Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development A Workshop Report Steering Committee for Workshops on Issues of Technology Development for Human and Robotic Exploration and Development of Space Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
OCR for page R2
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report 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 study was supported by Contracts NASW-99037 and NNH05CC16 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the agency that provided support for the project. Copies of this report are available free of charge from: Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Copyright 2005 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report 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
OCR for page R4
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report STEERING COMMITTEE FOR WORKSHOPS ON ISSUES OF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT FOR HUMAN AND ROBOTIC EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF SPACE DARRELL R. BRANSCOME, Chair, Science Applications International Corporation, Hampton, Virginia STEPHEN GOREVAN, Honeybee Robotics, Ltd., New York, New York MOLLY K. MACAULEY, Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D.C. DAVA J. NEWMAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ERIC E. RICE, ORBITEC, Madison, Wisconsin CHARLES R. TRIMBLE, U.S. Global Positioning System Industry Council, Sunnyvale, California CHARLES D. WALKER, Boeing Company, Arlington, Virginia Staff GEORGE M. LEVIN, Director, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board KAREN E. HARWELL, Senior Program Officer BRIDGET R. EDMONDS, Senior Project Assistant
OCR for page R5
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD WILLIAM W. HOOVER, Chair, U.S. Air Force (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia EDWARD M. BOLEN, National Business Aviation Association, Washington, D.C. ANTHONY J. BRODERICK, Aviation Safety Consultant, Catlett, Virginia JOHN-PAUL B. CLARKE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge SUSAN M. COUGHLIN, Aviation Safety Alliance, Washington, D.C. ROBERT L. CRIPPEN, Thiokol Propulsion (retired), Palm Beach Gardens, Florida DONALD L. CROMER, U.S. Air Force (retired) and Hughes Space and Communications (retired), Fallbrook, California PRESTON HENNE (NAE), Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Savannah, Georgia S. MICHAEL HUDSON, Rolls-Royce North America (retired), Indianapolis JOHN L. JUNKINS (NAE), Texas A&M University, College Station JOHN M. KLINEBERG, Space Systems/Loral (retired), Redwood City, California ILAN M. KROO, Stanford University, Stanford, California MOLLY MACAULEY, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. GEORGE K. MUELLNER, The Boeing Company, Long Beach, California ELON MUSK, Space Exploration Development Corporation, El Segundo, California MALCOLM O’NEILL, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, Maryland AMY PRITCHETT, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta DEBRA L. RUB, The Boeing Company, Anaheim, California CYNTHIA SAMUELSON, Logistics Management Institute, McLean, Virginia PETER STAUDHAMMER (NAE), Alfred E. Mann Institute, Los Angeles, California HANSEL E. TOOKES II, Raytheon International Inc. (retired), Falls Church, Virginia ROBERT W. WALKER, Wexler and Walker Public Policy Associates, Washington, D.C. ROBERT E. WHITEHEAD, National Institute of Aerospace, Henrico, North Carolina THOMAS L. WILLIAMS, Northrop Grumman, El Segundo, California RAY VALEIKA, Delta Airlines (retired), Powder Springs, Georgia GEORGE LEVIN, Director
OCR for page R6
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R7
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report Preface In response to the need for increased external input into its planning processes, the Office of Exploration Systems of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) asked the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) at the National Academies to plan a series of open workshops on issues important to technology development for human and robotic exploration and development of space (see Appendix A for the statement of task). Issues surrounding this topic include the formulation of specific processes to guide technology development, the need for pervasive strategic planning for technology development at NASA, increased synergy between NASA and other government agencies in technology development, and the need to address the expansion of activities in space in a manner that involves the stakeholders. The National Academies convened a steering committee to plan the workshops (see Appendix B for biographies of steering committee members). The first workshop held February 23-24, 2004, in Washington, D.C., focused on general policy issues surrounding the development and demonstration of space technologies. A summary of that workshop was released in May 2004.1 The second workshop, the subject of this report, focused on the interrelationship between government, industry, and academia in the development of advanced space technology. Participants at the September 8-9, 2004, workshop, held at the National Academies’ Beckman Center in Irvine, California, included government, industry, and academic stakeholders in technology development—both space and nonspace. Owing to the great diversity of subjects that could be discussed, the steering committee decided to focus the agenda on examples of relationships between government, industry, and academia in non-NASA federal agencies. Discussions were organized in three separate areas—Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) relationships, Department of Defense (DOD) relationships, and National Science Foundation (NSF) relationships. The intent of this focusing was to be able to discuss best practices and examples of cooperative efforts between the federal government and various stakeholders and to possibly apply lessons learned from the discussion to NASA space exploration efforts. It was also the intent of the steering committee to provide opportunities for attendees to fully participate in the discussions. The workshop agenda is presented in 1 NRC. 2004. Stepping-Stones to the Future of Space Exploration: A Workshop Report. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. Available online at <http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11020.html>. Accessed September 10, 2004.
OCR for page R8
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report Appendix C and the list of participants in Appendix D. Focusing questions provided to the speakers in advance are presented in Appendix E. This report represents a factual summary, prepared by the National Academies staff with steering committee assistance, of the proceedings of the workshop. The workshop report is not a comprehensive report on the myriad of relationships between government, industry, and academia in technology development; rather, it is a synopsis of the presentations by individual panelists and speakers and of the discussions at the workshop. It should not be taken as a consensus report of either ASEB or the National Research Council. This report is organized as follows: Chapter 2 introduces the workshop’s topic. Chapter 3 presents the discussion during the panel on DARPA relationships, Chapter 4 contains an overview of the discussion during the panel on DOD relationships, and Chapter 5 summarizes the discussion on NSF cooperative programs. Also, to aid the reader, an index of selected topics can be found in Appendix G. Darrell R. Branscome Chair, Steering Committee for Workshops on Issues of Technology Development for Human and Robotic Exploration and Development of Space
OCR for page R9
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report 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: Aaron Cohen, Texas A&M University, John Hurt, National Science Foundation, Frank Martin, Martin Consulting, John Roth, MicroSat Systems, Jeff Shamma, University of California, Los Angeles, and Steven Welby, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. 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 Oliver Boileau, Northrop Grumman (retired). Appointed by the National Research Council, 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.
OCR for page R10
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R11
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report Contents 1 SUMMARY 1 2 INTRODUCTION 7 Context for the Workshop, 7 Organization of the Workshop, 8 Opening Remarks, 9 3 DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY RELATIONSHIPS 12 DARPA Perspective, 12 Question-and-Answer Period, 18 Industry Perspective (by Northrop Grumman), 25 Question-and-Answer Period, 27 4 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RELATIONSHIPS 34 DOD Mentor-Protégé Program (Protégé Perspective, Coast/ACM), 34 DOD MURI Program (University Perspective, UCLA), 38 Small Business Perspective (MicroSat Systems), 42 Large Industry Perspective (Lockheed Martin), 45 5 NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION RELATIONSHIPS 49 National Science Foundation Perspective, 49 IUCRC Perspective (Berkeley Sensor and Actuator Center), 54 Joint Question-and-Answer Period, 57 APPENDIXES A Statement of Task 63 B Committee Member Biographies 64 C Workshop Agenda 68
OCR for page R12
Government/Industry/Academic Relationships for Technology Development: A Workshop Report D Workshop Attendees 70 E Focusing Questions 71 F White Papers 74 G Index of Selected Topics 80 H Acronyms and Abbreviations 81