AEROSPACE AMERICA FEBRUARY 2010
China’s short march to aerospace autonomy
Conversation with Graham Lake Forecasting turbulence over the seas A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS AND
With changing goals and priorities in Washington, D.C., taking part in the 2010 AIAA Congressional Visits Day Program is more important than ever. Come to Washington to let your representative hear how important aerospace is to our country, and take an active role in helping shape the future of the aerospace community. On Wednesday, March 17, AIAA members will share their passion about aerospace issues on Capitol Hill. Join us as we meet with congressional decision makers to discuss the importance of science, engineering, and technology to our national and economic security.
AIAA Congressional Visits Day For more information visit www.aiaa.org/cvd or contact Duane Hyland at email@example.com or 703.264.7558
Space debris: Turning goals into practice.
Changing aerospace cluster dynamics.
Crouching tiger, puffing dragon.
Some answers, but still some questions.
Page 18 Page10
With Graham Lake.
Homeland security goes transatlantic.
Hearts in free fall.
OUT OF THE PAST
FEATURES CHINA’S SHORT MARCH TO AEROSPACE AUTONOMY
China is stepping up its efforts in the aerospace arena and may be catching up with other nations sooner than expected. by Philip Butterworth-Hayes
NEW CAPABILITIES FOR GPS II/III
Civil customers now outnumber military users of GPS, and a new generation of satellites will bring even greater capabilities. by J.R. Wilson
FORECASTING TURBULENCE OVER THE SEAS
New techniques will soon provide pilots with advance warnings of turbulent skies in remote areas on transoceanic flights. by J.R. Wilson Page 38
BULLETIN AIAA Meeting Schedule AIAA Courses and Training Program AIAA News Meeting Program
B2 B4 B5 B11
COVER China is well on its way to becoming a significant player in the aerospace arena. Turn to page 24 to learn about their remarkable strides. Cover image: Xi’an Terra Cotta Warriors, dating from 210 B.C. Aerospace America (ISSN 0740-722X) is published monthly by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. at 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, Va. 20191-4344 [703/264-7577]. Subscription rate is a percentage of dues for AIAA members (and is not deductible therefrom). Nonmember subscription price: U.S. and Canada, $163, foreign, $200. Single copies $20 each. Postmaster: Send address changes and subscription orders to address above, attention AIAA Customer Service, 703/264-7500. Periodical postage paid at Herndon, VA, and at additional mailing offices. Copyright © 2010 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., all rights reserved. The name Aerospace America is registered by the AIAA in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. 40,000 copies of this issue printed. This is Volume 48, No. 2.
! w e N Personal • Flexible • Portable • Trusted AIAA eBooks Books
Gain the portability, flexibility, and personalization that AIAA eBooks provide. Now available from AIAA—your trusted source for aerospace research for more than 75 years. • More than 200 titles from the AIAA Education Series and the Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics series—including formerly out-of-print volumes from the 1960s and beyond. • Read it online or download it to your computer. • PDF format—easily read through the free Adobe software. • Available at the chapter level in addition to the entire book. • Print, copy, cut, paste! (some restrictions apply) • AIAA Members receive a 25% discount off of list price. • Make notes, search, and export citations. • Receive e-mail alerts and RSS feeds.
Start reading today at http://ebooks.aiaa.org Institutions wishing to purchase access should contact Adrian Fair at firstname.lastname@example.org, 888.854.6853, or 703.264.7505. Collections are available for all titles, by series, or by subject.
3/19/09 3:21:35 PM
® is a publication of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Elaine J. Camhi Editor-in-Chief Patricia Jefferson Associate Editor Greg Wilson Production Editor Jerry Grey, Editor-at-Large Christine Williams, Editor AIAA Bulletin Correspondents Robert F. Dorr, Washington Philip Butterworth-Hayes, Europe Michael Westlake, Hong Kong Contributing Writers Richard Aboulafia, John Binder, James W. Canan, Marco Cáceres, Edward Flinn, Tom Jones, Théo Pirard, David Rockwell, Frank Sietzen, J.R. Wilson Fitzgerald Art & Design Art Direction and Design Craig Byl, Manufacturing and Distribution David W. Thompson, President Robert S. Dickman, Publisher STEERING COMMITTEE Michael B. Bragg, University of Illinois; Philip Hattis, Draper Laboratory; Mark S. Maurice, AFOSR; Laura McGill, Raytheon; George Muellner, Boeing; Merri Sanchez, National Aeronautics and Space Administration; Mary Snitch, Lockheed Martin EDITORIAL BOARD Ned Allen, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics; Jean-Michel Contant, EADS; Eugene Covert, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; L.S. “Skip” Fletcher, Texas A&M University; Michael Francis, United Technologies; Christian Mari, Teuchos; Cam Martin, NASA Dryden; Don Richardson, Donrich Research; Douglas Yazell, Honeywell ADVERTISING National Display and Classified: Robert Silverstein, 240.498.9674 rsilverstein@AdSalesExperts.net West Coast Display: Greg Cruse, 949.361.1870 / gcruse@AdSalesExperts.net Send materials to Craig Byl, AIAA, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA 20191-4344. Changes of address should be sent to Customer Service at the same address, by e-mail at email@example.com, or by fax at 703/264-7606. Send Letters to the Editor to Elaine Camhi at the same address or firstname.lastname@example.org February 2010, Vol. 48, No. 2
Space debris: Turning goals into practice We are discovering that developing space debris mitigation goals was far easier than achieving them. The Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee is an international governmental forum for the coordination of activities related to issues of man-made and natural debris in space. IADC space debris mitigation guidelines are the benchmark for preserving the space environment and assuring safe space operations. They have been incorporated into agency regulations, commercial contracts and even laws. They may be costly and difficult to realize, but we must pursue them enthusiastically. Removing objects from the LEO protected region within 25 years from end of mission is an example of the challenges. Orbit lifetime estimates are extremely imprecise—since atmospheric drag is the major perturbing force, estimated lifetime depends strongly on the variable composition and density of the atmosphere, the changing attitude of the satellite relative to the direction of motion and the change in mass as propellants are expended or exhausted. These estimates also depend on when the lifetime is estimated. Deorbit during periods of high solar activity is easier than during periods of low solar activity. Extended launch delays may invalidate orbit lifetime estimates. Conservative designs based on periods of lower atmospheric density might diminish payload unnecessarily if the mission ends during high solar activity. Optimistic designs based on periods of high atmospheric density may not have sufficient stored energy for safe disposal. In addition, orbit lifetime estimates are not testable or verifiable. The sample size may never be sufficient to correlate confidently actual lifetime with estimates. What must the reliability of disposal systems be, and what is the energy cost of incorporating exquisitely reliable disposal systems? The real threat posed by a mission-ended spacecraft also depends on the actual orbit. What would the sanctions be for not adhering to the guideline? Could those who ignore the guideline be prevented from launching? Would anyone be willing to deorbit an offending spacecraft uncooperatively? How can we assure that the 25-year guideline has been met, and what can we do if it is not? Or, is 25 years not the best criterion, and should it be discarded? Disposal from geostationary orbit has similar issues. Drag is insignificant, but the effect of solar radiation is variable, depending on solar cycles, satellite attitude and surface emissivity and absorptivity, which also vary. Removing spent boosters from geostationary transfer orbits presents another dilemma. These orbits cross both the LEO and GEO protected regions. They also may require a long time to change favorably. Passivation guidelines compete with disposal guidelines if sufficient energy is to be available for deorbit. Boosters generally do not have enduring electrical systems, so the time required for deorbit may exceed battery life. With roughly a 100:1 penalty for each additional unit of mass in orbit, disposal mechanisms might compromise payload mass unacceptably. Several IADC guidelines engender these technical and operational issues. Industry and governments must address them. IADC should consider them and either modify the guidelines or suggest how they might be achieved with acceptable mission and lifetime burdens. Preserving the near Earth environment for mutual benefit requires mutual sacrifice. David Finkleman CSSI
Changing aerospace cluster dynamics WHAT IS THE BEST PLACE IN THE WORLD TO start up a new aerospace manufacturing business? Over the past 100 years the global aerospace manufacturing industry has tended to develop around a few cities— Wichita, Montreal, Seattle and Toulouse, for example—that have become hubs for a growing number of suppliers and related businesses. The process of “cluster” developments is now well documented. From Detroit to Silicon Valley, the dynamics of why and how similar or competitive businesses choose to work next to each other have been analyzed in depth. Most clusters originally formed around a key organization that through its industry importance—as a major integrator or international airport—has provided a central magnetic pole of attraction. In more recent years other factors have increased the attractiveness of clusters. The development of research institutions, generous local and national government grants, the availability of a specialized workforce and just-in-time production manufacturing techniques have all played their part in concentrating aerospace manufacturing in a few regions of the world. Michael Porter of Harvard University has created one of the most important recent analyses of cluster activity. He categorized such activity into four types: geographic (a concentration of different businesses in a single region), sectoral (a concentration of businesses working in the same sector), horizontal (the development of connections, such as shared IT networks, between businesses) and vertical (businesses at different levels in the supply chain). But over the past few years the dynamics of traditional aerospace cluster activities have started to change. There are new entrants to the market. The development of new aerospace businesses in China, Vietnam, Brazil, Mexico and, most recently, the United 4
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Arab Emirates has opened up new options for companies looking to grow their businesses. And some of the opportunities offered by companies in countries where aerospace is expanding rapidly will be greater than those offered by relocating around traditional clusters. In addition, traditional clusters themselves have also started to change, no longer looking inward toward key customers but increasingly developing links with clusters in other parts of the world.
about relationships, and what we are seeing is the evolution of the supply chain to a more international marketplace.” If cluster dynamics are following the global supply chain, then we should soon see this reflected in the way traditional sectoral clusters of North America and Europe work. What this means, in very broad terms, is that traditional clusters in North America and Europe will do less manufacturing and concentrate more on developing high-end integration and hightechnology skills, outsourcing the laborintensive manufacturing work to clusters in low-wage economies. This is exactly what seems to be happening. The key to transforming manufacturing clusters in North America and Europe to centers of aerospace excellence is access to innovation skills—corporate and academic. There is a new imperative for traditional manufacturing clusters to attract companies skilled in design and engineering, rapid prototyping, software development, part manufacturing, testing and research capabilities.
The government difference A new trend? So are we seeing a change in the way clusters are developing? Are the days of traditional regional aerospace centers numbered, or is increasing globalization going to underline their importance? “I think both,” says John Copely, head of Farnborough Aerospace Consortium (FAC), a cluster of aerospace manufacturers in the southeast of the U.K. The FAC is typical of the many European clusters that are rapidly building links to new aerospace markets in the Middle East and Far East. “Our office in Dubai is particularly important for us,” notes Copely, “especially for small and medium enterprises looking to gain access to new markets. They typically use the office for a year or so before building up enough experience of the market. Clusters have always been
In Europe the transformation process has been accelerated by government initiatives. The French government, for example, recognized the Aerospace Valley of Aquitaine and Midi-Pyrénées regions as a “global innovative cluster” in July 2005, and since then 212 partnership projects have been launched, including Nikos Pantalos
143 projects ﬁnanced for an overall budget of €450 million and public support of over €200 million. The Aviation Cluster of the Hamburg Metropolitan Area launched the European Aerospace Cluster Partnership (EACP) in May 2009, a network of skills cooperation by a large number of European aerospace clusters. According to Christian Ketels from the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness at the Harvard Business School, “The dispersion of Europe’s aerospace industry across many locations has often been brandished as a key competitive disadvantage versus the industry’s global rivals. While consolidation in fewer strong clusters remains crucial, Europe’s economic fundamentals will continue to result in more aerospace clusters than elsewhere. The collaboration across these clusters is crucial to turn this combination of different capabilities and assets across Europe into a competitive advantage, and reduce the costs of the geographic distance between them.”
ganizations. The Hamburg/Northern Germany and French Aerospace Valley clusters have an agreement to further educational links, exchange trainees and develop joint degree studies. Such links with academia will become particularly important if companies are to access the new skills required in the coming years and inﬂuence universities to prioritize the syllabus so new graduates understand the needs of the market when they qualify. “This has traditionally been a fairly slow process,” says the FAC’s Copely.
Aerospace manufacturing in Europe is concentrated in a few key areas. Around 90% of Poland’s aerospace manufacturing industry is in the country’s Aviation Valley in southeast Poland, with more than 22,000 aerospace employees. In the U.K., over 60% of all aircraft manufacturing takes place in the northwest of the country. In France the Aerospace Valley of Aquitaine and Midi-Pyrénées is responsible for one-third of the country’s aerospace turnover, employing over 100,000 people in 1,300 companies. These clusters already have an intricate web of networked partnerships. The Hungarian Aerospace Cluster and the Hamburg-based Hanse-Aerospace Cluster are cooperating on joint research into cabin systems development projects. The Polish Mazovia cluster of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) has begun talks with Germany’s BerlinBrandenburg Aerospace Alliance on UAV and VTOL UAV programs. Increasingly important are the growing networks of alliances between industrial clusters and research/academic or-
In Europe there tend to be two major types of clusters. There are traditional large groups of companies transforming legacy manufacturing centers into “innovation” regions. But there are smaller clusters as well, many in central and eastern Europe, building toward a niche position within the global aerospace supply chain as a result of market demand rather than the incentives provided by local or national governments. The EACP will develop new links between European aerospace clusters and has been partly funded by the European Commission—in recognition of the need to develop SMEs through cluster initiatives. According to Nikos Pantalos, senior level policy ofﬁcer of the European Commission: “Clusters are recognized as promising platforms for promoting innovation and strengthening the competitiveness of ﬁrms, especially of SMEs, to better face the global competition and create more jobs and companies in the
Market demand and new niches
EU. Many cluster initiatives have been developed at national and regional levels to support clusters, but there is a need for striving for more excellence and cooperation at the EU level in order to develop more world-class clusters in EU countries.” While European and North American clusters are developing new skills and new “virtual” cluster links with groups of companies in other parts of the world, there is a new generation of manufacturing clusters developing in low-wage economies to handle some of the manufacturing work no longer undertaken by U.S. and European companies. But these are very different from the traditional clusters developed in Europe and North America, and their dynamics are very different. For example, according to the Mexican aerospace industry trade association FEMIA, aerospace industry exports will reach $6 billion by the end of 2012. Mexico has developed its aerospace manufacturing activities through a series of clusters located mainly in the MexicaliTecate-Tijuana corridor and Baja, Calif. But unlike traditional North American and European clusters these do not have central airframer companies acting as an attracting force around which smaller companies gather. There are plans for Cessna, Bombardier, Bell and MD Helicopters to assemble complete airframes in the country, but none has done so yet. Brazil, which does very well in exporting complete airframes, has concentrated its aerospace sector in the city of São José dos Campos, in São Paulo State. But with Embraer, the country’s largest aerospace company, importing around 95% of its aircraft systems, structures and components from outside the country, the size of the São José dos Campos cluster is much smaller than an equivalent operation would be in Canada, the U.S. or Europe. Malaysia’s government has identiﬁed complex composite structures as the main driver for its aerospace industry and a “sectoral” cluster developing around this area of expertise. Composites Technology Research Malaysia was (Continued on page 9) AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Crouching tiger,puffing dragon THE YEAR 2009 SEEMED FILLED WITH glory for China: U.S. President Barack Obama’s official visit to Beijing, the 60th anniversary of the PRC’s founding, plans emerging to put a man on the Moon, and new fighter jets on the drawing board. Politics and anniversaries aside, whether or not the pace of China’s technological advances has increased dramatically in the past few months, or whether people outside—particularly in the U.S.—have been paying more attention, there is no denying that China seems to be on a roll in terms of furthering its aerospace capabilities. After becoming the third nation to put a man in space, having done so in 2003, China now appears intent on landing one on the Moon by 2020, possibly before the U.S. is able to return there. And the deputy air force chief, Gen. He Weirong, says a fighter equivalent to the Lockheed Martin F-22 should enter service by 2017-2019, somewhat ahead of the prediction by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates in July that China would not have such an aircraft before 2020. But all is not completely as it seems in this developing picture of China catching up with technology, flexing its political muscles on the world stage and in just about every respect seeking to portray itself as the new superpower. In like manner, all is not as it seems with the image of the U.S., as perceived from the outside, as riddled with angst about its technological capability and with worry about threats to its dominant position as the leading world power.
Reexamining predictions It is interesting to reread a study written by Adam Segal and Maurice R. Greenberg, senior fellow for China studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, and published in 2004 in the New Yorkbased independent Foreign Affairs magazine. Segal’s position was that longstanding U.S. supremacy in technology 6
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
ically, much of the budget deficit has been funded by China, seeking a use for the proceeds of the massive trade surplus it has with the U.S. The implications for aerospace and for science and engineering in general, in what is often perceived as a two-horse race between the U.S. and China, are obvious. As Segal’s study said: “Above all, [the U.S.] must not assume that future innovation will occur automatically. Only through renewed attention to science funding, educational reform, the health of labor and capital markets, and the vitality of the business environment can the United States maintain its edge— and the most innovative economy in the world.”
A Potemkin economy?
On October 15, 2003, a Long March 2F launched Shenzhou 5, China's first manned spaceflight.
could no longer be taken for granted as Asian nations including China ramped up spending on R&D and emphasized scientific and technological training. Pointing to the need for funding in research, Segal said: “A record $422-billion budget deficit, for example, may undermine future government support for R&D. Recent shifts in federal spending will leave basic research—that driven by scientific curiosity rather than specific commercial applications—underfunded, depriving the economy of the building blocks of future innovation.” Since then, of course, the U.S. national debt has ballooned to $8.8 trillion in 2009 and is forecast to rise to $17.4 trillion by 2017, said Alice Rivlin, former vice chair of the Federal Reserve Board and founding director of the Congressional Budget Office, in December. Iron-
But at the same time, it is necessary to bear in mind that cultural differences play a major role in how the state of play in both the Chinese and U.S. technological worlds is presented. Russia’s infamous Potemkin villages come to mind: These were facades of street fronts and entire pasteboard villages supposedly built and peopled by imported peasants in 1787 to impress Empress Catherine the Great and to hide depressed living conditions when she toured the Ukraine and Crimea by river. The U.S. has a recession-damaged economy that is open to public inspection; China has an economy that is whatever officials declare it to be, much of it out of sight of foreign researchers. In short, the situation of the U.S. with regard to technological innovation, though it could be far better, is not as bad as it looks, and China’s may not be as good as it looks. It is also necessary to remember that the sort of questioning, self-examination and criticism of and about officialdom that happens regularly in the U.S. takes place freely and openly, while in China such a process can be conducted only behind firmly closed doors.
Comparing students’ skills Shifting forward in time, there was a warning in February 2009 about the quality of scientific education in both China and the U.S. contained in a study published in Science Daily, a Marylandbased Internet Web site that presents news about science in general. The study looked at skill levels among nearly 6,000 freshmen at three U.S. and four Chinese universities, and found that while Chinese students were way ahead in knowledge of science facts, both nationalities were roughly equal in terms of reasoning ability—but both scored poorly considering that the students expected to major in science or engineering. Associate professor of physics at Ohio State University Lei Bao, lead author of the study, said: “Our study shows that, contrary to what many people would expect, even when students are rigorously taught the facts, they don’t necessarily develop the reasoning skills they need to succeed. Because students need both knowledge and reasoning, we need to explore teaching methods that target both.” Again, cultural differences come into play. A book published in 2009 by Cambridge University Press, China’s Emerging Technological Edge (Assessing the Role of High-End Talent), makes the point that comparisons of U.S. and ChiCao Jianlin
nese education systems inevitably match apples against oranges because of different classification terminology. In short, counting how many doctoral degrees are issued (more to foreign students than to locals in the U.S.) and showing that enrollment in science and engineering courses in China has risen at 20% a year since 1999 is “Chicken Little” analysis: “The sky is falling.” The authors of the book are Denis Fred Simon, professor of international affairs and director of the Program on U.S.-China Technology, Economic and Business Relations at Pennsylvania State University, and Cong Cao, senior research associate at the Neil D. Levin Graduate Institute of International Relations and Commerce, State University of New York. Their analysis shows that China’s cadre of scientists and engineers is far from overflowing with top people, and that the situation is going to get worse. The major problem, they say, is quality—scientists and engineers there may be, but the good ones are spread very thin. The result is what has been fairly well known about China for years: There are pools of excellence dotted around the country, but little depth of knowledge, and the upcoming retirement bulge can only worsen the problem. Sending Chinese students to universities in the U.S. or elsewhere overseas is a double-edged sword for Beijing. As Simon and Cao point out, a significant number of these students remain abroad—the best and the brightest, taking advantage of better earning power, opportunities and freedoms outside China. So the effect is a downgrading of the talent pool at home. Also, while the numbers leaving or returning home have fluctuated in response to various events, such as the Tiananmen Square massacre
in Beijing in June 1989, visa restrictions in the U.S. after September 11, 2001, the collapse of the dotcom bubble and the recession in Silicon Valley, the result is a net (though unquantified) brain drain. At home in China, Qian Xuesen say Simon and Cao, “the curriculum inside many fields tends to be narrow, covering only the specific area of study. As a result, Chinese universities have become technique focused....Rote learning, in which students who can answer questions in classrooms may not be able to solve and manage real-life problems, still dominates higher education....Creative thinking, entrepreneurship, interpersonal and intercultural skills, among others, have not been part of the pedagogy or curriculum, even at key institutions.”
Official acknowledgment Such thoughts were behind comments made by the “Father of Chinese Rocketry,” Qian Xuesen, shortly before he died in October 2009 at the age of 98. In the official Beijing Xinhua news agency obituary, Qian was referred to as an “excellent member of the Communist Party,” which he joined in 1959 after being deported from the U.S., where he lived from 1935 to 1955. Qian studied in the U.S. and rose to high positions within the U.S. military’s scientific establishment, becoming an expert in rocketry. He was arrested in 1950 on suspicions that he had communist sympathies, and was unsuccessful in attempting to stay in the U.S. Chinese liberal intellectual Yang Hengjun said to Xinhua in an interview that Qian had harbored critical views on the future of education in China, which he expressed to Premier Wen Jiabao, who visited Qian while his health was failing. “Qian Xuesen’s words were harsh—he told Wen that Chinese universities could not raise first-class scientists.…The reason, as we all know, is that our universities are auxiliaries to the political system, AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
and they are heavily influenced by the political system,” Yang said. “Qian Xuesen had always been meek to the authorities, but he finally asked a big question.” That these comments were published by the government’s own agency illustrates official awareness of and anxiety about the situation.
Security concerns International cooperation in technology and education is fine, but can be limited by major differences in the approach to technology and its uses, brought about by security concerns. A report from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in April 2009 on its conference marking 30 years of cooperation in science and technology between the U.S. and China, said that China’s vice minister for science and technology, Cao Jianlin, and the U.S. speakers “cited concerns over dual-use policies that limit export of technology
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
that may be intended for civilian purposes but which could have military uses. “According to the U.S. speakers, Congress has been strongly suspicious of efforts to share information and hardware with China and other nations—but that is short-sighted and self-defeating, they said.” AAAS is not the only learned body that is complaining. In January 2009, a report from the National Research Council said: “Many U.S. export and visa controls, developed during the Cold War era to prevent the transfer of technological and scientific advances to our enemies, now harm U.S. national security and economic prosperity. The current regulations were designed for a world that no longer exists and are unsuitable for today’s adversaries. Immediate executive action is needed to restructure this system to prevent further declines in U.S. scientific and technological competitiveness.”
Without such a change, and without a greater appreciation of the cultural differences between an open U.S. culture (even with public relations “spin”) and a Chinese culture that, even after considerable opening up is still far from having the same level of access to information or the same manner of interpretation of data, clashes of interpretation will remain inevitable. It has often been said by foreigners that, when working for Western companies in China, local engineers want to try to run before they have learned how to walk. The other side of that coin is the comment made in Simon and Cao’s book—specifically about ethnic Chinese brought up overseas, but equally applicable to many foreign managers or other “experts”—that “they don’t know what they don’t know, and they don’t know how much they don’t know” about living in the local culture. The comment, of course, can be aimed in both directions. The ethos that encourages individualism, and at times demands tough introspection in the West in general and in the U.S. in particular, needs considerably more time to evolve in China, where the tendency is to follow a leader without question and not take risks in thinking too far outside the box. That evolution must run the gamut from technical and scientific education to international standards, project management, and the creation by scientists and engineers of “invisible colleges” (to use Simon and Cao’s term) of colleagues and peer group members outside their immediate work circles with whom they can exchange ideas and from whom they can seek inspiration when problem solving. Other Asian centers of industry such as South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore have, to a greater or lesser extent, undergone just such a transition in their thinking and their education systems, while still retaining local characteristics. Without such an evolution, and considerable patience from actual and potential U.S. and other partners with China, the continuing development of the relationship is inevitably going to suffer from the complexities of trying to guess real motives and establish what is truly happening on both sides of the Pacific. Michael Westlake email@example.com
(Continued from page 5)
established by the government in 1990 and has developed to include Airbus, Boeing and Goodrich as major customers. Since then, other composite manufacturers have also been attracted to Malaysia: Asian Composites Manufacturing, a joint venture by Sime Darby Berhad and Naluri Berhad of Malaysia and Boeing and Hexcel of the U.S., set up shop in 2001, and Spirit AeroSystems Malaysia opened a composite facility in 2009, supplying structures principally to the Airbus single-aisle aircraft. It is hard to identify any region in Europe or North America that has concentrated so heavily on a single manufacturing sector such as composite structures, to the exclusion of almost every other subsector.
Asian centers Japanese companies, meanwhile, have begun an aerospace manufacturing cluster in Hanoi, Vietnam, with both Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Nikkiso recently setting up manufacturing plants in the capital. China’s aerospace manufacturing industries are distributed throughout the country, with major civil aircraft clusters in Harbin and Shanghai. In late 2008 the Chinese government announced the remerger of AVIC I and AVIC II, which had separated in 1999. Under the new structure, civil aircraft manufacturing has been centralized in Shanghai with the development of Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China to manage the C919 190-seat airliner and ARJ-21 regional jet. An AVIC helicopter company has been set up in Tianjin. But most of the other aerospace activities have been brought back to Beijing. A defense branch has been set up in the capital to develop new capabilities in areas such as unmanned air systems and to export J-10, JF-15 and L-15 Falcon military jets. A new engine company has been established in an aerospace cluster zone near Beijing Capital International Airport, and an airborne systems division has been set up in the Zhongguancun Aviation Science Park of Haidian district, in northwest Beijing. This reformation of aerospace clusters suggests that companies based in Shanghai and Tianjin will be fully inte-
grated within the global supply chain, while the Beijing-based defense, airborne systems and engine companies will oversee the development of primarily indigenous capabilities.
✈✈✈ It is clear that the dynamics of aerospace cluster developments in both Europe and
North America are changing. The process will most probably accelerate as companies seek to become increasingly more efficient at accessing new sources of innovative technologies in their domestic markets—and low-labor wage rates elsewhere. Philip Butterworth-Hayes firstname.lastname@example.org
Events Calendar FEB. 2-4 U.S. Air Force T&E Days, Nashville, Tennessee Contact: 703/264-7500 FEB. 10-11 Thirteenth Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference, Arlington, Virginia Contact: 703/264-7500 FEB. 14-18 Twentieth AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, San Diego, California Contact: A. Trask, email@example.com FEB. 23-26 Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum, Laurel, Maryland Contact: Glen Robertson, 256/694-7941; firstname.lastname@example.org MARCH 6-13 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana Contact: David Woerner, 818/726-8228 MARCH 16-17 Congressional Visits Day, Washington, D.C. Contact: 703/264-7500 MARCH 22-24 Eighth U.S. Missile Defense Conference and Exhibit, Washington, D.C. Contact: 703/264-7500 MARCH 22-24 Forty-fifth 3AF Symposium of Applied Aerodynamics, Marseilles, France Contact: Anne Venables, email@example.com APRIL 12-15 Fifty-first AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference; 18th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference; 12th AIAA Nondeterministic Approaches Conference; 11th AIAA Gossamer Systems Forum; Sixth AIAA Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Specialist Conference. Orlando, Florida Contact: 703/264-7500 APRIL 20-22 AIAA Infotech@Aerospace 2010, Atlanta, Georgia Contact: 703/264-7500 APRIL 25-30 SpaceOps 2010 Conference: Delivering on the Dream (hosted by NASA Marshall and organized by AIAA), Huntsville, Alabama Contact: 703/264-7500 AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Some answers,but still some questions AS WINTER ARRIVED IN WASHINGTON, THE defense appropriations bill was signed, while questions about NASA’s future human spaceflight program remained unanswered, and divergent plans for a new light combat aircraft began to emerge.
