The Navy’s research head revealed a new strategic direction document last week at the 2017 Naval Future Force Science and Technology Expo.
Rear Adm. David Hahn, chief of Naval Research (CNR) and head of the Office of Naval Research (ONR), unveiled the new framework, which is meant to echo a change in thinking about how naval researchers need to accelerate capabilities for warfighters.
Chief of Naval Research and head of the Office on Naval Research (ONR). Photo: U.S. Navy.
“It outlines how we align research to naval priorities, allocate our investment portfolios and accelerate decision-making to speed business execution,” he said July 20. It aims to sketch processes for quickly moving new technologies from basic research to finishes products for use in the services.
“From discovery to deployment, innovative U.S. naval technology has been essential to mission success. We’re going to ensure that continues,” Hahn added.
ONR described the framework, called Naval Research and Development: A Framework for Accelerating to the Navy and Marine Corps after Next, as a first-time shift to a “full-spectrum” way of looking at research, development, and acquisition for the future naval force.
The framework was developed because the U.S. technological advantage is diminishing as American technology development and adoption moves slower due to outdated behaviors and incentives, the document says. Institutional factors include things like fragmented decision-making, a lack of common priorities for decision-making across the research, development, test and evaluation spectrum, and a diffused strategic direction. This drags development, encourages risk aversion, and “erodes the will to kill underperforming technologies.”
The document says the secretary of the Navy, chief of Naval Operations (CNO), and commandant of the Marine Corps have challenged the R&D community to find ways to hasten technology development and delivery to forces, partially leading to this document.
“There is broad consensus that the current pace of technology development and adoption is unsatisfactory, and that without significant reform, we will lose the competition for maritime superiority,” the document says.
The framework, written in a general way, has three main components: align early research, development, and demonstration to priority technology requirements; allocate investments for a higher payoff in lethality, integration, and interoperability; and accelerate capability adoption to match technology innovation. ONR claims these components develop evolutionary and revolutionary capabilities while reducing cost and increasing speed.
The document specifically tasks the CNR with further developing and executing the framework with Program Executive Officers, System Commanders, resource sponsors, and other stakeholders.
The framework names five main priorities it has to align across the Navy R&D community: augmented warfighter; integrated and distributed forces; operational endurance; sense and sense-making; and scalable lethality.
ONR explained four factors for portfolio allocation decision: technology-unique timelines; evolutionary and revolutionary capabilities; resource efficiency technical lead vs. follow for R&D; and appropriate allocation of risk.
Finally, ONR noted three goals to guide implementation on how to accelerate and adopt capabilities. This includes:
- alignment to priorities so technology development moves from a system to mission-centric mindset;
- agile and responsive business so the speed of the naval R&D business decisions and execution are faster than the pace of technology innovation; and
- empowerment of people in the research enterprise so authority is pushed to the innovator level where persons in all positions have latitude, motivation, and sense of urgency to find the best ways to do their work.
Last Friday, during a keynote speech, CNO Adm. John Richardson endorsed the document and reiterated the importance of technological developments in increasing the Navy’s capacity quicker than merely building new ships.
Richardson repeated some of the points he made in June at a speech at the Naval War Collee (Defense Daily, June 14) about how the Navy needs to increase ship numbers, add new capabilities, and potentially network all of the assets together to reach greater capacity quickly.
He framed the need to change within an underlying thesis that the world is returning to an era of maritime competition after U.S. dominance over blue water areas for 20 to 25 years. “We are back in competition,” Richardson said.
Advances by Russia, China, and others countries’ militaries means the U.S. Navy has to change. The uncontested environment allowed the U.S. to become complacent with byzantine organizations and action burdensome, the CNO said. Meanwhile, these newer and leaner navies are inherently hungry and competitive.
The U.S. is still in the lead for naval forces and capabilities, but the momentum of the “game” has moved out of the U.S. favor, Richardson said. He illustrated this by noting that after the U.S. and its allies and partners recently concluded the BALTOPS exercise in the Baltic Sea, now Russian and China are conducting a bilateral naval and amphibious exercise in the Kaliningrad region of Russia for the first time.
Kaliningrad is a Russian enclave separated from the rest of the country and is surrounded by the Baltic Sea, Poland, and Lithuania.
Richardson also noted the Chinese People’s Liberation Army- Navy also conducted a live fire exercise this year in the eastern Mediterranean.