I know your office is relatively new, but have you seen any change in the availability or diversity of industry and academic researchers or Navy specialists to pursue Navy R&D?
It’s been on-again, off-again, but this office did exist under different names for the past 40 years.
In terms of the academic/industry side, we are very focused on the DoD sector, which already has done some culling from the community at large. Citizenship is a big challenge for DoD, but industries in the defense sector already have factored that into the people they hire.
The explosion of available data has not necessarily increased the information we need to make good decisions or our ability to conduct military operations. We recently completed a study with the Marine Corps and NRAC on information overload. The Corps is very interested in what they call “lightening the load” – some of that is pounds on the back, but also the information load, which is becoming a bigger and bigger problem for us to understand how to extract the information from the data that overwhelm us.
In the defense industrial sector and DoD labs, we are seeing trends toward more diversity in the workforce. On the academia side, however, there is an increasing foreign population in the STEM career fields. So even though the country is producing STEM graduates at increasing or level rates, a smaller number of them are eligible to work in defense industry or government laboratories.
In Navy-important areas, where we don’t have a huge commercial base to pull from, we closely watch some areas. One is nuclear engineers, because it takes so long to train them and ensure they are properly qualified to do the job, so we pay great attention to that pipeline. In the past 10 years we have actually increased the number of nuclear engineers we have and the average age of those in the Navy has been declining, which is a move in the right direction.
Another area we worry about is naval architects. It’s not just understanding how to design and build a ship, but understanding how to design and build a warship. So we establish relationships with the universities so those students who are studying naval architecture are aware of opportunities inside the Navy and DoD, not just those inside the commercial sector.
Chief Aviation Machinist’s Mate Eddie Casusol, from New York, reviews test data from an F/A-18 engine test in the jet shop aboard the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74). The Navy is researching ways to manage the ever-increasing quantities of data. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Charlotte C. Oliver
And, like everybody else, we worry about the folks in IT.
Perhaps related to that, what about dealing with ever-increasing quantities of information and data?
The explosion of available data has not necessarily increased the information we need to make good decisions or our ability to conduct military operations. We recently completed a study with the Marine Corps and NRAC on information overload. The Corps is very interested in what they call “lightening the load” – some of that is pounds on the back, but also the information load, which is becoming a bigger and bigger problem for us to understand how to extract the information from the data that overwhelm us.
In other areas, we are no longer driving the industry nor do we need to drive the industry. In the 1950s, perhaps we really were the driver in some of the electronics industry, but that has become pervasive and we no longer need to be the driver.
There are significant technology investments needed to figure that out. The Navy, ONR and DoD writ large are making investments in that arena. There are commercial parties also making investments, because they, too, are being overwhelmed with data.
Overall, how dependent is the government – especially the military – on commercial R&D?
It depends. The nature of the various sectors and technologies vary. In some areas, there is no commercial equivalent, so we are not terribly dependent. Warships, for example. In other areas, we are no longer driving the industry nor do we need to drive the industry. In the 1950s, perhaps we really were the driver in some of the electronics industry, but that has become pervasive and we no longer need to be the driver.
Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division kicked off the Foundation for Underwater Research and Education’s 12th International Human-Powered Submarine Races in the David Taylor Model Basin, West Bethesda, Md., June 24, 2013. U.S. Navy photo by Devin Pisner
We need to focus on something perhaps a little different – not the basic technology of the electronics, but an understanding of the technology, to make sure it is what we think it is and has the built-in security and surety you need for the military problem. So we no longer need to be the big driver of the basic technology, but may need to be the driver for some of the wrappers that go around it. In different sectors, we need to have a different understanding and need to be in a different place relative to driving the technology.