Madl, Dennis O.Overview
Publication Timeline
Most widely held works by
Dennis O Madl
Cost Comparison of the Navy's Air Combat Environment Test and Evaluation Facility (ACETEF) and the Air Force's Electronic Combat Integrated Test (ECIT)
(
Book
)
1 edition published in 1991 in English and held by 1 library worldwide Congress directed DoD to review the costs and capabilities associated with the use of the Navy's Air Combat Environment Test and Evaluation Facility (ACETEF) to satisfy aircraft electronic combat ground testing requirements in lieu of the Air Force developing its own Electronic Combat Integrated Test (ECIT) capability. This paper examines various ACETEF and ECIT capability options that could reasonably satisfy stated Air Force and Navy needs in terms of costs, effectiveness, and other qualitative considerations. Costs include investments for facilities, equipment, and software; deployment costs for testing at other than the primary flight test location; and operating costs for running the facilities over a 20-year period. Effectiveness is defined as the percentage of requirements satisfied by the various facility and capability alternatives. Based on the analysis, the Air Force ECIT proposal is the preferred alternative for meeting both stated testing and many variations in those needs.
Costs and Cost Savings Due to Laboratory Realignments
(
Book
)
1 edition published in 1991 in English and held by 1 library worldwide The Advisory Commission on the Consolidation and Conversion of Defense Research and Development Laboratories is reviewing proposals for realigning several DoD research facilities. In support of this review, the military services were asked to provide the Commission with estimates of the costs and savings that would result from these realignments. IDA reviewed the estimates submitted by the services, as well as those made by opponents of the various realignments, in order to assess their accuracy. Included in the review were analyses of the services' cost-estimating documentation and methodology and an assessment of COBRA, the model used by the services for estimating costs (as directed by the OSD). In addition, IDA investigated pertinent aspects of the proposed realignments of the following laboratories: the Army Combat Materiel Research Laboratory, the Naval Air Development Center, the Naval Underwater Systems Center-New London, the Naval Surface Weapons Center-White Oak, the David Taylor Research Center-Annapolis, and the Aircrew Training Research Facility at Williams Air Force Base. IDA found the services' cost and savings estimates to be reasonable and in accordance with established procedures for base closures. Several shortcomings of the COBRA model methodology were identified, but their effects did not significantly alter service findings and recommendations. Proposed realignments are essentially cost neutral, having estimated payback periods of between 9 and 18 years. In this regard, IDA believes realignment decisions should be based solely on effectiveness considerations.
Effect of the Proposed Closure of NASA's Subsonic Wind Tunnels: An Assessment of Alternatives
(
Book
)
1 edition published in 2004 in English and held by 1 library worldwide This paper addresses the expected effect of NASA's decision to close the National Full-Scale Aerodynamic Complex (NFAC) and the 12-Foot Pressure Wind Tunnel on the Department of Defense (DoD) and the U.S. aerospace industry. The wind tunnels in the NFAC are the largest and second largest in the world. This paper contains a brief history of the relationship between NASA and the DoD with respect to aeronautical test facilities, including an evaluation of DoD's reliance on NASA for subsonic tunnel testing and the efficacy of interagency agreements and alliances between the two organizations regarding aeronautical test facilities. The paper discusses the rationale for NASA's decision to inactivate the wind tunnels, the factors involved in declining use of the tunnels, and how NASA's full-cost recovery policy contributed to the closures. It also addresses why U.S. companies and DoD components conduct tests in foreign wind tunnels, and prioritizes and assesses eight alternatives available to DoD, including assuming responsibility for operating the tunnels, constructing replacement tunnels, using alternative tunnels, and maintaining the status quo. The author suggests establishing an independent agency to own and manage U.S. aerospace test facilities as well as the possibility of privatization. The paper emphasizes the long-term consequences of the full-cost recovery policy and the risks of increased dependence on foreign test facilities, either by choice or through failure to provide a timely response. (2 tables, 3 figures, 68 refs.). |
Languages
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Related Identities