As those on this site know – otherwise why would you be on the site? – the operational past of the System can be more than interesting; it can be fascinating; however, its primary value should be educational because, as George Santayana (1863-1952) said: (quote) Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it (end quote)
In 1963, George Miller and I were part of a professional development program conceived by those at ONI who had no knowledge of the past of successful acoustic data exploitation, limited though it was at that time. We were hired because ONI was then beginning to receive data from Adak and the BRIDGE site in Norway that, for security reasons, could not be forwarded to the activity Joe Kelly had established to analytically support the System: the Data Processing Unit (DPU) at the Brooklyn Navy Shipyard. Ed Smock and other from the pre-1965 period will remember that activity.
George and I had experience with data from Adak and BRIDGE but there was another reason we were hired: to “educate” two technical-degree types (mathematicians) who had no Navy experience but who were expected to, upon being “educated,” assume the primary responsibility for S&T and OPINTEL exploitation of incoming data. After, all, it appears to have been reasoned, our lack of technical education would limit our potential development.
Well, again, as the membership of this site know well, there is no substitute for real-world operational experience – and many years of it, i.e., observing items of interest in their native environments and, along the way, picking the brains of those who have information on design/engineering characteristics and operational doctrine: know what questions to ask and remember and apply the answers.
What ONI should have learned in the 1963, and though the following year, was that a lack of operational experience in an enormous handicap, one that would prove, in that case, insurmountable. Those whom George and I were expected to train were gone within less than two years and we were left to torment the non-believers who eventually gave up and left us alone.
Given the choice between personnel with extensive operational experience and those with only in-depth technical education, there is no real choice. Time spend trying to operationally and analytically train technical types is essentially a waste because, upon realizing how much there is to learn and how little such knowledge will advance their job skills with respect to their educational background (and future employment opportunities), they look elsewhere.
When later asked for my recommendations for training of other technical types ONI was considering hiring to do analysis, my response was: send them to Adak or Kef for five years as a first step. That suggestion was not well received.
In the above context, it is gratifying to know that CUS is as aware of these considerations as is the writer and is moving forward. I wish all those involved success and national preeminence in this fascinating field.
Bruce,
I really have enjoyed your narratives, insight, and analyses. You are always more than welcome here, and, if so inclined, drop in for a chat now and then. It brings us all back to life...
