DOCSLIB.ORG

Acquisition and Development Challenges Associated with the Littoral Combat Ship

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Acquisition and Development Challenges Associated with the Littoral Combat Ship i [H.A.S.C. No. 113–51] ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION HEARING HELD JULY 25, 2013 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 82–466 WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected]. SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia, Chairman K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina DUNCAN HUNTER, California JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi RICK LARSEN, Washington ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., Georgia MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado COLLEEN W. HANABUSA, Hawaii JON RUNYAN, New Jersey DEREK KILMER, Washington KRISTI L. NOEM, South Dakota SCOTT H. PETERS, California PAUL COOK, California DAVID SIENICKI, Professional Staff Member VICKIE PLUNKETT, Professional Staff Member NICHOLAS RODMAN, Clerk (II) C O N T E N T S CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS 2013 Page HEARING: Thursday, July 25, 2013, Acquisition and Development Challenges Associated with the Littoral Combat Ship ............................................................................ 1 APPENDIX: Thursday, July 25, 2013 .......................................................................................... 41 THURSDAY, JULY 25, 2013 ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS Courtney, Hon. Joe, a Representative from Connecticut, Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces ......................................................................... 3 Forbes, Hon. J. Randy, a Representative from Virginia, Chairman, Sub- committee on Seapower and Projection Forces .................................................. 1 WITNESSES Francis, Paul L., Managing Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management, U.S. Government Accountability Office .............................................................. 9 Hunt, VADM Richard W., USN, Director, Navy Staff, Department of Defense . 4 Stackley, Hon. Sean J., Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Develop- ment and Acquisition), Department of Defense ................................................. 6 APPENDIX PREPARED STATEMENTS: Forbes, Hon. J. Randy ...................................................................................... 45 Francis, Paul L. ................................................................................................ 62 Stackley, Hon. Sean J., joint with VADM Richard W. Hunt ........................ 47 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: [There were no Documents submitted.] WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: Mr. Forbes ......................................................................................................... 77 QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: Mr. Forbes ......................................................................................................... 81 Mr. Langevin ..................................................................................................... 83 Mr. McKeon ....................................................................................................... 81 Ms. Speier ......................................................................................................... 89 Mr. Wittman ..................................................................................................... 84 (III) ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LITTORAL COMBAT SHIP HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES, Washington, DC, Thursday, July 25, 2013. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a.m., in room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. J. Randy Forbes (chair- man of the subcommittee) presiding. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. J. RANDY FORBES, A REP- RESENTATIVE FROM VIRGINIA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES Mr. FORBES. I want to welcome all our Members and our distin- guished panel of experts to today’s hearing that will focus on the acquisition and development challenges associated with the Littoral Combat Ship [LCS]. Concurrent with our hearing this morning, the Government Ac- countability Office [GAO] released a report entitled ‘‘Significant In- vestments in the Littoral Combat Ship Continue Amid Substantial Unknowns about Capabilities, Use and Cost.’’ In this report GAO expresses concern about the design stability of the platform and concern about the program goals of the mission modules. Until these issues are clarified, GAO has recommended Congress con- sider restricting future funding to the program for the construction of additional seaframes until certain conditions are met. This is not the first time that we have received reports critical of the LCS program. The Perez report was a report commissioned by the Vice Chief of Naval Operations to assess and review the Navy readiness to receive, employ, and deploy the Littoral Combat Ship. This report, conducted in early 2012, was also critical of the LCS program both in terms of concepts and implementation. Spe- cific concerns included in this report include the concept of oper- ations, manning, maintenance, modularity, mission package capa- bility, training, and commonality were identified. The Director, Operational Testing and Evaluation [DOT&E] has also expressed concerns about the survivability of the Littoral Com- bat Ship and indicated that LCS 1 is not expected to be survivable in combat, and unable to maintain mission capability after taking a significant hit in a hostile combat environment. The testing pro- gram associated with this first class is also lagging. I would be remiss if I did not mention the engineering casualties that LCS 1 is encountering during the deployment to Singapore. While expected in the first class, the sheer number of casualties as- sociated with LCS 1 is troubling and needs to be quickly addressed. (1) 2 At a time of reducing resources, the Navy is planning to even more heavily rely on this lower cost alternative. I believe it is incumbent on this subcommittee to ensure that we have the most capable lower cost alternative that is relevant to the combatant com- manders in time of conflict. I also believe that criticism