIC Deed For Tenderers • Common faults in tender responses: – Focus on administrative content (e.g. travel, freight, insurance, bank fees) instead of industry capability. – Fail to address Industry Requirements. – Fail to describe how Australian industry will be market tested. – Fail to address associated Intellectual Property (IP) requirements. – Fail to link LIAs to the Work Breakdown Structure and Price Schedule. – Propose opportunities for Australian industry that are contingent upon the company winning other tenders. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION AIC Program Waivers • Under certain circumstances – e.g. an urgent operational requirement or ITAR or IP restrictions – a waiver may be sought from having to comply with specific AIC program requirements. • All requests for waivers must identify the specific AIC program requirement to be waived (e.g. AIC Plan or AIC Deed). • All requests for AIC Program Waivers are to be endorsed by the respective CDG/ DMO Division Head and approved by DMO’s HCES. • Procurement officers are encouraged to consult with the AIC Directorate when developing and staffing requests for waivers. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION AIC Program Audits • DIPS 2010 requires DMO’s AIC Directorate to conduct audits on Systems Program Office (SPO) AIC program management arrangements. • AIC Program Management Audits will commence in 2012 and will focus on confirming that AIC Plans and Deeds are being developed, implemented, and managed in accordance with Defence’s AIC program policy requirements. • Where audits identify a requirement for remedial action, DMO’s CES Division will assist the relevant SPO rectify the identified deficiencies. COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION Key Contacts and Resources • AIC Program Information and Resources - www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/aic • General AIC Enquiries - aic.info@defence.gov.au • Director AIC Program: Mr Christopher Ament – Christopher.Ament@defence.gov.au COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION The Australian Industry Capability Program Questions? COMMERCIAL ENABLING SERVICES DIVISION ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/aic/Introducing_AICprogram_28May12.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/aic/introducing_aicprogram_28may12.ppt",CKAPNTI3XKBU32N4A2TR4OOKQ2NNEBTV,310153,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-aic-introducing-aicprogram-28may12-ppt-20130503132153.ppt 94,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/94.blob?_blob_column=image,20060303232901,https://web.archive.org/web/20060303232901/http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/id/defence_industry_2005/AWD_Team_presentation.ppt,2006-03-03,2006-03-03,500," Air Warfare Destroyer Program Building Australia’s future air warfare capability Mr Warren King, Program Manager – Air Warfare Destroyer, DMO • What we’re about: The timely and efficient delivery of an affordable, effective, flexible and sustainable Air Warfare Destroyer capability for the security of Australia • Major project milestones achieved to date: Ship designer AWD Systems Centre Building Australia’s future air warfare capability CAPT Andrew Cawley, RAN, Chief Engineer – Air Warfare Destroyer Program, DMO AWD Systems Centre www.ausawd.com Mr John Gallacher, Chief Executive Officer, ASC Shipbuilding • Part of an integrated alliance team which will design, engineer, procure, build and deliver the ships to the RAN • Lead role in detailed engineering, manufacturing, consolidation and trials of ships in Adelaide • Will share risk and reward on project outcomes • Modern shipbuilding facilities in Adelaide AWD Shipbuilder • 1000 staff • Over 250 project management, naval design and engineering specialists • Partnered with Bath Iron Works – bringing world’s best practice surface combatant ship construction techniques • Partnered with Sinclair Knight Mertz – bringing Australia-wide capacity in naval detailed design Indicative resource build-up Industry opportunities Industry opportunities Infrastructure plans AWD Combat System-Systems Engineer Collins DDX LPD-17 DDX LPD-17 Aegis components Mr John Allcock, General Manager Systems Group, Raytheon Australia • AWD Combat System-Systems Engineer role: – Development of project management and systems engineering as part of the alliance – Undertake trade studies – Assist with establishment of AWD Systems Centre – Integrate non-Aegis elements of combat system • Raytheon credentials AWD Combat System-Systems Engineer • Established and experienced Australian