The way I understand your description of AEGIS compatibility of the Zumwalt is the essential component of CEC as an intermediary bridge. For example, in a Burke/Zumwalt task force, a SM-6 could be launched from a Zumwalt but cooperatively tracked and targeted via the Aegis onboard the Burke. Would this description be consistent with your comments?
Cooperative engagement will allow vessels to cooperate and use systems to link various vessels together into a single network and then share data as a whole.
This will allows target detected by one ship (or where it has been implemented, for targets detected by aircraft like the E-2D or the F-35C), to be identified by other ships in the network and fired upon with long-range missiles without that other vessel having to actually detect it themselves.
Having the capability for a ship to fire on targets with its own sensors having to "see" them, allows for increased standoff range, shorter cycle time, and lets the whole CEC fleet intercept threats with only a single only platform actually "seeing" or detecting them.
So yes, your scenario follows.
What was the reason that the Zumwalt went with TSCE as an infrastructure? There must be something in it that the Aegis system wasn't providing.
I think the idea was to develop a US Navy total Open Architecture Computing Environment (OACE) which they were orginally going to use to improve AEGIS.
The Total Ship computing environment (TSCE) developed from this effort, with a lot of input and inspiration from the Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and other NAval R&D efforts. It was desired to develop such an architecture for the ZUmwalts because they were the next big surfqace combatant program at the time.
It was meant to involve a system that would integrate the battle management software, electromechanical systems, sensors, maintenance, weapons systems, etc. into an standard overall architecture that would also use Commerical Off the Shelve Systsms (COTS) to develop a unified system.
overall this ended up going well beyond AEGIS alone. At some point, I do not know when, where, or who ultimately approved it, the overall architecture became its own and it evolved away from being a direct AEGIS system.
In the mean time, due to costs, downsizing the total buy, etc. it became a deciated Zumwalt system that through CEC would talk to and work with AEGIS, but not be AEGIS.
I think that is a 20,000 foot overview of how it got where it is.
Perhaps it will be adopted for other, later applications...but the US Navy also made a conscience decision to continue the development of AEGIS separate from this particularly with the BMD enhancements...and now the two are not compatible for TSCE to adopt BMD< or AEGIS to be Totla Ship Computing. It would be possible to develop a separate BMD capability for TSCE, but th Navy has decided that this is too expensive and represents a duplication of effort it does not want.
a special issue of some Polish naval journal (2012)