All at Sea with User Interfaces: From Evolutionary to Ecological Design for Submarine Combat Systems

Abstract

The quickening pace of technological advancement will require submarine command teams of the future to process greater volumes of data, potentially with fewer operators. User Interfaces (UIs) have evolved to meet current requirements, but this iterative process has propagated legacy design paradigms that may be unsuitable for future system specifications.To understand where improvements may be made, a review of current submarine control room operation is presented, using a sociotechnical systems approach. The social (command team: work, structure, and communication) and technical (combat systems) components are presented for context. An emphasis is placed on Sonar and Target Motion Analysis due to their prevalence within the control room. It was found that current UIs place increased cognitive requirements on operators due to the complexity and quantity of information presented. It is proposed that adopting an Ecological Interface Design (EID) approach could reduce such issues, facilitating effective resource allocation to manage increased data volumes. EID has been demonstrated to be effective across many domains, however, its exploitation in submarine control rooms is limited. Advances in modern submarine combat systems have promoted greater flexibility, providing an opportunity to utilise contemporary design philosophies for designing intuitive interfaces to maintain effective control room performance.The submarine control room is a complex sociotechnical system, formed of a highly trained command team and advanced combat system, with the objective of successfully completing missions in challenging environments, such as littoral waters (Roberts, Stanton, and Fay 2018).The system has evolved over time and so are highly evolved regarding operational capabilities, but this does not preclude further improvement. Technological advancements are frequently implemented without formal assessment of their impact from a sociotechnical perspective (Roberts and Stanton 2018). On submarine platforms, technological advancements are affording greater capabilities to meet changing requirements of operation (Bateman, 2011, Dominguez, Long, Miller, & Wiggins, 2006. These include new sensors and upgrades to existing sensors, producing larger volumes of data (Stillion and Clark 2015) with a drive to reduce crew sizes (Ly, Huf, and Henley 2007;Masakowski 2000). A critical question is whether such advances are being implemented with adequate consideration of the capacities of the operators, who already process large volumes of information. Of interest for potential improvements are the User Interfaces (UIs), which despite being highly advanced, have design shortcomings that limit operator performance, and the capacity of the entire control room. It is proposed that these issues could be addressed by switching from an evolutionary design paradigm to EID. Such a paradigm shift could allow future control rooms to meet future challenges and maintain effective operation.

Returning to periscope depth in a circular control room configuration

“…Submarines of the future are likely to include more advanced sensors and instruments such as Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) (Hewish 2002;Stanton and Roberts 2020a). The greater volume of data gathered from these new and improved sensors will be handled by a crew size that is likely to be similar to current requirements or potentially reduced (Masakowski and Hardinge 2000;Roberts et al 2017b;Fay et al 2019). Therefore, it is critical that operator workload is maintained at a suitable level for optimal performance (Masakowski 2000).…”

The quest for the ring: a case study of a new submarine control room configuration

“…Contemporary British submarine command rooms have separate sound and control rooms due to legacy constraints from a time when sonar information was solely in an auditory form (Stanton and Roberts 2020a). Further constraints from the use of a hull-penetrating periscope meant that the command room was situated on the top deck of the submarine beneath the conning tower (Fay, Stanton, and Roberts 2019;Hamburger, Miskimens, and Truver 2011;Scott 2017). This limited space for the command room necessitated all operators to sit facing towards the submarine's casing (Stanton and Bessell 2014).…”

“…This limited space for the command room necessitated all operators to sit facing towards the submarine's casing (Stanton and Bessell 2014). Advancements in technology, such as noise cancelling headphones and the ability to present sonar signals visually, Liquid Crystal Display screens and networked computing technology, mean that the sound room and control room no longer need to separate (Arrabito, Cooke, and McFadden 2005;Fay, Stanton, and Roberts 2019;Hamburger, Miskimens, and Truver 2011). Furthermore, the introduction of a non-hull penetrating optronics mast that sends images via fibre optic cables means the control room could be moved to a different deck on the ship (Hamburger, Miskimens, and Truver 2011;Scott 2017).…”