AFRL Towards the Next Horizon Dr William

AFRL – Towards the Next Horizon Dr William U. Borger Director, Plans and Programs Air Force Research Laboratory 1

Agenda n AFRL – Who We Are n S&T Budget n Principles and Vision n S&T Program Drivers n Future Directions 2

Air Force Research Laboratory Technology Directorates Commander (CC) Executive Director (CD) Vice Commander (CV) Chief Technologist (CT) Staff Propulsion & Power Directed Energy Plans and Programs (XP) Information Sensors Munitions Human Effectiveness Air Vehicles Materials & Mfg Space Vehicles AFOSR

AFRL People & Facilities • 5343 Government Employees • 3798 Onsite Contractors • 10 Major R&D Sites across US • Real Property Replacement Value = $1. 8 B • Equipment Property Replacement Value = $1. 7 B 4

AFRL Major Sites WRIGHT-PATTERSON PROPULSION (PR) AIR VEHICLES (VA) SENSORS (SN) MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING (ML) HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS (HE) COLLABORATIVE C 2 (IF) HQ AFRL ROME INFORMATION (IF) SURVEILLANCE (SN) HANSCOM BATTLE SPACE ENVIRONMENTS (VS) ELECTROMAGNETICS (SN) EDWARDS ROCKET PROPULSION (PR) BALLSTON AIR FORCE OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (AFOSR) MESA WARFIGHTER TRAINING RESEARCH (HE) KIRTLAND DIRECTED ENERGY (DE) SPACE VEHICLES (VS) BROOKS BIOEFFECTS, AEROSPACE PHYSIOLOGY (HE) TYNDALL EGLIN AIR BASE TECHNOLOGY (ML) MUNITIONS (MN) 5

Technology for the Air Force “Concept to Combat” 6. 1 Basic Research (e. g. , Bio Sciences ) 6. 2 Applied Research (e. g. , Joined-Wing ) 6. 3 Adv Tech Demos (e. g. , Night Vision Device Training) 7. 8 Man Tech (e. g. , PNVG – 2 nd Source for Intensifier Tubes) Full Spectrum Science and Technology Quick Reaction (e. g. , C-17 SKE Failure) User Needs (e. g. , Aging Wiring Integrity) Future Concepts Acquisition Consulting (e. g. , Unitized/ Modular Structures) (e. g. , Boom Operator Weapon System Trainer) 6

Agenda n AFRL – Who We Are n S&T Budget n Transforming AF S&T n S&T Program Drivers n Future Directions 7

Strategic Planning Guidance – Background n SPG Direction n “(U) Components will maintain or increase S&T investment at the levels programmed in the FY 20052009 President’s Budget FYDP for FY 2006 -2009, with the goal of achieving 3 percent annual real growth. ” 8

FY 05 President’s Budget AF S&T Budget By Directorate/Tech Area By Budget Activity Directed Energy Dual Use $102 M (7%) $5 M (1%) Human Effectiveness $104 M (7%) 6. 1 $217 M 16% 6. 3 $435 M 31% Propulsion $236 M (18%) Munitions $75 M (5%) 6. 2 $741 M 53% Space Vehicles $149 M (11%) Basic Research $217 M (16%) Information $116 M (8%) Materials & Mfg $129 M (9%) TOTAL: $1. 393 Billion Values May Not Add Due to Rounding Sensors $156 M (11%) Air Vehicles $104 M (9%) 9

FY 05 Total AFRL Budget By Directorate/Tech Area By Budget Activity BOS/MIL PAY $150 M 4% 6. 1 $254 M 7% 6. 3 $657 M 18% Munitions $165 M (5%) Air Vehicles $192 M (5%) Information $490 M (13%) Directed Energy $362 M (10%) Customer ** $1683 M 46% 6. 2 $904 M 25% Basic Research $640 M (19%) Human Effectiveness $235 M (6%) Space Vehicles $381 M (10%) Sensors $443 M (12%) Matl & Manuf $362 M (10%) • Values May Not Add Due to Rounding • ** Includes SBIR Propulsion $378 M (10%) TOTAL: $3. 648 Billion* As of 29 Nov 04 10

