UNCLASSIFIED
Climate & Energy Symposium
Johns Hopkins University
Howard Fireman
Deputy Director, Programming Division (N80)
29 March 2011
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
UNCLASSIFIED
Agenda
¾ Potential Capability
Objectives
¾ Strategic Guidance &
Implementation Options
¾ Energy Requirements and
Implementation
¾ Climate Considerations
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
2
UNCLASSIFIED
If your objective is: HIGH SPEED
¾ High Speed Hullforms
¾ Improve Prime Mover
Efficiency
¾ Improve Propulsor
power capacity and
efficiency
¾ Light Weight
Structure
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
3
UNCLASSIFIED
If your objective is: SURVIVABILITY
¾ Don’t get Hit
¾ Retain functionality
after hit
¾ Eliminate Energetics
¾ Improve Structures
¾ Improve damage
control and fire-fighting
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
4
UNCLASSIFIED
If your objective is: MISSION EFFECTIVENESS
¾ Improve performance of
Mission Systems
¾ Improve Quality of Service
of distributed systems.
¾ Time on Station
¾ Improve capacity of
network/unmanned
operations
¾ Improve onboard training
by use of simulation vice
underway activities
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
5
UNCLASSIFIED
If your objective is: LCC REDUCTION
¾ Reduce Manning
¾ Reduce Fuel Costs
¾ Eliminate unnecessary
redundancy
¾ Condition Based
Maintenance
¾ Onboard training
simulators vice time U/W
¾ Improve reliability of least
reliable equipment.
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
6
UNCLASSIFIED
Agenda
¾ Potential Design Objectives
¾ Strategic Guidance &
Implementation Options
¾ Energy Requirements and
Implementation
¾ Ship Design Challenges
¾ Climate Considerations
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
7
UNCLASSIFIED
SECNAVINST 5000.2D
NAVAL REQUIREMENTS
ACQUISITION
PASS 2
PASS 1
OSD/JOINT
LEVEL
MS A
JROC
NAVY / USMC
LEVEL
CBA
CBA
Forum*:
Lead Org*:
Chair/Co-chairs*:
PEO/SYSCOM/
OPNAV/HQMC
LEVEL
#
JROC
MS B
Annual
CSB
1
2
ICD
ICD
Approval
Approval
Alternative
Alternative
Selection
Selection
CDD
CDD and
and
CONOPS
CONOPS
Approval
Approval
R3B
OPNAV
N8
R3B
OPNAV
CNO/ASN(RDA)
R3B
OPNAV / CFFC
CNO
AOA
3
CONOPS
CDD
Phase I
SDS
5
4
RFP
RFP
Approval
Approval
SDS
SDS
Approval
Approval
R3B
ASN(RDA)
ASN(RDA)
Phase II
SDS
R3B
ASN(RDA)
ASN(RDA)
SSAC
SDD
6
Contract
Contract
Award
Award
Briefing
ASN(RDA)
RFP
IBR
Gate Review
Concept Design & Feasibility Studies
Preliminary &
Contract
Design
UNCLASSIFIED
Detail Design &
Construction
(DD & C)
3/29/2011 8:43
8
UNCLASSIFIED
SECNAVINST 5000.2D – PASS 1:
JROC
Approved
ICD + AOA Plan
Requirements,
Preferred
Solution,
Risks, and
Tech Dev Strategy
Known
CD
Capability Based Assessment*
CONOPS Dev
ICD(s) Dev
CDD Dev
AOA
1
Pre-AOA Process
Methods / Activities
Concept Formulation Program /
Design Space Exploration **
Trade-Studies
2
3
Navy
Navy
Selected
Approved Alternative &
ICD &
Approval of
AOA Plan Risk Mitigation
Risk
Identification
Response Surface Dev
Business
Case Analysis
Approved
CDD,
CONOPS &
SDS Plan
CONCEPT
REFINEMENT
Risk Management &
Mitigation
Set Based Design
SDS Plan Dev
Tech. Dev. Strategy Dev
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
9
UNCLASSIFIED
Agenda
¾ Potential Design Objectives
¾ Strategic Guidance &
Implementation Options
¾ Energy Requirements and
Implementation
¾ Ship Design Challenges
¾ Climate Considerations
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
10
UNCLASSIFIED
8
J
B
34
8
J
B
35
8
J
