IV. A TAXONOMY FOR LASERS IN SPACE
This section develops a taxonomy for space-based laser systems that
is connected with the warfighter’s terminology. A number of recently
conducted strategic studies, which highlighted various laser
applications, are summarized so that the relevant space-based laser
concepts can be organized with the taxonomy.
Subsequent sections will explore the concepts in more depth, and
provide relative scores for each concept based on its technical
merit and operational value. The technical assessment considers both
feasibility and maturity. The operational appraisal considers the
operational enhancement and the cost, which includes funding,
operations and maintenance support, and personnel. The most feasible
near-term concepts will be developed further in order to accelerate
the process of putting the technology into the hands of the
operational commands. This process uses a variety of paths, such as
Advanced Technology Demonstrations, Advanced Concept Technology
Demonstrations, the new Battlelabs which are chartered to provide
operational MAJCOMs with innovative ideas, and other informal
avenues.
A Taxonomy of Concepts
A functional taxonomy is more useful for technologists who map
various laser concepts onto operational applications than other
possible taxonomies that are based on laser parameters. Letting
‘form fit function’ gives technologists the greatest flexibility in
finding a variety of lasers to implement the concepts, and it also
keeps the operators from getting bogged down in technical details.
Space-based laser concepts will be grouped into four classes:
enabling systems, information-gathering systems,
information-relaying systems, and energy-delivery systems. The
discussion below elaborates on each class, and numerous examples of
concepts within each class will be discussed in subsequent sections.
Enabling Systems.
The effectiveness of some current weapon systems
can be enhanced substantially by specific applications of lasers,
thus suggesting the term “enabling systems” for this class of
concepts. A further breakdown of this area could include three
sub-classes of systems, including those that: provide an optical
signal for guidance of other systems, provide illumination for other
optical sensing systems, and provide information that would normally
be provided by non-laser systems. Laser target designators are an
example of the first sub-class that uses laser radiation to enhance
the accuracy of conventional munitions. An example of the second
sub-class would be the illumination of a target area with laser
radiation from a carbon dioxide (CO2) laser for improved imaging
with forward looking infrared (FLIR) systems.
Laser altimeters and
laser velocimeters fall into the third sub-class. However, lasers
that are used solely as internal components in a system and do not
emit the laser beam outside of the unit, such as ring laser
gyroscopes for inertial reference units, will not be included in
this study, although they offer substantial improvement in
capability. The enhancement of the laser systems that fall into the
“enabling” class reflects the incremental improvement that is
provided to weapon systems.
Information-Gathering Systems.
Optical sensing systems gather
information through the collection of optical energy. This energy
may be emitted by the source, as in the case of an aircraft engine’s
infrared emission, or may be scattered off or reflected from the
source, as occurs when a photograph is taken of a target site for
battle damage assessment (BDA) after it is attacked. Currently, such
optical systems are passive systems that do not emit any radiation
in order to make their measurements. Examples include reconnaissance
satellites, infrared missile tracking sensors, and weather
satellites. In many cases, active illumination with a laser source
can improve the information gathered or provide new information that
could not be obtained without the laser radiation.
The class of
“information gathering systems” can be further broken into two
sub-classes: those that use active illumination to image the target
with optical systems on the same platform, and those that use the
laser as a probe to gather ‘non-image’ information. The first
sub-class is exemplified by the AF’s Starfire Optical Range at
Kirtland AFB in New Mexico in which a laser beam illuminates space
objects and uses the scattered radiation collected at the same site
to form an image.36 An example of this second sub-class is remote
sensing using differential absorption laser radar (DIAL) technology
to measure effluents from targets that were just bombed or that is
engaged in manufacturing questionable substances.
Information-Relaying Systems.
Communication and data-relay systems
abound in the space environment, including both military and
commercial satellites that relay data, voice, television, and other
information across the globe. All of the current systems use
microwave frequency transmissions that propagate fairly well through
the atmosphere, although both clouds and the ionosphere can
interfere with these frequencies. Two attributes of microwave
frequencies are important when compared with optical frequencies.
First, the amount of information that can potentially be carried on
a given frequency (called the carrier) depends on that frequency, so
that the higher the carrier frequency, the more information that can
be potentially transmitted. Of course, suitable modulation schemes
need developing to take advantage of this information bandwidth.
