Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities

Committee on Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities

Naval Studies Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Committee on Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Naval Studies Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. N00014-00-G-0230, DO #25, between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of the Navy. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-09729-0 Copies of this report are available from: Naval Studies Board, National Research Council, The Keck Center of the National Academies, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Room WS904, Washington, DC 20001; and The National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities COMMITTEE ON IDENTIFICATION OF PROMISING NAVAL AVIATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OPPORTUNITIES JOSEPH B. REAGAN, Saratoga, California, Chair FRANK ALVIDREZ, Lockheed Martin Corporation ALFRED O. AWANI, Boeing Company WILLARD R. BOLTON, Sandia National Laboratories WILLIAM C. BOWES, Morro Bay, California H. LEE BUCHANAN, Perceptis, LLP JOHN A. CORDER, Colleyville, Texas ROBERT W. DAY, Raytheon Corporation EARL H. DOWELL, Duke University VALERIE J. GAWRON, General Dynamics FRANK A. HORRIGAN, Bedford, Massachusetts ARUN R. PALUSAMY, Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems ROBERT J. POLUTCHKO, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory BRUCE POWERS, George Washington University; Naval Postgraduate School LYLE H. SCHWARTZ, Chevy Chase, Maryland WILLIAM A. SIRIGNANO, University of California at Irvine Staff CHARLES F. DRAPER, Director JAMES E. KILLIAN, Study Director SUSAN G. CAMPBELL, Administrative Coordinator MARY G. GORDON, Information Officer IAN M. CAMERON, Research Associate AYANNA N. VEST, Senior Program Assistant (as of June 25, 2005) SIDNEY G. REED, JR., Consultant RAYMOND S. WIDMAYER, Consultant

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities NAVAL STUDIES BOARD JOHN F. EGAN, Nashua, New Hampshire, Chair MIRIAM E. JOHN, Sandia National Laboratories, Vice Chair ARTHUR B. BAGGEROER, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JOHN D. CHRISTIE, LMI ANTONIO L. ELIAS, Orbital Sciences Corporation BRIG “CHIP” ELLIOTT, BBN Technologies KERRIE L. HOLLEY, IBM Global Services JOHN W. HUTCHINSON, Harvard University HARRY W. JENKINS, JR., ITT Industries DAVID V. KALBAUGH, Centreville, Maryland ANNETTE J. KRYGIEL, Great Falls, Virginia THOMAS V. McNAMARA, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory L. DAVID MONTAGUE, Menlo Park, California WILLIAM B. MORGAN, Rockville, Maryland JOHN H. MOXLEY III, Korn/Ferry International JOHN S. QUILTY, Oakton, Virginia NILS R. SANDELL, JR., BAE Systems WILLIAM D. SMITH, Fayetteville, Pennsylvania JOHN P. STENBIT, Oakton, Virginia RICHARD L. WADE, Exponent DAVID A. WHELAN, Boeing Company CINDY WILLIAMS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology ELIHU ZIMET, National Defense University Navy Liaison Representatives RADM JOSEPH A. SESTAK, JR., USN, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, N81 (through October 1, 2004) MR. GREG MELCHER, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Acting N81 (from October 2, 2004, through November 8, 2004) RADM SAMUEL J. LOCKLEAR III, USN, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, N81 (from November 8, 2004, through October 13, 2005) RDML DAN W. DAVENPORT, USN, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, N81 (as of October 14, 2005) RADM JAY M. COHEN, USN, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, N091 (through January 19, 2006) RADM WILLIAM E. LANDAY III, USN, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, N091 (as of January 20, 2006)

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Marine Corps Liaison Representative LTGEN EDWARD HANLON, JR., USMC, Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command (through September 30, 2004) LTGEN JAMES N. MATTIS, USMC, Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command (as of October 1, 2004) Staff CHARLES F. DRAPER, Director ARUL MOZHI, Senior Program Officer SUSAN G. CAMPBELL, Administrative Coordinator MARY G. GORDON, Information Officer IAN M. CAMERON, Research Associate AYANNA N. VEST, Senior Program Assistant (as of June 25, 2005)

