The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

4 Evaluation Methodology
Pages 30-34

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 30... ... At the time the data-gathering phase of the study ended, the Track III initiative had reduced the number of concepts under consideration to seven finalists. Three of these were undergoing concept evaluation by industry and were considered competition sensitive; therefore, these were not considered in this study. Read the entire page →
From page 31... ... -1 = only one method of delivery A3 Provides a range of effects that inhibit mounted and dismounted maneuvers 0 = similar to Volcano, has both AT and APL components 1 = sensor that enables use of something other than an APL mine to counter dismounted targets 2 = multiple sensors/highly sophisticated sensors -1 = inhibits only personnel or only tanks; nonlethal against personnel -2 = nothing in place on ground to stop or slow enemy movement Ad Resists full spectrum of enemy breach methods, including dismounted methods 0 = has AP and AT components 1 = has man-in-the-loop to react to visual observation of breach 2 = unbreachable without great risk to troops; very difficult to breach 3 = multiple sensors, allowing other weapons to be brought to bear; larger area covered; automatically counters breach attempts -1 = nonlethal AP components; some AT components have antihandling devices -2 = has only AT or only AP N/A=no minefield to be breached Provides early warning of ground attack 0 = might provide early warning within normal observation range 1 = will provide early warning because of man-inthe-loop (observes ground attack) Read the entire page →
From page 32... ... 0 = as safe as Volcano A7 Is effective in all types of terrain and weather 0 = terrain and weather have no effect -1 = cannot see target because of weather/terrain; reaction requires sensor input that can be affected by weather/terrain A8 Poses minimal residual hazard to own forces and noncombatants after military conflicts 0 = can self-destruct/self-deactivate; no ground munitions to explode (munitions have exploded in the air or on contact with the ground) 1 = can be command detonated; is strictly nonlethal A9 Is difficult to detect by enemy forces 0 = same as Volcano; may be visible when shot off but are not easily visible on ground 1 = smaller and less easily seen than Volcano 2 = nothing to be detected on the ground -1 = bigger, easier to see; sends a signal that can be detected -2= visible and audible by the enemy before breaching A10 Poses minimal risk of fratricide 0 = has an APL component 1 = has no APL component; has nonlethal AP component 2 = man-in-the-loop allows identification of friend or foe before detonation; more accurate minefield location sensors tell own troops where munitions are; munitions can be turned off when own troops approaching; is strictly nonlethal All Effects modifiable for mounted and/or dismounted threat 0 = once in place munitions are either AT or AP 1 = has man-in-the-loop, therefore other systems can be used 2 = more sensors allow several options for bringing other weapons to bear A12 Has controllable activation/deactivation and duration before and after installation. Read the entire page →
From page 33... ... and/or allied forces 0 = same as M14/M16 1 = self-destruct/self-deactivating or man-in-the-loop 2 = nonlethal; more positive identification at greater ranges A23 Deters pursuit to facilitate breaking of contact under pressure 0= no man-in-the-loop, weapon does not require operator -1 = man-in-the-loop; nonlethal -2 = 1 -1 = Humanitarian Concerns The third criterion was fulfillment of the humanitarian intent of international agreements, such as the CCW and the Ottawa Convention. Although compliance with these agreements was not specifically included in the Statement of Task, the committee considered it implicit in the rationale for this study. Read the entire page →
From page 34... ... The following costs were considered for each alternative: E1 Research and development 0 = weapon already exists -1 = known, funded cost; relatively low cost; prototype exists or is technologically easy to achieve -2 = no prototype, but elements of the system exist; technology appears to be straightforward -3 = conceptual stage; requires a technology breakthrough E2 Procurement cost 0 = production base exists/has been produced -1 = production capability exists, anticipated product costs are low -2= requires complex manufacturing process and/or high product cost -3= manufacturing processes are conceptual, costs unknown 2 Despite the sponsor's admonition that cost not be considered a factor, it was included because the committee believed it might be a consideration for the future. However, cost estimates were rudimentary. Read the entire page →

From page 30...

