Engineers, computer scientists discuss open system architecture with industry

  • Published
  • By Justin Oakes
  • 66th Air Base Group Public Affairs
HANSCOM AIR FORCE BASE, Mass. --  Open systems architecture, it's a term that is frequently heard echoing throughout the Air Force acquisition community --  and also happened to be the topic of discussion at Hanscom AFB Oct 23.

A panel comprised of representatives from MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Hewlett Packard, IBM and the Software Engineering Institute, offered their perspective of open systems architecture to the base's engineering and computer scientist workforce during an Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association event.

"Open systems architecture is a new way of thinking about acquisition," said Harry Levinson, SEI spokesman. "It uses a commercial approach to both the business and technical aspect," referring to a shift from the traditional development paradigm.

Levinson defined opens systems architecture, also known as OSA, as an architecture in which the interrelationships of the components are defined by interface standards, and the architectural principles and guidelines are consistent with an open systems approach.

In layman's terms, "OSA uses commercially available, widely supported and accepted non-proprietary interface standards to be able to bring commercial products from multiple vendors into our weapons systems," said Col. Edward Masterson, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Engineering and Technical Management deputy associate director. "This is especially important so that, over the increasingly long times we operate our systems, we can easily and affordably add or update their capabilities."

The Air Force is quickly adopting this strategy and one such example at Hanscom is the dismount detection radar pod  -  a potential OSA radar pathfinder that launched its first developmental test flight in April. The information gathered from this effort will be used on other programs, like the emerging Joint STARS Recapitalization.

"With OSA, you can build systems that are more meaningful," said Ashu Gupta, a panelist from IBM.

According to Gupta, the ability to distribute copies, create work from original products and its familiarity are OSA's biggest draws.

A large portion of the event focused on cost, which is a concern for both the Air Force and contractors alike when developing or acquiring new platforms.

Dr. Stacy Doyle, a representative from MIT Lincoln Lab, posed the question, "How do you get new technology without being costly?"

While discussing the F-22 program and a growth in operational flight program complexity, she emphasized costs need to be balanced with warfighters' capabilities. Solutions should be affordable, capable and have the ability to evolve.

As upgrades become needed, vendors will have the opportunity to compete, enabling more competition over the entire life span of a platform.

"The benefit of having continued competition is that it holds a company's feet to the fire," said Doyle. "It also gives small businesses a chance if new technology is needed."

While open systems have many advantages, Hewlett Packard representative Matt Koehr warned that this approach may not be suitable for every program.

"Where do you draw the line? There are times when the cost is much lower compared to the (open systems) option," said Koehr.

For example, he cited a past experience with the Army and the Tactical Air Control Party program. The Army was entertaining the idea of using "Android phones versus bulky, $5,000 radios" -- one option clearly more economical than the other.

Following Koehr's presentation, AFCEA Lexington-Concord chapter president Stephen Falcone delivered one last take-away.

"Government engineers and program managers must decide how open they need to be for modernization and re-competition considerations," said Falcone. "They must also decide how much they can afford not to reap benefits in the future."