Inserting innovations in-service

Studies in Computational Intelligence

Volumn 304, Issue , 2010, Pages 17-53

  Kerr, Clive ^a   Phaal, Robert ^a   Probert, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

military; obsolescence; Technology insertion; upgrade

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956331016     PISSN: 1860949X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14084-6_2     Document Type: Article

References (105)

1. Lincoln, J.W.: Managing the aging aircraft problem. Report Number: RTO-MP-079(II) Ageing Mechanisms and Control, Research and Technology Organization, NATO, Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex, France (2003)
2. Hill, O.J.: Aircraft modifications: Assessing the current state of Air Force aircraft modifications and the implications for future military capability. Pardee RAND Graduate School Dissertation Series, Report Number: RGSD-207, The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica (2006)
3. Kerr, C.I.V., Phaal, R., Probert, D.R.: Technology insertion in the defence industry: A primer. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 222(8), 1009-1023 (2008)
4. Strong, G.: Technology insertion-A worldwide perspective. Journal of Defence Science 9(3), 114-121 (2004)
5. Tiron, R.: Aging avionics spell doom for air force, study warns. National Defense, NDIA's Business and Technology Magazine (August 2001), http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2001/Aug/ Aging-Avionics.htm
6. Bracken, P., Brandt, L., Johnson, S.E.: The changing landscape of defense innovation. Defense Horizons Paper Number 47, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, Washington DC, United States of America (2005)
7. Sutterfield, J.M., Jones, S.R.: Supporting tired iron: The challenges of supporting aging aircraft-Transformation or train wreck. In: Rainey, J.C., Scott, B.F. (eds.) 2004 Logistics Dimensions-Readings in the Issues and Concerns Facing Air Force Logistics in the 21st Century, vol. 2, pp. 18-52. Air Force Logistics Management Agency, Maxwell AFB (2004)
8. Milas, M.J., Vanderbok, R.: Beyond proactive DMSMS, what's next: Coordinated technology management. In: 9th Joint FAA/DoD/NASA Conference on Aging Aircraft, Atlanta, United States of America, March 6-9 (2006)
9. Kerr, C.I.V., Phaal, R., Probert, D.R.: Aligning R&D with changing product requirements in an evolutionary acquisition environment. In: The R&D Management Conference 2008, Ottawa, Canada, June 18-20 (2008)
10. MoD-Ministry of Defence: Defence industrial strategy. Report Number: Cm 6697, The Stationery Office, London, United Kingdom (2005)
11. Young, S.H.H.: Gallery of USAF weapons. Air Force Magazine 89(5), 146-169 (2006)
12. Wagner, M.: New system saves money, improves KC-135 performance. Air Force Materiel Command News Service (June 2005), http://www.afmc-pub.wpafb.af. mil/HQ-AFMC/PA/news/archive/ 2005/June/AFMCNS220605-11.htm
13. DID-Defense Industry Daily: KC-135 design innovation could save $583M, http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2005/07/ kc135-design- innovation-could-save-583m/index.php
14. Wagner, M.: New system improves KC-135 performance, saves money. Airlift Tanker Quarterly 13(3), 21 (2005)
15. Garbarino, M.: Lighter, stronger, reliable. Hilltop Times (September 30, 2004), http://www.hilltoptimes.com/ story.asp?edition=173&storyid=4912
16. Kerr, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D.: A strategic capabilities-based representation of the future British armed forces. International Journal of Intelligent Defence Support Systems 1(1), 27-42 (2008)
17. Phaal, R., Farrukh, C., Probert, D.: Customizing roadmapping. Research-Technology Management 47(2), 26-37 (2004)
18. Kerr, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D.: A framework for strategic military capabilities in defense transformation. In: The 11th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS 2006)-Coalition Command and Control in the Networked Era, Cambridge, United Kingdom, September 26-28 (2006)
