Drone Defense System Architecture for U.S. Navy Strategic Facilities - Systems Engineering Capstone Project Report - Threat from Commercially Availabl PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Drone Defense System Architecture for U.S. Navy Strategic Facilities - Systems Engineering Capstone Project Report - Threat from Commercially Availabl PDF full book. Access full book title Drone Defense System Architecture for U.S. Navy Strategic Facilities - Systems Engineering Capstone Project Report - Threat from Commercially Availabl by U. S. Military. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: U. S. Military Publisher: Independently Published ISBN: 9781718003606 Category : History Languages : en Pages : 80
Book Description
Small, commercially available unmanned aerial systems (UAS) are an emergent threat to Navy continental U.S. (CONUS) military facilities. There are many counter unmanned aerial system (C-UAS) tools focused on neutralization, and many sensors in place. A system-of-systems, defense-in-depth approach to C-UAS requires a central system to connect these new and existing systems. The central system uses data fusion and threat evaluation and weapons assignment (TEWA) to properly address threats. This report follows a systems engineering process to develop a software architecture for that central system, beginning with a requirements analysis, a functional baseline, and the resulting module allocation. A series of simulations in ExtendSim derives the performance requirements by examining the overall C-UAS scenario with currently available technology. Through a sensitivity analysis, the simulation shows that effective engagement range (combination of initial target range, detection range and neutralization range) is the dominant factor driving response time. The architecture modeled in Innoslate provides a discrete event simulation for system performance expectations. I. INTRODUCTION * A. BACKGROUND * B. PROBLEM STATEMENT * C. SCOPE * D. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PROCESS * E. SUMMARY * II. CONCEPT REFINEMENT * A. REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS * B. STAKEHOLDER REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS * C. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS * D. CONSTRAINTS * E. SYSTEM FIELDING * F. SUMMARY * III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN * A. ARCHITECTURE DESIGN * B. FUNCTIONAL ALLOCATION * 1. Fuse Data * 2. Assess Threat * 3. Provide Decision Support * C. REQUIREMENTS ALLOCATION * IV. DETAILED DESIGN * A. MODULE ALLOCATION * 1. Data Fusion * 2. Threat Assessment * 3. Decision Support * B. INTERFACES * 1. External Interfaces * 2. Subsystem Interfaces * C. SYSTEM VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION * 1. Sensitivity Analysis * 2. Determination of Effect for Human-in-the-Loop * 3. Probability of Kill versus Target Initial Range * V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK * A. FUTURE WORK * B. CONCLUSION
Author: U. S. Military Publisher: Independently Published ISBN: 9781718003606 Category : History Languages : en Pages : 80
Book Description
Small, commercially available unmanned aerial systems (UAS) are an emergent threat to Navy continental U.S. (CONUS) military facilities. There are many counter unmanned aerial system (C-UAS) tools focused on neutralization, and many sensors in place. A system-of-systems, defense-in-depth approach to C-UAS requires a central system to connect these new and existing systems. The central system uses data fusion and threat evaluation and weapons assignment (TEWA) to properly address threats. This report follows a systems engineering process to develop a software architecture for that central system, beginning with a requirements analysis, a functional baseline, and the resulting module allocation. A series of simulations in ExtendSim derives the performance requirements by examining the overall C-UAS scenario with currently available technology. Through a sensitivity analysis, the simulation shows that effective engagement range (combination of initial target range, detection range and neutralization range) is the dominant factor driving response time. The architecture modeled in Innoslate provides a discrete event simulation for system performance expectations. I. INTRODUCTION * A. BACKGROUND * B. PROBLEM STATEMENT * C. SCOPE * D. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PROCESS * E. SUMMARY * II. CONCEPT REFINEMENT * A. REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS * B. STAKEHOLDER REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS * C. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS * D. CONSTRAINTS * E. SYSTEM FIELDING * F. SUMMARY * III. PRELIMINARY DESIGN * A. ARCHITECTURE DESIGN * B. FUNCTIONAL ALLOCATION * 1. Fuse Data * 2. Assess Threat * 3. Provide Decision Support * C. REQUIREMENTS ALLOCATION * IV. DETAILED DESIGN * A. MODULE ALLOCATION * 1. Data Fusion * 2. Threat Assessment * 3. Decision Support * B. INTERFACES * 1. External Interfaces * 2. Subsystem Interfaces * C. SYSTEM VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION * 1. Sensitivity Analysis * 2. Determination of Effect for Human-in-the-Loop * 3. Probability of Kill versus Target Initial Range * V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK * A. FUTURE WORK * B. CONCLUSION
Author: U. S. Military Publisher: ISBN: 9781549788352 Category : Languages : en Pages : 104
Book Description
