Experiment_SOP_APR2011.pdf

Experiment/Study Standard Operating Procedure

(SOP)

July 2016 *updated April 2017

Approved by:

Walton C. Dickson Director, MBSL

US Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence (MSCoE) Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate (CDID)

Maneuver Support Battle Lab (MSBL)

14010 MSCoE Loop, Room 3691

ATTN: ATZT-CDB

Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 65473-8929

Maneuver Support Battle Lab

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

This is a rough outline for experimentation (plan, prepare, conduct, report). It is not all inclusive. It does not include all the details, but it does provide basic information.

This applies to experiments conducted by MSBL (including Lab LNOs acting as Project Manager (PM)) and larger integrating experiments led by another Battle Lab. There are some variations when the experiment is contracted, which are not covered in this document.

• Analysis drives the experiment design o to collect the right data o to answer the customer’s questions o to inform and/or influence a decision or document o to meet the desired outcome

• Breakdown of emphasis and effort, by percentage o 40% planning and coordination

Develop pattern of analysis Design experiment to collect the right data Set the conditions to collect the data o 20% execution o 40% data analysis and completing report

Answer the questions Present the information so that it is useful to the customer and decision maker Provides analytical underpinnings

PLAN

Any experiment or study starts with an idea. Somebody (the “stakeholder”) wants to know something in order to influence or affect some purpose.

Identify the Customer Identification of the “customer” or the person/organization that will take the results of the experiment or study to an informed decision with is key. For prototype or live experiments, the goal is to have interest from two out of the three communities (Combat Developer, S&T and Acquisition) on the S&T triangle, see figure 1. Interest from all three is preferred.

The primary customer is usually CDID RDD (prototype) or CODDD (concept), but could be

USAES (CEHC, DEI, DOTLD), USAMPS (ANSEC, DOTLD), USACBRNS (DOTLD),

MSCoE HD/CSO, RTD (C-IED), or some other organization. The customer could also be a lab or a PM.

One exception in experimentation is TRADOC ARCIC JAED directs integrating experiments via TRADOC TASKORDs and FRAGOs. These are large-scale events involving multiple battle labs over the course of a Fiscal Year (FY), i.e. Unified Challenges. See Appendix A, Types of Experiments.

Governance Approval The stakeholder will prepare a quad chart for leadership approval. See Appendix B, Planning Quad Chart. MSBL Plans & Integration (P&I) will present the idea to the MSBL for initial approval of resources. Official approval is granted through the Science and Technology Integration Working Group (S&TI WG). See Appendix C, S&T Integration and S&T Enabler Process. At the next available S&TI WG, the stakeholder will present their quad to the CDID Director for final approval to begin the experiment/study.

Develop the Charter Once CDID and MSBL leadership have approved, MSBL P&I will conduct a meeting to address questions, roles and responsibilities. A charter is written to guide the team towards the event execution. The stakeholder, with support from MSBL as necessary, will write a charter. See Appendix D, Project Charter Template.

The charter will be signed lastly by the CDID Director. Once a charter has been coordinated and approved, it is handed off to either the MSBL Experimentation Branch, Studies & Analysis Branch, or back to the stakeholder (lab, PM, etc) for execution.

PREPARE

A meeting between MSBL P&I, the stakeholder, the customer, and MSBL Experimentation Branch and/or Studies & Analysis Branch will be held as the Initial Planning Conference (IPC).

See Appendix E, Experimentation Cycle, for more information on conducting the IPC, MPC, and

FPC.

Establishing the Team An experiment team will be formed. See Appendix F, Experiment Team Organization. This is only a guide and should be tailored to each specific experiment. Major responsibilities, although not inclusive, are identified. It can be used for prototype experiments or concept

Figure 1. S&T Triangle experiments. The customer and stakeholders are a part of the Experiment Team. The experiment team can include CODDD, RDD, TCM-MS, USACBRNS, USAES, USAMPS, labs, and PM.

At the IPC, the experiment team will discuss roles and responsibilities and identify names of the personnel on the Experiment Team Organization Chart.

The Project Manager updates the initial planning quad chart in the latest format prescribed by CDID and MSBL leadership. The quad chart can be adapted for prototype, live or concept experiments.

Experiment Plan The Project Manager brings the team together to develop the experiment plan. See Appendix G, Experiment Plan Template. The Analysis Plan is part of the Experiment Plan, although it can be a separate document. The template shows the Analysis Plan as part of the overall Experiment Plan. The Analysis Plan includes the Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP). See Appendix H, DCMP Format.

The Project Manger manages the project and coordinates the actions of the other team members.

Through IPRs, conducted on a schedule to be determined by each experiment or study, the team is brought together for continued planning and coordination. See Appendix I, IPR Status.

For events requiring technology support or use of the experimentation lab resources, such as facility space, computers, hardware/software setups, a MSBL IT Request Form must be filled out and submitted to the Models & Sims Branch Chief at least 45 days prior to the event. See Appendix J, MSBL IT Request Form.

For TRADOC ARCIC JAED integrated events, such as a SIMEX, reference Appendix C, S&T Enabler Process and Appendix K, MDEC Checklist. For inclusion of S&T Enablers in Unified Challenge SIMEXp or GAMEXp, proposed S&T enablers will be presented to the S&TI WG at least 2 working group meetings before submission to ARCIC JAED. S&TI WG meetings are held the fourth Thursday of each month. This will allow adequate time for MSCoE approval before submission to TRADOC level.

Unified Challenge S&T Enabler Selection Process (see Appendix C)

1. Community of Practice (CoP) identifies the learning demands that will be addressed thru the year’s experimentation.

2. Informed by the Learning Demands the Lead Analyst identifies the gaps that experimentation will inform

3. Plans & Integration (P&I) references the CNA to identify the Ideas for Materiel Approach aligned against the gaps and builds a collective list of all potential enablers

4. P&I coordinates with RDECOM and ERDC Technical Liaisons to verify the efforts listed are still valid and to add any additional technologies which may be under development but not yet couched in the CNA.

5. The list of technologies is then put before the S&T Integration Work Group for approval.

Approving authority if the Chairperson of the WG but not lower than the Tech Director of the MSBL. The approving authority has authority to delete items from the list based on their understanding of the scenario and phases which will be used in the events.

6. P&I will build the quad chart and seek participation from RDD/TCM elements and researchers/engineers responsible for the developing the capabilities.

