2003 Spring Simulation Interoperability Workshop

1
2003 Spring SimulationInteroperability Workshop

• Link 16 Product Development Group (Link 16 PDG)

2
Link 16 PDG Spring 03 SIW Morning Agenda

• 1015 1030 Introduction, Opening Comments
  (Adin Burroughs)
• -Review of Action Items (Dr. Rob Byers) 
• 1030 1100 03S-SIW-72, Representation of Link
  16 Communications
• in the Joint Distributed Engineering Plant
• (Mr. Zach Furness)
• 1100 1200 Technical Discussions on High
  Fidelity Implementations
• (James Nutaro)
• -1100-1115 Review of current issues with
  synchronization
• -1115-1130 RELNAV and RTT Experimentation
• Requirements and Solutions
• -1130-1200 High Fidelity Synchronization
  Proposal
• 1200 1315 Lunch

3
Link 16 PDG Spring 03 SIWAfternoon Agenda

• 1315 1700 03S-SIW-142, Draft Link 16
  Simulation Standard
• -1315-1330 Introduction and Review of
  Sections 1 through 4
• -1330-1415 Review of Section 5.1 (General
  Requirements)
• -1415-1500 Review of Section 5.2 (DIS
  Implementation)
•  1500 1515 Break 
• -1515-1600 Review of Section 5.3 and Annex A
  (HLA Implementation)
• -1600-1630 Review of Informative Annexes
  (Implementers Guidelines, Analysis)
•   -1630 1700 03S-SIW-79, SIMPLE to DIS-J
  Annex 
• 1700 1715 Meeting Wrap-up
• -Review of action items (Dr. Rob Byers)
•  1715 Adjourn Link 16 PDG
• Meeting minutes will be taken by Dr. Rob Byers

4
SISO Tactical Datalink Study GroupLink 16
Product Development Group

• Introduction to Study Group and Product
  Development Group

5
Link 16 PDG Goals

• Create Implementable SISO Standard from TDL SG
• Nominally referred to as DIS-J and HLA-J
• Provide DIS technical solution
• Provide HLA technical solution
• Provide implementation and usage information
• Provide HLA BOM
• Provide materials to understand usage of the
  standard
• Provide guidance for eventual incorporation into
  IEEE standards
• PDG will concentrate on codifying and validating
  TDL SG identified technical solutions

6
SG and PDG Leadership

• Adin Burroughs, Northrop Grumman IT
• TDL SG and Link 16 PDG Chair
• Joe Sorroche, TACCSF/ASRCC
• TDL SG and Link 16 PDG Vice Chair
• Neil Barrett, JITC
• TDL SG Vice Chair Link 16 PDG Assistant Editor
• Dr. Rob Byers, Northrop Grumman IT (DMT
  Standards)
• TDL SG and Link 16 PDG Secretary

7
SG and PDG Membership

• Boeing
• VWC
• DMT
• Lockheed Martin
• DMT
• TACCSF
• Northrop Grumman
• Information Technology
• Integrated Systems
• Stasys
• TRW
• ASTi
• General Dynamics

• QinetiQ
• ASRCC
• SRC
• MRI
• MsTI
• 3Com
• Simulation, Inc
• APC
• CAS
• Marzen
• AMS
• Plexsys
• Raytheon

• USAF/AFC2TIG
• Australia Virtual Ship
• USAF/AFAMS
• USAF/AFRL
• USAF/ASC
• USAF/ASC-TM
• USAF/DMT
• USAF/NAIC
• USAF/TACCSF
• DMSO
• Sparta
• US Navy
• US Army
• DISA/JITC

8
SG and PDG History

• Oct 01 Formed grass roots working group after
  community response to informal inquiries
• Nov 01 Meeting at I/ITSEC
• Initial Presentation of ideas, technical
  discussion
• Decided to pursue becoming official SISO Study
  Group
• Dec 01 SISO EXCOM Approves TOR
• Feb 02 SG Reflector, AFAMS webpage established
• Mar 02 First official meeting of TDL SG (Spring
  SIW)
• Jun 02 Interim SG meeting at TACCSF
• Jul 02 SG Meeting at Euro-SIW
• Sep 02 SG Meeting at Fall SIW
• Oct 02 Link 16 PDG Kickoff

9
SG and PDG Current Status

• DIS and HLA structures and methodologies defined
• Finishing guidelines for HLA Ultra High
  Fidelity Synchronization
• Initial Draft of SISO STD-002 released
• Document being reviewed in the afternoon
• Appendixes under consideration

