Q&A: Colonel Chuck Hoppe

Written by Harrison Donnelly

Tactical Networker:
Covering Warfighter Needs for the
Legacy, Current and Future Force



Colonel Chuck Hoppe
Project Manager
Warfighter Information Network - Tactical

Hoppe entered the Army in 1983 from the U.S. Military Academy. He commanded B Company, 5th Battalion, 16th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kan., and was the commander, Army Research Development Information Systems Activity, and product manager, Acquisition, Logistics and Technology Enterprise Systems and Services.

From June 2004 to July 2006, Hoppe was program manager, Conventional and Special Operations Forces, Directorate of Special Programs, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics). From September 2006 to July 2007, he served as project manager, Tactical Radio Communications Systems, PEO C3T.

Hoppe was interviewed by MIT Editor Harrison Donnelly.

Q: How would you assess the state of the WIN-T program in late 2008?

A: A real quick introduction to WIN-T is important, I think, before we start talking specifics. Today when most people talk of WIN-T, they are speaking of the four increments that were defined in the June 2007 Acquisition Decision Memorandum [ADM]. Increment 1 [Inc 1] is the existing Joint Network Node- Network program and is an at-the-halt, or at-the-quick-halt, mostly commercial capability. Increment 2 is the initial onthe- move capability. It is a two-tiered architecture, broadband terrestrial line-of-sight and SATCOM both with on-the-move waveforms, and we push the SATCOM on-the-move down to company level. Increment 3 is the full on-the-move capability with the Increment 2 transmission systems in the military specification packaging. It is a three-tiered architecture in that we introduce the air tier, and of course Increment 3 is where the Future Combat System [FCS] unique configuration [CI] items are introduced. Increment 4 is the protected SATCOM on-the-move capability. Increment 4 brings anti-jam/low-probability- of-intercept/low-probability-of-detection technologies to the program on-the-move at a high data rate. Increment 4 is dependent on the Transformational Satellite [TSAT] constellation.

So, with the quick program introduction complete, back to the original question. Since the acquisition decision memorandum in June 2007, the WIN-T program is doing very well. The ADM produced the revised WIN-T organization with a focus on incremental deliveries and included making the Joint Network Node-Network [JNN-N] a program of record, redesignated as WIN-T Increment 1. Increment 1, commercial communications at-the-halt, continues to field and support the current war fight. Increment 2, SATCOM on-the-move and wideband terrestrial, is currently doing well in developmental testing and is scheduled to field in the near future. The increments of the WIN-T program are not the only systems in the larger PM WIN-T. There are a number of other workhorse systems and enabling programs in the PM and those programs are also doing very well. The overall portfolio is quite extensive and covers the gamut of warfighter needs, legacy, current force and future force. Frankly, it’s very humbling to sit back and ponder what the PM WIN-T team accomplishes day in and day out.

Q: How has the program changed since last year’s restructuring?

A: It has been 18 months since the certification of the WIN-T program through the Nunn/McCurdy process. Since that time the WIN-T program completely incorporated the former Joint Network Node-Network [JNN-N] program, now identified as WIN-T Inc 1. Increment 1 was broken down into two subincrements, Increment 1a and Increment 1b. Increment 1a completed a competitive contract award, continues to support the Army ARFORGEN [Army Force Generation] process and completed its IOT&E [Initial Operational Test and Evaluation].

WIN-T Increment 1 is now fielded to 70 of 77 Brigade Combat Teams—over 90 percent of the active force and over 60 percent of the total force. Increment 1 is the backbone of today’s tactical Army. That is a major change in and of itself, but one of the biggest changes is in Increment 2.

Increment 2 didn’t exist on June 4, 2007, and in the last 18 months we have completed PDR [preliminary design review] and CDR [critical design review] and are in the throes of developmental testing. As this article goes to print we will be packing up that equipment to ship to Fort Lewis, Wash., where we will begin new equipment training [NET] in January for a limited user test [LUT] in March 2009 heading to a Milestone C decision in late spring. To ensure interoperability between Increments 1 and 2, we incorporated Increment 2 capabilities into Increment 1b so we can be efficient and effective in the communications between the two increments. The OTM satellite waveform and the new information assurance architecture in Increment 2 are the two components in Increment 1b. Increment 1b is an integral part of the Increment 2 DT [developmental test], NET and LUT.

And then there is Increment 3—what most folks think of when they hear WIN-T. Increment 3 brings the full on-themove capability and the FCS-unique configuration items. One of the major tasks in the June 2007 ADM was the solidification of the FCS/WIN-T requirements. I am very pleased to say that between PM FCS-NSI and the WIN-T teams, we have not only signed a memorandum of understanding between the two program offices but have also identified, adjudicated, briefed the senior Army leadership and obtained approval of the WIN-T requirements for the FCS program.

