100 



direction of the national effort is not required, there is already plenty of bureaucracy 

 and maiiagement. However, more national coordination could be helpful, especially 

 if bureaucracy were reduced. ONR is the best example of efficiency and streamlined 

 procedures; imfortunatcly through programs like WOCE (World Ocean Circulation 

 Experiment), our community is burdened with too much management being done 

 by oceanographers who are supposed to be doing research. 



Generally speaking there is no problem with technology transfer between 

 R&D projects supported by the various agencies. Tor example, mooring and 

 current meter and neutrally buoyant float technology developed at the Woods Hole 

 Oceanographic Institution imder ONR auspices in the 60's and 70's is now routinely 

 used throughout the community. This is also the case for the CTD, an automatically 

 recording, wire-lowered instrument measuring conductivity (sahnity), temperature 

 and depth (pressure), as well as the XBT (expendable temperature-depth traces 

 for the upper ocean). These instniment systems are readily available commercially, 

 and widely and routinely used by Naval Laboratories and System Commands and 

 Operational units as well as the academic R&D community. All of these efforts 

 represent at least some exzimple of spin-off and then spin-on as well as dual-use. 

 The biggest problem in the future will probably be adequate market pull. 



Technology transfer from the more applied segments of the Navy may not 

 be as easy as it is in the R&D community, although I've heard of several good 

 examples. This area coiild really open up with the national priority on defense 

 conversion. But this is not my sphere of expertise. Again, market piUl (or possi- 

 bly memagement inertia) will probably be the limiting factor, as opposed to any 

 technical constraint. 