of the LCS program is warranted. From this most recent GAO report to the Perez report, and even DOT&E assessment, they all provide an alternative view as to how to best manage the acquisition and development of this effort. But let me emphasize that none of these reports disputes the necessity to rapidly field the capabilities proposed by the Littoral Combat Ship, and I look forward to doing my part to make sure that we methodically and expeditiously field the right LCS capability to the fleet in the years ahead. Today we are honored to have as our witnesses the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition, the Honorable Sean Stackley—Mr. Stackley, thank you for being here and for your dedication to our country; the Director of the Navy Staff and Chairman of the Littoral Combat Ship Council, Vice Admiral Richard Hunt, and, Admiral Hunt, we thank you for your service to this country and for taking time to be with us today; and the Managing Director of Acquisition and Sourcing Management, Government Accountability Office, Mr. Paul Francis. And, Mr. Francis, thank you and your entire team for the good work that they do in bringing these issues forward. And we thank you all for being here. I couldn’t think of a better panel to assist our subcommittee in reviewing this issue, and I hope that at the end of this hearing, that we will be best able to provide a firm direction as to the path forward with the LCS pro- gram. And before I recognize Mr. Courtney, I want to just make one other comment, and it is this: I hear from time to time people say- ing, well, isn’t this really problematic, because we have a difference within the Navy even about the LCS; that we have people that are raising different issues, and they are not on the same sheet of music? And I want to just tell you all I take a totally different view of that. I want to applaud you all for being able to come to the table, having divergent points of view, being willing to really ask the tough questions and put them on the table, and I think that is what makes our Navy so strong and capable is our ability to do that. So I just want to thank you all for your willingness to not come in here in an adversarial role where each person has to put forward their own side, but that we can really ask these tough questions and get answers, because in the end we want the best vessels for our Navy and for the American people, and I want to applaud you all for trying to do that. And after saying that, it is my privilege now to recognize the act- ing ranking member, I guess we would say today, or the vice rank- ing member Mr. Courtney, someone who is very committed to the Navy, and for any remarks that he might have. Mr. Courtney. [The prepared statement of Mr. Forbes can be found in the Ap- pendix on page 45.] 3 STATEMENT OF HON. JOE COURTNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM CONNECTICUT,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 ALAN BJERGA: (Sounds Gavel.) Good Afternoon, and Welcome to the National Press Club. My Name Is Alan Bjerga. I'm a Reporter Fo
    NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LUNCHEON WITH SECRETARY RAY MABUS SUBJECT: SATISFYING THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS ENERGY NEEDS MODERATOR: ALAN BJERGA, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LOCATION: NATIONAL PRESS CLUB, HOLEMAN LOUNGE, WASHINGTON, D.C. TIME: 12:30 P.M. EDT DATE: FRIDAY, APRIL 30, 2010 (C) COPYRIGHT 2008, NATIONAL PRESS CLUB, 529 14TH STREET, WASHINGTON, DC - 20045, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ANY REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISAPPROPRIATION UNDER APPLICABLE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW, AND THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT IN RESPECT TO SUCH MISAPPROPRIATION. FOR INFORMATION ON BECOMING A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB, PLEASE CALL 202-662-7505. ALAN BJERGA: (Sounds gavel.) Good afternoon, and welcome to the National Press Club. My name is Alan Bjerga. I'm a reporter for Bloomberg News, and President of the National Press Club. We're the world’s leading professional organization for journalists and are committed to our profession’s future through our programming and by fostering a free press worldwide. For more information about the Press Club, please visit our website at www.press.org. To donate to our programs, please visit www.press.org/library. On behalf of our members worldwide, I'd like to welcome our speaker and attendees to today’s event, which includes guests of our speaker as well as working journalists. I'd also like to welcome our C-SPAN and Public Radio audiences. After the speech concludes, I will ask as many audience questions as time permits.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress September 16, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32665 Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The current and planned size and composition of the Navy, the annual rate of Navy ship procurement, the prospective affordability of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans, and the capacity of the U.S. shipbuilding industry to execute the Navy’s shipbuilding plans have been oversight matters for the congressional defense committees for many years. In December 2016, the Navy released a force-structure goal that calls for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers. The 355-ship goal was made U.S. policy by Section 1025 of the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2810/P.L. 115- 91 of December 12, 2017). The Navy and the Department of Defense (DOD) have been working since 2019 to develop a successor for the 355-ship force-level goal. The new goal is expected to introduce a new, more distributed fleet architecture featuring a smaller proportion of larger ships, a larger proportion of smaller ships, and a new third tier of large unmanned vehicles (UVs). On June 17, 2021, the Navy released a long-range Navy shipbuilding document that presents the Biden Administration’s emerging successor to the 355-ship force-level goal. The document calls for a Navy with a more distributed fleet architecture, including 321 to 372 manned ships and 77 to 140 large UVs. A September 2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates that the fleet envisioned in the document would cost an average of between $25.3 billion and $32.7 billion per year in constant FY2021 dollars to procure.
