By BERNARD CRAMP and STEVE A. ROBERTSON

Cdr. Bernard Cramp, USN, is chief engineer of the Naval Sea Systems Command's Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme (Calif.) Division; Steve A. Robertson is the center's fleet technical operations officer.

 
The Navy's active fleet experienced very few Y2K problems. However, daily in-service engineering support requirements continued, even on New Year's Day 2000.

On a ship deployed thousands of miles from American soil, a fire-control petty officer needed help troubleshooting variances in his Aegis Combat System computer program. He e-mailed system experts at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Port Hueneme, Calif., for assistance and analysis of the system's performance. The problem was quickly isolated and corrected, and the ship remained ready to respond to any national tasking.

The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) and its technical experts provide such daily Remote In-Service Engineering assistance as part of its Distance Support program.

Another example: A petty officer on an aircraft carrier had isolated a problem on his NATO SeaSparrow Missile system down to a cable connector, but was unable to identify the connector part number. The ship was off the coast of California preparing for deployment, so the petty officer asked the experts at Port Hueneme for a video teleconference, during which he transmitted a picture of the connector for analysis. From the photo, the experts at Port Hueneme were able to determine how much damage had been done to the connector and to suggest an interim repair procedure that immediately corrected the problem. They also provided the part number, stock number, and supply status for connector procurement and permanent repair.

Meanwhile, a combat systems officer on a ship operating in the Adriatic needed some crucial information about a missile launching system. He sent an e-mail to NSWC Port Hueneme. The experts there contacted other technical advisors. Within a few hours the information needed was provided, and the system was returned to a high state of readiness.

As recently as just one year ago, these problems and numerous others probably would have been fixed the traditional way, with ship technicians attempting to troubleshoot the problem by using onboard resources, then following up with a series of messages (with their built-in coordination and release delays). Additional delays would follow as the engineering community analyzed the problem and prepared an edited response. Finally, a stateside technician probably would be dispatched, adding significantly to the delay--and to the final cost. The net result would be a forward-deployed U.S. Navy combatant operating for a long period of time with one or more critical systems at less than 100 percent capability.

Rewriting the Book

The examples cited above illustrate how much, and how fast, advanced technology has revolutionized engineering support for the active fleet. Graphics, live-system performance data, and video are now being shared in nearly real time to obtain expert assistance, increase system availability, and reduce both travel and cost.

The revolution in electronic commerce has reached the active fleet. NAVSEA's combat system engineering community is rewriting the book on in-service engineering to embrace this change--but at the same time is continuing to perform the functions required by the fleet, thereby gaining additional insights into the development of new products to meet the needs of ship operators. This approach means assuming more of a "life-cycle" role than an "in-service" role, to ensure that disciplined, closed-loop, engineering, software, and logistics processes are maintained throughout the life of the ship.

Industry roles also are changing, to provide low-cost product delivery and product support by reducing the cycle time required in the development and support processes. The net effect is a combined Navy/industry effort to ensure that Navy ships and their systems remain safe, effective, and affordable.

Most of today's systems, such as those essential to the CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability) and BDM (Ballistic-Missile Defense) programs, are commercial-off-the-shelf and computer-based (with technology refreshed every 18 months); they also are software-dependent and highly integrated. Changes to counter today's constantly changing spectrum of threats are rapid. Modifications to one system have significant impact on other systems on the same ship, within the battle group, and with joint forces.

The 21st-century combat system has, in short, moved outside the lifelines of the ship, overland, and into space. But its software-based design enables complex changes (as well as problems) to reach the forward-deployed battle force at the speed of a keystroke.

A Synergistic Transformation

This continued integration of the battle group into a synergistically effective fighting unit has led inevitably to significant changes in the way that future combat systems are developed and tested. The Navy's life-cycle engineers must assume a lead role not only in the definition of interoperability drivers but also in establishing requirements for a top-level battle group specification.

The life-cycle engineers also must prepare to meet the needs of the Navy's 21st-century Sailor. That Sailor will use modern tools and attend a Navy technical school--where he or she will be taught a generic system, then report to a ship with a similar, but potentially radically different, system, and see additional radical changes to that system between all deployments thereafter. In the past, when a Sailor would attend a Navy technical school to learn about a particular weapon system, he or she would report to a ship fitted with that system, and probably would see little appreciable change for several years. The 21st-century Sailor will be both comfortable and proficient at researching a technical problem by using a Web site or onboard file server rather than by reading a technical manual. This change creates a need for new tools and processes for exchanging information with and throughout the fleet so Sailors can "pull" the needed information to correct a problem rather than continue to rely on the present method, which "pushes" vast volumes of often unneeded and outdated information.

