Advancing Aeronautics: A Decision Framework for Selecting Research Agendas

Abstract : Publicly funded research has long played a role in the development of aeronautics, ranging from foundational research on airfoils to development of the air-traffic control system. Yet more than a century after the research and development of successful controlled, sustained, heavier-than-air flight vehicles, there are questions over the future of aeronautics research. The field of aeronautics is relatively mature, technological developments within it have become more evolutionary, and funding decisions are sometimes motivated by the continued pursuit of these evolutionary research tracks rather than by larger factors. These developments raise questions over whether public funding of aeronautics research continues to be appropriate or necessary and at what levels. Tightened federal budgets and increasing calls to address other public demands make these questions sharper still. To help it address the questions of appropriate directions for publicly funded aeronautics research, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) asked the RAND Corporation to assess the elements required to develop a strategic view of aeronautics research opportunities; identify candidate aeronautic grand challenges, paradigms, and concepts; outline a framework for evaluating them; and exercise the framework as an example of how to use it. Accordingly, this research seeks to address these questions: What aeronautics research should be supported by the U.S. government? What compelling and desirable benefits drive government-supported research? How should the government--especially NASA--make decisions about which research to support? Advancing aeronautics involves broad policy and decisionmaking challenges. Decisions involve tradeoffs among competing perspectives, uncertainties, and informed judgment.

[1]  Christian B Allen,et al.  12th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference , 2008 .

[2]  Paul K. Davis,et al.  Portfolio-Analysis Methods for Assessing Capability Options , 2008 .

[3]  Richard Silberglitt,et al.  The Global Technology Revolution 2020: Executive Summary: Bio/Nano/Materials/Information Trends, Drivers, Barriers, and Social Implications , 2006 .

[4]  Martijn Gough Climate change , 2009, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[5]  Anita D. Liang Reshaping NASA's Aeronautics Program , 2007 .

[6]  Paul R. Niven Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step for Government and Nonprofit Agencies , 2003 .

[7]  Gregory Tassey,et al.  Methods for Assessing the Economic Impacts of Government R&D , 2003 .

[8]  Philip S. Anton Roles and Issues of NASA’s Wind Tunnel and Propulsion Test Facilities for American Aeronautics , 2005 .

[9]  Technical Systems,et al.  COMMISSION ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SYSTEMS , 1999 .

[10]  A. M. Turing,et al.  Computing Machinery and Intelligence , 1950, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[11]  A. Chalk Market Forces and Commercial Aircraft Safety , 1987 .

[12]  G. Wayne Clough,et al.  Office of Science and Technology Policy Hearing Welcome Remarks , 1999 .

[13]  Lance Fortnow,et al.  The status of the P versus NP problem , 2009, CACM.

[14]  A Chalk MARKET FORCES AND AIRCRAFT SAFETY: THE CASE OF THE DC-10 , 1994 .

[15]  Richard Silberglitt,et al.  Portfolio Analysis and Management for Naval Research and Development , 2003 .

[16]  M. B. Zimmerman,et al.  Market Incentives for Safe Commercial Airline Operation , 1988 .

[17]  Susan P Baker,et al.  Crash risk in general aviation. , 2007, JAMA.

[18]  Henry R. Hertzfeld,et al.  Research and development project selection in the public sector , 1998 .

[19]  Richard Silberglitt,et al.  Toward Affordable Systems: Portfolio Analysis and Management for Army Science and Technology Programs , 2009 .

[20]  Joseph E. Aldy,et al.  The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates Throughout the World , 2003 .

[21]  H Sackman,et al.  Delphi Assessment: Expert Opinion, Forecasting, and Group Process , 1974 .

[22]  Alain Garcia ACARE : the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe , 2011 .

[23]  Alex Velicki,et al.  Advanced PRSEUS Structural Concept Design and Optimization , 2008 .

[24]  Alberto Elfes,et al.  Postoptimality Analysis in the Selection of Technology Portfolios , 2006 .

[25]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Evaluation and Recommendations for Improvement of the Department of Defense Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program , 2006 .

[26]  Christopher Bolkcom,et al.  Homeland Security: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Border Surveillance , 2004 .

[27]  Richard Mesic,et al.  Wind Tunnel and Propulsion Test Facilities: Supporting Analyses to an Assessment of NASA's Capabilities to Serve National Needs , 2005 .

[28]  Orlando Strambi,et al.  URBAN TRANSPORTATION ECONOMICS , 1994 .

[29]  nasa NASA's Role in Aeronautics: A Workshop. Volume 1: Summary , 2013 .

[30]  R. Dorf,et al.  The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into Action , 1997, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[31]  Susan Carlson Skalak House of Quality , 2002 .

[32]  Anne Nagel,et al.  The Balanced Scorecard Translating Strategy Into Action , 2002 .

[33]  Richard Silberglitt,et al.  The Global Technology Revolution 2020, In-Depth Analyses: Bio/Nano/Materials/Information Trends, Drivers, Barriers, and Social Implications , 2002 .

[34]  Roger E. Bilstein,et al.  Orders of Magnitude. A History of the NACA and NASA, 1915-1990. The NASA History Series. , 1989 .

[35]  E. Eckard,et al.  The Competitive Impact of Air Crashes: Stock Market Evidence* , 1998, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[36]  Nils Bruzelius,et al.  The value of travel time: Theory and measurement , 1979 .

[37]  Norman Crolee Dalkey,et al.  An experimental study of group opinion , 1969 .

[38]  Ilan Kroo,et al.  Innovations in Aeronautics 2004 AIAA Dryden Lecture , 2004 .

[39]  Paul K. Davis,et al.  Rand's Portfolio Analysis Tool (Pat): Theory, Methods, and Reference Manual , 2009 .

[40]  R. Nelson The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research , 1959, Journal of Political Economy.

[41]  P. Antón,et al.  The Global Technology Revolution: Bio/Nano/Materials Trends and Their Synergies with Information Technology by 2015 , 2001 .

[42]  Richard Silberglitt,et al.  A Delicate Balance: Portfolio Analysis and Management for Intelligence Information Dissemination Programs , 2009 .

[43]  Russell M. Cummings,et al.  Airplane design: Past, present, and future , 2002 .

[44]  William Sollfrey,et al.  Vertical Envelopment and the Future Transport Rotorcraft: Operational Considerations for the Objective Force , 2003 .

[45]  FortnowLance The status of the P versus NP problem , 2009 .

[46]  L. Sherry,et al.  A Decision Framework for Prioritizing Industrial Materials Research and Development , 2002 .

[47]  TWO-WEEK Loan COpy,et al.  University of California , 1886, The American journal of dental science.

[48]  EnergyInformationAdministration Annual Energy Outlook 2008 With Projections to 2030 , 2008 .

[49]  Keith Ridgway,et al.  QFD in new production technology evaluation , 2000 .

[50]  Russell M. Cummings,et al.  Airplane Design and the Biomechanics of Flight – A More Completely Multi- Disciplinary Perspective , 2004 .

[51]  Ilan Kroo,et al.  Innovations in Aeronautics , 2004 .

[52]  Jack L. Kerrebrock,et al.  Aviation and the Environment: A National Vision Statement, Framework for Goals and Recommended Actions , 2004 .

[53]  John C. Mankins,et al.  Technology Readiness Levels-A White Paper , 1995 .