workforce • Reach Back to the US will transfer experience and expertise to Australian workforce • Skilling Australia’s Defence Industry Policy • Integrated Product Development System • Cost As an Independent Variable (CAIV) • Integrated Product Teams • Commitment to an on time and on budget program Mr Paul Johnson, Managing Director, Lockheed Martin Australia • Aegis – the world’s most advanced shipboard weapon system • A highly integrated ship combat system • Built around the weapon system • Capable of simultaneous warfare on many fronts • Air, surface, subsurface, strike, area missile defence 105 Aegis Equipped Ships World-Wide – On Schedule 105 Aegis Equipped Ships World-Wide – On Schedule In Commission Planned 25 25 44 44 4 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 00 18 18 2 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 Total 75 Total 75 30 30 • Ships – USN TICONDEROGA CG 47 Class Cruisers – USN ARLEIGH BURKE DDG 51 Class Destroyers – Japan KONGO DDG 173 Class Destroyers – Spanish Alvaro de Bazan F-100 Class Frigates – Norway Fridtjof Nansen F-310 Class Frigates – S.Korea KDX-III Class Destroyers USN Aegis Combat System Engineering Agent USN Aegis Combat System Engineering Agent Forming the AWD Team USN Model PEO IWS System Engineer Direct Review Accept Combat System Engineering Agent Design Engineer Produce Ship Integrate System Integrate Land Based Test Ship Test Shipbuilders Design Engineer Construct Communication Communication Lockheed Martin Northrop Grumman (Pascagoula) General Dynamics (Bath) Install Test Trial Navy Program Office US Contracts INTEGRATED CAPABILITY TEAM USN Aegis CSEA (LMC) ALLIANCE Commonwealth AWD Platform System Designer AWD CSSE AWD Shipbuilder Government FMS Arrangement AWD Team Mr Warren King, Program Manager – Air Warfare Destroyer, DMO • Next steps: – Government to select ship designer – Defence+Industry regional conferences • How to contact us: – AWD.program@defence.gov.au - now operational – www.ausawd.com - coming 1 October 2005 – AWD road show - October 2005 ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au:80/dmo/id/defence_industry_2005/AWD_Team_presentation.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2005/awd_team_presentation.ppt",D7FZQ7ZHGL5CXL3WOXMQSZZJSTNMDW34,2666161,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2005-awd-team-presentation-ppt-20060303232901.ppt 95,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/95.blob?_blob_column=image,20060913170056,https://web.archive.org/web/20060913170056/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/LTGEN_Hurley.ppt,2006-09-13,2006-09-13,500,"1 Defence Capability Plan 2006-16 Lieutenant General David Hurley D&I Conference 2006 2 Scope  Introduction  DCP 2004-14 Achievements  DCP 2006-16 3 Defence Capability Plan  Development plan for Australia's military capabilities  Rolling 10 year focus  Updated annually as part of the budget process  Public version is released regularly to inform industry of Defence’s capability needs 4 Public DCP 2004-14  Released in February 2004  57 Government approvals to date  15 Approvals pre Kinnaird  13 Approvals during Transition period  29 First and Second Pass Approval  $11.3 bn total value  Achievement of over 80% of the planned approvals at either 1st or 2nd pass until 2006-07. 5 Post Kinnaird Approvals  14 Second Pass Approvals including:  Follow on Stand off weapon for FA-18  Airborne Surveillance for Land Operations  ANZAC ASMD Upgrade – Fire Control Radar  Heavy Airlift  AWD – Long Lead Items 6 Post Kinnaird Approvals  14 Second Pass Approvals including:  Follow on Stand off weapon for FA-18  Airborne Surveillance for Land Operations  ANZAC ASMD Upgrade – Fire Control Radar  Heavy Airlift  AWD – Long Lead Items 7 Post Kinnaird Approvals  14 Second Pass Approvals including:  Follow on Stand off weapon for FA-18  Airborne Surveillance for Land Operations  ANZAC ASMD Upgrade – Fire Control Radar  Heavy Airlift  AWD – Long Lead Items 8 Post Kinnaird Approvals  14 Second Pass Approvals including:  Follow on Stand off weapon for FA-18  Airborne Surveillance for Land Operations  ANZAC ASMD Upgrade – Fire Control Radar  Heavy Airlift  AWD – Long Lead Items 9  15 First Pass Approvals including:  Air Warfare Destroyer  Amphibious Deployment and Sustainment  Follow on Standoff Weapon Capability (also received 2nd Pass)  Improved Logistics Information System  Overlander – Field Vehicles and Trailers  Soldier Enhancement Version 2 Post Kinnaird Approvals 10 DCP 2006-16  Highlights  Financial Aspects  Key projects  Changes since DCP 2004-14  Delivering the DCP  Implementation