aeronautics research 1 aviation safety and security program overview and perspective on university...

Aeronautics Research

1

Aviation Safety and Security ProgramAviation Safety and Security Program

Overview andOverview andPerspective on University ProgramsPerspective on University Programs

April 13, 2005

Brian E. Smith

Chief, Aviation Safety & Security Projects Office

Ames Research Center

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Explore - Discover - Understand


2

OUTLINE

Overview of Current Aviation Safety & Security Program

Current AvSSP University and Cost-Shared Partnerships

Future (FY06-10) Acquisition Strategies


3

Overview of Current Aviation Safety & Security Program


4

Programs

Airspace Systems

Aviation Safety & Security

Explore New Aeronautical

Missions

Protect the Nation

Increase Mobility

Protect the Environment

Protect Air Travelers and

the Public

Objectives

Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate

Vehicle Systems


5

Decrease the aircraft fatal accident rate and the vulnerability of the air transportation system to threats and mitigate the consequences of accidents and hostile acts

• Develop and demonstrate technologies that reduce aircraft accident rates and reduce aviation injuries and fatalities when accidents do occur

• Develop technologies that reduce the vulnerability of the National Airspace System to terrorist attacks while dramatically improving efficiency of security

• Transfer these advanced concepts, technologies and procedures through a partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in cooperation with the U.S. aeronautics industry

Objectives:

Goal:

Aviation Safety & Security Program

Outcomes:• By 2005, enable a reduction of the aviation fatal accident rate by 50% from the

FY 91-96 average.• By 2009, enable a reduction in the vulnerability exposure of aircraft and other

components in the air transportation system.• By 2012, facilitate the near real-time identification and resolution of risks and

vulnerabilities in the air transportation system.


6

Aeronautics & Space Transportation

Technology Executive Council

Apr 23, 1997

Aeronautics & Space Transportation

Technology Executive Council

Apr 23, 1997

AvSSP Planning History Aviation Safety Investment Strategy Team (ASIST) Process Overview

Workshop 1Feb 18-21, 1997

Workshop 1Feb 18-21, 1997

Workshop 2Mar 5-6, 1997

Workshop 2Mar 5-6, 1997

Workshop 3Mar 24 -28, 1997

Workshop 3Mar 24 -28, 1997

Workshop 4Apr 15-17, 1997

Workshop 4Apr 15-17, 1997

Industry Input; Identify Major Accident Causes & IssuesUnderlying Problems

Solutions

Integrated Solution Set & Investment Options

Over 100 gov’t/industry organizations

Five Sub-Teams produced 58 prioritized recommended investments

These 58 were grouped into 23 Planning Elements in Three Investment Areas

FiveTeams

Thre

e

Inve

stm

ent A

reas

AccidentPrevention Accident

Mitigation

Aviation SystemMonitoring &

Modeling

ASIST Participating Organizations

Advanced Nav. & Position Corp.AIAAIAAAlaska AirlinesAllied SignalAllison Engine CompanyALPAAMAAOPA Air Safety FoundationARCCAARINCArizona State Univ.ARNAV Systems, Inc.Assoc. of Flight AttendantsATAAviation Research Inc.AvioniComBattelleBell Helicopter/ TextronBoeingBoeing Helicopter GroupBoston UniversityCessna Aircraft Co.Delta AirlinesDoD/ Air Force Safety CenterDoD/ ARMY Safety CenterDoD/ NAV Air DoD/ Naval Safety CenterDoD/ NAVMARDoD/ NAWCAD, Pax RiverDoD/ USAF, 416FLTSDoD/ USAF/WPAFBDoD/ WL/XPKDOT/ Volpe Center

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ.ERC Inc.FAA/ AARFAA/ AAR (LaRC )FAA/ ACEFAA/ AFSFAA/ AIRFAA/ ANDFAA/ ANMFAA/ ARAFAA/ ASDFAA/ ASYFAA/ AUAFAA/ AVRFAA/ AWRFAA/ CAMIFAA/ Technical CenterFlight Data Co.GAMAGeneral Electric Gulfstream AerospaceHelicopter Assoc. Inter. (HAI)HoneywellHughesJeppesenJohns Hopkins Univ.Litton/ APDLitton/ PRCLockheed MartinMcDonnell DouglasMcDonnell Douglas HelicopterMITRE CorporationNARINASA/ ARC

