Naval Engineering in the 21st Century The Science and Technology Foundation for Future Naval Fleets -- Special Report 306 (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 National Naval Responsibility for Naval Engineering Mission and Process for Achieving Goals
3 National Naval Responsibility for Naval Engineering Mission and Process for Achieving Goals
Pages 66-112
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 66... ...
. The core functions include • Establishing the research agenda and allocating resources, • Identifying performers, • Measuring outcomes and evaluating results, • Maintaining connections among the wider naval engineering com munity, and • Developing the requisite human capital to sustain the nation's naval engineering capability.
|
From page 67... ...
In addition, alternative methods to enhance organizational, individual, research, and educational performance are presented. ESTABLISHING THE RESEARCH AGENDA AND ALLOCATING RESOURCES As discussed in Chapter 1, naval engineering was designated a National Naval Responsibility in a 2001 ONR memorandum that specified the purpose of the designation and the activities that were to constitute the NNR-NE (ONR 2001)
|
From page 68... ...
The 2001 ONR memorandum set out the broad outlines of the organization's research agenda, envisioning an NNR-NE set of disciplines focused on the "development of educated and experienced people, expansion of the knowledge base, and cultivation of a climate supportive of innovation." It also called on ONR to "formulate and maintain investments" in these science and technology areas: ship design tools, ship structural materials, hydromechanics, advanced hull designs, ship propulsion, ship automation, and systems integration (ONR 2001)
|
From page 69... ...
Automation, control, and 2.2 2.8 2.0 3.2 10.2 232 system integration Basic 1.6 1.8 1.1 1.8 6.3 233 Applied 0.6 1.0 0.8 1.4 3.9 231 Ship design tools 2.4 3.4 3.0 3.0 11.9 165 Basic 2.4 3.4 3.0 3.0 11.9 165 Applied 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hydromechanics and 7.2 7.1 7.7 8.7 30.7 101 hull design Basic 4.8 5.5 5.5 5.4 21.2 94 Applied 2.4 1.6 2.2 3.3 9.5 121 Platform power and 20.2 13.7 20.6 18.7 73.3 852 energy Basic 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.9 6.0 136 Applied 18.8 12.4 19.2 16.8 67.3 1,601 Propulsors 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.4 8.5 105 Basic 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 3.5 82 Applied 1.2 1.4 1.0 1.4 5.0 131 Structural systems 6.5 6.9 4.7 8.1 26.2 133 Basic 4.1 3.7 3.7 3.5 15.0 106 Applied 2.4 3.2 1.0 4.6 11.2 203 Total 40.6 36.1 40.0 44.1 160.8 205 Basic 15.1 16.6 15.7 16.6 64.0 115 Applied 25.5 19.6 24.3 27.5 96.8 421 SOURCE: Tabulations of ONR 331 basic and applied research projects provided to the committee by ONR. to the committee, ONR delineated its research agenda within these categories for FY 2009 by using a combination of specific examples of funded projects and summary tables showing the number of projects and the level of funding in each of the technical areas.
|
From page 70... ...
and few in propulsors ($2.4 million, or 5.4 percent) ; ship design tools ($3.0 million, or 6.8 percent)
|
From page 71... ...
Furthermore, these informal processes do not match the requirements for monitoring and evaluation contained in the 2001 memorandum establishing the NNR-NE, which include monitoring of ONR's traditional output metrics for the NNR-NE as a unified initiative, strategic planning of the NNR-NE, monitoring of the health of the S&T enterprise supporting naval engineering, and annual reporting and periodic external review of the NNR-NE. As a coordinating office that lacks direct authority over the funding and award decisions outside of Code 33, however, whether a project has NNR-NE designation generally does not determine in advance what share of the projects or funding will go toward each category.
|
From page 72... ...
The strategic planning and assessment process should include a process for NNR-NE research fund allocation that is aligned with mis sion area needs and priorities so that resource allocation decisions are guided by a transparent, enterprisewide evaluation process that pri oritizes and evaluates research project merit in a consistent manner across the NNR.
|
From page 73... ...
For allocating projects among university and industry performers, ONR relies heavily on its program officers' assessments of research merit, relevance to Navy missions, the value of sustaining long-term relationships with productive principal investigators, and the need to develop new promising principal investigators. ONR reported to the committee that program officers are mindful of the need to balance the long-term value of continued investment in ongoing research with research breakthrough opportunities and shorter-term needs for research transitions in a constrained funding environment.
|
From page 74... ...
