The SHAPE kill chain explained: AI, human-machine teaming, and the future of US military power
July 21, 2025
In early June 2025, inside a high-security operations centre at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, a major experiment quietly unfolded.
The 805th Combat Training Squadron, known as the Shadow Operations Center-Nellis (ShOC-N), carried out Experiment 3, a hands-on test of how future military operations might change when powered by artificial intelligence, distributed data, and human-machine teaming.
The exercise focused on refining a new decision-making model for warfare called the SHAPE-Kill Chain, an evolution of the traditional ‘kill chain’ that military forces have used for decades.
What is the SHAPE kill chain?
Traditionally, a kill chain refers to the sequence of steps involved in identifying and responding to a threat: Find, Fix, Track, Target, Engage, Assess (or F2T2EA). But as conflicts today cut across air, land, sea, cyber, and space, that process needs to be faster, more connected, and less reliant on one central location.
The SHAPE model stands for Sense, Hold, Assess, Plan, Engage. It’s a new framework being explored to improve coordination between sensors, software, and commanders spread across different locations.
The aim is to shrink the decision window from hours to seconds, without removing human control.
“The ShOC enables a ‘drive-before-you-buy’ approach, ensuring the tools we field are effective, intuitive and ready for the fight,” says Lt. Col. Shawn Finney, commander of ShOC-N. “This experiment brought us one step closer to the future of command and control.”
Modern conflicts prove the applications for SHAPE kill chain
One of the driving forces behind this innovation is the need to respond swiftly to unfolding threats.
A striking example occurred in June 2025 during Operation Midnight Hammer, when US B‑2 Spirit stealth bombers dropped massive ordnance penetrator bunker-buster bombs on Iran’s Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear facilities. These were supported by Tomohawk missiles launched from a submarine targeting Isfahan. The mission demonstrated how rapid, coordinated action across domains can directly alter strategic outcomes.
Another clear example came in May this year during Operation Sindoor, when Indian forces conducted precision strikes against cross-border terrorist camps in Pakistan after a deadly terror ambush in India’s Jammu and Kashmir.
The success of these operations relied on real-time intelligence and fast, coordinated action.
The US military wants to be ready for similar high-stakes moments, whether in the Pacific, the Middle East, or cyberspace, by ensuring its command and control systems are as fast and flexible as the threats they face.
“We’re not just testing software, we’re challenging assumptions, validating tactics and shaping the operational architecture the Air Force and our allies will rely on in future conflicts. This was a proving ground for the kill chain of tomorrow,” Lt. Col. Finney opines.
The role of human-machine teaming
A highlight of Experiment 3 was a tool developed under the US military’s Maven Smart System. The AI-enabled assistant offered real-time targeting suggestions, which were then compared to decisions made by experienced human operators.
“Our goal was to measure how the machine could support, not replace, the human in the decision loop,” says Capt. Abby Brown, the lead planner. “This proved that future operations can rely on distributed nodes while maintaining a common operational picture,” Capt. Brown adds.
The experiment looked at how the machine could help by cutting through the noise and reducing the time it takes to make informed decisions.
The result? The AI made fast suggestions, but human judgment still proved crucial, particularly in situations requiring nuance and intuition. The team will use these insights to improve how AI supports, rather than overrides, operators.
A major step forward came from Project NEXUS, an initiative by Air Combat Command to enable shared decision-making even when teams are spread across the globe.
For the first time, analysts using different systems and located in separate areas could feed information into a common data stream and work from a shared operational picture.
“This proves we can operate with distributed teams and still act in sync,” says Capt. Brown. That’s key for future battles, where adversaries might target centralised command centres.
Testing in real world conditions
The ShOC-N built a simulated battle environment that mimicked modern combat conditions, including electronic warfare and non-traditional threats. That meant technologies had to perform under pressure.
“Replicating real warfare isn’t easy,” says Lt. Col. Wesley Schultz, Director of Operations. “But this experiment gave us a better sense of how realistic we need to get for future training and system development.”
Four industry teams were invited to demonstrate their tools during a “Structured Demonstration” phase. These tools focused on remote mission control, mission re-planning, ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) automation, and in-flight refuelling coordination.
Over four days, operators tested these tools and gave live feedback, an approach ShOC-N says helps ensure only useful, user-friendly technology moves forward.
Building a blueprint for tomorrow’s conflictss
Experiment 3 generated the highest number of observations in the ShOC-N’s history. The insights are now being used to plan future events like Bamboo Eagle 25-3, a major training exercise, with a specific focus on long-range strike missions, maritime integration, and multi-domain coordination. It may also influence Project Convergence and the broader Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) roadmap.
“We’re building the future of command and control in real time,” says Lt. Col. Finney. “This is about making sure the tools, people and tactics are aligned before the next real-world challenge.”
The SHAPE kill chain isn’t just a new acronym. It represents a shift in how modern militaries plan to fight. It accepts that future conflicts will be fast, messy, and multi-dimensional. By bringing together artificial intelligence, shared data, and real human judgement, experiments like these are building a blueprint for the kind of warfare nations may face in the years ahead.
“We’re not waiting for the future,” says Lt. Col. Finney. “We’re building it now, one iteration at a time.”