of Kinnaird 11 DCP 2006-16 Financial Aspects  Funding  Continuation of 3% funding growth beyond 2010/11 adds over $2 billion up to 2015/16  $625 million reprogrammed into Forward Estimates period 12 DCP 2006-16 Financial Aspects  Costs  DCP 2006-16 total cost over $51 billion  $31 billion to be spent on next 10 years on DCP projects  together with approved projects around $45 billion to be spend on Defence capabilities over the next decade 13 Cumulative DCP Funding 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DCP Year Cumulative DCP Funding ($ billion) 2004-14 DCP 2006-16 DCP Total Major Capital Equipment 2004-14 Total Major Capital Equipment 2006-16 14 Key DCP 2006-16 Projects  Joint Strike Fighter $12bn +  Air Warfare Destroyer $4.5bn +  Helicopters $3.7bn +  Maritime Patrol Aircraft $3.5bn +  Overlander $2.5bn +  Amphibious Ships $1.7bn +  Multi-mission UAV $1bn +  Military Satellite Capability $1bn + 15 Key Changes since DCP 2004-14  Changes include  rolling the DCP on out to 2015/16,  new projects,  increased project provisions,  reductions/deletions, and  timing changes. 16 New Projects in DCP 2006-16  24 new Projects/Phases worth $7.4 billion including:  Naval Combat Helicopters $2.5bn +  Ground Based Air Defence $750m +  Hawk Mid Life Upgrade $350m +  Logistics Management System $350m +  ANZAC Enhancement $350m + 17 Cost Increases to Existing Projects  17 cost band increases including:  Satellite Communications now $1000m to $1500m  Multi-Mission UAV now $1000m to $1500m  C-130H Replacement now $750m to $1000m  Hornet Refurbishment now $600m to $750m  ADF JCS Environment now $250m to $350m  Logistics Info Systems now $150m to $200m 18 Reductions/Deletions  3 deleted projects worth less than $100m;  5 cost band reductions including:  Surveillance Enhancement now $250m to $350m  Seahawk Mid-life Upgrade now $350m to $450m  Artillery Replacement now $450m to $600m 19 Delivering the DCP Implementation of Kinnaird  Significant preparatory work between 1st and 2nd pass  on average 22 months between 1st to 2nd pass  average 6% of total project funds spent before 2nd pass  Plus total annual funding of up to $66 million for:  Project Development Funds,  Capability Technology Demonstrators, and  Rapid Prototyping Development and Evaluation. 20 Initiatives in FY 06/07  New ‘Entry into DCP’ step  Formation of a Defence T&E Office  Re-orientation of Australian defence Simulation Office  Test the ‘one size fits all’ approach with Central Agencies  NCW Assessment and Compliance Gateways 2 1 CONCLUSION ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/LTGEN_Hurley.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/ltgen_hurley.ppt",JARPXQCNYD63OKKKQSIBASFZNN2RLNE5,1677619,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2006-20june-ltgen-hurley-ppt-20060913170056.ppt 96,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/96.blob?_blob_column=image,20060913165103,https://web.archive.org/web/20060913165103/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/MAJGEN_Molan.ppt,2006-09-13,2006-09-13,500,"Assisting Assisting Defence Defence Exports Exports Final 14 June 06 Assisting Defence Assisting Defence Industry to Export Industry to Export Major General Jim Molan AO DSC DMA DMO The position is known as the Defence Materiel Advocate (DMA). June 2004 - Minister for Defence as a ""new Defence export initiative"". MAJGEN Molan joined DMO as the DMA on 8 August 2005. Background Background Role The role of the DMA, as stated by the Minister, was to ""…help promote Australian defence exports and provide the linkage to operational experience"". Developments to DMA Position Developments to DMA Position I am no longer full time as the DMA. I am shared between the DMA job and an operational job This should be no problem as long as I am staffed appropriately. I hope that this will occur soon I will focus on strategy, direction and representing you overseas. Minister’s Inquiry into Defence Industry – results are keenly anticipated in export facilitation area Operational Position – under VCDF Operational Position – under VCDF Joint Joint Warfighting Warfighting Lessons and Lessons and Concepts Concepts Tasks What can I actually do? Assist access to foreign defence decision makers: Targeted visits overseas Door Kicking Role Door Kicking Role Exhibitions here and overseas Engage Foreign Visitors to Australia Provide operational advice In groups – SA, NSW, AIDN Individually – Companies – panel of experts Focus Development of programs, plans and strategies Requirement from Industry Requirement from Industry ( to kick a door down) ( to kick a door down) Give me a Target Give me a product – preferably one the ADF uses and that I have used and can therefore sincerely support Give me a time and place that we can meet with Target Stand back Previous Strategy for Previous Strategy for Assisting Assisting Who ever yells at me last gets my undivided attention! Achievements Since August 2005  Presentations to:  14 Military or Defence audiences,  5 civilian audiences,  4 media interviews,  22 Industry or Capability presentations or visits and  provided operational advice to 2 companies.  