Use It Or Lose It?
Use It Or Lose It? Does The Expanding Mission Space Of The National Laboratories Offer A Path To Transformation?
Lucas M. Feldner Sandia National Laboratories Electronics Systems Center
Elements of a Responsive Infrastructure * Excellent, trained, well-managed workforce Enhanced science and technology base including modern, maintained research facilities Efficient, modern, “right-sized” manufacturing facilities Revamped business practices and technical processes that permit rapid and flexible response to emerging needs
Frequent, end-to-end exercise of key capabilities – to remain highly responsive – to train the next-generation workforce
* Dr. John Harvey, Director, Policy & Planning, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy, presentation given to the 36th Annual IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, Washington, DC, December 14-15, 2005. June 14, 2006
Feldner
2
NW Budget will NOT increase Stockpile Stewardship Program RRW as a (politically palatable) path to transformation AFORDABILITY IS KEY NW Activities Funding FY1985 – FY2011 Millions of FY07 Dollars
Source: www.nnsa.doe.gov
June 14, 2006
Feldner
3
NNSA Labs: Expanding Mission Space Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Homeland Security & Defense Energy & Infrastructure Military Technologies and Applications Science, Technology, Engineering June 14, 2006
SNL FY05 Acutual Revenue by Source DOE Weapons 54% Other DOE 15% WFO 31%
TACMS-P
Feldner
4
WFO: the rapidly growing business areas for the Labs A strength to NWC, not a threat Non-NW work allows recruitment and retention of the “best and brightest” Non-NW work does not have same budget pressures and long term profiles Keep technical staff engaged in work critical to our National security Many key RI capabilities can and should be exercised in non-NW applications June 14, 2006
Feldner
5
From Dependence to Interdependence Technology Flow
NWC
WFO
WFO work grew out of S&T base developed for NW work As we journey down the path of transformation, is it time to ask not only what the NWC can do for WFO, but what WFO can do for the RI of the future? What can we do to take advantage of the significant capabilities emerging in WFO work? June 14, 2006
Feldner
6
Some Suggestions Remove artificial distinction between NW and non-NW work where appropriate – –
Often technical staff forced to choose between NW and WFO career paths Encourage crosscross-fertilization between NW/WFO expertise
– Manage perception of NW work among new staff
Develop and exploit strategic synergies between Non-NEP NW technology development programs and WFO –
S&T focus emphasized over program specific focus
Exercising elements of the RI on WFO enables both agility and affordability – – –
Spread cost burden Always fully engaged and dynamic/adaptable (SSP, RRW and WFO) Frequent demonstrations of key capabilities
Remove bureaucratic roadblocks to WFO work at NNSA Labs –
Retain requirement to demonstrate relevance to NW mission
June 14, 2006
Feldner
7
Beyond Simply COTS Insertion Modern electronics industry driven by commercial market forces (not defense industry) – Defense industry adapting to this by using COTS components and processes wherever possible
WR COTS insertion arduous and costly (eg: AF&Fs)
– Technology sunset issues, Life-of-Program Procurements – Treat AF&F as a Limited-Life-Component? Shorter lifetimes mitigate sunset/obsolescence issues Faster development cycles (more like WFO work)
Design methodologies need to be easy to qualify – – –
Qualify Technologies not individual components Push qualification up to sub-system (not component) level Easier to transfer technologies between weapon systems (modularity)
June 14, 2006
Feldner
8
More Collaboration across the complex… including industrial base? “Modular” design practices (including peer reviews) need not be limited to NNSA labs/plants Similar strategic environments and reliability requirements for weapon payloads and delivery systems (DoD contractors) “Pockets” of redundant expertise across aerospace community – – –
Same “trusted” foundries? (quickly leaving US) Similar manufacturing/business practices? PONI-like venue (only technical) for scientists and engineers in strategic fields?
June 14, 2006
Feldner
9
References Report of the Commission on Maintaining United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise, March 1, 1999 (“Chiles Report”) Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Future Strategic Strike Skills, March 2, 2006 Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Nuclear Weapon Effects Test, Evaluation, and Simulation, April 2005 Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on High Performance Microchip Supply, February 2005 W. Frank Moore, Sector Vice President & General Manager, Missile Defense Division, Northrop Grumman Mission Systems, transcript of speech given to the 36th Annual IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, Washington, DC, December 14-15, 2005. John Harvey, Director, Policy & Planning, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy, transcript of speech given to the 36th Annual IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, Washington, DC, December 14-15, 2005.