19. MoD-Ministry of Defence: The acquisition handbook, 6th edn. The Ministry of Defence, London, United Kingdom (2005)
20. Bessant, J., Tidd, J.: Innovation and entrepreneurship. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2007)
21. Goodman, R.A.: The dual mission of technology in strategic affairs. In: Dorf, R.C. (ed.) The technology management handbook, pp. 1617-1620. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1999)
22. CAIG-Cost Analysis Improvement Group: Operating and support cost-estimating guide. Cost Analysis Improvement Group, Office of the Secretary of Defense, The Pentagon, Washington DC, United States of America (1992)
23. Irvin, K.A.: The B-52: Past, present, future. In: Rainey, J.C., Scott, B.F., Reichard, J.O. (eds.) Global thinking, global logistics, pp. 32-41. Air Force Logistics Management Agency, Maxwell AFB (1999)
24. Herbert, A.J.: The 2018 bomber and its friends. Air Force Magazine 89(10), 24-29 (2006)
25. Webber, G., Smith, J., Anderson, J., Bachkosky, J., Brown, D., Fratarangelo, P., Hogan, R., Johnson, J., Katz, D., Kelly, M., Lister, M., Robinson, D., Rodriguez, J., Rumpf, R., Sinnett, J., Spindel, R., Windsor, G.: Life cycle technology insertion. Report Number: NRAC 02-02, Naval Research Advisory Committee Report, US Navy, Washington, United States of America (2002)
26. US Army: 2007 Army modernization plan. Department of the Army, The Pentagon, Washington DC, United States of America (2007)
27. Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R.: Strategic roadmapping: A workshop approach for identifying and exploring strategic issues and opportunities. Engineering Management Journal 19(1), 3-12 (2007)
28. MoD-Ministry of Defence: MoD roadmapping guidance. Report Number: FBG/36/09, Acquisition Management System, Ministry of Defence, London, United Kingdom (2005)
29. Ankersen, C.: Capabilities and capacities. In: Bland, D.L. (ed.) Transforming national defence administration, pp. 11-17. Queen's University School of Policy Studies, Ontario (2005)
30. MoD-Ministry of Defence: Enabling acquisition change: An examination of the Ministry of Defence's ability to undertake through-life capability management. A report by the Enabling Acquisition Change Team Leader, Ministry of Defence, London, United Kingdom (2006)
31. Smith, L., Rao, R.: New ideas from the Army (really). Fortune 130(6), 203-212 (1994)
32. Churchill, A.: The DSAC view on technology insertion. Distillation-The Science Journal for Dstl. Staff 6, 5-8 (2004)
33. Barber, A.H., Gilmore, D.L.: Maritime access: Do defenders hold all the cards? Defense Horizons 4, 1-8 (2001)
34. Brooks, T.A., Jenkins, H., Polmar, N., Pirie, R., Ryan, T.D., Sommerer, J., Weldon, W., Wolbarsht, J.: Science and technology for naval warfare 2015-2020. Report Number: NRAC 05-3, Naval Research Advisory Committee, Arlington, United States of America (2005)
35. Thompson, L.: Cruise missile defense: Connecting theater capabilities to homeland needs. Lexington Institute, Arlington, United States of America (2004)
36. RAF-Royal Air Force: Royal Air Force strategy: Agile, adaptable, capable. The Royal Air Force, United Kingdom (2006)
37. MoD-Ministry of Defence: The UK joint high level operational concept. Report Number: Joint HLOC, The Joint Doctrine and Concepts Centre, Ministry of Defence, Shrivenham, United Kingdom (2004)
38. MoD-Ministry of Defence: British air power doctrine. Report Number: AP 3000, The Stationery Office, London, United Kingdom (1999)
39. RAF-Royal Air Force: Future air and space operational concept. Report Number: FASOC, The Royal Air Force, United Kingdom (2005)
40. MoD-Ministry of Defence: Capability audit. Acquisition Management System, Ministry of Defence, London, United Kingdom. (2003), http://www.ams.mod.uk/ams/ content/docs/capaudit/capaudit.htm
41. Balaban, H.S., Greer, W.L.: Model for evaluating the cost consequences of deferring new system acquisition through upgrades. Report Number: P-3424, Institute for Defense Analyses, Alexandria, United States of America (1999)
42. Tirpak, J.A.: Making the best of the fighter force. Air Force Magazine 90(3), 40-45 (2007)
