|
|
||||||||||||||||
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 19
Review of Directed Energy Technology for Countering Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (RAM): Abbreviated Version
Appendix B
Committee Meetings
FIRST MEETING
JANUARY 24-25, 2007
HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA
Meeting Objectives
Introduce committee members to the National Academies and the Board on Army Science and Technology; conduct composition and balance discussion; discuss statement of task and sponsor expectations; receive orientation presentations on the mission, organization, and functions of the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command; receive presentations regarding emerging technologies relevant to the statement of task; consider and approve draft outline; and make writing assignments.
Presenters
Sponsor’s Welcoming Remarks
Mark Swinson, Chief Scientist, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
Directed Energy Combat Development Overview
Daryl Youngman, U.S. Army Air and Missile Defense Battle Laboratory
OCR for page 20
Review of Directed Energy Technology for Countering Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (RAM): Abbreviated Version
Joint High Power Solid State Laser (J-HPSSL)
Adam Aberle, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
HEL-JTO Overview
Don Seeley, Deputy Director, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/ Army Forces Strategic Command
Briefing to National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Directed Energy Technology for Countering Indirect Weapons
Daniel Trainor, Textron Corporation
High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator (HEL TD) Weapon System Program
Bill Gnacek, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
HELTD Lethality & Systems Assessment
Chuck Lamar, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
Introduction
Jackie Gish, Northrop Grumman Corporation
THEL, MTHEL & HEL Block 0
John Nugent, Northrop Grumman
3 – Laser Segment
Jay Marmo, Northrop Grumman Corporation
Thermal Management
Jackie Gish, Northrop Grumman Corporation
SSL Performance Projections
Jackie Gish, Northrop Grumman Corporation
Summary
Jackie Gish, Northrop Grumman Corporation
OCR for page 21
Review of Directed Energy Technology for Countering Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (RAM): Abbreviated Version
SECOND MEETING
FEBRUARY 26-27, 2007
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Meeting Objectives
Conduct final composition and balance discussion; continue receiving presentations regarding emerging technologies relevant to the statement of task; consider and approve the concept draft report; and make additional writing assignments.
Presenters
Directed Energy Systems
Patrick K. Garvey, Boeing Missile Defense Systems
Thin Disk Laser Technology Update to Board on Army Science & Technology
Edward W. Pogue, Boeing Missile Defense Systems
Counter RAM/Counter ManPADS/Counter Battery
Lee Gutheinz, Boeing Missile Defense Systems
Modeling & Simulation
Edward W. Pogue, Boeing Missile Defense Systems
Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD)
Don Slater, Boeing Missile Defense Systems
Directed Energy Systems Power and Energy Systems
Gary Grider, DRS-TEM, Inc.
Laser Area Defense Near-Term Employment Concept
Jim Horkovich, Raytheon Directed Energy Weapons
C-RAM Lethality
Rusty Graves and Wendell Cook, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
Modeling and Simulation Support to HEL System Development
Wendell Cook, BAE Systems
Phalanx, Fiber Laser, and Option 1 JHPSSL
Frank Brueckner, Raytheon Corporation
OCR for page 22
Review of Directed Energy Technology for Countering Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (RAM): Abbreviated Version
The Army’s Hybrid Electric Initiative
Gus Khalil, U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Center
THIRD MEETING
APRIL 3-4, 2007
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Meeting Objectives
Conduct final composition and balance discussion; continue receiving presentations regarding emerging technologies relevant to the statement of task; consider and approve the first full message draft report; and make additional writing assignments.
Presenters
Long Term Use of a BCS
Brian Strickland, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
DPSSL Illuminator Technology Development (and scaling SSLs to higher power)
Stephen G. Post, Missile Defense Agency
Army Research Laboratory-Enabling Technologies for Directed Energy Solid State Diode Pumped Lasers
Gary Woods, U.S. Army Research Laboratory
Status of Onshore Produced Ceramic Laser Gain Materials
Rick Gentilman, Raytheon Corporation
Air Force Laser Programs
R. Andrew Motes, U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory
Extended Area Protection & Survivability (EAPS) System Sensor Suite Requirements, Radars for C-RAM
Jim Mullins, Aviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering Center
C-RAM and Force Encampment Protection System (FEPS) Programs
Pete Kirkland, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command
OCR for page 23
Review of Directed Energy Technology for Countering Rockets, Artillery, and Mortars (RAM): Abbreviated Version
Advanced Tactical Technology–High Energy Lasers
Stephen Welby, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Lockheed Martin DE Overview
Kenneth W. Billman, Lockheed Martin Corporation
J-HPSSL Phase 3 (Option-1) Conceptual Design for ThinZag® Laser on an FCS-Like Ground Vehicle
Chas. W. von Rosenberg, Jr., Textron CorporationCorporation
FOURTH MEETING
MAY 7-8, 2007
IRVINE, CALIFORNIA
Meeting Objectives
Continue deliberations on the report; come to agreement on the findings and recommendations; prepare necessary written input; determine whether sensitive appendix is required; concur that the report is ready for peer review.
Presenters
None