For prototype and live experiments, a DD Form 2977, Risk Assessment, is required. Guidance is in ATP 5-19 and FLW Reg 385-10.

If a product demonstration is desired (mostly used for live and prototype experiments, an announcement and agenda of the demonstration should be sent at least 30 days prior to the demonstration.

CONDUCT

The Project Manager will oversee the execution of the experiment. The analyst will oversee the data collection in accordance with the established DCMP to ensure data is collected in sufficient detail to answer the questions of the stakeholder(s).

The Project Manager should send a daily summary of the event to MSBL and stakeholder leadership at the conclusion of each day of the event.

If the event execution includes a product demonstration, the following information should be addressed at or during the demonstration.

MSBL Project Managers responsibilities Purpose Objective Study Issues & Pattern of Analysis Methodology, to include scenarios Initial Observations Lab, PM or vendor responsibilities Description of the product’s capability Demonstration of technology

Question and Answer session

Upon completion of the experiment, the Project Manager should send an executive summary (EXSUM) of the experiment to the Experimentation Branch Chief or Studies & Analysis Branch Chief and/or the stakeholder (lab, PM, etc). See Appendix L, EXSUM Examples.

REPORT

The analyst will conduct the data reduction and analysis following the conclusion of the experiment.

The Project Manager will conduct meetings with experiment team in the days following the event to discuss initial insights and how the information will be presenting in the report. The initial insights brief is due within 30 days. See Appendix M, Initial Insights Brief Overview.

The initial insights brief should be staffed with the stakeholders and customer prior to meeting with MSBL Director.

The Experiment Report is drafted based on the initial insights brief and more robust data analysis following the event execution. See Appendix N, Experiment Report Template. The second page of the report should include SF 298 immediately preceding the report’s signature page.

Complete the SF 298 using the fillable PDF form, which can be downloaded from https://www.gsa.gov/Forms/TrackForm/32956. Block 1 is the same date that the MSBL Director signs the signature page. Insert completed SF 298 (front side only) into the report as the second page, ahead of the signature page.

The draft Experiment Report, including the Experiment to Action Plan (ETAP), should be staffed with all stakeholders, attendees, customer(s) and the experiment team. Adjudicate comments. See Appendix P, ETAP.

See guidance on report marking and distribution statements in Appendix Q, Distribution & Marking Instructions. Distribution statements will be written in the format directed by DOD Directive 5230.24, Distribution Statements on Technical Documents. If the Experiment Report is marked For Official Use Only (FOUO), state on the cover that the report is exempt from mandatory disclosure under the freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and which exemption applies.

“This document contains information EXEMPT FROM MANDATORY DISCLOSURE under the FOIA. Exemptions ..... apply.”

If MSBL participates in larger experiment, such as ARCIC JAED’s Unified Challenge, or another organization's experiment, such as Sustainment Center of Excellence’s Freedom of Movement Rock Drill or Maneuver Center of Excellence’s Army Warfighting Assessment (AWA), MSBL’s Experiment Report will follow their format.

A final report is due within 60-90 days of experiment conclusion. The Project Manager will brief the MSBL Director to obtain approval to release the report and the CDID Director to obtain approval to release the ETAP.

Once comments have been adjudicated on the draft report, the Project Manager should prepare a desk side brief for the MSBL Director and/or CDID Director. See Appendix R, Final Report Brief. The Project Manager should brief, but have the analyst, customer, and stakeholders present to answer questions. At the conclusion of the brief, leave a hard copy of the final report complete with ETAP with the CDID Director for final approval. After CDID Director approves, the MSBL Director will sign the release memo. Insert a signed copy of the memo into the final report and convert the document to PDF. Send to either the Experimentation Branch Chief, Studies & Analysis Branch Chief, or back to the stakeholder (lab, PM, etc) for execution.

The Project Manager will distribute the final approved report to customer, stakeholders, ARCIC JAED, ARCIC S&T (prototype experiments), Lab LNOs to MSCoE, and any others that have an interest. Ensure a copy is posted to the MSBL SharePoint (Archives, by year). A copy of the final report should be submitted to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/faqs/submitting_faqs.html).

https://www.gsa.gov/Forms/TrackForm/32956 http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/faqs/submitting_faqs.html

UNCLASSIFIED//Public Releasable

Types of Experiments

23 Oct 14 UNCLASSIFIED//Public Releasable 1

Venue Description Purpose Knowledge Characteristics Source of Credibility

Seminar

Seminar Wargame

Facilitated Wargame

Example: Unified Quest

• Subject matter experts

• Facilitators

• Vignettes as basis for discussion

• Understand problems

• Develop conceptual solutions

• Foundation: Rational

• Method / domain of validity:

inductive, established by expertise of participants

• Generates transferable knowledge

• Method: Minimize biases, ensure full participation

• Context: Diversity of perspectives

Game-based

Experiment (GAMEXp)

Example: NEA 7.0

Phase 2-3 Wargame

• Multi-sided, turn-based, formally adjudicated game

• Representation of forces and environment

• Assess concepts and required capabilities to organizational level (low resolution)

• How groups of people/things behave and interact

• Foundation: Pragmatic

• Method / domain of validity:

inductive, established by method and context

• Generates transferable knowledge

• Method: Formal adjudication

• Context: Accredited data and models, federation, expertise in representing scenario, concepts, WfF, etc.

Simulation-based

Experiment (SIMEXp)

Example: NEA 7.0

Phase 3 SIMEX

• Multi-sided, real-time

• Commanders with staffs (-)

• Simulated soldiers, equipment & environment

• White cell wraparound

• Assess concepts and required capabilities to entity level (high resolution)

• How individual people/things behave and interact

• Foundation: Pragmatic

• Method / domain of validity:

inductive, established by method and context

• Generates transferable knowledge

• Method: Formal adjudication augmenting simulated environment

• Context: Accredited data and models, federation, expertise in representing scenario, concepts, WfF, etc.

