DoD S&T Initiatives

The proposed DoD Science & Technology FY08 budget of $10.8 billion is 2.2% of the total DoD budget, a decline of $311 million (whereas total DoD budget grew by $42 billion in FY08). This is about a third of the NIH budget, but it’s spent on significantly fewer initiatives (I like the 3rd category – perhaps the vomit flashlight?):

Foundational Sciences – $300-500M
Active & Conventional Armor Technology – $50M
Defeat of Speed of Light Weapons Systems – $50-100M
Adaptive, Interactive, Full Immersion Training of the Soldier/Marine – $50-100M
Metamaterials – $30-50M
Information Warfare – $100-200M
Information Assurance – $100-200M
Networking Technology – $40-70M
Organization, Fusion, & Mining Large Data Sets for Enhanced Decision Making – $40-60M
Energy – $50-100M
Manufacturing Science Technology – $50-70M
Software Development Technology – $40-70M
Combatting Weapons of Mass Destruction – $50-100M
Neuro-ergonomics – $30-50M
Advanced Medical Research – $100-150M
Autonomous Operations of Networks of Unmanned Vehicles in Complex Environments – $100M
Disparate Sensors, Communications, & Spectrum Management – $500M
Biometric-Based Tactical Threat Identification Demonstration – $190M
Monitoring the Marine Environment for Marine Mammals During Active Sonar Operations – $150M
Specialty Materials for Airships – $30M

Given the crowd who probably reads this blog, I’ll add that the Advanced Medical Research initiative includes such topics as … tissue regeneration, traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder … [okay, all these make sense] … and …

“Off-head neurophysiologically-based brain activity sensing” [I get the gist – but there must be a better title] and
“Universal Antigens” [hmmm]

And yes, I realize these don’t add up to $10.8B. These are the major priorities – there will be others, and demonstration projects as well. UPDATE: Science is reporting a request to increase the S&T budget by 11% (1.2B) for FY09, though the likelihood of such an increase is slim. Additional resources would go primarily toward “foundational sciences, covering areas such as biosensors, photonic crystals, and the computing sciences.”

1 Comment »

  1. Optik said

    Where did you get these numbers from? Could you please point us to some official documents regarding those figures. Thanks.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: