Upload
dani
View
48
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The use of scenarios to develop Concepts of Operation for unmanned vehicles. 19 ISMOR 30th August Michael Tulip. Structure. The challenge in analysing Unmanned Vehicles Example 1 - Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) Example 2 - Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) Conclusions. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The use of scenarios to develop Concepts of Operation for unmanned vehicles
19 ISMOR
30th August
Michael Tulip
Structure
The challenge in analysing Unmanned Vehicles
Example 1 - Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs)
Example 2 - Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs)
Conclusions
Why are unmanned vehicles a challenge to analyse?
Equipment at an embryonic stage of development– Concepts of operation undeveloped– A wide variety of potential roles and capabilities
Issues with levels of autonomy
Possible problems with Rules of Engagement
UUVs as a contribution to capability
Maritime Underwater Fighting Capability (MUFC)
– UK MoD designation of capability
– Mix of platforms/systems
Customer - BAE SYSTEMS– UUVs a major component
CONOPS and Military Worth
System Mix Scenario
Wargame
Physics
Vignettes
Search algorithms
Expert opinion
Vignette analysis
Military Worth
Level of scenario detail
TF1TF2
TF1Sub
Sub
UUV
UUV
Country X
Country Y
Manual Wargame
Structured technique– non-probabilistic– adjudication of results by
referee
Output– CONOPS– vignettes e.g. “Interaction
of UUV with Submarine in sea area x”
– qualitative description of military worth
CONOPS
Deployment and recovery– UUVs deployed quickly – Apparent flexibility
Operations versus enemy submarines– Patrol near enemy ports and choke points– Track and trail– Communication of detection to C2 net
The use of a variable payload– Deployable sensors– Expendable mini-UUVs– UAVs?
Vignette analysis
Sub
Coast
Barrier
Detection radius of UUV versus
Sub
Barrier search
Vignette analysis
Sub
Coast
Barrier
Detection radius of
UUV versus Sub
Barrier search
Sub
Area search
Host
Area to be clearedSafe area
UUV
Detection Range
Mine clearanceUUV patrol
Host
Vignette analysis / wargame iteration
Wargame
Vignettes
Vignette analysis
Military worth of system mix
The value of UAV to AH effectiveness
Customer - UK MoD
The study scope was restricted– Only interested in the
value of UAV to AH– Defined ingress and
egress routes
Scenario
Workshop
Simulation
Vignettes Concept Options
CONOPS
Military Worth
Level of scenario detail
Limited scope of study reduces scenario complexity
BASE
Low threat Med threat High threat
AH + UAVIngress route
Egress route
Workshop
Involved military personnel, technologists and analysts
CONOPS– Vignette 1: Base to Refuelling Point– Vignette 2: At Refuelling Point– ……– Vignette 6: In Area of Operations
No assessment of military worth
Example CONOPS
Vignette 5 - Rendezvous point to Area of Operations
“Move forward in steps of distance x, searching for and identifying potential ground threats”
“AH moves forward in steps of distance y, searching for potential ground threats. UAV flys distance z ahead of main force identifying potential threats”
General AH CONOPS
General AH + UAV CONOPS
AH / AH + UAV
CONOPS versus threat A
AH / AH + UAV
CONOPS versus threat B
AH / AH + UAV
CONOPS versus threat C
“If the force detects threat A before threat A detects the force, the force attempts to bypass the threat”
Node based stochastic simulation
Ingress route
Egress route
Results from simulation
Other MoEs– UAV losses– Mission time– Hellfire used in Area of Operations
AH only ConceptOption 1
ConceptOption 2
ConceptOption 3
Att
ac
k H
elic
op
ter
Lo
ss
es
Workshop– Little indication of
military worth– Analysis on a vignette
by vignette basis– Limited scenario scope– Straightforward to set
up
Wargame– Helps establish military
worth– Analysis over whole
scenario– Wide scenario scope– Significant time and effort
to set up
Comparison of methods
Simulation– Single technique– Analysis over whole
scenario– Evaluates military worth
of concepts
Analytical techniques – Variety of techniques– Analysis on a vignette
by vignette basis– Evaluates military worth
for comparison with Wargame
Conclusions
The scope and constraints of the study define the complexity of the scenarios
Appropriate methods are chosen to address the differences in complexity
General method of analysis for unmanned vehicles– ‘softer’ techniques AND ‘harder’ techniques– Analysis of key parts AND Analysis of whole scenario