Print version

Network-Centric Warfare

Self-synchronisation is bandied about as a central feature of network-centric warfare (NCW) but what is self-synchronisation and what does it do? [1]

The seminal work on Network Centric Warfare by Alberts, Garstka and Stein describes the key elements of self-synchronisation as: ‘two or more robustly networked entities, shared awareness, a rule set, and a value-adding interaction’. In essence self-synchronisation is about independent military units automatically orchestrating their actions in accord with a Commander’s intent rather than waiting for direct orders or explicit instructions. It is thus seen as a way to undertake military operations precisely and quickly.

For self-synchronisation to work effectively, and provide the desired military outcomes, independent military units must be networked in a way that allows them to quickly share information, build the information into knowledge, make collective decisions and operate in a coordinated fashion to achieve objectives. Important in this self-synchronisation approach is the shared awareness to provide a clear understanding of what is happening and a rule set to ensure the Commander’s intent and rules-of-engagement are followed.

An area where self-synchronisation may be readily applied is in supporting services such as logistics, fire support and close-air support. In the case of logistics, real-time information on consumption of fuel and ammunition can be used to ensure sufficient and timely resupply. This has already proven to have significant operational benefit in the case of F-18 aircraft where information on fuel consumption and ordnance expenditure is sent to an Air Operations Cell via a data-link so that aircraft re-tasking, landing priority and their refuelling and re-arming can be effectively managed.

Another aspect of self-synchronisation is the orchestration of military units to work toward a common objective in a way that maximises the resources available and uses then in a judicious and timely manner. The argument is that self-synchronisation can cope with rapidly changing circumstances in unfamiliar and complex situations better than centralised planning and direction.

The concept of self-synchronisation appears to be in accord with the Australian concept of multi-dimensional manoeuvre (MDM) and the time-honoured approach of ‘directive control’.[2]

[1] Synchronisation is defined in the US as: the arrangement of military actions in time, space, and purpose to produce maximum relative combat power at a decisive place and time.

[2] Directive Control is an Australian philosophy of command and a system for conducting operations in which subordinates are a given clear direction by a superior on his intentions — that is the result required, a task, the resources and any constraints. It includes the freedom to decide how to achieve the required result.

Wednesday, 1 June 2005