Prepared for Milestone A Decision

Transcription

1 Test and Evaluation Master Plan For the Self-Propelled Artillery Weapon (SPAW) Prepared for Milestone A Decision Approval Authority: ATEC, TACOM, DASD(DT&E), DOT&E Milestone Decision Authority: US Army Service Acquisition Executive Designation: JROC Interest Date: September 2005 [Note: This document was designed for classroom exercise purposes only.] PART I - INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) presents the initial strategy for conducting T&E throughout the SPAW program. This TEMP will focus on testing in the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase. Testing for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development and Production phases will be outlined, but not addressed in detail. 1.2 Mission Description The SPAW performs the same seven tasks as those defined for all field artillery (FA) battalions in FM , Chapter 2. Those seven basic tasks of the field artillery are as follows: 1. Coordinate fire support 2. Acquire targets 3. Deliver supporting fires 4. Survive 5. Communicate 6. Move and/or maneuver 7. Maintain and re-supply A recent capability gap has emerged in the area of counter-battery fire; therefore, procurement of the Self-Propelled Artillery Weapon has become essential to the US maneuvering forces. Recent developments and proliferation of threat artillery have rendered US artillery forces extremely vulnerable. There is a critical need to provide supporting fires to the maneuver forces that are capable of ranges in excess of 32,000 meters. The Russian MSTA-X 152 mm self-propelled howitzer and the Chinese PLZ05-X 152 mm self-propelled howitzers are both projected to have a maximum range in excess of 32,000 meters. This performance puts US artillery forces at a distinct disadvantage. The range of the US M109A1 howitzer is 25,000 meters. With upgrades the M109 can

2 reach ranges of 30,000 meters. These weapons will still be vulnerable to enemy counterbattery fires. The SPAW will replace the existing systems with a single system that has the ability to perform both the light and heavy artillery missions for U.S. Army and Marine Corps use. The SPAW is expected to provide increased range, speed, maneuverability, firing rate, integration, communications, and the ability to logistically support these improvements in a battlefield environment. The SPAW will be used to provide armored combat support. It will be able to be air transported into the theater of operations and operate in combat with tanks and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. It requires excellent ground mobility allowing the ability to move and maneuver to increase personnel survivability. It requires the ability to fire in a 360 degree circle with its primary and secondary armaments. The system requires the ability to provide both direct (line of sight) and indirect (non- line of sight) firing. 1.3 System Description The SPAW is an extended range howitzer based on a concept similar to the existing M- 109A1 self-propelled howitzer. The SPAW consists of a 155 mm cannon mounted on a track vehicle chassis. The cannon are manufactured using new material technology and have a design range of 37,000 meters. The vehicle will have provisions to carry 30 rounds of conventional artillery ammunition. The vehicle also contains command/control and target acquisition electronics suites to provide precision targeting, location, and threat information. The crew of the SPAW will consist of a section chief, driver, gunner, one cannoneer who loads and fires the weapon, and two cannoneers who handle the ammunition. The SPAW system will be deployed in battery-sized units consisting of six weapons. The battery would also include four support vehicles. One tracked vehicle would be devoted to command and control functions. One tracked vehicle would be devoted to fire direction functions and subsystems. One vehicle would transport ammunition. One vehicle would carry satellite navigation and communications network equipment. All vehicles would contain compatible command/control and target acquisition suites. Each SPAW and tracked support vehicle is transportable by C-17.

3 PART II - TEST AND EVALUATION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE 2.1 T&E Management Office of the Secretary of Defense, Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (OSD (DOT&E) OT and LFT&E Oversight. TEMP approval Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Developmental Test and Evaluation (DASD (DT&E-TRMC) DT&E Oversight and advice to ATL on TEMP approval Program Executive Office Ground Combat Systems (PEO GCS) Self-Propelled Artillery Weapon Program Manager (SPAW PM) - Chairs Test WIPT and provides material and support for Test and Evaluation of SPAW Deputy Under Secretary for the Army for Test and Evaluation (DUSA TE) Army T&E Executive. Provides TEMP concurrence Army Test & Evaluation Command (ATEC/AEC/OTC) Lead Developmental Test Organization and Operational Test Agency. Conducts T&E through subordinate agencies (AEC and OTC) Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Provides Intelligence support to threat assessments Joint Interoperability Test Command (JITC) participates in Test WIPT provides Joint Interoperability Test Certification. 2.2 Common T&E Data Base Requirements Sufficient and appropriate data shall be collected in all test activities to ensure accurate determination of exit criteria compliance. Data shall be consistent with appropriate applicable standards. Maximum coordination and sharing among participating organizations shall be assured. The Program and Developmental Test Leads will ensure that DASD (DT&E) and DOT&E have timely access to all records, test data, and reports, including classified and proprietary information, as appropriate to carry out their independent assessments. 2.3 Deficiency Reporting (Omitted) 2.4 TEMP Updates This TEMP will be updated at each major future milestone as required by DoD Between major required updates Program Manager will keep TEMP up-to-date as required by performing required updates and informing Milestone Decision Authority as appropriate. 2.5 Integrated Test Program Schedule The SPAW program is event-driven. Testing provides data to systems engineering that demonstrates the level of compliance with the specifications and allows evaluators to

4 support assessment of the capabilities achieved. Significant events include MS A Decision (FY2006), a MS B decision (FY2007), a MS C decision (FY 2010), a demonstrated IOC (FY 2012), and a FRP Decision (FY 2014). These schedules are for reference only and present the scheduled activities as currently anticipated. The Integrated Master Schedule maintains the real-time program schedules, which will be revised as changes occur.