This is one of a series of systems engineering case studies prepared by the Air Force Center for Systems Engineering. This case study analyzes the Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). The Global Hawk is an advanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance air system composed of a high-altitude, long-endurance unmanned air vehicle (UAV) and a common ground segment (CGS) for command, control, and data collection. Its primary mission is to provide overt, continuous, long-endurance, all-weather, day/night, and near-real-time, wide-area reconnaissance and surveillance. The air vehicle is coupled with an integrated ground-based Mission Control Element (MCE) and Launch and Recovery Element (LRE) that monitors autonomous flight and facilitates-aided control of the air vehicle, when required. The Global Hawk system consists of the aircraft, payloads, data links, ground stations, and logistics support package. The ground stations have the ability to provide command and control (C2) of up to three vehicles and at least one air vehicle payload from a single ground station. The study provides a wealth of technical information about the aircraft and its complex history. The Department of Defense is exponentially increasing the acquisition of joint complex systems that deliver needed capabilities demanded by our warfighter. Systems engineering is the technical and technical management process that focuses explicitly on delivering and sustaining robust, high-quality, affordable solutions. The Air Force leadership has collectively stated the need to mature a sound systems engineering process throughout the Air Force. Gaining an understanding of the past and distilling learning principles that are then shared with others through our formal education and practitioner support are critical to achieving continuous improvement. These cases support academic instruction on SE within military service academies, civilian and military graduate schools, industry continuing education programs, and those practicing SE in the field. Each of the case studies is comprised of elements of success as well as examples of SE decisions that, in hindsight, were not optimal. Both types of examples are useful for learning. Along with discovering historical facts, we have conducted key interviews with program managers and chief engineers, both within the government and those working for the various prime and subcontractors. From this information, we have concluded that the discipline needed to implement SE and the political and acquisition environment surrounding programs continue to challenge our ability to provide balanced technical solutions. Chapter 1. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PRINCIPLES * 1.1 GENERAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING PROCESS * 1.1.1 Introduction * 1.1.2 Evolving Systems Engineering Process * 1.1.3 Case Studies * 1.1.4 Framework for Analysis * 1.2 GLOBAL HAWK MAJOR LEARNING PRINCIPLES AND FRIEDMAN-SAGE MATRIX * Chapter 2. GLOBAL HAWK DESCRIPTIONS * 2.1 MISSION * 2.2 GLOBAL HAWK SYSTEM * 2.2.1 Air Vehicle * 2.2.2 Common Ground Segment * 2.2.3 Support Segment * Chapter 3. GLOBAL HAWK PROGRAM * 3.1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND * 3 .2 ADVANCED CONCEPT TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT (ACTD) PHASE * 3.2.1 Original Acquisition Strategy * 3.2.2 Phase I * 3.2.3 Phase II * 3.2.4 Phase III * 3.2.5 Phase IV * 3.2.6 Summary of ACTD * 3.2.7 Collier Trophy * 3.3 ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENT (EMD)/PRODUCTION PHASE * 3.3.1 EMD * 3.3.2 Production * 3.3.3 Supporting Contractors * 3.3.4 Australian Deployment * 3.3.5 Combat Deployments to Southwest Asia * 3.3.6 Combat Losses * 3.3.7 Spiral 2 * 3.3.8 Organizational Structure * 3.3.9 Navy Global Hawk * 3.3.10 Production Lots 2 and 3 * 3.3.11 German Demonstration * 3.3.12 Block 10 Flight Test * 3.3.13 Airworthiness Certification of Block 10 * 3.3.14 Nunn-McCurdy Breach and Recertification * Chapter 4. SUMMARY * Chapter 5. REFERENCES * 6. APPENDICES
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Cruise missiles Languages : en Pages : 187
Book Description
Advancements in missile technology have made cruise missile capability available worldwide. Current US naval weapon systems lack full interoperability across multiple platforms and full integration of detection, control, and engagement processes against incoming targets. The key to defeating future threats to our military assets is in gaining additional reaction time. This can be accomplished by leveraging collective sensor detection data throughout the battlespace, utilizing the FORCEnet data resources to evaluate the threat, and engaging the threat with a tiered defense. The objective of this capstone project is to address the above issues through the use of Open Architecture (OA) within a FORCEnet environment. This report focuses on the development of a conceptual architecture for Cruise Missile Defense (CMD) that combines FORCEnet architecture requirements with Program Executive Office of Integrated Warfare Systems (PEO IWS)'s OA functional architecture technical requirements. Further, this conceptual architecture is compared with PEO IWS's functional architecture via a series of systems engineering diagrams. These diagrams culminate in a simulation model that analyzes and determines the validity of the conceptual architecture. Results from the simulation model show that the conceptual architecture performed significantly better than PEO IWS's. These results are attributed to the addition of a re-engagement loop called Observe-Orient-Decide-Act (OODA).