Field Experiment

Example:

Army Expeditionary

Warrior Experiments

(AEWE)

• Multi-sided, real-time

Real soldiers, (prototype) equipment and environment

• M&S wraparound

• Assess prototype solutions to capability gaps

• Assess impacts of new technologies

• Foundation: Empirical

• Method / domain of validity:

Deductive, established by experiment design and data collection / analysis

• Creates generalizable knowledge

• Method: Rigorous experiment design, data collection and analysis

• Context: Trained soldiers, mature representations of technology and realistic environment

Description

Linkages Resources

Impact/Risk

Title

• Problem Statement:

• Purpose:

• Endstate:

• Impact:

• DOTMLPF-P:

• Risk(s):

• AWFC/Learning Demands:

• Gaps:

• Lead Organization

• Personnel:

• CoEs:

• Funding:

• Facilities:

T

IM

E L

IN

E

JAN16 FEB16 MAR16 APR16 MAY16

D O T M L P F Policy

UQ NIEUC COE CTC

Maneuver Support Functional Concept

STSE CAMJFE WAS HD DSCA

Potential Venues

Description

Linkages Resources

Impact/Risk

Color in the circles for those that apply:

STSE = Set the Theater and Shape the Environment

JFE = Joint Forcible Entry

CAM = Combined Arms Maneuver

WAS = Wide Area Security

HD = Homeland Defense

DSCA = Defense Support of Civil Authorities

Color in the circles for those that apply:

UQ = Unified Quest

UC = Unified Challenge

NIE/AWA = Network Integration Event/Army Warfighter Assessment

COE = Center of Excellence events

CTC = Combat Training Center exercise

Color in DOTMLPF-P as applicable

GREEN = expected impact

YELLOW = marginal impact

BLACK = no impact

Lower Left Quad

Maneuver Support Functional Concept

COLOR KEY/LEGEND

Lower Right Quad

Potential Venues

DOTMLPF-Policy Line above timeline

STIM Governance Process

15-19 16-20 17-21

Engagement Opportunities

STIM Briefs

CoC

CNA

Gaps

Inform

S&T Memo

MSCoE S&T CoP & Schools

MSCoE STIM

MSCoE GOSC

S: 1 Apr

S&T Workshop Focused Discussion Meetings Senior Leader Visits Etc…

Update:

CoL, DOTMLPF, CNA, AWFC, O&O, ETC…

GOSC

Event Execution Study, Experiment, Research Effort, Exercise, Etc…

Studies, Experiments, Work Packages

EVENT TITLE

1 Ver 0.1, date

Project Name

Revision History

Version # Date Reason for Change Author

0.1 Charter initiated

Project Summary Problem

Statement

Brief Project Overview

(attach detailed summary to appendix if required)

Project Benefits

Warfighter Benefits

Linkage

(WFO, CNA,

ONS, JUONS,

Concepts, etc…)

Project Scope

In Scope Out of Scope

2 Ver 0.1, date

Project Leadership Name Contact Information

MSCoE Executive Sponsor

Executive Sponsor

Project Sponsor

Project Champion

Project Leader

Project Team Name Role Supervisor Organization

Roles and Responsibilities

Issues

Expected Outcome(s)

Deliverables

Project Risks Known

Constraints

Key Limitations

3 Ver 0.1, date

Key Assumptions

Known Risks To Project From Project

Consequences of NOT Doing

Project or Project Failure

Stakeholders

4 Ver 0.1, date

Approvals Name Signature & Date

Executive Sponsor

Project Sponsor

Project Champion

Project Leader

Preparation, Execution and Transition: Overview

FPC

Event Readiness Review

Event Directive, Analysis Plan, Data Collection & Management Plan

StartEx – 60/30 Days (approx.)

Hotwash

EndEx + 14 days

Experiment

Report

EndEx+30 days

Event Report

ARCIC Staffing

Experiment

To Action

Plan

Office of Primary

Responsibility

For Action

Actionable DOTMLPF

Recommendations

FPC

Event Readiness Review

Event Directive, Analysis Plan, Data Collection & Management

Plan

Hotwash Event Report

MPC

• Purpose. Refine experiment concept to draft executable products.

• Entrance Criteria. Draft Analysis Plans

• Exit Criteria. Draft Experiment/Event

Directive(s)

• Topics. Refine concepts for:

- Experiment/Event Design

- Scenario/Operational Environment

- Classification

- M&S federation & collaborative simulation environment

- Joint context and/or participation

- Training & Training Support Plan

- Experimental forces

- Visitor Support Operations

- Schedule

- Pilot test EndEx + TBD Days

(Specified in Exp. Prop.)IPC

• Purpose. Initial coordination based on experiment proposal.

• Entrance Criteria. Experiment Proposal

• Exit Criteria. Draft Analysis Plan

• Topics. Initial concepts for:

- Experiment/Event Design

- Scenario/Operational Environment

- Classification

- M&S federation & collaborative simulation environment

- Joint context and/or participation

- Training & Training Support Plan

- Experimental forces

- Visitor Support Operations

- Schedule

- Pilot test

StartEx – 180/120 Days

StartEx – 90/60 Days

(Multiple Events, if applicable)

Initial Planning Conference

• Purpose: Conduct initial coordination based on experiment proposal.

• Entrance Criteria: Experiment Proposal

• Exit Criteria: Draft Analysis Plan

• Participants:

– All participating Battle Labs / EAEs

– Applicable LDHD resources (WCBLUFOR, BLCSE, Threat, EXFOR)

Initial Planning Conference

• Addresses initial concepts for:

– Experiment/Event Design

– Scenario/Operational Environment

– Classification

– M&S federation & collaborative simulation environment

– Threat support

– WCBLUFOR

– Joint context and/or participation

– Training & Training Support Plan

– Experimental forces

– Visitor Support Operations

– Schedule

– Pilot test

Preparation: Planning Conferences

• Mid Planning Conference:

– Purpose. Refine experiment concept to draft executable products.

– Entrance Criteria: Draft Analysis Plans

– Exit Criteria: Draft Experiment/Event Directive(s)

– Topics: Same as IPC

• Final Planning Conference

– Experiment Readiness Review

– One prior to every experiment event

– Entrance Criteria:

• Event Directive

• Analysis Plan / Data Collection & Management Plan

• Successful Pilot Test / Rehearsal

– Exit Criteria:

• Final Directive & Plans

EXPERIMENT Planning Organization

• Responsible for planning, conducting, and reporting of assigned experiments

• Manage and coordinate actions of experiment team

• Establish experiment environment

• Determine issues

• Shape the experiment

• Organize and supervise data collection

• Analyze the data, and

• Write the report.

