opportunity to get S&T products in Soldiers’ hands early, thereby facilitating further evaluations to inform detailed system requirements and reduce the risk for transition.
Te Army uses a strategically guided, top- down approach to manage Technology Maturation Initiative efforts. A four-star governance body called the Army’s Sci- ence and Technology Advisory Group, co-chaired by the vice chief of staff of the Army and the Army acquisition executive, provides strategic guidance to the two-star Executive Steering Group chaired by the DASA(R&T). Te steer- ing group, in turn, provides guidance to the S&T community, executing com- mands for development and selection of future Technology Maturation Initia- tive efforts. Strategic top-down guidance and approval ensure that the efforts receive the necessary level of senior leader oversight to ensure alignment with the secretary of the Army’s priorities.
An example of a system being matured through Technology Maturation Initia- tives is the Modular Active Protection System (MAPS), which will enable the Army to provide optimized, layered defenses against the most advanced combat vehicle threats. Tis effort will develop and demonstrate experimental prototypes that fully integrate the MAPS architecture with advanced, autonomous countermeasures on ground platforms. Te results will inform the Army’s requirements for the Vehicle Protection Suite (VPS) and reduce the risk of rap- idly transitioning VPS capabilities to the Army’s combat vehicle fleet.
ARMY MANTECH During S&T technology development, it is important to understand if there are any associated issues with the manufacture of technologies that could affect the ability
to produce an item, or its affordability. Exploration of methods to manufacture technologies, in parallel with the execu- tion of S&T efforts, ensures that any new manufacturing processes required for these technologies have been developed before transition. Te Army’s ManTech Program develops and refines manufac- turing processes for affordable products, thereby reducing the risk of transition to programs of record.
Te program leverages manufactur- ing research conducted jointly by the services through the Joint Defense Manufacturing Technology Panel. Te panel of representatives from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Defense Logistics Agency, Missile Defense Agency and Office of the Secretary of Defense exists to avoid redundancies, identify and inte- grate requirements, and conduct joint planning.
ManTech yields reduced costs and improved products for the warfighter. As one example of numerous successes, its APOT project has matured lower-hull manufacturing technologies associated with combat vehicles, providing advanced protection. Tis effort enabled the U.S. to domestically produce a new alumi- num alloy with processes needed to form, forge and weld it into a structure for the underbody hull, providing a new stan- dard in blast protection. Te successes from APOT are informing requirements for future combat vehicles.
SBIR PROGRAM Te SBIR Program fosters innovation in all phases of S&T and shapes successful transitions by aligning small businesses directly with technology capability gaps. For instance, the 3rd Gen FLIR sen- sor suite leveraged small business efforts from the SBIR program. With the shift of Army S&T efforts toward mid- and
far-term technologies, SBIR efforts are critical for filling near-term technology needs.
Te Army is providing additional stra- tegic guidance to the SBIR community to ensure that its work aligns with the Army’s modernization priorities. Te additional guidance will help small busi- nesses focus investments in areas where the Army has critical needs.
CONCLUSION Strengthening a transition and reducing risk to an existing or future program of record require detailed action plans to effectively link planned S&T advanced technology development, Technology Maturation
Initiatives
while using SBIRs to promote innovation throughout the technology development life cycle.
A proactive, forward-focused strategy is critical. Managing the maturation efforts within one S&T portfolio helps to ensure alignment with Army priorities and ensure that action plans are in place to link efforts, ultimately reducing overall risk and ensuring successful transition to the PEOs and PMs.
For more information, contact the author at
julie.i.locker.civ@
mail.mil.
MS. JULIE I. LOCKER is deputy for integration for the DASA(R&T). She is responsible for integration of efforts across S&T and management of the maturation portfolio. She has a B.S. in mechanical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology and over 30 years’ experience in S&T and acquisition. She is Level III certified in engineering and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.
and ManTech,
ASC.ARMY.MIL
203
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / DASA(R&T)
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 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237 |
Page 238 |
Page 239 |
Page 240 |
Page 241 |
Page 242 |
Page 243 |
Page 244 |
Page 245 |
Page 246 |
Page 247 |
Page 248 |
Page 249 |
Page 250 |
Page 251 |
Page 252 |
Page 253 |
Page 254 |
Page 255 |
Page 256 |
Page 257 |
Page 258 |
Page 259 |
Page 260 |
Page 261 |
Page 262 |
Page 263 |
Page 264 |
Page 265 |
Page 266 |
Page 267 |
Page 268 |
Page 269 |
Page 270 |
Page 271 |
Page 272 |
Page 273 |
Page 274 |
Page 275 |
Page 276