Presented:  4 papers to the CDF  2 strategy papers to CEO DMO and DEC  Direct Support.  8 trade shows  2 conference overseas  6 conferences in Australia.  5 specific visits out of Canberra to 10 companies  met formally with 12 companies or their local representatives and many more companies informally The Future Strategy The Future Strategy Submission to the Minister’s Inquiry on Broader Issues Certain Initiatives Implement the Program The DMA Program Export Assistance to Defence Industry 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 Activity Plan 2006-2008 Activity Plan 2006-2008 Financial Year 2006 and 2007 Financial Year 2006 and 2007 Financial Year 2007 and 2008 Financial Year 2007 and 2008 What I cannot do I cannot assist you to develop your product for export – Industry Development is the responsibility of HID Cannot take on smaller products – need to group similar products Unlikely to be able to give priority to products or services that are not in use in the ADF – they will remain my priority I am here to help – try me! CONTACT DETAILS Major General Jim Molan Defence Materiel Advocate through Mr Stephen Park-smith DMA Policy Officer R2-5-B009 02 626 67693 Email: stephen.park-smith@defence.gov.au Questions Questions ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/MAJGEN_Molan.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/majgen_molan.ppt",EG3YX6OYRQPEAN2UCXXVYYQX5C2T2XNF,247224,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2006-20june-majgen-molan-ppt-20060913165103.ppt 97,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/97.blob?_blob_column=image,20060913170143,https://web.archive.org/web/20060913170143/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/Tim_Scully.ppt,2006-09-13,2006-09-13,500,"Tuesday, 19 May 2020 Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it's everybody's busi ness Defence + Industry 2006 ‘Working together to secure Defence capability’ Tim Scully Head Defence Security Authority ‘Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it’s everybody’s business’ Tuesday, 19 May 2020 Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it's everybody's busi ness DSA responsibilities • Must ensure Defence meets Australian Government standards for protective security • Manage over 154,000 clearances (includes over 33,000 for industry) • Process over 13,000 upgrades and initial clearances, and over 6000 aftercare processes annually. Aftercare will build to over 12,000 next year. • The US and UK face similar issues, but on a larger scale ‘Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it’s everybody’s business’ Tuesday, 19 May 2020 Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it's everybody's busi ness Planning personnel security requirements • Delays to industry are delays to Defence • Primary focus is support for Defence operations • Identify your clearance requirements early • Discuss your clearance requirements with the relevant Defence element and DSA • Prioritise your clearance requirements ‘Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it’s everybody’s business’ Tuesday, 19 May 2020 Working together • DSA is driving change in protective security • Changes to DSA internal processes • Flexibility with existing and previously held clearances • Develop a relationship with DSA • Security is everybody’s business ‘Secure capability, secure operations, secure Defence: it’s everybody’s business’ ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/Tim_Scully.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/20june/tim_scully.ppt",7GOGR65BXQWKX5RR2K3YN6NFQ3FJRQZK,39032,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2006-20june-tim-scully-ppt-20060913170143.ppt 98,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/98.blob?_blob_column=image,20060913165134,https://web.archive.org/web/20060913165134/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/DCEO.ppt,2006-09-13,2006-09-13,500," DMO PROJECTS: SCHEDULE - COST - PERFORMANCE Kim Gillis Deputy CEO DMO 06/07 BUDGET $8.7 Billion – $5.018 Billion on Acquisition – $3.599 Billion on Sustainment – About 45% of Defence budget – Approx. 