43. Tirpak, J.A.: A clamor for airlift. Air Force Magazine 83(12), 24-30 (2000)
44. Hebert, A.J.: Checking up on old aircraft. Air Force Magazine 87(12), 32-37 (2004)
45. Kreisher, O.: Aircraft geriatrics. Seapower Magazine 49(11), 31-35 (2006)
46. Magnuson, S.: Aging aircraft, war costs weigh heavily in future budgets. National Defense, NDIA's Business & Technology Magazine (January 2007), http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2007/January/ AgingAircraft.htm
47. Gan, X., Woodford, S.: Technology insertion cost-benefit handbook. Report Number: QINETIQ/D&TS/CS/HB0605269/1.0, TI MPA (Technology Insertion Major Programme Area), QinetiQ, Farnborough, United Kingdom (2006)
48. GAO-Government Accountability Office: Tactical aircraft: Recapitalization goals are not supported by knowledge-based F-22A and JSF business cases. Report Number: GAO-06-487T, The Government Accountability Office, Washington DC, United States of America (2006)
49. Greenfield, V.A., Persselin, D.: An economic framework for evaluating military aircraft replacement. Report Number: MR-1489-AF. The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica (2002)
50. Dowling, T., Hood, R., Hirst, R., Barker, D., Lomas, E., Phillips, E., Griffiths, A., King, B., Field, D.: Agile capability and adaptable systems. Report Number: QINETIQ/ EMEA/TECS/CR0700304, TI MPA (Technology Insertion Major Programme Area), QinetiQ, Farnborough, United Kingdom (2007)
51. Kosiak, S.M.: Buying tomorrow's military: Options for modernizing the US defense capital stock. Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Washington DC, United States of America (2001)
52. DoD-Department of Defense: Diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages guidebook. Department of Defense, United States of America (2005), http://www.dmsms.org/ file.jsp?storename=DoD-DMSMS-Guidebook-4-7-05.pdf
53. US Army: Army acquisition policy. Report Number: AR 70-1, Department of the Army, The Pentagon, Washington DC, United States of America (2003)
54. CBO-Congressional Budget Office: The potential costs resulting from increased usage of military equipment in ongoing operations. CBO Testimony by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Congressional Budget Office, The Congress of the United States, Washington DC, United States of America (2005)
55. Minter, C.: Diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages in the systems engineering process. In: Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages, DMSMS 1999 Conference, Monterey, United States of America, April 19-22 (1999)
56. Livingston, H.: Diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages management practices. Defense Microelectronics Activity, Department of Defense, United States of America (2000), http://www.dmea.osd.mil/docs/geb1-paper.pdf
57. Suman, L.L.M.: Cost-benefit analysis tool for avionics parts obsolescence. In: Rainey, J.C., Scott, B.F., Waller, G. (eds.) 2003 Logistics Dimensions-Strategy, Issues and Analyses, pp. 151-166. Air Force Logistics Management Agency, Maxwell AFB (2002)
58. CBO-Congressional Budget Office: Budget options for national defense. Congressional Budget Office, The Congress of the United States, Washington DC, United States of America (2000)
59. Forbes, J.A., Hutcheson, D.W., Staples, B.: Using technology to reduce cost of ownership. Annotated briefing, vol.1, Report Number: LG404RD4, Logistics Management Institute, McLean, United States of America (1996)
60. Hutcheson, D.W.: Using technology to reduce cost of ownership-Volume 2: Business case, vol. 2, Report Number: LG404RD4, Logistics Management Institute, McLean, United States of America (1996)
61. Keating, E.G., Dixon, M.: Investigating optimal replacement of aging air force systems. Report Number: MR-1763-AF. The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica (2003)
62. Keating, E.G., Snyder, D., Dixon, M., Loredo, E.N.: Aging aircraft repair-replacement decisions with depot-level capacity as a policy choice variable. Report Number: MG-241-AF. The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica (2005)
