DECADAL SURVEY OF CIVIL AERONAUTICS

Foundation for the Future

Steering Committee for the Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics

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



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future DECADAL SURVEY OF CIVIL AERONAUTICS Foundation for the Future Steering Committee for the Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics 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 R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future 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 Contract No. NNH05CC15C 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 organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-10158-1 Available in limited supply from the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20001, (202) 334-2858. Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, www.nap.edu. Copyright 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future 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. Ralph J. Cicerone 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. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future DECADAL SURVEY OF CIVIL AERONAUTICS Steering Committee PAUL G. KAMINSKI (NAE), Chair, Technovation, Inc., Fairfax Station, Virginia WILLIAM W. HOOVER, Co-chair, U.S. Air Force (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia INDERJIT CHOPRA, University of Maryland, College Park EUGENE E. COVERT (NAE), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ALAN C. ECKBRETH, Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, Hartford THOMAS M. HARTMANN, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California ILAN KROO (NAE), Stanford University, Stanford, California NANCY G. LEVESON (NAE), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge IVETT A. LEYVA, Microcosm, Inc., El Segundo, California AMY PRITCHETT, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta EDMOND L. SOLIDAY, United Airlines (retired), Valparaiso, Indiana JOHN VALASEK, Texas A&M University, College Station DAVID VAN WIE, Johns Hopkins University, Laurel, Maryland ROBERT WHITEHEAD, Aerospace Consultant, Henrico, North Carolina DIANNE S. WILEY, The Boeing Company, Huntington Beach, California Panel A: Aerodynamics and Aeroacoustics DAVID VAN WIE, Chair, Johns Hopkins University, Laurel, Maryland PAUL BEVILAQUA (NAE), Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California CHARLES BOCCADORO, Northrop Grumman Corporation, El Segundo, California THOMAS CORKE, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana ILAN KROO (NAE), Stanford University, Stanford, California ROBERT LIEBECK (NAE), The Boeing Company, Huntington Beach, California DAN MARREN, Arnold Engineering Development Center—White Oak, Silver Spring, Maryland STEPHEN RUFFIN, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta FREDRIC H. SCHMITZ, University of Maryland, College Park JOHN SULLIVAN, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana KAREN WILLCOX, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Panel B: Propulsion and Power ALAN C. ECKBRETH, Chair, Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, Hartford ROBERT BAKOS, ATK GASL, Ronkonkoma, New York* MEYER J. BENZAKEIN (NAE), Ohio State University, Columbus JAMES L. BETTNER, Rolls-Royce Corporation (retired), Pittsboro, Indiana DAVID E. CROW (NAE), University of Connecticut, Glastonbury MEHRDAD EHSANI, Texas A&M University, College Station JEFFREY W. HAMSTRA, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, Texas IVETT A. LEYVA, Microcosm, Inc., El Segundo, California TIMOTHY LIEUWEN, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta LOURDES QUINTANA MAURICE, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C. JAMES C. McDANIEL, JR., University of Virginia, Charlottesville TRESA M. POLLOCK (NAE), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor WILLIAM TUMAS, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico * Resigned October 12, 2005.