... At the time the data-gathering phase of the study ended, the Track III initiative had reduced the number of concepts under consideration to seven finalists. Three of these were undergoing concept evaluation by industry and were considered competition sensitive; therefore, these were not considered in this study.

Read the entire page →

From page 31...

... -1 = only one method of delivery A3 Provides a range of effects that inhibit mounted and dismounted maneuvers 0 = similar to Volcano, has both AT and APL components 1 = sensor that enables use of something other than an APL mine to counter dismounted targets 2 = multiple sensors/highly sophisticated sensors -1 = inhibits only personnel or only tanks; nonlethal against personnel -2 = nothing in place on ground to stop or slow enemy movement Ad Resists full spectrum of enemy breach methods, including dismounted methods 0 = has AP and AT components 1 = has man-in-the-loop to react to visual observation of breach 2 = unbreachable without great risk to troops; very difficult to breach 3 = multiple sensors, allowing other weapons to be brought to bear; larger area covered; automatically counters breach attempts -1 = nonlethal AP components; some AT components have antihandling devices -2 = has only AT or only AP N/A=no minefield to be breached Provides early warning of ground attack 0 = might provide early warning within normal observation range 1 = will provide early warning because of man-inthe-loop (observes ground attack)

Read the entire page →

From page 32...

... 0 = as safe as Volcano A7 Is effective in all types of terrain and weather 0 = terrain and weather have no effect -1 = cannot see target because of weather/terrain; reaction requires sensor input that can be affected by weather/terrain A8 Poses minimal residual hazard to own forces and noncombatants after military conflicts 0 = can self-destruct/self-deactivate; no ground munitions to explode (munitions have exploded in the air or on contact with the ground) 1 = can be command detonated; is strictly nonlethal A9 Is difficult to detect by enemy forces 0 = same as Volcano; may be visible when shot off but are not easily visible on ground 1 = smaller and less easily seen than Volcano 2 = nothing to be detected on the ground -1 = bigger, easier to see; sends a signal that can be detected -2= visible and audible by the enemy before breaching A10 Poses minimal risk of fratricide 0 = has an APL component 1 = has no APL component; has nonlethal AP component 2 = man-in-the-loop allows identification of friend or foe before detonation; more accurate minefield location sensors tell own troops where munitions are; munitions can be turned off when own troops approaching; is strictly nonlethal All Effects modifiable for mounted and/or dismounted threat 0 = once in place munitions are either AT or AP 1 = has man-in-the-loop, therefore other systems can be used 2 = more sensors allow several options for bringing other weapons to bear A12 Has controllable activation/deactivation and duration before and after installation.

Read the entire page →

From page 33...

... and/or allied forces 0 = same as M14/M16 1 = self-destruct/self-deactivating or man-in-the-loop 2 = nonlethal; more positive identification at greater ranges A23 Deters pursuit to facilitate breaking of contact under pressure 0= no man-in-the-loop, weapon does not require operator -1 = man-in-the-loop; nonlethal -2 = 1 -1 = Humanitarian Concerns The third criterion was fulfillment of the humanitarian intent of international agreements, such as the CCW and the Ottawa Convention. Although compliance with these agreements was not specifically included in the Statement of Task, the committee considered it implicit in the rationale for this study.

Read the entire page →

From page 34...

... The following costs were considered for each alternative: E1 Research and development 0 = weapon already exists -1 = known, funded cost; relatively low cost; prototype exists or is technologically easy to achieve -2 = no prototype, but elements of the system exist; technology appears to be straightforward -3 = conceptual stage; requires a technology breakthrough E2 Procurement cost 0 = production base exists/has been produced -1 = production capability exists, anticipated product costs are low -2= requires complex manufacturing process and/or high product cost -3= manufacturing processes are conceptual, costs unknown 2 Despite the sponsor's admonition that cost not be considered a factor, it was included because the committee believed it might be a consideration for the future. However, cost estimates were rudimentary.

Read the entire page →

← Previous Chapter Skim

Next Chapter Skim →

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.

4 Evaluation Methodology Pages 30-34

4 Evaluation Methodology
Pages 30-34