Defense budget ayes and nays Largely unnoticed by press and public, on December 19 the Senate approved and President Barack Obama later signed the $636.3-billion FY10 defense appropriations law. Almost three months late—Congress is rarely punctual in fulfilling this core responsibility—the bill contains provisions the administration wanted—and some it did not. The legislation is a success for Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ effort to halt production of the F-22 Raptor superfighter at 187 airframes, to kill a combat search and rescue helicopter for the Air Force and to postpone developmental work on the next-generation bomber. Because it puts an end to, or postpones, several big-ticket acquisition programs, critics say the bill is gutting the Air Force and widening a “fighter gap” that looms as a handicap to U.S. airpower in the coming decade. Yet when adjusted for inflation and added to expected supplemental legislation to cover an increase of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, U.S. defense spending in FY10 rises to a level not reached since WW II. And it is rising at a time when a $1.4-trillion federal deficit is predicted for FY10 alone. Among items the administration did not want are 10 C-17 Globemaster III airlifters for the Air Force. Gates says the
The defense bill will enable the Marines to operate five VH-71s.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
The defense budget calls for 10 C-17s, which the Air Force, the DOD and the administration do not want.
Air Force does not need more C-17s, as does Air Force chief of staff Gen. Norton Schwartz. The administration did not request the aircraft and says it does not want them. But supporters say the order will keep alive Boeing’s Long Beach, California, assembly plant, which produces no other product. The planemaker has also sold a handful of additional copies overseas, including a new (seventh) C-17 for Britain’s Royal Air Force. Also in the defense bill is limited funding for the Lockheed Martin VH-71 Kestrel presidential helicopter, based on the triple-engine AgustaWestland EH101. Back on May 15, Gates announced he was terminating the VH-71, which was to become the future Marine One, after delays and cost overruns caused by retroactive requirements for additional equipment. The bill will enable the Marines to operate five of the 23 VH-71s once planned although it is unclear whether, or how, they will fit into a presidential fleet. Ashton Carter, the Pentagon’s acquisitions boss, says he hopes to start another presidential helicopter program by this spring. The bill prohibits the Air Force from carrying out its plan to retire 248 F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon legacy fighters pending an April 1 report by a federally funded research and develop-
ment center. The bill also requires the service to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of its plan to shift F-15 training from Tyndall AFB in Florida to the Oregon Air National Guard’s Kingsley Field. The bill temporarily halts a shutdown of F-15 operations at Tyndall even though the unit no longer has a mission to perform. The spending bill contained 1,720 earmarks—those pesky add-ons sought by individual lawmakers for their districts, seen as democracy at its purest by supporters and as pork by critics. Many support museums and cultural centers in lawmakers’ home districts, viewed by some as luxuries given the federal deficit.
A shutdown of F-15 operations at Tyndall has been temporarily halted.
Light combat aircraft The Air Force and Navy are pursuing separate programs for small, light combat warplanes meant to be effective in counterinsurgency and special operations. The services are searching for a combat version of a turboprop training aircraft, like the Brazilian Embraer EMB314 Super Tucano or the U.S. Hawker Beechcraft T-6 Texan II. A dark-horse candidate is a resurrected version of the Vietnam-era OV-10 Bronco, which would be assembled by Boeing at a facility yet to be named. Some on Capitol Hill believe the dis-
aircraft and more worried that the small-warplane idea is a fad that is being pursued in several directions without adequate planning, procedures or oversight. The Air Force program, which was known as OA-X until recently and is now called LAAR (for light attack armed reconnaissance aircraft) calls for a small plane with an advanced sensor suite; hardpoints Combat versions of the Super Tucano (left), T-6 (bottom) to carry light missiles, bombs and and OV-10 are all LAAR program candidates. rockets; and the independent capability to find and engage targets at night. The LAAR would also function as parate programs should be merged into a forward air control aircraft, directing a single effort. Others wonder if investgunfire and ordnance from other plating in a lightweight combat aircraft is a forms. The aircraft will need to operate good idea at all, since it would entail sigfrom austere forward operating bases, nificant start-up costs and have little apincluding crude airstrips of grass or plicability to large-scale “peer” conflicts gravel. It needs to be largely self-sustainbetween nation states. To complicate the ing, since it will operate in locations situation, legislators from Kansas, where where maintenance support is all but the T-6 is assembled in Wichita, object to nonexistent. the Pentagon considering a Brazilian airSome of the requirements, including craft under any circumstances. those for high-altitude capability and for Last November, Sen. Sam Brownan on-board oxygen generation system, back (R-Kan.) and Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) sent a letter to House of Represeem tailored to the war in Afghanistan. sentatives leaders requesting an investi“If you’ve got three or four Seals or gation into reports that the U.S. and Green Berets stuck on a mountain and Brazil are negotiating an agreement for the enemy is engaging them, this is a U.S. acquisition of at least 100 Super reasonable answer,” former Pentagon Tucanos. The two, strong defenders of analyst Pierre Sprey says. “All they need the T-6, argued that such an agreement are some really accurate airborne .50would “demean the integrity of the fedcaliber machine guns or light cannons eral acquisition process” and result in the assigned to them and guaranteed availloss of thousands of American jobs. able within 10 minutes.” Tiahrt sent a similar letter to Gates. Sprey says a purchase of 50-100 Analysts in Washington, including LAARs would be a reasonable expendisome who follow acquisition closely, are ture, but would not substitute for “a real less concerned about the prospect that close air support [CAS] aircraft,” meanthe Pentagon might purchase a Brazilian ing a replacement for the venerable A-
10 Thunderbolt II. He says the Air Force and Navy have both ignored the CAS mission for years, making do with warplanes that were not designed for direct contact with troops. The LAAR program is being run by the Air Force’s Air Combat Command, which is responsible for traditional warfare, rather than Air Force Special Operations Command, which handles unorthodox fighting. Details of the program, including the amount allocated to it in the FY10 budget, have not been disclosed. Supporters believe the program will produce a low-cost, highly effective battlefield asset suitable for today’s conflicts; critics say LAAR is in effect a cop-out, a way of avoiding a stronger and deeper commitment to CAS. If the Air Force has been quiet about LAAR, the Navy has been silent about Imminent Fury, the demonstrator program that involves a Super Tucano— Kansas legislators notwith-standing—that appeared at three bases in the western U.S. last November. The aircraft is equipped with an electrooptical sensor in the nose turret and satellite and secure communications systems. According to the British magazine Air International, the Navy leased the aircraft from EP Aviation, a subsidiary of contractor Xe Security, formerly named Blackwater International. The service is expected to eventually lease four Super Tucanos, designated A-29B, to evaluate their capabilities.
NASA and human spaceflight A meeting between Obama and new NASA boss Charles Bolden at the White House on December 16 did not produce AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
the usual public statement afterward and resulted in no decision on the agency’s human spaceflight future. Spokesmen for the president and the administrator say they have no new information to impart while acknowledging that a policy must be set forth in public soon. The administration is scheduled to announce its FY11 budget request this month. On the agenda for the ObamaBolden meeting was the work of a blue ribbon panel headed by former aerospace executive Norman Augustine. Last October, the Augustine panel listed eight options for the future of the Constellation program. But the committee stopped short of telling the administration or NASA what to do. According to the online edition of Science magazine, Obama intends to seek a $1-billion increase in the NASA budget for FY11. The funds, according to the report, will be used in part to fund
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
a new heavy-lift launcher, replacing the Constellation program’s Ares V, which has not yet been built or tested, to take astronauts to the Moon, asteroids, and the moons of Mars, as well as for cargo. The initial Ares I launcher that is part of the Constellation program and that has completed a test flight is reportedly suffering cost and technical issues and was excluded from several of the Augustine panel’s recommendations. The Science article suggests that the White House is convinced that scarce NASA funds would be better spent on a simpler heavy-lift vehicle that could be ready to fly as early as 2018. Whether the report is accurate or not, it appears that NASA engineers are more satisfied with the Constellation program's Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV) than with efforts to construct a booster for it. When we went to press, however, the administration had not yet
Charles F. Bolden
made a policy announcement on human spaceflight. A White House statement following the Obama-Bolden meeting said: “The president confirmed his commitment to human space exploration and the goal of ensuring that the nation is on a sustainable path to achieving our aspirations in space. Against a backdrop of serious challenges with the existing program, the Augustine committee has offered several key findings and a range of options for how the nation might improve its future human spaceflight activities. The two spoke about the administrator’s
work at NASA and discussed the Augustine committee’s analysis.” Some critics have asked whether Bolden—an experienced astronaut and Vietnam combat pilot who was not the president’s first choice for the NASA portfolio—is pushing hard enough for Constellation. One Washington wag pointed to the stark contrast between Gates’ Pentagon and Bolden’s NASA: Gates is widely viewed as willing to take unpopular positions and to make difficult decisions. Bolden is respected and admired but is not known to have taken a controversial position on Constellation. Many believe Bolden would like to push harder for the next-generation human spaceflight program but feels constrained by his, and his agency’s, relative lack of clout in the administration. As currently planned and funded, NASA has five shuttle missions remaining, all scheduled to launch this year, to
complete the international space station. After the last flight, the shuttle’s 134th, the agency is scheduled to ground its orbiter fleet, and the nation will have no way to put astronauts into space until, or unless, NASA proceeds with the Constellation program. If Constellation matures as originally planned, the Ares rocket and Orion CEV will be ready for launch sometime between NASA’s official estimate of 2014 and the Augustine panel’s 2017 date. In the interim, U.S. astronauts will hitch rides on Russia’s Soyuz, launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, even though some U.S. sources believe Soyuz has its own safety and reliability issues. Their experience may be like that of NASA astronaut Timothy Creamer, who, together with Russia’s Oleg Kotov and Japan’s Soichi Noguchi, docked with the ISS aboard a Soyuz on December 22.
The three joined spacefarers already aboard, station commander Jeff Williams and cosmonaut Maxim Suraev, who is station flight engineer. Williams and Suraev will return to Earth in late March aboard another Soyuz, but three more astronauts are scheduled for launch in early April to boost the ISS crew to six. The final year of space shuttle operations was scheduled to begin with the February 7 launch of Endeavour on STS130 to deliver the Tranquility node and cupola, the last remaining segments of the station. The STS-130 crew is commanded by Marine Corps Col. George D. Zamka and will carry six astronauts. The cupola is a robotic control station with six windows around its sides and another in the center that provides a 360deg view around the station. Also scheduled this month: the arrival of a Progress unmanned resupply ship. Robert F. Dorr firstname.lastname@example.org
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Interview by Frank Sietzen
How, globally, are ANSPs [air navigation service providers] managing the current airline recession—what have been some of the consequences of traffic decline, and has this fed into service provision? Well first, it’s important we acknowledge that ANSPs have recognized that the airlines are struggling; they have reacted positively and have taken steps to help. That in itself is somewhat of a change from past decades. Within the constraints of their regulatory structure, ANSPs have been working hard to cut costs where possible. But as CANSO [Civil Air Navigation Services Organization] has already said publicly, we do not want to imperil long-term investment plans, nor of course does anyone want to see any cuts to front-line services. So the room for our members to reduce costs faster than the decline in traffic is understandably limited. Where is CANSO now in its development curve—how will the organization and the industry evolve in the next few years? To borrow a Churchillian quote, CANSO is at the “end of the beginning.” The secretariat and the members have performed outstanding work to bring the association from a standing start to where it is today in less than 15 years. The CANSO brand is strong and the organization is respected throughout the
In December 2009 Graham Lake was appointed director general of CANSO, the Civil Air Navigation Services Organization, based in Amsterdam. He began his career as an air traffic controller with U.K.NATS (National Air Traffic Services) in 1976 before moving to SITA as assistant vice president international relations in 1988, focusing on CNS/ATM (communications, navigation, surveillance/air traffic management) implementation in Europe and (for oceanic use) in the Atlantic and Pacific regions. In 1997 he became a vice president at ARINC in Annapolis, Md., responsible for the aviation services division.He then moved to the U.K.as managing director of the ARINC EMEA (Europe, the Middle East, and Africa) region.In that capacity he led teams providing passenger systems at more than 20 major international airports, as well as aircraft datalink and IT services for airline and ATC (air traffic control) use.
tion, by working closely with members and partner associations to provide the appropriate support necessary to facilitate these trends.
“The industry needs to look at the total value chain from the moment the passenger walks into the airport until he leaves at the other end of the journey. ” industry. The challenge now is for us to continue to deliver and to meet or exceed raised expectations. In terms of the evolution of the association and the industry, we are seeing clear trends towards convergence and harmonization technologically, operationally and institutionally. CANSO will continue to support this industry evolu14
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Given the wide oscillations in traffic (and income) and the requirement for long-term investment, is there an economic model emerging for ANSPs that offers a clear blueprint that balances the needs of aircraft operators with long-term investment plans? I don’t accept that there are “wide” oscillations in traffic and income. If we
Lake was also the founding president of AeroMobile, a joint venture company of ARINC and Telenor Norway, launched to develop and operate mobile communications services on aircraft for passenger and crew use. In 2006 Graham set up his own aviation technical services consultancy, AMSS, and was appointed nonexecutive chairman of Micro Nav, an ATC simulation systems company.
take a step back and look over an extended period into the past and project traffic trends into the future, we can certainly say that we are experiencing a significant but temporary downturn. Our industry has lost about two years’ worth of traffic growth. Don’t forget that this also has to be balanced in context with what might be termed the years of “excess” before 2008. I firmly believe the traffic trend will soon be upwards again; we must plan accordingly and prudently. All industries suffer from variations in income, and I don’t believe aviation is unduly susceptible. The lesson to remember for me is that it is better to “mend the roof when the sun is shining,” because it is much harder to be obliged to do so in an economic rainstorm.
Graham Lake If we look at what aircraft operators really need, it is of course a safe, reliable, environmentally sound and cost-efficient service. I believe they get that from ANSPs. We can debate the level of cost efficiency here and there, but ultimately real efficiencies will only come from harmonization across all stakeholder interests. Systemic change is going to be more important to achieve than charges reform, for example.
“If we look at what aircraft operators really need, it is of course a safe, reliable, environmentally sound and cost-efficient service.” The industry needs to look at the total value chain from the moment the passenger walks into the airport until he leaves at the other end of the journey. The whole industry needs a path to follow, a “vector,” if you will: Historically there has been a tendency for each sector and organization to focus on its own challenges in isolation. The trend today is collaboration, interoperability and harmonization. This has to be a good thing. Will the recession lead to more ANSP corporatization moves, or fewer? We have to remember that this period is not the only recession in the history of aviation. Remember the oil shock in 1973-1974, and the deep recessions in the early 1980s and ’90s. So many unforeseen events have the potential to seriously affect aviation—9/11 of course, or the trauma of the postcrash grounding of the DC10 fleet—the industry has to be strong enough to withstand and weather these shocks. Whether ANSPs choose to “corporatize” themselves is not really the issue. It is much more about the collective organized strength of the industry to withstand times of difficulty. There continues to be a mismatch be-
tween the technical capabilities of onboard systems to optimize flight profiles—especially in terms of taking the shortest route—and the ground-based systems managing the overall traffic flow. What role will CANSO play in bringing these two closer together? I agree that there is a mismatch between the technical capabilities of some onboard systems and some groundbased systems in terms of traffic flow. However, I don’t think that the systems themselves are the problem. Obviously, there is little point in having a shorter route between two airports using flex tracks if there is going to be unexpected or unavoidable holding at either end of the flight. Solving those sorts of aspects is a bigger challenge. CANSO will nevertheless continue to bring stakeholders together with the objective of achieving system-wide efficiencies. With the advent of global ATM [air traffic management] we will need global, transnational management systems to implement a seamless system. Yet states, for reasons of national sovereignty, are notoriously slow at embracing these concepts. What can CANSO do to accelerate the process? It is true that with the advent of a global ATM system we will need transnational management systems, but I don’t think we will need completely global sys-
Interview by Philip Butterworth-Hayes
Airport managers—especially those responsible for optimizing taxiway and runway operations—need to be engaged more fully in strategic ATM capacity and safety planning, otherwise all we will be doing with NextGen and SESAR [Single European Sky ATM Research] is moving traffic more swiftly between bottlenecks. Do you agree, and if so, how can this be done? I do agree that the ground infrastructure issues need to be comprehensively addressed. As I mentioned before, there is no point spending resources to shorten a route if there are going to be bigger delays at the end of the flight because the airport operations are not adequately optimized—no parking gate available at the arrival airport, for example. Ultimately, it is important that we recognize that ATM is part of a system that reflects the needs of airlines, airports, and ANSPs. We all need to work together to adapt and adopt solutions that offer real benefits. What new technologies and procedures do you think offer the most promising solutions to the safety, capacity, efficiency and environmental challenges of the future? It is essential to understand that a common approach to these challenges is likely to deliver the most success. I personally am a “technology agnostic”—I
“So many unforeseen events have the potential to seriously affect aviation—9/11 of course, or the trauma of the postcrash grounding of the DC10 fleet—the industry has to be strong enough to withstand and weather these shocks.” tems per se. We already have regional and subregional systems in place, and the first objectives should be and are to get them functioning effectively together. CANSO contributes to that effort by identifying key areas of action and applying focused workgroups to develop optimal approaches to the challenge.
don’t believe that it is a technology debate; it’s a solutions debate. For example, CANSO will not be entering into technological evaluations but will be seeking to identify and facilitate the implementation of well-thought-through approaches to each of the key operational areas of focus. AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
How close are we to developing clear metrics that can objectively measure service performance? Actually I think tremendous progress has been made on ATM indicators in recent years. You can see that in the work of the CANSO global benchmarking group and our human resources and environment work groups. CANSO will continue to encourage the development,
“I personally am a ‘technology agnostic’ —I don’t believe that it is a technology debate; it’s a solutions debate.” refinement and adoption of robust, publicly available and accountable metrics. The aim will be to provide appropriate measures and indicators that can be effectively used as a “dashboard” by CEOs and managers throughout the industry. But in your performance gathering work, which areas of ANSP performance can we now measure accurately and compare? Can you point to areas where this work has led or will lead to actual improvements? Both the FAA and Eurocontrol have done some excellent work in this area, which we have built on with our own CANSO Global Benchmarking Report. Our fifth report is just about to be published, and it builds on the FAA and European metrics with additional contributions from ANSPs in the Asia Pacific, Africa and Middle East [regions], so it’s a truly global perspective. The report encompasses productivity, cost-effectiveness, pricing, profitability and quality of service. Plus we also include benchmarks on HR, environment and safety issues. The whole point about all performance measurement work— whether you are developing metrics for salaries, environmental performance, capital equipment costs—is that the dashboard can be used by the people who manage air navigation services and the systems’ users. 16
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
It allows them to make comparisons. If you are measuring operations, day in day out, you can actually understand very clearly where performance is remaining stable, improving or deteriorating. And if it is deteriorating you can use the base metrics to take the appropriate actions to bring it back on track. We are already seeing ANSP CEOs acknowledge that the Benchmarking Report is helping them to improve the performance of their organizations, and this is obviously something we want to focus on in years to come. I am absolutely in favor of performance metrics being used as a framework for a global vision. It’s all about interdependency—benchmarking staffing levels, the environment…there are so many areas you can now take a critical look at and monitor. It allows us to look too at strategic trends, so when we are asked
playing, I would like to examine some of the ways we can go beyond that. Are you worried that, when we compare the work of developing next-generation ATM systems—via SESAR and NextGen, for example—and then look at the level of research funding that is available to states in other parts of the world, particularly Africa, we are in danger of developing a two-track global ATM system? What can be done about it? The reality of the world is that it is a large and complicated environment, and the solutions to its problems therefore must also be large and complicated. If you use the analogy of a large multinational supermarket chain then the operational technologies they employ to maximize their revenues include loyalty programs, automated checkout tech-
“The reality of the world is that it is a large and complicated environment, and the solutions to its problems therefore must also be large and complicated. ” about ANSP performance we have clear evidence of what is happening. ANSPs are coming under increasing pressure to mitigate commercial aviation’s impact on the environment— one of the goals of SESAR, for example, is to cut CO2 emissions per flight in Europe by 10%. But aren’t some of these targets unrealistic, given that there always has to be a balance between emissions, safety, noise and airspace architecture? I am a firm believer in interdependency, and I believe ANSPs, airports, airlines or other industry stakeholders will find it harder to act alone than with other stakeholders. We need to find a harmonized approach to the problem. It is unreasonable to expect ANSPs in isolation to find ways to meet these objectives. SESAR is an example of a regional approach to a global challenge. While I would applaud the role that SESAR is
nologies, and complex retail and stocking systems. But they are also operating in the same business as the local corner shop. The market is the same—but we have to create a situation where the high-tech business area does not shut out the low-tech players. So the issue is to make sure that all the systems are harmonized. This is particularly important for aircraft operators— we have to make sure all the systems are synchronized and that the whole ATM system becomes more efficient. And that means not looking exclusively at shorter flight times or optimal flight profiles but at the harmonized interdependency of the whole system. And I recognise that CANSO is in a privileged position to help with that. I also believe that there is strength in diversity. The more stakeholders that we can involve in constructively working to a converging vision, the better for the industry as a whole.
TerminalCHAOS Why U.S. Air Travel Is Broken and How to Fix It
ritten with the airline passenger in mind, the authors arm the flying public with the truth about flight delays. Their provocative analysis not only identifies the causes and extent of the problems, but also provides solutions that will put air transportation on the path to recovery. This is a very disturbing book—and it was intended to be. For the crisis in U.S. aviation is far more serious than most people imagine. Donohue and Shaver have given us the best prescription I’ve seen for fixing it. – Robert W. Poole Jr., Director of Transportation Studies at the Reason Foundation
By George L. Donohue and Russell D. Shaver III, George Mason University, with Eric Edwards
Donohue and Shaver have taken an enormously arcane and complex set of issues and players and laid them all out very clearly and directly .... It’s among the best and most thoughtful pieces written on the subject ... it’s a very, very good—and mostly evenhanded—distillation of the background and causes of the current quagmire that will only worsen as time is allowed to pass with no real fixes in sight. – David V. Plavin, former Director of Airports Council International–North America and former Director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
Read the first chapter (PDF) for free at www.aiaa.org/donohue
The air transportation system is fixable but the patient needs urgent and holistic care NOW. Donohue and Shaver are the doctors, and the doctors are in! They have the knowledge and capability to work through this problem to success if we as a community want to fix the system. – Paul Fiduccia, President of the Small Aircraft Manufacturers Association An impassioned and controversial look at the current state of aviation in the U.S. by a former FAA insider. This is must read material for those concerned with how the aviation system affects them as an airline passenger. – Glen J. D. McDougall, President of MBS Ottawa and former Director General, Department of Transport Canada Library of Flight Series 2008, 240 pages, Hardback ISBN: 978-1-56347-949-6 AIAA Member Price: $19.95 List Price: $29.95 AIAA Members Save 33%!
Order 24 hours a day at www.aiaa.org/books
4/22/08 2:56:12 PM
Homeland security goes transatlantic U.S. AND EUROPEAN DEFENSE AND AEROspace companies are working to build up their homeland security business to tap into an increasingly important market and build a transatlantic business base.
Flurry of purchases At a time when acquisitions have slowed considerably, homeland security has become one of the hottest areas for mergers related to defense and aerospace. Two of the seven largest defense and aerospace acquisitions in 2009 were companies purchased, at least in part, for their homeland security business. France’s Safran purchased an 81% stake in General Electric’s Homeland Protection business in a $580-million transaction, the largest pure-play homeland security acquisition, in September 2009. That same month General Dynamics paid $643 million for Aysys Technologies, a manufacturer of high-performance electrooptical and infrared sensors and systems and of multiaxis stabilized cameras. This came after a string of similar
purchases made the previous year. Of the five largest acquisitions in 2008, three were related to homeland security. BAE Systems purchased Detica Group for £531 million in the fall of 2008. Detica’s expertise is in software that can manage and analyze databases for antiterrorist and antifraud applications. The two largest acquisitions that year were predominantly defense, but also involved important homeland security business. Finmeccanica’s $3.9-billion acquisition of DRS Technologies in October 2008 provided the Italian national champion with important new capabilities in border security and UAVs. The $2.5-billion leveraged buyout of Booz Allen Hamilton’s U.S. government business provided the Carlyle Group with a company whose expertise includes intelligence analysis, operational support, strategy and emergency management. Booz Allen plays a key role in assisting Boeing on the SBI net, a virtual border fence for the U.S. that links radar, cameras and communications. In one case, the market became so
Border inspection requirements have led to mergers and corporate realignments.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
heated that a U.S. and a European company engaged in an acquisition bidding war. Ultimately New York-based L-1 Identity Solutions beat off a challenge by Safran to win Digimarc’s identification systems business for $310 million.
Cyber security and other hot areas Cyber security in particular has become an extremely hot acquisition area, with Raytheon making four acquisitions over the past four years and Harris making one. In April 2009 Harris purchased Crucial Security, a company that identifies network vulnerabilities. Raytheon purchased BBN Technologies, another company involved in cyber security, for approximately $350 million in October. The flurry of acquisitions is indicative of increased interest by defense and aerospace companies, which have taken notice of the market’s rapid growth. Littlenoticed European corporations have become transatlantic leaders in several key areas of the market, from detection to biometrics to public sector radios. With a string of about 10 acquisitions
DHS OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY $Billions $60
47.3 47 3
38.5 38 5
U.S. companies also are increasing their homeland security business lines, through acquisitions, international pursuits, and R&D breakthroughs. The focus here is more on building up a U.S. business base and using that to export to other countries. It tends to be a less transatlantic approach, and instead one more geared to satisfying the strong U.S. market and making exports to the Middle East, Asia, South America and other emerging markets.
Growth and goals on the rise
20 10 0
in the past decade on both sides of the Atlantic, U.K.-based Smiths Group has created the world’s largest detection business, with customers in airports and ports around the world. France’s Safran, a world leader in biometrics, expanded that core work with the acquisition of U.S.-based Motorola’s biometrics business in 2008. Safran then broadened into detection with its purchase of the 81% stake in General Electric’s homeland security detection business. BAE Systems’ purchase of U.K.based Detica was based on its belief that Detica’s security capabilities in risk mitigation can be brought to the U.S. market. It follows a decision by BAE Systems’ management to establish homeland security growth as a top strategic goal of the company. Earlier acquisitions of United Defense and Armor Holdings gave the company a portfolio of businesses that provide state and local police forces with mobile and protection systems such as armor, vests and helmets. Finmeccanica’s purchase of DRS Technologies was based in part on its interest in combining the border security capabilities associated with DRS’ contracts in Egypt and Jordan, and its own capabilities involving Italian and Libyan contracts.
EADS, the Franco-German-Spanish aerospace giant, purchased PlantCML, which provides call management and radio dispatch products for emergency call centers. The move is an effort to overtake market leader Motorola in the U.S. public safety mobile radio market. Congress has mandated that all maritime cargo containers entering the U.S. be scanned.
