.jpg)
Q&A: Colonel Jack Franz
Written by Marty Kauchak
Leading the Effort to Meet Major Command's
Simulation and Training Needs
Colonel Jack Franz
Commander
677 Aeronautical Systems Group
Colonel Franz graduated from Saint Louis University in 1983. After completing undergraduate navigator training and electronic warfare training, he was assigned to the 55th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing as an electronic warfare (EW) officer with the 343rd Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron (SRS). He flew over 200 operational reconnaissance missions on the RC-135 V/W aircraft. During this time he upgraded to instructor and commanded the wing’s lead Standardization and Evaluation EW Crew. Franz was selected and attended the Junior Officer Cryptologic Career Program (JOCCP) at the National Security Agency. Upon graduation from JOCCP, he was assigned to Air Force Flight Test Center where he led various classified EW flight test programs and served as the operations officer. In 1997, Colonel Franz was assigned to the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). He led the SIGINT Requirements Division which was responsible for the development of the Integrated Overhead SIGINT Architecture supporting both national and DoD intelligence communities. In April 2001, Franz took command of the NRO’s Overhead Collection Management Center. During this assignment he directed the employment of the nation’s overhead intelligence systems to support both national and DoD operational needs. His unit was awarded the Outstanding Intelligence Unit Award by the director, Central Intelligence Agency for their work during Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. Next, Colonel Franz attended Air War College (AWC) at Maxwell, AFB earning a master of strategic studies degree. Upon graduation from AWC, Franz served as deputy commander, Air Force Space Battlelab. During this time, his led his unit in several operational demonstrations of emerging technologies proving the viability of Near Space and advanced lasers weapons for Air Force Space Command. Colonel Franz has held several positions at the Aeronautical Systems Center including the chief of staff. He took command of the 677th Aeronautical Systems Group in May 2008.
Colonel Franz was interviewed by Marty Kauchak, MT2 editor, on December 14, 2009.
Q: How is the 677th AESG responding to the warfighter’s requirements from Afghanistan and Iraq? A follow-up: what is the top combat mission requirement for which you are providing a solution?
A: The major requirement was from Defense Secretary [Robert] Gates to provide the training capabilities for the [MQ-1] Predator and [MQ-9] Reaper crews. These training systems were critical to surge to provide the increased number of Predator orbits demanded by our troops in combat. The training systems can be used to train every mission function from takeoff to landing and weapons employment.
A key fact to keep in mind is that Afghanistan and Iraq are asymmetrical conflicts. It is our highly trained airmen who are the decisive factors while the technical weapons are just the tools these young airmen use. Our training simulators provide the realistic training that helps ensure these young airmen are prepared for whatever mission is required. They can rehearse for critical missions and be able to react to any new situation that comes up—we can walk them through those training simulations numerous times and allow them to fail—and understand the consequences. Today’s airmen are experienced before we send them into theater.
We also provide the ability to link high-fidelity training simulations together for a large scale exercise in a Virtual Flag—where we have hundreds or thousands of virtual and constructive entities coming together across a simulated area of interest. These exercises allow crews to conduct small and large team training in a dynamic environment. Virtual exercises cannot replace liveevents, but they ensure airmen get the most of the limited and very expensive live flying exercises. Additionally, using distributed training events we allow our crews to remain at their home station with their families while they train. The crews can actually train, day-in and day-out, with the same units they will later work with in theater. This ‘virtual’ operational familiarity helps them rapidly blend as a single team when they are in theater.
Q: Please update us on the Air Force Materiel Command’s Organizational Consolidation and Workload Alignment (OCWA) effort.
A: This effort emerged out of an AFMC study under General [Bruce] Carlson that looked at how to gain efficiencies for the Air Force to be able to recapitalize—develop and deploy new weapon systems while sustaining the aging and overworked current fleet or aircraft. General Carlson recognized there were synergies to allow new programs to be worked if we could consolidate certain workload. He also saw the opportunity to develop centers of excellence to push the Air Force to have the premier capabilities across DoD.
Based on this study by AFMC, the Air Force’s training simulation development, acquisition and sustainment is all being centralized at Wright Patterson Air Force Base [WPAFB]. The Air Force Research Laboratory [AFRL] is moving the Human Effectiveness labs specializing in simulation and training to WPAFB from Mesa, Ariz. Here they will be able to take advantage of the work some of the other labs are doing and work directly with the acquisition teams. The Aeronautical Systems Center [ASC] already at WPAFB provides the best engineering and acquisition capabilities available in the Air Force. Under ASC, the 677th AESG has lead the acquisition of most of the Air Force’s advanced training simulations. Now, under the consolidations taking place, the 677th will also pick up the role of managing the logistics and sustainment of the training systems in the field. Bringing all the training pieces together to form a “training simulation center of excellence” at Wright Patterson AFB provides a world-class capability second to none. It ensures the AF will have the most advanced training simulations.
We will also be able to provide the MAJCOMs [major commands] with streamlined, one-stop shopping for all their training simulation needs. We will be able to work with them to provide a complete integrated assessment of their programs and training requirements—today and into the future. This helps the warfighter work issues end-to-end instead of having to go one place to develop training capability, another place to procure it and still another to sustain it once it is fielded.
