Submarine Officer Lt. Cmdr. David Adams receives Naval Institute Honor

Since 03-02-04

From NSL UPDATE 02-27-2004

The Write Stuff: Submarine Officer receives Naval Institute Honor
By William Kenny, SUBSCOL Public Affairs

In collegiate and university circles, the maxim is "publish or perish. Those on the faculty know that to remain well regarded by their peers and their institution, they must become writers. For Lt. Cmdr. David Adams, a Prospective Executive Officer (PXO) Course student, the maxim is more "publish or submerge." Adams, recently selected as the Naval Institute's Proceedings first-ever recipient of the Battelle Prize for Writing on Technology and Innovation, characterizes his 14 articles as a product of his shore duty time.

"The whole time I was on (USS) Santa Fe (SSN 763)," he notes, "I only published one article, there's just not a lot of time on sea duty for that kind of thing. That kind of thing, specifically, falls into two main areas of interest explains Adams. "I've always been very interested in policy and strategy," he said. "I really started to write while I was at Monterey (Naval Postgraduate School) earning my masters in National Security, that's when I started to get things published.

"The 'spark' to write goes back a long time, when I was a 'stash' Ensign at the Pentagon working for the Secretary of the Navy speech writer, Cmdr. Neil Golightly, and he had written, and won, several essay contests. And he encouraged me to write - though it took five years for me to

actually do it. "I write about things I'm passionate about, that I think are really important. The first article I wrote that did well took me six or seven months to write. I'd like to think I've gotten better since then (grins). But the writing isn't the key so much as communicating ideas to try to influence the debate on what's important."

Successfully communicating his passions has resulted in numerous awards for his articles, most recently the Battelle Prize for an essay on a technology he feels is just now showing the promise he first glimpsed years ago, electromagnetic rail guns, which the title of his February 2003 award-wining essay succinctly (and somewhat understatedly) captured, "Naval Rail Guns Are Revolutionary."

Adams story behind his essay is every bit as interesting as the article itself. "One of my big passions in the Navy is technological innovation. "When I was on the Strategic Studies Group, in 1997, Admiral (James) Hogg (Director, SSG) said 'go out and find a solution to our challenge to lob ordnance far inland for a low cost.' And he mentioned there was some research going on at the University of Texas on electromagnetic rail guns. "I started to get involved in that and developed a concept. "There were lots of people looking at electromagnetic rail guns, for short-range air defense, among other applications, and I said 'no, this is the perfect thing for a surface ship! We could easily have all the power we need on a ship to lob metal hundreds of miles inland.'

"One aspect of our Naval strategy is to influence events and land 200 miles inland. I looked at a lot of technologies. But when I went to the University of Texas and they fired an electromagnetic gun at hypersonic speed and it penetrated a piece of steel about 10 inches thick, they proved to me it could be done."

The research, as Adams was to discover, was the easy part - advocacy and persuasion would be more difficult. "After a lot of analysis, I concluded 'this is the technology.' Adm. Hogg was sold and we briefed the Chief of Naval Operations but there were other initiatives in other areas and this one took a while to develop. "Technology isn't my only passion. I am most passionate about strategy, leadership, and

strengthening Navy culture-those are really important to me. The best way to share your passion and communicate on topics such as these is to write. "But in this case, I really got involved in this because the SSG, at the time, was focused on technological innovation. I did all those briefs, and good things came from that. "I went on to my Department Head tour on USS Santa Fe and left the Rail Gun research to some other people.

Then I went to work for Vice Adm. Konetzni as his aide, but I was also doing a lot of policy work, and for about a year, the Rail Gun never came up (and I didn't feel it was appropriate to bring it up)." But patience and preparation are, on occasion, rewarded as Adams continues. "Dr. Stephen A. Cambone, who was (Secretary of Defense Donald A.) Rumsfeld's right hand man for technology (Director of Program Analysis and Evaluation) came down and asked 'why isn't the Navy more interested in rail guns?' Vice Adm. Konetzni turns to me and says, 'Dave, you know

about this rail gun stuff. Develop a brief.'