The reason for this heightened interest in homeland security by leading firms in both Europe and the U.S. is clear. As companies grow more nervous about the outlook for defense budgets on both sides of the Atlantic, homeland security is becoming an increasingly attractive business opportunity with growth continuing for the foreseeable future. Total U.S. homeland security funding is up more than 160% since FY01, and it continues to grow. That is particularly attractive at a time when the commercial aerospace market is already under pressure and the U.S. and European defense budgets expect to feel more. Not only has the size of the market grown but so too have potential business opportunities. For years after the 2001 terrorist attacks, the homeland security sector was relatively sluggish as the U.S. and other countries sought to decide what to do to protect their homeland. The Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS), created in the wake of the attacks, sought to meld 22 agencies into one. It needed to create a procurement infrastructure, and much of the initial funding increase went into hiring personnel to provide improved protection. The result was that for years there were relatively few programs, and those programs that moved forward were often troubled. Since then new opportunities are increasing. In December the Coast Guard received its first UAV, a maritime variant of the General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ Predator B; the service is also studying the possibility of using Northrop Grumman’s Fire Scout for its unmanned vertical lift requirement. American EuroAEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
copter LLC, a subsidiary of EADS North America, won a U.S. Customs and Border Protection contract in July 2008 for 17 AS350B3 helicopters. With options, the contract could be worth more than $150 million to deliver 50 AS350BE helicopters over ﬁve years. Now ambitious goals also have been put in place. In 2007 Congress imposed a requirement that DHS achieve 100% scanning of U.S.-bound maritime cargo containers by 2012. While that requirement is unlikely to be met by then, it is indicative of national efforts to devote resources to reshaping homeland security. This market area is not only large and growing but also relatively open. In the U.S., the “buy America” provisions that restrict foreign competitors’ ability to participate in many areas of the defense market are lacking in homeland security. That gives foreign companies considerable potential to penetrate the market. Europe’s defense and aerospace prime contractors have also seen the success of their efforts to penetrate the U.S. defense market. BAE Systems kicked off the process with a series of acquisitions that began in 2000. Other U.K. companies followed a similar acquisition strategy with the result that many U.K. defense companies, such as BAE Systems, Cobham and Ultra, derive substantially more income from the U.S. defense market than from their home U.K. market. Continental European manufacturers such as Finmeccanica have recently begun following a similar strategy. European contractors are building on the experience they acquired in developing their market position in aerospace and defense. They are applying those same techniques to build a domestic presence in homeland security. For U.S. and European contractors, this area has the added appeal of being closely related to core defense companies’ core skills in dealing with a government customer and in doing systems integration.
Other international markets The attractiveness of the homeland security market is not limited to the U.S. International markets are growing rapidly in areas that include airport and port security as well as critical infrastructure protection. Border security is booming as a busi20
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
ness opportunity. The European Union is helping to pay for improved security along its expanded Eastern European borders. Poland and Romania, which have long borders with the former Soviet Union, have offered attractive opportunities. The Middle East has become a particularly active area, with Jordan, Libya, Egypt, Qatar and Saudi Arabia awarding contracts for border security over the past several years. Immigration management is another strong international growth area. Raytheon won the U.K.’s e-Borders contract in November 2007. Under this program it received a £650-million contract to put in place a system to track travelers to the U.K., including examining possible links to high-risk individuals or those already on terrorist watch lists. Raytheon is holding discussions with other governments on putting a similar system in place.
Specialty areas With the opportunities now in homeland security, virtually all major defense and aerospace prime contractors have established their areas of speciﬁc expertise. Raytheon, which does about $1 billion annually in this business, half of it international, has a broad portfolio in the area. Its international business, which also includes critical infrastructure protection, is growing more rapidly than its domestic business, accounting for most of its estimated $1.3 billion in homeland security contract bookings in 2009. SBInet is a virtual U.S. border fence.
Generally the U.S. prime contractors have focused on the U.S. market. For Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense contractor, the focus is on information technology, aircraft and biometrics. The company has been developing a state-of-the-art biometrics system for the FBI’s Next Generation Identiﬁcation System under a 10-year, $1-billion contract. The program increases the size of the bureau’s database and includes facial, iris and palm print recognition. Northrop Grumman is involved in the homeland security areas of information technology, patrol ships, and technical services. In addition, its Remotec subsidiary is a major provider of robotic products for bomb disposal and SWAT (special weapons and tactics) teams. General Dynamics is building the multibillion-dollar, 15-year Integrated Wireless Network to implement interoperable wireless communications services to support the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and Treasury. It is also developing and maintaining the Homeland Security Information Network Next Generation, a national information sharing platform for sensitive information. Boeing, whose footprint is among the most limited, is focusing on its work as prime contractor for the SBInet, a U.S. border security program. Many European prime contractors are developing their own niches. BAE Systems, the largest European defense contractor, has established growth in homeland security as a strategic goal. Thus the company has built up strong positions in counterthreat management, information technology, and mobility and protection systems for police forces. EADS, Europe’s largest aerospace contractor, showed the importance it is placing on the sector by making its only major acquisition in the U.S., purchasing homeland security contractor Plant CML. That follows three acquisitions in Europe in professional mobile radio and maritime security since 2006. Through its Eurocopter subsidiary, EADS also provides helicopters to the DHS. The company now estimates it has approximately €900 million of homeland security business, triple its level in 2000. Philip Finnegan Teal Group
New and Best-Selling Books from AIAA A History of Two CIA Projects. Based oon interviews, memoirs, and oral histories of the scientists and engineers involved, aas well as recently declassified CIA documents, and photographs, reports, and d technical drawings from Lockheed and te Convair, this is a technical history of the C eevolution of the Lockheed A-12 Blackbird.
“An “A An excellent way to get a solid grounding in the complex and challenging acquisition process.” —Jacques S. Gansler, Ph.D., University of Maryland, and former Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics
Management of Defense Acquisition Projects
FFrom RAINBOW to GUSTO: Stealth and tthe Design of the Lockheed Blackbird
Rene G. Rendon and Keith F. Snider Naval Postgraduate School 2008, 292 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-950-2 List Price $64.95
Paul A. Suhler 2009, 300 pages, Paperback, 1SBN: 978-1-60086-712-5 List Price $39.95
AIAA Member Price:
AIAA Member Price
W While the focus of this book is on ground combat system vulnerability, many of the co pprinciples, methodologies, and tools discussed are also applicable to the air d aand sea system communities.
“I urge all who are serious about understanding the development of the national security space arena to read it.” —Roger D. Launius Smithsonian Institution
F Fundamentals of Ground Combat SSystem Ballistic Vulnerability/Lethality P H. Deitz, Harry L. Reed Jr., Paul J. Terrence Klopcic, and James N. Walbert Ja Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 230 2009, 384 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-60086-015-7 List Price $119.95 AIAA Member Price:
Shades of Gray: National Security and the Evolution of Space Reconnaissance L. Parker Temple III 2005, 554 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-723-2 List Price $29.95
AIAA Member Price:
Also From AIAA Weaponeering: Conventional Weapon System Effectiveness
The Missile Defense Equation: Factors for Decision Making
Morris Driels, Naval Postgraduate School 2004, 466 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-665-5 List Price:
Peter J. Mantle, Mantle & Associates, LLC 2004, 525 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-609-9 List Price:
AIAA Member Price:
The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability Analysis and Design, Second Edition Robert E. Ball, Naval Postgraduate School 2003, 889 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-582-5 List Price:
AIAA Member Price:
Mathematical Methods in Defense Analyses, Third Edition J. S. Przemieniecki, Air Force Institute of Technology AIAA Education Series 2000, 421 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-397-5 List Price:
AIAA Member Price:
AIAA Member Price:
Effective Risk Management: Some Keys to Success, Second Edition Edmund H. Conrow, CMC, CPCM, PMP 2003, 554 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-581-8 List Price: AIAA Member Price:
Approximate Methods for Weapon Aerodynamics Frank G. Moore, Naval Surface Warfare Center Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 186 2000, 464 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-399-9 List Price: AIAA Member Price:
Order online at www.aiaa.org/books
Hearts in free fall WE HAVE ALL SEEN VIDEO OF ASTRONAUTS drifting and gliding gracefully around inside the ISS like fish in an aquarium. It looks so relaxing. Enjoyable as it appears, however, there is a down side to all that freefalling. “When astronauts land back on Earth after a long time in space, not only is their vestibular system mixed up and their kinesthetic sense thrown off,” says Benjamin Levine of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, “but also their bones and muscles have deteriorated.”
Critical mass? In space, even more than on Earth, the phrase “use it or lose it” applies. The human body and all its parts need to work to remain vital. Bones must bear weight to keep their density and strength. Muscles need to push or pull against resistance to stay in shape; without work they waste away. Is this also true of our most critical muscle, the human heart? To find out, NASA is launching a new study known Astronaut Clay Anderson floats through the Unity node of the ISS.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
as Integrated Cardiovascular. We know that astronauts lose heart mass and exercise capacity when they are in microgravity for a long time,” says NASA Johnson’s Julie Robinson, ISS program scientist. “We suspect that this could lead to impaired heart function, which could cause low blood pressure and even fainting when astronauts get back to gravity. But we need detailed information. In the future, astronauts will spend longer and longer [times] in space, and even live and work on the Moon and Mars. We want to know exactly how space living will affect their hearts and heart function.” Levine is a principal investigator for the experiment, along with Michael Bungo of the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. The two have enlisted the support of several other cardiovascular experts to conduct this research—the most comprehensive and advanced study of its kind to date. “We are investigating how, how much, and how fast deterioration occurs in the heart during long-duration space travel,” says Levine. The space station crew, which has recently increased to six, will help Levine and his team find answers by serving as subjects for Integrated Cardiovascular. The experiment will last for over two years—long enough to gather plenty of data on 12 different astronauts before, during, and after their stints in space. “We are incorporating the most sophisticated tools ever used in such an experiment to look at the heart and its chambers and valves,” Levine notes. “This is the first investigation ever to use advanced echo-Doppler techniques to follow the structure and function of the heart during long periods in space and confirm findings by using advanced magnetic resonance imaging tools on the ground. For example, we are using an echocardiogram to determine how heart muscle atrophy influences the way the heart relaxes and fills, and an MRI to quantify this atrophy precisely and deter-
mine whether [the heart] scars or gets infiltrated by fat.” Echocardiograms use high-pitched sound waves that are picked up as they reflect off different parts of the heart. These echoes are turned into a moving picture, allowing researchers to watch a movie of the heart in action as blood flows through it. By looking at such movies before, during and after spaceflight, the team can discern mechanical changes that happen in a person’s heart after he or she is away from Earth’s gravity for a long time. With the MRI, they can look at detailed computer images of the heart tissues to pinpoint exactly what kind of atrophy occurs. The researchers will also try to determine whether the heart’s deterioration is simply a matter of size—as with weightlifters who lose muscle mass if they stop lifting weights—or if the heart scars and cells die. In addition, the team is studying the effects of heart atrophy on crewmembers’ ability to exercise and on the likelihood of their developing unusual heart rhythms, both on the station and after they return to Earth. The researchers will also look closely at other cardiovascular issues, such as how blood pressure responds to the reintroduction of gravity at the levels experienced on Earth, the Moon and Mars. “All of the results will help us finetune exercise protocols for the space station crew,” Robinson says. “We will also learn what to look at in astronauts’ hearts before we send them to, say, Mars. We will identify a set of risk factors that can help flight surgeons determine the best candidates for long missions.” Levine adds, “We may, however, show that the heart does just fine in space, and that the strategies now used to keep astronauts in shape are adequate to keep the heart functioning normally and in good health. If so, flight surgeons can turn their attention instead to other potentially critical problems, such as bone loss or radiation exposure.”
Atrophy and arrhythmia The study’s results will also have the important benefit of helping researchers develop preventive and rehabilitative regimens for people on Earth. “The information we get from these experiments will be relevant for patients after long-term bed rest or other physical activity restrictions, as well as for patients with congestive heart failure, heart disease and even normal aging.” Cardiac atrophy, a decrease in the size of the heart muscle, appears to develop during spaceflight or its groundbased analog (bed rest), leading to diastolic dysfunction (abnormal left ventricular function in the heart) and orthostatic hypotension (a drop in blood pressure upon standing). Such atrophy also may be a potential mechanism for the cardiac arrhythmias (irregular heart rhythms) identified in some crewmembers after long-duration exposure to microgravity aboard the Mir space station. Recent investigations have suggested that cardiac atrophy may be progressive, without a clear plateau over at least 12 weeks of bed rest, and thus may be a significant limiting factor for extended-duration space exploration missions. This study will quantify the extent, time course and clinical significance of cardiac atrophy and identify its mechanisms. The functional consequences of this atrophy also will be determined for cardiac filling dynamics, orthostatic tolerance under both normal (Earth) gravity and fractional gravity (Mars and the Moon) conditions, exercise tolerance and arrhythmia sus-
NASA connection This experiment is supported entirely through NASA funding mechanisms using grants to the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, with on-site civil service and contractor support at NASA Johnson. The study’s full name is Cardiac Atrophy and Diastolic Dysfunction During and After Long Duration Spaceflight: Functional Consequences for Orthostatic Intolerance, Exercise Capability and Risk for Cardiac Arrhythmias (Integrated Cardiovascular). The payload developer is the NASA Johnson Human Research Program.
Astronaut Cady Coleman performs a remotely guided echocardiogram on a test subject using Integrated Cardiovascular protocols, while Betty Chen, a training coordinator, observes.
ceptibility, both on the station and following return to Earth. Using MRI, the Integrated Cardiovascular study will determine the magnitude of left and right ventricular atrophy associated with long-duration spaceflight and will then relate this atrophy to measures of physical activity and cardiac work in flight. In addition, it will use ultrasound to determine the time course and pattern of the progression of cardiac atrophy in flight. The study will also determine the functional importance of cardiac atrophy for cardiac diastolic function and the regulation of stroke volume (the volume of blood pumped by the heart in one contraction) during gravitational transitions and will identify changes in ventricular conduction, depolarization and repolarization during and after long-duration spaceflight. It will then relate these to changes in heart mass and morphology (shape and form).
Taking measurements The researchers will use echocardiography before, during and after spaceflight, and MRI before and after. In addition, they will use a special imaging technique called magnetic resonance spectroscopy to quantify the amount of fat in the subjects’ hearts. Before and after flight, they will tilt the subjects on a table at angles to approximate various levels of gravity—from lunar levels to those experienced on
Earth. During the tests, they will monitor each subject’s heart rate and blood pressure and measure blood flow from the heart with an echocardiogram. All these functions will be monitored and measured during exercise as well, both before and after flight, to determine the subjects’ reaction to the stress. Electrocardiograms will be taken on several occasions during the study and will last up to 48 hr at a time. These recordings will be concurrent with continuous measurements of blood pressure and activity (using Actiwatches worn at the waist and ankle) to estimate the amount of work the heart is doing daily on Earth and in space.
✈✈✈ Astronauts as a group are perhaps as healthy and fit as is humanly possible. But to the risks of bone loss and muscle weakness from prolonged spaceflight are now added concerns about potential risks to the heart. Astronauts take medication and perform exercises to counter the effects of weightlessness. This study will try to determine the extent of the effects of weightlessness on their hearts and discover what steps are needed to prevent damage. And studies like this may also result one day in better cardiac health for those of us here on Earth as well. Edward D. Flinn email@example.com AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
China’s short march to C
hina’s aerospace industry has some way to go before it can match the technical capabilities and manufacturing capacity of North America or Europe. But it is catching up fast. In November 2009 the deputy commander of the Chinese PLAAF (People’s Liberation Army Air Force), Ho Weirong, announced in a television interview that the air force would be operating a fifth-generation fighter within eight to 10 years. This was the fifth new JF-17 Chinese aerospace program to emerge last year. The COMAC C919 190-seat airliner was launched in March 2009, with an in-service date of 2020. The KJ-2000 AWACS aircraft and Xi’an ASN-207 tactical unmanned air system were officially unveiled at the October military parade in Beijing to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic. A 200-tonne-class military airlifter was also due to make its first appearance before the end of the year. Meanwhile, the China Satellite Navigation Project Center planned to launch four BeiDou-2 (Compass) satellites during 2009, as part of a program to develop a 12-satellite regional capability by 2012 and a full global capability of 30 medium Earth orbit and five geosynchronous Earth orbit satellites by 2020 at the latest. With activities ranging from new military and commercial aircraft China’s headlong rush into the global programs to satellite and other space projects, China is on its way aerospace market is unprecedented. Within 20 to becoming a significant player in the aerospace arena, where years it will have transit has long trailed the West. The growing number of alliances formed itself from a customer to a competitor in it is forming with Western companies is accelerating the trend and almost every area of the market—from front-line enabling faster advancement of its technologies. fighters to helicopters, unmanned air vehicles to missiles, military transport aircraft to airliners. But as the capability gap narrows, will China really be able to compete on equal by Philip Butterworth-Hayes terms with the U.S. and Europe, in both the Contributing writer 24
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Copyright© 2010 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
aerospace autonomy civil and military sectors? And how should Western companies respond to an emerging new aerospace power that offers as many threats as opportunities?
More than technology Building a competitive aerospace industry almost from scratch requires more than technical know-how. It takes a profound understanding of market demand and an industrial base that encompasses lean manufacturing and Six Sigma principles, a knowledge of the global supply chain (for both manufacturing and support), and an ability to integrate complex structures and systems via a global network of niche suppliers. There are some holes in China’s aerospace business portfolio, especially in areas such as competitive engine, avionics, and aircraft system design capabilities. And in some areas, such as business jets, there is hardly a Chinese presence at all. But China has proved adept at attracting Western suppliers to set up joint ventures that provide Chinese manufacturers with enough knowledge to kick-start an indigenous capability very quickly. Having acquired the basic knowledge base to produce aircraft such as the Chengdu J-10 and the JF-17—with performances reputedly on a par with an early-generation F-16—and the Airbus A320, produced under license by the Harbin Aircraft Industry Group (HAIG), China’s aerospace industry is now gearing up to manufacture products that it hopes will soon outperform those in the West. “The Chinese are a generation behind in aircraft technology, but they are catching up very quickly,” says London-based aerospace analyst Paul Beaver. “They have the capability to evolve their electronics technology at a far faster rate than anywhere else in the world, helped by the 300,000 new engineers coming into the market every year. The JF-17 is exceptionally interesting—the Pakistani version has Western avionics and weapon systems, and this makes it a very exportable product for countries wanting an aircraft with an F-16 Block 30 performance.”
Realigning with markets Over the past 18 months China has been restructuring its aerospace sector to align more closely its specialist manufacturing industries with the markets they serve. In late 2008 the Chinese government announced the remerger of AVIC I and AVIC II, the two Aviation Industries of China organizations separated in 1999. AVIC I, comprising 47 manufacturing companies, 31 research institutes, and 22 other aviation support companies, made larger aircraft and engines—including fighter aircraft, turbofan engines, air-to-air missiles, the ARJ 21, and the 50seater turboprop MA60 airliner. AVIC II made military and commercial helicopters along with the 50-seater ERJ 145.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
west Beijing. Other AVIC specialist companies have been developed to support general aviation and military transporter businesses.
Funding sources and airliner profits
In 2009 AVIC set up a number of semiindependent subsidiaries to build and market the new generation of aircraft under development. The defense branch was set up in Beijing, with reported assets of around $7.3 billion, to develop new capabilities in areas such as unmanned air systems (UAS) and to market fast jets such as the J-10 and JF-15 alongside trainers like the L-15 Falcon. The division manages 10 assembly plants and research institutes across China. Civil aircraft manufacturing has been devolved to the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC), based in Shanghai, to manage development of the C919 190-seat airliner and the C regional jet. COMAC businesses include AVIC I Commercial Aircraft, Shanghai Aircraft, and First Aircraft Institute. An AVIC helicopter company has been set up in Tianjin Binhai New Area, with the Tianjin municipal government holding a 31% stake in the company. A new aviation engine company, also producing composite materials, also has been started in an aerospace cluster zone near Beijing Capital International Airport. An AVIC airborne systems company has been established in the Zhongguancun Aviation Science Park of Haidian district in north-
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Part of the funding for the new enterprises has come from a 176-billion-yuan ($25.8-billion) credit agreement signed in January 2009 with 10 Chinese banks, including Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, China Construction Bank, and China CITIC (China International Trust and Investment) Bank. Chinese banks are playing an increasingly important role in funding major global aerospace deals. In November 2009, for example, Boeing signed aircraft leasing agreements with China Construction Bank and CDB Leasing for up to 25 billion yuan ($3.7 billion) in financing and leasing for Boeing aircraft. In terms of turnover, by the far the largest aerospace sector Chinese companies have targeted is the airliner market. It has taken China just 25 years to reach a stage where its indigenous products are in the market, competing with Western companies. It has achieved this extraordinary rate of growth through a three-pronged strategy of licensed assembly of increasingly complex Western aircraft, competitive bids for structures and component contracts on Boeing and Airbus aircraft and, finally, strategic alliances with Western manufacturers, leading to joint ventures in China. The first licensed assembly deal was the 1985 agreement with McDonnell Douglas to assemble MD-80s in Shanghai. The aircraft were assembled from kits, and 35 were produced between 1985 and 1994. A follow-on contract that substantially increased Chinese content was signed in 1992 to produce 40 MD-80/MD-90s, but this was amended in 1994 to produce 40 MD-90s, and again in 1998 when McDonnell Douglas merged with Boeing, which reduced the number of MD90s produced in China to just two. Then, in 2002, AVIC II and Brazilâ€™s Embraer formed a joint venture to build 50-seat Embraer EMB145 regional jets in Harbin. At the end of 2009 it was reported that the Harbin plant might also assemble 106-seat EMB-190 jets. Harbin is the center of an Airbus narrowbody
Joint ventures in China There have been significant joint ventures established in China over the past few years with aerospace companies in Europe, Canada, Brazil, and the U.S. Airbus China opened its Beijing office in 1990. The Airbus Beijing training center was set up jointly with China Aviation Supplies Import & Export in 1998, while nearby Airbus has set up a customer support center that stocks some 25,000 spare parts. The Airbus Tianjin assembly line opened on September 28, 2008, producing A320 aircraft. It is a joint venture between Airbus and a Chinese consortium of Tianjin Free Trade Zone and AVIC. ABEC, the Airbus (Beijing) Engineering Center, opened in early 2006 and is a joint venture between Airbus and AVIC, designing A350 XWB systems. In addition, Airbus signed a contract in January 2009 with Chinese partners, creating a joint venture to make carbon composite parts for its A350 XWB and A320 aircraft. Airbus’ Chinese business will hold a 20% stake in the joint venture, based in Harbin, and China’s Harbin Aircraft Industry Group will hold a further 50% stake, while other local players HAI, AviChina, and HELI will each own 10%. The new plant was ready for operations by in late 2009. Airbus said the value of its partnership with the Chinese aviation industry is expected to be near $200 million a year this year and $450 million in 2015. In June 2007 Boeing contracted a package of work for its range of Boeing 737NG, Boeing 747-8, and Boeing 787 aircraft valued at about $500 million. Chinese companies, for the first time, are building flaps, ailerons, and spoilers for Boeing aircraft. According to the company, “Boeing supplier partners have active supplier contracts with China aviation industry valued at well over US$2.5 billion.” Boeing is one of the main partners, with Hexcel and AVIC, in BHA Aero Composites in Tianjin, producing secondary composite structures and interior parts. First deliveries started in 2002. BHA customers include Boeing, Hexcel, Fisher, and Goodrich. It has over 570 employees. Fokker-Elmo, working with Boeing Electrical System Responsibility Center, delivers 99 part numbers to the Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, and -900 programs via a new plant in Langfang, Hebei Province, where it has 504 employees working on Boeing, Pratt & Whitney, and other companies’ electrical products. Messier-Dowty set up a plant at Suzhou for landing gear components. Bombardier’s new CSeries regional jet is being developed in conjunction with Shenyang Aircraft, which will supply the fuselage, center wing box, and doors. During the 2007 Paris Air Show the former AVIC I signed a risk- and revenue-sharing deal with Bombardier to develop the ARJ21-900, a 105-seat regional jet. The former AVIC I and Bombardier Aerospace have a longstanding strategic agreement that includes AVIC I’s Xian unit manufacturing components for the Bombardier 415 and SAC unit supplying components for the Q-Series aircraft. In October 2004 the French and Chinese presidents attended the signing
of a Cooperation Framework Agreement between AVIC II and Eurocopter for a joint helicopter venture. Eurocopter and the former AVIC II have been cooperating for more than 25 years, in particular with the Z9, a Dauphin made in China, and the EC120, also manufactured in China, by Harbin Aircraft Industries. In 2003, EADS, Eurocopter’s parent company, took a 5% share in the AviChina enterprise. The former AVIC II, through its subsidiaries Changhe Aircraft Industries and Shanghai Xinshen Aviation Industry Investment and Development, recently joined Shanghai Sikorsky as a shareholder. The company was established in 2003 by Sikorsky and Shanghai Little Eagle to build civil helicopter sales and support in China. The Harbin aerospace cluster houses the only assembly plant for the Embraer ERJ-145; Embraer moved ERJ-145 production to Harbin as part of a joint venture with AVIC II in 2004. During the September 2009 Asian Aerospace show Safran signed a framework agreement with AVIC for work on the aircraft, as did Nexcelle— a joint venture company created by GE’s Middle River Aircraft Systems and Aircelle, a Safran group company to supply nacelles. In November 2009 Honeywell opened its China Aerospace Academy in Shanghai to train aerospace engineers. The academy is located at Honeywell’s Shanghai Learning Center in Pudong. Alcoa and COMAC have set up a joint venture technology cooperation agreement to examine the use of advanced aluminium structural concepts, designs, and alloys for the 190-seat aircraft. General Electric recently reached an agreement with AVIC to set up a joint venture to provide avionics systems for the global airliner market; both GE and AVIC will each hold 50% of the venture. According to Boeing, its suppliers’ Chinese aerospace business includes the following activities: •General Electric procurement from Harbin, Shanghai, Xi’an, Sichuan, Suzhou, Guizhou, and Shenyang. The General Electric Suzhou plant makes engine parts and flight controls. •Goodrich contracted the CF34 fan cowl in 2008 to BHA. Hongdu Aviation in Nanchang builds 787 part kits for the 787 nacelle. •Parker Hannifin has a machining joint venture with Jincheng, Shanghai Qi Yi Automotive, and Sichuan Golden Dragon Machine. •Pratt & Whitney sources engine components from Xi’an and Chengdu. •Primus International has built an aircraft components factory in Suzhou. •Rolls-Royce procures from several locations in China, including Xi’an, Shenyang. •Snecma has a CFM56 engine blade joint venture in Guiyang.
assembly plant as well; the first Harbin-assembled A320 flew on May 18, 2009.
Growth of joint ventures In parallel with the license assembly program, Chinese companies have been gradually building up their work share on Airbus and Boeing programs. Led by Chengdu Aircraft, HAIG, Shanghai Aviation Industries Group, Shenyang Commercial Aircraft, and X’ian Aircraft, Chinese firms have evolved their product range from relatively simple structures through to doors and, most recently, complex composite parts. The new BHA plant operated by Chinese companies with Hexcel and Boeing, for example, produces complex composite panels and parts for interior and exte-
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
CHINESE SUPPLIERS TO MAJOR NEW AIRLINER PROGRAMS Supplier
BHA Aero Composites
Composite panels and parts
Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, -900
Flight deck, close out panels, dorsal fin, wing-to-body fairing, cover panels, wing fixed trailing edge, wing fixed leading edge, interior panels
Composite panels, door liners, fixed trailing edge
Wing fixed trailing edges and dry bay barriers, empennage panels
Wing fixed trailing edges and dry bay barriers, empennage panels, flight deck interior panels
Rear passenger door and nose section parts Rear passenger door and nose section parts Forward entry doors, over wing exit doors Aileron and spoilers Horizontal stabilizer and subassemblies Composite rudder
Airbus A318/A319/ A319CJ/A320/A321 Airbus A330/A340
Chengdu Aircraft Corporation
Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, -900 Boeing 747-8 Boeing 747-8
Contracted in 2005. From 2008 the contract is with Spirit. Contracted in 2007. First delivery 2009. Contracted in 2007
Part of a $600-million contract announced in June 2005 by Boeing to a group of Chinese suppliers
Harbin Aircraft Industry Group
Composite material parts and components
Airbus A350 XWB
The two companies have established a manufacturing center, now in operation, that is an equity joint venture enterprise, with HAIG holding an 80% stake and Airbus owning a 20% stake. According to the contract, the center will manufacture composite materials parts and components for the Airbus A320 family and participate in the industrialization and serial production of Airbus A350 XWB work packages.
Wing-to-body fairing panels
The company is affiliated to the Chengdu Aircraft Industrial Group based in Sichuan Province, China. Hafei’s capabilities include composite and sheet metal manufacturing, numerically controlled machining, tooling design and production, and complex structure assembly and integration. Contract signed 2005.
Hong Yuan Aviation Forging & Casting (HYFC)
Titanium forging parts to mount engines onto wings Titanium forgings
Airbus A318/A319/ A319CJ/A320/A321
Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, -900
Parts for vertical fin, horizontal stabilizer Aft fuselage subassemblies
Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, -900 Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, -900
Bombardier C Series
Bombardier Dash 8 Q400
Airbus A318/A319/ A319CJ/A320/A321 Airbus A330/A340
Shanghai Aviation Industries Group (SAIC) Shenyang Commercial Aircraft
Electronic bay doors, wing fixed trailing edges Fuselage section 16 Vertical fin Fixed trailing edge wing ribs
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
ATR 42-500/72-500/600 Boeing 737-600, -700, -800, -900 Boeing 747-8
There are 12 forgings for each Boeing 747. Deliveries began in 1984. Contract signed in 1995.