0.8% of Australia’s GDP TOP LEVEL GOALS FOR THE DMO DMO Purpose: ‘Equip and Sustain Australia’s Defence Force’ Optimise capability to military and nation by: 1. Delivering projects and sustainment (‘effectiveness’): – On time – On budget – To required quality – Safety – Capability 2. Make DMO more businesslike, accountable and outcome-driven (‘efficiency’) • ANAO 2005-06 program: Explosives, ASLAV, Army minors, HMAS Westralia replacement, Air Combat Fleet ISS, SDSS Get Well, HF Modernisation • ANAO concerned about cumulative effect of CCPs and low-level approving of CCPs. - Schedule - Cost - Requirements/Capability - Contract and CCPs - Logistics - Project management - Funding approval and legislative adherence - Test regime - Interoperability & standardisation - In-service support Performance Audits — ANAO measure against 10 attributes: AUDIT — ANAO AMCIP EXPENDITURE BUDGET NUMBERS • DMO has about 210 major projects • Total value of projects in the capital plan is $53.7b • Since Jul 03, of the 26 projects closed (worth about $5b): – eight projects required real budget increase ($127m) – excludes the effects of ‘intentional’ scope increase – 18 managed a real budget decrease ($90m) • This equates to a Nett Variation of $37m (only 0.7% of the total) • Australia’s problem is not COST - it is SCHEDULE  80% of the remaining cost problem is schedule  A surrogate for schedule slippage is capital underspend 59% of cost ‘increase’ was inflation, 30% was foreign exchange Only 11% was ‘real’ cost increase COST/SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE ACROSS PROJECT LIFE TOP 64 AMCIP PROJECTS 1983 - 2004 Tempo (1) OPERATIONAL DEPLOYMENTS - Effects on Contracts • Managing emergent capabilities straight into the field with not every contractual risk mitigation process in place • ASLAVs and Bushrangers to Iraq are examples • Not really new – we are just rediscovering it • Impacts on Contracts: – Prolongation , Excusable Delay, Certification – Spares, Logistic Support • Requires Defence Industry to play by new rules – in a ‘working together’ way in the national interest • East Timor - concurrency Tempo (2) DMO ANNUAL BUDGET (excluding GST) Budget in next 3 years $8.4b to $9.4b (12%) Constant 06/07 Dollars Budget in 3 years $6.5b to $8.4b (30%) 07-08 Actual Dollars 08-09 09-10 10 9.5 $AUS Billion 6.5 7.0 7.5 DMO Prescription 1 July 2005 Financial Year 03-04 02-03 04-05 05-06 06-07 PBS 06/07 data but with $0.4b Brought Forward from 06-07 to 05-06 for C17 Heavy Airlift Projected Budget 9.0 8.5 8.0 6.0 Actuals Kinnaird Review completed September Why is capability not achieved to Schedule? • Delays in approving projects • Delays in contracting for equipment • Contract Change Proposals • Delays in delivery of equipment • Delays in introduction into service WHY SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE? • Unrealistic schedules • Contract change proposals • Staff qualifications/training • Late delivery • Failure to report schedule problems early (industry) • Failure to detect schedule problems early (DMO) • Staff changes post-contract signature (both) FROM SLIPPAGE TO COST INCREASE Schedule slip causes cost increase to contractors or Defence through: • Inflation and FOREX movements as time passes. • Real cost of equipment rising over time • Overheads carried for a longer time. • Replanning and schedule recovery cost money. - Consequent costs, including T & E. • Production line ‘gap’ missed - restarts. • Dependent projects delayed. • ADF operational effects. • Early obsolescence or higher cost of equipment retention. • May compel change proposals. • Early warranty expiry. How does the DMO compare vs US AND UK? - MAJOR ACQUISITION PROJECTS (Converted to $AUS & 2006 figures) * 25 identified US projects ** 19 identified UK projects *** Across Top 30 DMO Acquisition projects **** Based on 26 projects closed since July 2003 (Approx. $5b) US IT data based on 2003 Standish Group Survey 15.7 $5.04 billion billion 30%- 40% 43% 10.4% 0.7% 17% 82% 20% 16% DMO 0.8% US DoD US IT UK MoD DMO Australia BUDGET (Aquisition) $126.1 billion $255 billion AVERAGE COST INCREASE AVERAGE SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE Defence 1.8% % OF GDP 3.9% 7.8% 2.4% UK MOD PROCUREMENT – AUDIT STUDIES – 1st report Effective project control is the key. Developing the contracting strategy: - Plan & manage the negotiation process. - Understand the desired outcomes. - Plan for successful execution. UK NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE: THE GOLD STANDARD (1) Plan and manage contract