AF S&T AS % OF AF BLUE TOA* FY 62 THROUGH FY 09 SE Asia Space Race U-2 Sensors Cruise Mx, ICBMs F-15 GPS F-117 Attack Radar Fly by Wire Turbofan EW Performance Space Imagery F-16 SE Asia Support 1 st solid state Integrated Circuit Desert Storm Contingency OPs Reagan Buildup AF in Production B-1 Stealth Digital Flight 1 st Laser LO Materials Stealth JSTARS B-2 LGB, Maverick UAVs Precision Targeting ISR, COMM Info Fusion Computational Science Affordability GWOT PGMs F 22, JSF, Global Hawk Predator ABL Long Range Strike Hypersonics NGB, SBR, HSI Directed Energy Nano, Bio, Info Multi-Functional * AF BLUE TOA excludes National Foreign Intelligence Program (NFIP), Defense Health Program (DHP), and Special Operations Command (SOCOM)

Operating Tenets n Outsource majority of research/tech development to industry and academia n Perform focused in-house research to maintain core expertise and be a smart outsourcer n Balance near term transfer and far term research n Collaborate/coordinate with others n Do. D: Army, Navy, DARPA, DTRA, MDA, NRO n Other federal agencies: NASA, DOE, others n Private sector n International 12

Agenda n AFRL – Who We Are n S&T Budget n Transforming AF S&T n S&T Program Drivers n Future Directions 13

Many Changes in Global Realities Since the Creation of AFRL The speed of modern technology and the creativity of our elusive and opportunistic adversaries makes “what we don’t know” highly dangerous Technology Threat What we don’t know we know (missed opportunities) (most dangerous) What we know /11 urity 9 st Sec s Po al ge n n lle tio ha Na C ew N What we don’t know What we know we don’t know “Global Situational Awareness” “One out of a Million” Threat Environment “Speed & Agility” Cyber / Info Ops Gap The World Has Changed… Lean Defense Budgets

In An Environment of Change AFRL Must Have a Clear Site Picture of What Our Customers Need Who are Our Customers and What Do They Want? n AF Senior Leadership – – n Technology ideas that shape future concepts Tech push to show operators what’s possible Program Managers (Capability Developers) – – n Transitionable technology options Core S&T connected to operational AF needs via CRRA “requirements pull” Three discrete: • Customers • Timelines • Outputs • Relationships Capability Users and Decision Makers – Responsive technology solutions – Unprecedented innovation to meet urgent needs Today’s Lab has one work structure to serve all customers 15

Attributes of the Envisioned Future one. AFRL Consistently anticipate and proactively adapt to an uncertain future n A valued AF team member – leading innovative, integrated, and multidisciplinary: n Long-term research, driven by an audacious technology goal – shape the future Air Force n Development of technology options that meet the needs of capability developers – deliver on our commitments n Technology response to urgent needs – provide rapid, come-as-you-are solutions n Grow technology leaders for the AF n Access and exploit all of mankind’s S&T knowledge n Establish and fully leverage strategic partnerships n Operate with sound enterprise business principles n 16

Agenda n AFRL – Who We Are n S&T Budget n Transforming AF S&T n S&T Program Drivers n Future Directions 17

Gen Jumper’s “Sight Picture” (Air Force Chief of Staff) Concepts of Operations (CONOPS). . . will guide our planning and programming, requirements reform, and acquisition. …Air Staff designed a new review to replace the ‘Quarterly Acquisition Review Program’--we call this new (process) approach a Capabilities Review and Risk Assessment (CRRA). . make warfighting effects, and the capabilities we need to achieve them, the drivers for everything we do. . shift from a program review to a review of how our programs contribute to warfighting capabilities and effects. 18

AF Capabilities–Based Planning National Strategies SECDEF Planning Guidance Joint Concepts Joint Integrated Capability is the absolute requirement. To be effective, you must be able to “plug and play” Planning Programming Budgeting Execution Integrated Capability Review and Risk Assessment (I-CRRA) Global Strike CONOPS Global Homeland Mobility Security CONOPS Global Nuclear Persistent Response Attack CONOPS Agile Combat Support CONOPS Space & C 4 ISR CONOPS 19

