Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 1

Ship SystemsAutomation

American Society of Naval EngineersIntelligent Ship Symposium

June 1-2, 1994Philadelphia

Joseph B. Fammetel: 703-528-3711fax: 703-243-0173

Note: This is a re-print of the original slide presentation given by theauthor, Joseph Famme, at the ASNE Intelligent Ship Symposium,

Philadelphia, 1994. Mr. Famme is now president of ITE Inc.,www.ITEinc.US, jfamme@ITEinc.US.

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 2

CAEAutomation

Percent Remote Control & Automation

0

20

40

60

80

100

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

TIMELINE

PE

RC

EN

T R

C &

A

COMBAT SYSTEMS

MACHINERYSYSTEMS

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 3

CAE

� Improve performance and survivability,� Reduce costs: acquisition, training and maintenance

Technology Leverage

Components by Ship Class

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

CG-47 DDG-51 MHC-51 SMCS

Ship Class

No

. of

Co

mp

on

ents 292

211

34 36

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 4

CAEOperating Environment

� External operating environment:� weather� sea state� ocean acoustics� water depth and bottom type� navigation hazards� shipping� enemy threats

� Internal operating environment:� readiness of vital & non-vital systems� readiness and alertness of the crew� automation doctrine in force� logistics readiness

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 5

CAEWarfighting Requirements

� Ship Operational Characteristics Study 1988� Twelve Imperative Characteristics. Five Apply to

HME & DC:� Integrated machinery systems� Survivability & the ability to fight hurt� Embedded readiness assessment, mission planning &

training� Condition-based maintenance� Collocation of ship control and CIC

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 6

CAENotional Conventional

CREW 360, MISSILES 120

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 7

CAEIncremental Approach

Manpower Reduction

0

100

200

300

400

R0 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10

REDUCTION PHASES

CR

EW

SIZ

E

252 using INCREMENTAL approach

162 using SA'AR-5 approach

ARPA GOAL

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 8

CAEReengineering

Manpower Reduction

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

R0 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10

REDUCTION PHASES

CR

EW

SIZ

E

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 9

CAETwo Versions Low - Mix ?

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 10

CAE

� Most merchant ships operate with a crew of less than twenty� Can a commercial hull be modified to meet the SOCS requirements

and reduce manpower as part of a high - low mix?� High mix provides sensors & C3I� Low mix, linked to a high mix, provides firepower

Conventional Low - Mix?

VLS MISSILES18 X 60

COMMAND CENTERS

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 11

CAELow - mix Stealth?

CREW 40 - MISSILES 1080

MACHINERY

COMMAND CENTERSBRIDGE

VLS MISSILES 18 X 60

CREW

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 12

CAETactical Team ?

Crew 360 - Missiles 120

Crew 40 - Missiles 1080

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 13

CAETactical Application

Gulf of Uno

HiLo

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 14

CAE

� Current bridge designs are inefficient and expose dozens ofwatchstanders to hazardous conditions

� Automation to meet SOCS requirements could use:� Navigation with autopilot, ECPINS, GPS, Radar Overlay, IR, ESM,

threat warning, C3I about external environment� USN SES-200 has ECPINS, GPS & radar overlay

Navigation

Collocation of Ship / Machinery Control and CICinto Primary and Secondary Command Centers

Minimum Bridge

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 15

CAE

� Current systems do not provide embedded readiness, missionplanning and training

� This SOCS requirement requires the most effort to achieve due to therequirements to use 'ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE" in the decisionaiding process. Applications include:

� Route selection considering the ship mission requirements, externalenvironment and the ship's internal readiness

� What if analysis of options

Mission Planning

A

B

C

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 16

CAE

� Current ship HME & DC platform internal systems do not adaptautomatically to the external environment (threat, sea state ...)

� The HME & DC systems should adapt automatically to improve:� operating efficiency� increase ship survivability

� Example: Pop up threat, cruise missile, 75 seconds time on top:� starting from Condition III� auto-start all vital systems and split for survivability� auto-full power to maneuver to pre-selected attack angle� turn ship for max-firepower, minimum damage / loss of life

Threat Decision Aids

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 17

CAE

� SOCS requirements are being addressed in SMCS� Will Navy ships apply these technologies?

– full integration of ship control, HME & DC, and combat systems indual command centers

– full function consoles located in all vital decision stations– adaptive HME & DC reconfiguration– built-in training and mission planning– built-in test to the single LRU & built-in spares– low LRU count / maintenance requirements– reduced manning– increased combat volume: 23 % to more than 50%

Machinery Control

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 18

CAE

� The number one public concern today is loss of life in combatoperations. Did Desert Storm set an non-repeatable precedent?

� The key to minimum loss of life in combat is sending the fewestpossible people into harm's way

� New designs support aggressive damage control� automation to reduce personnel requirements� adaptive HME & DC systems� inert gasses and non-explosive space fillers

Damage Control

NO PERSONNEL IN THESE SPACES

ALL SPACES IN THIS AREA FILLED WITHNON-COMBUSTIBLE GAS OR MATERIAL,INSTANT REACTION FLOODING / HALONRELEASE

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 19

CAE

� Maintenance is the highest driver for crew size in addition to damagecontrol. Methods to reduce maintenance manning are:

– change the design of systems and components. (SMCS reduces thecomponent type count for machinery control systems by 84%)

� Affordability Through Commonality– provide built-in test (BIT) and maintain systems based on condition

rather than time� use BIT to automatically update ship readiness assessment and to

support intelligent adaptive reaction to threats– convert watchstanders to non-watchstanders

Condition Based Maintenance

0

50

100

150

200

250

FLT I SMCS

FLT I = 211 SMCS = 34

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 20

CAE

� Computer power exists to support enabling technologies� Application technologies in artificial intelligence and sensors requires

significant work� Simulation can be used to validate design and test warfighting

assumptions� Reengineering techniques are available to audit design rationale

Enabling Technologies

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 21

CAE� Crew "trained" in the employment of automated systems and "new

warfare doctrine".� A "new culture" developed, as in the space program.� Maximum firepower, mission accomplished, minimum human risk.

Confidence Building

EX-AIRCRAFT HANGER

SHIP 2010 DESIGN CENTERTRAINING CENTER

BATTLE FORCETACTICAL TRAINER(BFTT)

LINKSIMULATION

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 22

CAEChange the Paradigm

�Manpower Reduction to

�Human Risk Mitigation

PLUS

PLUS

CREW 720, MISSILES 240

CREW 400, MISSILES 1200

OR

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 23

CAEChange the Design Process !!

Don't Tinker with the Design

Reengineer!!Manpower Reduction

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

R0 R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10

REDUCTION PHASES

CR

EW

SIZ

E

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 24

CAECultural Change

CUSTOM AND TRADITION

NAVY REGULATIONS

ROLES AND MISSIONS

PRESENCE, SHOW THE FLAG

SAFETY

INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

PRIDE

Reprinted 8/18/2003 by the Author, J Famme, President ITE Inc. 25

CAEConclusions� Automation is here to stay� Computer power exists to support the enabling technologies� Application technologies in artificial intelligence and sensors requires

significant work� Conventional designs are prohibitively expensive� Simulation can be used to validate design, test warfighting

assumptions, and support cultural change� Don't tinker with design, reengineer� The paradigm has changed to human risk mitigation� Cultural barriers will remain a challenge

It is an exciting time to be in the marine engineering profession!!