Systems Engineering Analysis
Littoral Undersea Warfare in 2025
1
Systems Engineering
Design Process
Design &
Analysis
Alternatives
Generation
Modeling &
Analysis
Problem
Definition
Decision
Making
Needs
Analysis
Alternative
Scoring
Objectives
Analysis
Decision
Implementation
Planning for
Action
Execution
Assessment &
Control
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
2
Conclusions
SEA-8 Problem Statement
 SEA-8
.. design a system that denies enemy
undersea forces (submarine and UUV)
effective employment against friendly
forces within the littorals during the
2025 timeframe.
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
3
Conclusions
Problem Definition Phase
 Needs Analysis
 Primitive Need
 Stakeholder
Acknowledgements
 System Decomposition
 Input-Output Modeling
 Functional Analysis
 Requirements Generation
 Effective Need
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Problem
Definition
Needs
Analysis
Objectives
Analysis
Modeling
Analysis
4
Conclusions
ASW Timeline 3/10/30
72hrs
10 Days
30 Days
Seize the
Initiative
Denial
sustained for
follow-on
actions
Begin ASW
Operations
1
2
3
4
Needs Analysis
5
6
7
8
9
Obj Analysis
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
5
Conclusions
Objectives Analysis Phase
 Objectives Analysis




Functional Objectives
Measures of Effectiveness
Measures of Performance
Performance Goals
Problem
Definition
Needs
Analysis
Objectives
Analysis
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
6
Conclusions
Scenario Building
Coastal
Choke Point Passage
Defense of Island Nation
TRANSIT
MAIN LAND
MAIN LAND
MAIN LAND
TRANSIT
TRANSIT
MAIN LAND
TRANSIT
Needs Analysis
ISLAND
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
7
Conclusions
SEA-8 Defined Alternatives
 Littoral Action Group (LAG)
 DD(X), LCS, SSN, MH-60
 Total Ship Systems Engineering (TSSE) –
Sea TENTACLE
 Host ship, UUV, USV, UAV, Stationary Bottom Sensors
 Tripwire
 UUV, Rapidly Deployable Stationary Bottom Sensors
 War of Machines
 UUV, Recharging Stations
 Floating Sensors
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
8
Conclusions
High-level Model
Development
Reliability
discrete event
simulation models
Logistics
analytical
Monthly Mean Sound Speed Profiles fomodels
r 40 00S 146 06E
0
Summer
nteres for 40 00S 146 06E
-10 Monthly Mean Sound Speed WiProfil
0
-40
-50
-50
-60
C4ISR
analytical
models
Obj Analysis
-60
-70
-70
0.8
Probability
0.7
Probability
1
0.6
Tripwire
Probability of Detection
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.3
0.8
0.2
0.7
0.1
0.6
0
0
100
200
300
0.5
400
500
600
700
Db
Time Steps (Hrs)
0.4
0.3
OUTPUT
DATA
0.2
80
0.1
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Time Steps (Hrs)
100
150(46)-
120
140
Monthly Mean Sound Speed Profiles for 40 00S 146 06E
200(61)-
0
Sensors
physics based
models5
10 12 14
10
250(76)-80
6 8
1500 1502 1504 1506 1508 1510 1512 1514 1516 1518
SoundSound
Speed
(m/s + 1500)
Speed (m/s)
-80
1500 1502 1504 1506 1508 1510 1512 1514 1516 1518
Sound SpeedModeling
(m/s)
Alt Generation
Summer
nteres for 40 00S 146 06E
-10 Monthly Mean Sound Speed WiProfil
0
0(0)-
Summer
Winter
-10
-20
50(15)-
-20
-30
Depth
(m) (m)
Depth
War of
Machines
-40
1
0.9
Db
-30
-40
-40
-50
-50
-60
-60
Depth in ft (m)
TSSE
Alternative
Depth in ft (m)
Tripwire
Alternative
Tripwire
Probability of Detection
OVERALL SYSTEM
50(15)PERFORMANCE
-20
-30
High-level
-30
100(30)Entity
Based Model
Depth
(m) (m)
Depth
Alternative
Needs Analysis
Summer
Winter
-10
-20
Alternative
LAG
0(0)-
80
100(30)-
100
150(46)-
120
140
200(61)-
-70
-70
250(76)-80
6 8 10 12 14
5
1500 1502 1504 1506 1508 1510 1512 1514 1516 1518
SoundSound
Speed
(m/s + 1500)
Speed (m/s)
-80
15
1500 1502 1504 1506 1508 1510 1512 1514 1516 1518
Sound Speed (m/s)
10
15
Range in kYds
20
20
25
30
25
30
Range in kYds
Analysis
9
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations




NO PERFECT SYSTEM
Scenario variables were the key factors
Each alternative studied had weaknesses
Differences between alternatives were
significant
“Best” solution might be a tailored mix
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
10
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations
REACTION TIME
 Enemy submarines are vulnerable in restricted
waterways
 Enemy timelines are unpredictable
 Quick reaction systems hedge uncertainty
 Strategic air least sensitive to enemy initiative
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
11
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations
PRESENCE
 Pervasive persistence is the goal
 Traditional methods
 Non-traditional methods
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
12
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations
KILL-CHAIN TIMELINE (KCT)
TRADEOFFS
 Traditional methods require short KCTs
 Non-traditional methods afford longer KCTs
 Standoff weapons systems more easily used if
longer KCT are allowed
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
13
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations
UNDERSEA JOINT ENGAGEMENT ZONE
(UJEZ)
 Cooperative mix of assets unlocks future ASW
force capabilities
 Future ASW forces may require the
establishment of the UJEZ
 Low false positive and low fratricide rates are
required
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
14
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Research
 Follow on study
 Development




Needs Analysis
UUVs
Rapidly deployable sensing grids
Common undersea picture
Autonomous recharge/replenishment systems
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
15
Conclusions
ASW Results, Insights and
Recommendations
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Tactics
 Strategic air
 JSOW like systems to deliver ASW assets
 Doctrine
 Evolution from waterspace management and
PMI to UJEZ
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
16
Conclusions
Systems Engineering Analysis
Littoral Undersea Warfare in 2025
17