40
•Empirical and simulation results for RCS are similiar.
•
•POFACETS results facilitated material considerations.
•
•RCS Comparisons are comparable between 2004 and 2005 TSSE designs.
•
•RCS Analysis (unclassified) and does not take into account AMRFS RF emissions.
RCS Conclusions
Text Box: ACCESS - 2004
ACCESS - 2004
Text Box: TENTACLE - 2005
TENTACLE - 2005
Our two methods of choice agreed on the RCS results, and helped us be confident on certain design tradeoffs.

Composite material represented the best choice for building the Sea Tentacle since it gave the best RCS results.
However, due to cost and structural constraints, the TSSE team decided to design a ship out of steel and composite material.

RCS Comparisons between 2004 and 2005 TSSE designs, show that TENTACLE RCS at 2000 long tons more displacement still renders a comparable RCS with that of ACCESS.

RCS analysis was done at the unclassified level and does not take into account the Amurfs RF emissions.