Maritime R&D—Only government funds can revive it . . .

This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected.  Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies.  Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue.  The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.

Maritime R&D-Only government funds can revive it . . .

In its 1985 publication, R&D in the Maritime Industry, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) summarized its findings on the state of technology and research in the U. S. maritime industries:

“ . . . the U. S. generally has lagged behind foreign competitors in applying technological advances to much of the U. S.-flag fleet and to the technology of constructing ships. OTA [concludes] that to achieve a competitive position in world ship­ping and shipbuilding, it is impor­tant for the United States to regain technological preeminence in these areas.”

During the three years since that opinion was formulated, what little maritime industries-related research and development that had been under way in this country has all but evaporated. Ship owners, faced with massive worldwide overtonnage, have been loath to invest scarce resources in R&D, preferring to purchase new tech­nology off-the-shelf from abroad when­ever urgent competitive grounds have justified the introduction of new ideas. The commercial shipbuilding industry, in far worse economic condition than the ship owners and facing little likeli­hood of future orders for new construc­tion is in no financial position to risk significant capital on R&D ventures.

The federal government, believing that the private sector should handle maritime R&D, has virtually ceased to back any maritime industry-related ef­fort whatever. (Curiously, however, the government continues to fund signifi­cant R&D efforts for other modes of commercial transportation.) The Mari­time Administration no longer budgets for research and development and with­drew its support from the highly suc­cessful National Shipbuilding Research Program (NSRP) after fiscal year 1986. Even the Navy allocated only $500,000 to the NSRP in fiscal year 1988, de­spite the program having demonstrated through 1985 savings of at least $75 million on a cumulative investment of less than $7 million.

The Office of Technology Assess­ment’s 1985 prescription for a more effective federal government role in maritime research included:

►  Defining the need for R&D as part of an overall federal maritime policy

► Determining what portion of the maritime R&D effort might best be performed by the private sector and then providing indirect incentives to ensure that the R&D is carried out

►  Stimulating coordination and transfer of technology within the maritime in­dustry and from military, foreign, and other sources

► Devoting government maritime R&D to high-risk or long-range problems in support of national goals

►  Establishing new or modified institu­tional arrangements to encourage, coor­dinate, and foster maritime R&D with federal and/or private support

That is clearly a minimum prescription for a very sick patient.

The necessity for federal government involvement in maritime R&D is obvi­ous. The various components of the industry are unable financially to per­form individually (or have performed for them) the research necessary for the United States to regain technological competitiveness with the leading mari­time powers.

A survey conducted by the Congres­sional Office of Technology Assess­ment in support of its 1985 report showed that, of the responding firms, some 42% of the shipyards and 63% of the ship operators had financed no sig­nificant R&D for the previous five years. The government is doing no bet­ter. Not only is the Maritime Adminis­tration no longer budgeting for research and development, but Navy R&D fund­ing tied to surface ship design and ship construction is infinitesimal in propor­tion to the naval shipbuilding budget or to the overall Navy R&D budget.

The Navy lacks an effective central coordination of and commitment to ship design and construction-related technology. Literally dozens of organi­zations have some degree of responsi­bility for ship-related research. The David Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center’s magnificent tow­ing tank and other experimental facili­ties at Carderock and Annapolis are probably the finest in the Free World, yet these facilities must compete on an equal basis with lower-overhead foreign organizations for Navy research-and- development dollars. As a conse­quence, the Navy’s own in-house capa­bility has been underutilized, and the results of many expensive Navy re­search programs are probably more accessible to foreign organizations than to U. S. industry.

Cooperation among the government agencies concerned with maritime R<* and what remains of the U. S. mari­time industry is necessary to achieve the concentration and the funding re­quired to produce meaningful results. The leading foreign maritime nations enjoy such cooperation as a matter ot course, and it has paid off in maritime innovations that have greatly benefited the foreign fleets.

Any legal impediments to a cooper* tive maritime R&D program should be swept away, and the resultant effort should be adequately and securely funded. (See the 30 December 1987 Second Report of the Commission on Merchant Marine and Defense.) The most effective way to accomplish this is to create a revolving fund financed by annual congressional appropriations matched at some level—perhaps one third to one half of the total—by con­tributions from the private sector.

With a few exceptions, U. S. man­time corporations are stagnant and d^ete riorating. Dissension and an almost total lack of cooperation riddle the in­dustry—even among the numerous an fragmented associations that represent the various corporate and labor inter­ests. The industry is the captive of ^lts own internal quarreling. This disarray is matched within the federal govern­ment, where no single unifying policy guides the many agencies that have J^u risdiction over maritime matters. A rc surgence in U. S. maritime research and development would be no panacea for an industry in such difficulties, b without such a renewed effort, there will be no progress.

The economic circumstances of the U. S. maritime industries being what they are, it will be necessary for som⁶ time to come for the federal govern­ment to provide the essential cataly^st any renaissance of maritime research and development in the United States-

Mr. Baker is the editor of Combat Fleets of World, published by the Naval Institute Press.