Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
link to page 1 link to page 1 link to page 2 
Updated February 15, 2022
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) is the
Since ABMS’s inception, Congress has expressed interest
U.S. Air Force’s latest effort to create a next-generation
in the development of next-generation C2 systems. The Air
command and control (C2) system. ABMS proposes using
Force states that ABMS is a nontraditional acquisition
cloud environments and new communications methods to
program. As a result, Congress has questioned the Air
allow Air Force and Space Force systems to share data
Force’s approach to replacing older systems and its
seamlessly using artificial intelligence to enable faster
approach to experimenting with emerging technologies.
decisionmaking. The Air Force describes ABMS as its
effort to create an internet of things, which would allow for
ABMS Development Efforts
sensors and C2 systems to be disaggregated from one
The Air Force has performed five events to date to
another (counter to how the Air Force has traditionally
demonstrate the new C2 capabilities it hopes to eventually
performed C2). This program is the Air Force’s
field. In December 2019 the Air Force, in its first ABMS
contribution to the DOD’s Joint All Domain Command and
“on-ramp”—the term the Air Force uses to denote a
Control (JADC2) effort focused on modernizing DOD
demonstration—showed the ability to transmit data from
decisionmaking processes for combat operations.
Army radars and Navy destroyers to both F-22 and F-35
fighter aircraft. This event also demonstrated the Space
ABMS was originally envisioned to replace the E-3
Force’s Unified Data Library (UDL), which is a cloud
Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) (Figure
environment combining space-based and ground-based
1), which currently directs air combat operations, but later
sensors to track satellites.
took on a broader scope. Former Assistant Secretary of the
Air Force for Acquisition Will Roper directed that the
In September 2020, ABMS performed its second on-ramp.
program become less focused on command centers and
This second on-ramp demonstrated detecting and defeating
aircraft, and to instead create digital technologies, like
a simulated cruise missile bound for the United States using
secure cloud environments, to share data across multiple
hypervelocity weapons as defenses. In addition, ABMS
weapons systems. Dr. Roper stated the contested
exhibited capabilities to “detect and defeat efforts to disrupt
environment envisioned by the 2018 National Defense
U.S. operations in space.” According to an Air Force press
Strategy forced the Air Force to restructure the ABMS
release “70 industry teams and 65 government teams”
program. In May 2021, General David Allvin, the Vice
participated in the event.
Chief of Staff of the Air Force in a DefenseOne article
The Air Force held a third on-ramp event in late September
stated, “What exactly is ABMS? Is it software? Hardware?
2020, in support of exercise Valiant Shield at Joint Base
Infrastructure? Policy? The answer is yes to all.” In other
Pearl Harbor-Hickam. During this event, the Air Force
words, the Air Force envisions ABMS as an acquisition
demonstrated using a KC-46 tanker aircraft to perform
program that will both procure things and implement other
tactical C2 by relaying data from older, fourth-generation
nondevelopmental efforts that the service views as equally
fighters to newer, fifth-generation aircraft like the F-22. In
important: new techniques to command and control
May 2021, the Air Force stated that procuring a
airborne forces.
communications pod for the KC-46 will be the first
Figure 1. E-3 AWACS
capability release for the ABMS program. The Air Force
said, “In a fight, the tankers will need to be flying near the
action anyway, supporting fighters, so using them as a
command-and-control system, either as the primary or a
resilient backup, just makes sense.”
A fourth on-ramp was held in Europe in February 2021.