So, the program has changed significantly, but it’s all been very positive. The only adverse impact to the program has really come to Increment 4. This is due to the dependency on the TSAT constellation. The TSAT program has changed since the WIN-T ADM was signed, and of course that means that the Increment 4 capabilities, protected SATCOM on-the-move, won’t come on the original schedule, but is intended to stay synchronized with the TSAT program. That’s kind of a longwinded answer to the question; the short answer would have been: It’s changed a lot!

Q: Last year you identified your priorities related to WIN-T, beginning with bringing the JNN-N at-the-halt capability to troops in the field. What have you done to achieve this goal?

A: My priorities within the PMO have stayed consistent: support the units in the fight; support the units preparing to enter the fight; reset units returning from the fight; transformation; and BRAC [Base Realignment and Closure]. The Increment 1 program is the current tactical backbone for the Army. It is the mainstay of the Brigade Combat Team and Division Headquarters. The continued fielding of Increment 1a capabilities, in accordance with the Army’s Force Generation Model [ARFORGEN], is all about those first three priorities—supporting units in the fight, prepping to enter the fight, and reconstitution of those returning from the fight. We have now fielded over 60 percent of the total force, over 90 percent of the active force, and 70 of 77 Brigade Combat Teams. The fieldings of the WIN-T Increment 1 capabilities are set by the ARFORGEN model, which in its simplest translation means that every unit authorized by their table of organization and equipment [TO&E] to have Increment 1 equipment that is in the ready pool for deployment gets their Increment 1 equipment regardless of compo. What that means is there were and are National Guard units that received Increment 1 equipment before some active duty units due to their place in the ARFORGEN model.

Q: What is the current status of the expanded capabilities to be offered under WIN-T Increment 2?

A: The most fundamental status is this: Inc 2 is real! It really is exciting to say that. As you know, Increment 2 is the initial-onthe- move capability. It introduces two new waveforms: the Network Centric Waveform [NCW] and the Highband Networking Waveform [HNW] and the NetOps to plan, initialize, monitor and control a mobile ad hoc network. NCW is the SOTM waveform, and HNW is the terrestrial, line-of-sight [LOS] waveform. The configuration items that make up a BCT have been at the Engineering Proving Grounds [EPG] at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., for the better part of the last two months. It’s been very exciting as the OTM network components come together. We will augment the nodes we currently have at EPG with some additional OTM nodes to get the number up to about 30 mobile nodes so we can do some engineering field tests during December. Then we will pack up the CIs and ship them to Fort Lewis, Wash., and Fort Stewart, Ga., and start training soldiers on January 5, 2009, with the equipment prior to executing the limited user test. We will finish NET in late February and then prepare for the Increment 2 LUT in March. Increment 2 is scheduled for a Milestone C Decision in the June 2009 time frame. The technologies are there; the production is there; the program is there; Increment 2 is coming along quickly.

Q: What would you identify as the chief achievement of the WIN-T program in 2008?

A: This is tough to pin down to a single achievement given all that has happened across the increments in the last 18 months. As we’ve discussed so far, each increment accomplished some significant achievements. Inc 1 completed its IOT&E, which is a huge accomplishment. Increment 2 delivered a BCT’s worth of equipment, conducted DT and is preparing for NET, which again is a huge accomplishment, especially when you think that on June 4, 2007, Increment 2 didn’t even exist. And Increment 3 finalized requirements with FCS and is moving on a path to get baselined and an APB in late spring 2009. I can’t say one is any less important than the other. All were extremely important to the success of each increment, the overall program and the ability for the Army to execute the missions they have today and in the future.

Q: What are the most significant challenges facing the programs?

A: In my opinion, the most significant challenges the program faces by increment are as follows. Increment 1 must complete fielding to the rest of the Army while continuing to reconstitute units, keeping the units in the ready pool for current operational needs. This may not seem like a big challenge to some, until you look at the remaining units to be fielded, which are almost exclusively Compo 3 and National Guard units. Those units that are prioritized to the front of the schedule due to ARFORGEN are actually relatively easy to field, comparatively speaking. This is true even of those units that are National Guard units because they get federalized, and taking them through NET and fielding is no different than any active unit. Fielding the non-ARFORGEN National Guard units will take a lot of coordination, ingenuity and patience. The National Guard Bureau is actively involved in this process, but this is not trivial, especially for the Guard unit. Completing this fielding is extremely important not just for the Title X requirements, but also for the Title XXXII missions of the Guard. This is One Army, One Fight! We can’t have disparate capabilities between Compos. We need to finish fielding the Guard and Reserve.