June 14, 2006
Feldner
10
Lucas M. Feldner Sandia National Laboratories Electronics Systems Center
Elements of a Responsive Infrastructure * Excellent, trained, well-managed workforce Enhanced science and technology base including modern, maintained research facilities Efficient, modern, “right-sized” manufacturing facilities Revamped business practices and technical processes that permit rapid and flexible response to emerging needs
Frequent, end-to-end exercise of key capabilities – to remain highly responsive – to train the next-generation workforce
* Dr. John Harvey, Director, Policy & Planning, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy, presentation given to the 36th Annual IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, Washington, DC, December 14-15, 2005. June 14, 2006
Feldner
2
NW Budget will NOT increase Stockpile Stewardship Program RRW as a (politically palatable) path to transformation AFORDABILITY IS KEY NW Activities Funding FY1985 – FY2011 Millions of FY07 Dollars
Source: www.nnsa.doe.gov
June 14, 2006
Feldner
3
NNSA Labs: Expanding Mission Space Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Homeland Security & Defense Energy & Infrastructure Military Technologies and Applications Science, Technology, Engineering June 14, 2006
SNL FY05 Acutual Revenue by Source DOE Weapons 54% Other DOE 15% WFO 31%
TACMS-P
Feldner
4
WFO: the rapidly growing business areas for the Labs A strength to NWC, not a threat Non-NW work allows recruitment and retention of the “best and brightest” Non-NW work does not have same budget pressures and long term profiles Keep technical staff engaged in work critical to our National security Many key RI capabilities can and should be exercised in non-NW applications June 14, 2006
Feldner
5
From Dependence to Interdependence Technology Flow
NWC
WFO
WFO work grew out of S&T base developed for NW work As we journey down the path of transformation, is it time to ask not only what the NWC can do for WFO, but what WFO can do for the RI of the future? What can we do to take advantage of the significant capabilities emerging in WFO work? June 14, 2006
Feldner
6
Some Suggestions Remove artificial distinction between NW and non-NW work where appropriate – –
Often technical staff forced to choose between NW and WFO career paths Encourage crosscross-fertilization between NW/WFO expertise
– Manage perception of NW work among new staff
Develop and exploit strategic synergies between Non-NEP NW technology development programs and WFO –
S&T focus emphasized over program specific focus
Exercising elements of the RI on WFO enables both agility and affordability – – –
Spread cost burden Always fully engaged and dynamic/adaptable (SSP, RRW and WFO) Frequent demonstrations of key capabilities
Remove bureaucratic roadblocks to WFO work at NNSA Labs –
Retain requirement to demonstrate relevance to NW mission
June 14, 2006
Feldner
7
Beyond Simply COTS Insertion Modern electronics industry driven by commercial market forces (not defense industry) – Defense industry adapting to this by using COTS components and processes wherever possible
WR COTS insertion arduous and costly (eg: AF&Fs)
– Technology sunset issues, Life-of-Program Procurements – Treat AF&F as a Limited-Life-Component? Shorter lifetimes mitigate sunset/obsolescence issues Faster development cycles (more like WFO work)
Design methodologies need to be easy to qualify – – –
Qualify Technologies not individual components Push qualification up to sub-system (not component) level Easier to transfer technologies between weapon systems (modularity)
June 14, 2006
Feldner
8
More Collaboration across the complex… including industrial base? “Modular” design practices (including peer reviews) need not be limited to NNSA labs/plants Similar strategic environments and reliability requirements for weapon payloads and delivery systems (DoD contractors) “Pockets” of redundant expertise across aerospace community – – –
Same “trusted” foundries? (quickly leaving US) Similar manufacturing/business practices? PONI-like venue (only technical) for scientists and engineers in strategic fields?
June 14, 2006
Feldner
9
References Report of the Commission on Maintaining United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise, March 1, 1999 (“Chiles Report”) Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Future Strategic Strike Skills, March 2, 2006 Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Nuclear Weapon Effects Test, Evaluation, and Simulation, April 2005 Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on High Performance Microchip Supply, February 2005 W. Frank Moore, Sector Vice President & General Manager, Missile Defense Division, Northrop Grumman Mission Systems, transcript of speech given to the 36th Annual IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, Washington, DC, December 14-15, 2005. John Harvey, Director, Policy & Planning, National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy, transcript of speech given to the 36th Annual IFPA-Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy, Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, Washington, DC, December 14-15, 2005.
June 14, 2006
Feldner
10