Thus, laser communication systems have inherently far greater
information capacity than microwave systems. The second attribute is
the spreading of the beam. As discussed more fully in Appendix A,
the physical phenomenon of diffraction causes all EM radiation to
spread out whose spreading is inversely proportional to the
frequency.37 Thus, for a given beam diameter or antenna size, a
microwave beam will spread out much faster than a laser beam, due to
the factor of 104 to 105 increase in frequency. Thus, laser
communication systems can more efficiently put the signal on the
receiver and require less output energy.
In order to transmit information, the space-based laser concepts in
the information-relaying class must include some method of
temporally varying (or modulating) some output characteristic of the
beam. Pulsing the output power exploits the well-developed digital
communication technology which uses semiconductor lasers to send
information through fiber optic networks. However, other modulation
schemes that vary the polarization, phase, and wavelength all offer
unique advantages.
Energy-Delivery Systems.
There are some cases in which the only
requirement is delivering energy to the target using either a CW or
pulsed laser beam. High-energy laser weapons destroy or degrade the
target by causing structural damage or blinding sensors. Power
beaming recharges a satellite’s batteries or delivers energy to a
remote location on the earth. Using high-energy pulses, a laser
system could also generate thrust on a distant spacecraft by blowing
off an ablative material on the base of a spacecraft, which provides
an alternative to chemical rockets for spacecraft propulsion.
Figure 1 summarizes this taxonomy and further refines these four
functional categories into possible sub-classes. Some representative
concepts are provided for the purposes of illustrating the taxonomy.
Figure 1. A Functional Taxonomy for Lasers in Space
Mapping Space-Based Lasers onto Operational Taxonomy
One of the most important goals of this study is to show how
space-based laser systems can enhance the ability to accomplish
various military missions. As we consider specific concepts, it is
useful to discuss how these systems relate to the taxonomy used by
the Air Force.
The Air Force recently identified six core competencies as it moves
beyond the Global Reach-Global Power concept to the new strategic
vision of Global Engagement. A “core competency” is the “combination
of professional knowledge, specific air power expertise, and
technological capabilities that produce superior military
outcomes.”38 The core competencies provide one means for expressing
the Air Force’s “unique form of military power” and “understanding
how the various aspects fit together.”39
The six core competencies
are:
The first core competency integrates air and space in order to
control the entire expanse from ground to outer space, and thus give
“freedom from attack and freedom to attack.”40 The ability to
designate targets from space platforms, provide high capacity
information channels to operators in theater, and, in the long term,
directly negate targets on or near the surface of the earth means
that space-based lasers have the potential to support this core
competency. Other concepts, such as space-based lasers for BDA, that
also support achieving air and space superiority will be discussed
later.
The concept of global attack involves the ability to rapidly deploy
expeditionary forces to a theater of operations where the United
States may not have existing bases. Space-based laser systems can
improve the knowledge of the theater by directly measuring winds and
improve low-light navigation by battlefield illumination with
infrared laser radiation, to highlight just two possible roles. Not
only does the pervasiveness of space systems translate into global
coverage, but the high speed of orbiting systems could be exploited
to put laser systems over the area of operations very rapidly, both
for weapons and support applications.
Rapid global mobility is essential for all military operations as
the United States retains a growing portion of its forces within the
US. Missions such as peacekeeping and humanitarian support will
likely increase, given that combat operations could always occur.
Space-based laser communication systems can provide secure, high
capacity connection with command and control facilities in CONUS,
while battlefield illumination from space can aid the initial
insertion of forces into an undeveloped region, as discussed later
in this study.
The ability to achieve precision engagement as a proven core
competency has relied largely on laser systems to designate targets
from the air or ground. Advances in space systems coupled with
improvements in laser technology will give the capability of
designating targets, including mobile ones, from space. It is
conceivable that laser-guided weapons could be launched from beyond
visual range of the target and guided to targets using space-based
laser designators in real time. This improved stand-off capability
reduces the risk to US forces and increases the vulnerability of the
adversary. As a support system, the high capacity laser
communication system could relay massive amounts of information to
the next generation combat aircraft (which may be uninhabited) to
give the pilot or the aircraft the very latest information on the
target, the weather, and military threats.
Military operations demand secure, relevant, and timely information.