"So I did and gave it to Adm. Robert Natter (at the time, Commander in Chief, US Atlantic Fleet and Commander Fleet Forces Command), and he loved it. "I told him 'we can build a one eighth scale of this gun and fire it in three months at a cost of $300 thousand. Now that's not a BIG scale more like a 30- mile range system. But we could do this and show the Navy that practical rail guns can be developed.' "Last May, we traveled to Scotland and conducted one of the first Sea Trial experiments. We loaded our Navy-built projectile into the British gun and we launched it. "And he had about the same reaction that I had had in Texas, 'Yes! We need this!' "Which is how we got to where we are today."

Adams makes the transition from author to advocate effortlessly. "Rail Guns are a very important technology. I think they change the face of the Navy, especially surface warfare. Eventually, I think, you'll be able to lob metal thousands, not hundreds, of miles in a matter of minutes. Admittedly, that's years from now, but the potential is there. "For the surface community and the Navy as a whole, this could revolutionize the naval firepower.

"For instance, if you had five ships with electro- magnetic rail guns with the ability to shoot six rounds a minute, you could have hit all the fixed targets that we hit in Kosovo in the first two hours of the war. You're talking about having both precision and volumes of ordnance, from the sea safe, protected, on target. That's a Big revolutionary change for the Navy. "I can see the Navy installing rail guns on the DDX and back fitting them to the Arleigh Burke class destroyers."

Pretty heady words from a submarine officer on shore duty as a student. Adams, though proud to be a submarine officer, sees himself as a more traditional naval officer and offers an illustration. "I'm a navalist, first in the sense that (Rear Adm. Alfred T.) Mahan was a navalist one who

believes in the value of a strong Navy and the need to make it stronger. My goal is to have influence on that process.

"But I see myself as both strong in strategy and policy and as a tactical expert in the Submarine Force. "But down the line, I also see myself doing more writing--I'm working with Vice Adm. Konetzni right now on a guide for submarine officers. "I've written about Naval strategy, which I think very few people understand. What Naval Strategy was always about was influencing events over time. "For example, land strategists often study Carl von Clausewitz. Von Clausewitz was an observer of Napoleon. While Napoleon won great land battles, he never was able to translate those victories into political success-ending up on Elba.

"Navalists, like myself, look to Mahan. Mahan looked at the British, who really didn't win large numbers of great or spectacular battles, but created what his book called "The Influence of Sea Power on History" not How to Win the Battle, but, rather, how to use military power to influence events for the long haul. "Military events change quickly but politics are slow to change. "Look at the Cold War, which is a proof of the effectiveness of a Naval Strategy. In essence, we blockaded the Soviet Union with joint forces (we used the Air Force, the Army and all the Armed Forces), and influenced events over time. I wrote an article on just this perspective, called 'Win Without Fighting.' (Prize Winner, September 2000 Colin L. Powell Joint Warfighting Essay Contest, Naval Institute.) It's important people look at strategy and understand the process, not just look at a short-term result."

From his earliest days in the Navy as an enlisted Electronics Technician, through his completion of the Royal Navy's "Perisher" submarine course, Adams feels he is the sum of the experiences of everyone he has ever met. "When I was working for Vice Adm. Konetzni, I watched how he interacted with people. I learned that you may not be able to change your personality, but you can change your behavior and say 'the way he is with people works for him and for them.' “When I was with the British Royal Navy for the 'Perisher' course, I learned many things that I took away from that environment I could use elsewhere. You should be able to apply a lesson learned at one point in your career to a new situation at a different point. You build on every experience as you progress and continue to influence in a positive direction.

"I think the number one way to have influence as someone within the Navy is you have to be a warfighter and you have to be good at that. So command at sea has always been my career goal. After that, I will see where my Navy career goes. I'd like to get my Ph.D. in International Relations, perhaps a Congressional Fellowship or a White House Fellowship. I'd like to teach at the Naval Post Graduate School or at the University of Texas. Most important I want to continue to build on what I see as my strengths, policy and tactics."