NASA/ DRFCNASA/ HQNASA/ JPLNASA/ LaRCNASA/ LeRCNATANATCANatl. Inst. for Aviation ResearchNational Weather ServiceNAVAIRNBAANCARNOAANorth Carolina A&T Univ.Northrop GrummanNorthwest AirlinesNRLNTSB - Seattle Field OfficeNTSB - Washington, DC OfficeOFCM - Fed. Coor. for MetrlgyPratt & Whitney Aircraft EnginesRegional Airline Assoc.Rockwell InternationalRTISAICSAMASikorsky AircraftTASCTechMatics, Inc.Teledyne Cont.UCLAUniversity of IllinoisWichita State UniversityWilliams International

Aircraft Self-Protection & PreservationHuman Error Avoidance

Protecting Air Travelers and the Public

Environmental Hazards Awareness & Mitigation

System Vulnerability Discovery & Management

Hostile Act Intervention & Prevention

LaRC, GRCARC, LaRC

ARC, GRC, LaRC, DFRC, JPLLaRC, GRC, ARC, DFRC

LaRC, GRC, DFRC

Strategic FociAeronautics Research

NASNASSystem-WideSystem-WideMonitoringMonitoring

NAS DataNAS Data DataDataAnalysisAnalysis

ToolsTools

Models Simulations ProfilesPrecursorsPrecursors

FactorsFactors

RisksRisks

Aviation Safety Projects FY 2000-2005

Accident Mitigation

SyntheticVision Systems

Weather Accident Prevention

Single Aircraft Accident

Prevention

System-Wide Accident Prevention

Aviation System Monitoring & Modeling

System SafetyTechnologies

Vehicle Safety Technologies

Weather Safety Technologies

Aircraft Icing


10

NASA Aviation Security Research

• NASA Contributions• Development of long-range,

advanced technology• Leverage existing technology &

expertise• Fill voids/niches as requested

• Emphases• Detection of new vulnerabilities • Vulnerability mitigation for

aircraft & systems• Security research viewed as an

inherently Government activity.• Will not be discussing Aviation

Security vis a vis University research.

Transforming the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NGATS)• The 108th Congress and President Bush enacted

VISION 100 - Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-176).• An integrated, multi-agency plan to transform the nation’s air transportation system to meet the needs of the year

2025.• NGATS Initiative will address critical safety and economic needs in civil aviation while fully integrating national

defense and homeland security improvements into this future system.

AvSSP Engagement:• AvSSP participating in Security, Safety, Weather and Shared Situational Awareness IPT action plan

development.• CAST Joint Implementation Measures Data Analysis Team (JIMDAT) providing input on Safety IPT goals,

objectives and safety management framework.• AvSSP exploring safety modeling and analysis opportunities with the JPDO Evaluation and Analysis Team.

Observations:• Weather IPT scope is metrology focused and does not include technologies such as Synthetic Vision Systems:

recommend broadening the scope. • Security IPT moving slowly and has been DHS-centric to date. AvSSP can greatly contribute to the security

roadmapping effort in the area of requirements and solution set development • Evaluation and Analysis activities create excellent opportunities for AvSSP support and contribution. Increased

EAO – AvSSP engagement will provide mutual benefit.

Joint Planning & Development Office (JPDO)Engagement and Observations

http://www.amtech-usa.org/jpdo/VISION_100_CITATION.pdf

JPDO Organization

FAA Administrator

JPDO Director/Deputy Dir

PartnershipManagement

REDAC ExecutiveCommittee

Sys Engineering & Integration

Interagency IPT Leads

Interagency IPT Leads

Senior Policy Committee

Evaluations & Analysis

PortfolioManagement

Business Management

ChiefArchitect

Master IPT

AirportInfrastructure

FAA

AviationSecurity

DHS

Air TrafficManagement

NASA

SituationalAwareness

DoD

SafetyManagement

FAA

EnvironmentalProtection

FAA

WeatherDOC

Global Harmonization

FAA

Interagency IPTs

NGATS Institute

Studies

IPT

Expert

Participation

NGATS Institute

Stakeholder Review Panel

NGATS Institute Executive Director

JPDO Board

AvSSP-supportedIntegrated Product

Teams

?