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future Panel C: Materials and Structures DIANNE S. WILEY, Chair, The Boeing Company, Huntington Beach, California SATYA N. ATLURI (NAE), University of California at Irvine* GREGORY CARMAN, University of California at Los Angeles INDERJIT CHOPRA, University of Maryland, College Park JANET DAVIS, Rockwell Scientific, Thousand Oaks, California RAVI B. DEO, Northrop Grumman Corporation, El Segundo, California PRABHAT HAJELA, Rensselear Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York MARK K. HINDERS, College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia ROBERT SCHAFRIK, GE Aircraft Engines, Cincinnati, Ohio NANCY R. SOTTOS, University of Illinois, Urbana GREGORY WASHINGTON, Ohio State University, Columbus TERRENCE A. WEISSHAAR, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia Panel D: Dynamics, Navigation, and Control, and Avionics NANCY G. LEVESON (NAE), Chair, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge RICHARD ABBOTT, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California CLARK R. BADIE, Honeywell International, Phoenix, Arizona JEFFERY ERICKSON, Boeing Phantom Works, Huntington Beach, California EPHRAHIM GARCIA, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York CHARLES L. GUTHRIE, Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems, Long Beach, California ELLIS F. HITT, Strategic Systems Solutions, Inc., Westerville, Ohio JAMES C. NEIDHOEFER, Aerotonomy, Inc., Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia DARRYLL J. PINES, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia JAMES RANKIN, Avionics Engineering Center, Ohio University, Athens JASON L. SPEYER (NAE), University of California at Los Angeles JOHN VALASEK, Texas A&M University, College Station Panel E: Intelligent and Autonomous Systems, Operations and Decision Making, Human Integrated Systems, and Networking and Communications EDMOND L. SOLIDAY, Chair, United Airlines (retired), Valparaiso, Indiana ELLA ATKINS, University of Maryland, College Park TAMER BASAR (NAE), University of Illinois, Urbana THOMAS Q. CARNEY, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana JOHN-PAUL CLARKE, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta MICHAEL DeWALT, Aviation Systems Certification Services, Eastbound, Washington FRANK L. FRISBIE, Apptis Inc., Washington, D.C. ANDREW LACHER, MITRE Corporation, McLean, Virginia RAYMOND R. LaFREY, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory (retired), New Braunfels, Texas CARL McCULLOUGH, U.S. Air Force Headquarters, Washington, D.C. AMY PRITCHETT, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta DONALD W. RICHARDSON, West Palm Beach, Florida NADINE SARTER, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor * Resigned January 19, 2006.

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future Staff ELIZABETH ALBRIGO, Senior Program Assistant ALAN ANGLEMAN, Study Director (from December 2005) ANNA FARRAR, Financial Associate JAMES GREGORY, NRC Science and Technology Policy Fellow (through December 2005) KAREN HARWELL, Study Director (through December 2005) GEORGE LEVIN, Director, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board HEIDI MURRAY, Senior Program Assistant JOHN SISLIN, Program Officer KERRIE SMITH, Co-Study Director JOHN WENDT, Senior Program Officer

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD RAYMOND S. COLLADAY, Chair, Lockheed Martin Astronautics (retired), Golden, Colorado WILLIAM L. BALLHAUS, BAE Systems National Security Solutions, Reston, Virginia CHARLES F. BOLDEN, JR., Jack and Panther, LLC, Houston, Texas EDWARD M. BOLEN, National Aviation Association, Washington, D.C. ANTHONY J. BRODERICK, Aviation Safety Consultant, Catlett, Virginia JOHN-PAUL CLARKE, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta PHILIP M. CONDIT (NAE), The Boeing Company, Redmond, Washington ROBERT L. CRIPPEN, Thiokol Propulsion (retired), Palm Beach Gardens, Florida RICHARD M. GOODY (NAS), Harvard University (emeritus), Falmouth, Massachusetts PRESTON HENNE (NAE), Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Savannah, Georgia WILLIAM W. HOOVER, U.S. Air Force (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia SYDNEY MICHAEL HUDSON, Rolls-Royce North America (retired), Indianapolis, Indiana JOHN M. KLINEBERG, Space Systems/Loral (retired), Redwood City, California ILAN KROO (NAE), Stanford University, Stanford, California MOLLY K. MACAULEY, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. FORREST S. McCARTNEY, Lockheed Martin Astronautics (retired), Indian Harbour Beach, Florida ELON MUSK, Space Exploration Development Corporation–SpaceX, El Segundo, California AMY PRITCHETT, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta ROBERT R. RANKINE, JR., Hughes Space and Communications Company (retired), Clearwater, Florida DEBRA L. RUB-ZENKO, The Boeing Company, Anaheim, California CYNTHIA SAMUELSON, Logistics Management Institute, McLean, Virginia PETER STAUDHAMMER (NAE), University of Southern California, La Quinta HANSEL E. TOOKES II, Raytheon International, Inc. (retired), Palm Beach Gardens, Florida RAY VALEIKA, Delta Airlines, Inc. (retired), Powder Springs, Georgia ROBERT S. WALKER, Wexler & 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 Staff GEORGE LEVIN, Director