    [Show full text]
  • Acquisition Research: Creating Synergy for Informed Change
    SYM-AM-16-019 Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Acquisition Research Symposium Wednesday Sessions Volume I Acquisition Research: Creating Synergy for Informed Change May 4–5, 2016 Published April 30, 2016 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA 93943. Acquisition Research Program Graduate School of Business & Public Policy Naval Postgraduate School The research presented in this report was supported by the Acquisition Research Program of the Graduate School of Business & Public Policy at the Naval Postgraduate School. To request defense acquisition research, to become a research sponsor, or to print additional copies of reports, please contact any of the staff listed on the Acquisition Research Program website (www.acquisitionresearch.net). Acquisition Research Program Graduate School of Business & Public Policy Naval Postgraduate School Table of Contents Keynote: The Honorable Sean Stackley, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, & Acquisition ............................................................... vii Plenary Panel: Weapon Acquisition Program Outcomes and Efforts to Reform DoD’s Acquisition Process ..................................................................................... 1 Panel 2. Applications of Real Options Analysis in Defense Acquisition ............ 3 Acquiring Technical Data With Renewable Real Options ....................................... 5 Incorporation of Outcome-Based Contract Requirements in a Real Options
    [Show full text]
  • NAVAL ENERGY FORUM Creating Spartan Energy Warriors: Our Competitive Advantage
    PROMOTING NATIONAL SECURITY SINCE 1919 NAVAL ENERGY FORUM Creating Spartan Energy Warriors: Our Competitive Advantage FORUM HIGHLIGHTS: u Keynote Addresses by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert, Admiral John C. Harvey, and other Distinguished Guests u Presentations on importance of culture change, successes/challenges for our fleet and shore infrastructure, investments in alternative fuels, information systems, energy efficient acquisition, and game changing solutions u Special remarks by Mr. Jim Hornfischer, New York Times bestselling author OCTOBER 13-14, 2011 RONALD REAGAN BUILDING & ITC u WASHINGTON, DC WWW.GREENFLEET.DODLIVE.MIL/ENERGY WWW.NDIA.ORG/MEETINGS/2600 A WELCOME MESSAGE Welcome to the 2011 Naval Energy Forum. wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of the seas. That Since I announced the Navy’s energy goals is why avoiding these fuel price spikes and elevations is essential to the at this forum two years ago, we have Navy’s core mission, and why developing alternative fuels is a priority. We made remarkable progress in our efforts have already seen a return on our investments in more efficient energy to achieve greater energy security for the use. Last year, we launched the first hybrid ship in the Navy, the USS Navy and the nation. I am committed to Makin Island. In its maiden voyage, the Makin Island saved almost $2 positioning our Naval forces for tomorrow’s million in fuel costs. Over the lifetime of the ship, we can save $250 challenges, and changing the way the million at last year’s fuel prices. Department of the Navy uses, produces, and acquires energy is one of our greatest We also continue to make progress in our efforts to test and certify all challenges because it is also one of our of our aircraft and ships on drop-in biofuels.
    [Show full text]
  • DEFENSE ACQUISITION REFORM: WHERE DO WE GO from HERE? a Compendium of Views by Leading Experts
    United States Senate PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Carl Levin, Chairman John McCain, Ranking Minority Member DEFENSE ACQUISITION REFORM: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? A Compendium of Views by Leading Experts STAFF REPORT PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE October 2, 2014 SENATOR CARL LEVIN Chairman SENATOR JOHN McCAIN Ranking Minority Member PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS ELISE J. BEAN Staff Director and Chief Counsel HENRY J. KERNER Staff Director and Chief Counsel to the Minority BRADLEY M. PATOUT Senior Policy Advisor to the Minority LAUREN M. DAVIS Professional Staff Member to the Minority MARY D. ROBERTSON Chief Clerk 10/2/14 Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 199 Russell Senate Office Building – Washington, D.C. 20510 Majority: 202/224-9505 – Minority: 202/224-3721 Web Address: http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations DEFENSE ACQUISITION REFORM: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? A Compendium of Views by Leading Experts TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1 II. BIOGRAPHIES AND ESSAYS PROVIDED BY CONTRIBUTORS ............. 5 1. Brigadier General Frank J. Anderson, USAF (Ret.) ........................... 5 2. The Honorable Norman R. Augustine ...................................... 11 3. Mr. David J. Berteau ................................................... 17 4. Mr. Irv Blickstein...................................................... 23 5. General James Cartwright,
    [Show full text]
  • From the Director
