In peace, technological superiority is a key element of deterrence. In crisis, it provides a wide spectrum of options to the National Command Authorities and commanders in chief, while providing confidence to our allies. In war, it enhances combat effectiveness, reduces casualties, and minimizes equipment loss. In view of declining defense budgets and manpower reductions, advancing military technology and ensuring that it undergoes rapid transition to the warfighter are national security obligations of ever greater importance.

To fulfill these obligations, the Director, Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E), has continually enhanced the strategic planning process for defense S&T. The foundation of this process is the Defense Science and Technology Strategy with its supporting Basic Research Plan (BRP), Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan (JWSTP), and Defense Technology Area Plan (DTAP) (References 1-4). These documents present the DoD S&T vision, strategy, plan, and objectives for the planners, programmers, and performers of defense S&T.

These documents are a collaborative product of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Joint Staff, military services, and defense agencies. The strategy and plans are fully responsive to the National Security S&T Council's National Security Science and Technology Strategy (Reference 5) and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's Vision and Joint Vision 2010 (JV 2010) (Reference 6), as shown in Figure 1. The strategy and plans and supporting individual S&T master plans of the military services and defense agencies guide the annual preparation of the defense program and budget. The strategy and plans are made available to the U.S. Government, defense contractors, and our allies with the goal of better focusing our collective efforts on superior joint warfare capabilities and improving interoperability between the United States and our allies.

Defense Science and Technology Strategy (Reference 1). The Defense Science and Technology Strategy is responsive to the Secretary of Defense's vision to "develop and transition superior technology to enable affordable, decisive military capability." The strategy focuses on four generic considerations that have high priority in making strategic decisions about which technologies are pursued:

• Affordability. Where appropriate, S&T projects must focus on increasing the effectiveness of a capability and decreasing cost, increasing operational life, and incrementally improving material through planned upgrades.

• Dual Use. The S&T program must contribute to building a common industrial base by using commercial practices, processes, and products, and by developing, where possible, technology that can be the base for both military and commercial products and applications.

• Accelerated Transition. Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs) are a key element in the S&T program to focus science and technology on supporting military needs and problems, expediting transitions, and providing a sound basis for acquisition decisions.

• Strong Technology Base. The technology base generates DoD's legacy to tomorrow's warfighter. Accordingly, it is imperative to maintain a stable technology base investment to develop options for the truly long term—beyond the threats, situations, and budgets that we can predict.

Biomimetics Nanoscience Smart structures

Mobile wireless communications Intelligent systems Compact power sources

Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan (Reference 3). The JWSTP takes a joint perspective horizontally across the Applied Research (6.2) and Advanced Technology Development (6.3) plans of the services and defense agencies to ensure that the requisite technology and advanced concepts for superior joint and coalition warfighting are supported. It ensures that the near-, mid-, and long-term needs of the joint warfighter are properly balanced and supported in the S&T planning, programming, budgeting, and assessment activities of DoD. The JWSTP is focused around 10 Joint Warfighting Capability Objectives (JWCOs). These objectives support the Joint Warfighting Capability Assessment (JWCA) and the four operational concepts emphasized in JV 2010: dominant maneuver, precision engagement, full-dimension protection, and focused logistics. A significant feature of the JWSTP is the identification of mechanisms for the timely transition of technology to the warfighter in the field before it becomes obsolete or falls in the hands of our adversaries.

Defense Technology Area Plan (Reference 4). This DTAP presents the DoD objectives and the Applied Research (6.2) and Advanced Technology Development (6.3) investment strategy for technologies critical to DoD acquisition plans, service warfighter capabilities, and the JWSTP. It also takes a horizontal perspective across the service and defense agency efforts, thereby charting the total DoD investment for a given technology. The DTAP documents the focus, content, and principal objectives of the overall DoD science and technology efforts. This plan provides a sound basis for acquisition decisions and is structured to respond to the DDR&E emphasis on rapid transition of technology to the operational forces. A separaately bound annex to this DTAP provides an assessment of the potential technology capabilities of other countries vis-à-vis the United States.

Taken together, the BRP, JWSTP, and DTAP provide programming guidance for the DoD S&T community.

S&T STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS

Oversight. The Director, Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E), is responsible for the overall direction, quality, and content of the DoD S&T Program. The DDR&E has established an integrated S&T strategic planning process to effectively discharge these responsibilities. This process is accomplished and coordinated through Defense Science and Technology Reliance. Development of the BRP, DTAP, and JWSTP is the responsibility of the Defense S&T Reliance Executive Committee (EXCOM). Membership of the EXCOM is shown below:

When significant actions are undertaken, an Expanded EXCOM is convened to ensure the widest possible coordination within the DoD research and development community. The membership of the Expanded EXCOM is shown below:

The EXCOM oversees the work of the Defense Committee on Research (DCOR), which is responsible for preparation of the BRP; the 10 technology area panels responsible for preparation of the DTAP; and the 10 JWCO panels responsible for preparation of the JWSTP. These plans build on—but do not duplicate—the service/agency S&T plans. They also consider recent technology forecasts such as OSD's Revolution in Military Affairs, the Air Force's New World Vistas, the Army's Force XXI and Army After Next, the Navy's Navy After Next, and the Marine Corps' Sea Dragon efforts.

