[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TRANSFORMING AMERICA'S AIR TRAVEL
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
June 11, 2015
__________
Serial No. 114-22
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
95-227PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., ZOE LOFGREN, California
Wisconsin DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
DANA ROHRABACHER, California DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ERIC SWALWELL, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois AMI BERA, California
BILL POSEY, Florida ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts
RANDY K. WEBER, Texas DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado
JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan PAUL TONKO, New York
STEPHEN KNIGHT, California MARK TAKANO, California
BRIAN BABIN, Texas BILL FOSTER, Illinois
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas
BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
GARY PALMER, Alabama
BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
------
Subcommittee on Space
HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chair
DANA ROHRABACHER, California DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma AMI BERA, California
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas ZOE LOFGREN, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado
BILL POSEY, Florida MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
STEVE KNIGHT, California
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
C O N T E N T S
June 11, 2015
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Brian Babin, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Space, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 10
Written Statement............................................ 12
Statement by Representative Donna F. Edwards, Ranking Minority
Member, Subcommittee on Space, Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 13
Written Statement............................................ 15
Witnesses:
Dr. Jaiwon Shin, Associate Administrator, Aeronautics Mission
Directorate, NASA; and Member FAA Research and Development
Advisory Committee
Oral Statement............................................... 17
Written Statement............................................ 19
Mr. Dennis Filler, Director, William J. Hughes Technical Center,
FAA
Oral Statement............................................... 31
Written Statement............................................ 33
Mr. William Leber, Chair, National Research Council report titled
``Transformation in the Air--A Review of the FAA Research
Plan;'' and Vice President, Air Traffic Innovations, PASSUR
Aerospace
Oral Statement............................................... 46
Written Statement............................................ 47
Dr. R. John Hansman, T. Wilson Professor of Aeronautics &
Astronautics; Director, MIT International Center for Air
Transportation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and
Chair, FAA Research and Development Advisory Committee
Oral Statement............................................... 54
Written Statement............................................ 55
Dr. Greg Hyslop, Senior Member, American Institute for
Aeronautics and Astronautics; Vice President and General
Manager, Boeing Research & Technology; Chief Engineer,
Engineering, Operations & Technology, the Boeing Company
Oral Statement............................................... 59
Written Statement............................................ 61
Discussion....................................................... 68
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Dr. Jaiwon Shin, Associate Administrator, Aeronautics Mission
Directorate, NASA; and Member FAA Research and Development
Advisory Committee............................................. 82
Mr. Dennis Filler, Director, William J. Hughes Technical Center,
FAA............................................................ 98
Mr. William Leber, Chair, National Research Council report titled
``Transformation in the Air--A Review of the FAA Research
Plan;'' and Vice President, Air Traffic Innovations, PASSUR
Aerospace...................................................... 128
Dr. R. John Hansman, T. Wilson Professor of Aeronautics &
Astronautics; Director, MIT International Center for Air
Transportation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and
Chair, FAA Research and Development Advisory Committee......... 132
Dr. Greg Hyslop, Senior Member, American Institute for
Aeronautics and Astronautics; Vice President and General
Manager, Boeing Research & Technology; Chief Engineer,
Engineering, Operations & Technology, the Boeing Company....... 137
Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record
Statement submitted by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
U.S. House of Representatives.................................. 148
TRANSFORMING AMERICA'S AIR TRAVEL
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 2015
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Space
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:02 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brian
Babin [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Babin. Good morning. The Subcommittee on Space
will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare
recesses of the Committee at any time. Without objection, the
Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's
Subcommittee on Aviation, Mr. LoBiondo, will be allowed to
participate in today's hearing.
And welcome to today's hearing titled ``Transforming
America's Air Travel.'' I recognize myself for five minutes for
an opening statement.
Before we begin this morning, I want to thank Chairman
Lamar Smith and my colleagues for the opportunity to serve as
the Chairman of the Space Subcommittee. It is truly an honor
and a privilege. And my district includes the Johnson Space
Center and many of National Aeronautics and Space
Administration's astronauts, scientists, engineers,
technicians, and contractors, and they call the 36th district
of Texas home. Because of this, I am keenly aware of the
opportunities and challenges that face NASA and our aerospace
sector. I look forward to working with Chairman Smith, Ranking
Member Johnson, Ranking Member Edwards, and this Congress.
I also want to thank Chairman Palazzo for his leadership
during what has been a very busy spring for the Space
Subcommittee. Thankfully, he is moving to the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Commerce, Science, and Justice which still has
jurisdiction over NASA spending, so I am certain that we will
stay in touch.
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of
the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, also known as
NACA. Founded in 1915 to supervise and direct the scientific
study of the problems of flight with a view to their practical
solution, NACA was ultimately incorporated into NASA when
Congress passed the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
That same year, Congress also established the Federal Aviation
Administration's predecessor, the Federal Aviation Agency.
NACA's legacy of civilian aeronautics and aviation research and
development is now carried out by NASA and FAA.
The aeronautics research carried out by these agencies is
vital to our nation's prosperity. Aviation accounts for $1.5
trillion in economic activity and a $78.3 billion positive
trade balance. Civil and general aviation is responsible for
11.8 million jobs in the U.S. and generates 5.4 percent of our
gross domestic product. Put simply, aviation is one of the
pillars of our economy.