• Purpose

• What do they need to know

• How will the info be used

• Context

• Red

• Blue

• Scenario

• Assistance

• Operations and admin

Project Manager

Stakeholders/

Scenario Team

Analysis Team Operations TeamExperiment Environment

Experimentation Branch

Chief

• Strategic guidance

• Experiment Report Approval

MSBL Director

• Oversight

Plans & Integration

• Initial planning and coordination

• Handover

Plans & Integration

•Initial planning and coordination

- Initial budget

• Handover document

- Charter (prototype experiments)

- Experiment CONOPS (concept experiments)

• Handover to Experimentation Branch at IPC

Experimentation Branch Chief

• Assign Team Leaders/Responsibilities

• Experiment Plan Approval

• Experiment Report Review/QC

• Oversight

Project Manager

• Responsible for planning, conducting, and reporting of assigned experiments

• Manage and coordinate actions of experiment team

• Experiment Plan

• Planning Calendar

• Schedule/Lead IPC, MPC, FPC, IPRs

- Status tracking and updates

• Experiment Staffing

- Experiment Team

- SME

- EXFOR

- Support

• Schedules

• Experiment Budget Management

• Request OT/CT (or ensure OT/CT is requested)

• Experiment Procedures

• Results/Insights Briefing

• Experiment Report

• Report Distribution

Operations

• Staffing Roster

• Soldier (EXFOR) Request

• Experiment Plan

• Operator Training

• Visitors/VIPs

• Maps/Lodging Info

• Personnel Accountability

• Rehearsals

• Experiment Execution

• Risk Assessment

• Admin Support

• Supplies

• Security

Analysis

• Need the analytical capability as part of the experimentation team, from the very beginning.

• Work as part of the team.

• Determine experiment issues

- Will not be given the issues.

- Draw out of the stakeholders, restate, and gain approval.

• Shape experiment design

• Analysis Plan

- Pattern of analysis

- Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP)

- coordinate with the MSCoE team

• Set conditions for data collection

• Coordinate and supervise data collection

- Determine the best way to collect data (who, what, where, when, and how)

- Collect data

• Develop surveys

• Analyze data

- Participate in initial insights discussion

- Participate in other briefings

- Develop and coordinate input (charts) for briefings

• Write the report (or MSCoE input for the report)

• Analysis coordination

• For integrating experiments, work with the lead analyst (from another Battle Lab)

Participate in all the analyst meetings (before, during, and after) and share that information with the MSCoE team

Experiment Environment

• Environment (LVC)

• Experiment Site Development

• Environmental Authorization

• Range Control Coordination

• Schedule:

- MSBL facility

- Range or TA

• DOIM Coordination

• Security (JPAS)

• Communication Plan

• Audio visual support

• IT

• Simulations & Networks

• Pucksters

Stakeholders/Scenario

• Experiment Issue Development

• What do they need to know

• How will the info be used

• Vignette Development

• SME Support

• Red

• Blue

• Scenario

• Customer interest

• Assist getting EXFOR

• Assist with training

• Assist with funding

• Safety Release

• Vendor Demonstration Agreement (VDA)

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Example Military Utility Assessment

(MUA) Experiment Plan

Date

14010 MANSCEN Loop, Room 3691

Use appropriate Distribution Statement. Example: DISTRIBUTION E. Distribution authorized to DoD components only (test and evaluation, vulnerability information) (23 March xxxx). Other request for this document shall be referred to Director, Maneuver Support Battle Lab, 14010

MSCoE Loop, Room 3691, ATTN: ATZT-CDB, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri 65473-8929.

Maneuver Support Battle Lab (MSBL) Signature Sheet

Author: ________________________________________ _____________

Name, Project Lead Date

Co-Author: ________________________________________ ____________

Name, Lead Analyst Date

Reviewed by: ________________________________________ ____________

Name, Position Date

Approved by: ________________________________________ ____________

Name, Experimentation Branch Chief Date

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose Statement

1.2 Objectives

1.3 System Description

1.4 Scope, Constraints, Limitations, and Assumptions ....... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2. Experimental Design

2.1 Variables

2.2 Experiment Subjects

2.3 Experiment Targets

2.4 Sampling Procedures and Run Order

2.5 Sources of Experimental Error

2.6 Strategies to Reduce Variability

2.7 Sample Size

2.8 Experiment Run Matrix

3. Experimental Procedures

3.1 Detailed Test Procedures

3.2 Hold-Experiment Criteria

4. Data Analysis

4.1 Methodology

4.2 Issues

4.3 Essential Elements of Analysis (EEAs)/Measures of Merit (MOMs)

4.4 Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP)

5. Logistics

5.1 Personnel

5.2 Equipment & Materials

5.3 Schedule

5.4 Test Site/Facilities

5.5 Safety

Appendix A Data Collection Managemetn Plan (DCMP) ..... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Appendix B Experiment Data Sheets and Questionnaires……………………………. Error!

Bookmark not defined.

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose Statement

The purpose of this experiment is

Objectives

The objectives of this experiment are

1.2 System Description

Scope, Constraints, Limitations, and Assumptions

Scope

Constraints.

Limitations.

Assumptions.

2. Experimental Design

2.1 Variables

The control variables are:

The response variables that will be assessed are:

2.2 Experiment Subjects or Experimental Forces (EXFOR)

2.3 Experiment Targets, objects, or other information as needed

2.4 Sampling Procedures and Run Order

EXAMPLE SKETCH

Figure 9: Site Layout o Vignette #1.

o Vignette #2

2.5 Sources of Experimental Error

2.6 Strategies to Reduce Variability

2.7 Sample Size

Dig & Fill Vignette # 2-3

Pick up & Move (w/ Clamshell) Vignette #2-1

Rubble Pile Interrogation Vignette #1-2

Culvert Interrogation Vignette #1-1

Hasty Leveling

Vignette #1-3, #2-2

Dig & Fill Vignette # 1-4

Sand Box

Sand Box Start Point

Pick up & Move (w/ Forks) Vignette #2-1

Asphalt Pad

Vignette # 1-4a

2.8 Experiment Run Matrix

Table 1: Experiment Run Matrix

3. Experimental Procedures

3.1 Detailed Experiment Procedures

1.

2.

n.

3.2 Hold-Experiment Criteria

Stop the experiment if, in the event of, etc.

4. Data Analysis

4.1 Methodology

4.2 Issues (number of issues TBD)

4.3 Essential Elements of Analysis (EEAs)/Measures of Merit (MOMs) (as many or as few as needed)

EEA 1.1.

o MOM 1.1.1.

o MOM 1.1.2.

o MOM 1.1.n.

EEA 1.n.

o MOM 1.2.1.

o MOM 1.2.n.

