Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 37
8
Major Conclusions and Recommendations
The central conclusion reached in this study is that the introduction of improved
materials into the defense systems and weapons inventory is necessary, looks
overwhelmingly difficult, and requires sustained, long-term efforts. Today's small,
fragmented, suboptimal effort in energetic materials research and development puts a
critical U.S. national technology area at risk. Resources across the entire spectrum of
energetic materials research and development are severely limited, but particularly so in the
funding for scale-up and advanced development studies of potential new materials.
Funding for the nation's energetic materials technology effort is shrinking.) Without
the opportunity for the current workforce to train the next generation of expert scientists and
engineers, much corporate knowledge may be lost. This knowledge is key to maintaining the
cu rrent weapon stockpiles safely, to ensu ring their performance, and to develop) ng the next
generation of energetic materials.
Resources required for scale-up and characterization of new materials are so limited
that it has proven nearly impossible to advance a new energetic material through the
required extensive characterization and qualification that must be performed to bring the
material to a level of maturity that will allow a system developer to consider the material as a
low- or moderate-risk candidate. In addition, transition funding for promising new materials
and formulations is essentially nonexistent. Concomitant with the decrease in research and
development resou roes, the com m ittee fou nd that the i nd ustria I base for prod uction of
energetic materials has continued to erode, as observed also in a manufacturing study by
the Department of Commerce,2 which concluded that energetic materials technology
development is in rapid decline and that the nation's energetic materials technology base is
at risk unless significant new resources are committed to this vital technology and top-level
national leadership is committed to sustaining this capability.
Revolutionary, orders-of-magnitude increases in performance as measured by
increased energy density or increased power are unlikely to occur in the near future. Yet,
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Export Administration, Office of Strategic Industries and
Economic Security. 2001. National Security Assessment of High Performance Explosives and High
Performance Components Industries. Executive summary available at
http://www.bxa.doc.gov/defenseind ustrial baseprograms/OSI ES/DefMa rketResea rch Rpts/Explosive
Componentsindustries.html. Accessed September 2003.
Department of Commerce. See note 1 above.
37
OCR for page 38
38
ADVANCED ENERGETIC MATERIALS
incremental improvements in performance provide great leverage when coupled to other
systems-specific improvements. Potential payoffs accrue in improved survivability and in
increased range and increased lethality of weapons.
The scarce resources available to the energetic materials technology effort are too
often focused on short-term responses. The driving force behind such short-term efforts is
perceived technology capability gaps, which may be attributable to hyperbole in news
accounts of foreign weapons effects, as well as overly dramatized intelligence reports of
foreign capabilities.3
The current defense focus is on limited theater actions, with an emphasis on
deployment of precision strike weapons that are smaller, cheaper, and at the same time
more lethal against all target classes. An extensive technology effort from the energetic
materials community will be required to meet the explosive and propellant requirements of
these new systems. To ensure that such an effort is effective, it is important to couple it
closely to efforts of the services to improve target lethality and weapons effects.
Current funding for the services often focuses on near-term individual service
requirements, and the resulting competition for scarce resources inhibits cooperative efforts
aimed toward more global national requirements. To overcome these barriers and
competition for scarce resources, a major restructuring of the programmatic control and
funding of energetic materials research and development is required in order to rebuild a
robust and productive national effort in energetic materials technology.
1. The committee recommends that the Department of Defense redirect attention and
resources to focus on strategies for reducing transition barriers to scale-up.
This effort should be closely coupled to the ongoing efforts of the services to improve
target lethality and weapons effects. Such an approach would ensure an extensive
technology effort from the energetic materials community and would help provide for an
adequate supply of well-trained scientists and engineers to meet the nation's future defense
requirements.
2. The committee recommends that the Department of Defense consider centralizing its
management of energetic materials research and development in order to achieve a longer-
term, cross-service perspective.
One possible approach to such a restructuring might include establishing an Energetic
Materials Technology Office in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). Similar to the
Office of Munitions, such an office would require a unique program element funding line with
the charter and authority to lead a national, coordinated energetic materials technology
thrust effectively. A clear benefit of this approach would be a robust and productive national
effort in energetic materials technology.
The recently initiated Advanced Energetics Initiative might be the cornerstone of this
national effort. However, any approach to achieving this suggested office would require
establishing broad oversight and coordination responsibility as well as authority over all the
energetic materials programs of the Department of Defense and a charter to develop
cooperative engagement with and coordination of industrial and academic programs at the
National Laboratories focused on energetic materials.
The overarching issue remains one of priority. Energetic materials are a key
component of the nation's defense strategies. A coordinated and sustained effort in
research, technology transition, and production technologies is needed to maintain the
contribution of these materials to U.S. national defense.
3 Examples can be found at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1854371.stm and
http://www.com mond reams.org/head linesO2/0303-06.htm. Accessed Novem ber 2003.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
materials technology