Increment 2 has an extremely aggressive schedule. From flash to bang, Increment 2 has gone from non-existence to a Milestone C decision in 24 months. Not many ACAT [acquisition category] ID programs can say that, and there are still events to accomplish like the limited user test coming up in March. The schedule is so tight for Increment 2 that any blip has a huge ripple affect. The collective team of government and contractors has been busting their humps for the last two months in the testing cycle to make sure we understand where we are technically and at the same time preparing for the first operational assessment of the initial on-the-move capability. There has been a very steep learning curve for a lot of people; they think they understand what a mobile ad hoc, self-forming, self-healing network means, but let me assure you, the capability it brings and the mental shift it will force are big. We are in constant teaching mode because this is not your 1990s static network.

In the case of Increment 3, I need to back up and make sure everyone understands that because of the “flash-to-bang” time for Increment 2 and the shift to an incremental capability delivery, Increment 2 is contractually an engineering change proposal to the Increment 3 SDD [system development and demonstration] contract. The two increments are inextricably tied. The developmental work in Increment 3 is what feeds Increment 2. Please remember, Increment 2 is the initial onthe- move capability. Increment 3 is the full on-the-move capability, which most people remember as the capabilities in the old pre-Nunn/McCurdy program. Increment 2 is basically early delivery of Increment 3 capabilities in different configuration items—different packaging, if you will. To get to that final list of capabilities and configuration items, Increment 3 has developmental work to finish. Providing incremental capabilities to Increment 2 helps tremendously in proving the technology at a certain level in a certain space/weight/power and cooling [SWAP-C] envelope. Inc 3 has to take those Increment 2 technologies and get them to the target capabilities. Quick examples of this are things like, currently, the two transmission systems in Increment 2, which come in their own boxes.

In Increment 3 the NCW [Network Centric Waveform] and HNW [Highband Networking Waveform] must be repackaged into a combined claim space of a current SINCGARS [Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System] radio mount, and, by the way, we add another capability into that JC4ISR radio by adding GBS [Global Broadcast Service] receiver in the same box. In Increment 2 we have a requirement to get to 27 Mbps throughput on the HNW link while stationary at a distance of 12 kilometers; we’re there. In Increment 3, we take it up to 110 Mbps. Increment 2 is a two-tiered architecture—line of sight or SATCOM. Increment 3 is a three-tiered architecture that brings an intermediate air tier, or what we call an advantaged node. The NetOps software in Increment 2 is an early drop of the Increment 3 NetOps. There are a lot of capabilities in the final build that bring all the network planning, initialization, monitoring and management of the whole network, and integration with JTRS [Joint Tactical Radio System] and FCS. And of course, there are unique SWAP-C requirements for the FCS configuration items that must have the same capabilities as the non-FCS CIs.

Q: Have most of the technological issues involved in putting the program together been resolved, or are there some things still to be worked out?

A: The fundamental technologies have been demonstrated in Increment 2, and the technical maturity process requires us to continuously update the body of evidence for those critical technology elements as defined by OSD DDRE [Office of the Secretary of Defense, Director of Defense Research and Engineering]. Even though most of the CTEs [critical technology elements] have already been demonstrated in Increment 2, there are some that still have to be demonstrated in an operationally representative environment. Some of the Increment 3 specific examples are DNA and the airborne layer. However, beyond that, there is always the question, even though the Increment 2 DT had a combination of as many as 51 static and OTM nodes, as to the scalability of the network. We continue to push the network to answer that question. There are a lot of advanced NetOps capabilities and integration challenges that are the heart of the Increment 3. For example, battlefield spectrum management is a challenge today and will be a bigger challenge with new software-based radio systems and FCS coming to the force. This area will be worked hard as we finalize the Increment 3 capabilities. The integration of the platform NetOps capabilities with LAN [local area network] and WAN [wide area network] NetOps into a network common operational picture must be done in such a way as to not overload the signal soldier with information. This must be seamless as we integrate the NetOps capabilities of the increment and move from at-the-halt to on-the-move assets.

Q: What are you doing to achieve synchronization and coordination with the Future Combat Systems program?

A: First and foremost, communication. My counterpart at FCS, Colonel Michael Williamson, and I signed an MOA [memorandum of agreement] back in June of this year. That MOA was a requirement of the ADM and formally part of the finalization of FCS requirements for the WIN-T program. The primary impact of that MOA, and the process that got the two program offices to a point where we could sign it, was open communications. That new line of communication allowed the two program offices to challenge each other and to make sure we understood what the other needed. We have Increment 2 equipment in the FCS SIL [System Integration Laboratory]; we invite FCS to all our design reviews; and I am an invitee to the FCS board of directors meetings. The WIN-T team knows how important the network is to the success of not just FCS but the Army in general.