SAIC, XAC, and BHA are cooperating on this contract. Originally contracted for 1996/2001, expanded to include “Texas Star” (November 2004), contracted with Spirit, expanded to full aft section 48 (2007) SAC is a risk-sharing partner in the design, manufacture, assembling, and testing of the aircraft’s fuselage.The contract follows a June 2007 memorandum of understanding on the C Series. Just over 10% of the C Series aircraft will be manufactured in China by Shenyang Aircraft. Shenyang also supplies the empennage, as well as the aft and forward fuselage sections for Bombardier’s Q400 turboprop airliner. Shenyang Aircraft (part of AVIC-I) and Stork Aerospace signed a contract in 2005 for the machining of components for the Gulfstream G450, the G500, and the G550.The order relates to components for the aircraft that were formerly produced elsewhere.
Contract signed in 2007, first delivery 2008, and inboard flaps contracted in 2007, first delivery in 2009
rior structures. This expertise has allowed Chinese concerns to widen their customer base from airframers such as Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, and Sikorsky to prime contractors like Spirit and Fokker-Elmo. At the same time, the number of joint ventures between Western companies and Chinese concerns, based in China, has mushroomed over the past two years. It is not hard to see why. According to Airbus’ September 2009 Global Market Forecast, China’s aviation market will see an annual increase of 7.9% in the next 20 years, becoming the world’s second fastest growing market after India. The Asia Pacific market, including China and India, is forecast to account for 31% of all global demand by 2027. AVIC is predicting that in the next 20 years China will need 3,815 airliners, comprising 2,822 aircraft of 100 seats or more and 993 regional jets. According to the Center for Asia Pacific Aviation, passenger numbers have been growing at over 10% a year in China (2009 measured against 2008) at a time when most areas of the world have seen a decline.
COMAC’s progress In the civil market, the litmus test for whether China’s aerospace capabilities really have reached those of the West will be the success of the COMAC 919. According to the current schedule, the 190-seat aircraft will be on the market by 2020; concept design and research will be completed in 2010, and production will start in 2014. The C919 is being developed as a competitor to the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737s and their successor programs. It is the most ambitious Chinese civil aviation program to date; the aim is to produce an aircraft that is 15-20% cheaper to operate, in terms of direct operating costs, than the current A320s and 737s. While the aircraft is aimed primarily at the Chinese domestic market it will also be
A tale of two helicopters The EC175 program was launched on December 5, 2005. The helicopter was developed in cooperation with Chinese industry in just four years, thanks to innovative new computing tools that offer major time savings. The work teams, separated by some 10,000 km, have been working together under the aegis of the French and Chinese governments. Their cooperation has been exemplary, and has benefitted from 30 years of close ties between the partners, first through the Dauphin and then through the EC120. During the development phase, an average of 50 Chinese employees joined their Eurocopter colleagues in France to define the helicopter's characteristics. Now it’s the turn of Eurocopter’s employees to reciprocate, and a staff of 30 is currently on permanent assignment in China to assist the teams with design, quality, production and procurement work. The development and industrialization work has been equally split between Eurocopter and AVIC according to the specialties of each company. Two different helicopters will result from the common platform: The EC175, manufactured, sold and maintained by Eurocopter in Marignane, and the Z15, manufactured, sold Z-15 and maintained by the AVIC Group.
made available to a wider audience and will therefore be a direct competitor to Airbus and Boeing in the most lucrative area of the market. How will it fare? “Given that both Boeing and Airbus are improving the efficiency rate of their current models by around 1% a year—in terms of fuel burn—Chinese companies have a tough task,” says Ian Lowden, managing director of U.K. aviation consultants RDG Solutions. “The current designs for the C919 look fairly conservative, and there is likely to be a high percentage of metal on the aircraft, rather than lighter composites. However, if timing of the launch can be managed so COMAC has access to new engine technology such as the geared turbofan—which could provide an immediate 10% minimum improvement in fuel burn over current designs—and Boeing and Airbus delay further their narrowbody replacement programs, it seems that there could well be a niche in the global market for this aircraft.”
K-8 Trainer AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Labor and raw material costs are lower in China than in the West, but others, such as transport and oil costs, are similar. COMAC will have cut its project management teeth on the ARJ-21, a 90-seat regional jet that took to the skies for the first time in November 2008. The ARJ-21 is very much a joint ChineseNorth American effort. The core design is based on an MD-80 configuration. Canada’s Bombardier is a lead partner, and most of the main systems have been sourced from U.S. companies—the flight deck comprises Rockwell Collins displays and avionics; Honeywell is providing the fly-by-wire flight control system, General Electric the CF34-10A engines, and Parker Aerospace the fuel systems. At the end of 2009 COMAC reported 90 orders for the aircraft, mainly by domestic Chinese airlines. But there are also orders for two aircraft from Lao Airlines of Laos, and for five, with options for 20 more, from GE Commercial Aviation Services, the U.S./Irish leasing company.
New aircraft reflect military shift Another recent export success for China has been the sale of Chengdu Aircraft Industries JF-17 and J-10 fighters to Pakistan. The agreement, announced in March 2009, will see 42 JF-17 aircraft jointly produced in Pakistan and China and exports of J-10s to Pakistan from China, probably starting in 2014. Pakistan could buy up to 150 JF-17s equipped with Western avionics and weapon systems. AVIC is aiming the JF-17 and J-10 at other export markets. Also in the planning stages is the J-10B, an export version of the J-10 with upgraded avionics and weapon systems. Another new Chinese military export hope is the Hongdu Aviation Industry Group’s advanced jet trainer, which was displayed for the first time publicly outside China at the November 2009 Dubai Air Show. Aimed at advanced training, lead-in training, and close air support markets, the aircraft features fly-by-
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
wire and digital cockpit systems and two Ukrainian-built Ivchenko Progress AI-222K25F turbojets, giving it a maximum speed of Mach 1.4. Other new export aircraft featured on the AVIC exhibition stand included the FTC-2000 supersonic trainer, the K-8 Karakorum jet trainer, the Z-11 multipurpose light helicopter, and the JF-17. All of these aircraft are aimed at countries in Africa, the Middle East, South America, and Southeast Asia, which have difficulty accessing U.S. and European technologies. But their development also reflects a fundamental change in direction for China’s own military strategic thinking. China’s military forces are undergoing a rapid transformation, from a manpower-intensive force set up primarily for defensive operations to a smaller, more flexible force with more offensive capabilities. For the PLAAF this has meant reducing reliance on large numbers of Soviet aircraft and developing a smaller air force based on indigenous technologies, capable of network-enabled operations. So the last few years have seen the development of new AWACS, air-to-air refueling, and UAS. China has throttled back its reliance on Russian platforms—though it purchased 24 Sukhoi SU-30-MK2s in 2004 and still depends on Russian and Ukrainian engine technology for many of its military programs—investing instead in Chinese military technologies that do more than just mimic Western models. The JF-17 and J-10 are entering the PLAAF in increasing numbers, the Shaanxi Y9 medium-range military transport—a C-130J equivalent—is currently under development. In the helicopter sector the Zhi-15 (Z-15)—a 6,000-kg-class transport helicopter jointly developed by HAIG and Europe’s Eurocopter— is due to enter military service around 2012— and the Z-10, an attack helicopter, is under development by Changhe Aircraft Industries. In June 2009 over 100 aircraft—including airto-air refueling and AWACS aircraft—took part in an exercise to demonstrate new, longrange strike capabilities based on indigenously built platforms. The next phase of development will be to increase networking capabilities for air- and space-based operations, according to PLAAF Commander Xu Qiliang, speaking to the official Xinhua News Agency at the start of November 2009. The sight of Xi’an ASN-207 tactical reconnaissance UAVs within the October 2009 Beijing parade of military vehicles suggests these assets are already being integrated
within the PLA’s operational structure—the next stage will be the development of Chinese-built high-altitude, long-endurance UAVs and unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs). The appearance of several concepts for both at the 2006 Zhuhai air show—including a stealthy Anjian UCAV Shenyang—suggests this is now an area of some priority for the nation’s aerospace companies.
2008; if the planned spacecraft docking systems work this year as intended, China will launch a space lab in 2012, around the time it plans to put an astronaut on the Moon. Other work is under way to develop more capable Earth observation assets—and, based on the remarks of PLAAF Commander Xu Qiliang in November, a greater military capability.
The speed with which China has acquired this broad range of aerospace capabilities is remarkable. At the current rate of progress it is likely that in most sectors China will be able to compete on broadly equal terms with the West by 2020, if not before. During the past 18 months it is China’s banks and Chinese aircraft orders that have provided vital support to civil aviation industries of the U.S. and Europe; China is a market that can simply no longer be ignored. The real issue for aerospace concerns in the West now is to develop a framework in which competition, at least for civil aircraft orders, can develop along commonly agreed lines.
✈✈✈ To develop further a network-enabled military capability, China is also investing heavily in new space systems. Its heavy-load launcher ChangZheng 5 (Long March 5) is due to be test flown in 2014, and its most capable form will be able to lift payloads of up to 25,000 kg to LEO or 14,000 kg to GTO. This year more satellites will be added to the BeiDou network until it provides a global satellite navigation capability between 2015 and 2020. In 2003 China launched its first manned spacecraft, ShenZhou 5, followed by other manned spaceflight missions in 2005 and
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2009
New capabilities for GPS II/III GPS III (Increment A)
While the Global Positioning System seems
by J.R. Wilson Contributing writer 32
ubiquitous today, nearly two decades elapsed between the launch of the first experimental GPS satellite and the 1995 declaration of a fully operational system for military and civilian use. Since then, GPS satellites have been upgraded constantly, with each new generation providing greater power and precision. The system has grown from a minimum constellation of 24 spacecraft to the 30 in orbit today, and plans call for maintaining the current number. In some ways, the evolution of GPS resembles that of the Internet. What began as an Air Force positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) program for the military has expanded so widely that civilian applications now outnumber military, and the system is used more for timing than for navigation. From turn-by-turn driving directions to pinpointing individual whales at sea to time signals for bank ATM machines, GPS applications have seen a significant transformation, especially in the past decade.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
“Unlike a lot of other satellite constellations, GPS affects a tremendous number of users, so there is a constant vigilance on the part of the Air Force to ensure any changes made do not disrupt those users,” says Lockheed Martin GPS III program director David J. Podlesney. “They go through great pains to make sure they accommodate all end users worldwide. “From originally looking at [military] navigation requirements, GPS today has transformed into a system where the primary use is the civil timing signal, and most navigation users are commercial. This new group, which was not originally imagined, is now the biggest component of the GPS user community, and the military is really the smallest user.” It remains a military system at heart, however, under control of the GPS Wing of the Air Force Space Command Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC). And although the U.S. government has repeatedly assured civilian and commercial users throughout the world the system will not be degraded to nonmilitary
Copyright© 2010 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Like the Internet, GPS has undergone a transformation never envisioned when it was created. Although more vital than ever to the military, the system now has more civil than military users. If glitches and potential delays can be averted, new satellites will soon provide even greater capabilities.
users (as it originally was), nor arbitrarily shut off for military reasons, this subject has remained an issue blocking full acceptance.
Importance of security
Given the critical importance of GPS to the military, which relies on it for close tracking of assets in an often confused battlespace, and for the viability of its growing arsenal of precision-guided munitions, the security of the constellation has never been of greater concern. As the civil world also looks to a future increasingly dominated by GPS, those concerns only broaden. “GPS security features have evolved to safeguard U.S. and allied forces and protect authorized GPS operations,” according to Col. Donald Wussler, who was deputy commander of the GPS wing before his promotion to director of development planning for SMC in May. “GPS security features enhance weapons delivery and, as a byproduct, minimize collateral damage.” The current GPS security architecture includes the selective-availability antispoofing module (SAASM) capability. Since selective availability was turned off in May 2000, SAASM’s primary benefit has been for antispoofing based on unclassified National Security Agency “black” cryptographic keys, which enable flexible handling options such as overthe-air distribution of keys. SAASM keys also are uniquely associated with distinct user groups, each on a separate cryptographic network. There are more than 100,000 such SAASM receivers in use by U.S. and allied forces around the world. “GPS Block II modernized satellites and Block III satellites will broadcast the military code [M-Code] signal, with added protection— including expanded cryptonets, secure acquisition, special messaging, and next-generation cryptography,” Wussler tells Aerospace Amer-
ica, adding that the Block III security architecture beyond SAASM is called PRONAV (protection of navigation). “The PRONAV security architecture will protect GPS mission effectiveness through application of defense-in-depth information assurance principles. PRONAV security relies on more than cryptography and uses additional technological methods and operational techniques to assure the integrity of GPS signals. PRONAV also allows innovation in tailoring a multitude of protection measures to different GPS applications, environments, and emerging threats. The end result is a fully modernized, robust security architecture that will protect U.S. and allied forces and GPS operations.”
Last August, the Air Force launched the last of eight Block IIR-M replacement satellites and is now preparing to launch the first of 12 Block IIF satellites this year. Those are to be joined, beginning in 2014, by a substantially upgraded Block III generation, which itself will advance through three stages of evolution. The IIR-M satellites added a new M-Code on both the L1 and L2 channels and a more robust civil signal (L2C) on the L2 channel in addition to the existing L1 C/A signal. The Boeing-built Block IIF satellites will have an extended design life of 12 years (the original satellites were designed for about 7.5 years in orbital operation), as well as more memory, faster processors, and a third (L5) new civil signal that will enable improved accuracy for many users. “Civilian users, whether U.S. or international, will be unaffected by changes in the GPS security architecture. Instead, civilian users will have access to more civil signals from a more robust GPS constellation—four civil signals from Block III satellites—with unAEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
“GPS III is probably best characterized as being a third-generation system where the focus is on improvement and modernization; the only two second-generation global SatNav systems in operation today are GPS II and GLONASS.” Col. Donald Wussler, former deputy commander, GPS Wing Air Force Space Command Space and Missile Systems Center
precedented timing performance delivered by improved satellite atomic clocks. As a result, user receivers that process two or more civil signals will achieve much better accuracy by removing the ionospheric error,” Wussler says. “In parallel, FAA is working to add L5augmentation to their wide-area augmentation system to improve reliability and robustness for properly equipped users, especially safetyof-life applications for commercial aviation.” John Duddy, who was director of GPS programs at Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems before being put in charge of all Boeing programs in Australia, explains how the L5 signal will be used by aviation services, including, eventually, air traffic control (ATC). The GPS Block IIF follow-on satellite design features increased signal strength.
“ATC is a ground-based system, but could someday go to a GPS-based system. Right now, it augments the existing system,” he tells Aerospace America. “The FAA is looking forward to the L5, which is a long-term strategy for them and allows them to start testing out various future applications. “In addition, the signal itself will allow for a more precise read, although that accuracy is still up to the Air Force. And it helps provide a more precise location fix. In some areas, such as city centers with tall buildings, where it is harder to get a good fix, the increased signal strength from Block IIF will help that.” GPS IIIA, being built by Lockheed Martin, will transmit another new civilian signal (L1C) and include a new M-Code antijam capability to enhance military security and capability. Three increments are planned for GPS III, each adding new capabilities as technologies mature. “GPS IIIB satellites will enable a crosslinked command and control architecture, allowing the entire GPS constellation to be updated from a single ground station instead of waiting for each satellite to orbit in view of a ground antenna. GPS IIIC satellites will also deliver greater M-Code power for increased resistance to hostile jamming via a high-powered spot beam,” Wussler says. “All users, military and civil, will receive improved accuracy integrity and assured availability. GPS III satellites will also transmit a new civil signal, L1C, which is compatible with the civil E1 signal that will be broadcast by the European Galileo satellite navigation [SatNav] system. L1C is also compatible with signals planned for broadcast by Japan’s Quasi-Zenith Satellite System.”
Those other systems—including the Russian GLONASS satellites—are seen as complementary to GPS, one reason the new satellites have enhanced interoperability, Wussler says. Galileo and China’s COMPASS are considered roughly equivalent to GPS I, which was a first-generation developmental system, while GPS II and GLONASS are recognized as the only second-generation (operational) global SatNav systems. “Galileo sees [itself] as independent, but if you have a full constellation of Galileo satellites and a full constellation of GPS, interoperability becomes important in providing a better and more powerful signal strength for the world,” Duddy says. “COMPASS is still working out the interoperability piece, from what I 34
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
understand, but they apparently don’t consider that as important. GLONASS is struggling along, but working cooperatively to assure compatibility.” Wussler says the GPS program will continue to work diligently with other SatNav systems as each evolves to the next generation, with a goal of achieving as much compatibility and interoperability as possible to provide civil users worldwide with the best possible combined PNT service. “We see GPS II as being today’s preeminent space-based PNT system. The deployment of GPS III will guide the world to a higher level of space-based PNT. While it’s difficult to predict the course that other global SatNav systems, or even regional/local augmentation systems, will follow in the years to come, we hope that GPS III will be joined by interoperable and compatible space-based PNT services,” he says. “Increasing GPS security for military users should have no effect on the civil prospects for other SatNav systems since SAASM, M-Code, and PRONAV have no impact on GPS civil signals. Increasing GPS accuracy and integrity, along with new GPS civil signals, will boost the GPS prospects for working effectively with other SatNav systems. New GPS signals have been designed to work either individually or in concert with other systems.”
From the civil user community perspective, having multiple systems available is a major plus, according to Basil Barimo, vice president of operations and safety for the Air Transport Association (ATA). “We would love to see a redundant satellite network that, if one turns off, you can switch over to the other and keep going,” he says. “We would like for airplanes to determine which satellite signal is right and step through, in priority order, to get what they need from wherever they can get it, without any interaction from the flight crew. “ATA believes these should all be interoperable systems, so when an airline purchases an aircraft and equips it to operate, either domestically or internationally, they don’t have to install multiple sets of equipment to operate in different parts of the world. We would like to see compatible systems so a single nav system can be put on the aircraft and do what it needs to do regardless of where it is in the world.” What the future actually holds for satellite-based ATC, however, remains an open question, adds Barimo.
“The alternatives today are to maintain some kind of ground network, which is fine for the U.S. And as we make this transition, that will be the case. We won’t do anything abrupt or risky in the commercial aviation world,” he says. “So we will hang onto ground infrastructure for some time and will operate a system that relies on both and has the ground system as a backup. As we become more comfortable and confident with satellites and address some of these security issues—which are very real— we gradually will migrate away from the ground system, even as a backup, which is ultimately where we need to be. But that isn’t anything that is going to happen in the near future.”
Warnings and responses
Last May, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report caused a considerable stir in Congress and the international GPS user community with warnings of potential launch delays for GPS III and both space and groundbased problems with the latest GPS II satellites. The report had been requested in the wake of the Air Force’s October 2008 biennial report to Congress, which restated previous concerns about the current constellation and the impact of any future delays. “Of the 31 GPS satellites currently on orbit, 20 are past their design life and 19 are without redundancy in either the navigation mission equipment or the satellite bus or both,” the USAF document stated. “Should GPS IIF launches be delayed, sustainment of the GPS constellation will be difficult and the [U.S. government] could fail to meet performance levels prescribed in published federal plans and standards.” The Air Force and Boeing both responded quickly to the GAO follow-up, which actually did little more than repeat USAF “worst case” scenarios that any significant delays or malfunctions in the GPS IIF or III programs could diminish the quality of service. “We are working through some remaining challenges prior to the delivery of the first GPS IIF satellite and have made great progress while keeping the right focus on mission success. We are planning to launch the first of the 12 GPS IIF satellites in early 2010,” said a July 7 statement from the GPS Wing. “SV2 will be scheduled based on constellation sustainment needs, but is not projected for sooner than 6-9 months after the first launch. We have ample satellites in the near term; we currently have 30 satellites on AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
“Under the original [GPS IIF] schedule, we were supposed to have launched some time ago, but we had some development issues; we still run into issues from day to day, which is typical on any program, but I believe all the technical issues are now behind us.” John Duddy, former director of GPS programs Boeing Space and Intelligence Systems
The GPS Block IIR-M replenishment satellite design has modernized features.
orbit and operational today. Users can rely on GPS with confidence today and will continue to be able to do so in the future. That sentiment was echoed in a simultaneous official statement from Boeing: “Working very closely with the Air Force and its team, Boeing has taken aggressive steps to resolve the technical issues on IIF with a strong emphasis on mission assurance. Design changes were required to ensure performance over the satellite design life and have caused schedule delays, but these changes are in the final phase of implementation, and a fully integrated satellite (SV1) has already successfully completed the thermalvacuum test program—the most stressing system level test. SV2 was shipped to the Cape on May 6 to perform system-level compatibility tests and serve as a risk reduction pathfinder for SV1 processing later this year.” Lockheed Martin Space Systems, meanwhile, was successfully completing a major GPS III milestone—the preliminary design review phase in May—and entering the followon critical design review (CDR) phase. That actually is a year-long series of 70 individual CDRs for key spacecraft subsystems, assemblies, and elements by Lockheed Martin and its industry partners, ITT and General Dynamics. Those are scheduled to conclude in the fall of 2010 with a final space vehicle CDR to validate the overall GPS III design for both military and civil requirements. “The launch schedule for GPS III certainly will maintain the current numbers [of operational satellites in orbit], but the more vehicles there are in the constellation, the better coverage and accuracy users on the ground have,” Podlesney told Aerospace America in mid-July. “Before we get through the development phase, the option rate is four per year. They can authorize two at a time, usually in January and July, although they can choose to exercise options earlier. It also depends on constellation health—these are planned more for launch-on-need rather than demand.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
“They will support the existing constellation; part of the requirement is to be backward compatible, with all the signals of the current constellation, but also forward compatible. The uniqueness of the III contract is it is a three-phase approach, not biting off the IIIC requirements right up front, but doing an incremental approach with A and B. So A needs the hooks to make it forward compatible, that is, a big enough structure to accommodate the IIIC systems, with weight and space area so we don’t need to change the basic satellite structure, change harnessing, or move components within the vehicle to make that happen.”
Block III advances
In addition to some new signals and increased power, the Block III satellites eventually will bring significant advances to both civil and military capabilities. “Ultimately, the IIIC will enable a regional spot beam, substantially increasing the military signal for areas of concern. To do that, you must be able to command the vehicle with a more robust crosslink across the constellation, which will be added in with the IIIB, giving us better telemetry,” Podlesney explains, adding that the advanced IIIC capabilities eventually will become the GPS standard. “The vehicles eventually wear out and, although most have lasted well beyond their design life, they ultimately will fail, and replacements will be needed.” The current plan calls for up to 12 GPS IIIA launches, beginning in 2014, followed by eight GPS IIIB and 16 GPS IIIC satellites, eventually replacing all previous models and sustaining the system through 2030. “From an overall perspective, what we now have is a logical progression toward a full constellation of GPS IIIC capabilities. It is the government’s call, however—if they decide they prefer the newer capabilities, they may decide to launch on demand as opposed to on need,” Podlesney concludes. “The government’s plan is not necessarily to exercise all 10 IIIA options (beyond the two now under contract) before switching over to the IIIB. They have structured the program with enough latitude to continue A, if they want, or, if we are finished with the development aspects, we can implement the B earlier. It all revolves around funding and performance levels, but the government has structured it with flexibility in terms of how they authorize things.”
“I launched an Estes Astron Scout – I saw the smoke trail go up in the air and thought it was cool. Suddenly for the first time I could see how fins were angles, nose cones were parabolas. Geometry had value now and I loved it.”
David Newill AIAA Associate Fellow
In fascinating new videos, AIAA A members rec recall
Share the Inspiration
the moment when aerospace erospace captur captured their imagination. Share your story too, a and spread the passion on for aerospa aerospace.
2/25/09 10:48:27 AM
turbulence over the seas
urbulence, the leading cause of injuries in commercial aviation, is a particular concern for transoceanic flights, in remote areas where the phenomenon is often worst and pilots have little information. NASA and NCAR (National Center for Atmospheric Research) are working to develop a prototype system to enhance the weather information available to pilots flying over these remote ocean regions. GATDSSA, the Global Atmospheric Turbulence Decision Support System for Aviation, project will use computer weather models, satellite data, and state-of-the-art artificial intelligence techniques to create a picture of developing storms and other potential causes of turbulence.
by J.R. Wilson Contributing writer 38
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
“One of the goals of providing automated weather information is to make better planning decisions on where to route aircraft in the first place, then give everyone—pilots, air traffic controllers, dispatchers—a common view of weather.” – JOHN WILLIAMS Copyright© 2010 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
When a cumulus cloud becomes vertically developed and dense enough to produce lightning, it is termed a cumulonimbus, or thunderstorm, cloud. The bulging, puffy, cauliflower shapes (left) and the well-developed anvil (right) indicate that this cloud has reached maturity. Copyright University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.
Researchers are developing techniques to give pilots earlier warnings of turbulence in remote areas on transoceanic flights. Until now, little information has been available in these regions, and pilots have had to rely on reports from other aircraft or on satellite data. NCAR is combining advanced technologies and computer modeling to develop clearer pictures of developing storms and other hazardous conditions.
“Oceanic weather is hard, because there isn’t any weather radar over the ocean; all we have are pilot reports and satellites,” notes John Murray, advanced satellite aviation-weather products (ASAP) project manager at NASA’s Science Mission Directorate. “In the past five years, we have developed a lot of tools to improve convective weather and turbulence forecasting, primarily over CONUS [continental U.S.]. Now we are trying to integrate these tools to deal with the oceanic turbulence problem. “We have given NCAR a number of grants in the past five years to develop and prove convective weather and turbulence products using satellite data. Many of those were joint with the University of Wisconsin, the University of Alabama-Huntsville, and MIT’s Lincoln Laboratory. For example, the $912,000, three-year grant we issued to NCAR in July to study oceanic convection and turbulence is an effort to bring together all of the tools developed in the previous five years of ASAP studies.”
Guidance for better decisions The GATDSSA study is focused on improving turbulence decision support systems for pilots, using satellite data to
address and improve information the U.S. provides to two world area forecast centers, in London and Washington, D.C. Those centers send out significant meteorological reports (SIGMETs) every four hours and significant weather charts every six hours for preflight briefings to pilots on overseas routes. The intent is to provide more rapid updates and enable pilots en route to request SIGMET updates. “Sometimes we call it global GTG [graphical turbulence guidance], a play on the CONUS GTG,” Murray says, referring to information currently derived from ground-based radars and satellites. “We are aligning this with the U.S. NextGen [Next Generation Air Transportation System] effort, part of which is to provide a 4D weather cube—time dimensions with diagnosis and forecast. “Our forecast will run from 0 to 36 hr, including 0-3-hr ‘nowcasts’ that include thunderstorm locations and intensities we can use to derive a probability of convectively induced turbulence. That is one of three major sources of upper atmospheric turbulence—the other two being mountain wave turbulence and clear air turbulence, which is associated with jet stream upper level fronts and shears.” GTG is an “expert system” that combines information AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
“This new work to detect the likelihood of turbulence associated with oceanic storms using key space-based indicators is of crucial importance to pilots.” – JOHN HAYNES program manager, Earth Science Division’s Applied Sciences Program, NASA
environmental and observational features of a thunderstorm and associating that with an aircraft observation of turbulence. Then build an empirical model that maps the observables and models data to a prediction of the turbulence,” he says. “That works by taking a set of data and training an ensemble of decision trees, each on a random subset of the data and only allowed to use a certain number of predictors. You train up about 200 decision trees, each able to vote on the classification of a new situation and, based on the distribution of those votes, you can relate to a probability of where turbulence is likely to be. That seems to be working pretty well, although we haven’t applied it yet to the global turbulence problem— just to predicting thunderstorms over the U.S. and convective turbulence.”