Airspace Systems(HQ)

IntegratedFlight DeckInformation

Systems (LaRC)

Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability

Mitigation(LaRC)


(GRC)

Aircraft Systems Self-Diagnosis

and Self-Reliance (LaRC)

Threat and Human Error Management

(ARC)


(LaRC)

Integrated Safety Data for Strategic Response

(ARC)

High Temperature

HazardMitigation

(GRC)

System Safety Technologies

(ARC)

System Vulnerability Detection

(ARC)

Design Tools& Ops forIn-Flight

Icing(GRC)

Vehicle Systems(HQ)

Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate(HQ)

2005Secure Aircraft

System for Information Flow

(GRC)

Aviation Safety & Security(HQ)

Planned Safety Projects from March 04 Planning Workshop

Current Safety Projects (end in FY 05)

Current Security Projects (end in FY09


14

Transformation of AvSSP Starting in FY06

• Emphasis on “barrier-breaking” technologies and/or paradigm-shifting research.

• Fewer projects than planned during March 2004 Industry/Gov’t workshops.

• More emphasis on unique role of NASA (“as only NASA can”); example:

Industry/FAA Voluntary Aviation Safety Information-sharing Process (VASIP)— Designed to provide means for aviation industry and FAA sharing of safety-

related information to proactively identify, analyze and correct safety issues — Develops a technical process to extract de-identified safety data from any

participating airline FOQA and ASAP programs, aggregate it through distributed databases and make it accessible to appropriate industry stakeholders for analysis

— NASA identified as having the institutional background, resources and personnel capable of developing this technical aggregation framework, as well as the analytical tools to support the process

• Barriers can be socio-political in nature.

Integrated Flight DeckInformation Systems

(LaRC)

Aircraft Systems Self-Diagnosis and Self-

Reliance (LaRC)

Threat and Human Error Management

(ARC)

Integrated Safety Data for Strategic Response (ARC)

High Temperature Hazard

Mitigation(GRC)

Design Tools& Ops forIn-Flight

Icing(GRC)


(GRC)

Vehicle Safety Technologies (LaRC)


(ARC)

Aviation SafetyReporting System

(ARC/FAA)

Self-PreservingAircraft

Safe Single-PilotOperations

Safety & SecurityInformation Sharing

Cyber SecureAir Transportation

Aviation SafetyReporting System

(ARC/FAA)

Foundational

Research Program

Directed Research

Competed DemonstrationProjects starting in FY07

Phase I Final YearFY05 Projects

FY06+ ProjectsFrom March 04 Workshop

AvSSP Research Transition Plan: FY05-FY07+Approach: fewer Projects consistent with resources

TransformationalFY07 Paradigm

FY06 TransitionActivities inFormulation

Integrated Safety Data for Strategic Response (ARC)

Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability Mitigation

(LaRC)


(ARC)

Secure Aircraft System for Information Flow

(GRC)

Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability Mitigation (LaRC) thru FY09

System VulnerabilityDetection (ARC) thru FY09

Secure Aircraft System for Information Flow (GRC) thru FY09

Planning & Prep forCompeted Projects

Applied/Operational& Basic Research

Implementation RiskReduction for Phase I

Av

iati

on

Sa

fety

Av

iati

on

Se

cu

rity

FY06 OngoingActivities

Airspace Systems(HQ)

Safe Single-Pilot OperationFY 07-11

Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability

Mitigation(LaRC)


(GRC)

Self-Preserving AircraftFY 07-12

Safety and Security Information Sharing

FY 07-12


(LaRC)

Cyber Secure Air Transportation

FY 10-14


(ARC)


(ARC)

Vehicle Systems(HQ)

Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate(HQ)

Secure Aircraft System for

Information Flow(GRC)

Aviation Safety & Security(HQ)

Future Projects from FY07 Program Operating Plan

Current Safety Projects (End in FY 05)

Ongoing Security Projects

Summaries of FY07 Competed Demonstrations

Self-PreservingAircraft

Safe Single-PilotOperations

Safety & SecurityInformation Sharing

Cyber SecureAir Transportation

Addresses capabilities for detecting, managing, and mitigating events, failures, and errors that would otherwise lead to hazardous situations and could result in injury and death of people. In designing self-preserving aircraft systems, a verification and validation basis for certification must be developed. Demonstrations should occur on real/virtual “obstacle courses” where hazard precursors are staged and vehicle adaptability and performance are observed.

