22.01.2015 Views

(IVAR) - Final Report - Strategic Environmental Research and ...

(IVAR) - Final Report - Strategic Environmental Research and ...

(IVAR) - Final Report - Strategic Environmental Research and ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 3-1 (cont.).<br />

Performance<br />

Objective<br />

Metrics (a) Description Data Requirements<br />

Success<br />

Criteria<br />

Results (b)<br />

SE4.2<br />

Maintenance<br />

Life cycle<br />

support is<br />

available –<br />

maintenance can<br />

be managed by<br />

military<br />

maintenance<br />

personnel.<br />

Maintenance information<br />

from <strong>IVAR</strong> <strong>and</strong> CEAT<br />

projects.<br />

Achievable<br />

Achieved:<br />

Routine<br />

maintenance can<br />

be h<strong>and</strong>led by<br />

local personnel<br />

[6.6.2.4].<br />

NOTES:<br />

(a) Performance Objective/Metrics/Criteria Numbering Convention: First character indicates P=Primary or S=Secondary<br />

criterion; Second character indicates – A=Automatic Tracking, B=Sampling Protocol, C=Data Streaming, D=Integration<br />

<strong>and</strong> Fusion, or E=Additional the performance objective; Third through fifth characters are the sequential numbers of the<br />

criterion, with n.1=Quantitative <strong>and</strong> n.2 = Qualitative criteria.<br />

(b) Section numbers included in square brackets “[ ]” provide a reference <strong>and</strong> link to the section of the report that provides<br />

the results for each performance criterion.<br />

3.1 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES<br />

As discussed in Section 1.2, we established six project objectives to demonstrate different aspects<br />

of the maturity <strong>and</strong> operational capabilities of digital avian radar systems based on user<br />

requirements we developed during prior studies. Within these groupings, we created 38 metrics<br />

<strong>and</strong> criteria to evaluate the systems’ performance relative to the six objectives: Twenty-four of<br />

these were quantitative metrics/criteria <strong>and</strong> 14 were qualitative metrics/criteria. Table 3-1<br />

provides an overview of the 38 performance criteria, the sections below exp<strong>and</strong> upon those criteria<br />

in terms of the objectives <strong>and</strong> metrics they were designed to test, <strong>and</strong> Section 5.6 presents the<br />

results of the evaluation of those criteria.<br />

3.1.1 Automatic Tracking<br />

Automatic tracking of targets is a core requirement of digital avian radar systems. Nearly all<br />

other features <strong>and</strong> capabilities of these systems derive from the ability to automatically track<br />

birds in real time. Consequently, we devoted much of the effort <strong>and</strong> many of the resources of the<br />

<strong>IVAR</strong> project to the demonstration <strong>and</strong> validation of this capability of the systems being<br />

evaluated.<br />

3.1.1.1 Quantitative Performance Criteria<br />

The performance objectives discussed in the following subsections were designed to evaluate<br />

automatic tracking quantitatively; that is, the Success Criteria were defined as a numeric quantity<br />

against which the results of testing the radar system could be evaluated.<br />

35

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!