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
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise Steering Committee for a Workshop to Develop Long-Term Global Aeronautics Scenarios Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1997
OCR for page R2
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise 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 competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of 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. William A. Wulf is interim 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. Kenneth I. Shine 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. William A. Wulf are chairman and interim vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. This study was supported by Contract No. NASW-4938 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 view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number: 0-309-05696-9 Available in limited supply from Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 (202) 334-2855 Copyright 1997 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.
OCR for page R3
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise Steering Committee for a Workshop to Develop Long-Term Global Aeronautics Scenarios WILLIAM W. HOOVER (chair), U.S. Air Force (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia GUION S. BLUFORD, NYMA, Inc., Brook Park, Ohio RICHARD S. GOLASZEWSKI, GRA, Inc., Jenkintown, Pennsylvania WILLIAM H. HEISER, U.S. Air Force Academy, USAF Academy, Colorado GRACE M. ROBERTSON, McDonnell Douglas Corporation (Douglas Aircraft Company), Long Beach, California JEFFREY K. SCHWEITZER, United Technologies/Pratt & Whitney, West Palm Beach, Florida. THOMAS B. SHERIDAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ROBERT E. SPITZER, Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Seattle, Washington Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Staff David A. Turner, Study Director JoAnn Clayton-Townsend, ASEB Director Victoria P. Friedensen, Senior Project Assistant Ted Morrison, Senior Project Assistant Transportation Research Board Staff Liaison Joseph Breen, Aviation Specialist
OCR for page R4
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board JOHN D. WARNER (chair), The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington STEVEN AFTERGOOD, Federation of American Scientists, Washington, D.C. GEORGE A. BEKEY, University of Southern California, Los Angeles GUION S. BLUFORD, JR., NYMA, Inc., Brook Park, Ohio RAYMOND S. COLLADAY, Lockheed-Martin Astronautics, Denver, Colorado BARBARA C. CORN, BC Consulting, Inc., Searcy, Arizona STEVEN D. DORFMAN, Hughes Electronics Corporation, Los Angeles, California DONALD C. FRASER, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts DANIEL HASTINGS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge FREDERICK HAUCK, International Technology Underwriters, Bethesda, Maryland WILLIAM H. HEISER, U.S. Air Force Academy, USAF Academy, Colorado WILLIAM W. HOOVER, U.S. Air Force (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia BENJAMIN HUBERMAN, Huberman Consulting Group, Washington, D.C. BERNARD L. KOFF, Pratt & Whitney, West Palm Beach, Florida FRANK E. MARBLE, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena C. JULIAN MAY, Technical Operations International, Inc., Kennesaw, Georgia GRACE M. ROBERTSON, McDonnell Douglas Corporation (Douglas Aircraft Company), Long Beach, California GEORGE SPRINGER, Stanford University, Stanford, California Staff JoAnn Clayton-Townsend, Director
OCR for page R5
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise Preface THE TASK In June 1996, the Office of Aeronautics of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) approached the National Research Council (NRC) with a request to conduct a workshop to help guide their strategic planning process.1 At the workshop, five future scenarios of the world, based primarily on economic, social, and policy factors, would be refined and further developed by considering the potential for revolutionary and evolutionary technology developments, by determining the key issues for aeronautics, and by discussing the general role that NASA should play in addressing the key issues in the future. These scenarios would span the breadth of aeronautics, including civil aviation, military aviation, and access to space.2 In addition, the scenarios would consider other critical factors that could impact the future of aeronautics, including information and communications systems, national and global transportation systems, and air traffic management systems. Long-term was defined as 15 to 25 years or beyond the next-generation systems. The pre-workshop development of the scenarios would be accomplished by a core team of individuals from the NASA Office of Aeronautics, working in collaboration with The Futures Group (TFG), a firm specializing in corporate strategic planning, and the Systems Technology Group of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). STUDY APPROACH A steering committee was formed under the auspices of the Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board to accomplish the task of planning and conducting the workshop, advising on the pre-workshop selection of the long-term global scenarios, and developing a report that would convey the results of the workshop. Appendix B contains brief biographies of the steering committee members. Before the workshop the steering committee met on two occasions, on August 7 and September 16, 1996, and after the workshop on October 3 and October 28, 1996, to finalize this report. The workshop itself took place on September 30 to October 1 The statement of task, as approved by the governing board of the NRC, can be found in Appendix A. 2 In addressing the "access to space" area of aeronautics research and development, the steering committee, the scenarios, and the workshop addressed only potential requirements for launch vehicles for unmanned Earth-orbital space applications. Solar and deep space exploration and the manned space program were not considered.