EEA 2.1.

o MOM 2.1.1.

o MOM 2.1.n.

EEA 2.2.

o MOM 2.2.1.

EEA 2.n.

o MOM 2.3.1.

o MOM 2.3.n.

4.4 Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP)

The DCMP is included in Appendix A. It includes a cross walk between issues/EEAs/MOMs and Data Elements (DE) and Data Source (DS).

5. Logistics

5.1 Personnel

a.

The chart below lists the key experiment personnel and roles. Note: Can also insert

Experiment Team organization chart if desired

Name Roles Organization/Code Phone Number

b. EXFOR

5.2 Equipment & Materials (resources)

The following items are needed for the experiment:

Equipment

Materials

5.3 Schedule

Date Time Task Personnel

(MUA) Experiment

Lead

M o n d a y

T u e s d a

W e d n e s d a

T h u rs d a

F ri d a

5.4 Experiment Site/Facilities

Test Site/Facility (example “TA-190 – Asphalt Pad and Sand Box”) o Hours of operation (“as needed”)

5.5 Safety (safety release, risk assessment, etc)

Appendix A Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP)

Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP)

ABC xx Military Utility Assessment (MUA) Experiment

Issue

Issue

EEA

Essential Element of Analysis

(EEA)

MOM #

Measure of Merit

(MOM)

Data Elements

(DE)

Data Source

1.

1.1 1.1.1

1.1.2

1.1.3

1.1.4

1.2 1.2.1

1.2.2

1.2.3

1.2.4

2.

2.1 2.1.1

2.1.2

2.2 2.2.1

2.3 2.3.1

2.3.2

2.4 2.4.1

2.4.2

Appendix B Experiment Data Sheets and Questionnaires (NOTE: AS

MANY OR AS FEW AS NEEDED)

Demographics Questionnaire

TO BE COMPLETED AT START OF EXPERIMENT

Questionnaire #1

TO BE COMPLETED AFTER EACH SET OF RUNS Date: __________________

Name _______________________________ Date ________________________

Role (position, job, etc.) _________________________________

Type, style, questions as determined to fit needs of the experiment (Likert scale, yes/no, table, open ended, comments, etc.)

SME Questionnaire

TO BE COMPLETED AFTER SME HAS OBSERVED SET OF RUNS

Name _______________________________ Date ________________________

Type, style, questions as determined to fit needs of the experiment (Likert scale, yes/no, table, open ended, comments, etc.)

Data Collection Sheet - “A”

Vignette #1-1:

DATE/TIME: ______________________________ DATA COLLECTOR:________________________

TEAM/OPERATOR _________________________________________________________ RUN # ___________

SPECIAL GEAR: MOPP: YES/NO COLD WEATHER : YES/NO

TEMPERATURE______ DAYTIME/NIGHT PRECIPITATION: NONE/RAIN/SNOW/SLEET

LIGHT CONDITIONS: BRIGHT/ OVERCAST (Cloudy)/ DARK/ OTHER _________________

Data Collection Sheet – “N”

Vignette #1-N:

TEAM/OPERATOR: _______________________________ RUN #: _______________

SPECIAL GEAR: MOPP: YES/NO COLD WEATHER: YES/NO

Data Collection Sheet – “H”

General

TEAM/OPERATOR _________________________________________________________ RUN # ___________

PLATFORM: hijk

FY 06 Data Collection Management Plan (DCMP) As of:26 MAR 06

1. This DCMP consolidates study issues for "Battle Lab Name".

2. Hierarchy in each objective: FOR EXAMPLE

Element Example Description

Objective 1 Objective Statement

Issue 1.1 Issue (Question)

EEA 1.1.1 Subordinate Issue (Question)

MOM 1.1.1.1 Measure

Data Source 1.1.1.1.1 Measure

3. DCMP Instructions:

1) Insert the assigned objectives from TRADOC in the objective column; Insert approved "bottom up objectives" here also

2) Insert the issues in the issues column for each objective

3) Insert the EEA for each issue in the EEA column

4) Insert the MOMs for each EEA in the MOM column

5) Indicate the data source for each MOM

6) Annotate with an 'X' the BL event that will answer each MOM

7) Annotoate any large scale events the BL is participating i.e. IE05, UQ05 in the FY

4. DCMP Definition:

Data collection and management plan becomes the R&S plan for the study - it describes the elements to be collected, when, where and how they will be collected, how they will be archived

EACH event requires a stand-alone

DCMP.

Data Collection Management Plan

1 2 3 4

The objective focuses on the

"why " a study is to be done, not on" what " the specific issues are to be studied

1.1

Issues and EEA are stated as a hierarchial set of questions

1.1.1

Delineate sub-elements of the problem for which answers must be produced.

Usually require narrative answers; The quantitative and qualitative output of the analytical tools is used with judgmental evaluations to produce meaningful answers to the EEA. EEA are formulated in such a manner that when properly answered they give a judgmental evaluation of the critical issues in the study.

1.1.1.1

All issues/EEA should have

MOMs identified. MOM are generated by analysis tools or from data produced by analysis tools. Types of MOMs:

Dimensional Paramenters -measure inherent parameters of a system e.g. size, weight, capacity, Measures of

Performance (MOP)-measures attributes of a system e.g. speed, error rate, firng rate, Measure of Effectiveness

(MOE) - measures how a

"system" affects other enities e.g. average age of unit in the

COP, kills per round fired, Measures of Force

Effectiveness (MOFE) -measures how a force performed its mission e.g. Loss

Exchange Ratio (LER).

There are several data sources -each with their own set of considerations: automated -simulation output, network monitors; human observation -data collectors, observing analysts; participant input -surveys, AARs, interviews

MOM

EVENTS

Data Sources

Use this section (optional) to show the cross-reference of Issues-EEAs-

MoM to Venues/Events

Obj # EEA# EEAIssue # IssueObjectives MOM#

1 of 2 7/12/2016 11:44 AM

DCMP - Data Collection Management Plan (Alternative Template)

Problem Statement:

Level Code Element Event Ready?

Issue Issue #1 1st Issue, stated in the form of a question. All N EEA EEA 1.1 1st Essential Element of Analysis, of 1st Issue, stated in the form of a question. All N

MOM MOM 1.1.1 1st Measure of Merit 1 N

MOM MOM 1.1.2 2nd Measure of Merit 1 N

MOM MOM 1.1.3 3rd Measure of Merit 1 N

MOM MOM 1.1.4 4th Measure of Merit 1 N

EEA EEA 1.2 2nd Essential Element of Analysis, of 1st Issue, stated in the form of a question. All N

MOM MOM 1.2.1 1st Measure of Merit 2 N

MOM MOM 1.2.2 2nd Measure of Merit 2 N

MOM MOM 1.2.3 3rd Measure of Merit 2 N

MOM MOM 1.2.4 4th Measure of Merit 2 N

Issue Issue #2 2nd Issue, stated in the form of a question. All N EEA EEA 2.1 1st Essential Element of Analysis, of 2nd Issue, stated in the form of a question. All N

MOM MOM 2.1.1 1st Measure of Merit 3 N

MOM MOM 2.1.2 2nd Measure of Merit 3 N

MOM MOM 2.1.3 3rd Measure of Merit 3 N

MOM MOM 2.1.4 4th Measure of Merit 3 N

EEA EEA 2.2 2nd Essential Element of Analysis, of 2nd Issue, stated in the form of a question. All N

MOM MOM 2.2.1 1st Measure of Merit 4 N

MOM MOM 2.2.2 2nd Measure of Merit 4 N

MOM MOM 2.2.3 3rd Measure of Merit 4 N

MOM MOM 2.2.4 4th Measure of Merit 4 N

Statement of the Problem, in the form of a statement, not a question.

FY14

Unified Challenge 14.4

SIMEX

Agenda

• UC 14.4

– Overview & Schedule

– Status

– Actions

– Way Ahead

UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIED

Linkages

• MSCoE Line of Effort:

- MS&P ISO Integrated Distributed Operations

• MSCoE Issues:

- How do MS&P forces and capabilities enable freedom of action during Integrated Distributed Operations (IDO)?

- How does the Army identify, prevent, and mitigate threats and hazards, and recover from the effects of attacks?

- What is the potential contribution of science and technology (S&T) to mitigate risks to required MS&P capabilities?

T

IM

E L

IN

E

MAR14 APR14 MAY 14 JUN14 JUL14 AUG14 SEP14

•25-27: MPC 1 via

BLCSE

•15: Draft

Experiment

Directive

•5-16: MDMP

•13-15: MPC 2

•TBD: IPR to CDL

•11: Publish Exp

Directive, Analysis

Plan, DCMP

•16-20: ROC

•26-27: Final

Planning

Conference

•Sim Integration

Testing

•Sim Integration

Testing

•11-15: Final

Planning

Conference 2

•8-12: Training

•16-26: SIMEX

Unified Challenge 14.4 (FBL Lead)

D O T M L P F

Purpose: To meet the demands of the future strategic environment with its strategic vision and priorities, the Army must make its force leaner while retaining capability, prevent overmatch through 2025, and set the conditions for fundamental change by 2030-40.

Task: The Fires Lab (FBL) will lead UC14.4 SIMEX to examine the

Army’s capability to conduct unified land operations (ULO) in an OE that challenges the full spectrum of combined arms operations while supporting the traditional core competencies and tenets of an Army operation in a Join enabled fight. The assessment of capability will focus on a 420K force that is S&T enabled

MSCoE Learning Demand: How do Maneuver Support and Protection

(MS&P) forces and capabilities support the Army in 2025?

DOTMLPF Discussion

Concepts: Inform the MS&P Functional Concept

Doctrine: Inform changes to the new Division and Corps HQ manuals

Organization:

•What new requirements will there be for the BEB/MEB to conduct

Support Area and mission support to the Regional Aligned Forces?

•Inform the community of Practice on the possible ORG change of EAB

EN Companies

Materiel: What new S&T that would improve capabilities of the MS&P units to conduct their assigned missions

Resources Required / Issues

• S&T Enablers:

- Need concept of employment/TTPs for SIMEX

- S: 11JUN14

• Tech METL Tasks:

- Critical Mission Threads due to FBL

- S: 30MAY14

• Analysis DCMP

- S: 28MAY14

Experimentation Team

Project Manager name

Stakeholders/Scenario Team Lead: name

Support: name

Other Organizations:

CODDD

TCM-MS

TCM-Geo HD/CS Office G2 Threat

USACBRNS

USAES

USAMPS

Analysis Team Lead: name

Support: name

Operations Team Lead: name

Support: name

Experiment Environment Lead: name

Support: name

Experimentation Branch Chief name

MSBL Director name

Plans & Integration name

Topic Status OPR SUMMARY

FUNDING HIRTZ FAD received. Cross-org LOAs working. ARFORGEN funding working directly with 204 MEB.

MANNING CPT ARCENEAUX Expect BEB player positions on amended TRADOC TASKORD. Awaiting by name list of 204th personnel. BCT MPs will play at Benning

LVC- E ATHMER Working.

ANALYSIS OWEN Working.

SCENARIO CPT ARCENEAUX Working.

FACILITY HIRTZ Not working yet. Scheduled to start o/a August.

STRATEGIC

COMMS

LTC BART Working.

S&T

ENABLERS

HIRTZ 3 MSCOE S&T Enablers. CONOPs & TTPs due FBL NLT 11JUNE14. Need assistance to finalize CONOPs & TTPs to ensure technology employment agrees with concepts and doctrine in 2025.

Upcoming Events

HIRTZ ROC 16-20JUN…will play MEB, EN BDE, and CORPS/DIV Staff from FLW. FPC 26-27JUN14 via BLCSE.

UC14.4 Unified Challenge SIMEX as of 21MAY14

OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

– Working, problems do not require assistance

– Completed or Working, no problems – No Report

Topic STATUS OPR Description of Activity

EXPERIMENT

FUNDING

RODGERS Funding received on FAD. Funding spreadsheet discussed with ARCIC JAED 3/19

Cross Org LOA HIRTZ Coordinate with G-8 for creation of funding codes and Cross Org LOA for the experiment. Spreadsheet created.

as of 21MAY14

FUNDING

OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

MANNING

DOCUMENT

CPT A All manning request submitted. No other actions taken.

HICON/CORPS CPT A FORSCOM requested. MP/CM/EN – ALL O5 POSITIONS.

DIV CPT A (WCBF) Mike Bean - Protection Cell Chief LTC Bart – Engineer FORSCOM requested – DIV Provost Marshall, CBRNE (critical fill)

EN BDE CPT A 2x TRADOC TASKORD

IBCT & SBCT

BEB

CPT A FORSCOM request submitted for BEB CDR & S3. Amended TRADOC TASKORD expected to include BEB CHEM, CO CDRs, PLT LDRs. BEB SME expected to go to Benning for SIMEX.