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future This page intially left blank

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future Preface The air transportation system is important to the economic vitality, public well-being, and national security of the United States. The aerospace industry has historically made a large contribution to the positive balance of trade for the U.S. economy. In 2005, it had a $37 billion positive balance of trade, of which $29 billion was for civil aeronautics.1 In addition, the United States has had a long history as the unchallenged world leader in civil and military aeronautics, though this position is now in jeopardy in areas such as research capability, technological expertise, and the performance of civil aircraft and air traffic management systems. With leadership comes opportunity, particularly with regard to setting international standards for aircraft certification and operations. A position of continued leadership would allow the United States to ensure that viable global standards continue to be established for the application of emerging technologies and operational concepts. Without such standards the global aviation market and the global transportation system will be fractured into separate fiefdoms ruled by national and regional aviation authorities acting independently. This would impede the ability of passengers and cargo to move seamlessly—and safely—from country to country. The United States needs “world-class science and engineering—not simply as an end in itself, but as the principal means of creating new jobs for its citizenry as a whole as it seeks to prosper in the global marketplace of the 21st century.”2 Strong action is needed to ensure that U.S. leadership continues to assure the future of the domestic and global air transportation systems.3 The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is explicitly chartered to preserve the role of the United States as a leader in aeronautics technology. To pursue that goal, NASA contracted with the National Research Council’s Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) to complete a decadal survey of civil aeronautics, to prioritize research projects to be undertaken in the next 10 years. For the last 50 years, the National Research Council has conducted decadal surveys in astronomy. The idea of conducting a decadal survey of aeronautics originated in discussions among the ASEB, the Office of Management and Budget, and congressional committees with an interest in civil aviation. Although this study takes special note of NASA’s priorities for civil aeronautics research, it also identifies national priorities for non-NASA researchers. Additionally, the study points out synergies between civil aeronautics research and research objectives associated with national defense, homeland security, and the space program. In FY 2004, NASA’s budget for aeronautics was just over $1 billion. NASA’s aeronautics budget for FY 2006 was $884 million, and it will be reduced to $724 million in FY 2007 if Congress accepts the President’s budget. If that happens, in just 3 years NASA’s budget for aeronautics will have sustained a reduction of 32 percent, even as NASA’s total budget increases by 9 percent. This budgetary trend will make it increasingly difficult for NASA to build a solid foundation for the future. However, regardless of the overall funding level, NASA’s aeronautics program should focus on the key strategic objectives, 1 D. Napier. 2005. 2005 Year-End Review and 2006 Forecast—An Analysis. Arlington, Va.: Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). Available online at <www.aia-aerospace.org/stats/yr_ender/yrendr2005_text.pdf>. 2 National Research Council. 2005. Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, p. 30. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. Available online at <http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html>. 3 National Research Council. 2003. Securing the Future of U.S. Air Transportation: A System in Peril, p. 11. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. Available online at <http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/10815.html>.

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future themes, and high-priority research and technology challenges described herein. The present survey was completed in parallel with ongoing efforts to create a national policy on aviation and separate efforts by NASA Headquarters to assess the aeronautics program. The authors of this report are confident that all three efforts will work toward the common goal of assuring that long-term national investments in aeronautics research and technology substantially improve the air transportation system and achieve other appropriate national objectives. Paul Kaminski, Chair Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics Steering Committee

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future 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 Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). 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: Tony Broderick, Aviation Safety Consultant Dianne Chong, The Boeing Company Raymond Colladay, Lockheed Martin Astronautics (retired) John Douglass, Aerospace Industries Association of America Alan Epstein, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Kenneth Rosen, NAE, General Aero-Science Consultants, LLC David Schmidt, University of Colorado Gunter Stein, NAE, Honeywell (retired) Tom Williams, Northrop Grumman 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 Sheila E. Widnall, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Appointed by the NRC, she 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 R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future This page intially left blank