OCR for page R6
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise 2, 1996. In consultation with the study's sponsor, the term "key issues" was defined further by the steering committee as key needs and opportunities for aeronautics and the technological implications of these needs and opportunities. During the pre-workshop scenario development process most steering committee members were interviewed by a member of the NASA/TFG/SAIC core team. The steering committee also participated in the scenario selection process that determined which five of sixteen possible scenarios would be presented and discussed at the workshop.3 The specific narratives for each scenario in Appendix D, however, were developed solely by the core team. At the workshop, the steering committee employed the scenario-based strategic planning process described in Chapter 1 and in Appendix H, led each of the "world teams" in their analysis of the scenarios, and fostered a cohesive and interactive exchange of ideas among the widely diverse and knowledgeable group of participants. ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT This report begins with an Executive Summary that outlines the results of this study based on the workshop and the deliberations of the steering committee. In Chapter 1 the need for strategic planning in aeronautics is discussed, and the pre-workshop scenario development process and the workshop agenda are briefly described. Each of the five future scenarios that were examined during the workshop are summarized in Chapter 2. Each summary includes a discussion of the role of aviation and aeronautics in the scenario and a list of the needs and opportunities for aeronautics as determined by the working group that focused on the scenario during the workshop. In Chapter 3 the collective results of the workshop and the additional deliberations of the steering committee are presented. The general role that the steering committee believes NASA should play in maintaining the superiority of U.S. aeronautics products and services in the future also is discussed. Several appendices are included that provide additional information on various aspects of the workshop and the study in general. Notes in the report's main text refer the reader to a related appendix when appropriate. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The steering committee thanks all those who participated in the workshop for their extraordinary contributions and sense of commitment to the task. 3 A complete list of the workshop participants can be found in Appendix C.
OCR for page R7
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 9 Need for Strategic Planning in Aeronautics, 9 Pre-Workshop Development of the Scenarios, 10 The Workshop, 14 Maintaining U.S. Competitiveness in Aeronautics, 14 References, 15 2 LONG-TERM GLOBAL SCENARIOS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR AERONAUTICS 17 Introduction, 17 Pushing the Envelope, 17 Grounded, 22 Regional Tensions, 25 Trading Places, 30 Environmentally Challenged, 33 Summary of Needs and Opportunities, 37 3 NEEDS AND OPPORTUNITIES, TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS, AND THE FUTURE ROLE OF NASA 41 Future Needs and Opportunities, 41 System Level Technology Implications, 44 NASA's Future Role in Maintaining U.S. Competitiveness in Aeronautics, 47 References, 50 APPENDICES A Statement of Task 53 B Biographical Sketches of Steering Committee Members 55 C Workshop Participants 57 D Scenario Narratives as Provided by the NASA/TFG/SAIC Core Team 61 E Workshop Agenda 117 F Questions for World Team Sessions 121 G Bibliography 123 H Scenario-Based Strategic Planning as Described by the Futures Group 127
OCR for page R8
Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Aeronautics: Scenario-Based Strategic Planning for NASA's Aeronautics Enterprise List of Tables and Figures TABLES ES-1 The Five Scenarios and Their Dimensions, 2 ES-2 Robust, Significant, and Noteworthy Needs and Opportunities, 3 2-1 Summary of Needs and Opportunities for Each Scenario, 38 3-1 Robust, Significant, and Noteworthy Needs and Opportunities, 42 FIGURES 1-1 The 16 possible scenarios based on four dimensions, 12 1-2 The pre-workshop scenario development process, 13 H-1 NASA global scenarios, 128 H-2 Organizational strategies, 129