63. Bouchereau, V., Rowlands, H.: Methods and techniques to help quality function deployment. Benchmarking: An International Journal 7(1), 8-19 (2000)
64. Akao, Y.: Quality function deployment: Integrating customer requirements into product design. Productivity Press, Cambridge (1990)
65. Shen, X.X., Tan, K.C., Xie, M.: Benchmarking in QFD for quality improvement. Benchmarking: An International Journal 7(4), 282-291 (2000)
66. Krause, M.E.: Attack operations for missile defense. Report Number: 28, Center for Strategy and Technology, Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, United States of America (2002)
67. Bicheno, J.: The lean toolbox. Picsie Books, Buckingham (2000)
68. Birchall, D., Tovstiga, G.: Capabilities for strategic advantage: Leading through technological innovation. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2005)
69. JSA-TTCP-Joint Systems and Analysis group of the Technical Cooperation Program: Guide to capability-based planning. In: Military Operations Research Society (MORS) 'Capabilities-Based Planning: The Road Ahead Workshop', Alexandria, United States of America, October 19-21 (2004)
70. Cohen, L.: Quality function deployment: How to make QFD work for you. Addison Wesley, Reading (1995)
71. Leary, M., Burvill, C.: Enhancing the quality function deployment conceptual design tool. Transactions of the ASME: Journal of Mechanical Design 129(7), 701-708 (2007)
72. NAO-National Audit Office: Ministry of Defence major projects report 2005, Report Number: HC 595-I, The Stationery Office, London, United Kingdom (2005)
73. DoD-Department of Defense: Operation of the defense acquisition system. DoD Instruction 5000.2, Defense Acquisition University, Fort Belvoir, United States of America (2003)
74. Marple, J., Clark, B., Jones, C., Zubrow, D.: Measures in support of evolutionary acquisition. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, United States of America (2001)
75. GAO-Government Accountability Office: Joint strike fighter: DoD plans to enter production before testing demonstrates acceptable performance. Report Number: GAO-06-356, The Government Accountability Office, Washington DC, United States of America (2006)
76. Henderson, D.E., Gabb, A.P.: Using evolutionary acquisition for the procurement of complex systems. Report Number: DSTO-TR-0481, Electronics and Surveillance Research Laboratory, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Department of Defence, Salisbury, Australia (1997)
77. Skorczewski, L.: Technology insertion in military aerospace programmes. Journal of Defence Science 9(3), 126-130 (2004)
78. Ostgaard, J., Carbonell, J., Benning, S.: Aging avionics: A science and technology challenge or acquisition challenge. Report Number: RTO-EN-14 Lecture Series 218 'Aging engines, avionics, subsystems and helicopters', Research and Technology Organization, NATO, Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex, France (2000)
79. IBM-IBM Business Consulting: Enabling technology insertion through smart acquisition. Report Number: QINETIQ/S&E/SPI/CR041575, TI MPA (Technology Insertion Major Programme Area), QinetiQ, Farnborough, United Kingdom (2004)
80. Chedister, R.: AAC contributions to situational awareness. In: The Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association (AFCEA) InfoTech 2005, Dayton, United States of America, October 18-20 (2005)
81. Gibbs, R.: Open architecture stores integration software for implementation of a universal armament interface. In: Joint Architecture for Unmanned Systems Working Group Meeting, Chicago, United States of America, July 25-28 (2005)
82. Bryan, T.: Open systems: Fielding superior combat capability quicker. Program Manager 27(1), 48-56 (1998)
83. Hanratty, M., Lightsey, R.H., Larson, A.G.: Open systems and the systems engineering process. Acquisition Review Quarterly, 47-59 (Winter 1999)
84. Gouré, D.: Modularity, the littoral combat ship and the future of the United States Navy. Lexington Institute, Arlington, United States of America (2006)