For this reason, information superiority on the battlefield is one
of the first objectives. Laser communication systems have the
potential of being more jam-resistant given the narrow beam and the
optical frequencies. The narrow beam also makes these systems less
likely to be intercepted by the adversary. A number of other
concepts using space-based laser systems could improve offensive and
defensive information warfare activities.
Finally, the core competency of agile combat support makes forces
more responsive while leaving a smaller “support footprint” in
theater. The support includes logistics, airbase security, civil
engineering, and other administrative and medical functions. This
core competency probably has the least direct connection to
space-based laser systems than the others, but there is a role
nonetheless.
In addition to the potential for high-capacity
communication systems that use space-based lasers, one possible
concept is to use space-based laser illumination aimed at corner
cube reflectors mounted on terrestrial vehicles as an
“identification-friend-or-foe” (IFF) system to reduce the risk of
fratricide and improve the detection of infiltrators into the
airbase area. By vibrating the corner cubes in a coded pattern that
can be varied daily, this IFF system could be made more secure.
To summarize, the four functional classes of laser systems connect
to the six core competencies, as shown in Figure 2. The
information-relaying systems apply to all the core competencies
given the increasingly central role of information in military
operations. Enabling systems may have the next widest applicability,
while space-based target designation will affect the first, second,
and fourth core competencies, and battlefield illumination will aid
the third and sixth core competencies, as discussed above.
Information-gathering and energy-delivery systems appear, at first
cut, to be somewhat more narrowly applicable, but these systems are
likely to provide unique capabilities such as improved weather
monitoring, remote BDA, and negation of counterforce targets.
Clearly, lasers in space are relevant to achieving the AF mission.
Figure 2. Mapping Laser Taxonomy to AF Core Competencies
In the current doctrine of the Air Force, the four roles are
aerospace control, force application, force enhancement, and force
support.41 Aerospace control encompasses those operations that are
intended to “control the combat environment”, while force
application roles “apply combat power”, force enhancement roles
“multiply combat effectiveness” and force support activities
“sustain forces”.42
In each role, there are various
missions, many of which relate to space operations. There is no
unique approach to map the missions to the roles. For example, a
bombing mission that destroys an enemy air defense site falls into
both “force application” and “aerospace control” roles. Table 2
lists the roles, possible space missions, and the relevant core
competencies. Further, the Space Handbook gives a detailed
discussion of many of these space missions as related to these
roles.43
Table 2. Roles and Missions for Space Power
ROLES |
POSSIBLE SPACE-RELATED MISSIONS |
RELEVANT CORE COMPETENCIES |
Aerospace Control
Space Control) |
Counterspace
Space Surveillance |
Air
and Space Superiority
Information Superiority |
Force Application |
Strategic Attack
Interdiction |
Global Attack
Precision Engagement
Information Superiority |
Force Enhancement |
Surveillance and Reconnaissance
Meteorological Satellite Systems
Communications Satellites
Navigation Systems
Environmental Remote Sensing |
Rapid Global Mobility |
Force Support
(Space Support) |
Launch Support (Spacelift)
On-Orbit Support |
Agile Combat Support |
|
As the various concepts for lasers in space are developed later in
this report, they will be connected back to these roles and missions
to help those who advocate space-based laser systems from either the
technological or operational perspective. For example, active
imaging of space objects from space platforms aids space control
through the space surveillance mission. Laser propulsion systems
could aid the spacelift mission in transferring payloads from LEO to
GEO.
It is clear that laser communication systems and space-based
laser weapons aid the force enhancement and force application roles,
respectively. The reason for putting the technical concepts into the
proper roles and missions is to bridge the gap between the
technological and operational worlds.
The taxonomy developed here for space-based laser systems emphasizes
the functional aspects of these systems, which helps relate the
concepts to operational roles and missions as well as compare the
concepts to existing systems and other non-laser alternatives. This
taxonomy will be used in the following sections to discuss specific
concepts for lasers in space.
Back
to Contents
V. PAST STRATEGIC PLANNING STUDIES
In recent years, a number of long range studies conducted by the Air
Force are directly relevant to the use of lasers in space. The
reason for looking ahead is that laser technology is maturing and
access to space is increasingly easy. At the same time, the end of
the Cold War provides the opportunity for the senior leadership of
the Air Force to search for the proper vision and strategy for the
21st century. In this section, various concepts for “lasers in
space” are extracted from the more relevant strategic studies. It
should be noted that some concepts that are being studied by NASA
and the commercial sector are included in a final compilation of the
concepts.
