1 / 18

The use of scenarios to develop Concepts of Operation for unmanned vehicles

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.

dani
Download Presentation

The use of scenarios to develop Concepts of Operation for unmanned vehicles

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The use of scenarios to develop Concepts of Operation for unmanned vehicles 19 ISMOR 30th August Michael Tulip

  2. Structure • The challenge in analysing Unmanned Vehicles • Example 1 - Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) • Example 2 - Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) • Conclusions

  3. 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

  4. Scenario System Mix CONOPS and Military Worth Wargame Vignettes Vignette analysis Search algorithms Physics Expert opinion Military Worth 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

  5. TF1 Sub Sub Country X Country Y UUV TF2 TF1 UUV Level of scenario detail

  6. 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

  7. 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?

  8. Barrier search Sub Detection radius of UUV versus Sub Barrier Coast Vignette analysis

  9. Area search Sub UUV Barrier search Host Host UUV patrol Detection Range Mine clearance Sub Safe area Area to be cleared Detection radius of UUV versus Sub Barrier Coast Vignette analysis

  10. Wargame Vignettes Vignette analysis Military worth of system mix Vignette analysis / wargame iteration

  11. Scenario CONOPS Workshop Vignettes Concept Options Military Worth Simulation 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

  12. Level of scenario detail • Limited scope of study reduces scenario complexity Ingress route AH + UAV BASE Egress route Low threat Med threat High threat

  13. 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

  14. Example CONOPS • Vignette 5 - Rendezvous point to Area of Operations General AH CONOPS “Move forward in steps of distance x, searching for and identifying potential ground threats” General AH + UAV CONOPS “AH moves forward in steps of distance y, searching for potential ground threats. UAV flys distance z ahead of main force identifying potential threats” “If the force detects threat A before threat A detects the force, the force attempts to bypass the threat” AH / AH + UAV CONOPS versus threat A AH / AH + UAV CONOPS versus threat C AH / AH + UAV CONOPS versus threat B

  15. Node based stochastic simulation Ingress route Egress route

  16. Results from simulation • Other MoEs • UAV losses • Mission time • Hellfire used in Area of Operations

  17. 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 • Analytical techniques • Variety of techniques • Analysis on a vignette by vignette basis • Evaluates military worth for comparison with Wargame • Simulation • Single technique • Analysis over whole scenario • Evaluates military worth of concepts

  18. 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

More Related