85. O'Rourke, R.: Navy Aegis cruiser and destroyer modernization: Background and issues for congress. Report Number: RS22595, CRS Report for Congress, Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, Washington DC, United States of America (2008)
86. MacKenzie, S.C., Tuteja, R.: Modular capabilities for the Canadian Navy's single class surface combatant: A perspective on flexibility. Report Number: DRDC-CR-2006-004, Defence Research and Development Canada, Department of National Defence, Ottawa, Canada (2006)
87. Dowling, T., Pardoe, T.: Technology insertion metrics. Report Number: QINETIQ/D&TS/CS/CR050825, TI MPA (Technology Insertion Major Programme Area), QinetiQ, Farnborough, United Kingdom (2005)
88. Lorell, M.A., Lowell, J.F., Kennedy, M., Levaux, H.P.: Cheaper, faster, better? Commercial approaches to weapons acquisition. Report Number: MR-1147-AF. The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica (2000)
89. DID-Defense Industry Daily: Lockheed upgrades US submarine acoustics under A-RCI program (2006), http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/03/ lockheed-upgrades-us-submarine-acoustics-under-arciprogram-updated/index.php
90. Kerr, G., Miller, R.W.: A revolutionary use of COTS in a submarine sonar system. The Journal of Defense Software Engineering (November 2004) (CrossTalk), http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2004/11/0411Kerr.html
91. GAO-Government Accountability Office: Matching resources with requirements is key to the unmanned combat air vehicle program's success. Report Number: GAO-03-598, The Government Accountability Office, Washington DC, United States of America (2003)
92. DID-Defense Industry Daily, Building a better LANTIRN: Denmark spends $20M to upgrade targeting pods (2006), http://www.defenseindustrydaily. com/2006/11/ building-a-better-lantirn-denmark-spends-20m-to-upgradetargeting- pods/index.php
93. Chait, R., Lyons, J., Long, D.: Critical technology events in the development of the Abrams tank: Project Hindsight revisited. Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, Washington DC, United States of America (2005)
94. Bakken, B.E.: Handbook on long term defence planning. Report Number: RTO-TR-069, Research and Technology Organisation, NATO, Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex, France (2003)
95. Mahnken, T.G.: The cruise missile challenge. Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Washington DC, United States of America (2005)
96. Correll, J.T.: Revolution by adaptation. Air Force Magazine 87(2), 62-63 (2004)
97. Dowling, T.: Technology insertion and obsolescence. Journal of Defence Science 9(3), 151-155 (2004)
98. DND-Department of National Defence: Canadian defence beyond 2010: The way ahead-An RMA concept paper. RMA Operational Working Group, National Defence Headquarters, Ottawa, Canada (1999)
99. von Karman, T.: Toward new horizons. United States Army Air Force, Washington DC, United States of America (1945)
100. Kosiak, S.M.: Matching resources with requirements: Options for modernizing the US Air Force. Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Washington DC, United States of America (2004)
101. MoD-Ministry of Defence: Defence technology strategy for the demands of the 21st century. Report Number: DTS, Ministry of Defence, London, United Kingdom (2006)
102. Raupp, G.B.: A new paradigm for disruptive technology development and transition. In: National Defense Industry Association's 7th Annual Science and Engineering Technology Conference, Orlando, United States of America, April 20 (2006)
103. Kerr, C.I.V., Mortara, L., Phaal, R., Probert, D.R.: A conceptual model for technology intelligence. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning 2(1), 73-93 (2006)
104. Chait, R., Lyons, J., Long, D.: Critical technology events in the development of the Apache helicopter: Project Hindsight revisited. Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University, Washington DC, United States of America (2006)
105. US Army: Materiel requirements. Regulation Number: AR 71-9, Department of the Army, The Pentagon, Washington DC, United States of America (1997)