2002 Assessment of the Office of Naval Research's Air and Surface Weapons Technology Program (2002) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2. General Observations
2. General Observations
Pages 14-20
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 14... ...
These projects guidance for projectiles, precision strike navigation, and weapons imagery link were of high technical quality and appeared to be led by technically competent managers.2 The committee recommends that these excellent projects be continued and that sufficient funding, acknowledgment, and ongoing support be provided to ensure their successful transition into major programs. The committee had some general observations on the future of naval air and surface weapons that overarch the specific findings and recommendations, which follow in Chapters 3 and 4 of this report.
|
From page 15... ...
While the FNC process for aligning and partnering these communities appears in principle to be very successful in focusing S&T investments and creating a clear path for transition to acquisition within the future years' defense plan, it has done so through an almost exclusive ASWT program S&T focus on air and surface weapons near-term needs, to the detriment of developing technologies for the Navy and Marine Corps after next. Moreover, FNCs focus on transition rather than technology, and this is reflected in the ASWT program as follows: (1)
|
From page 16... ...
Recommendation: In collaboration with other Department of the Navy elements, ONR should develop a strategic naval air and surface weapons technology plan that will achieve a balance between near- and long-term goals. This effort should include collaboration with both the Marine Corps Combat Development Command and the Navy Warfare Development Command, given their concept-based approaches, as well as the help of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and the Naval Air Systems Command, given their influence on naval air and surface weapons technology needs.
|
From page 17... ...
It should be mentioned that two of the arguments used to justify pushing gun technology to provide fire support at ranges in excess of 100 nmi are the limited magazine space aboard combatants and the inability to replenish missiles at sea. Several presentations indicated that the Navy cannot reload a VLS 6The committee believes the cold launch of shipboard missiles provides additional flexibility and firepower.
|
From page 18... ...
A littoral fire support ship with large magazines and many more launch positions could provide high-rate, high7For several years, the Naval Surface Warfare Center's (NSWC's) Port Hueneme Division has demonstrated a transportable rearming method (TRAM)
|
From page 19... ...
However, while the TCS FNC thrusts appear to address specific limitations of current systems (or, in the case of gun technology, future gun systems) , the committee was disappointed with the TCS FNC overall, because it does not aggressively address some of the more urgent problems of time-critical strike.
|
From page 20... ...
One area that appeared to be directly applicable to the problem of small-boat or jet-ski targets coming out of the sun was the infrared sea clutter rejection work. Of particular interest in light of the constraints on rules of engagement within ports of call would be the application of nonlethal concepts that are currently in development in other Services, discussed in Chapter 3 under "Directed Energy." The committee recommends investigating some nonlethal approaches in future Code 351 programs, or, at a minimum, integration of nonlethal approaches into systems in coordination with Code 353 (Expeditionary Operations Technology Division)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.