Post on 15-Jan-2015
description
transcript
Centre Defence Enterprise
for
Enduring Challenge Competition
Enduring competition
Perpetual
Radical
£3M per year
Enduring competition
Challenges
Enduring
9 framework
Framework
Protection Lethality Human performance
Mobility Lower cost of ownership
Framework
Situational awareness Communication Data Power
Enduring challenge
Conventional Weapons
Active Integrated Protection Systems (AIPS)
Enduring Challenge
Competition
Centre for Defence Enterprise
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Conventional Weapons
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Programme vision
Research and Development will have supported UK Weapons Freedom of Action and Operational
Advantage by maturing technologies and evidence to enable a future complex weapons, novel weapons and general munitions portfolio underpinned by the principals of Commonality, Modularity and Re-use.
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
B C
D
© Crown Copyright Dstl 2013
Tech
nolo
gy
Sys
tem
Time
Technology development in absence of systems thinking (pet projects)
System thinking in absence of technology maturation (concepting)
A
A: Technology driven activity with focused system analysis e.g. Future Local Area Air Defence System (FLAADS)
B: System driven activity with focused technology maturation e.g. Selective Precision Engagement At Range (SPEAR)
C: Technology push into application with future refinements e.g. Brimstone 2
D: Stretching requirement tempered by available technology e.g. Future Anti Surface Guided Weapon (FASGW)
Innovation and Exploitation
Therefore we will need to introduce Systems Expertise to follow technology development in the Centre for Defence Enterprise through the Weapons Science and Technology Centre (WSTC). Visualisation courtesy of MBDA via MCM ITP
Programme drivers (1) • Conventional Weapons
– Complex Weapons (Guided Munitions) – General Munitions (excluding small arms)
• Operational advantage – “…we often need superior technology and other forms of battle-
winning edge.”
• Freedom of Action – “…we must be able to operate, maintain, and refresh certain
capabilities effectively, without being dependent on others.”
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Programme drivers (2) • Policy / doctrine trends
– Through Life Cost – Complex Weapons are very expensive • Commonality
– The use of a single weapons system across multiple roles
• Modularity – The use of a single sub-system in multiple weapons system
• Re-use – Developing an existing sub-system or system for a new application
– Accuracy • Reduced risk of Collateral Damage • Comparable Effect with smaller or fewer weapons
– Lifespan
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Programme Themes
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
CDE enduring challenges
• lethality (weapons – conventional, novel, directed energy, defence, less-than-lethal)
• lower cost of ownership (platforms, equipment, facilities)
• Protection (personnel, platforms, facilities, digital systems, materials)
• New capabilities (challenging current convention, disruptive)
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Points of contact
• PDD@dstl.gov.uk
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Active Integrated Protection System
(AIPS) - Enduring Challenge
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Contents
• AIPS Research Scope • Threats • Active Protection Description • Why Active Protection • Active Protection Issues and Challenges • What we want • What we don’t want
© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Active Integrated Protection System (AIPS) Research Scope • Mass efficient vehicle protection by the
application of Hard Kill and/or Soft Kill technologies
• Hard Kill measures aim to physically interact with incoming threats to prevent or reduce impact - “Don’t be Hit”
• Soft Kill measures aim to disrupt the threat engagement chain “Don’t be acquired / Hit”
• Goal: An affordable Fully Integrated System with inherent Threat Detection and Situational Awareness
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
The Threats
• Non-complex shoulder launched anti-tank (AT) systems
• Complex anti-tank guided munitions (ATGM)
• Tank fired large calibre munitions
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
What Constitutes a typical AIPS?
• Active and passive sensors for threat launch and/or track • Control & processing hub • Hard kill effectors • Soft kill effectors • Host platform supporting architecture
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Why Active Protection? • Proliferation capable anti armour systems is a major risk • Vehicle passive and reactive protection measures may no longer provide
complete protection for some threat systems • Passive protection systems only deal with the
“Do not be Penetrated” layer of the onion
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
Active Protection – The Issues
• Active protection is not the panacea of platform protection and should be considered as only part of the survivability toolkit.
• Common issues: – Diverse and evolving range of threats – Coverage and dealing with multiple threats – Physical integration (Size, Weight, Power) – Potential collateral effects
• Use in complex environments – Safety – Security
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
The Active Protection Challenge
Developing a low risk, mass efficient, affordable and flexible protection capability that can provide increased survivability to a range of land platforms.
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
What We Want
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
• Innovation – New combat vehicle APS concepts with lower
integration and operational risk: • Novel concepts and technologies to detect, classify
and track a threat • Novel methods of physically interacting with the
threat (Hard Kill) • Novel methods of disrupting the engagement chain
(Soft Kill) • Novel adaption of technologies
• Consideration of the issues, performance trades and risk mitigation
What We Don’t Want
OFFICIAL © Crown copyright 2013 Dstl
27 May 2014
• Novel solutions that don’t attempt to deal with the real threat scenario – i.e. “Don’t be there”
• Solutions that don’t address the key issues – Solutions that are not feasible in the real world of safety, size,
weight and power constraints • Technology studies of existing commercially available APS
systems