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Preface The Department of Defense (DOD) seeks to transform the nation’s armed forces to meet the military challenges of the future. The Navy and the Marine Corps have defined their respective Service visions of transformation in Sea Power 211 and Marine Corps Strategy 21,2 and together they form Naval Power 21,3 the vision of how the naval forces of the United States will be equipped, trained, educated, organized, and employed in the 21st century. Joint Vision 20204 is the DOD vision that defines how the various elements of the DOD, including the naval forces, will operate in global conflicts as a single, integrated war-fighting entity. Many new war-fighting concepts are expressed in Naval Power 21, such as sea basing and network-centric operations, and the Office of Naval Research (ONR), in accordance with its mission to foster innovation in fields relevant to the Naval Services, requested that the National Research Council’s Naval Studies Board conduct a study to identify new science and technology opportunities that might lead to new capabilities in naval aviation to support and enable these new war-fighting concepts. 1   ADM Vern Clark, USN, Chief of Naval Operations. 2002. “Sea Power 21,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, Vol. 128, No. 10, pp. 32-41. 2   Gen James L. Jones, USMC, Commandant of the Marine Corps. 1999. Marine Corps Strategy 21, Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C., July. 3   Hon. Gordon England, Secretary of the Navy; ADM Vern Clark, USN, Chief of Naval Operations; and Gen James L. Jones, USMC, Commandant of the Marine Corps. 2002. Naval Power 21 … A Naval Vision, Department of the Navy, Washington, D.C., October. 4   U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. 2000. Joint Vision 2020, Department of Defense, Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities The charge to the Committee on Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities specified related tasks that can be paraphrased as follows: (1) recognize what the Navy leadership has pronounced as the most important operational concepts of the future (e.g., the Naval Power 21 vision); (2) determine what capabilities are critical for implementing those operational concepts, especially as they apply to naval aviation; and (3) identify the technologies required to best enable those critical capabilities (i.e., assess the ONR science and technology (S&T) portfolio to enable capabilities and fill capability gaps). The terms of reference are given in full in Appendix A. The complete process of constructing and implementing a research and development portfolio also includes other important tasks that were beyond the committee’s charter of investigation: (4) an assessment of the state of maturity of each of the technologies to be developed, (5) prioritization of the work to be done and allocation of resources, and (6) the design of a transfer plan for the transition of each technology to a user. All of these tasks are, of course, interrelated, and they must be organized and prioritized in what is usually referred to as a strategic plan. The committee found no such plan at ONR to review. Although it did consider building a full naval aviation strategic S&T plan of its own to use as a template for its deliberations, the committee decided that such an activity was both well beyond its resources and would preempt the Navy’s own process. To illustrate the value of the strategic planning process, the committee first studied the concepts described in Naval Power 21 and considered the thoughts of some influential thinkers to gain insight into what these concepts imply for naval aviation; drew from its members’ own experience and expertise to specifiy some capabilities that, if developed, would make a significant difference in naval aviation’s future capabilities; and finally, sought to identify key technologies in which ONR could invest to achieve these capabilities. This report discusses the results of those efforts.

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: MajGen Charles F. Bolden, Jr., USMC (retired), Houston, Texas, Eugene E. Covert, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Jose B. Cruz, Jr., Ohio State University, Alan H. Epstein, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, RADM Robert H. Gormley, USN (retired), The Oceanus Company, James D. Lang, La Jolla, California, Alton D. Romig, Jr., Sandia National Laboratories, and Robert E. Whitehead, Henrico, North Carolina. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities this report was overseen by Lee M. Hunt of Alexandria, Virginia. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   INTRODUCTION   7      Background,   7      This Study,   10      Emphasis and Approach in This Study,   11 2   STRATEGIC AND TECHNOLOGY PLANNING AND DISRUPTIVE CAPABILITIES FOR NAVAL AVIATION   14      Rationale,   14      Naval Power 21,   15      Some Disruptive Capabilities,   17      Findings,   24      Recommendations,   25 3   SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE DISRUPTIVE CAPABILITIES   27      Mapping to Functional Science and Technology Areas,   27      Findings,   57      Recommendation,   57

OCR for page R1
Identification of Promising Naval Aviation Science and Technology Opportunities 4   SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PLANNING FOR NAVAL AVIATION   58      ONR—The Portfolio Approach,   58      Air Force—The Integrated Product and Process Development Approach,   59      Using Context in Managing S&T Planning,   60      Managing S&T Using the Portfolio Approach,   62      Managing Programs in an S&T Portfolio,   63      Program Execution in an S&T Portfolio,   64      A Naval Aviation Strategic S&T Plan,   64      Congressional Add-ons,   67      Findings,   71      Recommendations,   72     APPENDIXES         A  Terms of Reference   77     B  Committee Meeting Agendas   78     C  Committee and Staff Biographies   85     D  Allocation of Funding in the Naval Aviation Program at the Office of Naval Research   92     E  Acronyms and Abbreviations   96