Talk:Network-centric warfare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	To-do list for Network-centric warfare:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Items (or set of links) to include: Background/history Vision Relevant technologies Architectural/design challenges International issues Policy/organizational issues Also: Add external CEC link http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/weaps/cec.htm

Contents 1 Overall Rework 2 Prior Discussion 3 Information Revolution section POV 4 US Doctrine 5 No longer a stub

[edit] Overall Rework

I'm starting a To-Do list here. I think it may be easier to initially restructure this article as a series of short sections with links to the (numerous) other pages that discuss salient aspects of NCW/NCO. Otherwise, we'll just duplicate all that other work. JXM 06:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prior Discussion

I'm ading the stub tag intill some one adds the basics of the doctren and not only examples. --maayan 20:51, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Network centric warfare is not an exclusivly american docterine.All 1st world powers are moving into this direction.

One of the countries developing rapidly to a centric warfare enviroment is The Netherlands. Specially there army is building a centric warfare system. One of the conclusions at this point is that datacom by radio is a show stopper.

[edit] Information Revolution section POV

I put an NPOV warning on this section. It cites no references and sounds like propaganda. I also added a request for an expert for this whole article. --205.250.250.154 06:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree about with the propaganda comment. I have professional links with the NCW/NCO community and will try to find time to rework this article in the next few days. JXM 06:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] US Doctrine

Copied from User talk:Khendon I disagree with your addition of US military to the NCW page. The term extends beyond the US - see for example the extended international membership in the NCOIC (www.ncoic.org). Unless you have thoughts to the contrary, I'd recommend changing it back. JXM 04:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Hm. I'm not an expert, but I've always heard of NCW as a US doctrine. I know for sure that it's not a UK doctrine - there's a similar but subtly different doctrine called network-enabled operations. Perhaps we can fold that in though. --Khendon 07:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

How's that? I think it would be useful also to separate out the generic information about the doctrine from the purely US issues. --Khendon 07:48, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

The revised intro is certainly a bit sharper now, although the nuance about NCO being a broader term should probably be restored in some way. We should probably also redirect the UK NEO term here. Also, I support the idea of separating out US and generic issues.

I'll try to add something to the policy/org. issues this week. JXM 19:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I think different nations mean the same, but use different acronymns. In this case study, Sweden’s Use of Commercial Information Technology for Military Applications, which I found here[1], they do some comparisons between the Swedish (NBD) effort and the U.S. (NCW) effort. They also briefly mention the second tier nations progress. 83.248.166.70 09:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No longer a stub

A significant amount of work has done on this article. I removed the stub tag. —ERcheck @ 13:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)