There undoubtedly are other planning documents, such as Mission Area
Plans at AF Space Command, that contain concepts for using lasers in
space. These strategic studies describe a reasonable number of
concepts of space-based laser systems that fit in the four classes
described earlier, and identify several high-payoff concepts with
near-term technology demonstrations. The apparent consensus in these
strategic studies is that the major concepts are known, but it is
likely that some specific applications have been missed.
Laser Mission Study
Beginning at the end of 1991 and ending in October, 1992, a
comprehensive study of laser applications to military missions,
called the Laser Mission Study (LMS), was conducted at the direction
of Major General Robert R. Rankine and under the leadership of
Lieutenant General Bruce K. Brown (USAF, then retired). The basic
objective of the study was to “find applications that the operators
could support.”44 A number of laser application studies were
conducted in the past, but this more comprehensive study considered
a wider variety of missions.
There have been numerous technological
advances, including the maturing of semiconductor lasers, the
development of adaptive optics, and the integration of various
technologies necessary for laser-based remote sensing. The Laser
Mission Study objectives were:
-
Unite users and technology developers in search for militarily
useful laser applications, some as yet undiscovered, by (1) exposing
users to laser technology and technologists to user missions and (2)
identifying technology shortfalls or mission capability
enhancements, considering the potential of laser technology
-
Gain user understanding of, and support for, laser technology
development
-
Present game plan (methodology) for early injection of study results
into S&T investment process45
More than 100 people from all four military services as well as
other government agencies participated, including a specific “space
panel” comprised of over 14 members from AF Space Command, Phillips
Laboratory, program offices and support contractors. Of the 94
applications identified in the overall study, 22 made the final cut
as concepts of high value to the operational community. Seven of
these relate directly to space:
-
Illuminator/Imager for Space Surveillance
-
Ground-Based Laser ASAT Weapon
-
Laser Satellite Communications/Mission Data Relay
-
Weather Monitoring and Characterization
-
Remote Earth Sensing and Characterization
-
Space Debris Cataloging
-
Space Track Accuracy Improvement46
Each of these seven concepts is discussed in some detail in the LMS,
including a technical description, an operational concept, key
enabling technologies, and technical challenges. These discussions
are particularly useful for evaluating the concepts in terms of
technical feasibility and operational enhancement. The LMS also
includes a brief analysis of space-based active sensing for weather
monitoring and remote sensing.
Additional concepts were identified by the space panel as “worth
keeping in the database” and are included in the final compilation
at the end of this section. However, the Laser Mission Study did not
elaborate on these concepts because either the mission was of low
interest to the operational users or the technology was not
sufficiently mature. But most of the titles of the concepts are
sufficiently descriptive to permit a first-order discussion.
New World Vistas
During the summer of 1995, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board
(SAB) was tasked by the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of
Staff to “identify those technologies that will guarantee the air
and space superiority of the United States in the 21st century.”47
The SAB undertook an intensive study that resulted in a 15 volume
report called New World Vistas (NWV) that covers a wide range of
technologies, including a host of concepts for lasers in space. (The
NWV report consists of 14 unclassified volumes and one classified
volume, including an ancillary volume of interviews and speeches
related to NWV. All of the information discussed in this report
related to NWV came from the unclassified volumes.)
The SAB study
team was composed of many leaders in the R&D area who collected
information from AF laboratories, Department of Energy laboratories,
operational AF organizations, and industry. While some of the ideas
contained in NWV are evolutionary, some have revolutionary
implications, there is a blend of technical and operational
perspectives. And NWV is broader than the LMS given the greater
breadth of the charter and the diversity of its participants.
Throughout the NWV report, lasers in space appear as concepts that
will be of great value to the Air Force in the 21st century. The
table at the end of this section consolidates these concepts. The
NWV report discusses a number of weapons and non-weapons concepts
for lasers in space, although the technical depth of the discussion
varies from brief comments to extensive descriptions of systems. Not
surprisingly, there is considerable overlap in the concepts between
the LMS and NWV. Nevertheless, these two studies represent the best
technical assessment of the strategic studies that include
space-based laser concepts.