S&T Investment Development CSAF & Sec. AF AFMC/CC SAF/AQ AFSPC/CC I-CRRA Capability Shortfalls MAJCOMs DDR&E SAF/US Wargaming System Program Offices DSB/SAB g nin n Pla sed ming ba ty- gram li abi Pro p Ca and S&T DARPA Congress Investment 20

Focused Long Term Challenge (FLTC) Problem Strategy Capability Vision Fueled by Technology Capability 6. 3 – Mid Term Demo’s es ng le al h h. C c Te 6. 3 – Near Term Demo’s 6. 1 6. 2 AFRL FY 08 – 13 POM AFRL FY 13 – 18 POM Time AFRL FY 18 – 25 POM 21

Sector Focus Technology to Capability to CONOPS Warfighter Technology Areas Aeronautical Sector Expeditionary Readiness & Support Responsive Air Ops & Survivability F 2 T 2 on Air Combat Systems AIR FORCE CONOPS Space Force Projection Counterspace C 2 ISR Sector Global ISR Command & Control Global Information Enterprise Target Effects Integrated Defense Weapons Sector Global Strike n Global Persistent Attack n Global Mobility n Space & C 4 ISR n Nuclear Response n Space Sector n Homeland Security n Agile Combat Support Air Vehicles (VA) Space Vehicles (VS) Information (IF) Munitions (MN) Directed Energy (DE) Materials & Manuf. (ML) Sensors (SN) Propulsion (PR) Human Effectiveness (HE) AFOSR

Changing the Plot • For decades the Pentagon’s war plans focused on countering conventional military threats. • New planning scenarios focus on preparing for a wider range of contingencies • To migrate from Traditional to other areas requires Revolutionary Technology Enablers 23

Irregular More likely USAF Coverage – Current View Lower vulnerability Catastrophic Less likely Higher vulnerability Traditional Disruptive 24

Irregular More likely Future USAF Coverage – Perception 1 Lower vulnerability Catastrophic Higher vulnerability Less likely Pro: Move Resources to Address Future Threats Con: Assumption of Infinite Air Superiority Invalid Traditional Disruptive 25

Irregular Pro: Needs/Opportunity Everywhere Con: Fiscal Reality Demands Focus More likely Future USAF Coverage – Perception 2 Lower vulnerability Catastrophic Less likely Higher vulnerability Traditional Disruptive 26

Future USAF Coverage – Perception 3 Give Your Enemy “No Sanctuary” Leverage Joint Expertise Lower vulnerability Higher vulnerability Less likely Traditional Catastrophic More likely Irregular Get There First Field Innovative Concepts Disruptive 27

Technology Enablers Catastrophic More likely Irregular Single Stage to Orbit Space Based Laser Net Centricity – Advanced Info Ops High Power Microwaves Long Loiter Sensor. Craft Lower vulnerability Higher vulnerability Nano Chem. Bio Sensors Multi Mission Mobility Less likely Long Range Strike (Hypersonics) Traditional Self-Healing Materials 600 nm Disruptive Quantum/Bio Computing – 28 Advanced Psy. Ops

Agenda n AFRL – Who We Are n S&T Budget n Transforming AF S&T n S&T Program Drivers n Future Directions 29

Increase Multi-Disciplinary Solutions Airborne Laser Laboratory Adaptive Optics Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser 30+ Years of Air Force S&T investments in beam control and high energy lasers have made an ABL Possible 1. 5 m Telescope Atmospheric Compensation 3. 5 m Telescope Atmospheric Measurements

On the Horizon S&T for Special Operations REVOLUTIONARY TECHNOLOGY • Directed Energy • Next Generation Gunship S&T • Power • Fabrication • Micro-Munitions • Micro-Communication • Micro-Sensors • Counter-Proliferation • Reasoning Logic • Quality Assurance • Analytic Toolkit 31

Summary n Special Partnerships exists between AFRL and industry n Industry is a “supplier” and a “customer” n AFRL driven by Capability Based Planning I-CRRA defines tech pull n AFRL defines tech push n Industry needs to speak the same language n Global Vigilance, Reach and Power AF CONOPS CBP&P n Changing “nature of warfare” is driving future S&T Research Irregular/catastrophic/traditional/ disruptive n AFRL is changing investments in response n New Do. D directions will impact Industry n 32

QUESTIONS? Defending America by unleashing the power of innovative science and technology 33