    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 2016 WINTER FROM THE DIRECTOR Friends, designed to expand and improve SBIR/STTR commercialization. Expect First, I hope that the Holiday season to see results in the SBIR/STTR offered all of you and yours blessings in Transition Program (STP) curriculum, abundance! 2016 is off to a great start the 2016 Forum, SYSCOM-level pilot – full of challenges and opportunities. programs to deepen Phase I linkage In just a few short months, we’ll open with industry, and an updated version the doors to our 16th annual Forum for of our useful Defense Contractors SBIR/STTR Transition – “The Forum” – Partnering Manual. with an exciting difference: we’re now partnered with the Navy League and its • DCAA Compliance Initiative legendary Sea, Air & Space Expo! (See Section 873 of the 2016 National the Forum article elsewhere in this issue). Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Robert L. Smith, Director, DON SBIR/STTR Programs But that’s just part of the story of how is aimed at minimizing proposal and we’re taking a great SBIR/STTR program award process delays relating to fiscal download the newest version of our and making it even better. In addition system certification, with consider- DON SBIR/STTR Phase III Guidebook, to the Forum, here are ten items on the able discussion about how best to with new information about SBIR/STTR’s Department of the Navy’s (DON’s) SBIR/ achieve this goal. We were integral to emerging role in acquisition program STTR menu for 2016. that discussion; and further experi- planning and management.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress June 2, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32665 Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Summary In December 2016, the Navy released a force-structure goal that calls for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers. The 355-ship goal was made U.S. policy by Section 1025 of the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2810/P.L. 115- 91 of December 12, 2017). The Trump Administration has identified the achievement of a Navy of 355 or more ships within 10 years as a high priority. The Navy states that it is working as well as it can, within a Navy budget top line that is essentially flat in real (i.e., inflation-adjusted terms), toward achieving that goal while also adequately funding other Navy priorities, such as restoring eroded ship readiness and improving fleet lethality. Navy officials state that while the 355-ship goal is a priority, they want to avoid creating a so-called hollow force, meaning a Navy that has an adequate number of ships but is unable to properly crew, arm, operate, and maintain those ships. The Navy states that its proposed FY2021 budget requests the procurement of eight new ships, but this figure includes LPD-31, an LPD-17 Flight II amphibious ship that Congress procured (i.e., authorized and appropriated procurement funding for) in FY2020. Excluding this ship, the Navy’s proposed FY2021 budget requests the procurement of seven new ships rather than eight.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress September 24, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32665 Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Summary In December 2016, the Navy released a force-structure goal that calls for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers. The 355-ship goal was made U.S. policy by Section 1025 of the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2810/P.L. 115- 91 of December 12, 2017). The Trump Administration has identified the achievement of a Navy of 355 or more ships within 10 years as a high priority. The Navy states that it is working as well as it can, within a Navy budget top line that is essentially flat in real (i.e., inflation-adjusted terms), toward achieving that goal while also adequately funding other Navy priorities, such as restoring eroded ship readiness and improving fleet lethality. Navy officials state that while the 355-ship goal is a priority, they want to avoid creating a so-called hollow force, meaning a Navy that has an adequate number of ships but is unable to properly crew, arm, operate, and maintain those ships. The Navy states that its proposed FY2021 budget requests the procurement of eight new ships, but this figure includes LPD-31, an LPD-17 Flight II amphibious ship that Congress procured (i.e., authorized and appropriated procurement funding for) in FY2020. Excluding this ship, the Navy’s proposed FY2021 budget requests the procurement of seven new ships rather than eight.
    [Show full text]
  • Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress
    Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Ronald O'Rourke Specialist in Naval Affairs December 20, 2019 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL32665 Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The current and planned size and composition of the Navy, the rate of Navy ship procurement, and the prospective affordability of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans have been oversight matters for the congressional defense committees for many years. On December 15, 2016, the Navy released a force-structure goal that calls for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers. The 355-ship force-level goal is the result of a Force Structure Assessment (FSA) conducted by the Navy in 2016. A new FSA— referred to as the Integrated Naval FSA (INFSA), with the term naval referring to both the Navy and Marine Corps (i.e., the two naval services)—is now underway as the successor to the 2016 FSA. The Acting Secretary of the Navy states that he expects the INFSA to be published no later than January 15, 2020. Statements from Department of the Navy (DON) officials suggest that the INFSA could result in a once-in-a-generation change in the Navy’s fleet architecture, meaning the mix of ships that make up the Navy and how those ships are combined into formations and used to perform various missions. DON officials suggest that the INFSA could shift the fleet to a more distributed architecture that includes a reduced proportion of larger ships, an increased proportion of smaller ships, and a newly created category of large unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) and large unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs).