10
SG and PDG Current Status
continued

• Reference Implementation by Northrop Grumman IT
• Funded by USAF Agency for Modeling and Simulation
  under Joint Synthetic Battlespace Infrastructure
  Initiative
• Being implemented in CCD Product
• Fidelity Level 3 testing complete on 21 Mar

11
SG PDG Spring 03 Update Way Ahead

• Complete submittals of changes to DIS-EBV (Mar
  03)
• Complete Link 16 Simulation Standard
• Second Draft at Euro 03 SIW
• Form Ballot Groups (August 03)
• Release Final Draft by Fall 03 SIW
• Enter Balloting (September 03)
• Brief NATO C3A TDL ITS (September 03)
• Next Years Terms Of Reference for TDL Study
  Group?
• Link 11A, 22, TIBS

12
Challenges with CurrentDIS/HLA Standards

• DIS Standard lacks detail for interoperability
• DIS was never finished
• No standard enumeration list for TDL types within
  DIS
• Multiple DIS implementations in the wild
• Ability to exchange TADIL J messages, no ability
  to simulate JTIDS networks
• No methodology defined for HLA

13
Goals for New Standard

• Standard, interoperable implementation
• Easy initial implementation
• Minimal impact on current users, e.g. NATO SIMPLE
  Standard
• Ability to ease transition from old formats to
  new
• Effects level simulation of JTIDS net
• Ability to route datalink data separately from
  truth data
• Minimize bandwidth utilization
• Discrete definitions of fidelity
• Identify FOM/SOM data items for HLA JTIDS
  emulation

14
Goals for New StandardEffects to Be Simulated

• Timeslot allocation/metering of data with nominal
  values or from an actual NDL
• Segmenting of data into NPGs
• Segmenting of data into Nets
• Multi-netting
• Crypto-netting
• Net entry procedures
• Synchronization
• Multiple NTRs

15
Goals for New StandardEffects to Be Simulated
continued

• Relnav
• Multiple JTIDS units transmitting at same time
• Waveform/RF simulation
• Antenna, propagation details
• Additional JTIDS Datatypes
• Link 16 Enhanced Throughput
• VMF
• Free Text (Voice/Imagery)

16
Goals for New StandardEffects Not Covered

• Individual Pulses
• Effects of conflicting pulses if hopping patterns
  coincide

17
Comparison/Contrast of DIS-J to SIMPLE

• SIMPLE encompasses and wraps around DIS
• Not only TADIL, but environment as well
• TADIL-TALES is a part of DIS and HLA
• TADIL-TALES currently only addresses Link 16
• Other datalinks will be efforts of the Study
  Group over the next year
• Does not address additional needs in the
  environment generation
• TADIL-TALES addresses needs of higher fidelity
  Link 16 RF simulation

18
SG and PDG On-Line Resources

• SISO Reflectors
• http//www.sisostds.org (go to reflectors)
• All discussions and documents from the SG and PDG
  are available from the reflector page
• AFAMS Hosted Discussion Server and Document
  Repository
• http//www.afams.af.mil
• Click on programs and exercises, listed on this
  page
• DMSO Reflector
• Currently not in use, has archives for Nov-Jan 01

19
Link 16 PDG 03S-SIW-072

• Representation of Link 16 Communications in the
  Joint Distributed Engineering Plant
• Zach Furness

20
Link 16 PDG

• Technical Discussions on High Fidelity
  Implementations
• Adin Burroughs, James Nutaro

21
Current Level 4 Synchronization

• Renamed to Medium Level Synchronization
• Requires participants to be time synchronized
• Participants go through Low Fidelity
  Synchronization
• Participants then go through a series of RTT
  exchangemethod for simulating this has been the
  crux of much debate
• Problem has been in overcoming latency

22
Current Level 4 Synchronization
23
Current Level 4 Synchronization

• This allows simulators to go through fine
  synchronization, simulating the effects of fine
  synchronization
• This meets the needs of effects based
  simulatorsmission training/rehearsal, compliance
  testing
• This does not meet the needs of the Link 16
  Experimentation/Analysis community, where
  simulation of the RTT exchange needs to happen
  with errors lt1MS
• Will attempt to meet this via HLA effects
• If HLA cannot meet these needs, will need to move
  to a JTIDS Communication Server for ultra-high
  fidelity analysis/experimentation

24
Link 16 PDG03S-SIW-142

• Review of SISO STD-002
• Draft Link 16 Simulation Standard

25
Link 16 PDG Wrap-up

• Action Item Review
• Review of upcoming schedule
• TDL SG Reminder!