5 PART III - TEST & EVALUATION STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 T&E Strategy The objective of testing during the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) phase is to mature critical technologies and demonstrate the desired capabilities are achievable. There are three critical technologies for the SPAW: 1. Cannon Tube Metallurgy necessary to achieve increased range without sacrificing accuracy. 2. Armor necessary to enhance survivability against counter-battery fire, without sacrificing transportability or mobility. 3. Interoperability necessary to improve coordination of fire support missions and defend against counter-battery fire. 3.2 Developmental Evaluation Approach The SPAW testing will be focused on maturing critical technologies and key systems and validating the operational capabilities of the SPAW system. Technology Maturation will focus on lab and limited field tests of critical technologies, and on development and validation of system-level models and operational simulations. The results of the TMRR testing will support a Milestone B decision to determine if the SPAW is ready for Engineering and Manufacturing Development. There are three critical technologies involved in the development of the SPAW system. They are as follows. 1. Cannon Tube Metallurgy: The SPAW requires substantially increased range, survivability, and air transportability. These design requirements conflict somewhat in that the cannon tube must be longer to increase muzzle velocity and must be heavier to control deflection, i.e. droop or bending. At the same time, the tube must be light enough so that the SPAW system is transportable by C-17. In order to achieve a balance of stiffness, strength, and weight, more advanced materials are required. Current cannon tube metal technology has little design margin. Indications are that new materials, such as composites, and new processes, such as sandwich construction, are capable of handling the stressing requirements of the SPAW system. 2. Armor Performance: The SPAW system requires survivability, mobility and transportability. These design requirements can be potentially contradicting. Survivability, especially from counter battery fires, implies heavier armor yet mobility and transportability implies lighter vehicle design and less armor. Heavier armor impacts the vehicle s ability to be transportable by helicopter, as well as it s mobility to ford streams, and achieve required cruising speeds. Advanced, lightweight armor materials offer some potential for achieving survivability, mobility and transportability design objectives. Recent research and development efforts have yielded lightweight armor materials that are being incorporated into the SPAW design. 3. Interoperability: The SPAW system requires a robust and sophisticated communications system that can receive fire direction information from all US and allied sources. It must be flexible, reliable, hardened, immune to electronic countermeasures, have significantly enhanced range, and capable of supporting

6 various forms of encryption. This level of technology has been demonstrated, but not been fielded in U.S. and allied artillery systems to date Developmental Evaluation Framework A draft CDD has been developed. The requirements in the draft CDD reflect the Analysis of Alternatives. SPAW PMO will undertake engaging with contractors to design, fabricate and test required prototypes during TMRR phase. A top level evaluation framework matrix containing primary capabilities (as defined in the CDD) will be provided as the material solutions are identified, matured, and reflected in the TEMP Test Methodology The majority of tests will be conducted using engineering development models of SPAW firing components, SPAW track vehicle, and the command/control and target acquisition suites. A complete SPAW system will be used for selected system-level tests to assist in demonstrating that the SPAW is ready for entry into the EMD phase. Major test events during the TMRR phase include cannon tube testing with a maximum design firing charge, armor testing at design limit impact forces, and command/control and target acquisition suite operation at maximum design data rates, both incoming and outgoing, using the most stressing operationally realistic scenario. The TMRR phase testing will be conducted at contractor facilities, Yuma Proving Ground, and at Fort Sill, and supported by Unit XXX. Vehicle and system maintenance and support will be provided by Unit ZZZZ with assistance and training provided by the prime-contractors. Test scenarios during the TMRR phase will be primarily limited to developmentally challenging scenarios, designed to extract developmental test and evaluation data for use in maturing the design and critical technologies. At least one test will be conducted with a complete SPAW system in a relevant environment. Barrel tube developmental and live fire tests will be conducted. Testing during the EMD phase will focus on subsystem integration and system-level development tests to mature the SPAW system, and operational tests to assess SPAW effectiveness, suitability, and overall capabilities. Testing during the Production and Deployment phase will focus on maturing the production processes, validating updates to components/systems, operational tests of production representative systems under realistic operational conditions, and live fire testing of the SPAW Modelling and Simulation (M&S) A high fidelity model of the SPAW command/control and target acquisition suites will be used for developmental simulations to test system interfaces and performance limits. This model will also be used in operational simulations to evaluate man-machine interfaces, operational procedure development, crew training, and selected maintainability aspects. The model will be capable of emulating the entire SPAW electronic suite in software, as well as accommodate varying levels of Hardware-In-The-Loop (HWIL) Test Limitations and Risks

