![Page 1: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives
James H. KingNaval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader
Office of Naval Research29 April 2004
![Page 2: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The Bait
• Systems engineering provides a method for examining alternatives. Mr. King will discuss the application of technological forecasting, engineering, ship design, cost analysis, and operations research analysis to examine alternative approaches to solving naval problems. We will show examples of integrated analysis.
![Page 3: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The Switch
• Systems engineering provides a method for examining alternatives. Mr. King will discuss the fundamentals of systems engineering and the implications for technology and application of technological forecasting, engineering, ship design, cost analysis, and operations research analysis to examine alternative approaches to solving naval problems. He will show an example of integrated analysis. He will present current challenges.
![Page 4: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Outline
• The Principles of Systems Engineering– Implications for Technology
• The Dimensions of Technology Selection– Some Methods of Technology Selection
• Cost-Benefit Analysis
• The Role of Probability
• Risk
• Current Challenges
![Page 5: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
PRINCIPLES OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
• THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Maximize the Expected Value
• THE PRINCIPLE OF EVENTS OF LOW PRIORITY
The fundamental missions of the system should not be jeopardized, nor its fundamental objectives significantly compromised, in order to accommodate events of low probability.
Systems Engineering HandbookRobert E. MacholMcGraw-Hill
![Page 6: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Principles (Cont’d)
• THE PRINCIPLE OF CENTRALIZATIONCentralization of authority and decision-
making, that is, the centralization of information as distinguished from material.
• THE PRINCIPLE OF SUBOPTIMIZATION
The optimization of each subsystem independently will not, in general, lead to a system optimum and, more strongly, improvement of a particular subsystem may actually worsen the overall system.
![Page 7: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Some Methods of Technology Selection
![Page 8: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Why is Technology A Concern
• Cannot afford everything– Not everything in basic research can be
applied– Not everything can be implemented
• Choices
• A Systems Engineering problem– Cannot view each thing independently
So, how do we decide?
![Page 9: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The Big Lie
If you say something often enough, and with enough enthusiasm, it becomes fact
![Page 10: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
New York Floor
In the New York state legislature, who gets the floor?
![Page 11: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
New York Floor
In the New York state legislator, who gets the floor?
The one who yells the loudest.
![Page 12: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Friends in High Places
![Page 13: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Analytical Hierarchy Process
Goal
Objectives
Sub-Objectives
Alternatives
![Page 14: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Variants
• Pareto Analysis
• Pain Analysis
• Pair wise Comparisons
• etc
![Page 15: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Strengths
• Organized
• Transparent
• Repeatable
• Sensitivity Analysis
What Is the Key Weakness?
![Page 16: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Opinion
![Page 17: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Another Approach:Cost-Benefit Analysis
![Page 18: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Design, Cost, and Effectiveness Impacts
ofSurface CombatantTopside Signature
Reductionin
Littoral Environments
1
JAMES H. KING, Naval ArchitectHead, Signature Control Technology Department
and
DANIEL J. PLATT, Naval ArchitectSystems Assessment & Engineering Department
Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division
![Page 19: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Purpose
• Traditionally, goals based on threat weapon performance
• Go beyond:– Impact of signature control on combat system– Impact of signature control measures on ship
design– Cost drivers
• Evaluate signature control in littoral warfare
![Page 20: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
ProcessBaseline
Ship
Scenarios
SignaturePerformance
Prediction
ShipVariants
CombatSystem
Alternatives
Threats
R&D Needs
Goals
Cost-Effectiveness
Analysis
OperationalEffectiveness
Analysis
CostAnalysis
ConceptDevelopment
SpecificShip
Impacts
SignatureControlMethods
DETERMINATION
COMPUTATION
FORMULATION
![Page 21: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Ship Variants
0 1 2 3 4(Baseline)
(Baseline)
(separateRCS / IR)
(limitedintegration)
(integratedRCS / IR)
(aggressivereduction)
(passivecueing)
(no areaAAW)
(autonomousESSM)
A
B
C
D
Com
bat
Sys
tem
Alt
ern
ativ
es
Signature ReductionAlternatives
![Page 22: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Candidate Ships
A0, A1, A2, B2
B3
C0, C1, C2
C3, D3
C4, D4
![Page 23: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Mission Analysis
TBMD
NSFS AAW Picket NEO Spec Ops
Forward Presence HVU Protection
SC
PTGs
SC
SC HVU
HVU
Aircraft
SC
PTGs
Aircraft
DDG
DefendedPoint
PTGs
SC
SC
Shore ASCMBatteries
SC
Raid 3
Raid 1
Raid 2
SC
SC
LHD
LPD
LPD
Aircraft
SC
Recon.
