Area Denial Munition Authorization Under Communication Latency
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing area denial systems face communication latency issues due to the remote location of command and control units, leading to delayed authorization of munitions, which can result in reduced effectiveness and unnecessary waste of munitions, especially in deeply deployed systems.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of a communication latency compensation method in area denial systems, which includes networked munitions, sensor devices, and gateway devices, allows for predictive targeting and authorization filtering to ensure timely and accurate engagement of targets, even at long ranges, using processor-executable program instructions and authorization filters.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If the command and control unit is located remotely to allow deep operating ranges, then the safety and operational flexibility are improved, but communication latency increases causing delayed authorization
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary actions by predicting target future positions before authorization is needed. The gateway device calculates predicted position areas based on current target position and velocity, then pre-determines which munitions would be effective against the predicted position. This allows the system to compensate for communication latency by having authorization decisions ready in advance.
Solution Approach 2:
The gateway device acts as an intermediary between the remote command and control unit and the munitions. It receives target sensor data, performs local processing to determine predicted position areas and effective munitions, and autonomously authorizes munitions based on pre-determined criteria. This intermediary function eliminates the need for real-time remote authorization while maintaining system safety.
2Adaptability or versatility
If human in the loop operation is maintained for landmine policy compliance, then ethical requirements are met, but system efficiency and response time are reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The gateway device performs preliminary authorization determinations by autonomously identifying effective munitions based on predicted target positions. This preliminary action filters out ineffective munitions before human review, so that when the human operator provides final authorization, the decision is made more efficiently with pre-processed information.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements partial automation where the gateway device handles the complex computational task of determining effective munitions based on predicted positions, while the human operator provides the final authorization decision. This partial automation approach maintains policy compliance through human oversight while improving efficiency by automating the computationally intensive prediction and filtering processes.
3Device complexity
If traditional targeting methods are used without latency compensation, then system simplicity is maintained, but munition waste increases due to outdated target position data
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary calculations to predict where the target will be when authorization and firing occur, rather than using the current target position. The gateway device computes predicted position areas based on target velocity and direction, then identifies munitions that would be effective against the predicted position. This preliminary prediction prevents munition waste by ensuring authorized munitions will actually hit the target.
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes the parameter used for targeting from current target position to predicted future position. By incorporating target velocity and time-to-contact into the positioning calculation, the system adjusts the targeting parameter to account for communication latency, ensuring that munitions are authorized based on where the target will be rather than where it is now.
Data Source
AI summary
An area denial system may be operationally placed with communication latency compensation. The area denial system may include a plurality of munitions, one or more sensor devices, and a command and control unit, networked together and having a command and control latency for communication between the command and control unit and the remainder of the area denial system. Latency compensation may include determining a first target position, determining a first predicted position area for the target using the command and control latency and the first target position, receiving an authorization to arm one or more of the munitions, determining a second target position, and determining that the second target position is outside a threshold distance from a first authorized munition of the one or more authorized munitions, and in response, de-authorizing the first authorized munition.