Q: What are your primary goals for 2009, and where do you think the program will be at the end of next year?

A: My primary goals have not changed: support troops in contact; support troops preparing for contact; reconstitution of forces; transformation; and BRAC. These goals are derived from my two customers: the warfighter and the taxpayer. However, 2009 is a big year for the increments of WIN-T as programs. Increment 1 is going to continue to field and reconstitute units and programmatically is looking at achieving full materiel release. Increment 2 has a milestone C decision and then the follow-on LRIP [low rate initial production] contract award. I expect to get Increment 3 an APB and be in a position to go to critical design review at the start of FY10. All in all, we have a busy year ahead of us.

Q: A number of other programs are under the PM WIN-T. What are their missions, and how do they relate to the WIN-T program?

A: PMO WIN-T has a very broad portfolio. The easiest way to explain the other products is by product manager. Lieutenant Colonel Ray Compton took over Increment 1 this past July. Lieutenant Colonel Craig Schaefer has both Increments 2 and 3 because of the dependencies of those two increments. Those three programs we’ve discussed at length already. Lieutenant Colonel Duane Amsler has nine products he manages under the Multichannel Satellite Terminal Product Office. The Phoenix satellite terminal provides Quad-Band [C, X, Ka and Ku] capability in the super high frequency [SHF] range. This allows the terminal to operate over commercial and military SHF satellites. Amsler also manages the Army terminals for the global broadcast system, both receive terminals and the TSBM [Transportable Satellite Broadcast Manager]. Also in PdM MST is the Commercial Satellite Terminal Program [CSTP], which is where several other programs get their commercial satellite terminals. For example, the Increment 1 satellite terminal trailer is actually provided via a contract in the CSTP [Commercial SATCOM Terminal Program] office; this is the same contract the Marine Corps uses for their SWAN [support wide area network] terminals.

Then there are the special, current tactical protected communications systems, SCAMP [Single-Channel Anti-Jam Man- Portable Terminal] and SMART-T. SMART-T is the Secure Mobile Anti-Jam Reliable Tactical Terminal; it provides users with secure, survivable, anti-jam, satellite communications in a HMMWV configuration. Currently SMART-T operates in the EHF bands on the MILSTAR constellation, but we have an upgrade program to take advantage of the AEHF constellation once on orbit. The man-portable version SMART-T system is the single channel anti-jam man-portable [SCAMP]. SCAMP provides worldwide, anti-jam, low probability of intercept and detection, and assured voice and data communications. PdM MST also has the large X and C band tactical satellite dishes. The LAMBDA program is another larger terminal that does Ku as well as C and X band. And the High Capacity Communications Capability program is a pre-MDAP terminal program in support of TSAT.

Jennifer Zbozny is the product director for an organization most Army tactical signal units know only by its acronym, TNAC2. TNAC2 is short for tactical network architectures and configurations current. It’s a long name, but in a nutshell it integrates the current force network and ensures interoperability of Army networking products and solutions across and external to PEO C3T, as well as Marine Corps networking products and solutions. Basically, if a device uses IP and is introduced to the tactical network, TNAC2 helps make sure it plays nice. The final product director [PD] in PMO WIN-T is Joseph Forino, who is the PD for NetOps-Current Force [CF]. PD NetOps-CF also has a myriad of products that range from the Army tactical cryptographic key generation, management and loader products; commercial network planning and monitoring tools; and data products that allow battle command systems, Blue Force Tracker and FBCB2 systems to operate on the tactical IP network.

So, when someone asks me how things are going in WIN-T, they could be in for a long-winded answer. We are very diverse, very busy, extremely relevant and never short of work.

Q: Is there anything else you would like to add?

A: Yes, first I’d like to thank MIT for the opportunity to have this interview. As we went through these questions and answers, I hope readers got the impression that PMO WIN-T is bigger than the increments of WIN-T. It’s important that every opportunity I get to “re-calibrate” someone’s data point on WIN-T, I take it. The program has been around a while, and if a person’s last data point is prior to June 5, 2007, they have an old data point and I need to get them up to speed. Also, this interview has been very “transport-centric.” The network is very important, but at the end of the day most soldiers’ or Marines’ interface to the network is their application. If the app isn’t working, they don’t care if it is the app or the network; they just want their app to work. I say all this because inside PEO C3T is the network, the battle command applications, the situational awareness applications, the command post and force protection for fixed sites. To make it all work, we work hard together. ♦