Overall scientific and technical merits of the proposal; 2. Potential Naval relevance and contributions of the effort to the agency's specific mission; 3.
|
From page 75... ...
The committee concludes that no formal process exists within ONR for regular review of Navy mission needs relevant to its S&T planning for new projects with NNR-NE designation or for determination of allocation plans for funding to performer organizations. ONR's performer evaluation process, including that for its NNR-NE portfolio, differs from that of some other government research sponsors in not including an evaluation of its basic research proposals by external peer reviewers.
|
From page 76... ...
The Navy Warfare Centers use peer-review evaluation, with external reviewers encouraged, for proposal selection in certain programs. Box 3-2 describes examples of the use of peer review of project proposals by research organizations within DOD and at other federal agencies.
|
From page 77... ...
The report describes review procedures applying to all stages of the production of scientific research, from project selection and program formation through work in progress to finished products, with the focus on individual projects or on the body of work of an organization. The survey identified two Army research grant-making agencies that conduct external reviews of project proposals.
|
From page 78... ...
Proposers may suggest reviewers for their proposals. The external reviewer evaluations are advisory.
|
From page 79... ...
In addition, the committee received proposals for cooperative research organizational structures from professional societies, university groups, the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) , and the National Shipbuilding Research Program (TRB 2002, 31)
|
From page 80... ...
. At the January 2010 committee workshop, a Warfare Centers participant identified the function of the mission capability manager as a possible model for ONR to emulate.
|
From page 81... ...
Recommendation: To improve communication of operational requirements and the transitioning of technology to naval ships, ONR should implement the concept of a technology interpreter in the NNR-NE. The task of the technology interpreter would be to assist in the technology transition process.
|
From page 82... ...
The performance reports are meant to explain how well actual performance measures up to the plan and what the agency plans to do to narrow the gap between plans and performance. Although such documents are not generally required at the subagency level, high-performing research units recognize the importance of commitments to assessment, measurement, and continuous process improvement (Roberts 1990; Roberts and Rousseau 1989)
|
From page 83... ...
The commit tee also could not determine whether any NNR-NE guiding goals or objectives were tied to strategic plans at the department or agency level. The committee was unable to identify an NNR-NE strategic plan that establishes priorities and identifies measurable objectives, an annual performance plan, or annual performance reports.
|
From page 84... ...
: NSF is reviewing its performance assessment framework, in keeping with the Administration's commitment to establishing an evaluation infrastructure that complements and integrates efforts to strengthen performance measurement and manage ment. This overall effort has been a specific focus of the recent update of the NSF Strategic Plan, which places special emphasis on testing and refining new approaches to assessment and eval uation.
|
From page 85... ...
. Intellectual capital is often thought to be a function of human capital, structural capital, customer capital, and innovation capital, with the relationships among these factors varying by institution, available resources, and setting (Yeniyurt 2003; Chen et al.
|
From page 86... ...
First, they consider whether the portfolio's goals are aligned with the mission of the parent organization or sponsor. Second, they use quantitative and qualitative performance measures along with metrics to assess the intellectual capital, creativity, and productivity of the intellectual enterprise.
|
From page 87... ...
lists its focus areas as fleet and force sustainment, maritime domain awareness, power projection, and power and energy. BOX 3-5 Naval S&T Focus Areas in 2009 Naval S&T Strategic Plan 1.
|
From page 88... ...
Many of the objectives listed in Table 3-2 are related to NNR-NE's mission of developing educated and experienced people, expanding the knowledge base, and cultivating a climate supportive of innovation in the S&T categories that fall within its purview. The objectives on this list, and more generally the objectives highlighted among all 13 focus areas of the 2009 ONR strategic plan, might be a useful starting point for NNR-NE in identifying the broad categories of work in which the Navy has higher-priority interest.
|
From page 89... ...
