1 / 15

Submarine Warfare Torpedo Launch System Analysis

Explore criteria for launching torpedoes in submarine warfare, focusing on ownship readiness and firing task requirements. Evaluate interface for user-friendly decision-making and data processing. Hypothesize on display designs for optimal user-computer performance.

dyerp
Download Presentation

Submarine Warfare Torpedo Launch System Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Requirements Analysis Domain: Submarine Warfare Goal: Launch Torpedoes • OwnshipReadinessTask – Criteria that must be met concerning your ownship. 11. FiringTask – Criteria that must be met concerning the situational relationship between ownship and target. Aft the beam? In the baffles?

  2. Empirical Test Criteria I. Ownship Readiness Task: • Speed<=9.5 KTS • Dive Angle < 3 Degrees • Turn Rate<= 1 Degree per minute II. Firing Task: • Ownship AFT the beam (We are sneaking up from behind) • Ownship in baffles (Cone defined as 15 degrees either side of a line extending longitudinally through the target back along its direction of travel) • Distance <40NM • Torpedo envelopes cover 50% of 90% escape envelope

  3. Escape Envelope 90% Enable Point T Torpedo Envelope O – ownship T - target

  4. 1. AFT the Beam 2. In Baffles 3. Distance < 40NM 4. Torp. Envelopes >50% Ownship- in the baffles T 15° O 15 ° O- ownship T- Target

  5. Additional Requirements • Make accurate decisions • Make fast decisions • Keep one’s attention focused on critical information. • User acceptance of the interface (i.e. user friendliness, likeability).

  6. Conceptual Hypothesis: Displays that promote cognitive flexibility will enhance user-computer performance. Operational Hypothesis: Multiple coding ofdata will result in better user-computer performance than when data is only in one form.

  7. Conceptual Hypothesis: By limiting data-driven tasks, user-computer performance will be enhanced. Operational Hypothesis: Using statusindicators to limit data-driven tasks will result in better user-computer performance than when status indicators are not used to limit data-driven tasks.

  8. Conceptual Hypothesis: If information load is minimized in order to allow human processing to comfortably absorb all displayed data, user-computer performance will be enhanced. Operational Hypothesis: Displays that include only that information needed by theoperator at a given time will result in better user-computer performance than displays that include additional information. Operational Hypothesis: An interface with judicious redundancy will result in better user-computer performance than an interface with unnecessary redundancy.

More Related