    [Show full text]
  • See Our FY18 Annual Report Here
    NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA CONSORTIUM FOR ROBOTICS AND UNMANNED SYSTEMS EDUCATION AND RESEARCH (CRUSER) FY18 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by Lyla Englehorn, Faculty Associate – Research December 2018 Approved for public release: distribution unlimited Prepared for: Dr. Brian Bingham, CRUSER Director and Dr. Raymond R. Buettner Jr., NPS FX Director THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From-To) 28 December 2018 Technical Report 1 Oct 2017 – 30 Sept 2018 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER Consortium for Robotics and Unmanned Systems Education and Research (CRUSER) FY18 Annual Report 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER Lyla Englehorn, MPP 5e.
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Construction and Engineering Ship Design and Technology Symposium
    Naval Construction and Engineering Ship Design and Technology Symposium Wednesday, May 6, 2015 Multi-Purpose Room, MIT Media Laboratory Building E14, 6th floor 0800 - 0845 Registration and Continental Breakfast 0845 - 0920 Welcome and Opening Remarks - Prof. Gang Chen, Head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering - Prof. Dick Yue, Mechanical Engineering Area 5 Director - CAPT Joe Harbour, 2N Curriculum Officer 0920 - 1010 Research Brief: Prof. Henrik Schmidt - Evaluation of an L-Shaped Acoustic Array Composed of Multiple Autonomous Vehicles: LCDR(s) Kerry Bosché - The Effect of Array Orientation on the 3D Acoustic Picture for Sound Sources and the Vertical Ambient Noise Profile: LT Author Anderson 1010 - 1030 Break and Poster Sessions (featuring student theses and projects) 1030 - 1050 Research Briefs: Prof. Franz Hover - Shipboard Integrated Engineering Plant Survivable Network Optimization: CAPT Thomas Trapp 1050 - 1140 Student Design Project Briefs - CG-47 Class Railgun Conversion: LCDR John Genta, LCDR Chris Wing, LCDR Johnathan Walker, LT Konstantinos Mentzelos - Naval Search and Rescue Craft SAR-1: LCDR(s) Matt Strother, LT Vanea Pharr, LT Matt Williams 1140 - 1200 Break and Poster Sessions (featuring student theses and projects) 1200 - 1300 Lunch Buffet and Keynote Address The Honorable Sean Stackley, ASN (RDA) 1300 - 1320 Research Briefs: Prof. Stefano Brizzolara - Effect of Inverted Bow on the Hydrodynamic Performance of Navy Combatant Hull Forms: LCDR(s) Jeff White 1320 – 1345 Student Design Project Briefs - Small Surface Combatant SSC: LCDR Brandy Dixon, LCDR(s) Kerry Bosché, LT Ryan Zachar 1345 - 1405 Research Brief: Prof. Steven Leeb - Utilization of Vibration Assessment During Rotor Spin-Down to Determine the Mechanical Health of Rotating Machines: LT Ryan Zachar 1405 - 1425 Break and Poster Sessions (featuring student theses and projects) 1425 – 1445 Research Brief: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions Newsletter Winter 2016 in Just a Few
    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 2016 WINTER FROM THE DIRECTOR Friends, designed to expand and improve SBIR/STTR commercialization. Expect First, I hope that the Holiday season to see results in the SBIR/STTR offered all of you and yours blessings in Transition Program (STP) curriculum, abundance! 2016 is off to a great start the 2016 Forum, SYSCOM-level pilot – full of challenges and opportunities. programs to deepen Phase I linkage In just a few short months, we’ll open with industry, and an updated version the doors to our 16th annual Forum for of our useful Defense Contractors SBIR/STTR Transition – “The Forum” – Partnering Manual. with an exciting difference: we’re now partnered with the Navy League and its • DCAA Compliance Initiative legendary Sea, Air & Space Expo! (See Section 873 of the 2016 National the Forum article elsewhere in this issue). Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Robert L. Smith, Director, DON SBIR/STTR Programs But that’s just part of the story of how is aimed at minimizing proposal and we’re taking a great SBIR/STTR program award process delays relating to fiscal download the newest version of our and making it even better. In addition system certification, with consider- DON SBIR/STTR Phase III Guidebook, to the Forum, here are ten items on the able discussion about how best to with new information about SBIR/STTR’s Department of the Navy’s (DON’s) SBIR/ achieve this goal. We were integral to emerging role in acquisition program STTR menu for 2016. that discussion; and further experi- planning and management.
    [Show full text]