To ensure that the integrated S&T planning is responsive to the strategy, the Defense S&T Reliance network has developed the following goals to guide the effort:

• Enhance the quality of Defense S&T activities and develop world-class products.

• Ensure the existence of critical masses of resources.

• Reduce redundant S&T capabilities and eliminate unwarranted duplication.

• Gain productivity and efficiency through collocation and consolidation of in-house S&T work.

• Preserve the vital mission-essential capabilities of the services throughout the process.

The DTOs are presented in a separate volume in two parts—one for this DTAP and one for the JWSTP. The DTAP DTO number consists of a two-letter prefix corresponding to the names of the 10 technology areas addressed in this document, a two-digit numeral that represents the DTO sequence, and a second two-digit numeral that is an undefined field. The letter prefix for the JWSTP DTO number corresponds to the 10 sections (A through J) in Chapter IV of that document, followed by a two-digit sequence number. Thus, DTO numbers easily distinguish JWSTP from DTAP DTOs. The DTO sequence numbers do not connote priorities.

DTAP Development. The 10 technology area panel chairpersons are responsible for preparing their respective DTAP chapters. Technology area panel membership consists of service and appropriate defense agency technical specialists, with a senior service S&T manager serving as chairperson. These individuals have continued the integrated planning activities initiated under the Tri-Service S&T Reliance. The 10 technology area panels, the service chairs, and the DDR&E staff points of contact are shown in Figure 2.

The DTAP identifies the anticipated return on investment through 205 DTOs. More than half of the DTOs are supported by two or more services or defense agencies. Allocation of Defense S&T resources must also consider service-unique requirements, which are not addressed in detail in this DTAP. The execution of the S&T programs to attain the DTOs and service-unique objectives is accomplished through the service and defense agency plans, as shown in Figure 1.

Enabling and Support Technologies. The DTOs provide focus for the development of technologies that address an identified military need. This DTAP also addresses the continued development of the enabling technologies that are critical to sustaining the DTOs, laying the foundation for future DTOs, and precluding technological surprise. These technology development activities involve proof-of-concept experiments, laboratory demonstrations, and evaluations supported by models and simulations. The technology developments also provide for the investigation of innovative technologies that could have significant impact on military applications across a broad spectrum of applications. Investment in enabling technologies supports the S&T strategy goal of maintaining a strong technology base.

Review and Assessment. After publication of the plans documents, Technology Area Reviews and Assessments (TARAs) are held for each of the 10 DTAP technology areas, the basic research program, and the manufacturing technology program. These reviews are conducted by TARA teams. At least two-thirds of the TARA team members are from outside DoD. Most TARA team members are recognized experts from the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine, the Defense Science Board, the scientific advisory boards of the military departments, industry, and academia. The TARA team is chaired by a senior executive appointed by the DDR&E. The appropriate representatives from the Defense S&T Reliance Technical Panel brief the DoD program as compared to the planning guidance. Special S&T issues identified by the DDR&E and applicable JWSTP ACTDs are also reviewed.

Following the review, the TARA chair briefs the findings and recommendations to the DDR&E-chaired Defense Science and Technology Advisory Group (DSTAG). Included in this briefing are the TARA chair's program recommendations for termination, adjustment, and enhancement to better align the S&T program to comply with the guidance. Based on DSTAG recommendations and decisions, the DDR&E briefs the issues to the Program Review Group (PRG), and program decision memorandums (PDMs) are issued as needed. The TARA process is shown in Figure 3.

RESOURCES

Table 1 lists the combined Exploratory Development (6.2) and Advanced Technology Development (6.3) S&T funding associated with the DTAP. The portion of DTAP funding related to DTOs is also included. Total 6.2 and 6.3 resource funding for each technology area is presented as the appendix to this DTAP.

The DTAP identifies the advanced concepts and enabling technologies that are essential to enhancing high-priority joint warfighting needs and that will receive funding precedence in the President's Budget and accompanying FYDP.

The following chapters describe the technology development plans for each of the 10 technology areas. The strategic goals and acquisition and warfighting needs identified for the technical area are presented, along with a list of the applicable DTOs. These are followed by discussion of each subarea wherein the specific warfighter needs, goals, and timeframes; major technical challenges; related federal and private efforts; and S&T investment strategy are identified. Each chapter concludes with a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms unique to that discussion. A separately bound annex provides an assessment that rates the general status of foreign capabilities in each of the technology subareas addressed. The United States is included in each table so that an appraisal can be made as to a country's relative capability. The full text of each DTO is given in the Defense Technology Objectives of the Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan and the Defense Technology Area Plan, contained in a separate volume.

1. Defense Science and Technology Strategy, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, May 1996, reprinted January 1997

2. Basic Research Plan, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, January 1997

3. Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, January 1997

4. Defense Technology Area Plan, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, January 1997

5. National Security Science and Technology Strategy, National Science and Technology Council, 1995

6. Joint Vision 2010, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1996

7. Defense Technology Objectives of the Joint Warfighting Science and Technology Plan and the Defense Technology Area Plan, Director of Defense Research and Engineering, January 1997