B
36
8
J
B
37
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8 16 16 16 8
8
8
8
8
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
CLF
CLF
CLF
CLF
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B B
B B
B B B
B B
B B
B
B B
38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Unrep ATF CombatTransit
MEF ATF Assault 16 hrs
Slow ast Op Area/West Op Ar
B
B
B
B
C
6
18 18 18
2
e
a
c
c
c
3
1
C
2
e
7
C
2
e
C
2
e
C
2
e
5
C
2
e
C
2
d
Sea Base Operations
Location
Readiness
SOA Speed kts
Operation
Threat
Ocean/East Op Area
B
B
B
B
21 21 21 21
c
c
c
c
Max GTMs
APMs
Min SSDGs
Fly Day hrs/day
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
Aircraft J/R/M
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Replenishment
B
62
B
63
CLF
B
B
65 66
B
64
Mission
MEB Assault
East Op Area/Port
Location
Readiness
C
C
C
SOA Speed kts 2
2
2
e
e
e
Operation
Threat
4
C
2
C
2
B
67
B
68
CLF
C
C
70 71
C
69
Sea Base Operations
East Op Area
C
C
C
2
2
2
C
2
C
2
C
72
C
73
CLF
C
C
75 76
C
74
Load/Reconstitute/In Port/Anchor
SPOD
D
D
D
D
D
0
0
0
0
0
C
77
MEB Extraction/Reconstitution
MEB ATF Transit
West Op/East Op
B
B B
21 21 21
c
c
c
C
2
e
C
2
d
B
2
f
B
2
f
B
2
b
B
2
b
B
2
b
B
21
c
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
3
8
2
1
3
8
2
1
3
8
2
1
3
8
2
1
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
C
78
CLF
C
B
80 81
C
79
ESG Transit
Ocean
B
B
B B
18 18 18 18
D
0
B
82
D
0
B
83
D
0
CLF
B
B
85 86
B
84
B
87
In Port/Anchor
Forward Base
D D D D
0
0
0
0
B
88
D
0
B
89
D
0
C
2
e
2
1
4
16
J
C
90
D
0
B
18
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
f
f
f
f
f
a
a
a
a
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
a
APMs
Min SSDGs
Fly Day hrs/day
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
2
1
4
16
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
2
0
3
8
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
2
0
3
8
Aircraft J/R/M
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Max GTMs
x
Vk
=
+
Energy
Vk
Ships Service Load
6
J
Overarching Design Ref Mission
Amphibious Warfare
Propulsion Energy
(Ship Type Energy versus
Speed)
OPERATIONAL PROFILE
Ship Service
Energy Load
Propulsion Energy
Probability Distribution Function
(Ship Type Energy versus
Frequency at Mission)
(Ship Type Vk versus Frequency at Mission)
(Ship Type Energy versus
Frequency at Mission)
Medium SC
=
PHASE HOU RL Y SPEED ESTIMATES
Small SC
Ship Total Energy
Load
SERVICE LIFE
Probability Distribution Function
(Ship Type Life versus Frequency)
(Ship Type Total Energy versus
Frequency at Mission)
0
18
36
54
72
speed
90
TIM E (D AYS)
108
126
144
Mission Profile
& Operating Tempo
162
180
Frequency
B
61
Day
West Operation Area
C
C
C
2
2
2
e
d
d
Frequency
8
J
D
33
ATF Hi Speed Transit
Frequency
0
P
Mission
Frequency
0
#REF! D
31 32
Day
Energy
Fly Day hrs/day
Aircraft J/R/M
Replenishment
Energy Requirements
Energy
Total Life Cycle Energy Requirement
Amphibious Warfare Ship
Medium Surface Combatant
Small Surface Combatant
(Probability Distribution Function)
Plant Architecting
Define Local Optima
Performance Assessment Modeling
Cost Modeling
Effectiveness Assessment
Nuclear Primary Plant Sizing
Plant Architectures Driven by Lifecycle Ship Mission Profiles
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
11
UNCLASSIFIED
Agenda
¾ Potential Design Objectives
¾ Strategic Guidance &
Implementation Options
¾ Energy Requirements and
Implementation
¾ Ship Design Challenges
¾ Climate Considerations