National Naval Responsibility for Naval Engineering Mission 89 TABLE 3-2 Objectives of the S&T Focus Areas Supported by ONR Code 33 Focus Area Objectives Fleet and force sustainment Sea-based sustainment • Flexible and responsive warehousing • At-sea assembly and reconstitution of forces Flexible and responsive delivery systems • Point-of-delivery systems • Heavy-lift vehicle launch and recovery • Ship-to-shore logistics Integrated logistics • Common operating picture -- logistics • Autonomous resupply systems • Source-to-objective asset visibility Maritime domain awareness Pervasive and persistent sensor networks • All domain coverage • Mission-focused autonomy with near real-time self-tasking • Secure, survivable, self-healing, adaptable, and affordable Identification of hard targets through diverse sensing • Identification of entities and events via electromagnetic signatures • Development of SIGINT capability to understand human activity • Characterization of acoustic signatures • Use of tagging, tracking, and location to declutter battlespace picture Sensor and data integration and threat assessment • Automated image, video, and SIGINT processing • Rapid, accurate, multisource data integration including national and tactile sensors, intelligence, and open-source data • Automated decision tools • Automated ISR sensor retaskings to refine battlespace knowledge Automated assessment of events and entities to determine intent Power and energy Energy security • Alternative and renewable energy sources • Future logistics tools • Resilient power networks and systems Efficient power and energy systems • Materials, devices, and architectures to increase efficiency and power density for platforms and reduce weight for personal power • Efficient power conversion, switching, distribution, control, and thermal management • Engines, motors, generators, and actuators • Electromechanical, thermal, and kinetic energy storage High energy and pulse power • Energy storage power system architectures • Energy pulsed power switching and control systems (continued on next page)
|
From page 90... ...
90 Naval Engineering in the 21st Century TABLE 3-2 Objectives of the S&T Focus Areas Supported by ONR Code 33 (continued) Focus Area Objectives Power projection Future Navy fires • Increased fires volume and accuracy • GPS-denial compensation • Indirect fires to 250 miles from safe offshore locations • Long-range surface warfare capability Control collateral damage • Scalable effects weapons • Selectable and directional lethality Time-critical strike • Hardened target–moving target reach and destroy • Worldwide to meet warfighter requirements Small-unit combat power • Increased small-unit weapon lethality • Neutralize larger hostile forces • Application of Joint Fires • Advanced weapon sights, including multispectral Combat-insensitive munitions • Reduce system sensitivity to sympathetic detonation • Maintain payload range and lethality Survivability and self-defense Platform stealth • Reduce aircraft, above-water, and subsurface signatures • Multispectral LO technologies Force protection • Detect and determine threat intent to interrupt kill chain • Detect and deter small boat and unmanned threats • Antiswimmer technology • Nonlethal response Countermeasures and counterweapons • Threat weapon tracking and weapon–countermeasure–sensor selections • Automated decision making and battle management aids • Low-false-alarm-rate, 360-degree detection • Hard kill and soft kill against threat kinetic weapons • Extend standoff to beyond threat damage range • Directed energy weapons for speed of light engagement • Counter-LO capabilities Survivable platforms • Advanced platform construction materials • Damage-tolerant platform architectures • Automated damage-control focusing • Advanced materials for self-healing platforms
|
From page 91... ...
• Higher-performance platforms at reduced fuel consumption • Efficient, all-terrain, lighter, more agile ground vehicles includ ing suspensions and drivetrains • Manned vessel launch and recovery • Operator guidance tools • Lightweight, higher-strength advanced composites and struc tural metals for optimized platform performance Vertical lift operations in challenging environments • High-performance vertical and short takeoff and landing • High sea states launch and recovery technology to enable manned or unmanned air operations Autonomous and unmanned vehicle mobility • New unmanned platform design technology • Advanced robotic systems for air, ground, and sea combat • Unmanned vessel launch and recovery Total ownership cost Platform affordability • Advanced modeling and simulation for design, test, and eval uation • Advanced naval materials • Open architecture for hardware and software • Low-cost, reliable sensors and electronics • Innovative manufacturing technologies Maintenance and life-cycle cost • Condition-based maintenance systems • Anticorrosion and antifouling technologies • Wear-resistant lifetime materials • Energy-efficient systems • Software reliability Manning optimization • Human–systems integration • System automation • Autonomous systems NOTE: GPS = Global Positioning System; LO = low observable; ISR = intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; SIGINT = signals intelligence.
|
From page 92... ...
The research objectives for NNR-NE that ONR establishes in the recommended enterprisewide strategic planning and assessment process should relate to its three interrelated missions: developing educated and experienced people, expanding the knowledge base, and cultivating a climate supportive of innovation. For example, ONR might establish a goal for the number of undergraduates, graduates, and postdoctoral candidates to be offered fellowships each year.
|
From page 93... ...
For applied research or advanced technology development projects, NNR-NE might develop objectives related to technology transition into Navy R&D projects at the BA 3 level and above. Because the development of a climate of innovation is also one of the organization's charter missions, it appears that NNR-NE should also develop objectives related to this area.
|
From page 94... ...