negotiation – Right portfolio of skills & experience – Clear ground rules for negotiation and application of the contract – Active strategic analysis of the portfolio of contracts and application of lessons learnt Understand the outcomes to be delivered – Negotiate from a common baseline – Ensure all parties understand the contract negotiated Plan for successful execution – Link the contract to the agreement of desired behaviours in executing the project – Use the contract to incentivise achievement, with use of contract terms to protect the parties. UK NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE: THE GOLD STANDARD (2) The Contracting Strategies Tool – Encourages early commercial input – Promotes discussion of procurement arrangements – Analyses the type of procurement applicable – Guides development of the appropriate contracting strategy – Provides a checklist review before the strategy is implemented * Has been developed to ‘proof of concept’ stage. WHY SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE? (reprise) • Unrealistic schedules • Contract change proposals • Staff qualifications/training • Late delivery • Failure to report schedule problems early (industry) • Failure to detect schedule problems early (DMO) • Staff changes post-contract signature (both) SCHEDULE & MANAGEMENT: AREAS OF INTEREST (1) • Realistic schedules and simpler master schedules. • Minimise number of contract changes. • Minimise time taken resolving contract changes. • Keep contract changes to the design stage. • More incentives for on-time delivery. • Enforced penalties for late delivery. SCHEDULE & MANAGEMENT: AREAS OF INTEREST (2) • Increasing % of contract value paid on delivery. • Regular and earlier contractor reporting. • Contractor to report regularly on est. delivery date. • Earlier detection of project slippage. • Minimise changes to staff numbers and personnel. SUPPORTING THE DMO’S PEOPLE • DMO Institute comes with high quality training on schedule management (art & science) and the tools. • Class room training should be followed up by on-the-job assessment. • Can universities introduce engineers to schedule management and tools such as OPP? • Train project directors/managers in schedule analysis. • Clear and & concise Instructions on the principles of schedule management. • Simple and concise administrative processes and procedures in support of project schedule management. Project management • Complex project management competencies • Establishment of Project Management College • UK MOD and DPA discussions • AIPM Special Reference Group • DMO commitment to project management • Industry incentives to participate • SADI review CONCLUSION Schedule Cost Performance ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/DCEO.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/dceo.ppt",PG3V4UN2OQPWHKFJJQSAKE7ZNZQLR3YG,327752,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2006-21june-dceo-ppt-20060913165134.ppt 99,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/99.blob?_blob_column=image,20060913170203,https://web.archive.org/web/20060913170203/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/DI%20Conference.ppt,2006-09-13,2006-09-13,500,"Mr Warren King Program Manager - Air Warfare Destroyer DEFENCE+INDUSTRY 2006 CONFERENCE AWD Program Update Shaping the AWD Program • Kinnaird • Carnegie Wylie Review • Design led procurement philosophy Achievements to date • RFPs for Shipbuilder, Combat System-System Engineer and Platform System Designer released and evaluated • 6 successful decisions from 5 visits to Government in 2005 – CSSE – Raytheon Australia Pty Ltd – Shipbuilder – ASC AWD Shipbuilding Pty Ltd – Evolved Ship Designer – Gibbs & Cox, Inc. Achievements to date • AWD Systems Centre Location • Phase 2 - Design – Capability Requirements Review - Early 2006 – Systems Design Review - Mid 2006 – Mid Term Review – Mid 2006 – Preliminary Design Review - Mid 2007 – Second Pass – Second-half 2007 • Phase 3 - Build – Critical Design Review - Mid 2008 – Delivery - from 2013 Future Outcomes • Build skills base through First and Second Pass Approval • Skilling Australia’s Defence Industry (SADI) • AWD Roadshow – Industry Interest • Maturity of Maritime industry Industry Factors • Systems Integration • Operational Capability • Minimum manning • Future growth demands Technical Challenges • Our Vision – An Australian Air Warfare Destroyer Capability – Future ‘In Country’ naval construction assured Summary ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/DI%20Conference.