Talk:Command Post of the Future

File:The Command Post of the Future system.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:The Command Post of the Future system.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

External links

All links lead to 404 pages. I have removed them but there may exist active links for relevant pages out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.246.254.12 (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Added active link for external links GD changed the url for it. GD had changed the URL the active one is https://gdmissionsystems.com/en/command-and-control/command-post-of-the-future 129.246.254.12 (talk) 16:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Proposed: expand Development coverage

The article currently has a single citation (a 2007 article with a dead archive link) and no dedicated discussion of how CPOF moved from a DARPA demo to an Army program of record. Proposing the following, all from primary/official sources.

Proposed text:

In October 2003, Major General Peter W. Chiarelli saw a demonstration of the system at Fort Hood and requested it be tested with his 1st Cavalry Division; DARPA deployed CPOF systems to the division headquarters and each brigade headquarters in Iraq beginning in March 2004, with MAYA Design Inc. as the primary contractor. A 2014 RAND case study attributes the program's rapid maturation to continuous involvement of senior retired military consultants acting as users in an iterative development process, personnel continuity through the transition to Army management, Chiarelli's role as an "operational champion," flexible supplemental funding, and users' willingness to accept an "80 percent solution" rather than waiting for a complete one. A 2010 Defense Acquisition University account of the transition states that division leadership took ownership of a "test-fix-test process, allowing warfighters to dictate the requirements," and that user and field support representative feedback drove a faster iterative development cycle than the traditional approach. Formal transition to Army management occurred in April 2006; by October 2006 more than 500 CPOF systems supported Army operations in Iraq, with subsequent feature development managed by the Army's PM Battle Command program office rather than the original contractor.

Note on sourcing: the DAU/Defense AT&L piece is confirmed to exist via Gale and Free Library bibliographic records, and I found a third-party mirror with matching quotes, but I could not reach dau.mil or DTIC directly to verify against the original. Worth trying to locate the original Defense AT&L January 2010 issue before or shortly after this goes in, as a belt-and-suspenders check.

— Integrate-by-parts (talk) 21:10, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Integrate-by-parts (talk) 21:10, 18 September 2026 (UTC) Integrate-by-parts (talk) 21:10, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

References