National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

EVALUATION OF THE NATIONAL AEROSPACE INITIATIVE

Committee on the National Aerospace Initiative

Air Force Science and Technology Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This is a report of work supported by Grant F49620-01-1-0269 between the U.S. Air Force and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number 0-309-09175-6 (Book)

International Standard Book Number 0-309-53107-1 (PDF)

Limited copies are available from:

Air Force Science and Technology Board

National Research Council

500 Fifth Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20001

(202) 334-3118

Additional copies are available from:
The National Academies Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu

Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

www.national-academies.org

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL AEROSPACE INITIATIVE

EDSEL D. DUNFORD, Chair,

TRW (retired)

DONALD J. KUTYNA, Vice-Chair,

Loral Space and Communications, Colorado Springs

KEVIN G. BOWCUTT,

The Boeing Company, Huntington Beach, California

KENNETH E. EICKMANN,

University of Texas at Austin

WESLEY L. HARRIS,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

HANS G. HORNUNG,

California Institute of Technology, Pasadena

KATHLEEN C. HOWELL,

Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

ERIC J. JUMPER,

University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana

IRA F. KUHN, JR.,

Directed Technologies, Arlington, Virginia

ANDREW J. MEADE,

Rice University, Houston, Texas

CARL J. MEADE,

Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, Palmdale, California

NEIL E. PATON,

Liquidmetal Technologies, Lake Forest, California

RONALD F. PAULSON,

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland

FRED E. SAALFELD,

National Defense University, Washington, D.C.

DONNA L. SHIRLEY,

University of Oklahoma, Norman

PETER STAUDHAMMER,

Northrop Grumman, Redondo Beach, California

Air Force Science and Technology Board Liaisons

ROBERT A. FUHRMAN,

Lockheed Corporation (retired), Pebble Beach, California

ELI RESHOTKO,

Case Western Reserve University (emeritus), Cleveland, Ohio

Staff

JAMES C. GARCIA, Study Director

LaNITA JONES, Project Assistant

DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Research Associate

ANDREW WALTHER, Intern

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

AIR FORCE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD

ROBERT A. FUHRMAN, Chair,

Lockheed Corporation (retired), Pebble Beach, California

R. NOEL LONGUEMARE, Vice-Chair,

Private Consultant, Ellicott City, Maryland

FRANK CAPPUCCIO,

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Fort Worth, Texas

LYNN CONWAY,

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

LAWRENCE J. DELANEY,

Titan Corporation, Arlington, Virginia

STEVEN D. DORFMAN,

Hughes Electronics (retired), Los Angeles, California

EARL H. DOWELL,

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

DELORES M. ETTER,

U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland

CHANDRA KUMAR N. PATEL,

University of California at Los Angeles

RICHARD R. PAUL,

The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington

ROBERT F. RAGGIO,

Dayton Aerospace, Inc., Dayton, Ohio

ELI RESHOTKO,

Case Western Reserve University (emeritus), Cleveland, Ohio

LOURDES SALAMANCA-RIBA,

University of Maryland, College Park

EUGENE L. TATTINI,

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California

Staff

MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Director

WILLIAM E. CAMPBELL, Administrative Officer

CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate

DEANNA P. SPARGER, Administrative Associate

DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Research Associate

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

Preface

Since the end of the Cold War, the percentage of national resources devoted to aerospace has declined and graduation rates in science and engineering have declined as well. The goal of the National Aerospace Initiative (NAI), a partnership set up in 2001 between the Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), is to sustain U.S. leadership in aerospace in the coming decades. The initiative challenges the military services and agencies to accelerate development and demonstration milestones in selected areas to allow systems to be implemented earlier than they would otherwise have been.

