3. Are Present R&D Framework, Etc. Acceptable?
3.1 Example of Japanese Case
After targeted R&D and reaction are assessed, R&D structure must be organized to suit to the assessed requirement. But reality is not so optimistic.
3.1.1 Japanese case is reviewed briefly here, whose potential is thought to be the highest at least for practical applications of technology.
1) R&D structure in Japan consists of two categories i.e. individually based and cooperative (consortium) based as quite often seen in other countries.
2) Individual R&D is implemented by companies (mainly by seven major shipbuilders), universities, institutions and societies. And cooperative R&D projects are sometimes promoted by the government (examples being TSL and Mega Float) or voluntarily organized.
3) All of the major shipyards have their own facility for R&D, like ship model basin, and are carrying out proportionally small projects based on individual needs. (Refer to Fig.10)
3.1.2 Under such structure, Japan faces problems such as;
1) R&D expense against sales brought down to 1% + from current 2%.
2) Number of researchers is reportedly less than 400, 1/3 of past maximum. (This cannot simply be believed, because dual purpose people in design field might have been omitted.)
3) Still each company conducts same sort of R&D in duplication with others in order not to be defeated in severe competition. And leadership for corrective action is weak. Consequently, less innovative output is achieved.
4) At the same time, there is less challenge and help to equipment suppliers. Japanese shipbuilders today have forgotten their origin which had been equipment supplier above shipbuilder in the old times.
3.1.3 Then to which direction R&D structure to be steered?
1) Major shipbuilders had better be merged to form less number of groups. But this is only easy to say.
