Trans RINA, Vol 155, Part C1, Intl J Marine Design, Jan - Jun 2013
The principal human agents involved were the Officer of the Watch (OOW) who was on the ship’s bridge maintaining a visual lookout and controlling the ship with the capacity to overrule manoeuvring orders from the Operations Room (deep inside the frigate) should he consider them to be dangerous. The Principal Warfare Officer (PWO) who was responsible in the tactical handling of the ship and the integrated use of its weapons systems and sensors. The PWO assumed a tactical command role in multi threat missions.
Warfare Officer (AAWO) was responsible for plan of defence in response to an air attack.
Picture Controller; Air
The Anti-Air The Captain
oversaw all the operations. A number of other personnel (e.g. the Anti-Submarine Picture Supervisor; Surface Picture Supervisor; Surface
Picture Supervisor; Anti Submarine Warfare Director; Missile Director and Electronic Warfare Director) advised the PWO and AAWO about target, weapon and ammunition status, target engageability and jammer status. ship
Furthermore, in addition to these personnel the possessed a computer-based command system
which could manage communications and control weapons and sensor systems, allowing information to be passed independently of the command system itself.
The analysis showed that the system as a whole, rather than a given individual or piece of equipment, held all relevant data/information, but this changed throughout the various stages of the engagement.
personnel had different views of the data network with different interpretations and implications being drawn from the same piece of data (e.g. the PWO would interpret the posture of the ship and its implications for his role in a different way to the AAWO). Command activities required high-level awareness of a wide range of knowledge objects, whereas personnel manning the sensor systems required low-level, detailed awareness of a subset of knowledge objects. Third, the ‘sharing’ of awareness did not necessarily entail communication between individuals.
Figure 4. Workstations in the operations room onboard a Type 23 frigate
Looking across the operations room in the Type 23 as a whole, the picture compilers and picture supervisors manning the sensor systems were engaged in perception tasks (using Endsley’s terminology); and the AAWO, PWO and Captain were concerned with higher level comprehension and projection tasks
(particularly the The various key
Captain in the latter case). 3.
WHERE ARE THE BOUNDS OF A JCS? Indeed, it would probably have
been confusing or misleading if all individuals attempted to share all of their separate views of the situation.
So far, it has largely been assumed the JCS under consideration has been restricted to the vessel. However, this is not always the case. In fact, the bounds of analysis of a JCS are largely set by the person doing the analysis or the breadth of the functions of the system under consideration. For example, Hollnagel (2007) illustrated this issue with respect to commercial aviation; he suggested that the JCS relating to an airliner could be characterised in a similar manner to the skins of an onion (see Figure 5).
Rather, was more important that specific agents within the system had an awareness of who (or what) held the specific views required.
Figure 5. The many bounds of a JCS for the air transport system (adapted from Hollnagel, E. (2007). Flight Decks and Free Flight: Where are the System Boundaries? Applied Ergonomics, 38, 409-416).
©2013: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects C-7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98