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   INTRODUCTION   4      Importance of U.S. Civil Aviation,   4      Perspectives,   5      Origin of the Study,   5      Purpose of the Survey,   6      Strategic Objectives for U.S. Civil Aeronautics Research,   6      References,   8 2   PROCESS FOR INTEGRATION AND PRIORITIZATION   9      Study Process,   9      Prioritization,   9      Next Steps,   12      References,   12 3   RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGES   13      Aerodynamics and Aeroacoustics,   13      Propulsion and Power,   19      Materials and Structures,   29      Dynamics, Navigation, and Control, and Avionics,   37      Intelligent and Autonomous Systems, Operations and Decision Making, Human Integrated Systems, and Networking and Communications,   45      References,   54 4   COMMON THEMES AND KEY BARRIERS   57      Common Themes,   57      Key Barriers,   63      References,   64 5   FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS   65      Principal Findings,   65      Other Findings of Importance,   67      Recommendations,   70      References,   70

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future                APPENDIXES          A  R&T Challenges for Aerodynamics and Aeroacoustics   73      B  R&T Challenges for Propulsion and Power   89      C  R&T Challenges for Materials and Structures   111      D  R&T Challenges for Dynamics, Navigation, and Control, and Avionics   136      E  R&T Challenges for Intelligent and Autonomous Systems, Operations and Decision Making, Human Integrated Systems, and Networking and Communications   152      F  Lessons Learned from Other Federal Agencies   171      G  Statement of Task and Work Plan   173      H  Biographies of Committee and Panel Members   175      I  Speakers   192      J  Acronyms and Abbreviations   194

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future Tables, Figures, and Boxes TABLES ES-1   Fifty-one Highest Priority Research and Technology Challenges for NASA Aeronautics, Prioritized by R&T Area,   2 2-1   Sample QFD Prioritization,   11 3-1   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area A: Aerodynamics and Aeroacoustics,   14 3-2   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area B: Propulsion and Power,   22 3-3   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area C: Materials and Structures,   30 3-4   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area D: Dynamics, Navigation, and Control, and Avionics,   38 3-5   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area E: Intelligent and Autonomous Systems, Operations and Decision Making, Human Integrated Systems, and Networking and Communications,   47 5-1   Fifty-one Highest Priority Research and Technology Challenges for NASA Aeronautics, Prioritized by R&T Area,   66 5-2   NASA Technology Readiness Levels 1 to 9 for Aeronautics Research,   69 A-1   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area A: Aerodynamics and Aeroacoustics,   74 B-1   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area B: Propulsion and Power,   90 C-1   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area C: Materials and Structures,   112 D-1   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area D: Dynamics, Navigation, and Control, and Avionics,   137 E-1   Prioritization of R&T Challenges for Area E: Intelligent and Autonomous Systems, Operations and Decision Making, Human Integrated Systems, and Networking and Communications,   153 FIGURES 1-1   Terminology breakdown tree,   7 3-1   NASA and national priorities for Area A: aerodynamics and aeroacoustics,   15 3-2   NASA and national priorities for Area B: propulsion and power,   23 3-3   Actual and predicted exposure to significant noise (65-dB day-night average sound level) and enplanement trends forthe United States, 1975-2005,   23 3-4   Considerable gas turbine fuel efficiency improvements are still possible,   24 3-5   NASA and national priorities for Area C: materials and structures,   31

OCR for page R1
Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics: Foundation for the Future 3-6   NASA and national priorities for Area D: dynamics, navigation, and control, and avionics,   39 3-7   NASA and national priorities for Area E: intelligent and autonomous systems, operations and decision making, human-integrated systems, and networking and communications,   46 3-8   R&T Thrusts related to Area E: intelligent and autonomous systems, operations and decision making, human integrated systems, and networking and communications,   52 B-1   Actual and predicted exposure to significant noise (65-dB day-night average sound level) and enplanement trends for the United States, 1975-2005,   91 B-2   Considerable gas turbine fuel efficiency improvements are still possible,   95 B-3   Technology issues in supersonic combustion ramjets,   103 BOXES ES-1   Recommendations to Achieve Strategic Objectives for Civil Aeronautics Research and Technology,   3 1-1   Terminology,   7 2-1   NASA’s Mission as Reflected by Selected Items from the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (As Amended),   11