– Patents and licenses – Citations • Transitions – BA 1 to BA 2 transitions – Transition to Innovative Naval Prototype and Future Naval Capability – Transition to program offices • People – STEM program – Advanced degrees completed – Participants joining naval warfare labs Qualitative measures could be established by assessing performance in each of these areas as good, fair, or poor. The resulting template is shown in Table 3-3.
|
From page 95... ...
As a means to improve on measuring outcomes and evaluating results for NNR-NE, the committee-commissioned paper on transitioning technology to naval ships provides seven recommendations for improving S&T technology transition in general based on lessons learned from case studies (Doerry 2010)
|
From page 96... ...
As noted in the commissioned paper: The current model favoring transitioning technology directly from S&T to products directly supporting acquisition programs has lead to the R&D "Valley of Death." The principal cause of the "Valley of Death" is that a ship acquisition program has a very short window following Milestone A to fund technology development that will mature in time to support integration into the overall ship design process. Technology that is not perceived to be ready during this short window will typically not be incorporated.
|
From page 97... ...
. Sustaining an adequate naval engineering pipeline and achieving the twin goals of developing human capital and revitalizing naval ship systems engineering require a focus on ensuring effective connections
|
From page 98... ...
and professional societies [e.g., the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME) , the American Society of Naval Engineers (ASNE)
|
From page 99... ...
With regard to the ability to meet human capital and naval engineering and design objectives, the consortium model was found better than the professional society model, but both were significantly better than the project-centered model. The 2002 NRC committee, however, suggested that the absolute ranking of these models should depend on the relative importance given by sponsors to each objective.
|
From page 100... ...
Regardless of the model selected, the ability to foster development of total ship engineers depends on the opportunities for attainment of the necessary formal education and design experience. Enabling People A critical aspect of developing human capital and revitalizing the naval ship systems engineering community is enabling the people who make up that community.
|
From page 101... ...
Recommendation: ONR's enterprisewide strategic planning and assessment process for NNR-NE should include the following: • A process to develop NNR-NE strategic priorities with respect to connectivity with the wider naval engineering community as well as with respect to communication with stakeholders, technical advisory groups, the user community, and the broader research community. The process should include adoption of one or more of the cooperative research models reviewed in the report of the 2002 NRC Committee on Options for Naval Engineering Cooper ative Research; • A process to identify NNR-NE priorities associated with human capital and organizational development; and • Metrics associated with connectivity with the naval engineering community and human capital and organizational development.
|
From page 102... ...
The NNR-NE interdisciplinary and integrative research objectives should be established as part of the strate gic planning processes and should include assessment, benchmarking, and continuous process improvement components. DEVELOPING HUMAN CAPITAL AND REVITALIZING NAVAL SHIP SYSTEMS ENGINEERING The 1990s were a period of great change within DOD and the Department of the Navy precipitated by the fall of the former Soviet Union, the end of the cold war, and the desire to capitalize on the so-called "peace
|
From page 103... ...
NAVSEA headquarters alone saw the cadre of highly experienced naval ship design engineers shrink from about 1,200 in 1992 to fewer than 300 in 2005 (Keane et al.
|
From page 104... ...
for Ship Design Acquisition Workforce Improvement. The Ship Design Management HCS will ensure a highly experienced warship design workforce to sustain NAVSEA as the nation's leader in naval ship design" (Keane et al.
|
From page 105... ...
. The naval engineering human capital pipeline is illustrated in Figure 3-1.
|
From page 106... ...
Printed with permission from the National Shipbuilding Research Program, from the Shipbuilding Engineering Education Consortium Viability and Operational Concepts Final Report, June 16, 2009.)
|
From page 107... ...
. This demand estimate appears inconsistent with the report's estimate of total employment of naval engineers in these sectors of 15,000 (National Shipbuilding Research Program 2009, 21)
|
From page 108... ...
; and • Leveraging NAVSEA funding under the Naval Engineering Education Center Consortium to support SeaPerch and other initiatives. REFERENCES Abbreviations AFOSR Air Force Office of Scientific Research ASNE American Society of Naval Engineers DHS Department of Homeland Security DON Department of the Navy GAO General Accounting Office or Government Accountability Office NRC National Research Council NSF National Science Foundation ONR Office of Naval Research TRB Transportation Research Board AFOSR.
|
From page 109... ...
2000. Naval Engineering: A National Naval Obligation.
|
From page 110... ...
2009. A Human Capital Strategy for Ship Design Acquisition Workforce Improvement: The U.S.
|
From page 111... ...
2001. Memorandum: National Naval Program for Naval Engineering.
|
From page 112... ...
112 Naval Engineering in the 21st Century U.S. Department of Commerce.
|
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.