BACKGROUND AND SCOPE OF STUDY

As the primary DoD participant in NAI, the Air Force became concerned about possible effects on its program and budget if NAI investment decisions followed a set of priorities different from those of the Air Force. For an independent assessment of the feasibility and operational relevance of NAI, the Air Force turned to the National Academies. In March 2003, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering requested a detailed study of NAI. The full statement of task is given in Box P-1. The study grant was awarded in mid-May 2003, after which the Committee on the National Aerospace Initiative was formed under the auspices of the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Air Force Science and Technology Board (see Appendix A for short biographies of committee members). The first committee meeting was held in early August 2003. By agreement with the sponsor, the committee addressed two of the three NAI “pillars” (subject areas)—hypersonics and access to space—but did not attempt to comment on space technology.1

1  

It was agreed that the broad scope of the third NAI pillar—space technology—and the DoD security classification of much of the pertinent related information would limit the committee’s approach. The first two NAI pillars—hypersonics and access to space—had narrower scopes and largely involved unclassified information, and recent budget proposals made these two pillars subjects of nearer-term concern.

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

Box P-1
Statement of Task

To assist the Department of Defense, the services and agencies, and NASA by providing an independent evaluation of the feasibility of achieving the science and technical goals as outlined in the National Aerospace Initiative, the National Academies, under the leadership of the Air Force Science and Technology Board, will form a committee to answer the following general questions concerning the NAI:

  1. Is it technically feasible in the time frame laid out?

  2. Is it financially feasible in the same time frame?

  3. Is it operationally relevant?

In developing its answers, the committee will perform the following tasks:

  • Examine information provided by DoD and NASA that defines, in broad terms, the goals for NAI to include enabling technologies needed to support the effort and the types of capabilities enabled.

  • Evaluate the expected output from the science and technology implied by the NAI in terms of warfighter capability requirements.

  • Make recommendations on the relevance of implied NAI S&T solutions to meeting these requirements as compared to other possible options. Assess impact on current service efforts to meet these capability needs.

  • Baseline the current technology readiness of these requisite technologies and provide a committee estimate of associated technology development timelines. This estimate should take into account the professional opinion on how quickly relevant technologies can be matured.

  • Identify and make recommendations for the technologies that should be emphasized over the next five to seven years to expedite overall roadmap accomplishment. The committee should consider two budget scenarios for the development of NAI timelines; one that recognizes the current constrained Air Force budget, assuming no additional NAI funds are allocated, and one that meets the optimal NAI development timelines as developed by the committee. Provide a rough order of magnitude estimate of the difference.

  • Provide independent recommendations on specific efforts that could advance the areas of hypersonic propulsion, access to space, and space technology to meet warfighter needs over the next 20 years.

  • Suggest initiatives required to ensure a more robust aerospace science and engineering workforce is available to meet these needs.

When the committee began this study, most committee members assumed they would be reviewing a clearly defined program with a strong management organization. In fact, the committee discovered that NAI included programs that predated the initiative and that the NAI executive office had only recently been staffed and was functioning as an advocate, facilitator, and data-sharing mechanism, with financial and management responsibility for the various programs remaining with the services and agencies.

STUDY APPROACH AND CONSTRAINTS

Over a 3-month period, the committee gathered data and information by meeting with persons involved in NAI planning, budgeting, and execution and by reviewing relevant reports and other documents. Appendix B lists presentations made to the committee by guest speakers.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

Committee members met with the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E) three times to receive information that was unclassified and cleared for public release, export-controlled information, and DoD classified information. The vice chair of the committee and the director of the Air Force Science and Technology Board, both with appropriate active security clearances, were briefed at a highly classified level. It was determined that the content of that briefing did not materially affect the findings and conclusions of this report. As requested by the Air Force, the committee’s final report is unclassified; however, it is based on the understanding the committee received from all the information presented to it. The report does not (and could not) reflect information that was not presented to the committee.

During its first meeting, the committee divided itself into two main writing teams—one for hypersonics and one for access to space. Air-breathing hypersonics is an embryonic technology with considerable promise but no operational systems, while rocket-based vehicles have been operational as space launch or missile systems for 50 years. Because of the enormous difference in their operational maturity, the information presented to the committee differed substantially for the two topics. Discussion in this report of hypersonics and space access reflects these differences.