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
12
Approach: Energy System Sufficiency
vs Energy Requirements
UNCLASSIFIED
State A
Speed
Maneuvering
RCS Sig
IR Sig
Acoustic Sig
Radar Sys
EW Sys
Weapon Sys
CM Sys
0%
Levels
50% 100%
State B
0%
Levels
50% 100%
Speed
Maneuvering
RCS Sig
IR Sig
Acoustic Sig
Radar Sys
EW Sys
Weapon Sys
CM Sys
State C
0%
Levels
50% 100%
Speed
Maneuvering
RCS Sig
IR Sig
Acoustic Sig
Radar Sys
EW Sys
Weapon Sys
CM Sys
State Transitions:
Time, Power, Systems
State Transitions:
Time, Power, Systems
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
13
Sizing Power Generation:
Impact of Sea-State
UNCLASSIFIED
¾ Involuntary
speed
reduction
¾ Voluntary
speed
reduction
• Slamming
• Deck wetness
Involuntary Speed
Reduction
SS 1-3 SS 4
From PNA
SS 5
SS 6
SS 7
Probability of Sea State - Open Ocean North Atlantic
100
90
80
Expect to
Operate
Through
SS 7
70
Percent Time
• Depends on
Direction of
seas and wind
Voluntary Speed
Reduction
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
SEA STATE
Percentage Probability of Sea State
6
7
8
Data From PNA
From PNA
Cumulative Probability of up to this Sea State
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
14
UNCLASSIFIED
Agenda
¾ Potential Design Objectives
¾ Strategic Guidance &
Implementation Options
¾ Energy Requirements and
Implementation
¾ Ship Design Challenges
¾ Climate Considerations
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
15
UNCLASSIFIED
Presidential
Directive
Task Force
Climate
Change
Navy Arctic Efforts
¾ Jan 09 - NSPD 66 / HSPD 25 – Established Arctic Policy
for US
¾ Directed DoD to develop greater capabilities in the Arctic
¾ May 09 - TFCC Established by CNO
¾ Initial Tasking – develop roadmap for Navy Arctic needs
Navy Arctic
Roadmap
FY11-12 Actions include:
US Arctic
CBA
“Initiation of Capabilities Based Assessments
regarding required Navy Arctic capabilities”
“Formalizing new cooperative relationships that
increase Navy experience and competency … in
the Arctic”
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
16
UNCLASSIFIED
Arctic Capabilities Roadmap
U.S. Strategic What does the U.S. want to do in the Arctic? Objectives
Navy Core Described in CS21 and Naval Operations Concept Capabilities
What is Navy’s desired end-­‐state for the Arctic?
Navy Strategic Objectives
Missions
Scenarios
Tasks
Capabilities
Gaps
How do we go about achieving that end-­‐state?
What might happen in the Arctic?
Tactical Objectives
CONOPS
How would Navy respond?
Current Capabilities
Doctrinal What are Approaches
the tactical Tasks
details?
Metrics & How successful does Navy need to be?
Where does Navy need to be better?
Standards
Gaps
What changes would make Navy better?
Solutions
DOTMLPF Solutions
How much better would Navy be and at what cost?
UNCLASSIFIED
Utility of Solutions
3/29/2011 8:43
17
UNCLASSIFIED
Capability vs. Cost Analysis
Generates
Individual Ship
Concept
Performance
Factors
Concepts That Meet Desired
Capabilities Constrained by Cost
0.7500
Provides Objectives and Thresholds
for CDD
0.7000
Inputs
Capability
Model
0.6500
0.6000
Capability/Performance Roll-Up
0.5500
Capability Vector
Analytical Hierarchy
Process
• Pair-wise Comparisons
• Prioritize Performance Factors
• Capability Vector
0.5000
0.4500
0.4000
0.3500
Cost
Model
Generates
0.3000
0.2500
400.00
600.00
800.00
1000.00
1200.00
1400.00
1600.00
ROM Cost (m illions FY09$)
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
18
UNCLASSIFIED
Questions
UNCLASSIFIED
3/29/2011 8:43
19