SERA 17 Committee 1

1
SERA 17 Committee 1
Chairman Peter Worsøe, DK Secretary Patrick
Russell-Jones, UK Patrick Culier, FR Dan-Åke
Enstedt, SW Dimitri Griffioen, NL Hans-Karl Haak,
GE Col. Nevzat Kilinc, TR Claudio Macario Ban,
IT Col. Jirí Navrátil, CZ
2
SERA 17 Committee 1

• How to define and which are the technological
  priorities for the EDTIB?

3
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• Our analysis
• Political background for defence planning
• Likely military missions and functional concepts
• 10 Technology areas identified with 39
  sub-headings
• Immediate technology priorities to fill gaps in
  capability
• Processes for promoting collaboration

4
Defence missions

• Peace Keeping
• Peace Enforcement
• Border Control
• Anti Terror, External
• Anti Terror, Internal
• Crisis Management (Civil)
• Humanitarian Aid
• National Defence
• General Defence

5
Defence functional concepts

• Battlespace/Situational Awareness
• Command and Control
• Force Application
• Protection
• Focused Logistics

6
Technology areas

• Energetic Materials
• Power supplies
• Autonomous navigation and operation
• Sensor technology for target acquisition and
  surveillance
• CBRNX detection
• Material technology
• Computers/Processors/software
• Less than lethal weapons
• Directed energy weapons
• Electronic Warfare Systems

7
Technology priorities

• In support of Battlespace/Situational awareness
  and Command and Control
• to provide effective co-operation through
  information management and evaluation to support
  decision making
• Open architecture software and processors for
  data exchange and communication
• Common interface structures, man-machine
  interfaces, head up displays, voice recognition
• Simple, secure and rugged networking technologies
• Identification Friend-Foe (IFF)
• in addition, to assist timely decision making,
  equipment interoperability and joint training
• Virtual systems for joint training and simulation
  in real time

8
Technology priorities contd

• In Force Application to provide options for
  flexible response through progressively scaleable
  weapons
• Electro-magnetic, infra-red (IR),
  millimetric-wave or ultra-sonic applications for
  force protection and graduated response in
  peacekeeping roles
• In Protection protecting deployed forces.
• Future armour, e.g. lightweight materials, high
  strength steel or alloys
• Personal protection (dismounted soldier)
• In Focused Logistics to improve deployed joint
  force operational support
• Computer-based logistics and intelligent
  warehousing

9
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• How can these priorities be taken forward in
  Europe?

10
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• Technological ambitions need to be matched by RT
  investment
• only the UK and France devote a similar
  proportion (12) of their defence budgets to RD
  as compared to the US.
• Europe as a whole spends around 20 of what the
  US does on defence research
• only 9 European countries (8 EDA members) spend
  significant sums on RT

11
RD as of Defence Expenditure and of GDP
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
RD as of total defence spend
0 1 2
3 4
5 6
Defence spending as of GDP
12
WEAG RT spend in 2001
13
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• Efficiency gains offered by European RT
  co-operation should be re-invested
• The temptation to make savings in this area would
  compound the relative under investment in
  research compared to the US

14
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• Defence Planning processes need to be harmonised
  to facilitate greater co-operation
• Progress cannot be made without synchronisation
  of requirements and budgets to support them

15
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• Need to build on existing co-operative
  arrangements offering flexibility and
  transparency
• This is essential to encourage co-operation and
  to facilitate some top down direction of
  programmes

16
How to define and which are the technological
priorities for the EDTIB?

• EDA should assist the co-operative process by
  highlighting common areas of interest and
  encouraging MS to work together
• EDA should fulfil the missing role of being the
  adviser on opportunities for collaboration

17
Key messages

• European Technological ambitions need to be
  matched by RT investment
• Efficiency gains offered by European RT
  co-operation should be re-invested
• Defence Planning processes need to be harmonised
  to facilitate greater co-operation
• Need to build on existing co-operative
  arrangements offering flexibility and
  transparency
• EDA should assist the co-operative process by
  highlighting common areas of interest and
  encouraging MS to work together

18
SERA 17 Committee 1

• How to define and which are the technological
  priorities for the EDTIB?

19
Defence budgets (2001) as of GDP RD and
Equipment as of budget (IISS Military Balance
2001/02)