SPARTA, Inc

CAPS

In the early 1990's, the Commander's Analysis and Planning Simulation (CAPS) was developed by SPARTA, Inc. for the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), then the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), as an integrated, low fidelity, theater missile defense simulation to assess missile defense architectures and to demonstrate to potential users how a ballistic missile defense might work. CAPS originally provided force-on-force simulation of theater missile defense to facilitate ballistic missile defense planning. CAPS has evolved over time and is now one of MDA's core simulation models. It is widely used by all major Combatant Commands and is a principal missile defense simulation tool for numerous national and regional wargames. Currently, as a medium fidelity analytical tool, CAPS assists MDA in forming a bridge between analysts/engineers designing ballistic missile defense architectures and operators.

CAPS details active defense forces with land, air, space, and naval components against ballis tic missiles and air breathing threats. As a planning tool, CAPS allows analysts to determine the area that a force can defend or operate in and to evaluate the effectiveness of a force against a particular threat. As a training tool, CAPS allows prospective theater air and missile commanders to study various missions and defense configurations prior to conducting expensive field exercises. As an analytical tool, CAPS assists the Joint Staff, MDA, and Services in forming a bridge between the operators who will provide missile defense in actual combat situations and the engineers and analysts designing an air and missile defense architecture.

The breadth of the CAPS user community also results in many varied uses of the tool at its over 50 installations worldwide. SPARTA operators provide military wargaming and exercise support by using CAPS to provide significant insight into weapons system effectiveness under various operational scenarios and rules of engagement. ( See the table below of exercises and wargames in which CAPS has been involved.) These exercises also typically involve intensive use of SPARTA's distributed collaborative planning tools which integrate a set of chat, whiteboard and file sharing tools into the CAPS user interface to support technical data interchange and the exchange and merging of defense design plans.

CAPS can illustrate defense footprints (i.e., defense capability to protect areas on the ground), potential operating regions for defensive systems, areas defended by various deployments of defensive forces, and expected performance of defensive forces in simulated campaigns. (See the descriptions of each view below.) These analyses are performed via a graphical user interface (GUI) which provides access to CAPS functionality in a "point-and-click" environment. The GUI opens the analytical simulation capabilities of CAPS to users who possess no more specialized software knowledge than that required to use a word processor or a spreadsheet program.

SPARTA Capabilities and Experience Employed on CAPS

  • Software design and development (multiple language experience to produce a fully integrated product that takes advantage of many advanced software technologies including object oriented design, JMS messaging, and XML schemas)
  • Distributed collaborative planning tool development and use (chat, whiteboard, and file sharing tools for data exchange and merging of defense plans)
  • GOTS/COTS integration experience (JDP, ADEM, PEGEM, PLASTR, ISAAC integration)
  • Physics-based modeling (radars, satellites, threats, interceptors, lasers, aircraft)
  • Domain expertise (missile defense and mission planning)
  • Graphical software development (2D, 3D display, maps)
  • Wargame and exercise support
  • User interface design for ease of use
  • Software training (instructional class material development and instruction)
  • Requirements management (US/allied users, developing operational concepts & direct user support)
  • Model federation (HLA, DIS)
  • Software environment (COE)
  • Data modeling (XML schema development and implementation)
  • Program management (cost, schedule, risk of program with subcontracts)

Representative CAPS Uses at Exercises and Wargames

Exercises and PLANEXs

  • JWID97 (USS Coronado), 1997
  • Roving Sands 1998, 1999
  • Joint Project Optic Windmill (JPOW) 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000
  • RIMPAC (USS Coronado) 1998, 1999, 2000
  • JTFX/JEFX (USS Coronado) 1998, 1999
  • Central Enterprise 1997, 1998
  • PACOM/USFJ PLANEX 1996, 1998
  • Northern Edge 1999, 2000
  • Lucky Sentinel 1999
  • Fleet Battle Experiments 1998, 1999, 2000
  • Coral Talon III / IMD-1 2002
  • IMD-2, IMD-3 2002, 2003

Wargames

  • CMD Planning 1996
  • Nimble Screen 1999
  • Nimble Shield 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001
  • Global 1999, 2000, 2001

Real World Contingencies

  • Noble Safeguard 1998
  • Operation Desert Thunder 1998
  • Operation Iraqi Freedom 2003

CAPS Views

Footprint

The first view is a Defense Footprint. It shows the area on the ground that can be defended against ballistic missiles. The color coding shown on the grid is the probability of negation (Pn), or level of protection, where the dark blue region indicates a Pn of 0.99 or greater and the lighter blue indicate a Pn of 0.95 or greater. Alternatively, CAPS can display the depth-of-fire (or number of engagements) to indicate where the defensive system may have shoot-look-shoot capability. Footprints are useful in understanding how a system works and for doing trades within a system. Varying the intercept altitude, changing the interceptor logic or radar capability, are all examples of system trades. Footprints are also helpful in understanding how a system's capability varies versus different threats. Example trades in this area include ballistic missile type, missile range, or radar cross section.

Operating Area

The second view is Operating Area. This view is used to answer the question of where a defensive system should be located to provide engagement capability. Most often, this is used for the Navy systems, who have more of a challenge in positioning for an engagement to satisfy both surveillance and intercept functions. If you want to understand where to place a unit, you can use CAPS' Operating Area tool. You can look at several potential trajectories and determine whether or not there is one platform location or ship operating area that can handle a group of launch locations. In this case, the color coding shown on the grid represents the depth of fire – pink indicates regions where the weapon system can track, but not engage this particular threat; yellow is the operating region where a single engagement opportunity is possible; and green represents two engagement possibilities.

Defended Area

The next view is the Defended Area. This view is probably the one most used by operators and analysts. A defended area answers the question of whether a given defense architecture laydown can protect specified critical assets against the shown Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace (IPB). If you want to develop a full architecture Defense Design, you can use CAPS' Defended Area tool. This tool lets the user place defensive units on the map, look at the risk of the defended asset list against a specified threat, connect the defensive units on a network, set up cueing between platforms and understand which assets can be protected by the defense. The color coding on the analysis grid shown here is the same as for the footprint view and indicates the probability of negating threats targeted at each grid square.

Scenario

The last view (Scenario) is used to determine defense performance over multiple days or months. You can either manually create a scenario of BM/ABT threats within CAPS or you can read in a pre-scripted threat tape created from a validated scenario. This view introduces the time component to the analysis and is particularly helpful in understanding issues such as inventory coupled with firing doctrine, reconstitution and re-supply. The blue lines indicate threat trajectories with the red line segments indicating kills (and stopping at the calculated intercept point). Penetrators or leakers are shown according to a legend of other colors. In this case, purple indicates a Pk failure engaging the westernmost threat.

The Secretary of Defense, in January 2002, directed that the MDA develop and integrate a Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) capability as soon as possible. MDA has instituted an aggressive acquisiti on strategy of two-year evolutionary block builds. As one of MDA's Core Models, CAPS is released semi–annually in order to support the rapidly evolving development and design of the BMDS and its elements.

To inquire about the latest CAPS release, please contact SPARTA, Inc. at caps.questions@sparta.com.