27
1.0-
0.8-
0.6-
0.4-
0.2-
   0-
Probability
     6            12           18          24          30          36          42           48         54 
Required Continuous Track Time (minutes)
Sea TENTACLE is sensitive to required track time due to its immobile sensors
Tripwire is also insensitive, but lacks recharge capability
Trapezoid: Needs Analysis
Needs Analysis
Obj Analysis
Alt Generation
Modeling
Analysis
Conclusions
War of Machines is insensitive to required track time due to invasive mobile platforms
Sensitivity to Required Continuous Track
 Time within First 10 Days
LAG shows a high probability of lost track due to the standoff ranges of manned platforms
Littoral Action Group
Sea TENTACLE
Tripwire
War of Machines
Tracking Ability
This graph represents the sensitivity of alternatives to required continuous track time. “Required continuous track” may be defined as the time that we must have unbroken track on the enemy.  This may be necessary to perform enemy engagement or identification.  For the purpose of our study, the required track time is considered to be directly proportional to the length of the kill-chain timeline. The required continuous track times are displayed across the x axis of this graph with probability of achieving the respective continuous track along the y axis.  Sensitivity to continuous track time is shown by the steepness of the line’s slope.  The results of the Littoral Action Group are shown here.  Although this alternative acheives a 70% probability of 6-minute continuous track of any one Red sub within the first 10 days, if the required continuous track time is extended to 54 minutes, the probability of success drops below 30%.  (CLICK)  Here the performance of all four alternatives can be seen. (CLICK) Sea TENTACLE is sensitive to the increased requirement in unbroken track time due to the inability of its bottomed sensors to trail the enemy and because of their limited coverage of the Area of Responsibility.  (CLICK)  Due to the standoff ranges required by manned platforms, the Littoral Action Group has a relatively high-probability of lost track, and therefore is sensitive as well. (CLICK) The War of Machines alternative is insensitive due to its invasive trailing method and recharging capability.  Yet, it must be mentioned that War of Machines possesses a high technological risk in both the coordination required in trailing enemy submarines and the recharging of UUVs in enemy waters. If either of these risks fail to be overcome in 2025 then this alternative’s performance will be inadequate. (CLICK) Tripwire is also insensitive, but displays a decreased performance due to its inability to recharge. (CLICK) CDR Bindi will now brief the results, insights and conclusions associated with this analysis.