THE APPROACH BY THE PANEL 



Studies already undertaken were reviewed. Staff interviewed many 

 active practitioners in marine affairs in government, in industry, in 

 tfie oceanograpliic researcfi community, and at universities, and re- 

 ported to the panel on what they had been told. This memorandum 

 has been prepared on the basis of what was learned. 



FINDINGS: Introduction 



The panel learned that there are many specific tasks necessary to 

 the development of ocean engineering which need doing but no general 

 agreement exists as to what, specifically, ought to be done first. No 

 area of ocean technology stands out as critical yet totally neglected. 



This could be interpreted as reassuring evidence of normal progress. 

 But the panel feels there is a contributory cause to this drift which 

 is not normal. The contributory cause is the expense of working in 

 the ocean which occurs partly because of the nature of ocean engineer- 

 ing, partly because of the way we go about doing it. The inherent 

 reasons are straightforward but worth noting. You can't leave something 

 on the ocean's surface without mooring it; then, how long it remains 

 there is uncertain. You can't put something on the bottom and find 

 it easily when you come back. It is difficult in the ocean to see and 

 touch what you work with. In addition to the extremes of weather over 

 water, the physical, chemical, and biological effects of water on mate- 

 rials, instruments, and constructions are in general so much more 

 extreme than they are on land, it costs extra even for impermanence. 

 Furthermore gear can't exist except as part of a "system" which means 

 that every upward adjustment in requirements balloons through a 

 whole chain of inter-connected parts. Fighting cost, reliability, and 

 weight at the same time means something has to give. It is usually all 

 three. To top off the expensiveness brought on by the nature of the 

 work, we characteristically add expense unnecessarily by a cut-and-try 

 approach to complex system development in which we fail to work on 

 components separately in advance and suffer further disadvantage in 

 the use of otherwise suitable materials because of marine fouling, stress 

 corrosion, etc. 



This matter of cost has a major influence on what can or cannot 

 get done. Further, it involves the important side effect of making it 

 tempting to let someone else do it— or at least pay for it. Working out 

 all the details in advance is expensive and time consuming and so 

 rather more risk is accepted in groping forward. Or one looks to some- 

 one else to work things out. In any event many things which people or 

 organizations would normally do for themselves are put on a wish 

 list instead. 



10 