Author: Ronald O'Rourke Publisher: ISBN: 9781075833274 Category : Languages : en Pages : 30
Book Description
The Navy wants to develop and procure three new types of unmanned vehicles (UVs) in FY2020 and beyond-Large Unmanned Surface Vehicles (LUSVs), Medium Unmanned Surface Vehicles (MUSVs), and Extra-Large Unmanned Undersea Vehicles (XLUUVs). The Navy is requesting $628.8 million in FY2020 research and development funding for these three UV programs and their enabling technologies. The Navy wants to acquire these three types of UVs (which this report refers to collectively as large UVs) as part of an effort to shift the Navy to a new fleet architecture (i.e., a new combination of ships and other platforms) that is more widely distributed than the Navy's current architecture. Compared to the current fleet architecture, this more-distributed architecture is to include proportionately fewer large surface combatants (i.e., cruisers and destroyers), proportionately more small surface combatants (i.e., frigates and Littoral Combat Ships), and the addition of significant numbers of large UVs. The Navy wants to employ accelerated acquisition strategies for procuring these large UVs, so as to get them into service more quickly. The emphasis that the Navy placed on UV programs in its FY2020 budget submission and the Navy's desire to employ accelerated acquisition strategies in acquiring these large UVs together can be viewed as an expression of the urgency that the Navy attaches to fielding large UVs for meeting future military challenges from countries such as China. The LUSV program is a proposed new start project for FY2020. The Navy wants to procure two LUSVs per year in FY2020FY2024. The Navy wants LUSVs to be low-cost, high-endurance, reconfigurable ships based on commercial ship designs, with ample capacity for carrying various modular payloads-particularly anti-surface warfare (ASuW) and strike payloads, meaning principally anti-ship and land-attack missiles. The Navy reportedly envisions LUSVs as being 200 feet to 300 feet in length and having a full load displacement of about 2,000 tons. The MUSV program began in FY2019. The Navy plans to award a contract for the first MUSV in FY2019 and wants to award a contract for the second MUSV in FY2023. The Navy wants MUSVs, like LUSVs, to be low-cost, high-endurance, reconfigurable ships that can accommodate various payloads. Initial payloads for MUSVs are to be intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) payloads and electronic warfare (EW) systems. The Navy defines MUSVs as having a length of between 12 meters (about 39 feet) and 50 meters (about 164 feet). The Navy wants to pursue the MUSV program as a rapid prototyping effort under what is known as Section 804 acquisition authority. The XLUUV program, also known as Orca, was established to address a Joint Emergent Operational Need (JEON). The Navy wants to procure nine XLUUVs in FY2020-FY2024. The Navy announced on February 13, 2019, that it had selected Boeing to fabricate, test, and deliver the first four Orca XLUUVs and associated support elements. On March 27, 2019, the Navy announced that the award to Boeing had been expanded to include the fifth Orca. The Navy's large UV programs pose a number of oversight issues for Congress, including issues relating to the analytical basis for the more-distributed fleet architecture; the Navy's accelerated acquisition strategies and funding method for these programs; technical, schedule, and cost risk in the programs; the proposed annual procurement rates for the programs; the industrial base implications of the programs; the personnel implications of the programs; and whether the Navy has accurately priced the work it is proposing to do in FY2020 on the programs.
Author: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Publisher: National Academies Press ISBN: 0309458161 Category : Technology & Engineering Languages : en Pages : 49
Book Description
The development of inexpensive small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) technologies and the growing desire of hobbyists to have more and more capability have created a sustained sUAS industry, however these capabilities are directly enabling the ability of adversaries to threaten U.S. interests. In response to these threats, the U.S. Army and other Department of Defense (DoD) organizations have invested significantly in counter-sUAS technologies, often focusing on detecting radio frequency transmissions by sUASs and/or their operators, and jamming the radio frequency command and control links and Global Positioning System signals of individual sUASs. However, today's consumer and customized sUASs can increasingly operate without radio frequency command and control links by using automated target recognition and tracking, obstacle avoidance, and other software-enabled capabilities. The U.S. Army tasked the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study to address the above concerns. In particular, the committee was asked to assess the sUAS threat, particularly when massed and collaborating; assess current capabilities of battalion-and- below infantry units to counter sUASs; identify counter-sUAS technologies appropriate for near- term, mid-term, and far-term science and technology investment; consider human factors and logistics; and determine if the Department of Homeland Security could benefit from DoD efforts. This abbreviated report provides background information on the full report and the committee that prepared it.
