Transcript Slide 1

The NATO Industrial Advisory Group
(NIAG)
Studies Exploratory Group Briefing
Liviu LAZAR
IS - Staff Officer NIAG
Guyonne Le Fournis
IS – Secretary NIAG
1
Where NIAG fits under CNAD:
NORTH ATLANTIC
COUNCIL
National
Armament
Directors
Representatives
Conference of
National Armaments
Directors (CNAD)
NADREPs
NAAG
NAFAG
NNAG
ARMY
AIR
NAVY
NIAG
(Industry)
NATO Army / Airforce / Navy
Armament Groups
2
& in the broader “NATO Community”
NORTH ATLANTIC
COUNCIL
Military
Committee
C3O
A
C
T
Conference of
National Armaments
Directors (CNAD)
Defence
Investment
Division
Emerging
Security
Challenges
Division
NADREPs
NAAG
NAFAG
NNAG
ARMY
AIR
NAVY
NIAG
(Industry)
STO
(Science & Technology
Organization)
Life Cycle
Management
PROJECTS
3
NIAG Charter
• NIAG is a high-level consultative and advisory
body of senior industrialists of NATO member
countries, acting under the Conference of
National Armaments Directors (CNAD), with the
aims of:
– Advising National Armament Directors on industrial
perspectives and issues –
“High Level Advice”
– Bringing industrial know-how and ideas to the work in
CNAD and other NATO Bodies addressing NATO
military capability requirements –
“Technical Studies Advice”
4
How does NIAG operate ?
•
Plenary Meetings:
– 3 per year – February / June / October)
– NATO and Partner formats
•
•
NIAG ‘Services’:
– Study Sub-Groups
– “High Level” Strategic Advice,
- “Pre-feasibility” Studies,
- Workshop Organisation/Support,
- Demonstration preparation//analysis.
– Industrial Network
- Responding to information requests.
– Representation in meetings
– Industrial viewpoints,
“Pre-feasibility” studies:
– What is the current state-of-the art?
– What do future technologies offer?
– What is practical and achievable?
– What is the best way to achieve “interoperability” ?
5
NIAG Studies –
Nine Steps to Implementation
Responsible:
Timeline:
Step 1
Studies Submission – to CNAD and
CBC
MAGs
By June
Study Year -1
Step 2
Study and Tasking Request – to NIAG
Study
Sponsor
Group
8 weeks before Step 3
Step 3
NIAG Exploratory Group (EG)
Meeting
NIAG ViceChairman
One month before Step 5
Step 4
Study Proposal Document – to CNAD
for approval
NIAG Staff
Officer
Immediately after Step 3
Step 5
Study Sub-Group Kick-Off Meeting
NIAG SG
Chair
Study Start
Step 6
Study Conducted
NIAG SG
Chair
Step 7
Study Reporting – to Sponsor Group
and NIAG
NIAG SG
Chair
Step 8
Study Assessment – to CNAD/NIAG
Study
Sponsor
Group
One month after Step 7
Step 9
Study Administration Completion –
study payments
NIAG SG
Chair
Three months after Step 7.
6
Exploratory Group Meeting Agenda
1.
OPENING REMARKS AND INTRODUCTIONS
NIAG Vice-Chairman : Mr. Martin HILL
2.
INTRODUCTION TO NIAG STUDY PROCEDURES
Brief by International Staff – NIAG Staff Officer
3.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OF PROPOSED STUDY
Brief by Study Sponsor
4.
REVIEW OF DOCUMENTATION
5.
NOMINATION OF STUDY CHAIR, DEPUTY CHAIR, RAPPORTEUR AND
NATIONAL FOCAL POINTS
6.
STUDY ORGANISATION – WORK TEAMS ALLOCATION AND WAY AHEAD
7.
STUDY CONTRACTING ARRANGEMENTS, BUDGET PLANNING &
ADMINISTRATION – By NIAG Secretary
8.
STUDY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS – By NIAG Staff Officer
9.
DATE OF KICK-OFF MEETING OF STUDY GROUP
7
At this meeting:
• The Secretary will collect and collate your Business Cards/Contact
Information.
• You, the Industry experts, are invited to:
– Understand and give consideration to the study objectives and
requirement;
– determine your/your company interest in study, and your potential role
and contribution;
– Consider volunteering to the study leadership team as Chair, or Deputy
Chair, or Rapporteur.
• The Sponsor group will be invited to nominate a ‘Quick Reaction
Team’ to support the study activity.
• The Secretary will provide follow-up notes of the meeting presenting
the study objectives and organisation agreed at this meeting, the
study way ahead and all contacts information.
8
For information:
•
NIAG Chairman – Mr Wayne Fujito (US)
– [email protected]
•
NIAG Vice-Chairman – Mr Martin Hill (UK)
– [email protected]
•
IS – Staff Officer– Mr Liviu Lazar
– [email protected]
•
NIAG Secretary – Ms Guyonne Le Fournis
– [email protected]
…………………………………………………………………………………..
•
NIAG Website – https://niag.hq.nato.int
– (password protected)
•
STO Website - www.sto.nato.int
9
Item 7 - Study Administration
Reference: NIAG-WP(2006)0003 dated 24 April 2006
• Contracting Arrangements.
