ALL TOGETHER, NOW!
FIGURE 3
RAPID FIELDING Ensuring an acquisition path to field DTRA-NTD’s technology solutions rapidly required new approaches for JPEO-CBD.
In contrast to traditional
models for technology transition, JPDL- RND initiated an acquisition product office for the M2PRDS program at the same time as the kickoff of the dedicated S&T efforts. Rather than having separate research and acquisition teams, members of the acquisition product office and members of the S&T office functioned as a single program team with separate focus areas.
A CLEARER PICTURE
This side-by-side illustration compares the performance of the previous radiological-nuclear point detector, VDR-2, and the MERLIN VIPER. Both performed a reconnaissance run in an urban village training area, and MERLIN VIPER provided Soldiers with a more detailed picture of radiological- nuclear hazards in much less time. (SOURCE: the authors)
biological, nuclear, radiological and explosive (CBRNE) programs for fund- ing, size and acquisition parameters; the U.S. Army CBRNE Agency to develop new, realistic scenarios for testing and evaluating never-before-fielded sensors; and multiple Army chemical battalions and combatant commands for real-world field testing and user feedback. (See Fig- ure 3.)
Constant communication with all mem- ber organizations by the joint DTRA and JPDL-RND teams ensured that the effort remained flexible enough to accommodate changes while informing stakeholders when key design decisions became permanent. Tis unity of effort, involving nearly every office and staff element with a current or future role in fielding the equipment, smoothed the path for transition from DTRA to JPDL- RND and eventually to end users.
Te third element involves the DTRA- NTD program office’s early commitment to using as many government off-the- shelf materials as possible for prototype development, including newly designed sensors and inventory parts already in production. Additionally, project officers established ground rules for physical and electronic hardening so that all detector casings and internal components could withstand harsh, contaminated military environments with minimal mainte- nance needs. DTRA-NTD invested early in modeling scenarios and computer- aided drafting designs to determine optimal detector configurations and vehicle emplacements, maximizing detec- tion capability while minimizing the use of expensive components. DTRA-NTD’s modeling and design efforts, coupled with extensive prototyping and testing with government materials, mitigated production risks and maximized cost benefits for future production models.
54
Such close partnering necessitated modifying standard processes for both organizations. Tis entailed building a common language where similar terms historically had had different interpreta- tions. For example, the team developed a heavily tailored set of technical reviews and used that as the protocol for acceler- ating the development of M2PRDS. Te team eliminated the use of conventional names such as “preliminary design review” and “critical design review.” Instead, the focus was on determining up front where the parallel efforts needed to be in sync and how best to assess whether those objectives had been met successfully. Tese
technical reviews provided deci-
sion points and the opportunity for each organization to revise their processes if needed based on assessment of risk.
Test and evaluation also required modi- fication of language and processes. Te JPEO-CBD is seeking to reduce the amount of retesting that occurs after technology
transitions. For M2PRDS,
the research and acquisition team had to reach a common understanding of differ- ences in concepts such as iterative versus phased builds and what that means for the ability to receive formal evaluation of any testing.
Army AL&T Magazine
April-June 2018
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168