Studying developing thunderstorms on land will aid in predictive modeling capabilities. Image courtesy North Dakota State Climate Office.
from a variety of sources that is then weighted based on reliability, timeliness, and other factors. Satellite data can be the first indication of possible trouble in areas without radar coverage or regular traffic routes, filling in data gaps through examination of such things as gravity wave patterns in clouds; turbulence often is associated with breaking waves. Another technique called “random forests,” first identified in 2001, also can be applied, according to John Williams, NCAR’s GATDSSA project lead. “The basic idea is to take a set of data in which you associate a number of predictors with a predictant—in our case, taking various
Overshooting tops can provide strong evidence of turbulence.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
Another useful weather feature is called overshooting tops—cloud towers that have punched through the general cloud top, indicating the greatest area of strong updrafts and, if associated with precipitation, leading to strong downdrafts and so a good chance for severe turbulence. Other factors, such as features associated with the jet stream, also are considered, because turbulence itself is too small to be seen. “The average area of turbulence is only about 10 to a few hundred meters, and satellites can only see [weather] features down to about 1 km in length or breadth—but we can see areas where turbulence is likely to occur,” Murray explained. “So a main satellite function is actually to help us rule out areas least likely to have turbulence. “Turbulence actually is most damaging when the area is about the same size as the aircraft itself. If you have an area that is very strong and only 100-1,000 ft long, all that energy is concentrated like a punch. And that’s where people standing in the aisles hit the top of the cabin when the aircraft drops or rises abruptly.” Part of the current NCAR effort is to study more closely elements associated with thunderstorms over land, such as height, size, and intensity, and how they are likely to be related to turbulence, then apply those measurements to satellite data. Because groundbased radars and other measurements used in the forecasting methodology over land are not available over water, identifying commonalities that can be seen with both is crucial to enhancing oceanic forecasting.
Aid from advanced space systems Advanced satellite technologies now coming online or due in the near future also will substantially improve weather-related data available to turbulence prediction and detection. For example, the MODIS (moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer) imager now flying on NASA’s Terra and Aqua Earth orbiting satellites can see down to 250 m, very close to the scale of turbulence. Higher resolution sensors coming online include imagers that look at visible light, providing not just pictures but energy measurements at different wavelengths. By looking at the differences in multiple data channels, researchers can tell if the cloud tops are cooling quickly, indicating rapid convection. Other sensors called sounders look at the infrared portion of the spectrum, providing information on relative humidity and temperature at different altitudes. Balloon sounders currently are used for that, along with some on satellites, but future satellite sensors will be much more sophisticated. “In a few years, we will have even higher resolution imagers on the GOES series; around the midteens, the GOES-R satellite will have an advanced imager, and eventually these experimental sensors will become standard,” Murray says. “GOES-R also will have a lightning sensor, and the polar orbiting satellites will have instruments measuring profiles of temperature and water vapor—the starting point for all weather forecasts. “If you look at the GTG model, it starts out using information from NOAA’s rapid update cycle,” Murray continues. “The RUC tells the temperature and water vapor levels for the next 6 hours and is the finest resolution instrument we have for that. By looking at the RUC profiles, the GTG can tell what the stability of the atmosphere will be at a particular location.” While NASA satellites are being used in developing the system, Williams adds, they will serve primarily for verification and tuning, rather than data-gathering, in an operational system. “We are using primarily operational environmental satellites, such as NOAA’s GOES, and hope to use the European MediaSat and Japanese 1R satellites. The NASA satellites are, by and large, polar orbiters and make occasional stripe measurements, so we really can’t base a product on them,” he says. “But we can use some advanced NASA research satellites to verify the products we develop based on the others. For example, there is a satellite with a down-pointing radar
that can really characterize what the storms look like as it flies over that strip; we can use that to verify that the information we have on that storm, based on the environmental satellites, is correct.”
MODIS can see down to 250 m, very close to the scale of turbulence, and so aids in turbulence prediction.
The size factor Because of the actual size of areas of turbulence, the impact varies greatly with the size of the aircraft—as does the best course of action for the pilot to take. “Turbulence operates at the scale of the aircraft, so if the area of turbulence is smaller than the aircraft, it might be felt as just a little high-frequency chop, where an aircraft the same size as the turbulence would have a much higher level of problem,” Murray explains. “The size of the aircraft and its configuration, amount of fuel, whether it has passengers or cargo, all change the loading. What a 747 might not even feel or a 737 might feel as light to moderate turbulence,
“For nonfatal accidents, turbulence is the number-one cause of injury to flight crews and passengers, especially flight attendants, who spend so much time on their feet.” – JOHN MURRAY someone in a smaller aircraft might experience as severe turbulence.” Thus the cost of diverting may be significantly higher than the benefit of any evasive action for a “big heavy” than for a lighter aircraft. In addition, some new aircraft are deAEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
signed with some measure of turbulence mitigation built in, so even if all other factors are identical, the pilot of a new model might make a different decision from the one made by the pilot of an older aircraft from the same family. Researchers also are developing or enhancing other ways to measure encountered turbulence and determine the best approach for a variety of aircraft that may be on course to encounter it next. “In-situ turbulence reporting is a system developed by NCAR to turn the airplane into a turbulence monitor,” Williams says. “That uses the eddy dissipation rate [EDR]—measuring the rate at which energy flows from largescale forcing mechanisms down to smaller scale eddies. The scaling from EDR to a particular aircraft depends on its speed, weight,
The GTG combines and assigns weight information from a variety of sources.
and wing area. We take the reporting aircraft’s independent measurement and can scale it back to apply to any particular aircraft type and operating conditions. “That gives us routine, objective measurements of turbulence, which are key to developing relationships of what can be measured by satellite, from the global forecast system model and the aircraft measured turbulence, using AI [artificial intelligence] techniques to sort through all this data and uncover those relationships, which we then will apply globally.”
Communicating the results Currently, the global forecast model run by the U.S. National Weather Service provides 3D forecasts of wind, temperature, stability, humidity, and other environmental features around the world. The data will be used to derive diagnostics of turbulence and combined to form an estimate of where it is likely to occur. “So the various satellite systems, the AI methodology of random forests, etc., are put 42
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
together, using some pretty fast computers to process it all with minimum latency to get information to decision-makers. In a year, we plan to demonstrate cockpit uplinks of customized maps of turbulence ahead of oceanic flights; for that, we send a text message to ARINC that will be downlinked via satellite to the ACARS [aircraft communications addressing and reporting system] printer, which is an enabler for that cockpit uplink,” he says. “We will have a Web link for pilots to review the messages they receive and provide feedback. We also will have a Web-accessible link, using Java, based on a system called the Aviation Digital Data Service, for dispatchers, air traffic controllers, and anyone else interested, but next year probably only visible to selected United Airlines dispatchers. It will be a few years before it would be FAA approved and publicly accessible.” The system is being designed to avoid the need for any additional cockpit hardware, Williams adds, although additional pilot training may be required down the line. “We’re doing our best to focus on the atmospheric science problems of predicting thunderstorms and turbulence, making use of available data feeds and technologies, such as uplinking a text graphics map to ACARS,” he notes. “We would prefer a graphical color map, but we’re focusing on the aviation weather problem, not the dissemination problem. So it will print out on the same strip printer as other ACARS messages in the cockpit, which is a new use of an existing product. “We hope, in two years, we can make the system available to the FAA for evaluation as part of the NextGen operational capability in 2013, where it would be run routinely by the FAA Tech Center or National Weather Service. The grids would be made available for airlines or private vendors to use as they see fit. We hope that will mean inclusion in electronic flight bags currently under development to provide pilots with graphical displays of a variety of weather data in the cockpit—and that certainly will require some additional pilot training.” At the same time, any such system will have to avoid creating information overload for the pilot.
Managing the load “One thing we studied under our last aviation weather program was how much of a pilot load, with respect to weather [information], can be managed effectively. We learned it is best to give a pilot only what he needs. He
“Our goal is to give pilots a regularly updated picture of the likely storms ahead as they fly over the ocean, so they can take action to minimize turbulence and keep their aircraft out of danger.” – CATHY KESSINGER NCAR project scientist
has too many other things to manage to be looking at weather maps in the cockpit, so any information you provide has to be very specific and tailored specifically to his need,” Murray says. “This is an evolutionary question. There is an ATC [air traffic controller] there now, because he has information the pilot doesn’t. If the pilot has better information, it might be better to let him make decisions now made by others, especially if he can make a better decision. But until the information is better, the workload is divided to take advantage of the fact the ATC knows things the pilot doesn’t. “The whole purpose of NextGen is to use automated tools to help manage this vast amount of information without overwhelming the pilot,” says Murray. “As the FAA and airlines examine the quality of information they get through NextGen, the question becomes ‘When, and to what degree, do we give pilots more autonomy?’ In a typical en route scenario, with aircraft spaced out every 5 mi. and 2,000 ft, if the pilot gets information that would avoid or reduce turbulence, there’s no reason not to independently change altitude or heading. Right now, however, there are too many factors to make that determination.” The information now being developed under the NCAR program, together with other NASA, NOAA, FAA, and academic research, has been identified as critical for NextGen, Murray says, and especially for its 4D Network-Enabled Weather System. The longterm goal of that network-centric, Internetbased approach is for every system aboard an airplane to have an IP address, making the relationship between all aircraft, satellite, and ground systems similar to that of all the networked computers in an office. “NextGen will use a standard database, and all ATM [air traffic management] will be based on a very strict data set, called the single authoritative source. And I tend to think weather information associated with that will be much higher quality and will have some probabilistic components, such as saying, ‘Here’s where we expect convection to be in 1 hr with 85% confidence and in 2 hr with 35% confidence,’ and so on,” Murray says.
“That information and those probabilities will be constantly updated and improved, because weather is nonlinear and chaotic, which is why weather forecasts are less reliable the farther out you try to go. If you get one observation just a little wrong, it can throw the whole forecast off.”
Parallel efforts NextGen and its weather component involve efforts by a wide range of government agencies, industry and industry organizations, and academia, including international collaboration. Those range from the FAA, NOAA, NASA, and NCAR to the American Meteorological Society’s Aviation Range and Aerospace Meteorology Group and AIAA’s Atmospheric and Space Environments Technical Committee to NASA’s Aeronautical and Space Operations Subcommittee. Those and others work closely through an interagency/ industry partnership program to coordinate their efforts. That also applies to ongoing efforts in Europe and Asia to develop similar systems, including a global standard to deal with weather information. Thus while each effort is primarily designed to develop a new airspace system for a nation or region, each also must deal with aviation as a global enterprise. The same aircraft may fly through multiple jurisdictions on a single flight, but will need a coordinated set of rules and information provision to do so safely and efficiently. “I think we can improve safety, efficiency, and passenger comfort by providing an automated system, with minimal latency, to help pilots, dispatchers, and air traffic controllers make better decisions on how to route the aircraft and when to divert or prepare for encounters with pockets of turbulence,” Williams concludes. “Our system will indicate something about storm height and intensity, which includes the hazard of turbulence, but also water temperature and the possibility of hail and lightning. So even though turbulence is the primary goal of our system, if you know where the storms are and their intensity, these other hazards also might be avoided.” AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
25 Years Ago, February 1985 Feb. 8 Arabsat 1, the Arab world’s first communications satellite, is launched by an Ariane rocket. The satellite was developed by a French consortium. Also launched on the same mission is Brazil’s first satellite, Brazilsat 1. However, on January 2, 1986, Arabsat 1 malfunctions and ceases to operate. NASA, Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1985, pp. 136, 455; NASA, Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1986-90, p. 3. 50 Years Ago, February 1960 Feb. 2 Paul Codos, the French flying pioneer, dies in Paris. With others, he set speed and endurance records for distance flights in the 1920s and 1930s. In January 1932 he flew the first flight from Paris to Hanoi and in May 1934, with copilot Maurice Rossi, flew the Atlantic from Paris to New York in a record 38 hr 27 min. The Aeroplane, Feb. 19, 1960, p. 215; Paul Codos file, NASM. Feb. 2 The USAF two-stage Titan ICBM makes its launch from Cape Canaveral, Fla. Both stages ignite successfully and the second stage achieves separation. The first full-range flight of the Titan I is achieved on February 24. D. Baker, Spaceflight and Rocketry—A Chronology, p. 99. Feb. 3 Duane E. Graveline, a doctor at the USAF Aerospace Medical Laboratory at Brooks AFB, Texas, undergoes simulated weightlessness as encountered in space when he is submerged in liquid in a centrifuge and placed in a 5-g spin, demonstrating muscle deterioration without exercise. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915-60, p. 119. Feb. 4 Scientists at Stanford University report the successful reflection of radar signals bounced off the Sun’s corona on April 7, 10, and 12, 1959. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915-60, p. 119. Feb. 7 New data from Explorer VII reveals that the outer Van Allen radiation belt rim around the Earth moves as much as 500 mi. north and south in latitude and varies tenfold in intensity within a few hours. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915-60, p. 119. Feb. 9 Spacetrack, the National Space Surveillance Control Center, is dedicated at Bedford, Mass. The facility detects, tracks, catalogues, and identifies man-made objects orbiting Earth. These include active or inactive satellites, spent rocket parts, and fragmentation debris. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915-60, p. 119. Feb. 11 The X-15 rocket research aircraft makes its third successful powered flight. Pilot Scott Crossfield flies it up to 88,116 ft and reaches a speed of 1,466 mph. D. Jenkins, X-15: Extending the Frontiers of Flight, p. 610. Feb. 16 The Reaction Motors Div. of Thiokol Chemical successfully completes a series of 36 tests of the 59,000-lb-thrust throttlable XLR-99 Pioneer rocket engine 44
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
for the X-15 at the Arnold Engineering Development Center at Tullahoma, Tenn. Because of developmental delays with the XLR-99, the X-15 is using the “Interim Engine,” consisting of two XLR-11 engines of 8,000 lb total thrust. The XLR-11s are upgraded versions of the engine used in the old Bell X-1 and other early X research aircraft. D. Jenkins, X-15: Extending the Frontiers of Flight, passim. Feb. 16 Plans are announced in Washington, D.C., to use the British solid-fuel Skylark sounding rocket to send U.S.-built instruments 100 mi. into the atmosphere. The U.S. wishes to obtain comparative results of some experiments conducted in different latitudes such as Australia, at whose Woomera facility the rocket is usually launched. The Aeroplane, Feb. 26, 1960, p. 256. Feb. 19 The Discoverer X is launched but does not reach orbit. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915-60, p. 119. Feb. 25 The sold-fuel Pershing two-stage medium-range ballistic missile, designed to replace the single-stage liquid-fuel Redstone missile as the Army’s primary theater-level weapon, achieves its first test flight from Cape Canaveral, Fla. Named after WW I Gen. John J. Pershing, the missile serves for 30 years. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915-60, p. 119. Feb. 26 The newly developed Atlas-
by Frank H. Winter, Ret. and Robert van der Linden National Air and Space Museum
An Aerospace Chronology
Agena B vehicle is launched in an attempt to orbit the first Midas satellite, designed to detect hostile ICBM launches. But the second stage Agena fails to separate and the satellite does not go into orbit. The Aeroplane, March 11, 1960, p. 328. 75 Years Ago, February 1935 Feb. 1 The annual RAF Middle East Command air display takes place at Heliopolis, Egypt. Prince Farouk, heir to the country’s throne, is among the visitors. The flying is reportedly of a high standard, although sand churned up by stiff breezes prevents live parachute drops. Mock attacks on towed targets are made, and the event also features troop-carrying airplanes, aerial ambulances, formation flying, parachute drops of dummies, supply dropping, and other demonstrations. The Aeroplane, Feb. 13, 1935, p. 181. Feb. 3 Hugo Junkers, the German airplane designer and pioneering manufacturer, dies on his 76th birthday in Munich. The son of a mill owner and gas engine manufacturer, Junkers started his own firm in 1895 to make water-heating machines for bathing spas. These were so-called Junkers electric geysers. In 1910 he patented an all-wing aircraft. In 1915 his company made its first all-metal airplane, of sheet steel, and in 1916 made an all-aluminum one. Junkers Aircraft was formally founded in 1919. Closed soon after because of the Versailles Treaty, the company later reopened and became one of the world’s great airplane firms. Subsidiaries opened in 1920 in Moscow and Sweden soon after. In 1921, the company started a domestic air service that was later taken over by Lufthansa. Junkers retired in 1932 and devoted himself to scientific experiments and his family. His aircraft played a crucial role in supporting Hitler’s ambitions in WW II, particularly the infamous Ju 87 “Stuka” dive bomber that swept before the advancing German armies in Western Europe and later Russia, and the superlative Ju 88 medium bomber. This despite the fact that Junkers himself was an ardent anti-Nazi. The Aeroplane, Feb. 6, 1935, p. 146. Feb. 12 The Navy rigid airship USS Macon is destroyed in a storm a few miles off Point Sur, Calif., while returning from maneuvers. All but two of the crew survive. As soon as the captain, Lt. Cmdr. Herbert Wiley, realizes the ship is falling, he orders the crew to prepare to abandon ship. They inflate and jettison rubber lifeboats, and, as the airship’s stern settles into the water, swim to them. Three ships later pick up the crew. The Macon was launched April 21, 1933, shortly after the loss of her sister ship, the Akron. Flight, Feb. 21, 1935, p. 198. Feb. 21 A new transcontinental record is set by Leland S. Andrews and Henry Meyers in a Vultee standard transport machine flown in a gale from Los Angeles to New York in 11 hr 34 min at an average speed of 218 mph. The previous record for the 2,577-mi. route, set a month ago, was 11 hr 59 min. The Aeroplane, Feb, 27. 1935, p. 234.
Feb. 23 The first airplane of the fortnightly Sabena airmail service between Brussels and the Belgian Congo, a Fokker F. VIIb/3m called the Edmond Thieffry, leaves with 82 kg of mail. Pilot Prosper Cocquyt was invited to King Leopold's palace a few days earlier to explain the operating arrangements. Cocquyt has been Sabena’s chief pilot since 1927. The Aeroplane, Feb. 27, 1935, p. 251. And During February 1935 —The Segrave Trophy for 1935 goes to Kenneth Waller for his flights to and from Australia and the Belgian Congo. Named for Sir Henry Segrave, the trophy is bestowed upon the British subject who makes the year’s most outstanding demonstration of locomotion by land, air, or water. The Aeroplane, Feb. 6, 1935, p. 146. —Pacific Alaska Airways, a subsidiary of Pan American, receives its new Lockheed Electra twin-engine airliner at its Fairbanks headquarters. Previously, the airline flew singleengine Lockheed Vegas. The two main routes are from Fairbanks to Nome and Fairbanks to Bethel, each about 550 mi. The Aeroplane, Feb. 13, 1935, p. 192. 100 Years Ago, February 1910 Feb. 11 French pilot Julien Mamet completes the first flight of an airplane in Spain while piloting his Bleriot. A. van Hoorebeeck, La Conquete de L’Air, p. 82. AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
AEROSPACE AMERICA/FEBRUARY 2010
AIAABulletin FEBRUARY 2010 AIAA Meeting Schedule
AIAA Courses & Training Program Schedule
AIAA Meeting Program
AIAA Infotech@Aerospace 2010 Inside Aerospace—An International Forum for Aviation and Space Leaders
AIAA Courses and Training Program
Standard Conference Information B24
AIAA Vice President–Publications Michael B. Bragg takes a moment to thank Dr. Vigor Yang, Georgia Institute of Technology, for his service as editor-inchief of AIAA’s Journal of Propulsion and Power. Dr. Yang stepped down after serving as editor-in-chief from 2001–2009.
AIAA Directory AIAA HEADQUARTERS 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500 Reston, VA 20191-4344 www.aiaa.org
AIAA Western Office 999 North Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 440 El Segundo, CA 90245 800/683-AIAA or 310/726-5000 310/726-5004 FAX
To join AIAA; to submit address changes, member inquiries, or renewals; to request journal fulfillment; or to register for an AIAA conference. Customer Service: 800/639-AIAA†
Other Important Numbers: Aerospace America / Greg Wilson, ext. 7596* • AIAA Bulletin / Christine Williams, • AIAA Foundation / Dave Quackenbush, ext. 7514*, Suzanne Musgrave, ext. 7518* • Book Sales / • Corporate Members / Merrie Scott, ext. 7530* • International Affairs / Megan Scheidt, ext. 3842*; Emily Springer, ext. 7533* • Editorial, Books / Heather Brennan, ext. 7568* • Editorial, Technical Journals / Amanda Maguire, ext. 7507* • Education / Lisa Bacon, ext. 7527* • Exhibits / ext. 7575*
800/682-AIAA or 703/661-1595, Dept. 415
Cecilia Capece, ext. 7570* • Honors and Awards / Carol Stewart, ext. 7623* • Proceedings / 800/682-AIAA or 703/661-1595, Dept. 415 • Professional Development / Patricia Carr, ext. 7523* • Public Policy / Steve Howell, ext. 7625* • Section Activities / Chris Jessee, ext. 3848* • Standards, Domestic / Michele Ringrose, ext. 7515* • Standards, International / Erin Kahn, ext. 7645* • Student Programs / Karen Thomas, ext. 7520* • Technical
* Also accessible via Internet. Use the formula first name last firstname.lastname@example.org. Example: email@example.com. † U.S. only. International callers should use 703/264-7500.
Addresses for Technical Committees and Section Chairs can be found on the AIAA Web site at http://www.aiaa.org.
Committees / Betty Guillie, ext. 7573* We are frequently asked how to submit articles about section events, member awards, and other special interest items in the AIAA Bulletin. Please contact the staff liaison listed above with Section, Committee, Honors and Awards, Event, or Education information. They will review and forward the information to the AIAA Bulletin Editor.
MEETING (Issue of AIAA Bulletin in which program appears)
CALL FOR PAPERS (Bulletin in which Call for Papers appears)
U.S. Air Force T&E Days 2010
13th Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference (Dec)
20th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting
San Diego, CA Sep 09 5 Oct 09 http://space-flight.org/AAS_meetings/2010_winter/2010%20winter.html
Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF-2010) Laurel, MD Jul 09 15 Jul 09 Contact: Glen Robertson, 256.694.7941, firstname.lastname@example.org
2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference
Big Sky, Montana (Contact: David Woerner, 818.726.8228; email@example.com; www.aeroconf.org)
8th Responsive Space Conference (AIAA Los Angeles and Orange County Sections)
Los Angeles, CA (Contact: James Wertz, firstname.lastname@example.org, www.responsivespace.com)
2010 Congressional Visits Day
8th U.S. Missile Defense Conference and Exhibit
3AF 45th Symposium of Applied Aerodynamics
Marseilles, France (Contact: Anne Venables, secr.exec@ aaaf.asso.fr, www.aaaf.asso.fr)
51st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Orlando, FL Dynamics, and Materials Conference 18th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference 12th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference 11th AIAA Gossamer Systems Forum 6th AIAA Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Specialist Conference (Jan)
10 Aug 09
AIAA Infotech@Aerospace 2010 (Feb)
23 Oct 09
SpaceOps 2010 Conference: Delivering on the Dream (Jan) Hosted by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center and organized by AIAA
1 Aug 09
ASTRO 2010—15th CASI Astronautics Conference
Toronto, Ontario, Canada Contact: G. Languedoc, 613.591.8787, www.casi.ca
Inside Aerospace—An International Forum for Aviation and Space Leaders (Feb)
2010 Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala
Fifth Argentine Congress on Space Technology
Mar del Plata, Argentina Contact: Pablo de Leon, 701.777.2369, Deleon@aate.org,
31 May–2 Jun†
17th St. Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Navigation Systems
Saint Petersburg, Russia (Contact: Prof V. Peshekhonov, www.elektropribor.spb.ru, email@example.com)
4th International Conference on Research in Air Transportation (ICRAT 2010)
Budapest, Hungary Contact: Andres Zellweger, firstname.lastname@example.org, www.icrat.org
16th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference
Stockholm, Sweden Contact: Hans Bodén, email@example.com
3rd International Symposium on System and Control in Aeronautics and Astronautics (ISSCAA 2010)
Harbin, People’s Republic of China Contact: Zhenshen Qu, firstname.lastname@example.org, http://isscaa.hit.edu.cn
ASME TurboExpo 2010
Glasgow, Scotland, UK
28 Jun–1 Jul
27th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Chicago, IL Testing Conference 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference 40th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference 41st AIAA Plasmadynamics and Lasers Conference 42nd AIAA/ASME Joint Thermophysics and Heat Transfer Conference 5th AIAA Flow Control Conference
28 Jun–2 Jul†
8th International LISA Symposium
Stanford, CA. (Contact: Sasha Buchman, 650.725.4110, www.stanford.edu/group/lisasymposium)
30 Jun–3 Jul†
ICNPAA 2010—Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Aerospace and Sciences
Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil Contact: Prof. S. Sivasundaram, 386.761.9829, email@example.com
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
(Contact: www.turboexpo.org) Jun 09
5 Nov 09
MEETING (Issue of AIAA Bulletin in which program appears)
CALL FOR PAPERS (Bulletin in which Call for Papers appears) Oct 09
40th International Conference on Environmental Systems
28th Scientific Assembly of the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR 2010)
Bremen, Germany Contact: www.cospar2010.org
2 Nov 09
46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit Nashville, TN
19 Nov 09
8th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference & Exhibit Nashville, TN
19 Nov 09
AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference AIAA Atmospheric and Space Environments Conference
Toronto, Ontario, Canada Jul 09
27 Jan 10
2010 International Heat Transfer Conference
Washington, DC (Contact: Avram Bar-Cohen, 301.405.3173; firstname.lastname@example.org; www.nano.org/ihtc14.pdf)
31 Aug–2 Sep
AIAA SPACE 2010 Conference & Exposition Anaheim, CA 28th AIAA International Communications Satellite Systems Conference (ICSSC–2010)
1 Feb 10
10th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Fort Worth, TX (ATIO) Conference and 13th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference
8 Feb 10
5th Advanced Satellite Multimedia Systems (ASMS) Conference/ 11th Signal Processing for Space Communications (SPSC) Workshop—Joint Event
Sardinia, Italy Contact: Dr. Sandro Scalise, email@example.com, www.asms2010.org
27th Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences
Nice, France Contact: www.icas.org
27 Sep–1 Oct
61st International Astronautical Congress: Space for Human Benefit and Exploration
Prague, Czech Republic www.iac2010.cz
21st International Conference on Adaptive Structures and Technologies (ICAST)
State College, PA (Contact: George Lesieutre, 814.863.0103, gal4+ICAST2010@psu.edu) Philadelphia, PA
31 Jul 09
2010 International Powered Lift Conference
Aeroacoustics of High-Speed Aircraft Propellers and Open Rotors Warsaw, Poland Contact: Damiano Casalino, firstname.lastname@example.org
1 Mar 10
AIAA Missile Sciences Conference (SECRET/U.S. ONLY)
49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition
21st AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting
New Orleans, LA Contact: Peter Lai, 310.336.2367, www.space-flight.org/ AAS_meetings/2011_winter/2011%20winter.html
2011 1 Jun 10
To receive information on meetings listed above, write or call AIAA Customer Service, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA 20191-4344; 800.639.AIAA or 703.264.7500 (outside U.S.). Also accessible via Internet at www.aiaa.org/calendar. †Meetings cosponsored by AIAA. Cosponsorship forms can be found at http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=292.
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
2010 31 Jan–1 Feb
Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty Analysis T&E Days Conference Nashville, TN http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2339&viewcon=courses
31 Jan–1 Feb
Systems Engineering Fundamentals
T&E Days Conference
1 Feb–31 Jul
Introduction to Spaceflight
1 Feb–31 Jul
Fundamentals of Aircraft Performance & Design
Aeroelasticity: State-of-the-Art Practices
Distance Learning Structures et al. Conferences Orlando, FL http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2336&viewcon=courses
Modern Modeling of Aircraft Structures*
Structures et al. Conferences
Introduction to Non-Deterministic Approaches
Structures et al. Conferences
Orlando, FL Orlando, FL
Structures et al. Conferences
Modern Design of Experiments
Basic Fluids Modeling with Surface Evolver
Computational Heat Transfer (CHT) and Thermal Modeling
Fluids Conferences Chicago, IL http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2120&viewcon=courses
Stability and Transition: Theory, Modeling and Applications
Liquid Propulsion Systems
Hydrogen Safety Course*
Joint Propulsion Conference
NPSS: A Practical Introduction*
Joint Propulsion Conference
Advanced Solid Rockets
Joint Propulsion Conference
Air Breathing Pulse Detonation Engine Technology*
Joint Propulsion Conference
Tactical Missile Design-Integration
Joint Propulsion Conference
31 Jul–1 Aug
System Identification Applied to Aircraft—Theory and Practice GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2109&viewcon=courses
31 Jul–1 Aug
Robust and Adaptive Control Theory
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug
Automated Modelling and Simulation of Dynamic and Control Systems Using the Bond Graph Method in Aerospace Applications*
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug
Advanced Space Vehicle Control and Dynamics*
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug
Emerging Principles in Fast Trajectory Optimization
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug
Mathematical Introduction to Integrated Navigation Systems with Applications
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
System Architecture, Capability, and Technology Assessment: Return on Investment SPACE Conference Anaheim, CA http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2387&viewcon=courses
Systems Engineering Fundamentals
The Space Environment and Its Effects on Space Systems
Aircraft Conceptual Design
Optimal Design in Multidisciplinary Systems
Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2347&viewcon=courses
ATIO/MAO Conference Fort Worth, TX http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2279&viewcon=courses ATIO/MAO Conference
Fort Worth, TX
Systems Engineering Fundamentals
Fort Worth, TX
Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance
Missile Sci Conference
1 Dec–30 Apr
Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics
1 Dec–30 Apr
Advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics
1 Dec–30 Apr
Computational Fluid Turbulence
1 Dec–30 Apr
Spacecraft Thermal Control
* = New Course To receive information on courses listed above, write or call AIAA Customer Service, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA 20191-4344; 800.639.2422 or 703.264.7500 (outside the U.S.). Also accessible via the internet at www.aiaa.org/courses.