MEB AMBER CPT A 204MEB sending 25 players. 2x Stryker BN on FORSCOM request. 1x EOD on TRADOC TASKORD.

PUCKSTERS

(military)

RED CPT A 204th MEB sending 5 military pucksters.

648th MEB tasked 3 personnel through TCM-MS.

FLWCTO Task CDID-14-098-188 (pub 08 April 2014): 1 September

PUCKSTERS

(contract)

HIRTZ Simultaneously working alternative with FBL to provide additional pucksters as needed.

as of 21MAY14

MANNING OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

IT AMBER ATHMER

TWG AMBER ATHMER Ongoing

INTEGRATION AMBER ATHMER Monthly TIE events ongoing, leading to spiral integration in June

ORBAT AMBER ATHMER S: 11JUN14 to meet ROC drill

UNIT COMPO AMBER JAMSD

TERRAIN

STATUS

JAMSD No MSCoE requirement. Waiting for JAMSD to provide the terrain

JVTR AMBER ATHMER Have the software and will load as needed to support the event.

MANNING /

STAFF BLUE

ATHMER

BLCSE

ACCOUNTS BLUE

ATHMER

VOIP

BLUE

ATHMER

FIRESIM

BLUE

ATHMER Contacted FBL, they are still working on the plan and will send out when completed as of 21MAY14

Live, Virtual, Constructive Environment (LVC-E)OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

ONESAF EQUIP AMBER RICHARDS

ONESAF SOFTWARE AMBER RICHARDS Waiting on the correct version to be dropped by JAMSD.

ONESAF SCENARIOS BLUE RICHARDS Not yet developed by JAMSD

ORBAT BLUE RICHARDS Waiting on Guidance regarding the task force composition

UNIT COMPOSITIONS AMBER RICHARDS JAMSD will generate from the ORBAT

PUCKSTER

WORKSTATIONS

BLUE RICHARDS We have 20 boxes that are ready to go.

PUCKSTERS (contract) Name Simultaneously working alternative with FBL to provide additional pucksters as needed.

Concurrent training with CPOF

BLUE RICHARDS

STARTEX POSITIONS BLUE RICHARDS TBD

Naming Convention Mapping for CPOF AMBER

RICHARDS Working on a possible work around. OneSAF naming convention is controlled by JAMSD, CPOF uses alias name OneSAF can use the Alias name, will need to test.

as of 21MAY14

LVC-E – ONESAF OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

CPOF TECH

SUPPORT

PERSONNEL

BLUE

ATHMER

CPOF EQUIP BLUE ATHMER

CPOF

SOFTWARE

BLUE ATHMER Waiting on which version will be used for the SimEx

CPOF TRAINING BLUE GOTT Anticipated CPOF class TBD.

MAPPING /

OVERLAYS BLUE

ATHMER Waiting on final decision where the simex will happen

Concurrent training with OneSAF

BLUE

GOTT

Working CPOF station BLUE

FINCHER Currently there is one CPOF station in the Main CR.

as of 21MAY14

LVC-E – CPOF OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

Appointment of Analyst

NC TAYLOR Complete: Owen is the analyst for UC14.4

MSCoE Learning Demands

NC OWEN Learning Demands Complete

Pattern of Analysis NC OWEN Draft POA being worked

DCMP OWEN Will begin being worked once POA is near completion

MSCoE MSEL OWEN Will be worked in conjunction with DCMP

Analysis Manning NC HIRTZ Manning requirements TBD once DCMP and POA near completion; Hirtz will coordinate manning resources

Event Execution:

Data Collection

OWEN Occurs during the experiment; based on DCMP

Initial Insights OWEN Analysis to support Initial Insights occurs during the experiment

Post-Event Analysis OWEN Requires experiment data

Report Input OWEN Begins during Post-Event Analysis; input goes to MCBL

ETAP Input OWEN Begins following completion of Report Input as of 21MAY14

ANALYSIS

NC

OVERALL STATUS

NC: No Change from Last IPR

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

ISC-B

SCENARIO

CPT A POC list established by FBL. No other actions taken.

CORPS

OPORDERS

WCBF Complete

DIVISION

OPORDER

LTC BART

MORGAN

WCBF

Completed at MDMP

MEB OPORDER 204 MEB Between MDMP and Event.

MEB CONOPS 204 MEB Completed at MDMP as of 21MAY14

OPERATIONAL SCENARIO SUPPORT OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

PROTECTION

STRATCOM

LTC BART

MORGAN

SIMMONS

MANEUVER

SUPPORT

STRATCOM

LTC BART

MORGAN

SIMMONS

as of 21MAY14

EXPERIMENT STRATCOM OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

S&T ENABLERS HIRTZ Quad charts, concept of employment and TTPs due to Sill NLT 13JUN14.

Early/Austere Entry

HIRTZ Not playing….austere entry not a part of UC14.4 scenario

Signature Control/Mgmt

HIRTZ Advanced Obscurants will be added to MSCOE S&T Enabler list. Need CONOP & TTP for each echelon.

Area Denial HIRTZ Solid State Active Denial Technology (SS-ADT) will be added to MSCOE S&T Enabler list. Need CONOP & TTP for each echelon.

Autonomy HIRTZ Layered Approach to Explosive Hazard Detection will be added to MSCOE S&T Enabler list. Need CONOP & TTP for each echelon.

Persistent & Pervasive Obstacle/Hazard Detection

HIRTZ Layered Approach to Explosive Hazard Detection will be added to MSCOE S&T Enabler list. Need CONOP & TTP for each echelon.

as of 21MAY14

S&T ENABLERS OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

FACILITY HIRTZ MDEC, MSBL conference room reserved for SIMEX and planning dates

Lighting HIRTZ

Audio HIRTZ

Clean-up

MDEC

HIRTZ Cleaning crew to be schedule prior to training week

Trash HIRTZ to be scheduled with building maintenance for daily removal before, during, and after SIMEX

Experiment Comms

HIRTZ

Door Codes HIRTZ to be established one week prior to training week

Shredder HIRTZ to be repaired of alternative collection method established

Security Brief to players

HIRTZ

Door Signs HIRTZ

Environmental HIRTZ as of 21MAY14

FACILITY OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

Security Clearances

SFC HILL For players and pucksters….anticipated to start on time with no issues.