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/di%20conference.ppt",LGAUAAPC4VOLBEFJU4X6PTO2JAL3XWM2,548155,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2006-21june-di-20conference-ppt-20060913170203.ppt 100,/defence-gov-au-powerpoints/files/100.blob?_blob_column=image,20060913165640,https://web.archive.org/web/20060913165640/http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/DominicZaal.ppt,2006-09-13,2006-09-13,500,"Dominic Zaal Dominic Zaal Director General Industry Capability Director General Industry Capability 21 June 2006 21 June 2006 Defence and Industry Conference 2006 Defence and Industry Conference 2006 Defence Capability Plan: Defence Capability Plan: Industry Capability Industry Capability Defence Capability Plan  Provide industry with planning guidance on Defence capability requirements and associated spending intentions  Promote investment in the skills and capabilities required by Defence  Represents a 20% + increase in Defence demand over the next decade  Significant opportunities for Australian industry both Primes and SMEs  Includes new guidance on Australian industry opportunities  by capabilities and by activities  work in progress Defence Capability Plan: Australian Industry Opportunities Activities/Capabilities Avionics Command and Control Systems Communications Systems Data Fusion technologies Electronic Warfare Systems Information and Database Management Systems Photonic technologies Propulsion Systems Radar Technologies Sensor Systems Simulation Systems Software Systems Space-based Communications Structures Surveillance and Reconnaissance Systems Systems Architecture Training Aids Underwater Acoustic Technologies Weapon Systems Other Design Assembly/Construction Refurbishment / Outfitting Project Management Configuration Management Simulation / Modeling Systems Development Systems Integration Education/Training Logistical Support In-Service Support Testing and Evaluation Defence Capability Plan  Have done a preliminary analysis of the DCP and Sustainment expenditure:  by key defence industry sectors  by total and estimated in-country expenditure  by key capability areas  this is very much work in progress – still needs to be validated  does not detail what capabilities or how much work should be done in-country Total Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 41 Billion Sustainment - $ 40 Billion Total - $ 81 Billion 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition DCP Sustainment Total Procurement In-Country Expenditure  Acquisition: In-Country Expenditure 20% – 50%  differs from sector to sector  historically – 46%  Sustainment: In-Country Expenditure 60% – 90%  again differs from sector to sector  historically – 85% Estimated In-Country Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 16 Billion Sustainment - $ 32 Billion Total - $ 48 Billion 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition In-country Sustainment In-country Total In-country Procurement Estimated Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure by Sector Electronics 46% Aerospace 29% Maritime 10% Vehicles & Land 9% Weapons & Munitions 6% Acquisition Sustainment In-Country Expenditure 20% – 50% In-Country Expenditure 60% – 90% Electronics 41% Aerospace 20% Maritime 22% Vehicles & Land 12% Weapons & Munitions 5% Electronic Systems: Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 18 Billion Sustainment - $ 16 Billion Total - $ 34 Billion 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition DCP Sustainment Total Procurement Electronic Systems: Estimated In-Country Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 7 Billion Sustainment - $ 12 Billion Total - $ 19 Billion 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition In-country Sustainment In-country Total In-country Procurement Electronic Systems: Proportion by Key Capabilities (2006 – 2016) Command & Control 15% Radar Technologies 7% Underwater Acoustics 6% Surveillance & Reconnaissance 13% Systems Integration 32% Communications 14% Electronic Warfare 13% Aerospace: Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 12 Billion Sustainment - $ 8 Billion Total - $ 20 Billion 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition DCP Sustainment Total Procurement Aerospace: Estimated In-Country Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 3 Billion Sustainment - $ 7 Billion Total - $ 10 Billion 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition In-country Sustainment In-country Total In-country Procurement Aerospace: Proportion by Key Capabilities (2006 – 2016) Avionics 13% Propulsion 26% Training Aids 6% Structures 55% Maritime: Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 