According to press releases, the Air Force curtailed this
event due to budget constraints. This fourth on-ramp linked
allied nations including the Netherlands, Poland, and the
United Kingdom into combined air operations. According
to General Harrigan, commander of U.S. Air Forces
Europe, this fourth event tested U.S. and allied capabilities
to perform long-range strike missions with F-15E aircraft
launching AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile
(JASSM) (see Figure 2), while simultaneously utilizing
U.S. and allied F-35s for airbase defense missions.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-3_Sentry#/media/
File:E-3_Sentry_exercise_Green_Flag_2012_(Cropped).jpg.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
Figure 2. F-15E Launching a JASSM Missile
FY2019 NDAA (P.L. 115-232)
o Section 147: Limitation on Availability of Funds
for Retirement of E-8 JSTARS Aircraft
FY2020 NDAA (P.L. 116-92)
o Section 236: Documentation Relating to the
Advanced Battle Management System
FY2021 NDAA (P.L. 116-283)
o Section 146: Analysis of Moving Target Indicator
Requirements and Advanced Battle Management
System Capabilities
o Section 221: Accountability Measures Relating to
the Advanced Battle Management System
Source: https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2018-02-06-Lockheed-
The FY2021 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-260
Martins-JASSM-R-ER-Declared-Operational-on-F-15E-Strike-
Division C) reduced ABMS funding from the $302 million
Eagle#assets_117:19452.
requested to $158.5 million, citing “unjustified growth and
A fifth on-ramp was in the Pacific in spring 2021, but
forward financing.”
canceled this event due to budget constraints.
Throughout ABMS’s development, Congress has expressed
GAO Report Recommendations
concern about retiring older C2 systems such as JSTARS
The FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
and AWACS before identifying a suitable replacement.
directed the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to
Congress also directed the Air Force to develop traditional
evaluate the ABMS program. In an April 2020 report, GAO
acquisition justifications, such as cost estimates and
recommended to the Air Force Chief Architect four actions
requirements documentation, to ensure that both Congress
to improve program performance:
and the service understand what is to be procured. These
actions reflect the recommendations from GAO.
1. Develop a plan to attain mature technologies
when needed for ABMS development areas.
Potential Questions for Congress
2. Produce a cost estimate updated regularly
What are the risks of disaggregating command and
reflecting actual ABMS costs, updating
control using the ABMS approach?
Congress quarterly.
How should the Air Force balance innovation and
3. Prepare an affordability analysis that should
experimentation with procuring mature technologies?
be updated regularly.
What opportunities does ABMS provide that traditional
4. Formalize and document acquisition authority
command and control systems cannot provide?
and decisionmaking responsibilities of Air
Would ABMS benefit from utilizing the new budget
Force offices involved in ABMS.
authority flexibilities found in the 6.8 Software and
Digital Technology Pilot Program budget activity code?
The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force concurred with all
recommendations. General David Goldfein, former Chief of
Staff of the Air Force, disagreed with the recommendations,
CRS Products
noting that GAO’s analysis did not reflect classified
CRS Report R44108, U.S. Command and Control and
information. GAO stated that it had access to the classified
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Aircraft, by Jeremiah
information, and that this additional information did not
Gertler and Jeffrey Nelson
affect its analysis and recommendations.
CRS In Focus IF12045, Replacing the E-3 Airborne Warning and
ABMS Management Structure
Control System (AWACS), by John R. Hoehn and Jeremiah
Gertler
According to the same GAO report on ABMS, the Air
CRS In Focus IF11493, Joint All-Domain Command and Control
Force originally identified the Air Force Chief Architect,
(JADC2), by John R. Hoehn
currently Preston Dunlap, to coordinate ABMS-related
efforts across each of the Air Force’s Program Executive
CRS In Focus IF11654, The Army’s Project Convergence, by
Offices. GAO expressed concern about the potential lack of
Andrew Feickert
decisionmaking authority for ABMS as a result of this
management structure. In November 2020, however, Dr.
Other Resources
Roper selected the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office to
GAO-20-389, Defense Acquisitions: Action is Needed to Provide
serve as the ABMS Program Executive Office. The Chief
Clarity and Mitigate Risks of the Air Force’s Planned Advanced
Architect Office continues to develop the service-wide
Battle Management System
architecture (i.e., how software and radios are able to
connect with one another) to support ABMS.
This product benefited from Katherine Leahy research
during her internship with CRS.