7 There are no known test limitations that would significantly affect the evaluator s ability to draw conclusions about the TRLs or system capabilities. 3.3 Developmental Test Approach Mission Oriented Testing Subsystem evaluation/self-assessment will be conducted as part of trade studies and system requirements verification testing. The results will determine if the SPAW system is at TRL 6 or higher Developmental Test Events and Objectives The key test objectives for the TMRR phase focus on the following: Firing range Evaluate the maximum firing range & accuracy (CEP). Firing rate Evaluate the reload and fire capability of the SPAW. Interoperability Assess the capability of the SPAW to accept targeting information from external systems, and exchange information with communications and positioning systems. Armor performance Evaluate the near-miss vulnerability of the SPAW to counterbattery threat rounds. Transportability Assess the airlift transportability of the SPAW. Mobility Evaluate the capability of the SPAW to maneuver in various field conditions. At a minimum, assess the following characteristics: - Speed on improved roads - Stream fording Supportability Assess the supportability of the SPAW. 3.4 Certification for Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) The Component Acquisition Executive (CAE) will evaluate and determine system readiness for Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E). Prior to the CAE s determination of readiness for IOT&E, an independent Assessment of Operational Test Readiness will be conducted by OUSD (AT&L). It shall consider the risks associated with the system's ability to meet operational suitability and effectiveness goals and will be based on capabilities demonstrated during DT&E and OAs, as well as on the criteria described in this TEMP. The final report for DT will provide insight into the system s readiness for IOT&E. 3.5 Operational Evaluation Approach (Details Omitted for Training Purposes) 3.6 LIVE FIRE TEST AND EVALUATION APPOACH (Details Omitted for Training Purposes) 3.7 Other Certifications (Details Omitted for Training Purposes) 3.8 Future Test and Evaluation (Details Omitted for Training Purposes)

8 PART IV - RESOURCE SUMMARY 4.1 Introduction Testing will be planned to take advantage of existing DoD ranges, facilities, and other resources wherever practical. 4.2 Test Resource Summary SPAW Test Articles Anticipated prototypes and test articles are listed in Table These represent the minimum anticipated requirements. Article Type SPAW System Prototype Cannon Tubes Armor SPAW Mockup SPAW Chassis LRIP SPAW System Table Prototypes and Test Articles Article Description Prototype of complete SPAW system SPAW full sized Cannon tubes Complete set of SPAW system armor Full sized SPAW Mockup (size and Mass) Full sized, SPAW chassis for support of Vulnerability testing Production representative SPAW systems Quantity (Duration) Test Phase Location 3 sets 2 TMRR, EMD Contractor facilities and designated Government test range 3 Contractor TMRR facilities and designated Government test range Contractor TMRR facilities and designated Government test range 1 EMD Transportability demonstrations Contractor facilities and designated Government test range 1 LFT&E Designated government test facilities. 6 OT Designated government test ranges

9 UNCLASSIFIED FOR TRAINING USE ONLY Test Sites The TMRR Phase testing will be conducted at contractor facilities, Yuma Proving Ground, and at Fort Sill. Test Range support for tracking exercises and/or live engagements will include but not be limited to ground truth sensors, radar and/or optical tracking systems. TMRR testing is intended to be conducted at designated contractor facilities, Yuma Proving Ground, and at Fort Sill. Specific range sensor requirements are to be determined. Regardless of range, the USG will require administrative support (office space, communications, security/classified storage, etc.) as well as range operations support Test Instrumentation EMD and Production testing will require large open areas for maneuver and fire and laboratories/ranges to emulate environmental extremes. Test Range support for tracking exercises and/or live engagements will include but not be limited to ground truth sensors, radar and/or optical tracking systems. Specific range sensor requirements are to be determined Test Support Equipment At least one set of four battalion support vehicles Threat Representation - TBD Test Targets and Expendables Cannon rounds Estimate 500 rounds for TMRR Phase Threat rounds Estimate 20 representative threat rounds for the TMRR Phase Operational Force Test Support Vehicle and system maintenance and support will be provided by Unit ZZZZ with assistance and training provided by the prime-contractor Models, Simulations, and Testbeds Models and simulations will be contractor developed and maintained Joint Mission Environment SPAW PMO will explore the use of distributed Live, Virtual, and Constructive (LVC) testing throughout the program s acquisition lifecycle in order to create an operationally relevant Joint Mission Environment. System will be tested in a live environment during EMD, DT, and IOT&E. Specific details will be determined by

10 UNCLASSIFIED FOR TRAINING USE ONLY the T&E WIPT and reflected in the MS B TEMP Special Requirements There are no known special requirements. 4.3 Federal, State, and Local Requirements (Details Omitted for Training Purposes) 4.4. Manpower/Personnel and Training (Details Omitted for Training Purposes) 4.5 Test Funding Summary - (Details Omitted for Training Purposes)