New Paradigm for Embedded Sensor Design

From 1945 until 2001 the U.S. & her allies knew exactly where security threats were and what we would be up against. The “Cold War “scenario was very classical and predictable. Encounters or “threats” would come from the Soviet side and while we were concerned about the Chinese our main focus was how to contain/deter/defeat any large aggressive move the U.S.S.R would make.

We understood the Soviet force posture and weapons systems and DOCTRINE . Our triad of strategic bombers, ICBM’s and submarine forces all played into the concept of mutual assured destruction and all its variants. Weapons ecosystems evolved that would be used against classical force posture led by generals giving orders to brigade commanders who in turn would task young Lt.’s leading platoons. Our approach was organized on our classic weapons systems and doctrine going head to head with theirs. This approach included at its heart all types of sensors that acquired and processed various types of data. The sensors were painfully designed using the processes of the 50’s, 60’s etc. They were by and large stovepipe in nature as was indicative of the time. Even with the advent of COTS in the early 1990’s many sensors just simply were not smart enough to be interoperable and usually had a five to seven year design cycle. The design cycle for sensors paralleled that of the weapons platform itself. All this changed with 9-11 and our wakeup call that no longer would we engage with a monolithic enemy that looked and fought largely like we do and had in the past. Classic land –sea –air battles with your enemy, who wore real uniforms, followed a code of conduct and whose leaders were trained at their countries equivalent of West Point, Annapolis or the AF Academy would be in the past. Our enemy today has no formal military training or can site unit battle honors. They engage in the art of ambush and infiltration. Their strategy is placing IEDS, suicide vests, or shooting someone after they have infiltrated that organization. These methods call for another approach in containment. Clearly our existing sensors and weapons systems were designed for a different type of encounter. In order to counter this new asymmetrical threat we must first understand its nature. Many papers and research have been devoted to pointing out the differences between those engaging in non nation state acting vs. the previous process of engagement. It is our intention here to deal with what must be done to address a new paradigm in positioning to handle today’s threat. It is painfully clear that design cycles must be cut and all technology offered needs to be highly intelligent and adaptable. One can only achieve these goals if they start with a concept of a virtual design platform as the “incubator” and foundry used for new sensor design. Fortunately Wind River’s Simics package is oriented toward this rapid prototyping environment. In a world where sensor design is to be shortened from 4 to 7 years down to 9-12 months it is critical that a new approach such as this be integrated and utilized by embedded sensor designers. Simics allows and addresses the design chain from the processor through a complete system and surrounding network. Through the leveraging of Simics one can retain and reuse equity from project design to project design. This is absolutely essential in today’s DOD budget paradigm.  If you are a DOD prime or sub contractor seeking to stay in business it’s key you evaluate the Simics model and understand how it can be leveraged . Visit http://www.windriver.com/products/simics/ or the blog @ http://blogs.windriver.com/wind_river_blog/simics/