Current and evolutionary flight deck systems, operational concepts, and technologies do not promote optimal pilot situation awareness, workload allocation, and decision-making. Demonstrate reliable adaptive automation and pilot interfaces that prevent unsafe flight situations due to breakdown between human/machine interface and technologies to enable general aviation and single crew cargo operations with safety equivalent to two-crew operation. Demonstrate improved human and automation reliability.

Demonstrate government/industry sharing of key safety risk and security vulnerability information and demonstrate a working prototype of network-based integration of information sources allowing assessment of risk within the National Aviation System. This prototype will be scalable within the proprietary firewalls of a single operator to NAS-wide functionality, will be flexible across both strategic and tactical timeframes, and should overcome obstacles to interoperability of distributed data sources.

Demonstrate a robust cyber attack-proof e-aircraft (i.e., one that is fully capable of exploiting all characteristics of a fully digital airspace) operating in a future, digital secure NAS network to enable secure network operations with no loss in efficiency due to security measures. Ensure security risk reduction technologies that enhance efficient NAS operations by demonstrating seamless, fully secured, mobile, scaleable networks.


18

Current AvSSP University and Cost-Shared Partnerships


19

Historical AvSSPUniversity Partnerships, FY04 in $K

Langley Research Center $3,213Hampton, VA

Ames Research Center $4,359Moffett Field, CA

Glenn Research Center $2,524Cleveland, OH

TOTAL Program University Procurement $10,096

Approximately 12% of FY04 Procurement directly funds University Research; equivalent to 6% of Total Program Full-Cost dollars; itemized list of recipients in Back-Up Charts


20

FY04 AvSSP University Contracts, CooperativeAgreements, Grants & Purchase Orders

Contracts

CooperativeAgreements

Grants

PurchaseOrders

4

59

21

33


21

Future (FY06-10) Acquisition Strategies


22

AvSSP Business / Acquisition Strategy(Circa 1998, Updated 2005)

• NASA ARMD objective: cost-sharing preferred, ie., NASA should “not pay for all of anything”

• Joint NASA/FAA/industry workshops called for moving from investment areas to specific implementation options (1997 ASIST)

- Technical discussions- Identified appropriate Government/industry/academic roles- Facilitated industry team-building

• Used standard competitive procurements where required specifications are known

• Used workshop results to intelligently structure NRA solicitations for new technology developments

- Cost-sharing is selection factor- Emphasis on motivation/time/team for implementation/commercialization

• Established Cooperative Agreements as preferred arrangement with selected NRA offerors

• Aviation Safety 2000-2005 NRA’s were highly successful in leveraging NASA funds, securing partner commitment

to R&D products, & handing-off of mature technologies.


23

FY06-10 Budget Prospectus

• Significant cuts from current FY05 $906M Aeronautics Research budgets in out years.• Major reductions in Vehicle Systems Program• Significant transformations in acquisition strategies

within Airspace Systems & AvSSP

data from Feb. 7 budget release now in public domain


24

Future Acquisition Strategies

• Increased pressure for competitive selection similar to past NASA Research Announcement (NRA) process.• By FY07, ~50% of total Full-Cost budgets will be “Competed.”• Remainder considered to be “Directed” funding and

“Foundational” research.• Currently only ~25% of total Full-Cost budget is considered

“Procurement” available for technical work.

• AvSSP currently has no specific acquisition targets for University work in the out-years.

• A significant percentage of the new Foundational Research Program will target University partners.

Comparison of Current and FutureAvSSP Acquisition Strategies

25%

75%

~75%

~5%

Procurement:$’s available for in-house& out-of-house research

Non-Procurement:

SalariesTravel

Institutional Support

Competed Demonstrations:Including:SalariesTravelInstitutional Support

Directed Research:Including:SalariesTravelInstitutional Support

Foundational Research Program

FY05 Full-Cost Model FY07 Model

~20%


26

Challenges within the New Strategy

• NASA Institutions may be in direct competition with outside entities for 50% of future research dollars.

• Research and institutional segments of NASA will need to partner with Universities, industry & Other Government Agencies to win some significant percentage of Competed Acquisitions.

• NASA aviation safety research has addressed needs of:• Manufacturers (airframe, engine, avionics)• Airlines (crew procedures, fatigue, maintenance, training)• Air traffic control (facility day-to-day operations)

• ARMD will need to determine level of support for operational research needed to…• Maintain safety in an environment of continuous change within those segments of

aviation that are currently enjoying historically-low accident rates, namely, Part 121 commercial-transport operations. Changes may come in the form of introduction of new aircraft, new airspace operational paradigms, new avionics, changing pilot demographics, evolving security threats, airline cost-cutting, and a host of other factors.