The Air Force scientific and technical community has taken the
recommendations of the SAB as stated in the New World Vistas quite
seriously. The senior leadership not only has redirected budgetary
resources, but also is reorganizing the R&D laboratories into one AF
research laboratory that will not report through the Product Centers
as the four current laboratories do.48 Anyone interested in
understanding where the AF will be heading in the early 21st century
is well advised to consider the NWV report in great detail. The
weapon systems of tomorrow’s air and space forces will emerge from
the technologies that are examined in NWV.
Spacecast 2020
One strength of in-residence officer professional military education
(PME) is giving a select group of officers the opportunity to focus
their intellect and expertise on academic topics of interest to the
Air Force, and to do so without the normal daily distractions. Thus,
the Chief of Staff has used Air University (AU) on two recent
occasions to study the effects of emerging technology on the future
operational capabilities of the AF. The participants were primarily
the students of Air War College (AWC) and Air Command and Staff
College (ACSC), with oversight and contributions from the faculty.
These studies typically have greater operational depth and less
technical strength as compared to NWV and LMS. Though not intended
as criticism, this distinction serves as a highly useful balance to
the other reports. Since many AWC and ACSC students have operational
experience, including combat in various recent engagements, they
focus on what really works and what will be useful.
The first study, Spacecast 2020, resulted from a tasking from the AF
Chief of Staff to “identify capabilities for the period of 2020 and
beyond and the technologies to enable them”49 that equate with US
space superiority. The study uses an “alternate futures” approach to
help the participants develop new concepts. Those concepts scored by
an operational analysis and the highest scoring concepts were
developed in a series of white papers. Scattered throughout the
report are various concepts that involve lasers in space.
While
there is some overlap with the LMS and NWV concepts, the
participants were less constrained by preconceived notions of
technology and hence identified some concepts that stretch the
limits of technology. For example, Spacecast 2020 includes
holographic projection from space, planetary defense weapons, and
weather modification systems that would involve lasers in space in
ways or at power levels that stagger the imagination. The table at
the end of the section consolidates more important concepts for
space-based lasers from Spacecast 2020.
Air Force 2025
The second AU contribution to strategic studies is the recently
completed Air Force 2025 study, which was directed by the AF Chief
of Staff. The study was designed to be the capstone of a series of
long-range studies that had been directed by the CSAF, including NWV
and Spacecast 2020. The objective of AF2025 was to address the
question: “What capabilities should the USAF have in 2025 to help
defend the nation?”50 The study examined both technical ideas and
operational concepts, soliciting worldwide input through the World
Wide Web. The final product consists of 3,300 pages in ten volumes
with 40 white papers that address a wide range of topics by focusing
on innovative ideas rather than defining new roles and missions.
This study was undertaken just as New World Vistas was being
completed. This timing allowed the AF2025 participants (as with
Spacecast 2020, composed of AWC and ACSC students and faculty) to
interact with the NWV team. That overlap, however, meant that the
AF2025 study did not benefit from a careful consideration of the
ideas in NWV. The primary value of AF2025 is the operational
perspective brought by the officers in the study, even though a
significant amount of technical detail is contained in some of the
white papers.51
A number of concepts were generated, both internally and externally,
and operations analyses were used to rank those concepts in terms of
the competitive edge offered in alternative scenarios. The best
concepts were more fully developed into white papers. As with
Spacecast 2020, the number of space-based laser concepts included in
the study included varying amounts of technical detail. Most of the
laser concepts involved high-energy laser weapons rather than the
other three classes of laser systems. The laser concepts examined in
AF2025 are included at the end of the section.
NASA and Commercial Applications
The value of using lasers in space has been clear to the
non-military users. The National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) recently orbited a laser-based remote sensing
experiment called LITE (that is described in more detail later).
Both NASA and the commercial sector are interested in laser
satellite communications for very-high data rates. Further, NASA is
exploring the use of lasers for improved instrumentation onboard
spacecraft, such as a deep space altimeter that uses laser pulses
for accurate ranging off distant objects.
The International Society for Optical Engineering 1993 conference on
“Space Guidance, Control and Tracking” examined technologies to
improve spacecraft performance through enhanced attitude control.52
For example, one of the concepts explored using a
charged-coupled-device (CCD) detector to improve spatial acquisition
and tracking for laser satellite communications. The interest of
NASA and the commercial sector in technologies that enable
space-based applications helps the military to be “smart buyers” in
some of these technologies and to focus on areas that are militarily
unique.