Summary of Congressional Actions on
AMBS
John R. Hoehn, Analyst in Military Capabilities and
Congress has expressed interest in the development of
Programs
ABMS systems. The following list summarizes
IF11866
congressional action in the previous three NDAAs:
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11866 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED
Updated February 15, 2022
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
The Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) is the
Since ABMS’s inception, Congress has expressed interest
U.S. Air Force’s latest effort to create a next-generation
in the development of next-generation C2 systems. The Air
command and control (C2) system. ABMS proposes using
Force states that ABMS is a nontraditional acquisition
cloud environments and new communications methods to
program. As a result, Congress has questioned the Air
allow Air Force and Space Force systems to share data
Force’s approach to replacing older systems and its
seamlessly using artificial intelligence to enable faster
approach to experimenting with emerging technologies.
decisionmaking. The Air Force describes ABMS as its
effort to create an internet of things, which would allow for
ABMS Development Efforts
sensors and C2 systems to be disaggregated from one
The Air Force has performed five events to date to
another (counter to how the Air Force has traditionally
demonstrate the new C2 capabilities it hopes to eventually
performed C2). This program is the Air Force’s
field. In December 2019 the Air Force, in its first ABMS
contribution to the DOD’s Joint All Domain Command and
“on-ramp”—the term the Air Force uses to denote a
Control (JADC2) effort focused on modernizing DOD
demonstration—showed the ability to transmit data from
decisionmaking processes for combat operations.
Army radars and Navy destroyers to both F-22 and F-35
fighter aircraft. This event also demonstrated the Space
ABMS was originally envisioned to replace the E-3
Force’s Unified Data Library (UDL), which is a cloud
Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) (Figure
environment combining space-based and ground-based
1), which currently directs air combat operations, but later
sensors to track satellites.
took on a broader scope. Former Assistant Secretary of the
Air Force for Acquisition Will Roper directed that the
In September 2020, ABMS performed its second on-ramp.
program become less focused on command centers and
This second on-ramp demonstrated detecting and defeating
aircraft, and to instead create digital technologies, like
a simulated cruise missile bound for the United States using
secure cloud environments, to share data across multiple
hypervelocity weapons as defenses. In addition, ABMS
weapons systems. Dr. Roper stated the contested
exhibited capabilities to “detect and defeat efforts to disrupt
environment envisioned by the 2018 National Defense
U.S. operations in space.” According to an Air Force press
Strategy forced the Air Force to restructure the ABMS
release “70 industry teams and 65 government teams”
program. In May 2021, General David Allvin, the Vice
participated in the event.
Chief of Staff of the Air Force in a DefenseOne article
The Air Force held a third on-ramp event in late September
stated, “What exactly is ABMS? Is it software? Hardware?
2020, in support of exercise Valiant Shield at Joint Base
Infrastructure? Policy? The answer is yes to all.” In other
Pearl Harbor-Hickam. During this event, the Air Force
words, the Air Force envisions ABMS as an acquisition
demonstrated using a KC-46 tanker aircraft to perform
program that will both procure things and implement other
tactical C2 by relaying data from older, fourth-generation
nondevelopmental efforts that the service views as equally
fighters to newer, fifth-generation aircraft like the F-22. In
important: new techniques to command and control
May 2021, the Air Force stated that procuring a
airborne forces.
communications pod for the KC-46 will be the first
Figure 1. E-3 AWACS
capability release for the ABMS program. The Air Force
said, “In a fight, the tankers will need to be flying near the
action anyway, supporting fighters, so using them as a
command-and-control system, either as the primary or a
resilient backup, just makes sense.”
A fourth on-ramp was held in Europe in February 2021.
