DOCSLIB.ORG

A New Battle Command Architecture for Multi-Domain Operations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A New Battle Command Architecture for Multi-Domain Operations The MITRE Center for Technology & National Security A NEW BATTLE COMMAND ARCHITECTURE FOR MULTI-DOMAIN OPERATIONS Countering Peer Adversary Power Projection By Eliahu Niewood, Greg Grant, and Tyler Lewis ©2019 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. Approved for Public Release. Distribution unlimited. Case number 19-3703 This page intentionally left blank. 1 MITRE Center for Technology and National Security | December 2019 A New Battle Command Architecture Joint C2 capabilities. No mechanism currently exists Many users and systems would be simply within DoD for creating and implementing the Joint overwhelmed by the vast quantity of data. There capabilities needed by the Combatant Commands, must be some framework to determine who gets for Multi-Domain Operations as each Service designs to a different high-end what information. While enhancing interoperability Countering Peer Adversary Power Projection problem unique to its domain. In the absence of a and connectivity across systems is a critical enabler common force design, each Service focuses largely for JADC2, it is not a complete solution to the C2 on its own specific needs as it develops various challenges themselves. C2 is not just about The 2018 National Defense Strategy shifts strategic compelling example of this challenge is meeting the elements of a path forward for JADC2. situational awareness, it is about how and by whom focus to preparing for high-end conflict against peer rapid time lines required for finding, fixing, and decisions are made. Developing new technologies adversaries – specifically Russia and China – where engaging the relocatable systems on which Platform-centric acquisition. DoD’s acquisition and fielding new capabilities will not be enough to the Joint Force will face acute time, distance, and competitors increasingly rely as a means to project system is optimized to develop and field exquisite enable JADC2; changes in concepts of operation, anti-access and area-denial (A2/AD) operational power and create robust A2/AD defensive networks. platforms, and industry is incentivized to pursue authorities, and organizational constructs will also challenges. Halting Russian or Chinese aggression large procurement contracts with lengthy life cycle be needed. and degrading emplaced A2/AD networks will Joint Force Not Joint Enough operations and maintenance tails. Developing the require the United States and its allies to rapidly plan communications networks and enabling connectivity and execute operations using capabilities from all Employing sensors and effectors in domain- and between platforms and the C2 capabilities needed to domains, Services, and allies in a synchronized, Service-agnostic ways could dramatically shorten effectively leverage those platforms is not always cooperative, and efficient manner. the time it takes to engage multiple relocatable seen as lucrative from an industry perspective. targets. Solving the time problem enables the Joint Moreover, it can be difficult for advocates in Realizing simultaneous cross-domain operations will Force to attack and maneuver faster than Red can Congress to back ethereal “connections” and “data” New concepts and approaches to enable JADC2 require a new approach to battle management and operate. This acceleration is one of the central over more tangible and energizing platforms. must focus on operating in new ways that bring the the supporting command and control (C2) animating ideas behind joint all domain command Joint Force’s suite of capabilities together from architecture required to rapidly find, fix, and finish and control (JADC2). Yet, despite multiple years of Service-based authorities and operations. Simply across all domains in a coherent and effective large sets of adversary mobile targets. Today, such focused energy and attention on this problem, DoD put, the individual Service components are averse to manner. They must describe how the Joint Force synchronization at speed is difficult if not impossible. has made far too little progress developing and loosening control over their own capabilities. can organize more effectively to perform the Military decision makers are dependent on legacy C2 fielding the capabilities needed to make JADC2 a Handing control of assets from one domain to a necessary C2. They must describe the roles of systems impeded by multiple barriers, including reality. But JADC2 is more than just new equipment. commander from another is alien to their way of theater, operational, and tactical-level commanders those between domains, classification levels, the Moving toward true “multi-domain operations” will operating. Existing organizational structures in the and decision makers in performing their duties. And Services themselves, and our allies. of necessity drive development of a new approach to various Combatant Commands reinforce this they must describe what capabilities and enablers C2, as the existing approach is still a “system of Service-based approach to operations. will come from the Services, national authorities, the Such barriers exist for both sense-making and deconfliction” rather than a “system of integration.” IC, and partner nations. Obviously, new concepts decision-making processes. For sense making, Insufficient focus on C2 and technological myopia. will need to be developed and improved through the Department of Defense (DoD) and Intelligence Developing and operating robust and truly There is a common belief that JADC2 is about experiments designed to help determine which Joint Community (IC) are unable to easily combine integrated C2 systems will require overcoming a bringing all the data together, labeling it, and C2 tactics, techniques, and procedures are most disparate data sets to improve situational awareness or number of significant obstacles. These include: applying artificial intelligence (AI) via an agile effective for employing specific capabilities during to provide better information to strategic, operational, software approach. This approach will neither work rapid and dynamically adaptive operations. and tactical decision makers. For decision making, Lack of common force design. One of the most nor provide the needed capability; it is unlikely there effectors are divided by Service or domain with limited significant challenges is that the current will be enough bandwidth in contested or denied Experimentation cannot proceed unless there are ability to understand the full range of capabilities Service-based model for development and environments to move all the data to every system both new concepts and technology to experiment available to achieve desired effects. One particularly acquisition is not conducive to developing or fielding and platform involved in high-end operations. with. MITRE believes that before DoD can make Moreover, most data is not relevant to most users. real progress on turning JADC2 into an operational 2 reality, it must decide on some guiding core leaders to possess the breadth and depth of Interoperability enabled by “loose couplers.” more efficient and effective resource task pairing. tenets, which can then be used as a basis for knowledge needed to understand when and where Instantiating JADC2 relies on rapidly and Those ML algorithms need large data sets of experimentation and prototyping. capabilities can be most effectively employed. One dynamically communicating between numerous decisions and their outcomes for model training and way to help address these challenges, and to enable dissimilar capabilities and platforms. Today, testing purposes. The performance estimates Organization around function. A commander who the brokering described above, is to dynamically however, many of the relevant systems cannot be described above could be used as an input to a ML wants to destroy a target should be able to rapidly develop estimates of unit, capability, or platform connected across Services and security levels or or AI system. The outcome of the scenario could be consider all available capabilities in order to determine performance against potential tasks. This would help with partner and allied systems. MITRE proposes used as the feedback mechanism to drive training of which would be most effective. For example, the to isolate the need at the operational level of decision “loose couplers” as an information design approach the ML network. MITRE is currently experimenting commander must know whether Army long-range making, these estimates would help isolate the need to enable widespread interoperability in a lightweight with the concept of task brokering, and there is fires or Navy sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles for first-hand understanding of how well a particular way. These loose couplers would be derived by convincing evidence that introducing AI into this are the right tool for a specific target set. To achieve asset might perform a given task from the determining the needs for task brokering and process will lead to significantly enhanced this type of optimization, operational-level C2 might be decision-making process. performance assessments described above. effectiveness. organized around a dynamic set of critical warfighting missions, such as ground surveillance, fires, offensive Determining mission performance estimates might As opposed to universal or complete interoperability, Context-based displays for situational space control, etc., rather than around be done by the tactical systems themselves or by loose coupling involves exchanging a minimal understanding. As the complexity of the decision domain-specific
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fm 6-02 Signal Support to Operations
    FM 6-02 SIGNAL SUPPORT TO OPERATIONS SEPTEMBER 2019 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This publication supersedes FM 6-02, dated 22 January 2014. HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY This publication is available at the Army Publishing Directorate site (https://armypubs.army.mil/) and the Central Army Registry site (https://atiam.train.army.mil/catalog/dashboard). *FM 6-02 Field Manual Headquarters No. 6-02 Department of the Army Washington, D.C., 13 September 2019 Signal Support to Operations Contents Page PREFACE..................................................................................................................... v INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ vii Chapter 1 OVERVIEW OF SIGNAL SUPPORT ........................................................................ 1-1 Section I – The Operational Environment ............................................................. 1-1 Challenges for Army Signal Support ......................................................................... 1-1 Operational Environment Overview ........................................................................... 1-1 Information Environment ........................................................................................... 1-2 Trends ........................................................................................................................ 1-3 Threat Effects on Signal Support .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ATP 3-57.70. Civil-Military Operations Center
    ATP 3-57.70 Civil-Military Operations Center May 2014 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. FOREIGN DISCLOSURE RESTRICTION (FD 1): The material contained in this publication has been reviewed by the developers in coordination with the United States Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School foreign disclosure authority. This product is releasable to students from all requesting foreign countries without restrictions. Headquarters, Department of the Army This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online (https://armypubs.us.army.mil/doctrine/index.html). To receive publishing updates, please subscribe at http://www.apd.army.mil/AdminPubs/new_subscribe.asp. Army Techniques Publication Headquarters, No. 3-57.70 Department of the Army Washington, DC 5 May 2014 Civil-Military Operations Center Contents Page PREFACE..............................................................................................................iv INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................v Chapter 1 OPERATIONS .................................................................................................... 1-1 General ............................................................................................................... 1-1 Unified Land Operations ..................................................................................... 1-2 Decisive Action ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Development and Production Issue Area Active Assignments
    United States General Accounting Office GAO National Security and International Affairs Julyl1995 Systems Development and Production Issue Area Active Assignments GAO/AA-95-4(3) Foreword This report was prepared primarily to inform Congressional members and key staff of ongoing assignments in the General Accounting Office's Systems Development and Production issue area This report contains assignments that were ongoing as of July 6, 1995, and presents a brief background statement and a list of key questions to be answered on each assignment. The report will be issued quarterly. This report was compiled from information available in GAO'S internal management information systems. Because the information was downloaded from computerized data bases intended for internal use, some information may appear in abbreviated form. If you have questions or would like additional information about assignments listed, please contact Louis Rodrigues, Director; Brad Hathaway, Associate Director; or Thomas Schulz, Associate Director, on (202) 5124841. Page 1 GAO/AA-95-4(3) Contents Page WEAPON SYSTEMS JUSTIFICATION ,MONITORING OPERATIONAL TEST OF B-l1B BOMBER. 1 ,STATUS OF NAVY TACTICAL AIRCRAFT MODERNIZATION EFFORTS. I , EVALUATION OF THE INTEGRATION OF ATCCS INTO THE ARMY BATTLE COMMAND SYSTEM. I , SHALLOW WATER ANTISUBMARINE WARFARE LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO. 2 , ACQUISITION OF THE ENHANCED FIBER OPTIC-GUIDED MISSILE (EFOG-M) SYSTEM. 2 , REVIEW OF AV-8B REMANUFACTURE PROGRAM. 2 COMBAT AIR POWER ASSESSMENT--SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE. 3 New , THE NAVY'S EFFORTS TO DEVELOP A COMBAT SYSTEM FOR THE NSSN. 3 New , SURVEY OF B-lB CONVENTIONAL MISSION UPGRADE PROGRAM. 3 WEAPON SYSTEMS ACQUISITION PROCESS , EVALUATION OF THE SERVICES' EFFORTS TO DEVELOP COOPERATIVE IFF SYSTEMS.
    [Show full text]
  • Battle Command on the Move
    Battle Command on the Move Authors: Rebecca Morley Chief Joseph Kobsar POC: Rebecca Morley AMSRD-CER-C2-BCS-MD Building 2700 Ft. Monmouth, NJ 07703 Telephone: (732) 532-8927 Fax: (732) 532-8929 [email protected] 1. Abstract Battle Command on the Move (BCOTM) is a revolutionary capability that provides current and future combined arms commanders all of the information resident in their command posts, and the required communications necessary to command and control their combined arms team on the move, or at a short halt, from any vantage point on the joint battlefield. The purpose of the BCOTM effort was to convert five M-7 Bradley Fire Support Team (BFIST) vehicles into BCOTM systems. Three operator workstations and an extensive Mission Equipment Package (MEP) were integrated into the five BFIST platforms to provide a common operational picture and enable Situational Understanding (SU) while on the move. The integration team consisted of three groups who worked together for 2 months to complete the system from the concept until the final hand off to the 4th Infantry Division (ID), Fort Hood, TX. The program was extremely successful and has led to further advancements in battle command on the move. 2. Background 2.1. The Current Battle Command Currently, command and control is conducted from Command Posts (CP). There are three basic areas of battle command; the current fight, future planning, and support. The current fight is the responsibility of the Division Tactical (DTAC) CP, which is usually small and mobile and allows the commander to plan and monitor the battle from a remote location.
    [Show full text]
  • Network-Centric Operations Case Study: the Stryker Brigade Combat Team
    THE ARTS This PDF document was made available CHILD POLICY from www.rand.org as a public service of CIVIL JUSTICE the RAND Corporation. EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit NATIONAL SECURITY research organization providing POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges SUBSTANCE ABUSE facing the public and private sectors TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY around the world. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Support RAND Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND National Defense Research Institute View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non- commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Network-Centric Operations Case Study The Stryker Brigade Combat Team Daniel Gonzales, Michael Johnson, Jimmie McEver, Dennis Leedom, Gina Kingston, Michael Tseng Prepared for the Office of Force Transformation in the Office of the Secretary of Defense Approved for public release; distribution unlimited The research described in this report was prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD).
    [Show full text]
  • Atp 6-02.60 Techniques for Warfighter Information
    ATP 6-02.60 3 February 2016 TECHNIQUES FOR WARFIGHTER INFORMATION NETWORK- TACTICAL DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This publication supersedes FMI 6-02.60, dated 5 September 2006, and FM 11-55, dated 22 June 1999. HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online (https://armypubs.us.army.mil/doctrine/index.html). To receive publishing updates, please subscribe at http://www.apd.army.mil/AdminPubs/new_subscribe.asp *ATP 6-02.60 Army Techniques Publication Headquarters No. 6-02.60 Department of the Army Washington, DC, 3 February 2016 TECHNIQUES FOR WARFIGHTER INFORMATION NETWORK - TACTICAL Contents Page PREFACE.............................................................................................................. iii INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... iv Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION TO WARFIGHTER INFORMATION NETWORK-TACTICAL 1-1 Overview ............................................................................................................. 1-1 Increment 1 ......................................................................................................... 1-1 Increment 2 ......................................................................................................... 1-3 Network Transport .............................................................................................. 1-4 Tactical Internet .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Improving C2 and Situational Awareness for Operations in and Through the Information Environment
    Improving C2 and Situational Awareness for Operations in and Through the Information Environment Christopher Paul, Colin P. Clarke, Bonnie L. Triezenberg, David Manheim, Bradley Wilson C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2489 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0131-1 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2018 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: U.S. Army photo Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface This is the final report for a RAND project that identified and refined concepts for organizing for, executing, and supporting command, control, computers, coordi- nation, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance activities in the informa- tion environment (IE).
    [Show full text]
  • Command, Control, Communications, Computers, And
    GW-4 Command, Control, Communications, And Battle Management August 19, 1994 Page 245 Chapter Four: Command, Control, Communications, Computers, And Battle Management Any discussion of the Gulf War that seeks to derive lessons about command, control, communications, computers, and battle management (C4/BM) must be prefaced with several important caveats. The choice of what to analyze, and how to analyze it, is not a simple one. The Gulf War was one of the most complex conflicts in history, and involved major innovations in command and control.1 o First, the question arises of "lessons for whom?" The Gulf War was fought between a UN Coalition and Iraq, but the UN did not exercise practical command from either UN headquarters or from the field. The US was not simply prima inter pares, it exercised de facto command over most of the planning before the war, controlled the way in which the war was fought, and made the most of the key decisions regarding conflict termination. While there was a joint command in the field, the US led this command in close cooperation with Saudi, British and French commanders. While Egypt, Kuwait, Syria and the other members of the Coalition made national decisions about the role of their forces, they did not play a major role in the overall command system. As a result, command, control, communications, computers, and battle management (C4/BM) during the Gulf War is not representative of a war where the UN exercised direct command, or a multinational command existed in which several nations had to play an equal role.
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Development and the Art of Battle Command
    Self-Development and the Art of Battle Command James C. Madigan Operational Architecture, TRADOC Program Integration Office for Army Battle Command Systems (OA, TPIO-ABCS) 1321 Holman Street Leavenworth, Kansas 66048 913-684-4505 (DSN 552) [email protected] ABSTRACT This study explores the self-development process. The self-development process is framed within the Army Leader Development program. This study intends to focus on self-development and the art of Battle Command. The Army’s Leader Development Program consists of three pillars: Institutional, Operational, and Self-Development; however, self-development within the Army officer corps lacks focus and purpose. The Battle Command Focused Rotation program found that the self-development pillar is the weakest and needs additional emphasis to improve its effectiveness, if it is to have any impact on leaders understanding the Art of Battle Command. DA PAM 350-58 provides an outline for the establishment of leader self-development. The focus to provide structure for self-development is lacking. Current thoughts are that the individual is completely in charge of his self-development program. This is a poor way in an age of technology and information dominance to grow leaders. With the sporadic operational experience that current leaders receive, there is a need to be more structured with the Army’s self-development pillar. The correct amount of structure is debatable, as too much can be just as harmful as not enough. This analysis concludes that President Harry Truman and General George S. Patton had certain aspects of self-development in common. This study investigates the documented self-development activities of Truman and Patton.
    [Show full text]
  • FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Provides Commanders and Their Staffs with Tactics and Procedures for Exercising Mission Command
    FM 6-0 COMMANDER AND STAFF ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS MAY 2014 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This publication supersedes ATTP 5-0.1, dated 14 September 2011 HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online (https://armypubs.us.army.mil/doctrine/index.html). To receive publishing updates, please subscribe at http://www.apd.army.mil/AdminPubs/new_subscribe.asp. FM 6-0, C1 Change No. 1 Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 11 May 2015 Commander and Staff Organization and Operations 1. Change 1 to FM 6-0, 5 March 2014, adds the supersession statement to the cover. 2. Modifies figure 7-2. 3. Modifies figure 9-5. 4. Adds joint command relationships to appendix B. 5. Modifies table B-2. 6. Modifies table B-3. 7. Adds definitions of close support, direct liaison authorized, direct support, and mutual support. 8. A number sign (+) marks new material. 9. FM 6-0, 5 May 2014, is changed as follows: Remove Old Pages Insert New Pages front cover front cover pages i through vi pages i through vi pages 7-1 through 7-2 pages 7-1 through 7-2 pages 9-23 through 9-45 pages 9-23 through 9-46 pages B-1 through B-7 pages B-1 through B-7 pages Glossary-1 through Glossary-9 pages Glossary-1 through Glossary-9 pages Index-1 through Index-9 pages Index-1 through Index-9 7. File this transmittal sheet in front of the publication for reference purposes. DISTRUBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
    [Show full text]
  • Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2)
    108 Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) INVESTMENT COMPONENT Modernization MISSION The system features platform SYSTEM INTERDEPENDENCIES Provides integrated, on-the-move, timely, interconnections through two In this Publication Recapitalization relevant battle command information to communication systems: FBCB2- Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data Maintenance tactical combat leaders and Soldiers from Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (AFATDS), Battle Command System (EPLRS), supported by the Sustainment Support System (BCS3), brigade to platform and across platforms tactical Internet; and FBCB2-Blue Force Distributed Common Ground System- within the brigade task force and other Tracking, supported by L-Band satellite. Army (DCGS-A), Movement Tracking Joint forces. The Joint Capabilities Release (JCR) is the System (MTS), Nett Warrior (NW), next software release and addresses Joint Warfighter Information Network-Tactical DESCRIPTION requirements, database simplification, (WIN-T) Increment 1, Warfighter The Force XXI Battle Command Brigade Type 1 encryption, a product line Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) and Below (FBCB2) forms the principal software approach, and enables the Increment 2, Warfighter Information digital command and control system for transition to the Blue Force Tracking II Network-Tactical (WIN-T) Increment 3 the Army at brigade levels and below. It (BFT II) transceiver, allowing a tenfold provides increased situational awareness increase in data throughput. FBCB2 Other Major Interdependencies (SA) on the battlefield by automatically is the primary platform-level digital AMDWS, ASAS, BFT-AVN, DTSS, disseminating throughout the network Battle Command (BC) for the Army and CPOF, JTCW, JSTARS, MCS, JC2C timely friendly force locations, reported Marine Corps at brigade-and-below, enemy locations, and graphics to consisting of computer hardware and PROGRAM STATUS visualize the commander’s intent and software integrated into tactical vehicles • Current: In production scheme of maneuver.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter Fireside Readings Leadership and High Technology Battle of the Bulge: Air Operati Professional Military Educati
    Winter Fireside Readings Leadership and High Technology Battle of the Bulge: Air Operati Professional Military Educati v Secretary of the Air Force Dr Donald B. Rice Air Force Chief of Staff Gen Larry D. Welch Commander, Air University Maj Gen David C. Reed Commander, Center for Aerospace Doctrine, Research, and Education Col Sidney J. Wise Editor Col Keith W. Geiger Associate Editor Maj Michael A. Kirtland Professional Staff Hugh Richardson, Contributing Editor Marvin W. Bassett. Contributing Editor Dorothy M. McCluskie, Production Manager Steven C. Garst, Art Director and Illustrator The Airpower Journal, published quarterty, is the professional journal of the United States Air Force. It is designed to serve as an open forum for presenting and stimulating innovative think- ing on military doctrine, strategy, tactics, force structure, readiness, and other national defense matters. The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, the Air Force, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government. Articles in this edition may be reproduced in whole or in part without permission. If repro- duced, the Airpower Journal requests a courtesy line. Leadership and High Technology Brig Gen Stuart R. Boyd, USAF 4 Air Power in the Battle of the Bulge: A Theater Campaign Perspective Col William R. Carter, USAF 10 The Case for Officer Professional Military Education: A View from the Trenches Lt Col Richard L. Davis, USAF 34 Antisatellites and Strategic Stability Marc J. Berkowitz 46 The Bekaa Valley Air Battle, June 1982: Lessons Mislearned? ClC Matthew M.
    [Show full text]