• Improve safety in those segments of aviation that are viewed as the least safe, namely, GA, public-safety aircraft, single-pilot light jets, etc.


27

System Safety Technologies, System Wide Accident Prevention (SWAP) Sub-ProjectOverhaul of Southwest Airlines procedures resulted in a 60% reduction of problems in line ops.

Mean Number of Problems on Target Items per Flight

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Line Crews Test Crews Week 1Test Crews

Week 3Test Crews

4 monthsLine Crews

Mean Number of Problems

After Insertion ofSWAP Training Procedures

Academia NASA BRIDGE Operational Community

VP of Southwest Airlines has invited AvSS

Division Manager, George Finelli, to SW

HQ at DFW to give him kudos on NASA

SWAP tools that made this possible.


28

NASA Aviation Safety Reporting SystemGeneral Accomplishments• Since the implementation of the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) in 1976, over 637,000 reports have been

submitted by pilots, mechanics, air traffic controllers, cabin attendants, and other aviation personnel.

• The ASRS is the largest repository of aviation human factors incidents in the world.

• The ASRS has accomplished over 7,100 database searches for government agencies, students, universities, research organizations, international organizations, aircraft manufacturers, etc.

• Since 1976, the ASRS has issued over 3,400 safety alert messages in the form of Alert Bulletins & For Your Information Notices. Approximately, 47% of the addressee responses indicated that a follow-up action was taken as a result of the safety alert message.

Example Operational Impacts

• Identified and alerted the FAA Office of Aviation Safety & the National Business Aviation Association to the increasing frequency of Teterboro Airport (TEB) departure conflicts with Newark Airport (EWR) arrivals. NBAA has notified its members to be on alert for amended altitudes and headings, while the FAA has instructed its controllers to ensure clear and concise communications be initiated especially as they relate to TEB 5 IDP amendment procedures.

• Issued several ASRS Alert Bulletins to Embraer concerning EMB135/145 cockpit seat lock failures. FAA Flight Standards response indicated possible issuance of an AD to address the problem.

Example NTSB Accident Support

• Accomplished a database search request on TCAS conflict incidents for the NTSB in support of the investigation of the B757 and Tu154 mid-air collision over Germany.

Academia NASA BRIDGE Operational Community


29

Upcoming Activities

• Aviation Safety and Security Program Sub-Committee of the Aeronautics Research Advisory Committee Meeting scheduled Q2 2005.

• Replanning of current AvSSP portfolio consistent with available resources.

• Non-Advocate Review of portfolio in late FY05 or early FY06 in preparation for AvSSP II start.


30

Concluding Remarks

• Significant paradigm-shifting work has been accomplished in the 5 years of Aviation Safety; FY05 is the final year of implementation.

• First year of implementation for Aviation Security projects going very well - Subprojects are well coordinated with customers/partners - Vulnerability assessment is providing a firm foundation for implementing activities in all technical areas

• Construction of future Aviation Safety R&D portfolio well underway; awaiting final FY 2006 and out budgets to complete.

• Increased emphasis on Competed Acquisitions in out-years of AvSSP II.

• As is currently the case, University research will play a key role in AvSSP research portfolio albeit on a competitive basis.


31

Back-up Charts


32

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Border & Transportation Security Directorate – Transportation

Security Administration (TSA)— Transportation Security Laboratory

– Regular & direct participation in several NASA technical working groups (TWGs)

— Transportation Security Policy & Security Technology Office

– Interactions at Program & HQ levels; MOU in-process

— Strategic Management & Analysis– Developing partnership for vulnerability

assessments– Currently scheduling a senior management

NASA/TSA courtesy visit and briefing Border & Transportation Security Directorate – Immigration &

Customs Enforcement (ICE)— Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS)

– Direct interaction at technology level, requirements negotiation at user level; MOU in-process

Science & Technology Directorate– Limited discussions, need to further develop

— System Engineering Development– Technical & Programmatic discussions with

Counter-MANPADS director— Discussions with Cyber Security Office

Chief Information Officer– Limited discussions, and invited to join working

group to strengthen sharing of terrorism information Business Liaison Director

– Limited discussions

Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

— Interagency Communications Team – Regular and direct coordination

— Aircraft Airworthiness; Air Traffic; Safety R&D Program

– Continuing strong partnerships developed in Aviation Safety Program and Airspace Systems Program

Homeland Security Presidential Directive(s) Interagency Working Groups

— Federal Critical Infrastructure Protection R&D Plan (HSPD-7)

– Cyber Security Infrastructure Protection R&D Plan Working Group member. Federal R&D Plan due President Dec. 2004

– Transportation Sector CIP R&D Plan

Although, not member of working group, reviewing draft

— Comprehensive Terrorist-Related Screening Procedures Report (HSPD-11)

– Member of team developing strategies to enhance effectiveness of screening activities, Report due President Nov 2004.