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
AIAA IN THE EVOLVING AEROSPACE MARKETPLACE Klaus Dannenberg, AIAA Deputy Executive Director
At the onset of the new year, most of us show real interest in the business outlook for our respective parts of the aerospace marketplace. I’m no different than everybody else. Of course, I want to know where we are going! If anything, I may be more interested since it is part of my day job to position AIAA to address meaningful changes in our community. So I try to absorb a variety of forecasts and then draw some conclusions on the impact on the Institute of the continuing and evolving trends. This month I thought I’d share some of that information with you and tell you what AIAA is planning in key, relevant emerging areas. Overall, it appears that the aggregate aerospace marketplace will be just about flat in 2010 when compared with 2009. The annual December AIA Year End Forecast projected total sales exceeding $214B this year, slightly more than was experienced in 2009. In addition, in Washington the talk around the beltway indicates that the defense drawdown won’t really begin to hit for another year or two and then it may impact land forces more heavily than the other combatant components. Furthermore, the Obama administration’s emphasis on international participation and leadership will be strongly reflected throughout our business. The recent growth trend in commercial space applications should continue while commercial aviation seems to have bottomed out and is beginning a slow recovery process. None of this should be a surprise to anyone keeping up with the news, but what is AIAA doing to adapt to these trends? AIAA is addressing these trends in a variety of ways: from inclusion of new topical content in our current product mix, to the creation and development of new products and services in topic areas where they are needed and desired, and finally to an over-
When did I know? For as long as I can remember, I have always been fascinated by air and space. This fascination came from my father, a career aerospace engineer, who will always be an inspiration for me. Another inspiration was my mother’s brother, who flew in the Blue Diamonds team of the Philippine Air Force and was a Philippine Airlines chief pilot and executive. The Summer of 1972 is when I knew for sure. I was seven years old, and our family took a trip out east to visit several places that would inspire me to no end. We visited the US Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL, where I saw the huge Saturn V on its side and walked on a simulated lunar surface. We saw the Blue Angels, then flying the F-4 (built in my hometown of St. Louis) at their NAS Pensacola home. Then we went to Kennedy Space Center, where we saw the Apollo 17 Saturn V being stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building. When Apollo 17 launched that December, I remember thinking how cool it was that I saw that very rocket with my own eyes coming together in that huge, huge building! If all that were not enough, we stopped
all outreach beyond our legacy technical communities. To complicate matters, as you might expect these efforts are all interwoven, e.g. new activities may mingle policy, technical, standards, educational, and membership activities. The international aspect also is integrally involved as we definitize new agreements with other aerospace societies worldwide. Two areas in which we are rapidly having an impact are Commercial Space and Earth Observation. Commercial Space trends have been growing for several years, so the emergence of that technical and business community is expected. The Earth Observation thrust however has only recently gained traction within AIAA due to the Administration’s emphasis on Global Climate Change. While AIAA is not choosing sides in the warming debates, we recognize that consistent, reliable, and compatible data is needed: for understanding the science, for monitoring compliance with treaties, and for monitoring cap and trade processes. A great majority of this data is obtained from sensors on aerospace platforms, whether airborne or in space. So the expertise of the AIAA membership can make substantive contributions in this relevant and controversial area. In both of these two emerging areas, we have a dedicated core group of volunteers and staff that create, evolve, and mature the Institute’s offerings to stimulate the professional and business environments. We are developing both technical and policy events. We are assisting these communities in developing standards that will enable their business models to grow. We have progressed far enough in the Earth Observation area to post an information paper (http://www. aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=535). So we are quickly obtaining a reputation for “value added” that makes the expansion to new constituencies easy, fun, and fulfilling. As our world changes around us, the AIAA adapts our products and services to continuously provide timely opportunities for professional growth and to stimulate interactions throughout our aerospace community. As you see new trends and opportunities emerge, contact Craig Day or myself at email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org respectively with your ideas. Then let’s see if we can make them a reality. Each of the initiatives discussed began just that way. by the USAF Museum in Dayton, OH, on the way home. There I saw for the first time the XB-70 and a film about its history. I was completely enthralled by this fast jet. I came home from this trip so excited by airplanes and the Saturn V that I was oozing desire for a future somewhere in the aerospace world. Thankfully, after many years of study that culminated in BS and MS engineering degrees, I found myself celebrating 20 years of service with The Boeing Company in 2007. The Summer of ‘72. That’s when I knew.—Paul Segura (AIAA Senior Member) I give most of the credit for my aerospace interest to my grandfather, the train engineer. His idea for baby sitting was to take the grand children to the Wilmington Delaware airport and watch the commercial and military aircraft take off and land. He also was the only person I knew of that had a personal subscription to Aviation Week. In the 1960s in Wilmington, that was rare. As far as I can remember most of my Jr. and Sr. High School reports were aerospace related, however I didn’t switch from aircraft to rockets until I went to my first Este’s model rocket club meet. So when it was time for college I chose a school with an aerospace program, Penn State. After I completed my degree, I went with the job offer that had the most interesting rocket propulsion programs, and have been with it ever since.—William Skinner, Deputy General Manager, Jacobs Technology Inc. (AIAA Associate Fellow) What ignited your imagination? When did you know? To find out more, visit www.aiaa.org/ShareYourStory. AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
AIAA ANNOUNCES THE 2010 FELLOWS AND HONORARY FELLOWS AIAA is pleased to announce the election of the 2010 AIAA Fellows and Honorary Fellows. Presentation of the new Fellows and Honorary Fellows will take place at the AIAA Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala on 12 May 2010, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, in Washington DC. The highest distinction conferred by AIAA and its Board of Directors is that of Honorary Fellow, which is granted to preeminent individuals who have had long and highly contributory careers in aerospace, and who embody the highest possible standards in aeronautics and astronautics. The 2010 Honorary Fellows are: William Heiser, U.S. Air Force Academy Robert Liebeck, The Boeing Company Sheila Widnall, Massachusetts Institute of Technology The distinction of Fellow is conferred by AIAA and its Board of Directors upon outstanding members of the Institute who have made notable and valuable contributions to the arts, sciences, or technology of aeronautics or astronautics. The 2010 Fellows are: Douglas Allen, Schafer Corporation Balakumar Balachandran, University of Maryland Genevieve Comte-Bellot, École Centrale de Lyon Thomas Corke, University of Notre Dame Paul Dimotakis, Jet Propulsion Laboratory John Dugundji, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Edward Francisco, Omnicraft LLC
Alec Gallimore, University of Michigan Peyman Givi, University of Pittsburgh Wagdi Habashi, McGill University Michael Heil, Ohio Aerospace Institute Christopher Hoeber, Space Systems/Loral Takashi Iida, National Institute of Information and Communication Technology Mikhail Ivanov, Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Seung Kim, Seoul National University Heiner Klinkrad, European Space Agency Norman Knight, General Dynamics Dimitri Mavris, Georgia Institute of Technology Padmanabhan (P.K.) Menon, Optimal Synthesis Inc. Roger Myers, Aerojet Frederick Ordway III, Consultant and Author David Parekh, United Technologies Research Center Darryll Pines, University of Maryland Jubaraj Sahu, U.S. Army Research Laboratory Lakshmi Sankar, Georgia Institute of Technology Brewster Shaw, The Boeing Company James Shields, Draper Laboratory Jan van Ingen, Delft University of Technology David Van Wie, Johns Hopkins University Woodrow Whitlow, NASA Glenn Research Center In 1933, Orville Wright became AIAA’s first Honorary Fellow. Today, AIAA Honorary Fellows and AIAA Fellows are the most respected names in the aerospace industry. For more information about AIAA’s Honors and Awards program, please contact Carol Stewart at 703.264.7623 or at email@example.com.
AIAA SUSTAINED SERVICE AWARD RECIPIENTS ANNOUNCED!
Carl Tilmann, Dayton-Cincinnati Section, “For outstanding service and dedication to the Institute, Technical Committees and Activities, and the AIAA Dayton-Cincinnati Section.”
AIAA is pleased to announce that Sustained Service Awards will be presented to the following individuals during 2010; we thank them for their dedication and service. The Sustained Service Award recognizes sustained, significant service and contributions to AIAA by members of the Institute.
Region 4 Shirley Brandt, Houston Section, “For energetic, extensive and tireless service to the AIAA Long Island Section, the AIAA Houston Section, and Region 4.”
Region 1 Michael Hirschberg, National Capitol Section, “For outstanding leadership of vertical flight technical activities, educational outreach, and the advancement of the aerospace profession.” Mark Maughmer, Central Pennsylvania Section, “For sustained service in publications and technical activities, leadership of the Atwood Award Committee, and unofficial but much appreciated contributions to advising the AIAA Penn State Student Branch.” Robert Melton, Central Pennsylvania Section, “For more than two decades of service as an advisor to the AIAA Penn State Student Branch and almost two decades as Associate Editor of AIAA Journals.” Region 2 Yvonne Parker, Cape Canaveral Section, “For sustained service to the AIAA Cape Canaveral Section by continued support of the council and dedication to its mission.” Region 3 Ellis Hitt, Columbus Section, “For sustained service to the AIAA Digital Avionics Technical Committee, the Digital Avionics Systems Conference, and the AIAA Columbus Section.” Tom I-Ping Shih, Indiana Section, “For significant contributions to the development and application of computational fluid dynamics and for leadership in education.”
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Region 5 Karen Copper, St. Louis Section, “For many years of dedication to AIAA at the section, regional, and Institute levels.” Region 6 Todd Farley, San Francisco Section, “For over a decade of outstanding dedicated service to AIAA spanning the national level with the Air Transportation Systems Technical Committee to the local AIAA San Francisco Section.” Tracy Kent Pugmire, Orange County Section, “An exceptional leader, contributor and mentor within and for AIAA, accepting and performing well major and minor tasks for the Institute, Technical Committee, and profession.” For more information about the AIAA Honors and Awards program, please contact Carol Stewart at 703/264-7623 or at firstname.lastname@example.org.
To submit articles to the AIAA Bulletin, please contact your staff liaison with Section, Committee, Honors and Awards, Event, Precollege, or Student information. They will review and forward the information to the AIAA Bulletin Editor. See the AIAA Directory on page B1 for contact information.
DON’T MISS YOUR CHANCE TO ATTEND THE 2010 AIAA CONGRESSIONAL VISITS DAY Every year, AIAA members—engineers, scientists, researchers, students, educators, and technology executives—come to Washington, DC, to take part in AIAA’s Congressional Visits Day program (CVD). They meet with national decision makers to discuss critical industry issues in civil aeronautics, civil astronautics, and defense. What’s our goal? Through face-to-face meetings with members of Congress, congressional staff, key administration officials, and other decision makers, Congressional Visits Day raises awareness of the long-term value that science, engineering, and technology bring to the United States. Planning for 2010 AIAA’s 13th Annual Congressional Visits Day will take place 16–17 March 2010. Preliminary briefings will be on 16 March at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, in Washington, DC, with the visits and the AIAA Congressional Reception taking place on 17 March on Capitol Hill. We expect the 2010 CVD to be the best yet, but to make that happen we need your enthusiastic participation. If you have any interest in science and technology policy, or in how your government works, this event is for you!
An International Forum
Your elected officials only hear your voice if you actively engage them. Although discussing public policy with government officials may seem daunting at first, AIAA’s experienced public policy staff can show you exactly what to do. Attending CVD will give you all the tools you need to engage your representatives on issues of vital importance to yourself, the aerospace industry, and our nation. Register Today for CVD! Registration for this year’s Congressional Visits Day has begun. Please visit our registration page (http://www.aiaa.org/ content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2216) to sign up for this exciting grassroots event, and have your voice heard on Capitol Hill. If you have any questions about CVD, are looking for materials for this year’s event, or need help in finding lodging, please contact Duane Hyland at 703.264.7558 or email@example.com. (There is no reserved block of hotel rooms for CVD this year.) There are also opportunities for members to become team captains and help coordinate the activities of their state delegations. If you are interested in becoming a team captain, or in assisting an existing team captain for your state, please let us know!
11–12 May 2010
for Aviation and Space Leaders
Making a Difference: Aerospace Leadership for Energy and Environmental Challenges
Hyatt Regency Crystal City Arlington, Virginia
The Forum will cover the follow topics: DAY 1: Energy and the “Greening” of Aviation
t Aviation – Current Energy Challenges t Energy Policy – Current and Needed t Conserving Energy through Operations t Energy Efﬁciency through Technology
DAY 2: Aerospace Leadership for Climate Change Understanding, Mitigation, and Adaptation
t Status t Climate Observations and Policies – The Curren Gas t Climate Change Mitigation Through Greenhouse ance Compli and ations Observ in Issues – ions Reduct Monitoring n t Enabling Effective Climate Monitoring and Emissio Tracking – The Next 5 Years t Providing Operational Climate Monitoring and Mitigation Veriﬁcation – Beyond 5 Years Organized O i db by
Co-Sponsored C S d by
EARLY BIRD REGISTRATION DEADLINE: 12 APRIL 2010 For the latest program and registration information visit: www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace Ofﬁcial Media Sponsors
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
OBITUARIES AIAA Associate Fellow Osborn Died in December 2009 John Robert “Bob” Osborn, 85, died on 18 December 2009. He had been a member of AIAA for over 50 years. During World War II, Prof. Osborn enlisted and served in the U.S. Navy until 1945. He then earned his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University in 1957 in the laboratory of Professor Zucrow. He worked as a mechanical engineer at Morton Thiokol in Huntsville, AL, working on rocketry and solid propellants. From 1957 until 1980, he worked as a professor at Purdue University in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, and then he transferred to Aeronautics and Astronautics where he continued until his retirement in 1990. In 1989, he won Outstanding Teacher and Researcher at Purdue University, presented by his students and colleagues. In 1995, AIAA awarded Prof. Osborn the prestigious Wyld Propulsion Award for the outstanding contributions in analytical studies of rocket propulsion, which contributed to successful development of rocket propulsion systems including the Space Shuttle main engine and rocket motor. AIAA Honorary Fellow, and Former Air Force Chief of Staff, Lew Allen, Jr. Died in January Gen. Lew Allen, Jr. died on 4 January. In a career spanning more than 40 years, Gen. Allen was a highly regarded scientist and administrator whose work touched on atomic testing, space exploration, and a variety of clandestine projects. Besides having been a former Air Force chief of staff, Allen also headed NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory from 1982 to 1990. During his tenure at NASA’s JPL, Allen oversaw the launches of the Magellan
spacecraft to Venus and the Galileo mission to Jupiter, as well as the Voyager 2 spacecraft’s explorations of Uranus and Neptune. Allen also held various intelligence positions, including becoming head of the National Security Agency in 1973. In 1946, Allen graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, NY. He flew B-29 bombers at Carswell Air Force Base in Texas before returning to school at the University of Illinois for graduate training in nuclear physics, where he received a master’s degree in 1952 and a doctorate in physics in 1954. Allen went on to specialize in the military effects of nuclear weapons, studying high-altitude nuclear explosions and developing satellite and missile systems. For his work, Allen was inducted into the Air Force Space and Missile Pioneers Hall of Fame in 2007. His other honors included the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, the Air Force Distinguished Service Medal and the Legion of Merit. From 1978 to 1982, Gen. Allen served as the Air Force’s 10th chief of staff and one of the principal military advisers to presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. After his military retirement in 1982, he spent eight years guiding NASA’s unmanned space program. At the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, he oversaw the Galileo mission to Jupiter, which provided the only direct observations of a comet colliding with a planet; the Magellan mission to Venus, which mapped the planet and its gravity field; and the only fly-bys of Uranus and Neptune, by the spacecraft Voyager 2. In 1990, Gen. Allen led a NASA investigation into a faulty mirror on the $1.5 billion Hubble Space Telescope, which had been launched that year. His report, issued in November 1990, concluded that a flawed test instrument used by the mirror’s manufacturer, Perkin-Elmer Corp., was to blame. The federal government settled with Perkin-Elmer for $25 million.
Early Bird Deadline: 22 March 2010 Late Registration Deadline: 15 April 2010
2010 Conference and Exhibit … information system technologies enabling revolutionary advances in 21st century aerospace
20–22 April 2010 The Westin Buckhead Atlanta Atlanta, Georgia 09-0675
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS Recognize the achievements of your colleagues by nominating them for an award. Nominations are now being accepted for the following awards, and must be received at AIAA Headquarters no later than 1 July 2010. The nomination form can be downloaded from www.aiaa.org, or AIAA members may submit nominations online by logging into www.aiaa.org, “MY AIAA.” Aerospace Software Engineering Award is presented for outstanding technical and/or management contributions to aeronautical or astronautical software engineering. (Presented odd years) Children’s Literature Award is presented for an outstanding, significant, and original contribution in aeronautics and astronautics. (Presented odd years) Dr. John Ruth Digital Avionics Award is presented to recognize outstanding achievement in technical management and/ or implementation of digital avionics in space or aeronautical systems, including system analysis, design, development, or application. (Presented odd years) Excellence in Aerospace Standardization Award is presented to recognize contributions by individuals that advance the health of the aerospace community by enabling cooperation, competition, and growth through the standardization process. (Presented odd years) Faculty Advisor Award is presented to the faculty advisor of a chartered AIAA Student Branch, who in the opinion of student branch members, and the AIAA Student Activities Committee, has made outstanding contributions as a student branch faculty advisor, as evidenced by the record of his/her student branch in local, regional, and national activities. Gardner-Lasser History Literature Award is presented for the best original contribution to the field of aeronautical or astronautical historical nonfiction literature published in the last five years dealing with the science, technology, and/or impact of aeronautics and astronautics on society.
sis should be upon the high quality or major influence of the piece rather than, for example, the importance of the underlying technological contribution. The award is an incentive for aerospace professionals to write eloquently and persuasively about their field and should encompass editorials as well as papers or books. Space Processing Award is presented for significant contributions in space processing or in furthering the use of microgravity for space processing. (Presented even years) Summerfield Book Award is named in honor of Dr. Martin Summerfield, founder and initial editor of the Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series of books published by AIAA. The award is presented to the author of the best book recently published by AIAA. Criteria for the selection include quality and professional acceptance as evidenced by impact on the field, citations, classroom adoptions, and sales. James Van Allen Space Environments Award is presented to recognize outstanding contributions to space and planetary environment knowledge and interactions as applied to the advancement of aeronautics and astronautics. The award honors Prof. James A. Van Allen, an outstanding internationally recognized scientist, who is credited with the early discovery of the Earth’s “Van Allen Radiation Belts.” (Presented even years) AIAA proudly participates with other societies and organizations concerning the following award. Elmer Sperry Award commemorates the achievements of Dr. Sperry by seeking to encourage progress in the engineering of transportation. This joint society award, sponsored by AIAA, IEEE, ASME, SNAME, SAE, and ASCE, is given in recognition of a distinguished engineering contribution, which through application proved in actual service has advanced the art of transportation whether by land, sea, or air. Nominations due 1 September. For further information visit http://www.sperryaward.org. If you need further information, please contact Carol Stewart, Manager, AIAA Honors & Awards Program, at firstname.lastname@example.org or at 703.264.7623.
History Manuscript Award is presented for the best historical manuscript dealing with the science, technology, and/or impact or aeronautics and astronautics on society. Information Systems Award is presented for technical and/ or management contributions in space and aeronautics computer and sensing aspects of information technology and science. (Presented odd years) Lawrence Sperry Award is presented for a notable contribution made by a young person to the advancement of aeronautics or astronautics. The nominee must be under 35 years of age on 31 December of the year preceding the presentation. Losey Atmospheric Sciences Award is presented for recognition of outstanding contributions to the atmospheric sciences as applied to the advancement of aeronautics and astronautics. Missile Systems Award The award is presented in two categories. The Technical Award is presented for a significant accomplishment in developing or using technology that is required for missile systems. The Management Award is presented for a significant accomplishment in the management of missile systems programs. Pendray Aerospace Literature Award is presented for an outstanding contribution or contributions to aeronautical and astronautical literature in the relatively recent past. The emphaAIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
AIAA WELCOMES NEW MEMBERS, JOINED NOVEMBER 2009 Region I Baltimore Jean-Francois Dietiker David G. Galosky David C. Johnson Greater Philadelphia Jin Kang Hampton Roads Aurelien Borgoltz Jennifer Inman Xiaoyi Li George Switzer Harry A. Verstynen Long Island Niranjan Desai Mohamed Buhamad, Sr. National Capital Lisa Marie Barrick Morgan J. Boardman Doug L. Britt Joseph Davis, Jr. Edward Masso Frederick W. Perkins Chitra Sivanandam Thomas A. Weiss New England Jesse M. Carr Justin S. Glenn Feig Craig Jacobson Johannes M. Soulages Northern New Jersey Pavel Danilov Southern New Jersey Edward H. Bridge, Jr. Leszek J. Sczaniecki Region II Alabama/Mississippi Sean R. Fischbach Thomas D. Kmiec Thomas K. Percy Jack Stockdale Frank R. Szofran Cape Canaveral Louis Linden Alan Mast Central Florida Kevin M. Chibar Scott D. Redmerski Noel Rodriguez Eric Stenftenagel Luke Traylor
Palm Beach Nader Fateh Savannah Jason A. Meade Region III Columbus Joseph M. Hodge Dayton/Cincinnati Drew W. Caswell Jeffrey M. Donbar Elad H. Kivelevitch Stanislav Kostka Jake Schmidt Illinois Eric Loth Indiana Matthew E. Harvazinski Northern Ohio Mark Stewart Region IV Albuquerque Timothy D. Luddeke Kenneth Reese Richard H. Searle, Jr. Houston Zhanke Liu Evan Thomas
Orange County Robert M. Davies Jerry L. Knepper Pacific Northwest Lawrence Litchfield Sacramento James Knight Brandon P. Wright San Diego Andy von Stauffenberg San Fernando Pacific William R. Hasbrook San Francisco Juan Alonso David C. Bellavia Satish Chalasani John Jacobson David Miller Charles S. Stopera Sarah J. Thompson Thomas R. Volden
San Gabriel Valley Chelsea A. Dutenhoffer No Section Assignment Senthilkumaran Radhakrishnan Dmitriy Bank North Texas Timothy J. McGaha
Tucson Zack May
Utah Michael Jordan
Iowa Pasupathi Pandian Rocky Mountain Daniel N. Baker Corvin J. Connolly Jeffrey Henry Daryl McCallister Richard A. Purinton, Jr. Timothy D. Stovall Wichita Edward Feltrop Region VI Antelope Valley David Bertucci Michael O’Such
No Section Assignment Jyotirmay Gadewadikar
Los Angeles Anne M. Bender Keith D. Graham Joe Hansen Stephanie L. Martinez Lewis Scherer Tyler F. Winter
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
China (PRC) Haocheng Feng Xuzhao He Zonglin Jiang Gao Junhui Hua Li Ming Bo Sun Chun Wang Yi Wang Jianwen Xing Xuejun Zhao France Matthieu Boileau Marc Bouchez Benoit Fiorina Olivier Gicquel Fusade Laurent Serre Laurent Jorge A. Michalowski Dac Nguyen Tran Germany Christoph Klein Tino Schmiel Bernard Weigand Ansgar Willburger Oliver Zeile Great Britain Oluyomi Aboderin Adam M. Baker James C. Beck Timothy Fletcher Andy R. Mills Ian R. Sheppard Zhijin Wang Qing Xiao Greece Anastasios Demoiros Stylianos Seitanis India Prabhakar A. Mandakolluthur
Australia Timothy M. Cook
Israel Yonatan Winetraub
Austria Carl-Herbert Rokitansky
Italy Antonio Gammarota Valerio Scordamaglia
Brazil Danilo S. M. Antonio Fabio M. Correa Canada Keyvan Azimi Josée Boudreau Tomas Martinez Ugo Mayaud Harvey Tremblay
Japan Shizuko Adachi Hiroyuki Ohmine Latvia Dmitrijs Fetisovs Malaysia Fairuz I. Romli
Netherlands Bastiaan B. Kok Elisabetta Lamboglia Nigeria Dienipriye P. Alagha Olufunke J. Alao Oladipo Arokoyo Keneth O. Chukwu Michael Chukwu Akindele E. Daodu Henry Esom Ibironke C. Ladele Ayansola D. Ogundele Adebayo Ogunleye Ademola J. Ojelade Rashidat Olanrewaju Attah Olori Adebayo Onafowokan Rose Yemson Saudi Arabia Joseph L. Brezovic, Jr. Serbia Petar D. Mirosavljevic Singapore Surinderjit Singh Spain Jose-Luis Chicharro Mariella Graziano Francisco B. Ibarrondo Sweden Duncan McLeod Gunnar Tibert Sydney Marc Hartmann Taiwan (ROC) Wei-Ting Hsu United Arab Emirates Ahmed Al Shoaibi
AIAA Infotech@Aerospace 2010 . . . information-system technologies enabling revolutionary advances in 21st-century aerospace 20–22 April 2010 The Westin Buckhead Atlanta Hotel Atlanta, GA Synopsis Infotech@Aerospace (I@A) is AIAA’s premier forum for modern aerospace systems focusing on information-enabled systems, algorithms, hardware, and software. I@A provides a unique opportunity for fostering advances and interactions across these disciplines. The attendees and authors are involved in military, commercial, and exploratory systems that are dominated by the communication of information via computers and software and will shape the 21st century. Scientific and engineering issues related to architecting, designing, developing, operating, and maintaining modern aerospace and defense systems will be addressed. This includes aircraft, spacecraft, ground systems, robots, avionics, and sensors, as well as systems of systems. This conference is of particular interest for those associated with autonomous, cooperative, and unmanned systems; communication and networked systems; robotic systems; and human–machine interactions. I@A represents each of the information technologies that enable modern aerospace systems, I@A also addresses their role in the integration of those systems. Featured applications include unmanned air systems (UAS), integrated system health management, and space systems automation and robotics. I@A is AIAA’s premier forum for modern systems focused on aerospace-related information technologies and the systems they enable. This conference will provide a unique opportunity for fostering advances and interactions across these disciplines. Added new highlights for the 2010 event include: • Plenary sessions, including keynote by Dr. Werner J.A. Dahm, Chief Scientist of the U.S. Air Force • Lockheed Martin Aeronautics plant tour (including the C-130J and F-22 Production Lines, as well as the P-3 Wing Line) • Invited panels on Autonomous Aircraft and Spacecraft Autonomy
Special Events Tuesday, 20 April Autonomous Aircraft—The Future of Civil Aviation? Organizer: Sanjay Garg, NASA Glenn Research Center Chair: Gary Balas, University of Minnesota Panelists: Honorable Robert S. Walker, Retired Congressman, Executive Chairman,Wexler & Walker; John Langford, President, Aurora Flight Sciences; Prof. R. John Hansman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; FAA Representative With the success of UAVs (Unmanned Air Vehicles) in the recent wars as well as their envisioned applications for commercial purposes, and the confluence of computation, information, navigation, communication, and intelligent system technologies, the unthinkable—having pilotless autonomous planes carrying passengers and cargo in the commercial airspace—has become potentially achievable in our lifetime. For the purposes of this discussion, autonomous civil aircraft implies the capability to perform all the typical functions required for safe flight while flying in conformance with national airspace constraints, without having a human in the control loop, either on- or off-board. This panel of experts will discuss the challenges to making civil autonomous aircraft a reality from multiple perspectives: technical advancements that still need to be made, the policy support needed to make the investments in technology, the regulatory challenges for flying in civil airspace, etc. Wednesday, 21 April Awards Luncheon The awards luncheon will be held from 1230–1400 hrs. Admission is included in the registration fee where indicated. Additional tickets may be purchased for $45 via the registration form or at the AIAA on-site registration desk.
Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Plant Tour Lockheed Martin Aeronautics will host a plant tour on Wednesday, 21 April. The tour will provide an opportunity to see the C-130J and F-22 Production Lines, as well as the P-3 Wing Line. More information will be available at www.aiaa.org/ events/I@A in late February.
Cyber Café (Internet Access) There will be complimentary computers with internet access for conference attendees during the following hours: Monday, 19 April Tuesday, 20 April Wednesday, 21 April Thursday, 22 April
1600–2000 hrs 0700–1900 hrs 0700–1900 hrs 0700–1700 hrs
AIAA cannot directly intervene with the U.S. Department of State, consular offices, or embassies on behalf of individuals applying for visas.
Accompanying Persons Program Accompanying persons are invited to meet for coffee at 1000 hrs on 20 April 2010. Information about local attractions, activities, and tours will be available at that time.
Pre-Conference Book Sale—15% Off for Conference Attendees Conference attendees save 15% on the cost of any books when they place their tax-free orders prior to the conference. Plus, they receive free shipping to the conference. We will ship the books to the conference and they will be ready for pickup by the attendee at the AIAA exhibit during posted exhibit hours. Orders must be placed no later than 31 March 2010 to take advantage of this special offer. (Please note that book orders not picked up during the conference will be shipped to the attendee via FedEx/UPS/DHL at the attendee’s expense.) AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Conference Proceedings This year’s conference proceedings will be available in two formats: after-meeting DVD and online proceedings. This cost is included in the registration fee where indicated. If you register in advance for the online proceedings, you will be provided with instructions on how to access them. If you register on-site, you will be provided with instructions at registration. The after-meeting DVD will be mailed six to eight weeks after the conference. Online proceedings and DVD packages may be purchased in advance or at the registration desk.
“No Paper, No Podium” & “No Podium, No Paper” Policy Papers will be accepted based on the quality of the extended abstract, originality of work and/or ideas, and anticipated interest in the proposed subject. The conference will have a “No Paper, No Podium” and a “No Podium, No Paper” policy; i.e., if the final manuscript is not received by the above deadline, the author will not be allowed to present the paper at the conference, and conversely, if no presentation is made at the conference, then the paper will be removed from the conference proceedings. These policies are intended to eliminate no-shows and to improve the quality of the conference for attendees.
Registration AIAA will no longer be publishing printed copies of the registration form. Registration forms are available to download on the main page of the event Web site, www.aiaa.org/events/I@A, or you may follow the steps to register online. Registering in advance saves conference attendees time and money. If you mail or fax your registration, payment must be included with your registration form. Early-bird registration forms must be received by 22 March 2010. Registration forms cannot be processed without full payment. Preregistrants may pick up their materials at the advance registration desk. The regular registration deadline is 15 April 2010. All those not registered by 15 April 2010 may do so at the on-site registration desk. All nonmember preregistration prices include a one-year AIAA membership. All cancellations must be received in writing no later than 23 March 2010. There is a $100 cancellation fee. Registrants who cancel beyond this date or fail to attend will forfeit the entire fee. If you require more information, please call 703.264.7577 or e-mail email@example.com. By 22 Mar 23 Mar–15 Apr Onsite (19 Apr) Full Conference with Online Proceedings Member $700 $800 $900 Nonmember $835 $935 $1035 Includes session/workshops Tuesday–Thursday, Tuesday evening reception, Wednesday awards luncheon, and single-user access to the online conference proceedings. Full Conference with Combined Package of Online Proceedings and After-Meeting DVD Member $740 $840 $940 Nonmember $875 $975 $1075 Includes session/workshops Tuesday–Thursday, Tuesday evening reception, Wednesday awards luncheon, single-user access to the online conference proceeding, and after-meeting DVD. Full-Time Undergraduate Student Member $0 $10 $20 Nonmember $30 $40 $50 Includes complementary conference registration to the session/ workshops only. Full-Time Graduate or Ph.D. Student Member $40 $50 $60 Nonmember $70 $80 $90 Includes complementary conference registration to the sessions/ workshops only
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
General Chair James Rankin Ohio University Technical Program Co-Chairs Fernando Figueroa NASA Stennis Space Center Matthew D. Nixon Boeing-SVS James D. Smith II Software Engineering Institute Full-Time Retired Member $40 $50 $60 Includes sessions Tuesday–Thursday, Tuesday evening reception, and Wednesday awards luncheon participation only. Discounted Group Rate $630 $630 $630 Advance only. 10% discount off Member Rate for 10 or more individuals from the same organization who register and pay at the same time with a single form of payment. Includes all catered events and technical papers. Completed, typed list of registrants needs to be submitted to registrar (prior to event or onsite). Extra Tickets Tuesday Evening Reception Wednesday Awards Luncheon Online Proceedings & After Meeting DVD
$50 $45 $180
On-Site Registration Registration hours are as follows: Monday, 19 April Tuesday, 20 April Wednesday, 21 April Thursday, 22 April
1500–1900 hrs 0700–1700 hrs 0700–1700 hrs 0700–1600 hrs
Notice on Visas If you plan to attend an AIAA technical conference or course held in the United States and you require a visa for travel, it is incumbent upon you to apply for a visa with the U.S. Embassy (consular division) or consulate with ample time for processing. To avoid delays, AIAA strongly suggests that you submit your formal application to U.S. authorities a minimum of 120 days in advance of the date of anticipated travel. To request a letter of invitation, visit www.aiaa.org/events/ I@A, and select “Notice on Visas” for further instructions. You may also request a letter of invitation by contacting AIAA at the following address: ATTN: Customer Service American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500 Reston, VA 20191-4344 703.264.7577 • 703.264.7657 FAX E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Hotel and Local Transportation Information AIAA has arranged for rooms at The Westin Buckhead Atlanta located at 3391 Peachtree Road, N.W., Atlanta, GA 30326. The Westin Buckhead Atlanta is situated in Atlanta’s most affluent and fashionable business, shopping, and entertainment district located adjacent to Lenox Mall and Phipps Plaza. To make a reservation, you may do so online by contacting the following: http://www.starwoodmeeting.com/Book/AIA16A
or by calling 1-800-WESTIN1 or 404.365.0065 and ask for Hotel Reservations. Room rates are the U.S. federal government per diem rate at the time of the conference currently at $141 for single or double room occupancy. Please specify in advance the time and date of arrival and departure and identify yourself with the AIAA conference. Rooms will be held until 29 March 2010 at 1700 hrs (local time) while availability lasts and then released to the general public at new rates identified at the discretion of the hotel. The Westin Buckhead Atlanta is very accessible to Atlanta’s Hartsfield Jackson Airport. Numerous transportation options are available and include the following.
metropolitan areas in the United States. Atlanta is headquarters to The Coca-Cola Company, AT&T, and Delta Airlines, and features fine dining, museums, theater, attractions and legendary shopping experiences.
MARTA MARTA trains depart from the baggage claim area at Hartsfield-Jackson airport and provide direct service to the Buckhead station, which is located just 1.5 blocks from our hotel. The average cost is $1.75 for a one-way trip.
International Traffic in Arms Regulations
Taxi An average cab ride from the airport is about 25 minutes and costs $40 for a one-way trip. Atlanta Link Shuttle This shuttle service (www.theatlantalink.com) is $20.50 one way and $40 round trip. It provides service to Buckhead area hotels, and can be arranged in advance for pick-up services.
About Atlanta Atlanta is the capital and most populous city in the state of Georgia, as well as the urban core of one of the fastest-growing
Conference Certificate of Attendance Available Certificates of Attendance are available for attendees who request documentation at the conference itself. AIAA offers this service to better serve the needs of the professional community. Claims of hours or applicability toward professional education requirements are the responsibility of the participant. Please request your copy at the on-site registration desk. AIAA speakers and attendees are reminded that some topics discussed in the conference could be controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). U.S. Nationals, which are U.S. Citizens and Green Card Holders, are responsible for ensuring that technical data they present in open sessions to non-U.S. Nationals in attendance or in conference proceedings are not export-restricted by the ITAR. U.S. Nationals are likewise responsible for ensuring that they do not discuss ITAR exportrestricted information with non-U.S. Nationals in attendance.
Sponsorship Opportunities Available tabletop packages offer elevated visibility, effective marketing and branding options, and direct access to all attendees and prominent decision makers from the aerospace community. Contact Cecilia Capece at email@example.com or 703.264.7570 for more details.
8th Annual U.S. Missile Defense Conference and Exhibit www.aiaa.org/events/missiledefense Warﬁghters and the Integration of Deployed Missile Defense Systems
22–24 March 2010 Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center Washington, DC This conference is:
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Program-at-a-Glance Tuesday, 20 April 2010 0800–0845 hrs Keynote Speaker: TBD 0900–1100 hrs Invited Panel: Autonomous Aircraft—The Future of Civil Aviation? Organizer: Sanjay Garg, NASA Glenn Research Center Chair: Gary Balas, University of Minnesota Panelists: Honorable Robert S. Walker, Retired Congressman, Executive Chairman,Wexler & Walker; John Langford, President, Aurora Flight Sciences; Prof. R. John Hansman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; FAA Representative With the success of UAVs (Unmanned Air Vehicles) in the recent wars as well as their envisioned applications for commercial purposes, and the confluence of computation, information, navigation, communication, and intelligent system technologies, the unthinkable—having pilotless autonomous planes carrying passengers and cargo in the commercial airspace—has become potentially achievable in our lifetime. For the purposes of this discussion, autonomous civil aircraft implies the capability to perform all the typical functions required for safe flight while flying in conformance with national airspace constraints, without having a human in the control loop, either on- or off-board. This panel of experts will discuss the challenges to making civil autonomous aircraft a reality from multiple perspectives: technical advancements that still need to be made, the policy support needed to make the investments in technology, the regulatory challenges for flying in civil airspace, etc. 0900–1230 hrs Technical Sessions (Note: There will be a Networking Coffee Break from 1030–1100 hrs) UAS Mission Management & Execution I& II ISHM Anomaly Detection I&II Digital Avionics I&II Security and Safety of Aviation Information Systems I&II Novel Sensors I&II Advances in Adaptive Control I&II Situational Assessment Technologies I&II 1230–1400 hrs Lunch 1400–1530 hrs Technical Sessions ISHM Diagnosis Adaptive Control Methods and Validation Techniques I Intelligent Flight Planning and Guidance I Verification and Validation of Aerospace Systems I Autonomous Systems I Path Planning and Optimization Cognitive Systems and Data Fusion 1530–1600 hrs Networking Coffee Break 1600–1800 hrs Technical Sessions ISHM Diagnosis II Adaptive Control Methods and Validation Techniques II Intelligent Flight Planning and Guidance II Verification and Validation of Aerospace Systems II Autonomous Systems II
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Fault Tolerance and Error Mitigation Intelligent Decision Support Methods 1800–1930 hrs Reception Wednesday, 21 April 2010 0800–0845 hrs Keynote Speaker: Dr. Werner Dahm, Chief Scientist, U.S. Air Force 0900–1230 hrs Technical Sessions (Note: There will be a Networking Coffee Break from 1030–1100 hrs) Computer Tools, Simulations and Prototypes I&II ISHM Prognosis I&II Technology, Tools and Techniques I&II Intelligent Adaptive Control Methods I&II Air Traffic Management I&II Robust Coordinated Distributed Planning I&II Multi-Sensor Systems for GN&C I&II 1230–1400 hrs Awards Luncheon 1400–1800 hrs Technical Sessions (Note: There will be a Networking Coffee Break from 1530–1600 hrs) Sense & Avoid Technologies and Capabilities for UAS I&II ISHM Architectures I&II Unmanned Aircraft Design I&II Sensor System Deployment I&II Fault Management in Large Scale Systems of Systems I&II Metrics and Analytical Tools for Adaptive Control I&II Spacecraft Autonomy I&II Thursday, 22 April 2010 0900–1230 hrs Technical Sessions (Note: There will be a Networking Coffee Break from 1030–1100 hrs) Enabling Plug and Play Systems I&II ISHM Software Tools I&II Unmanned Aircraft System Platforms I&II Software Systems I&II Situational Assessment Technologies III &IV Applications of Intelligent Propulsion Control I&II Control and Estimation Methods I&II 1230–1400 hrs Lunch 1400–1800 hrs Technical Sessions (Note: There will be a Networking Coffee Break from 1530–1600 hrs) InfoTech R&D for Unmanned and Robotic Air Systems I&II Topics in Integrated Systems Health Management I&II Space Automation and Robotics I&II SDRE Approach for Robust Estimation and Control I&II Neural Network and Fuzzy Logic Methods I&II Intelligent Data Processing I&II Applications of Guidance, Navigation, & Control I&II Visit www.aiaa.org/events/I@A for the most up-to-date list of speakers and program information.
Inside Aerospace—An International Forum for Aviation and Space Leaders Making a Difference: Aerospace Leadership for Energy and Environment Challenges 11–12 May 2010 Hyatt Regency Crystal City Arlington, VA Synopsis The 2010 Inside Aerospace Forum will bring together leaders from the United States and abroad for a candid discussion of how to make aviation more energy efficient and “green” and how to use aerospace technology effectively to understand and limit climate change. AIAA has partnered with the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS) to understand how the aerospace profession can best address these important issues. Our theme of Making a Difference: Aerospace Leadership for Energy and Environmental Challenges encompasses two overarching topics: 1) Energy and the “Greening” of Aviation 2) Aerospace Leadership for Climate Change Understanding, Mitigation, and Adaptation The forum will bring in the viewpoints of scientists, aerospace professionals, government officials, and representatives of nongovernmental organizations. There will be keynote addresses each day to frame the issues, as well as panel discussions to provide in-depth analysis and an opportunity for audience interaction. Panel sessions will address the following topics: Day 1: Energy and the “Greening” of Aviation • Aviation—Current Energy Challenges • Energy Policy—Current and Needed • Conserving Energy Through Operations • Energy Efficiency Through Technology Day 2: Aerospace Leadership for Climate Change Understanding, Mitigation, and Adaptation • Climate Observations and Policies—The Current Status • Climate Change Mitigation Through Greenhouse Gas Reductions—Issues in Observations and Compliance Monitoring • Enabling Effective Climate Monitoring and Emission Tracking—The Next Five Years • Providing Operational Climate Monitoring and Change Mitigation Solutions—Beyond Five Years A final session each day will summarize views, suggestions, and observations from that day’s panel discussions and set forth appropriate recommendations, along with milestones to measure progress toward their implementation. Following the forum, AIAA will produce a conference report documenting these assessments. Attendance at this event is open to all interested parties, with directed invitations being extended to key decision makers from government, industry, academia, and applicable non-governmental organizations. Special events held in conjunction with the forum include the AIAA Fellows Dinner and the AIAA Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala.
Special Events and Networking Opportunities Continental Breakfasts Continental breakfast for attendees and speakers will be available Tuesday and Wednesday morning at 0700 hrs in the AIAA registration area at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City. Networking Luncheon A networking luncheon will be held on Tuesday, 11 May, 1130–1300 hrs, in Tidewater 1/2 at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City. The cost of the luncheon is included in the registration fee where indicated. Additional tickets may be purchased upon registration or onsite. Keynote Luncheon A keynote luncheon will be held Wednesday, 12 May, 1130– 1300 hrs, in Regency C/D at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City. The cost of the luncheon is included in the registration fee where indicated. Additional tickets may be purchased upon registration or onsite.
Networking Coffee Breaks Networking coffee breaks for attendees and speakers will be held Tuesday and Wednesday, 11 and 12 May, in the morning and afternoon in the AIAA registration area at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City (times are listed in the program). Welcome Reception A welcome reception for all attendees and speakers will be held Tuesday, 11 May, 1630–1800 hrs, in the Cinnabar restaurant at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City. There will be a special presentation by the AIAA National Capital Section. The cost of the reception is included in the registration fee where indicated. Additional tickets may be purchased upon registration or onsite.
Other Special Events AIAA Fellows Dinner (By Invitation Only) Invited AIAA Fellows and Honorary Fellows will have the opportunity to see friends, network with colleagues, and meet the 2010 Fellows and Honorary Fellows of the Institute at the AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
AIAA Fellows Dinner on Tuesday, 11 May, at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington, VA. Reception at 1830 hrs. Dinner at 1915 hrs. Business attire. For more information, please contact Carol Stewart at 703.264.7623 or firstname.lastname@example.org. AIAA Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala The 2009 AIAA Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala will be held Wednesday, 12 May, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington, DC. AIAA dedicates this evening to honoring achievement in aerospace. We will recognize some of the most influential and inspiring individuals in the industry. Reception at 1830 hrs. Dinner at 1930 hrs. Formal (black-tie) attire. Reservations are needed for tables and individual seats. Tickets are $250 for individuals and $2,500 per table seating of ten. Photo ID is required to enter the building. For reservations and more information, please contact Merrie Scott at 703.264.7530 or email@example.com.
Pre-Conference Book Sale—15% Off for Conference Attendees Conference attendees save 15% off the price of any books when placing their tax-free orders prior to the conference. Plus, they’ll receive free shipping to the conference. We will ship the books to the conference and they will be ready for pickup by the attendee at the AIAA preregistration desk during posted registration hours. Orders must be placed no later than 5 May 2010 in order to take advantage of this special offer. Details about how to participate will be posted on the conference Web site and sent to all conference registrants with their confirmation materials.
Registration AIAA is committed to sponsoring world-class conferences on current technical issues of the day in a safe and secure environment. As such, all delegates will be required to provide proper identification prior to receiving a conference badge and associated materials. All delegates must provide a valid photo ID (driver’s license or passport) when they check in. For student registrations, a valid student ID is also required. We thank you for your cooperation. All participants are urged to register online at www.aiaa.org/ events/insideaerospace. Registering in advance says conference attendees up to $100. If you mail or fax your registration, payment must be included with your registration form. A PDF registration form is also available on the AIAA Web site. Print, complete, and mail or fax the form with payment to AIAA. Address information is provided. Early-bird registration forms must be received by 12 April 2010, and regular registration forms will be accepted until 6 May 2010. Preregistrants may pick up their materials at the advance registration desk. All those not registered by 6 May 2010 may do so at the on-site registration desk. Cancellations must be received no later than 27 April 2010. There is a $100 cancellation fee. Registrants who cancel beyond this date or fail to attend the conference will forfeit the entire fee If you have any questions, please contact Yvonne Rivera, conference registrar, at 703.264.7506 or firstname.lastname@example.org. Registration fees are as follows: By 12 Apr 13 Apr–6 May On-Site Option 1: Full Conference AIAA Member $400 $450 $500 Nonmember $535 $585 $635 Includes sessions, Tuesday networking luncheon, Wednesday keynote luncheon, and Tuesday welcome reception. Option 2: Full-Time Undergraduate Student AIAA Member $0 $10 Nonmember $30 $40 Includes sessions only.
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Option 3: Full-Time Undergraduate Student Plus Function Tickets AIAA Member $189 $199 $209 Nonmember $219 $229 $239 Includes sessions, Tuesday networking luncheon, Wednesday keynote luncheon, and Tuesday welcome reception. Option 4: Full-Time Graduate or Ph.D. Student AIAA Member $40 $50 Nonmember $70 $80 Includes sessions only.
Option 5: Full-Time Graduate or Ph.D. Student Plus Function Tickets AIAA Member $229 $239 $249 Nonmember $259 $269 $279 Includes sessions, Tuesday networking luncheon, Wednesday keynote luncheon, and Tuesday welcome reception. Option 6: Full-Time Retired AIAA Member $40 $50 $60 Includes sessions, Tuesday networking luncheon, Wednesday keynote luncheon, and Tuesday welcome reception. Option 7: Discounted Group Rate $360 per person $360 per person N/A 10% discount off AIAA member rate for 10 or more persons from the same organization that register and pay at the same time with a single form of payment. Includes sessions and all catered events. A complete typed list of registrants, along with completed individual registration forms and a single payment, must be received by the preregistration deadline of 6 May 2010. Extra Tickets Tuesday Networking Luncheon Wednesday Keynote Luncheon Tuesday Welcome Reception
$56 $56 $77
On-Site Registration Hours On-site registration will be held as follows: Tuesday, 11 May 2010 Wednesday, 12 February 2010
0700–1630 hrs 0700–1630 hrs
Notice on Visas If you plan to attend an AIAA technical conference or course held in the United States and you require a visa for travel, it is incumbent upon you to apply for a visa with the U.S. embassy (consular division) or consulate with ample time for processing. To avoid bureaucratic problems, AIAA strongly suggests that you submit your formal application to U.S. authorities a minimum of 120 days in advance of the date of anticipated travel. To request a letter of invitation, visit www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace and click on “Notice on Visas” for further instructions. You can also request a letter of invitation by contacting: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Attn: Customer Service 1801 Alexander Bell Drive Suite 500 Reston, VA 20191-4344 703.264.7500 • 703.264.7657 FAX E-mail: email@example.com AIAA cannot directly intervene with the U.S. Department of State, consular offices, or embassies on behalf of individuals applying for visas.
Organized by AIAA Co-Sponsored by ICAS Official Media Sponsors Aerospace America Aviation Week General Chair Mark J. Lewis Chair, Department of Engineering, A. James Clark School of Engineering, University of Maryland AIAA President, 2010–2011 Steering Committee Chair Philip Hattis Draper Laboratory Steering Committee Andrea Amram The Aerospace Corporation Ron Bengelink International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS) Dorothy Buckanin Federal Aviation Administration Carol Cash Carol Cash & Associates LLC John Christian University of Texas at Arlington Richard Christiansen Crown Consulting David Elrod Aerospace Testing Alliance Selma Goldstein The Aerospace Corporation Jerry Grey Consultant Ashwani Gupta University of Maryland Roger Hartman Sandia National Laboratories Basil Hassan Sandia National Laboratories Jasper Jørgensen SpaceArch
Hotel Reservations AIAA has made arrangements for a block of rooms at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City, 2799 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202, 703.418.1234. The Hyatt Regency Crystal City is located minutes from the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, VA. Room rates for single or double occupancy are $225 USD (plus applicable taxes). Please identify yourself as being with AIAA. These rooms will be held until 25 April 2010 and then released to the general public.
Help Keep Our Expenses Down (And Yours Too!) AIAA group rates for hotel accommodations are negotiated as part of an overall contract that also includes meeting rooms and other conference needs. Our total event costs are based in part on meeting or exceeding our guaranteed minimum of group-rate hotel rooms booked by conference participants. If we fall short, our other event costs go up. Please help us keep the costs of presenting this conference as low as possible—reserve your room at the designated hotel listed in this Preliminary Program and on our Web site, and be sure to mention that you’re with the AIAA conference. Meeting our guaranteed minimum helps us hold the line on costs, and that helps us keep registration fees as low as possible. All of us at AIAA thank you for your help!
Hertz Car Rental Hertz Car Rental Company saves members up to 15% on car rentals. The discounts are available at all participating Hertz locations in the United States, Canada, and where possible, internationally. For worldwide reservations, call your travel agent or Hertz directly at 800.654.2200 (U.S.) or 800.263.0600 (Canada). Mention the AIAA members savings CDP #066135 or visit www.hertz.com. Don’t forget to include the CDP #.
Certificate of Attendance Certificates of Attendance are available for attendees who request documentation at the conference itself. Please request your copy at the on-site registration desk. AIAA offers this service to better serve the needs of the professional community. Claims of hours or applicability toward professional education requirements are the responsibility of the participant.
International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) AIAA speakers and attendees are reminded that some topics discussed in the conference could be controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). U.S. nationals (U.S. citizens and permanent residents) are responsible for ensuring that technical data they present in open sessions to non-U.S. nationals in attendance or in conference proceedings are not export restricted by the ITAR. U.S. nationals are likewise responsible for ensuring that they do not discuss ITAR exportrestricted information with non-U.S. nationals in attendance.
Mordechai Levin Masterflight Foundation Rick Olemacher Northrop Grumman Corporation Phil Smith Space Grant Education and Enterprise Institute Mary Snitch Lockheed Martin Corporation
AIAA will no longer be publishing printed copies of registration forms. Registration forms are available for download on the main page of the event Web site at www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace.
Marilee Wheaton The Aerospace Corporation
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Preliminary Program Tuesday, 11 May 2010 0700–0800 hrs Registration and Continental Breakfast 0800–0810 hrs Welcome Remarks and Introduction Speaker: Mark J. Lewis, AIAA President, 2010–2011, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace 2010 0810–0840 hrs Session 1: Opening Keynote Address Keynote Speaker: Ian Poll, Professor of Aerospace Engineering, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedfordshire, United Kingdom 0840–0940 hrs Session 2: Aviation—Current Energy Challenges Chaired by: Donald R. Erbschloe, Chief Scientist, Headquarters Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, IL This panel will define the key energy and environmental issues facing aviation today. Experts from the government, industry, and the U.S. Air Force will explore our current state of energy supply, production, and use, as well as the resulting environmental challenges and concerns. Panelists will speak to ongoing efforts and partnerships (e.g., CAAFI) designed to manage and address these issues. Finally, the panel will introduce the dynamic aspects and trends of these issues, many of which will be discussed in follow-on panels. Moderated by: Donald R. Erbschloe, Chief Scientist, Headquarters Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, IL Panelists: Lourdes Q. Maurice, Chief Scientist for Environment, Office of Environment and Energy, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC Nancy N. Young, Vice President, Environmental Affairs, Air Transport Association of America, Inc., Washington, DC Joanna M. Bauldreay, Aviation Fuels Development Manager, B2B Technology Group, Shell Global Solutions (UK), Chester, United Kingdom (invited)
0940–1000 hrs Networking Coffee Break 1000–1130 hrs Session 3: Energy Policy—Current and Needed Chaired by: Carol Cash, Carol Cash & Associates LLC, Strongsville, OH, and Vice President-Elect, Public Policy, AIAA Panelists in this session will discuss current energy and environmental policy and its impact on aviation. Potential topics include cap and trade, land-use change, and air transportation modernization. Additional discussion will focus on policies that will be required in the future as aviation continues to address energy and environmental challenges. Moderator: James Asker, Managing Editor, AVIATION WEEK, Washington, DC Panelists: Richard B. Leshner, Senior Policy Analyst, Technology Division, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC Ian A. Waitz, Jerome C. Hunsaker Professor and Department Head, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA Billy M. Glover, Managing Director, Environmental Strategy, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA Bruno Costes, Head of Operations and Compliance and Deputy Head of Environmental Affairs, Airbus (invited)
1130–1300 hrs Networking Luncheon 1300–1420 hrs Session 4: Conserving Energy Through Operations Chaired by: Dorothy “Dot” Buckanin, Federal Aviation Administration, Galloway, NJ Moderator: Wilson Felder, Director, William J. Hughes Technical Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Atlantic City Airport, NJ Panelists: Victoria Cox, Federal Aviation Administration Col. Kevin Trayer, U.S. Air Force Fayette S. Collier, Manager, Environmentally Responsible Aviation Program, NASA
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
1420–1440 hrs Networking Coffee Break 1440–1600 hrs Session 5: Energy Efficiency Through Technology Chaired by: Michael Popp, Manager, Turbomachinery & Combustion Devices Engineering, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, West Palm Beach, FL Moderator: Graham Warwick, Senior Editor Technology, AVIATION WEEK, Washington, DC Panelists: Jean Botti, Chief Technical Officer, EADS, Munich, Germany David Parekh, Vice President, Research, United Technologies (UTC), East Hartford, CT William E. Harrison III, Technical Advisor, Fuels and Energy, Propulsion Directorate, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH
1600–1630 hrs Session 6: Day 1 Wrap-Up and Closing Remarks Moderator: Carol Cash, Carol Cash & Associates LLC, Strongsville, OH, and Vice President-Elect, Public Policy, AIAA 1630–1800 hrs Welcome Reception Wednesday, 12 May 2010 0700–0800 hrs Registration and Continental Breakfast 0800–0810 hrs Welcome Remarks and Introduction Speaker: Mark J. Lewis, AIAA President, 2010–2011, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace 2010 0810–0840 hrs Session 7: Keynote Address Keynote Speaker: TBD 0840–0940 hrs Session 8: Current Climate Monitoring and Policy Status Chaired by: Rick Ohlemacher, Aerospace Systems, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Arlington, VA, and Chair, AIAA National Capital Section The Day 2 kickoff panel will discuss what has been accomplished and what needs to be done to establish and implement national policy for enhancing our capability to advance climate change understanding, mitigation, and adaptation. It is intended to set the stage for day of sessions that follow to dive into the details of measurements and systems needed to build from existing capability and fill the gaps to meet national and global needs over the next few decades. Moderator: Rick Ohlemacher, Aerospace Systems, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Arlington, VA, and Chair, AIAA National Capital Section Panelists: Sherburne Abbott, Associate Director for Energy and Environment, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC (invited) Ralph J. Cicerone, President, National Academy of Sciences, and Chair, National Research Council, Washington, DC (invited)
0940–1000 hrs Networking Coffee Break 1000–1130 hrs Session 9: Climate-Change Mitigation Through Greenhouse Gas Reductions—Issues in Observations and Compliance Monitoring Chaired by: Jon Malay, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Arlington, VA Panelists will discuss the technical and regulatory challenges of how greenhouse gas emissions might be monitored for one or more of the following purposes: assessment of the effect of mitigation efforts on climate change; compliance with legislation under a “cap and trade” regimen; and/ or verification of compliance of domestic and international emissions under hypothetical future treaty commitments coming from the Copenhagen and follow-on multinational discussions. Moderator: Philip DeCola, Senior Policy Analyst, Energy and Environment Division, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC
Panelists: Joseph Goffman, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency (invited) Michael Freilich, Direct, Earth Science Division, Science Mission Directorate, NASA, Washington, DC (invited) Steven W. Pacala, Princeton University, and Chair, Committee on Methods for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Board on Atmospheric Sciences, National Research Council (invited) Jennifer Warren, Vice President, Technology Policy and Regulation, Lockheed Martin Corporation
1130–1300 hrs Session 10: Keynote Luncheon Keynote Speaker: TBD 1300–1420 hrs Session 11: Enabling Effective Climate Monitoring and Emission Tracking—The Next 5 Years Chaired by: Philip E. Ardanuy, Raytheon Engineering Fellow and Chief Scientist, Raytheon Information Solutions, Raytheon Company, Reston, VA The Fourth Assessment Report, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR4; 2007) found that “Warming of the Climate System Is Unequivocal.” Mitigation and adaptation are necessary responses to one of mankind’s greatest historical challenges. This session will address how a necessary and shared understanding of both the state of the Earth’s global climate system (past, present, and future) and the ongoing emissions contributing to climate change can be achieved. Means will also be explored regarding how that information can be integrated with socioeconomic models inside decision support systems to enable the short-term, near-future utilization of effective mitigation tools and adaptation strategies by policymakers.