According to press releases, the Air Force curtailed this
event due to budget constraints. This fourth on-ramp linked
allied nations including the Netherlands, Poland, and the
United Kingdom into combined air operations. According
to General Harrigan, commander of U.S. Air Forces
Europe, this fourth event tested U.S. and allied capabilities
to perform long-range strike missions with F-15E aircraft
launching AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile
(JASSM) (see Figure 2), while simultaneously utilizing
U.S. and allied F-35s for airbase defense missions.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-3_Sentry#/media/
File:E-3_Sentry_exercise_Green_Flag_2012_(Cropped).jpg.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
Figure 2. F-15E Launching a JASSM Missile
FY2019 NDAA (P.L. 115-232)
o Section 147: Limitation on Availability of Funds
for Retirement of E-8 JSTARS Aircraft
FY2020 NDAA (P.L. 116-92)
o Section 236: Documentation Relating to the
Advanced Battle Management System
FY2021 NDAA (P.L. 116-283)
o Section 146: Analysis of Moving Target Indicator
Requirements and Advanced Battle Management
System Capabilities
o Section 221: Accountability Measures Relating to
the Advanced Battle Management System
Source: https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2018-02-06-Lockheed-
The FY2021 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-260
Martins-JASSM-R-ER-Declared-Operational-on-F-15E-Strike-
Division C) reduced ABMS funding from the $302 million
Eagle#assets_117:19452.
requested to $158.5 million, citing “unjustified growth and
A fifth on-ramp was in the Pacific in spring 2021, but
forward financing.”
canceled this event due to budget constraints.
Throughout ABMS’s development, Congress has expressed
GAO Report Recommendations
concern about retiring older C2 systems such as JSTARS
The FY2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
and AWACS before identifying a suitable replacement.
directed the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to
Congress also directed the Air Force to develop traditional
evaluate the ABMS program. In an April 2020 report, GAO
acquisition justifications, such as cost estimates and
recommended to the Air Force Chief Architect four actions
requirements documentation, to ensure that both Congress
to improve program performance:
and the service understand what is to be procured. These
actions reflect the recommendations from GAO.
1. Develop a plan to attain mature technologies
when needed for ABMS development areas.
Potential Questions for Congress
2. Produce a cost estimate updated regularly
What are the risks of disaggregating command and
reflecting actual ABMS costs, updating
control using the ABMS approach?
Congress quarterly.
How should the Air Force balance innovation and
3. Prepare an affordability analysis that should
experimentation with procuring mature technologies?
be updated regularly.
What opportunities does ABMS provide that traditional
4. Formalize and document acquisition authority
command and control systems cannot provide?
and decisionmaking responsibilities of Air
Would ABMS benefit from utilizing the new budget
Force offices involved in ABMS.
authority flexibilities found in the 6.8 Software and
Digital Technology Pilot Program budget activity code?
The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force concurred with all
recommendations. General David Goldfein, former Chief of
Staff of the Air Force, disagreed with the recommendations,
CRS Products
noting that GAO’s analysis did not reflect classified
CRS Report R44108, U.S. Command and Control and
information. GAO stated that it had access to the classified
Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Aircraft, by Jeremiah
information, and that this additional information did not
Gertler and Jeffrey Nelson
affect its analysis and recommendations.
CRS In Focus IF12045, Replacing the E-3 Airborne Warning and
ABMS Management Structure
Control System (AWACS), by John R. Hoehn and Jeremiah
Gertler
According to the same GAO report on ABMS, the Air
CRS In Focus IF11493, Joint All-Domain Command and Control
Force originally identified the Air Force Chief Architect,
(JADC2), by John R. Hoehn
currently Preston Dunlap, to coordinate ABMS-related
efforts across each of the Air Force’s Program Executive
CRS In Focus IF11654, The Army’s Project Convergence, by
Offices. GAO expressed concern about the potential lack of
Andrew Feickert
decisionmaking authority for ABMS as a result of this
management structure. In November 2020, however, Dr.
Other Resources
Roper selected the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office to
GAO-20-389, Defense Acquisitions: Action is Needed to Provide
serve as the ABMS Program Executive Office. The Chief
Clarity and Mitigate Risks of the Air Force’s Planned Advanced
Architect Office continues to develop the service-wide
Battle Management System
architecture (i.e., how software and radios are able to
connect with one another) to support ABMS.
This product benefited from Katherine Leahy research
during her internship with CRS.
Summary of Congressional Actions on
AMBS
John R. Hoehn, Analyst in Military Capabilities and
Congress has expressed interest in the development of
Programs
ABMS systems. The following list summarizes
IF11866
congressional action in the previous three NDAAs:
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS)
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11866 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED