Distributed Remote Sensing for Naval Undersea Warfare Abbreviated Version (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Pages 1-14
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
This study, which was requested by the former Chief of Naval Operations, addresses the state of the art of and the challenges for DRS and related technologies, assesses current shortfalls, and makes recommendations toward rapidly implementing DRS systems to counter the growing submarine threat as well as problems of countermine warfare.1 Most concepts for DRS are not mature, and there are many challenges in integrating them for use as a military system; neverthe 1The essential features of a DRS system for undersea warfare include the following: a sensor field involving a number of fixed and/or moving nodes to conduct surveillance, detection, and localization of submarines or mines; communications links to transmit data from the sensor subsystem to a processing facility or unit; and a communications center to receive results from the processing facility or unit, to combine them with other intelligence for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and, in a time of hostilities, to cue available attack assets to locations where targets can be found more precisely and attacked or neutralized.
|
From page 2... ...
Consequently one can ask: How can the observations made from many distributed sensors, each with small gain, be related to that from one large sensor with high-array gains? 2 Work has been done recently by Task Force Antisubmarine Warfare on detections by many closely spaced, small, short-range acoustic and combined acoustic and nonacoustic sensors (e.g., Deployable Autonomous Detection System)
|
From page 3... ...
This speed mismatch leads to an issue of how to design clusters of distributed systems in such a way that a patrolling enemy submarine will enter a local network and then be detected and tracked with high probability. The same issue applies to the placement of fixed arrays.
|
From page 4... ...
Operating the field of sensors for a DRS system as well as deploying them, or putting them in place, requires considerable logistical support. For a fleet of UUVs for DRS, a large component of a ship, or perhaps several modules of a littoral combat ship (LCS)
|
From page 5... ...
While DRS is deemed critical to Navy operations in important regions as a force multiplier, cost saver, and means of keeping sailors out of harm's way, there is no dedicated program-level office responsible for the development and implementation of DRS. The committee notes that DRS systems can be a force multiplier, but it emphasizes very strongly that most of the potential has not been realized, except for the current ASW capability of air-dropped systems such as sonobuoys, including directional command-activated sonobuoy systems and air-deployable active receiver extensions (e.g., the Extended Echo Ranging [EER]
|
From page 6... ...
Recommendation 1: In order to bring to fruition distributed remote sensing systems for significant, near-term capabilities, the committee recommends the following: • The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Integration of Capabilities and Resources (N8) should ensure that all undersea DRS requirements and resources become resident within a single directorate in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, so as to maximize synergy in funding resources, R&D, and systems integration for the achievement of near-term results.
|
From page 7... ...
should lead to a spiraldevelopment cycle modeled on the APB/ARCI program. Attributes of this model are as follows: -- Basic implementation hardware with more frequent software builds and complex hardware components dropped in during each spiral; -- A data-driven, robust peer review process to vet and test proposed improvements and algorithms on the basis of available field data; -- A disciplined and consistently resourced activity, strongly coupled to the science and technology program of the Office of Naval Research (ONR)
|
From page 8... ...
should commission a design study that will perform a robust analysis of the systems concepts as well as the CONOPS consistent with Recommendation 1, including both acoustic and nonacoustic sensing, for an engineering effort to develop a combined active and passive, rapidly deployable distributed remote system for antisubmarine warfare. Such a system should effectively replicate the expected passive performance of the Advanced Deployable System, but it should be augmented with an active capability.
|
From page 9... ...
of the feasibility of delivery by a "heavy lift" unmanned undersea vehicle such as the large-diameter UUV Seahorse or by other heavy-lift air assets including those of the U.S. Air Force; 6As of this writing, the Navy plans major changes to the ADS program.
|
From page 10... ...
Those with the highest potential payoff are automated DCLT algorithms for operator support for both fixed and mobile sensor fields, acoustic communications and undersea networks, autonomous operations and distributed autonomy for UUVs so that they can both close on a target and set up projected DCLT based on target course and speed, energy sources and their efficient use for both propulsion and electronics, and improved and possibly alternative sensors. The committee also notes that technologies useful to DRS capabilities come from a large and diverse set of disciplines and vendors.
|
From page 11... ...
should: • Maintain and, if possible, increase 6.1 and 6.2 funding for DRS-related efforts; and • Align relevant 6.2 and 6.3 funding to provide for technology insertion into the DRS program office advocated in Recommendation 1. This DRS program office should establish very close links between the S&T technologists and the Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems to provide both technology push and operational pull, and together with the CNR, it should coordinate efforts at the fundamental and applied level for the desired evolution of DRS systems.
|
From page 12... ...
Plan: Vision, Roadmap, and Program, Washington, D.C., February. 9 Naval Studies Board, National Research Council, 2001, Naval Mine Warfare: Operational and Technical Challenges to Naval forces, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.; Naval Studies Board, National Research Council, 1997, Technology for the United States Navy and Marine Corps, 2000-2035: Becoming a 21st-Century force, Volume 7: Undersea Warfare, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.; Naval Studies Board, National Research Council, 1994, Mine Countermeasures Technology, Volume ii: Task force Report (U)
|
From page 13... ...
Specifically, • The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Integration of Capabilities and Resources (N8) should accelerate support toward achieving an organic MCM capability, and experiments and simulations should be performed to see how organic MCM components integrated into DRS configurations could speed up MCM operations; and • The Program Executive Office for Littoral and Mine Warfare (PEO[LMW]
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.