In general, the committee’s approach to assessing NAI’s technical feasibility was to analyze the main technical challenges to achieving NAI technical objectives and then decide whether NAI addresses those challenges. The committee did not attempt to predict whether all the challenges would be met. There are unknowns that despite DoD’s and NASA’s best efforts might not be resolved. NAI technical goals may be achievable and would certainly be useful if they were achieved; however, no one can guarantee that executing the best possible NAI plan will result in their achievement. The committee did its best to address technical feasibility separately from financial feasibility; however, in reality, the two are intertwined. NAI technical objectives cannot be achieved without money to pay for the needed research and technology development effort.

The inability to clearly determine NAI funding adversely affected the committee’s ability to assess the financial feasibility of NAI. A clear understanding of NAI funding is also needed to consider current versus optimal budget scenarios and to provide related advice on NAI planning.

Estimating the investment required to develop technology is difficult under the most optimal conditions. Therefore, when even a rough estimate was beyond the scope of the study, the committee strove to evaluate what it could—namely, the relative utility of the technology area. An accurate and complete cost estimate by independent professionals who are expert in the practice should be completed as a follow-on to this study.

Finally, to assess the operational relevance of NAI, the committee looked for formal user requirements documents for NAI technologies or systems using NAI technologies. However, the committee did not base its conclusions solely on existing documents but rather sought indicators that such technologies could have a substantial payoff for the various military missions.

It was beyond the committee’s ability to conduct an exhaustive review and comparison of all the options and alternatives for satisfying current warfighter requirements or providing future warfighting capabilities.

NASA’S NEW SPACE EXPLORATION MANDATE

On January 14, 2004, President Bush publicly announced “a new plan to explore space and extend a human presence across our solar system.”2 The President’s plan called for developing and

2  

President Bush Announces New Vision for Space Exploration Program. Remarks by the President on U.S. Space Policy. NASA Headquarters. Washington, D.C. Speech available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040114-3.html. Last accessed on March 25, 2004.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

testing a new crew exploration vehicle (CEV) by 2008, human missions to the Moon as early as 2014, and, later, human missions to Mars.

The President’s plan was announced after the committee had completed its study and submitted its draft report for external peer review. It was clear to the committee and peer reviewers that the new NASA mandate could affect NAI as NASA’s plans, programs, and resources shift toward new objectives. On February 9, 2004, the committee held a teleconference with Robert Shaw, Special Assistant to DDR&E, to discuss the likely outcome of the new mandate. Exactly how NAI will be affected is not yet clear; however, Mr. Shaw conjectured that some NAI schedule objectives might be significantly delayed. Technical objectives could change as well.

Despite the timing of the announcement and its uncertain consequences, the committee wanted this report to be as relevant as possible. In the limited time it had available, the committee reviewed the report and made revisions that it felt were reasonable. The committee found effects on NAI’s access-to-space pillar easier to foresee than effects on its hypersonics pillar. Access to space is obviously relevant to development of the CEV and human missions to the Moon and Mars. What role hypersonics will play is not obvious at this time.

The committee advises readers of this report to keep in mind the reorientation now under way at NASA and the effects that this reorientation might have on the future of NAI.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The members of the NRC study committee were highly motivated and intellectually curious and represented a wide range of academic, industrial, and military backgrounds. Because of a short schedule to cover such a complex subject, the meeting sessions were lengthy and the period of report drafting was abbreviated. In spite of this, every member of the committee willingly accepted his/her writing assignment, and many of them made site visits to organizations with programs in the subject areas.

The committee thanks the many organizations and guest speakers that provided excellent support to the committee. All the speakers were impressive and presented information to the committee that had a direct bearing on the study. From the high quality of the presentations, it was obvious that the speakers and others had spent many hours preparing. For the committee, this was time well spent. We hope that the speakers, their organizations, the committee’s Air Force sponsor, and the ultimate readers of this report will agree.

Finally, the committee thanks the NRC staff members who supported the study. Primary among them were Mike Clarke, Jim Garcia, LaNita Jones, Daniel Talmage, and intern Andy Walther.