– NIAG ‘Study Order’ sent to each participating company
• Lays out Study Objectives, payments, security, proprietary rights
AT THE KICK-OFF MEETING:
– Please list the Participating Companies and experts for the study SG.
– For each participating company, please collate and forward to the
Secretary the name and address that the Study Order is to be sent to.
• Budget/Payment
– NATO Formula - €412 per “man day”,
– “Man Days” = Meeting Days + Study Days + Travel Day.
AT THE KICK-OFF MEETING:
– Please provide Secretary with name and address of each participating
company’s Financial Office to which she may write to request the payment
invoice.
10
Item 8 - Studies Reporting
Reference: NIAG-WP(2006)0003 dated 24 April 2006 (On CD ROM issued to SG Chairman)
• Interim Report to NIAG Plenary
– 4 ‘Power Point’ slides.
(11 Oct 2011)
• Interim reports to Sponsor Group responsibility of QRT
• Final Report Summary briefs by Chairman (or delegated SG
member) to:
– Sponsor Group
– NIAG Plenary (8 power point slides)
• Final Report (Written)
– Executive Summary - 2 pages
– Main Body
- 20 pages
– Annexes
(Microsoft ‘Word’ & “Adobe Acrobate” Formats/ Send to Secretary)
• Summary Report for NIAG Studies Historical Record
11
BACK UP SLIDES
12
Payment Management
SUB-GROUP PAYMENT SPREADSHEET
NIAG SUB-GROUP NO. …...
Meeting Number/Name
Mtg1
Mtg2
Mtg3
Mtg4
NIAG1
Scheduled start date
Scheduled end date
Sheduled duration
Meeting venue
Europe/ USA Canada
ATTENDANCE RECORD
Name
Company
Country
BUDGETED CLAIMS
Name
Company
For Attendance - mark 'Y'
TOTALS
Claim
Days
Euro
Country
GRAND TOTAL
DATE:
SIGNED - SG Chair
13
Technology Readiness Levels
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Basic principles observed and reported.
Technology concept and/or application formulated.
Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic
proof of concept.
Technology component and/or basic technology sub-system
validation in laboratory environment.
Technology component and/or basic sub-system validation in
relevant environment.
Technology system/sub-system model or prototype
demonstration in relevant environment.
Technology system/sub-system prototype demonstration in an
operational environment.
Actual technology system completed and qualified through test
and demonstration.
Actual technology system “mission proven” /“qualified” through
successful mission operations.
14
Technology Readiness Level
Description
1. Basic principles observed and reported
in context of a relevant Military Capability
Shortfall
Lowest level of technology readiness. Scientific research begins to be evaluated for military applications and
translated into applied research and development. Examples might include paper studies of a technology's
basic properties.
2. Technology concept and/or application
formulated
Invention begins. Once basic principles are observed, practical applications can be postulated. Applications
are speculative and there may be no proof or detailed analysis to support the assumptions. Examples are
limited to analytic paper studies.
3. Analytical and experimental critical
function and/or characteristic proof of
concept
Active research and development is initiated. This includes analytical and laboratory studies to physically
validate the analytical predictions of separate elements of the technology. Examples include components
that are not yet integrated or representative.
4. Technology component and/or
breadboard (system / sub-system
representation) validation in laboratory
environment
Basic technological components are integrated to establish that the pieces will work together. This is
relatively "low fidelity" compared with the eventual system. Examples include integration of "ad hoc"
hardware in a laboratory.
5. Technology component and/or
breadboard (system / sub-system
representation) validation in relevant
environment
Fidelity of breadboard technology increases significantly. The basic technological components are
integrated with reasonably realistic supporting elements so the technology can be tested in a simulated
environment. Examples include "high-fidelity" laboratory integration of components.
6. Technology system/subsystem model
or prototype demonstration in a relevant
environment
Representative model or prototype system, which is well beyond the breadboard (representation) tested for
TRL 5, is tested in a relevant environment. Represents a major step up in a technology’s demonstrated
readiness. Examples include testing a prototype in a high fidelity laboratory environment or in a simulated
operational environment.
7. Technology system prototype
demonstration in an operational
environment
Prototype near, or at, planned operational system. Represents a major step up from TRL 6, requiring the
demonstration of an actual system prototype in an operational environment (e.g., in an aircraft, in a vehicle,
or in space). Information to allow supportability assessments is obtained. Examples include testing the
prototype in a test bed aircraft.
8. Actual technology system completed
and qualified through test and
demonstration
Technology has been proven to work in its final form and under expected conditions. In almost all cases,
this TRL represents the end of true system development and demonstration. Examples include
developmental test and evaluation of the system in its intended weapon system to determine if it meets
design specifications, including those relating to supportability.
9. Actual technology system “mission
proven” / “qualified” through successful
mission operations
Actual application of the technology in its final form and under mission conditions, such as those
15
encountered in operational test and evaluation and reliability trials. In almost all cases, this is the end of the
last “bug fixing” aspects of true system development. Examples include using the system under operational
mission conditions.