Author: Todd Harrison Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield ISBN: 1538140322 Category : Political Science Languages : en Pages : 53
Book Description
The proliferation of counterspace weapons across the globe often calls into question what can be done to best protect satellites from attack. This analysis from the CSIS Aerospace Security Project addresses different methods and technologies that can be used by the United States government, and others, to deter adversaries from attack. A wide range of active and passive defenses are available to protect space systems and the ground infrastructure they depend upon from different types of threats. This report captures a range of active and passive defenses that are theoretically possible and discusses the advantages and limitations of each. A group of technical space and national security experts supported the analysis by working through several plausible scenarios that explore a range of defenses that may be needed, concepts for employing different types of defenses, and how defensive actions in space may be perceived by others. These scenarios and the findings that resulted from subsequent conversations with experts are reported in the penultimate chapter of the report. Finally, the CSIS Aerospace Security Project team offers conclusions drawn from the analysis, actionable recommendations for policymakers, and additional research topics to be explored in future work.
Author: Congressional Service Publisher: Createspace Independent Publishing Platform ISBN: 9781723255861 Category : Languages : en Pages : 42
Book Description
The Navy is developing three new ship-based weapons that could improve the ability of Navy surface ships to defend themselves against missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and surface craft: the Surface Navy Laser Weapon System (SNLWS), the electromagnetic railgun (EMRG), and the gun-launched guided projectile (GLGP), previously known as the hypervelocity projectile (HVP). The Navy refers to the initial (i.e., Increment 1) version of SNLWS as HELIOS, an acronym meaning high-energy laser with integrated optical dazzler and surveillance. EMRG could additionally provide the Navy with a new naval surface fire support (NSFS) weapon for attacking land targets in support of Marines or other friendly ground forces ashore. The Department of Defense is exploring the potential for using GLGP across multiple U.S. military services. Any one of these three new weapons, if successfully developed and deployed, might be regarded as a "game changer" for defending Navy surface ships against enemy missiles and UAVs. If two or three of them are successfully developed and deployed, the result might be considered not just a game changer, but a revolution. Rarely has the Navy had so many potential new types of surface-ship air-defense weapons simultaneously available for development and potential deployment. Although the Navy in recent years has made considerable progress in developing technologies for these new weapons, a number of significant development challenges remain. Overcoming these challenges will require additional development work, and ultimate success in overcoming them is not guaranteed. The issue for Congress is whether to approve, reject, or modify the Navy's funding requests and proposed acquisition strategies for these three potential new weapons. Potential oversight questions for Congress include the following: Using currently available air-defense weapons, how well could Navy surface ships defend themselves in a combat scenario against an adversary such as China that has or could have large numbers of missiles and UAVs? How would this situation change if Navy surface ships in coming years were equipped with SNLWS, EMRG, GLGP, or some combination of these systems? How significant are the remaining development challenges for SNLWS, EMRG, and GLGP? Are current schedules for developing SNLWS, EMRG, and GLGP appropriate in relation to remaining development challenges and projected improvements in enemy missiles and UAVs? When does the Navy anticipate issuing roadmaps detailing its plans for procuring and installing production versions of SNLWS, EMRG, and GLGP on specific Navy ships by specific dates? Will the kinds of surface ships that the Navy plans to procure in coming years have sufficient space, weight, electrical power, and cooling capability to take full advantage of SNLWS and EMRG? What changes, if any, would need to be made in Navy plans for procuring large surface combatants (i.e., destroyers and cruisers) or other Navy ships to take full advantage of SNLWS and EMRGs? Given the Navy's interest in HPV, how committed is the Navy to completing the development of EMRG and eventually deploying EMRGs on Navy ships? Are the funding line items for SNLWS, EMRG, and GLDP sufficiently visible for supporting congressional oversight?
Author: United States United States Air Force Publisher: CreateSpace ISBN: 9781499397499 Category : Languages : en Pages : 100
Book Description
The character of future international conflicts represents a complex and unpredictable set of challenges that necessitates a significant shift in the United States' approach to warfighting. Strategic guidance in Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense reinforces that -...the United States will continue to take an active approach to countering...threats by monitoring the activities of non-state threats worldwide, working with allies and partners to establish control over ungoverned territories, and directly striking the most dangerous groups and individuals when necessary. The U.S. Air Force (USAF) Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) Vector-Vision and Enabling Concepts: 2013-2038 balances the effects envisioned in the USAF Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009-2047 with the reality of constrained resources and ambitious national strategy for a complex world. More importantly, as a visionary document, the RPA Vector opens the aperture beyond current austere fiscal realities to explore art of the possible technologies in the 2013-2038 timeframe. The intent is to examine technological advances necessary to enable the Air Force's future RPA force.
Author: U. S. Military
Author: U. S. Military
Author: U. S. Military
Author: 
Author: Ronald O'Rourke
Author: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Author: Todd Harrison
Author: Congressional Service
Author: 
Author: United States United States Air Force
Author: United States