Edsel D. Dunford, Chair

Committee on the National Aerospace Initiative

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

Acknowledgment of Reviewers

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Darrell R. Branscome, Science Applications International Corporation,

Yvonne C. Brill, Consultant,

Robert P. Caren, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired),

Aloysius G. Casey, U.S. Air Force (retired),

Stewart E. Cranston, Veridian Engineering,

Werner J.A. Dahm, University of Michigan,

Delores M. Etter, U.S. Naval Academy,

Alexander H. Flax, Consultant,

Delma C. Freeman, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (retired),

George A. Paulikas, Aerospace Corporation (retired),

Todd I. Stewart, Ohio State University, and

John M. Swihart, Swihart Consulting, Inc.

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert A. Frosch (NAE), Harvard University. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

Acronyms


ACC

Air Combat Command

AEDC

Arnold Engineering Development Center

AFB

Air Force Base

AFMC

Air Force Materiel Command

AFOSR

Air Force Office of Scientific Research

AFRL

Air Force Research Laboratory

AFROC

Air Force Requirements Oversight Council

AF SAB

Air Force Scientific Advisory Board

AFSPC

Air Force Space Command

AIA

Aerospace Industries Association

AIT

Atmospheric Interceptor Technology (program)

AMCOM

Aviation and Missile Command

AMRAAM

advanced medium-range air to air missile

APU

auxiliary power unit

AQR

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science, Technology, and Engineering

ARRMD

affordable rapid response missile demonstrator

ASC

Aeronautical Systems Center

ASCI

Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative

ASNRDA

Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition

ASTP

Advanced Space Transportation Program

ATS

access-to-space


BAU

business as usual

BMDO

Ballistic Missile Defense Organization

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

C4ISR

command, control, communications, computing, intelligence,

surveillance, and reconnaissance

CAV

common aero vehicle

CC

commander

CDR

critical design review

CFD

computational fluid dynamics

CFUSAI

Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry

CMC

ceramic matrix composite

CoDR

conceptual design review

CONOPS

concept of operations

CONUS

continental United States

CRRA

capability review and risk assessment

CSAF

Chief of Staff of the Air Force

CUBRC

Calspan-University of Buffalo Research Center, Inc.

CV

vice commander


DAKOTA

Design Analysis Kit for Optimization and Terascale Applications

DARPA

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

DCR

dual combustion ramjet

DDR&E

Director of Defense Research and Engineering

DES

discrete-eddy simulation

DMF

dry mass fraction

DoD

Department of Defense

DOE

Department of Energy

DSB

Defense Science Board

DSMC-NS

direct simulation Monte Carlo–Navier-Stokes


EELV

evolved, expendable launch vehicle

ERV

expendable rocket vehicle


FALCON

Force Application and Launch from CONUS (program)

FEM

finite element model

FLRS

future long-range strike

FRSC

fuel-rich staged combustion

FSD

full-scale development

FSW

friction stir welding

FY

fiscal year

FYDP

Future Years Defense Program


GASL

General Applied Science Laboratory

GDP

gross domestic product

GNC

guidance, navigation, and control

GOTChA

goals, objectives, technical challenges, and approaches

GPS

Global Positioning System

GRC

Glenn Research Center

GRST

Global Response Task Force

GSTF

Global Strike Task Force

GT

ground testing

Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

H2

diatomic hydrogen

HC

hydrocarbon

HCV

hypersonic cruise vehicle

HQ

headquarters

HS/H

high speed/hypersonics

HTHL

horizontal takeoff/horizontal landing

HyFly

Hypersonics Flight Demonstration (program)

HyTech

Hypersonics Technology (program)