Coordination withHomeland Security-Related Organizations


33

Department of Defense (DoD) Air Force, Navy, Army

— Direct coordination between relevant NASA & DoD technical activities; leveraging NASA-DoD partnerships & existing MOAs

– I.e., Hanscome AFB, Eglin AFB, Wright-Patterson AFB, NAVAIR, AFRL, JTAMDO, Draper, NEADS, TRADOC, Tyndal AFB, ACC, NAVCAN, OSD AS&C, OSD-HD,

Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office (JASPO)– Regular & direct participation by JASPO &

Service personnel in NASA TWGs U.S. Northern Command and NORAD

— Joint Interagency Coordination Team member – regular member of various tiger teams– participates in exercises such as AV 04

National Innovative Technology & Mission Assurance Center (NITMAC)

– MOU in-process

White House Homeland Security Council, Border and Transportation Security Directorate

— Regular member on interagency working group ATF, FBI, USSS, NORAD, NORTHCOM, FAA, TSA, OSD, OMB, DOT, DHS)

Other Interagency Interagency Homeland Air Security (IHAS) Steering

Group— (Co-leads: White House Homeland Security

Council & JTAMDO; membership: NORAD, NORTHCOM, FAA, TSA, FBI, USSS, OSD, ASD-HD, ICE, FAMS)

— IHAS Steering Group and National Capital Region Working Group

– Regular participation by NASA Program Office & technical personnel

Coordination withHomeland Security-Related Organizations


34

Langley Research Center FY04 University Partnerships

OLD DOMINION UNIVDREXEL UNIVAUBURN UNIVUNIV MINNESOTASTATE UNIV NEW YORK BINGHAMTNGEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVUNIV VIRGINIAGEORGIA TECH APPLIED RES CORPEAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITYUNIV ILLINOIS URBANA CHAMPAGNUNIV IOWACOLLEGE WILLIAM & MARYCATHOLIC UNIVOHIO UNIVRUTGERS STATE UNIVHAMPTON UNIV


35

SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITYGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYFOOTHILL COMMUNITY COLLEGECLEMSON UNIVERSITYGIRVAN INSITITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYPURDUE UNIVERISITYRICE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZUNIVERSITY OF MARYLANDMOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINESTANFORD UNIVERSITYUNIV OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEYUNIV OF OKLAHOMA

Ames Research Center FY04 University Partnerships


36

CASE WESTERN RESERV UNIV CENTRAL STATE UNIV JOHNS HOPKINS UNIV MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIV OHIO AEROSPACE INSTITUTE OHIO STATE UNIV PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV UP UNIV AKRON UNIV ILLINOIS URBANA UNIV TEXAS SAN ANTONIO UNIV TOLEDO UNIV VIRGINIA UNIVERSITIES SPACE RESCHWASHINGTON UNIV ST LOUIS

Glenn Research Center FY04 University Partnerships

NASA Advisory Council to the Administrator

Small AircraftTransportation Sys SC

Safety Working GroupJohn O’Brien, Chair

Aviation SafetyReporting System SC

Aerospace TechnologyAdvisory Committee (ATAC)

Advisory body toAero Enterprise regarding

plans, policies, and programs D. Swain, Chair and B. Neumann, Exec. Sec.

Aeronautics Technology Subcommittee (ATS)To assess programs, provide advice on

appropriateness of the goals and objectives, assess adequacy of progress and quality of effort, and

recommend changesDavid Crow, Chair and Terry Hertz, Exec Sec

Mark Anderson Bill BorgerMike Benzakein Chris Hart John Hansman Jack Clemons John O’Brien Mark Miller Ron Swanda Richard Trusis

aeronautics research 1 aviation safety and security program overview and perspective on university...

Documents