It is critical that DOD collaborate with NASA, the Department of
Energy, and commercial companies in order to get the optimal use of
dwindling R&D resources in the development of space-based laser
applications. Although this type of cooperation is time-consuming
and difficult, the payoffs should include improved interoperability,
more rapid fielding of experiments, and improved understanding
through data sharing. While all of the participants will benefit,
the Air Force is best positioned to take the leadership through AF
Space Command and the Phillips Laboratory.
Summary of Concepts from Strategic Studies
A variety of concepts discussed in the strategic studies use lasers
positioned in space to accomplish various missions. In several
concepts, the laser may be based on the ground and the beam sent to
the intended target, possibly with the use of relay mirrors. The
ground-based laser (GBL) ASAT weapon and power beaming from earth to
space are examples of such concepts; these are also included in the
table below for completeness because the beams transit the space
environment. Table 3 is a compilation of the concepts grouped into
the taxonomy described above. Additional concepts from other sources
are included in the table to provide a comprehensive summary.
In the next section, a semi-quantitative scoring scheme is developed
and then applied to the concepts listed in Table 3. In subsequent
sections, a brief synopsis of each concept is presented as part of
this scoring. The discussion briefly identifies the operational
concept, operational enhancement, key enabling technologies, and
primary challenges. (It is impossible in this report, due both to
space limitations and the author’s expertise, to cover all the
concepts in depth.) Subsequent sections will focus on a few of the
concepts that have the greatest near-term potential and discuss ways
to bring these concepts to fruition. The plethora of concepts and
the emphasis given to space-based laser applications in the
strategic studies strengthens the drive to put this technology into
the operational community.
Table 3. Summary of Concepts from Strategic Studies
Concept |
New
World
Vistas |
Spacecast
2020 |
Air
Force
2025 |
Laser
Mission
Study |
Other
Sources |
ENABLING SYSTEMS |
|
|
|
|
|
target designation |
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
battlefield illumination |
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
guidance (alignment, docking) |
|
|
|
X
|
SPIE
|
deep
space laser altimeter |
|
|
|
|
NASA
|
satellite-to-staellite velocimeter |
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INFORMATION GATHERING SYSTEMS |
|
|
|
|
|
remote sensing for BDA |
|
|
|
X
|
|
environmental monitoring |
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
weather monitoring |
X
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
space derbis cataloging |
|
|
|
X
|
|
integrated Tactical Warnng/Attack Assessment
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
active illuminator/imager for space surveillance
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INFORMATION RELAYING SYSTEMS |
|
|
|
|
|
sensor pointing accuracy beacon network
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
sattelite traffic management/IFF |
|
|
|
X
|
|
laser communications and data relay |
X
|
|
X
|
X
|
NASA
|
space track accuracy improvement |
|
|
|
X
|
|
space-based reference grid |
|
|
|
X
|
|
holographic projector |
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ENERGY DELIVERY SYSTEMS |
|
|
|
|
|
laser rocket propulsion |
X
|
|
|
X
|
NASA
|
power beaming (earth to space) |
X
|
|
|
X
|
|
power beaming (space to earth, space to space)
|
|
|
|
|
NASA
|
space debris clearing |
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
space-based counterforce weapon (a.k.a GPOW)
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
space-based BMD weapon |
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
GBL
ASAT weapon |
X
|
|
X
|
X
|
|
space-based ASAT weapon |
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
space-based counter-air weapon |
X
|
X
|
X
|
X
|
|
planetary defense weapon |
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
weather modification system |
|
X
|
|
X
|
|
|
Back
to Contents
VI. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING THE CONCEPTS
A simple set of criteria that covers both technical and operational
perspectives is used to rank the twenty-eight concepts identified in
the previous section. Although somewhat qualitative, the assessment
moves the discussion from purely descriptive reviews of concepts to
critical evaluations of concepts that are most likely to strengthen
operational capabilities in the near term. A five-point scoring
system is used to evaluate proposals during a source selection and
permit a semi-quantitative ranking of concepts.