IHPRPT

integrated high-payoff rocket propulsion technology

IHPTET

integrated high-performance turbine engine technology

IOC

initial operational capability

IP

integrated powerhead

IPD

integrated powerhead demonstrator

ISR

intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance

ISS

International Space Station

IVHM

integrated vehicle health management


JHU/APL

Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Laboratory

JROC

Joint Requirements Oversight Council


LaRC

Langley Research Center

LEO

low Earth orbit

LES

large-eddy simulation

LOx

liquid oxygen

LH2

liquid hydrogen

LRS

long-range strike


MAJCOM

major command

MCH

methylcyclohexane

MDA

Missile Defense Agency

MDO

multidisciplinary design optimization

MIPCC

mass injection precompressor cooling

MIS

modular insertion stage

MMC

metal matrix composites

MNS

mission needs statement

MPV

MIPCC-powered vehicle

MSFC

Marshall Space Flight Center


NAI

National Aerospace Initiative

NASA

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA HQ/MDepAA

Office of Space Flight Deputy Associate Administrator

NASA HQ/RAA

Office of Aeronautics Associate Administrator

NASP

National Aerospace Plane

NAVAIR

Naval Air Systems Command

NDAA

National Defense Authorization Act

NGLT

Next-Generation Launch Technology (program)

NIST

National Institute of Standards and Technology

NRC

National Research Council

Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

NRO

National Reconnaissance Office


OML

outer mold line

OMS

orbital maneuvering system

ONR

Office of Naval Research

ORDs

operational requirements document

ORS

Operationally Responsive Spacelift

ORSC

oxidizer-rich staged combustion

ORU

orbital replacement unit

OSD

Office of the Secretary of Defense

OSP

orbital space plane

OSTP

Office of Science and Technology Policy

OTV

orbit transfer vehicle


P&W

Pratt & Whitney

PBR

President’s budget request

PDR

preliminary design review

PGS

Prompt Global Strike

PLIF

planar laser-induced fluorescence

PRD

program requirements document


R&D

research and development

RAA

regional airline association

RANS

Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes

RASCAL

Responsive Access, Small Cargo, Affordable Launch (program)

RATTLRS

Revolutionary Approach to Time-Critical Long-Range Strike (program)

RBCC

rocket-based combined cycle

RCS

reaction control system

RDT&E

research, development, test, and evaluation

RFI

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act facility investigation

RLV

reusable launch vehicle

RP

rocket propellant

RTA

Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator (program)


S&E

science and engineering

S&T

science and technology

SAALT

Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology

SAF

Secretary of the Air Force

SBR

space-based radar

SC

Space Control

SDB

small-diameter bomb

SECAF

Secretary of the Air Force

SECDEF

Secretary of Defense

SED

Single-Engine Demonstrator (program)

SJ

scramjet

SLV

small launch vehicle

SMC

Space and Missile Systems Center

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

SMV

space maneuvering vehicle

SOA

state of the art

SOV

space operations vehicle

SSC

Stennis Space Center

SSTO

single stage to orbit

STEM

space, technology, engineering, and mathematics

STS

Space Transportation System (shuttles)


TBBC

turbine-based combination cycle

TCT

time-critical target

TDRSS

tracking and data relay satellite system

TEO

technology executive officer

TJ

turbojet

TOA

total obligational authority

TPS

thermal protection system

TRL

technology readiness level

TSTO

two stage to orbit


URETI

university research, engineering, and technology institute

USAF

U.S. Air Force

USECAF

Under Secretary of the Air Force

USMC

U.S. Marine Corps

USSTRATCOM

U.S. Strategic Command


V&V

validation and verification

VAATE

Versatile Affordable Advanced Turbine Engines (program)

VLS

vertical launch system

VMC

vehicle management computer

VMS

vehicle management system


WMD

weapons of mass destruction

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R16
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R17
Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R18
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R19
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10980.
×
Page R20
Next: Executive Summary »
Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $52.00 Buy Ebook | $41.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Aerospace Initiative (NAI) was conceived as a joint effort between the Department of Defense (DOD) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to sustain the aerospace leadership of the United States through the acceleration of selected aerospace technologies: hypersonic flight, access to space, and space technologies. The Air Force became concerned about the NAI’s possible consequences on Air Force programs and budget if NAI program decisions differed from Air Force priorities. To examine this issue, it asked the NRC for an independent review of the NAI. This report presents the results of that assessment. It focuses on three questions asked by the Air Force: is NAI technically feasible in the time frame laid out; is it financially feasible over that period; and is it operationally relevant.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!