•Kill-Chain Timeline (KCT) tradeoffs exist between
traditional and non-traditional ASW methods. |
|
•Traditional manned trailing assets require short KCTs
because of the need for manned systems to operate from a safe trailing
distance to prevent counter detection and counter targeting. While maintaining safe standoff, a quieter
future enemy will further complicate the problem for manned platforms. Traditional ASW forces, using traditional
ASW methods, have to make rapid choices concerning whether or not to shoot or
else risk losing contact with a perspective target. By comparison, invasive non-traditional
unmanned trailing systems that are capable of tracking at a closer range,
decreased their probability of lost track and allowed for the use of longer
KCT capable weapons systems. |
|
•Short KCTs relied upon rapid ROE decisions and required
the engaging asset to either be the detecting asset or be within close
proximity when detection occured.
Non-traditional tracking and trailing methods allowed for a longer KCT
and expand the engagement envelope to include standoff weapons. |
|
•(click) |
|