SurveillanceRadar
Patrol Area
![Page 24: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Mission Effectiveness
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP AAWHVU NEOTBMD SPECNSFS
FP=Forward Presence AAW=Anti-Air Picket =GoodHVU=High-Value Unit Protection NEO=Noncombatant Evacuation Operations =FairTBMD=Theater Ballistic Missile Defense SPEC=Special Operations =PoorNSFS=Naval Surface Fire Support
Com
bat S
yste
m V
aria
nts A
B
C
D
Signature Reduction Variants
0 1 2 3 4
![Page 25: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Cost
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
A0 A1 A2 B2 B3 C0 C1 C2 C3 C4 D3 D4
Variant
TY
96$M
ESCALATION BUDGETORDNANCEOTHER COSTHULL,MECH,ELECTELECTRONICSCHANGE ORDERSBASIC ADDERSBASIC CONST/CONVPLAN COSTS
Average DDG51 FLTIIA Cost
![Page 26: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Cost-Effectiveness
A0
A1A2
B2
C0
C1
D3C4
D4
B3C3
C2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100
SCN COST (TY96$M)
EF
FE
CT
IVE
NE
SS
'SC
OR
E'
![Page 27: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Conclusions
• Study conclusions– The combination of signature control and appropriate
combat systems yields cost-effective ship options– Increased cost of signature control is easily outweighed
by decreased combat system cost– For some missions, signature control is vital to success– Future focus will be on the technologies appropriate to
signature level 3
• Process conclusions– Small team, focused on limited missions and scenarios– Effective model for future studies
![Page 28: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
What are the Weaknesses of This Approach?
![Page 29: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
An Idea: A Hybrid Approach
Goal
Objectives
Sub-Objectives
A0A1
A2B2
C0C1
D3C4D4
B3C3C2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100SCN COST (TY96$M)
EF
FE
CT
IVE
NE
SS
'SC
OR
E'
![Page 30: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Hybrid Approach
• Use AHP, or a similar approach, to identify and weigh objectives
• Use rigorous cost-benefit analysis to evaluate alternative technology systems for achieving the objectives.
• Evaluate the alternative systems using AHP
• Guide investment decisions.
![Page 31: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
What is the Fundamental Principle of Systems
Engineering?
![Page 32: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
What is the Fundamental Principle of Systems
Engineering?
Maximize the Expected Value
What is Implied?
![Page 33: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
The Role of Probability
• Remember, Maximize the Expected Value– Performance– Cost– Weight– Risk– Etc
• Expected value implies probabilistic assessment.
• Results are rarely expressed this way
![Page 34: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
The Two Sides to Risk
![Page 35: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Risk Risk Management
Assessment Event Probability
Low Medium High
Event Consequence
Low
Medium
High
The Risk of Action
![Page 36: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Risk
• But what about The Risk of Inaction?– Adversary development– Program delay– Increased cost– Technology abandonment– Etc.
This should be considered!
![Page 37: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Technology Riskvs Potential
Benefit
Cost
C
B
A
D Size of Circle Indicates TechnologyReadinessLevel
Which would youchoose?
![Page 38: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
The Challenge
![Page 39: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Current Challenges
• What is desired?– A fact-based technology evaluation system
• Recognize uncertainty• Identify uncertainty
– Balance risk of action and risk of inaction– Effective and efficient cost analysis
• Suited to the immaturity and uncertainty of technology
![Page 40: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Current Challenges
• Technology Solutions– Systems-based
• Alternate technical system approaches• Use mixes of technologies that makes sense
– Maximize expected value– Catch the revolutionary technology
• Institutionalize systems engineering approach to technology selection
![Page 41: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
IdentifyFunctional
Needs
Fact-BasedAnalysis
A
A
A
A
TechnologyCloud
Cost Performance Risk
+ -
Maximized Expected Value
![Page 42: An Approach to Examining Technical Alternatives James H. King Naval Architect/Signatures Thrust Leader Office of Naval Research 29 April 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022070414/5697c0011a28abf838cc2448/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Discussion
James H. King
Office of Naval Research800 N. Quincy StreetArlington, VA 22217-5660
Phone: (703) 696-4714E-mail: [email protected]