News 1998 Army Science and Technology Master Plan



F. Science and Technology Review

TRADOC conducts an annual (December–April) review of all Army 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 S&T work to give the combat developer an opportunity to review and assess the relevance of the S&T work efforts to the warfighter concepts. It also provides feedback to the materiel developers on the relative merits of each S&T effort. The results from the S&T review will be used by the combat developer to identify potential STO candidates. The review also provides information on perceived shortfalls and redundancies in the Army S&T work efforts (see Figure II–7).

Figure II-7. TRADOC S&T Reviews
Click on the image to view enlarged version

G. Science and Technology Objectives Review

TRADOC serves as the executive agent on behalf of the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Research and Technology) (DAS(R&T)) for the execution of the annual STO review. The STO review provides the forum for the user and developer communities to vote on the warfighting and technical merit of each proposed STO. STO reviews provide the follow–on mechanism to the S&T review that further defines and aligns users’ requirements and the materiel developer’s efforts. The STO is a necessary link in the S&T cycle (see Figures II–8 and II–9).

Figure II-8. Army S&T Objective Review
Click on the image to view enlarged version

Figure II-9. S&T Objective Process
Click on the image to view enlarged version

H. Advanced Technology Demonstration Review

The STO review provides a basis for ATDs. TRADOC participates in ATDs via battle laboratories and DCDs. TRADOC and the materiel developer (MATDEV) jointly develop a demonstration plan with agreed–upon exit criteria to execute the ATD. ATD management plans are briefed to and recommended by a COC prior to approval at the Army Science and Technology Working Group (ASTWG). ATDs are resource intensive and provide the medium to conduct troop interaction with mature technologies. ATDs have provided significant contributions to the soldiers on the battlefield. The Battle Laboratory Integration, Technology, and Concepts Directorate (BLITCD) serves as the primary coordinator for all ATDs.

I. Advanced Concepts and Technology II Program

The ACT II program was initiated in 1994 to give industry direct access into the battle labs to streamline materiel acquisition and to help give warfighters overmatch capabilities. ACT II competitively funds industry to demonstrate its advanced technologies, prototypes, and NDIs having the greatest potential to fulfill warfighting requirements. Demonstrations are conducted for the battle laboratories in 12 months or less.

The battle labs develop topics to be solicited via a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) based on the results of the S&T and STO review processes. These reviews identify gaps and shortfalls in current S&T efforts. Those FOCs lacking Army S&T work are presented as ACT II topics. Those project proposals that can potentially be addressed by industry and best meet the needs of the Army are selected for funding (Figure II–10).

Figure II-10. Advanced Concepts and Technology II Program
Click on the image to view enlarged version

J. Summary

These concurrent evaluations of the Army’s S&T efforts provide an overlapping assurance that the materiel developers stay focused on the warfighting requirements of the future. They provide a means by which efforts can be validated or refocused, duplication can be eliminated, and gaps can be filled.

K. Army After Next Linkage to the Science and Technology Community

The AAN project conducts broad studies of warfare to about the year 2025 to frame issues vital to the development of the Army after about 2010, and provides these issues to the senior Army leadership in a format suitable for integration into TRADOC combat development programs. Studies are currently pursued in four areas focused out to 2025: geopolitics, military art, human and organizational behavior, and technology. The AAN project conducts its studies through an annual cycle of wargames and workshops that culminates in an Annual Report to the Chief of Staff, Army (CSA).

AAN technology insights and issues are developed using networks of technologists from government (DoD and non-DoD), industry, and academia. To ensure that these insights and issues are fed into the S&T investment process and the combat developments process, the AAN project has established close relationships with Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition), AMC, the Army Research Laboratory, The Army Research Office, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, as well as the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans and members of the TRADOC combat developments community, to include BLITCD and the battle labs.

While TRADOC’s DCSCD presents the commander’s position on S&T investments, the AAN project works in concert with the DCSCD to describe the enabling technologies assessed as crucial to the U.S. Army in 2010 to 2025. In particular, the AAN perspective is now sought to determine S&T investments in a certain percentage of 6.1 and early 6.2 programs. In order to carry this out, the AAN project and DCSCD work together in an expanding set of S&T processes. These include the Triennial 6.1 Program Review, the development of Army SROs, and the selection of AAN STOs.

This close working relationship between the AAN project and the DCSCD ensures that the task of handing off technology insights to the combat developments community is a continuous process based on two–way communications. In addition, the challenge of providing continuity from current forces and Army XXI forces to forces in 2025 is met.

The AAN project will support the Army in developing unique partnerships with key members of the S&T community to develop the critical technologies needed for future warfighting. One such player is DARPA, which is already working with the Army to explore innovative concepts and technologies. Other areas of focus include ways to speed up acquisition agility to keep pace with accelerating changes in technology, and innovative business practices that can help to rapidly transform ideas into capabilities (see Figures II–11 and II–12).

Figure II-11. Influences on the Army's Future - Getting to AAN and Beyond
Click on the image to view enlarged version

Figure II-12. Army XXI to AAN Decision Points
Click on the image to view enlarged version

Click here to go to next page of document