Technical Criteria
Feasibility
This criterion measures whether the concept is
theoretically possible by assessing the potential of the concept
rather than its implementation. In some cases, the path to fielding
a system is relatively straightforward even if the process has not
proceeded very far, while in other cases, despite years of intensive
study, significant challenges remain. In still other cases, the
basic laws of physics may limit the likelihood that the concept will
ever achieve fruition.
The following five-point scale measures the
technical feasibility of the concept:
1- concept unlikely to succeed, due to current understanding of
basic laws of nature 2- multiple new breakthroughs required to make concept work
3- only a few major technical challenges or breakthroughs remain
4- no major breakthroughs required; multiple engineering issues
remain 5- only minor technical issues remain to be resolved
Maturity
Technical maturity measures how far the concept has moved
toward realization. The score assesses demonstrated progress in the
process of developing the maturing of a concept, using the following
five-point scale:
1- nothing has been demonstrated to support this concept
2- multiple major components remain to be demonstrated or developed
3- a few major components remain to be demonstrated or developed
4- major components exist but multiple, minor components remain to
be developed 5- components exist; a complete system may have been demonstrated
Operational Criteria
Assuming that the concept would meet its technical objectives, the
operational questions are whether the concept would substantially
enhance operational capabilities, and whether the “cost” of the
concept would prohibit the development or purchase of other military
systems. The idea of enhancement and cost are distinct but related.
A concept may be expensive in terms of funds and manpower but worth
the investment if it adds unique capability. Although not addressed
in detail here, there are alternative methods of achieving the same
mission, many of which influence the assessment of new concepts.
Enhancement
This measurement qualitatively assesses how much the
deployment of the proposed system would aid operational
capabilities. In some cases, it adds a new way of operating that
already exists, and thus provides an incremental improvement in
capability. In other cases, the capability offered by a concept
revolutionizes the operational capabilities, and thereby permits
radical changes in the conduct of military operations. The following
five-point scale assesses the enhancement of the various concepts:
1- limited enhancement; military requirement adequately met by
existing systems 2- minimal improvement in military capability
3- some significant improvement, permitting increased flexibility or
responsiveness 4- substantial new capability or greatly enhancing existing
capability 5- revolutionary capability, giving decisive military edge to
warfighter
Cost
Here, “cost” is meant to estimate the required funds and
manpower in the current resource-constrained environment where
procuring system A may mean system B will not be procured or
modernized. These alternative costs are inherently subjective,
because they are based on a prediction of which system delivers the
most “bang for the buck.” The following five-point scale measures
the cost of the particular concept of a space-based laser system:
1- extremely expensive, requiring substantial delay or canceling of
other systems 2- very expensive, requiring entirely new support system and
multiple platforms 3- expensive, requiring a few platforms and using existing support
system 4- inexpensive, using a single platform with multiple capabilities
5- relatively inexpensive, readily adaptable to existing systems
Although careful thought underlies the application of these criteria
to the concepts described in the next sections, other evaluators
might give different scores based on their knowledge of technology
or operational requirements. There is no “correct” answer to this
evaluation, rather it is a considered assessment. If the scoring
motivates others to develop their own ranking, then one of the
objectives of this study will have been achieved.
Table 4. Scoring Criteria
Score Description
Technical Feasibility
-
concept unlikely to succeed, due to current understanding of basic
laws of nature
-
multiple new breakthroughs required to make concept work
-
only a few major technical challenges or breakthroughs remain
-
no major breakthroughs required; multiple engineering issues
remain
-
only minor technical issues remain to be resolved
Technical Maturity
-
nothing has been demonstrated to support this concept
-
multiple major components remain to be demonstrated or developed
-
a few major components remain to be demonstrated or developed
-
major components exist but multiple, minor components remain to
be developed
-
components exist; a complete system may have been demonstrated
Operational Enhancement
-
limited enhancement; military requirement adequately met by
existing systems
-
minimal improvement in military capability
-
some significant improvement, permitting increased flexibility or
responsiveness
-
substantial new capability or greatly enhancing existing
capability
-
revolutionary capability, giving decisive edge to warfighter
Operational Cost
-
extremely expensive, requiring substantial delay or canceling of
other systems
-
very expensive, requiring entirely new support system and multiple
platforms
-
expensive, requiring a few platforms and using existing support
system
-
inexpensive, using a single platform with multiple capabilities
-
relatively inexpensive, readily adaptable to existing systems
|
Back
to Contents
|