The MK 92 Fire Control system (FCS) & a new, integrated, highly reliable and light-weight U.S. Navy Fire Control system for missile and gun control. This system, which is in production for the FFG, PCG, PGG and PH...
The MK 92 Fire Control system (FCS) & a new, integrated, highly reliable and light-weight U.S. Navy Fire Control system for missile and gun control. This system, which is in production for the FFG, PCG, PGG and PHM Ship Classes, provides the detection and automation required for modern naval warfare. Search radar data & presented at a very high rate at the operator's console, a highly integrated man-machine interface. Utilization of monopulse and “track-while-scan” techniques result in multiple target tracking capability. The system console(s) offer a self-contained command and control capability and, in addition, standard digital computer channels provide the versatile interface with the ship's command and control, integrating the complete engagement process. Error cancellation techniques are employed to obtain high performance accuracy even under severe environmental conditions. The low manning requirement for both operation and maintenance is a key system attribute for all applications. Comprehensive “at-sea” evaluations, performed by the U.S. Navy, demonstrated successful system operation in all modes of surveillance, multi-target tracking and simultaneous missile and gun engagements. The “at-sea” performance record of the FCS MK 92 was cited by the Chief of Naval Operations to have established new standards for Naval Surface Weapons systems.
Progressive worsening of naval ship acquisition circumstances over this decade has overtaken the HI‐MIX/LO‐MIX concept as an effective approach to dealing with warship cost constraints. Management‐based strategies ...
作者：
ECKHART, MUSN (RET.)The Authoris currently Chief Scientist in the Autonetics Marine Systems Division
Rockwell International concentrating in Digital Simulation Applications in System Engineering. A graduate of the U. S. Naval Academy in 1945 he served in various surface assignments until 1950. Subsequent thereto after being designated an Engineering Duty Officer (ED) he had Type Commander Staff Laboratory ESO and Naval Shipyard assignments until 1962 when he became the Miltary Chairman Electrical Science at the U. S. Naval Academy. In 1965 he became the Head Electrical/Electronics Design Branch Bureau of Ships remaining in this assignment until 1967 when he assumed the responsibilities of Director Ship Concept Design Division Naval Ship Engineering Center. Upon retiring from the U. S. Naval Service in 1970 he joined Rockewell International and the following year became the Manager of the Integration Programs Group involved in Model—Based Systems Analysis EM Effectiveness Submarine Control and Ship Data Miltiplexing. His education includes a BS degree from the U. S. Naval Academy a BS degree in Electrical Engineering received from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1949and a MS degree in Electrical Engineering received from The George Washington University in 1967. A former ASNE Council Member
he has been active in ASNE at both the National and Local Section levels since 1967.
The general systemsengineering state—of—the—art has not been equal to the functional diversity of modern multimission warships, nor to the more complex system relationships that are characteristically involved in ...
The general systemsengineering state—of—the—art has not been equal to the functional diversity of modern multimission warships, nor to the more complex system relationships that are characteristically involved in their design. Resultant dependence upon qualitative assessments of higher level relationships in warship definition and design has been and is a critical impediment to the Navy's corporate purposes, both in prosecuting its vital rebuilding campaign and in dealing with the technological pace of naval warfare. A design methodology development, first reported on ASNE Day 74, has provided the basis for removing this impediment. The threshold criterion of systemengineering, quantification, and correlation of total systemdesign objectives, can be satisfied for warship definition and design. Further, the basic elements of an exploitive systemengineering practice have been developed sufficiently to confirm their validity. This work is interpreted in terms of the systemengineering structure that can be expected to emerge; first, because it can be done, and second, because its payoffs are so urgently needed by the Navy.
作者：
CAPTAIN MYRON ECKHART JR. USN (RET)CAPTAIN MYRON ECKHART
JR. USN (RET) is currently on the Technical Staff of Autonautics Division Rockwell International Marine Systems Engineering where he is engaged in digital simulation applications in system engineering. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy in 1945 he served in various surface assignments until 1950. Subsequent thereto after becoming an Engineering Deputy Officer (EDO) he had Type Commander Staff Laboratory ESO and shipyard assignments until 1962 when he became the Military Chairman Electrical Science at the U.S. Naval Academy. In 1965 he became the Head Electrical/Electronics Design Branch NAVSEC/BUSHIPS remaining in this assignment until 1967 when he assumed the responsibilities of Director Ship Concept Design Division NAVSEC. He retired from the U.S. Navy in 1970 and the following year became the Manager of the Integration Programs Group involved in Model-Based System Analysis EM Effectiveness submarine control and 2KSES pay load. His education includes a BS degree from the U.S. Naval Academy a BS degree in Electrical Engineering awarded by MIT in 1949and an MS degree in Electrical Engineering received from George Washington University in 1967. A former Council Member
he has been an active member in ASNE since 1967.
Ship design directions are towards closure of net design objectives in surface warships on direct measures of combatant capabilities. Simulation techniques are employed to model design conditions encompassing the dyna...
Ship design directions are towards closure of net design objectives in surface warships on direct measures of combatant capabilities. Simulation techniques are employed to model design conditions encompassing the dynamics of the ship system including its human action network; of the system environment; and of threat stresses. Capability objectives can then be evaluated in traceable relationships to working level design parameters of the mechanical system (“ship”), hardware, and software, as modified by system-level variables. This paper describes the technical rationale which underlies the initial development of the prerequisite methodology in application to a surface warship taken from the waterline up. This application is dominated by the large class of system dynamics known as EM effects. Hence, the relationship of the general case to the particular area known as EM Effectiveness is considered.
作者：
WILKENLOH, CHARLES E.THE AUTHOR Was born in New York City on the 24th of November 1906. Attended the public schools there
graduating Stuyvesant High School in 1925. Has engineering credits at Columbia University Extension and is at present a student at the American University in Washington D. C. Has worked in the field of electrical engineering most of his life and was at one time the laboratory manager for E. L. Cunningham Inc. and also was assistant to the factory engineer of the Arcturus Co.—both manufacturers and sellers of radio vacuum tubes. Came to the Design Division of the Bureau of Engineering (now Ships) in 1939 and started work on the design and development of ships' exterior signal systems of which the navigational light system is a major part. This work brought him face to face with the “legalistics” involved in applying navigational lights to naval vessel construction. Is now recognized as the Bureau Authority on matters relating to the navigation lights and in this capacity attended the Congressional hearings for Public Law 239 (An act designed by the Judge Advocate General for the purpose of permitting the navy to deviate from the Rules of the Road under certain conditions) as advisor to the head of the Admiralty Section of Judge Advocate General. Also attended the meetings of the American Committee for Revision of the Rules of the Road as Bureau of Ships' representative and advisor to the chairman. Has been concerned with “Lights and Laws” for over ten years.
暂无评论