1420–1440 hrs Networking Coffee Break 1440–1600 hrs Session 12: Providing Operational Climate Monitoring and Change Mitigation Solutions—Beyond 5 Years Chaired by: Mordechai Levin, Executive Director, Masterflight Foundation, Richmond, IL Current and projected monitoring programs using aerospace technologies and systems involve the detection and measurement of key climate-change parameters, including atmospheric “greenhouse” gases and aerosols, the absorption and generation of these substances by vegetation and the oceans, the effects of clouds and solar changes on the Earth’s energy balance, and the measurement of ice and snow cover depletion. This session will examine the effectiveness and projected findings of these programs and suggest approaches to evolving these capabilities from research to operational programs. Also, the session will explore long-term climate-change mitigation prospects enabled by aerospace technologies, including alternative energy sources and reducing solar thermal radiation input. Moderator: James Vedda, Center for Space Policy & Strategy, The Aerospace Corporation, Arlington, VA Panelists: Randall Friedl, Chief Scientist for Earth Sciences and Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA John Mankins, CEO, Managed Energies Technologies, Ashburn, VA David Crisp, OCO Principal Investigator, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA
1600–1630 hrs Session 13: Day 2 Wrap-Up and Closing Remarks
Moderator: TBD Panelists: TBD
Visit www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace for the most up-to-date list of speakers and program information.
51st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference 18th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference 12th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference 11th AIAA Gossamer Systems Forum 6th AIAA Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Specialist Conference 12–15 April 2010 Early Bird Registration Deadline: 8 March 2010
Rosen Centre Hotel Orlando, Florida
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
New and Forthcoming Titles AIAA eBooks!
More than 200 AIAA books—including formerly out-of-print titles—are now available in e-book format for viewing online or downloading to your computer. Purchase chapters or the entire book. Check them out today at http://ebooks.aiaa.org. The Engines of Pratt & Whitney: A Technical History Jack Connors Library of Flight Series 2010, 528 pages, Hardback ISBN-13: 978-1-60086-711-8 AIAA Member Price: $39.95 List Price: $49.95
Principles of Flight Simulation David Allerton, University of Sheffield AIAA Education Series 2010, 471 pages, Hardback ISBN-13: 978-1-60086-703-3 AIAA Member Price: $74.95 List Price: $94.95
Optimal Control Theory with Aerospace Applications Joseph Z. Ben-Asher, Technion—Israel Institute of Technology AIAA Education Series February 2010, 264 pages, Hardback ISBN-13: 978-1-60086-732-3 AIAA Member Price: $69.95 List Price: $89.95
Advances in Collaborative Civil Aeronautical Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Ernst Kesseler and Marin D. Guenov Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, 233 2010, 438 pages, Hardback ISBN-13: 978-1-60086-725-5 AIAA Member Price: $79.95 List Price: $109.95
From RAINBOW to GUSTO: Stealth and the Design of the Lockheed Blackbird
Aircraft Engine Controls: Design, System Analysis, and Health Monitoring Link C. Jaw, Scientific Monitoring, Inc. and Jack D. Mattingly, Mattingly Consulting AIAA Education Series 2009, 364 pages, Hardback ISBN: 978-1-60086-705-7 AIAA Member Price: $74.95 List Price: $99.95
Analytical Mechanics of Space Systems, Second Edition Hanspeter Schaub, University of Colorado, and John L. Junkins, Texas A&M University AIAA Education Series 2009, 794 pages, Hardback ISBN: 978-1-60086-721-7 AIAA Member Price: $79.95 List Price: $104.95
Computational Modelling and Simulation of Aircraft and the Environment: Volume I—Platform Kinematics and Synthetic Environment Dominic J. Diston AIAA Education Series 2009, 356 pages, Hardback ISBN: 978-1-60086-704-0 AIAA Member Price: $74.95 List Price: $94.95
Finite Element Structural Analysis: New Concepts J.S. Przemieniecki, Air Force Institute of Technology (Ret.) AIAA Education Series 2009, 138 pages, Hardback ISBN-13: 978-1-56347-997-7 AIAA Member Price: $69.95 List Price: $89.95
Paul A. Suhler Library of Flight Series 2009, 300 pages, Paperback ISBN-13: 978-1-60086-712-5 AIAA Member Price: $29.95 List Price: $39.95
Out of This World: The New Field of Space Architecture
Fundamentals and Applications of Modern Flow Control Ronald D. Joslin and Daniel N. Miller Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 231 2009, 522 pages, Hardback ISBN: 978-1-56347-983-0 AIAA Member Price: $79.95 List Price: $104.95
A S. Howe and Brent Sherwood, with cover art by Syd Mead Library of Flight Series 2009, 422 pages, Hardback ISBN-13: 978-1-56347-982-3 AIAA Member Price: $89.95 List Price: $119.95
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
View complete descriptions and order 24 hours a day at www.aiaa.org/new
Upcoming AIAA Professional Development Courses 1 February 2010–31 July 2010 Distance Learning Courses http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=156 Two self-paced courses available in the convenience of your home or office. Students receive instructions for completing the course, a course notebook, problem sets, and accompanying texts. Over five months, you’ll follow a proven curriculum of reading and homework assignments.
Fundamentals of Aircraft Performance and Design (Francis Joseph Hale) This course will give you an introduction to the major performance and design characteristics of conventional, primarily subsonic, aircraft. At the end of the course, you will be able to use the physical characteristics of an existing aircraft to determine both its performance for specified flight conditions and the flight conditions for best performance. You will also be able to take a set of operational requirements and constraints and perform a feasibility design of an aircraft that should satisfy both the requirements and constraints. The emphasis is on simple analytical relationships that are applicable to classes of aircraft rather than on the traditional graphical techniques applied to a specific individual aircraft with a specified weight.
Introduction to Space Flight (Francis Joseph Hale) By the time you finish this course, you will be able to plan a geocentric or interplanetary mission to include the determination of suitable trajectories, the approximate velocity budget (the energy required), the approximate weight (mass) and number of stages of the booster, and the problems and options associated with the terminal phase(s) of the mission. You’ll learn fundamental concepts and analytical expressions.
10–11 April 2010 Free Conference Registration to the AIAA Structures Conferences in Orlando, Florida, when you sign up for one of these Courses! http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2336&viewcon=courses
Fundamentals of Non-Deterministic Approaches (Instructors: Michael P. Enright, Ben H. Thacker, Sankaran Mahadevan, and Ramana V. Grandhi) This course is offered as an overview of modern engineering methods and techniques used for modeling uncertainty. Fundamentals of probability and statistics are covered briefly to lay the groundwork, followed by overviews of each of the major branches of uncertainty assessment used to support componentand system-level life cycle activities, including design, analysis, optimization, fabrication, testing, maintenance, qualification, and certification. Branches of Non-Deterministic Approaches (NDA) to be covered include fast probability methods (e.g., FORM, SORM, Advanced Mean Value, etc.), simulation methods such as Monte Carlo and importance sampling, surrogate methods such as response surface, as well as more advanced topics such as system reliability, time-dependent reliability, probabilistic finite element analysis, and reliability-based design. An overview of emerging non-probabilistic methods for performing uncertainty analysis will also be presented.
Aeroelasticity: State-of-the-Art Practices (Instructors: Paul Cizmas, Jennifer Heeg, Thomas W. Strganac, and Gautam SenGupta ) There has been a renewed interest in aeroelasticity arising from high performance aerospace systems, multiple control surface configurations, and pathologies associated with nonlinear behavior. This course provides a brief overview of aeroelasticity and examines many new “fronts” currently being pursued in aeroelasticity that include reduced-order models, integrated fluid-structural dynamic models, ground vibration testing, wind tunnel tests, robust flutter identification approaches for wind tunnel and flight test programs, and aeroservoelasticity. It will emphasize current practices in analytical and experimental approaches within industry and government labs, as well as advances as pursued by these organizations with the support of university research.
Tensegrity Systems (Instructor: Robert Skelton) This course is to provide the analytical machinery required to integrate structure and control design, and to show that this optimized structure usually has a finite, rather than an infinite, complexity. The first challenge is to choose the right paradigm for structure design. As opposed to a control system that torques or pushes the structure away from its equilibrium, a tensegrity paradigm for structures will allow one to modify the equilibrium of the structure to achieve the new desired shape, so that power is not required to hold the new shape. Integrating structure and control design will require less power from the control system to accomplish the same objectives. Less control power also impacts the parameters of structure design, since less structural stress is imparted to the structural components during control.
Modern Modeling of Aircraft Structure (Instructor: Simon Fevola) This course covers a wide variety of modeling techniques associated with modeling entire aircraft and aircraft structural components such as wings, control surfaces, spars, ribs, buckled skin, pressurized and non-pressurized fuselage shell, frames, bulkheads, cabin doors windows, and honeycomb floor structure. It covers specific concepts and principles required for computer modeling whole aircraft as well as the latest trends that use intricate automated techniques such as global CFD pressure application and coincident rigid elements. This course is to provide an outline of the techniques and procedures required to determine “the correct solution” well in advance of any required correlation testing or safety determinations. This course demonstrates learned and accumulated methods used over the past 25 years as well as the application of the latest available government and commercial codes.
26–27 June 2010 Free Conference Registration to the 40th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, 10th AIAA/ASME Joint Thermophysics and Heat Transfer Conference, 27th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement and Ground Testing Conference, 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, 41st Plasmdynamics and Lasers Conference, and 5th Flow Control Conference in Chicago, Illinois, when you sign up for one of these Courses! http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2120&viewcon=courses
Stability and Transition: Theory, Modeling, Experiments, and Applications (Instructors: Hassan A. Hassan, Helen L. Reed, and William S. Saric) Knowledge of transition is critical for accurate force and heating predictions and effective control (both transition delay and enhancement). This course reviews the roadmap to transition, including receptivity, attachment line, transient growth, stability, and breakdown; and presents a comprehensive and critical review of current methods used to determine the physics and onset of transition for a wide variety of 2D and 3D flows, both high- and low-speed. Tools reviewed include linear stability theory, parabolized stability equations, and direct numerical simulations. Guidelines for experiments and flight tests are reviewed. Then a comprehensive review of transition region models will be provided including algebraic/integral and differential models. In particular, an approach will be presented in which one calculates onset and extent of transition as part of the solution at a cost typical of turbulent flow calculations. Once the user specifies the transition mechanism, the eddy viscosity of the non-turbulent fluctuations is provided.
Computational Heat Transfer (CHT) and Thermal Modeling (Instructor: Dean S. Schrage) The CHT course provides a detailed focus on the thermal analysis process and offers a unique analysis perspective by developing the concepts around AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
practical examples. It is a computational course dedicated to heat transfer simulation. In the treatment of the general purpose advection-diffusion (AD) equation, the course material provides a strong introductory basis in CFD. The course promotes a multistep modeling paradigm from which to base computational heat transfer analysis. Seven lectures form a close parallel with the modeling paradigm to further emphasize the concepts. The present CHT course is also designed around an array of practical examples and contemporary simulation codes, employing InterLab sessions. The course includes commercial grade meshing and analysis tools to promote continued study. The overall goal of the CHT course is to form a bond between theory and practice, emphasizing a definitive structure to the modeling process.
Verification and Validation in Scientific Computing (Instructors: Christopher J. Roy and William L. Oberkampf) The performance, reliability, and safety of engineering systems are becoming increasingly reliant on scientific computing. This short course follows closely the instructors’ new book Verification and Validation in Scientific Computing (Cambridge University Press, 2010). The course deals with techniques and practical procedures for assessing the credibility of scientific computing simulations. It presents modern terminology and effective procedures for verification of numerical simulations and validation of mathematical models that are described by partial differential or integral equations. The approaches presented are applicable to commercial, corporate, government, and research computer codes. While the focus is on scientific computing, experimentalists will benefit from the discussion of techniques for designing and conducting validation experiments. A framework is providing for incorporating various error sources identified during the verification and validation process into the total simulation prediction uncertainty. Application examples are primarily taken from fluid dynamics, solid mechanics, and heat transfer.
Modern Design of Experiments (Instructor: Richard DeLoach) Aerospace researchers with considerable subject-matter expertise who have had relatively little formal training in the design of experiments are often unaware that research quality and productivity can be substantially improved through the design of an experiment. Reductions in cycle time by factors of two or more in real-world aerospace research programs, with quality improvements of that same order, have resulted from the application of fundamental experiment design techniques taught in this course. Examples drawn from specific studies will illustrate quantitatively resource savings, quality improvements, and enhanced insights that well-designed experiments have delivered in various university, government, and industry aerospace programs. Computer software CDs included with the course (Design Expert) will be demonstrated.
Basic Fluids Modeling with Surface Evolver (Instructor: Steven Collicott) The free Surface Evolver code has powerful unique capabilities for capillary fluids. Unfortunately, many have downloaded the code, run the fluids demos, and then are unable to advance to solving real problems in new geometries. In this short course, Professor Collicott teaches how to be productive with Surface Evolver on your own. He aims to lead you up the “learning curve” for the code for a new era of productivity in science and engineering. The course teaches methods for the creation of new 3-D geometry definitions including defining contact angle, symmetry boundaries, and diagnostic quantities. Methods for effective use of the code in new geometries, including assessing convergence, outputting desired data, and methods to adapt default volume, area, etc., computation methods to unique geometries are covered. Modeling axisymmetric and 2-D geometries are also taught.
29–30 July 2010 Free Conference Registration to the Joint Propulsion Conference in Nashville, Tennessee, when you sign up for one of these Courses! http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=230&lumeetingid=2347&viewcon=courses
Advanced Solid Rocket Technologies (Instructors: David Poe) This two-day course will explore a broad range of state-of-the-art technologies in solid rocket advancement. Topics including new paradigm for internal flow analysis, coupled launcher and booster optimization, modern thrust vector control device, insulation erosion evaluation, advanced propellant development, principle of aluminum combustion, and new combustion instability analysis for solid rocket motors will be discussed by both domestic and international experts of the field. The course will also emphasize current practices in both analytical and experimental approaches within the U.S. industry and government labs, as well as advances as pursued by the European and Japanese solid rocket industries.
Air Breathing Pulse Detonation Engine Technology (Instructors: Dan Paxson, Dora Musielak, Fred Schauer, Gary Lidstone, K. Kailasanath, Razi Nalim, Tom Kaemming, and Venkat Tangirala)
The PDE Technology short course is designed to present a comprehensive overview of air-breathing Pulse Detonation Engines, including detonation combustion theory, performance metrics, fuels and initiation systems, detonation physics research, technical challenges, and opportunities for development of PDEs. This course will be taught by instructors who are renowned experts from government and industrial organizations actively engaged in PDE propulsion R&D. They will discuss state of the art, challenges, and development trends of this exciting propulsion technology.
Liquid Propulsion Systems—Evolution and Advancements (Instructor: Alan Frankel) Liquid propulsion systems are critical to launch vehicle and spacecraft performance, safety, and cost. This course will cover rocket propulsion fundamentals; propulsion chemistry; converting chemistry into performance; launch vehicle propulsion; spacecraft propulsion; and applying propulsion lessons learned.
Hydrogen Safety Course (Instructors: Steve McDougle and Stephen Woods) The course is intended to provide the student with a working knowledge of safety issues associated with the use of hydrogen. Using the aerospace industry standard, “Guide to Safety of Hydrogen and Hydrogen Systems” (AIAA G-095-2004), this course presents basic safety philosophy and principles and reviews a practical set of guidelines for safe hydrogen use. The information presented is intended as a reference to hydrogen systems design and operations and handling practices; users are encouraged to assess their individual programs and develop additional requirements as needed. The course focuses primarily on aerospace applications, but other uses are also covered.
Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS): A Practical Introduction (Instructors: Ian Halliwell, Edward Butzin, and Paul Johnson) The objective of this course is to give attendees a working knowledge of Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS) software and allow them to create and/or modify system models using this tool. The course material will discuss the object-oriented architecture and how it is used in NPSS to develop flexible yet robust models. A detailed presentation of NPSS execution options, syntax, and interfaces with external codes will be addressed. Overviews of NPSS operation (i.e., Solver, etc.) will also be included. The attendees will be involved interactively with the material by performing exercises on their personal hardware that demonstrates and further clarifies the material. All attendees will be provided with a reduced capability version of NPSS for their use during the course and will be permitted to keep it after the course is completed.
Tactical Missile Design—Integration (Instructor: Eugene L. Fleeman) This is a self-contained short course on the fundamentals of tactical missile design and integration. The course provides a system-level, integrated method for missile aerodynamic configuration/propulsion design and analysis. It addresses the broad range of alternatives in meeting performance, cost, and other measures of merit requirements such as robustness, lethality, accuracy, observables, survivability, and reliability. Methods are generally simple closedform analytical expressions that are physics-based, to provide insight into the primary driving parameters. Configuration-sizing examples are presented for rocket, turbojet, and ramjet-powered missiles. Typical values of missile parameters and the characteristics of current operational missiles are discussed.
AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
AIAA Courses and Training Program Registration Form
REGISTRATION FORM (or register online at www.aiaa.org) B0210
All registrants please complete the information below.
Conference Badge Name
DISTANCE LEARNING COURSES (1 FEBRUARY–31 JULY 2010)
Late by 1 Feb 10
On-site Beginning 1 Feb 10
if you are renewing or reinstating your membership. (You must pay the full Check here nonmember conference fee.) RETURN FORM TO: 1) For fastest, easiest service, register online at www.aiaa.org/courses
2) By mail: return completed 3) By fax: send the signed, form with payment to completed form with credit AIAA, Professional Development card payment to 1801 Alexander Bell Dr., Ste 500 703.264.7657 Reston, VA, 20191 Cancellations Substitutions may be made at any time. Cancellations must be postmarked four weeks before the course start date and are subject to a $100 cancellation fee to cover administrative overhead. AIAA reserves the right to cancel any program due to insufficient registration or any situation beyond its control. Each course will be reviewed three weeks prior to the start date and may be canceled if a minimum enrollment has not been reached. Participants will be notified immediately and a full refund will be issued. AIAA cannot be responsible for expenses incurred because of course cancellation. AIAA reserves the right to substitute speakers in the event of unusual circumstances. For additional information, call Dan Medina at 703.264.7642 or 800.639.2422; FAX 703.264.7657; E-mail: danielm@ aiaa.org. Check here if you need to make special arrangements due to a disability. Attach requirements on a separate sheet of paper.
American Express VISA
Credit Card Number: ______________________________________________ Expiration Date: _________Month _______ Year _____ Signature: _____________________________________ E-mail address of cardholder for receipt: ______________________________________________
COURSES OFFERED AT STRUCTURES CONFERENCES
All registrants must provide a valid ID (driver’s license or passport) when they check in. For student registration, valid student ID is also required.
5% Group Discounts
Deduct 5% for three or more students from the same organization, if registered simultaneously, prepaid, and postmarked four weeks before the first day of the course. Please register each person on a separate form. Photocopies are acceptable.
Late by 10 Apr 10 On-site Beginning 11 Apr 10
Fundamentals of Non-Deterministic Approaches $1095
Aeroelasticity: State-of-the-Art Practices $1095
Tensegrity Systems $1095
Modern Modeling of Aircraft Structure $1095
COURSES OFFERED AT FLUID DYNAMICS ET AL. CONFERENCES
Attend any professional development course and receive “free” registration to the conference sessions only
Early Bird by 31 May 10
Late by 26 Jun 10
On-site Beginning 27 Jun 10
Stability and Transition: Theory, Modeling, Experiments, and Applications $1095
Computational Heat Transfer (CHT) and Thermal Modeling $1095
Veriﬁcation and Validation in Scientiﬁc Computing $1095
Modern Design of Experiments $1095
Basic Fluids Modeling with Surface Evolver $1095
COURSES OFFERED AT JOINT PROPULSION CONFERENCE
Attend any professional development course and receive “free” registration to the conference sessions only
Early Bird by 28 Jun 10
Late by 28 Jul 10
On-site Beginning 29 Jul 10
Advanced Solid Rocket Technologies $1095
Air Breathing Pulse Detonation Engine Technology $1095
Early Bird by 15 Mar 10
AIAA MEMBERSHIP: If you are registering for one of the collocated professional development short courses at the nonmember rate, included with your registration fee is one year of AIAA membership. Included in your AIAA membership will be periodic communications about AIAA if you prefer not to receive membership beneﬁts, products, and services. Check here information via e-mail. From time to time, we make member information available to companies whose products if you prefer not to have your name or services may be of interest to you. Check here and address used for non-AIAA mailings. Signature_____________________________________________Date__________________
Attend any professional development course and receive “free” registration to the conference sessions only
FORM OF PAYMENT: AIAA Member Number: ___________________________
Introduction to Space Flight
Daytime Phone Number
Fax Number (include country code)
—REGISTRATION OPTIONS— AIAA NonAIAA NonAIAA NonMember Member Member Member Member Member
Fundamentals of Aircraft Performance and Design
Early Bird by 1 Jan 10
Select your registration options below. Payment by check, credit card, or money order—payable to AIAA— must accompany registration. To pay the member rate, your membership must be in good standing.
Liquid Propulsion Systems—Evolution and Advancements $1095
Hydrogen Safety Course $1095
Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS): A Practical Introduction $1095
Tactical Missile Design—Integration $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375 . Please indicate if you qualify for the: __ Prepaid Group Discount (One 5% discount per registrant)
TOTAL DUE: $ _______________________ AIAA BULLETIN / FEBRUARY 2010
Standard Information for all AIAA Conferences This is general conference information, except as noted in the individual conference preliminary program information to address exceptions. Photo ID Needed at Registration All registrants must provide a valid photo ID (driver’s license or passport) when they check in. For student registration, valid student ID is also required. Conference Proceedings This year’s conference proceedings will be available in two formats: after-meeting DVD and online proceedings. The cost is included in the registration fee where indicated. If you register in advance for the online papers, you will be provided with instructions on how to access the conference technical papers. For those registering onsite, you will be provided with instructions at registration. The aftermeeting DVD will be mailed six to eight weeks after the conference. Journal Publication Authors of appropriate papers are encouraged to submit them for possible publication in one of the Institute’s archival journals: AIAA Journal; Journal of Aircraft; Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics; Journal of Propulsion and Power; Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets; Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer; or Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication. WriteTrack will be replaced by ScholarOne Manuscripts (Thomson Reuters) during 2009. More information about the transition is available on the WriteTrack home page. Speakers’ Briefing Authors who are presenting papers, session chairs, and cochairs will meet for a short briefing at 0700 hrs on the mornings of the conference. Continental breakfast will be provided. Please plan to attend only on the day of your session(s). Location will be in final program. Speakers’ Practice A speaker practice room will be available for speakers wishing to practice their presentations. A sign-up sheet will be posted on the door for half-hour increments. Timing of Presentations Each paper will be allotted 30 minutes (including introduction and question-and-answer period) except where noted. Audiovisual Each session room will be preset with the following: one LCD projector, one screen, and one microphone (if needed). A 1/2” VHS VCR and monitor, an overhead projector, and/or a 35-mm slide projector will only be provided if requested by presenters on their abstract submittal forms. AIAA does not provide computers or technicians to connect LCD projectors to the laptops. Should presenters wish to use the LCD projectors, it is their responsibility to bring or arrange for a computer on their own. Please note that AIAA does not provide security in the session rooms and recommends that items of value, including computers, not be left unattended. Any additional audiovisual requirements, or equipment not requested by the date provided in the preliminary conference information, will be at cost to the presenter. Employment Opportunities AIAA is assisting members who are searching for employment by providing a bulletin board at the technical meetings. This bulletin board is solely for “open position” and “available for employment”
postings. Employers are encouraged to have personnel who are attending an AIAA technical conference bring “open position” job postings. Individual unemployed members may post “available for employment” notices. AIAA reserves the right to remove inappropriate notices, and cannot assume responsibility for notices forwarded to AIAA Headquarters. AIAA members can post and browse resumes and job listings, and access other online employment resources, by visiting the AIAA Career Center at http://careercenter.aiaa.org. Committee Meetings Meeting room locations for AIAA committees will be posted on the message board and will be available upon request in the registration area. Messages and Information Messages will be recorded and posted on a bulletin board in the registration area. It is not possible to page conferees. A telephone number will be provided in the final program. Membership Professionals registering at the nonmember rate will receive a one-year AIAA membership. Students who are not members may apply their registration fee toward their first year's student member dues. Nondiscriminatory Practices The AIAA accepts registrations irrespective of race, creed, sex, color, physical handicap, and national or ethnic origin. Smoking Policy Smoking is not permitted in the technical sessions. Restrictions Videotaping or audio recording of sessions or technical exhibits as well as the unauthorized sale of AIAA-copyrighted material is prohibited. Department of Defense Approval The DoD Public Affairs Office has determined that, for purposes of accepting a gift of reduced or free attendance, these events are widely attended gatherings pursuant to 5 CFR 2635.204(g). This determination is not a DoD endorsement of the events nor approval for widespread attendance. If individual DoD Component commands or organizations determine that attendance by particular personnel is in DoD interest, those personnel may accept the gift of free or reduced attendance. As other exceptions under 5 CFR 2635.204 may allow the acceptance of gifts, DoD personnel are urged to consult their Ethics Counselor. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) AIAA speakers and attendees are reminded that some topics discussed in the conference could be controlled by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). U.S. Nationals (U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents) are responsible for ensuring that technical data they present in open sessions to nonU.S. Nationals in attendance or in conference proceedings are not export restricted by the ITAR. U.S. Nationals are likewise responsible for ensuring that they do not discuss ITAR export-restricted information with non-U.S. Nationals in attendance.
Inspire | Challenge | Enable The AIAA Foundation is a nonprofit,
and classroom grants, we seek to inspire the
tax-exempt educational organization
next generation with a passion for science
founded in 1996. Through scholarships,
and engineering. Aided by donations large
student conferences, design competitions,
and small, we invest in the future.
For more information or to make a tax-deductable donation visit www.aiaafoundation.org