The challenges are real, and the timeline is the present. The encouraging news is that the NAVSEA life-cycle engineering community already has started the transformation necessary to develop the new methods and fleet support tools required by the future fleet.

To address the need for system interoperability, NAVSEA has developed a Distributed Engineering Plant (DEP) to link numerous NAVSEA, NAVAIR (Naval Air Systems Command), and SPAWAR (Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command) testing facilities across the country into a single test bed and to fully test computer programs prior to shipboard installation. Prior to deployment of the USS George Washington Battle Group (GW BG), a DEP test plan and network was established using sites in Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren, Va.; Wallops Island, Va.; the Port Hueneme Division Detachment in Dam Neck, Va.; SPAWAR facilities in San Diego (Calif.); the Port Hueneme Division Detachment in San Diego; and the NAVAIR center in Point Mugu, Calif. Using these sites to simulate actual GW BG configurations, engineers across the country were able to identify and resolve problems during shore-based testing that, prior to DEP, would have resulted in interoperability problems on and between the ships of the battle group.

The Management of Change

To ensure that the impact on the battle group is considered prior to installing any new system, an innovative "deployment minus 30 months" (D-30) change-management process has been developed by NAVSEA and Atlantic and Pacific Fleet representatives. To oversee the D-30 process and ensure that configuration control is maintained, NAVSEA has assigned Battle Force Action Officers to each battle group. The new process has already proved to be successful and has resulted in integrated installations within the deploying Battle Group.

Readying itself for a new life-cycle role in the future, the engineering community is developing system effectiveness metrics to ensure that future combat systems: (1) are safe to operate, and the Sailors trust the systems; (2) are effective and meet the Navy's mission-performance requirements; and (3) are affordable--which means they can be operated and maintained within the cost goals budgeted. These system- effectiveness metrics will be used both to validate system upgrade requirements and to develop new maintenance strategies.

Distance Support Web sites and remote-maintenance capabilities--provided, for example, by the NAVSEA Anchor Desk and/or through the Sailor-to-Engineer program--also are being developed, and have the capability of providing real-time information to the 21st-century fleet Sailor. These new capabilities not only will ensure that the combat systems Sailor of the future is provided the technical data he or she requires, but also will ensure that that data is technically current, correct, relevant, understandable, and tailored to the specific system and ship configuration (as well as to the deployed battle group when the ship deploys). Additionally, when the information on the Web is not sufficient, a "help desk" will be available to enable the deployed Sailor to obtain remote assistance by contacting engineering experts via e-mail for real-time information, or by requesting remote technical assistance via real-time video to troubleshoot a problem.

Robust Changes Predicted

Undoubtedly, additional changes are on the way. Combat systems will become even more integrated and complex. Just over the horizon, for example, are: (a) combat systems that will perform predictive self-analysis and advise the Sailor (and the engineering community concurrently) on its performance status and what needs to be repaired, and when; and (b) systems that are robust enough to allow engineers at a remote site to conduct actual repairs and/or systems analyses (when practical), thus allowing the deployed Sailor to focus on other tasks.

The predictive nature of these and other systems, moreover, will allow the Navy to realize true condition-based maintenance and will radically change today's integrated logistic support processes. These combat systems also will receive periodic performance upgrades, which will be accomplished as easily as downloading the latest version of a word processor--creating the need for new configuration control processes and an equally responsive support infrastructure.

To help meet the requirement for reduced shipboard manning, Sailors are needed whose technical expertise will focus more on how and where to access sources of technical knowledge than on how to repair the combat system. This leads to a mandate for new and innovative ways to develop, train, and support the Sailors of the future fleet.

Vice Adm. Eli T. Reich, who created the vision of an integrated Surface Missile capability, said the following when asked why the Navy established the "In-Service Engineer": "It was recognition that complex systems require complex logistics support--you can't have one without the other!"

In recent years, integrated Navy systems have evolved rapidly, and are continuing to do so--into extremely complex battle-force and joint-warfare systems. The effectiveness of these systems, from fleet introduction to and through extended fleet service, will depend on the use of a closed-loop system engineering process to evaluate their capability and sustainability, as well as the ability of shipboard personnel to operate and maintain equipment.

The shore establishment's traditional role of In-Service Engineering is for that reason rapidly transforming to a Life-Cycle Engineering role. Working closely with industry, the Navy is creating a seamless, one-stop-shopping approach for fleet maintenance and support.

Through a disciplined and closely monitored engineering approach, NAVSEA has made itself ready to meet the needs of the 21st-century Sailor, and is leading the way in delivering and supporting safe, effective, and affordable warfare systems to the fleet.