Q: Highlight the Air Force’s near-term (FYs 2010 and 11) training systems business opportunities.
A: There’s a lot. Every May we co-host with National Training Systems Association [NTSA] the Advanced Planning Briefing to Industry at WPAFB. During this event we present all the training simulation work the Air Force plans for the next few years. Each new program is briefed with projections for when it will be competed. The MAJCOMs come and explain their roadmaps and requirements. Additionally, the labs present some of their work to help show industry where we are going in training simulation.
A key program for further development this year is the Joint Terminal Control Training Rehearsal System [JTC TRS]. The first production- ready article was a small business set aside. This program has been going extremely well and has achieved all the joint requirements to be able to train the Air Force, Army, Navy and Marine Corps, as well as Special Forces and Joint Terminal Attack Controllers [JTACs]. It is another step as we expand our distributed virtual training capabilities. We will complete a large production of that program later this spring with the initial deliveries going to the Air Force and SOCOM. The Office of the Secretary of Defense is still working to help decide which services will receive the next deliveries.
The amount of training simulation workload continues to grow each year. We just released the request for proposal [RFP] for C-17 CLS contract that could result in close to $1 billion worth of sustainment work over the next few years. We are working through a large C-130J training system procurement and the associated sustainment [requirements]. We are just getting started working to re-compete the current F-16 Aircrew Training Devices; the E-3 AWACS Maintenance Trainers; the T-25 EW trainer, the B-1 Aircrew Trainer and the Predator Mission Aircrew Training System. Our 507 ACSS teams at Hill AFB are also busy today working source selections for the KC-135, the B-52, the C-5 and C-130H training. Overall, there are about 20 major training programs we plan to award over the next two years.
We have been blessed with a very healthy industry. Each year we see new small and medium business competing against the large defense companies. The result is better training systems for our aircrews.
Q: Describe how the 677th AESG obtains innovative ideas and technologies from the small business community. A follow-up: Please update us on your team’s planned 2010 outreach efforts to industry.
A: We have a very robust small business training community. They compete very aggressively for the contractor logistics and sustainment work. Small business has traditionally provided courseware development, system prototyping and some technical studies for us. Today we have small businesses working the training system requirements analysis for the KC-X and JCA [Joint Cargo Aircraft] — two very large Air Force programs.
The ASC Small Business Office works closely with the local NTSA chapter to ensure small business can compete. They help them understand how to find out information on upcoming source selections as well as how to develop and submit a proposal. I personally have office calls with several small businesses and host some to demonstrate new technology they feel could support our training systems.
Q: A message to industry: how can companies help the 677th AESG provide simulation and training solutions on time and on cost?
A: The training simulation industry has grown tremendously over the last years. Part of that growth is based on more workload and part is based on new technology. As the Air Force consolidates the training simulation workload at Wright Patterson AFB there are some key things we need from industry.
We need very clear proposals to our ECPs [engineering change proposals] and RFPs for a new contract. Our teams read lots of material and need to be able to clearly understand what is being proposed to determine if it is a qualified proposal. I know we have raised our standards and expect more in these proposals from industry today. We have increased oversight and want to ensure we meet the warfighter’s needs.
Training systems is also a very dynamic business. The users constantly change their needs as missions evolve and we think of new ways to reach out to young airmen. The 677th works every day at improving its business practices. We must stay within the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations but are open to new ways of doing business and working with industry. I am always open to companies helping us to realize new ways to do business or new tools to allow us to streamline old business practices.
Q: Your help wanted list: describe the top three technology challenges your command needs the help of industry and the academic community to solve.
A: Today’s Air Force fights in either a joint or coalition environment. We have high-fidelity trainers linked together that allow mission rehearsal but do not have the multi-level security to conduct daily persistent training between F-22, B-2 and other weapon systems. The problem compounds itself when we start to bring in joint training systems but really gets impossible with coalition training. The United States Air Force must have the ability to virtually train with our allied partners while still protecting the classified capabilities of our systems.
We have also moved virtually from training air-to-air engagements at 40,000 feet to very-low altitude missions, conducting surveillance of urban areas to actual ground-based training with the JTC TRS. We need high-fidelity physics based capabilities to provide realistic virtual environments. We need these virtual entities as lifelike as possible and literally thousands of them at once, with the ability to have them distributed over a secure network. Industry has done amazing things making the graphics look real, but now we need them to be ‘alive.’ This is one area where the gaming industry can help us.
We also have latency issues as we expand our distributed training. A key example of where we see this being a problem is when we have two virtual aircraft operating close together, such as when we are trying to refuel. One trainer may be stationed on the east coast while the other trainer is stationed in the Pacific. When the pilots are virtually lining up to refuel, the graphics must respond quickly enough to prevent negative training. We are conducting some tests with AFRL and Air Mobility Command at Scott AFB to determine how much latency can be accepted. As we expand the skills we train virtually over distributed networks we will have to always consider possible impacts from latency.
Today’s airmen are the best trained in the world. They expect the best training systems. Our job is to work with industry ensure they have them. ♦