5 Billion Sustainment - $ 9 Billion Total - $ 14 Billion 0 500 1000 1500 2000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition DCP Sustainment Total Procurement Maritime: Estimated In-Country Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 3 Billion Sustainment - $ 7 Billion Total - $ 10 Billion 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition In-country Sustainment In-country Total In-country Procurement Maritime: Proportion by Key Capabilities (2006 – 2016) Equipment, 24% Structures, 67% Propulsion, 9% Vehicles & Land: Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 3.5 Billion Sustainment - $ 5.0 Billion Total - $ 8.5 Billion 0 500 1000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition DCP Sustainment Total Procurement Vehicles & Land: Estimated In-Country Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 1.5 Billion Sustainment - $ 4.0 Billion Total - $ 5.5 Billion 0 500 1000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition In-country Sustainment In-country Total In-country Procurement Vehicles & Land : Proportion by Key Capabilities (2006 – 2016) Equipment 36% Vehicles 46% Support Systems 13% Propulsion 5% Weapons & Munitions: Acquisition and Sustainment Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 2.5 Billion Sustainment - $ 2.5 Billion Total - $ 5.0 Billion 0 500 1000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition DCP Sustainment Total Procurement Weapons & Munitions: Estimated In-Country Expenditure (2006 – 2016) Acquisition - $ 1.5 Billion Sustainment - $ 2.0 Billion Total - $ 3.5 Billion 0 500 1000 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 A$ (Million) Acquisition In-country Sustainment In-country Total In-country Procurement Weapons & Munitions: Proportion by Key Capabilities (2006 – 2016) Weapons 59% Munitions 41% Expenditure by Key Capabilities (2006 – 2016) Total In-Country Command & Control $5.1 $2.9 Communications $4.7 $2.7 Electronic Warfare $3.7 $2.1 Radar Technologies $2.4 $1.3 Underwater Acoustics $2.0 $1.2 Surveillance & Reconnaissance $4.4 $2.5 Systems Integration $11.5 $6.5 Training Aids $1.8 $1.1 Propulsion $9.3 $5.1 Structures $18.9 $11.6 Avionics $1.8 $0.9 Equipment $5.0 $3.5 Vehicles $5.5 $3.8 Munitions $2.0 $1.6 Weapons $2.9 $1.4 $81 $48 Future Directions: DCP analysis by Strategic Industry Capabilities 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 06 / 07 07 / 08 08 / 09 09 / 10 10 / 11 11 / 12 12 / 13 13 / 14 14 / 15 15 / 16 Strategic Industry Capability Defence demand (majors, minors sustainment) Core level of required in-country industry capability $ Strategic Industry Capability Defined and analysed in terms of: - key technology components - Key industrial capability components Summary: Delivering the DCP  Estimated in-country expenditure (acquisition & sustainment) of $47 billion.  Representing a 20% + increase.  Electronic systems represents almost 50%.  Delivering to the schedule will be a challenge for Defence and industry:  Australian industry will need to address capability, capacity and workforce issues.  Based on in-country expenditure, approximately 23,500 defence industry employees will be required by 2012/13 – an increase of about 3500 employees in 6 years.  Enhanced Defence and industry relationship:  better engagement and planning;  greater flexibility and transparency;  focus on outcomes, performance and schedule delivery; and  improvement productivity and innovation. Summary: Delivering the DCP  Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) will play an important role:  Over 40% of in-country expenditure ($20 + billion) will flow directly or in-directly to SMEs  Important to get the Prime SME balance right – ensuring that the right people do the right work  Primes will be required to deliver effective and transparent supply chain management outcomes.  Defence Industry Policy Review:  Will seek to establish a policy framework, which defines Australian industry’s role in the delivery and support of ADF capability outcomes.  Will seek to develop an implementation framework to ensure that Australian industry is able to delivery the capabilities required in support of the ADF.  Strongly encourage industry to provide their input into the Review. ",application/vnd.ms-powerpoint,200,http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/DominicZaal.ppt,"au,gov,defence)/dmo/id/defence_industry_2006/21june/dominiczaal.ppt",FWBLMJMTNDY2HV3QZJOQN64MRCBOJNWO,594566,domains/defence-gov-au/powerpoints/original/au-gov-defence-dmo-id-defence-industry-2006-21june-dominiczaal-ppt-20060913165640.ppt