Objective Crew Served Weapons (OCSW) 2003 Small Arms Symposium & Exhibition National Defense Industrial Association May 13, 2003 Glen Berg, OCSW Program Manager Joint Service Small Arms Program Candice Parker, XM 307/XM 312 Program Manager General Dynamics Armament & Technical Products May 13, 2003 1
OCSW Team PMCSW, PM FCS, TRADOC, UAMBL , USAIC, USMC Solutions Integrator Fire Control Weapon Ammunition Kaman Dayron May 13, 2003 2
WHAT IS OCSW? OCSW Program Started in 1994 l Lightweight, Crew Portable Weapon System l 25 mm Airbursting Ammunition l 260 SPM Fuzed Rounds l Full Ballistic Solution l Programmable Ammunition with Muzzle Velocity Correction l TAS Laser Range Finder & Target Tracking May 13, 2003 3
OCSW Family – XM 312 l . 50 CAL Variant of the OCSW l Part Interchangeability with OCSW, 5 Parts are Different l Demonstrated January 7, 2003 l Performance & Physical Characteristics Exceed Other Crewtype. 50 CAL Weapons l Development of XM 312 will Accelerate OCSW Maturity May 13, 2003 4
XM 307 & XM 312 Weapons May 13, 2003 5
OCSW ATD EXIT CRITERIA BASELINE(S) M 240 B 128 lb 43. 4 lb 84 lb 24. 2 lb I. LIGHTWEIGHT MK 19 -System Weight (no Ammo), Lbs 144 lb - Crew (2 Man) Portable Modules 76 lb (Transport Module Weight w/ ammo), Lbs II. LETHALITY - Accuracy / Dispersion) (deflection error @ 600 m) - Fuze Function Set by Fire Control N/A - Air burst Point Range Error N/A (known range, 600 m) - Defeat of Defilade Target Minimal None - High P(i) (*1) x y - Armor Penetration 2”- 3” RHA 3/4” HHA (at 0 deg. obliquity) @ 1, 500 m - P(h), Lt Vehicle Target @ 1, 000 m (Two 5 rd bursts; stationary 2. 3 x 2. 3 m target) III. DAY / NIGHT CAPABILITY - Demonstrate Thermal Module IV. LAND WARRIOR COMPATIBILITY N/A None z 1/2” HHA @ 800 m - Range Measurable ____OCSW ATD THRESHOLD GOAL 57 lb 38. 6 lb 38 lb/person 35 lb/person 2 mils Single Shot 10 m (+/- 5 m) Yes 3 x / 12 y / 8 z 2” RHA (*2) 1, 000 m. 35 ____ Status 04/03 48. 4 lbs 36 lbs 0. 5 mils 1. 54 mils @ 600 m Full Auto 3 & 5 rnds 4 m 2. 0 m @ 621 m (+/- 2 m) sd=2. 21 m Yes 6 x / 24 y / 16 z Yes 2” HHA (*2) Yes 2, 000 m 0. 75 1. 00 1000 m 2, 000 m (modular interface to OCSW) (*3) LW Interoperable LW Wireless Interoperability Yes Partial Simulation Measurable Based on Government approved Modeling & Simulation: V. SURVIVABILITY - Casualty Reduction (*4) VI. SUSTAINABILITY - Lbs Ammo/ “Kill” (*1) 111 117 VII. AFFORDABILITY - Cost /”Kill” (Ammo) (*1) $1, 420 $600 - Design to Avg Unit Prod. Cost (HE Ctg) $ 24(15) $ 2 40 % Reduction 90 % Reduction 25 20 6 $130 $. 55 $300 $ 29 $130 $ 22 Yes $252/$206 $35. 93/$29. 43 * 1 - Weighted AMSAA Analytical Model: Avg: 200 -2000 m; Standing/Prone/Defilade (5/20/75 %). “Kill” refers to fraction of threat squad incapacitated; current systems have significantly less incapacitation capability against defilade targets. AMSAA model not representative of actual operational engagement scenarios. * 2 - Test Warhead Only (no fuze). * 3 - ATD will assess weight vs. range of available uncooled thermal sensors. Criteria Rev: 21 Jul 98 * 4 - Reduction from small arms inflicted casualties in TRAC-WSMR CASTFOREM high resolution scenarios. Performance: 4/7/03
Program Management Approach l Open – Honest Communication l Goal Oriented Discussions l Ability/Commitment to make Decisions l Utilize Management Tools ä MS Project ä Project Link ä EVM – Costed Work Packages Build a Successful, Synergistic Relationship ä Tech Reviews l Report All News – Good and Bad May 13, 2003 7
Lessons Learned Need Sub-contractor Buy-in ä Team Approach Promotes: Responsiveness, Honesty, True Understanding and Synergy ä Drives on-time delivery within budget l Systems Integration Is Key ä System Integration Test (SIT) Process was Key to Success ä Test to Increasing Goals to Meet Thresholds ä Test to Find Problems ä SIT Encourages Growth & Development of a Dynamic Team l Don’t Understate Small Arms Weapon System Complexities ä Employ Sophisticated Systems Engineering Processes ä Utilize all Engineering Disciplines ä Recognize the Importance of All Sub-Systems ä Envelope of Safety is Paramount in Development l May 13, 2003 8
Lessons Learned (continued) Get Receiving PM On-Board Early ä PM Rep as ATD DPO, 2 Years prior to Transition ä Delegated RAA for Transition & Requirements Development l Keep DA Involved ä By-Product of PM Involvement ä Advertise Success l Solicit User Input & Buy-in ä Conduct User Juries & Early Operational Assessment ä Invest in High Quality Models l Be Open to Unique & Novel Approaches ä Encourage Team Creativity ä ATD is Time to Take Technical Risks – HOWEVER, Must be Managed! l May 13, 2003 9
Keys to Successful Transition Customer in Core Team Anxious Customer Facilitate Transition Team Open Communication Demos, Demos & More Demos Good Plan Good Product May 13, 2003 10
Experimental Unmanned Vehicle (XUV) Program XUV Team ä General Dynamics Armament & Technical Products n Integration, XM 307 Weapon System ä Raytheon Electronic Systemsn Designed & Built Wireless Control, Fire Control ä General Dynamics Robotic Systems - Unmanned Ground Vehicle ä Recon Optical - Stablized, Turreted Weapon Mount (Lightning Mount) ä JSSAP LAD Team l Non-Firing Demonstration ä FT Bliss, Tx. , March 7, 2003 l Firing Demonstration ä Ethan Allen Firing Range, Vt. , March 20, 2003 l May 13, 2003 11
May 13, 2003 12
Скачать презентацию Objective Crew Served Weapons OCSW 2003 Small Arms
8573994959f19f8639bdab113d9a2ec9.ppt