Seating Chart

MDEC

HIRTZ S:20 JUN14

VOIP locations HIRTZ

MDEC

Schedule for Setup

ATHMER

Admin/ Security Brief

HIRTZ

Road to War Brief

CPT A

Scenario Brief CPT A

Training Week Schedule

HIRTZ

as of 21MAY14

OTHER OVERALL STATUS

– Not Working, but will be delayed due to previous efforts

– Not Working, no problems, should begin on time

– Working, problems require help from Div or higher

MSBL IT Request Must be submitted 45 days prior to event

Date

Event Lead

E-mail

Contact Number

Event Start Date Event End Date

Alternate POC

Alternate Number

Alternate Email

Number of Participants Attending

Classification Level

Location of Event

Event Type

Hardware Requirements BLCSE VTC (NOFORN)

BLCSE VOIP (NOFORN)

PROJECTION

PRINTING

Amplified Voice (MIC)

Projection Requirements (If needed)

Software Requirements (CPOF, OneSAF, BCS, NVESD Toolset, Filesharing)

Event Lead will be responsible for coordinating / providing the following information:

List of Attendees Physical Security Requirements (Door Access, JPAS Visit Requests) Office Supply Needs Providing Attendees notice/documentation of Account Requirements 30 days prior to event

- BLCSE AUP

- DD2875 for required network (completed per instruction) - Named Accounts

- Copy of Cyber Awareness Certificate (must not expire before end date of event)

**BLCSE AUP and Cyber Awareness Training is only required for no-name accounts

If the event is a SIMEX, then the ORBAT (Task Org), and scenario information must be submitted to M&S lead so it can be built into the simulation.

Event Milestone Checklist

PLAN

Define the Problem/Topic

Develop the Problem Statement/Issue

Develop the Initial Planning Quad

Develop the Charter

PREPARE

Develop Experiment Plan/Analysis Plan

Develop DCMP

Develop Scenarios/Vignettes

Determine/Coordinate Venue Requirements

Determine SME/Participant Requirements

Send WARNO/Invites

Determine Data Collector Requirements

Determine Facilitator Requirements

Submit Tasking Orders

Coordinate with Protocol

Prepare Read-Ahead Packets

Coordinate with CDID Security Manager

Coordinate with Building Manager for trash collection/facility cleaning

Prepare Event Handouts

Coordinate/Collect Administrative needs for event (pens, paper, tape, supplies)

Coordinate Senior MSBL/CODDD/MSCoE person for official welcome to event participants

Coordinate with LVC-E to establish a door PIN (treat this data as classified information)

CONDUCT

Conduct Rehearsal(s)

Setup the venue for event (chairs, tables, computers, data collection tools, etc)

Conduct briefing for security/general admin of MDEC and building/area, especially parking and door

REPORT

Reduce and organize data

Analyze data

Prepare Initial Insights Brief

Prepare draft Experiment Report

Staff draft Experiment Report

Adjudicate Comments

Conduct desk side brief with CDID/MBSL Directors for report approval

Staff final/signed Experiment Report

Close out contracts, if required

Things to consider during a SIMEX, large-scale integrating event, or an event in the MDEC:

Determine who will open/hours of operation/who will close

Prepare Signs for doors/marquee sign (w/ changeable letters)

Setup Table for badges near entrance; seats on first day for check-in

Badges for participants/MSBL staff (ensure sufficient supply of yellow badges, have a few red on hand, MSBL employees should have blue ones)

Print Attendance/Security rosters, one for each day of operation

Coordinate for access to JPAS to validate clearances

Collect/Purchase paper for printers

Collect/Purchase ink/toner for printers

Print/Place Name tents/desk markers for each player position

Determine seating arrangement for players and pucksters

Determine VOIP phone placement

Print VOIP telephone numbers and users’ names for tech directory

Coordinate for ONESAF training/who/when/where

Coordinate for CPOF training/who/when/where

Prepare/Create CPOF overlays for experiment

Coordinate for a SME for CPOF during experiment/on-call/present

Coordinate Trash and police procedures/trash bags/trash removal thru Building Coordinator

Coordinate for vacuuming of facility before/after event thru Building Coordinator

Prepare Road to war brief to players/pucksters

Prepare Scenario brief to players/pucksters

Identify MSBL staff duties

Clearly specify White cell rules/limits

Identify software needed on computers/operational check for all accounts/software

Identify unique software/hardware requirements, i.e., MI COP software, chatrooms, etc.

Identify unique hardware requirements, i.e., headphones

Articulate OPTEMPO/schedule during experiment

Collect/Purchase spare bulbs for projectors

Check sound/visual system/screen switching

Load references on shared drive

Pre-position high demand documents on shared drive

Pre-position OPORDERS on shared drive

Pre-position experiment telephone directory on shared drive

Ensure remote access for players/SMEs/analysts in other locations

Coordinate for player storage space on shared drive

Identify any printing/handout requirements/copying requirements

Identifying any recording/operator/recording media requirements

Identify cd/dvd media/supplies for duplicating requirements

Prepare BLCSE account documentation/request for access/computer training

Login procedures for desktop computers

Check icons on desktop for players

Check printing capability on desktop computers

Visitor procedures/ uncleared personnel procedures

Confirm VIP greeting for players

Confirm SME from CODDD/Schools availability

Identify visiting VIPs and establish VIP handling procedures

Send invitation to senior personnel within MSCoE

Prepare an end-of-experiment survey/outbrief of players

Ensure sufficient supply of bags for Shredder, purchase as needed

Ensure sufficient supply of trash bags (large and small), acquire more from cleaning crew

Have a Laser pointer available

Determine the screen layout, i.e. Left – schedule, Middle – CPOF , Right – current events/briefings

At ENDEX recover the MDEC to original condition; remove classified material, admin supplies, etc.

Shred classified material

Order replacement of supplies consumed during experiment.

M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System (MASS) Zeroing Procedure Limited Objective

Experiment (LOE): Maneuver Support Battle Lab (MSBL) and Army Nonlethal Scalable

Effects Center (ANSEC) conducted a Limited Objective Experiment (LOE) of the M26 MASS

Zero Procedures using the XM1116 Nonlethal Extended Range Marking round equipped with a new rear sight leaf at Range 17, Non-Lethal firing range, on 17 February 2016.