the implication of continued government involvement (in addition to 

 the normal divergence of opinion on regulation and monitoring) 

 which leads to such differences of opinion by industry on government's 

 role in a new field. It seems to depend a lot on how much is available to 

 b6 put at risk in the early stages. 



The panel sees no way out except by deciding each case on its own 

 merits, for industry is not uniform in its attitudes and its needs; its 

 relationships with government vary. 



CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 



Short-range ocean engineering problems and applications are being 

 attacked and solved by industry if they otherwise would block operations, 

 but the solutions are often expedient and expensive in the long run 

 because they have been worked out in a hurry. A long-range program 

 for supplying background information on the oceans exists in NOAA, 

 though it is bound to fall short of satisfying everybody's requirements 

 because it is expensive in the detail and the precise characteristics 

 sufficient to keep everybody happy. 



But the extensive lists of engineering to be done in the oceans 

 include whole classes of problems in materials, techniques, engineering 

 characteristics, and instrumentation whose solutions, if anticipated, 

 could save time, and money, and possible environmental strain, if 

 tackled now. They seem ripe for government encouragement if only of a 

 limited sort. Since the candidates for support are so numerous, as are 

 the selection schemes themselves, the panel came to the conclusion that 

 what is needed is wide-ranging stimulation of the field to provide 

 technical alternatives, with demonstration technology left to others 

 once particular ideas prove out. 



This conclusion was not independent or isolated. Two organiza- 

 tional examples of what kind of organization people in ocean engineer- 

 ing would like to see active kept cropping up: (1) the Office of Naval 

 Research through its twenty-five years history and the role it has played 

 in providing continuity to the support of basic research and in paving 

 the way for the National Science Foundation, and (2) the National 

 Advisory Committee on Aeronautics and the role it played in welding 

 research, industrial, and governmental efforts in aeronautical engineer- 

 ing. Both were outstanding in stimulating progress in highly technical 

 areas— the one in basic and the other in applied science. The heart of 

 the matter is that support was offered for good ideas, not for predict- 

 able results. 



However, neither the ONR nor the NACA concepts apply to ocean 

 engineering today. ONR was launched to preserve the Navy-University 

 relationship at the end of the vigorous fast-moving and successful 



15 