And while we currently enjoy the benefits of our nation's
early investments in aeronautics R&D, other nations are now
attempting to challenge our leadership. This is particularly
troubling when the largest growth sector is not here in the
United States but in Asia. In order to maintain our leadership,
we must strategically prioritize our government investments,
provide a competitive environment for industry, and coordinate
and clearly define public and private sector efforts to
maximize efficiencies and minimize duplication that may crowd
out investment. If we are successful in these efforts, the
potential aerospace breakthroughs in the coming decades are
very, very promising.
Advances in hypersonic flight could revolutionize the
aerospace sector. Continued research into supersonics and air
traffic management could greatly reduce flight times.
Structural and material research stands to improve safety and
save lives. Unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, research and
development could benefit agriculture, search and rescue,
fighting forest fires, mapping and surveying, and even package
delivery.
In order to realize these benefits, we must be ever
vigilant. NASA and FAA will have to ensure that the research
they support does not duplicate private sector investments. For
instance, industry has a considerable incentive to develop
safer, more reliable, and more efficient aircraft. Federal
intervention and support should be limited to high-risk, high-
reward research that the private sector cannot or will not do
on their own. Without such prioritization, valuable resources
risk being diluted among disparate tasks. This requires a great
deal of coordination between NASA and the FAA.
Many of the activities that we will be discussing today are
conducted by both these agencies. In 2003, Congress established
the Joint Planning Development Office, or JPDO, to coordinate
efforts between NASA, FAA, and other agencies to develop the
Next Generation Air Transportation System, known as NextGen.
JPDO functions were recently rolled into the NextGen program
office, but the issue highlights an overarching theme that
Congress will have to monitor. As budgets tighten, NASA should
not be used as a piggy bank for other agency requirements.
As many have pointed out in the past, the first A in NASA
is aeronautics. But we need to be clear: aeronautics is more
than just air traffic management, aviation efficiency, and
green fuels. NASA has a long and proud tradition of pushing the
boundaries of the possible, a legacy that it should ensure
continues into the future. Similarly, we need to ensure that
FAA is focused on safety and efficiency. That clearly requires
coordination, but hopefully will not cause wasteful duplication
or sacrifice the cutting-edge breakthroughs we're used to.
Aerospace and aviation research promise many benefits, but
not without challenges. NextGen continues to lack clearly
defined cost, schedule, and performance parameters. Last year,
the FAA Inspector General testified that the initial cost
estimate of $40 billion split between federal and private
sector investment could double or even triple, and that
implementation could take an additional decade. This is
unacceptable. Congress either needs better baselines and
metrics to track progress, or a different plan. In the interim,
I fear that valuable R&D funding, the very seed corn of future
prosperity, is being used to simply maintain World War II-era
systems.
The challenges are also near term. While Congress waits for
NextGen details, reports of potential cyber vulnerabilities to
aircraft and NextGen systems proliferate in the press. While
recent allegations may be overstated, respected and
knowledgeable experts, such as the Government Accountability
Office and the National Research Council, have warned that
cybersecurity should play a more prominent role in NextGen
development.
I want to conclude by thanking our witnesses for being here
today to discuss aeronautics and aviation research. This highly
esteemed panel will certainly inform the Committee's
consideration of the Research, Engineering, and Development
activities at FAA. I look forward to their testimony and I
appreciate their participation.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Babin follows:]
Prepared Statement of Subcommittee on Space
Chairman Brian Babin
Before we begin this morning, I want to thank Chairman Smith and my
colleagues for the opportunity to serve as the Chairman of the Space
Subcommittee. It is truly an honor and a privilege. My district
includes the Johnson Space Center and many of National Aeronautics and
Space Administration's (NASA) astronauts, scientists, engineers,
technicians, and contractors call the 36th district of Texas home.
Because of this, I am keenly aware of the opportunities and challenges
facing NASA and the aerospace sector. I look forward to working with
Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and Ranking Member Edwards this
Congress. I also want to thank Chairman Palazzo for his leadership
during what has been a very busy spring for the Space Subcommittee.
Thankfully he is moving to the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce,
Science, and Justice which has jurisdiction over NASA spending, so I am
certain we will stay in touch.
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of the
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, or ``NACA.'' Founded in
1915 to ``supervise and direct the scientific study of the problems of
flight with a view to their practical solution,'' NACA was ultimately
incorporated into NASA when Congress passed the National Aeronautics
and Space Act of 1958. That same year, Congress also established the
Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) predecessor, the Federal
Aviation Agency. NACA's legacy of civilian aeronautics and aviation
research and development (R&D) is now carried out by NASA and FAA.
The aeronautics research carried out by these agencies is vital to
our nation's prosperity. Aviation accounts for $1.5 trillion in
economic activity and a $78.3 billion positive trade balance. Civil and
general aviation is responsible for 11.8 million jobs in the U.S. and
generates 5.4 percent of our gross domestic product. Put simply,
aviation is one of the pillars of our economy.
While we currently enjoy the benefits of our nation's early
investments in aeronautics R&D, other nations are now attempting to
challenge our leadership. This is particularly troubling when the
largest growth sector is not here in the U.S., but in Asia. In order to
maintain our leadership, we must strategically prioritize our
government investments, provide a competitive environment for industry,
and coordinate and clearly define public and private sector efforts to
maximize efficiencies and minimize duplication that may crowd-out
investment.
If we are successful in these efforts, the potential aerospace
breakthroughs in the coming decades are promising. Advances in
hypersonic flight could revolutionize the aerospace sector. Continued
research into supersonics and air traffic management could greatly
reduce flight times. Structural and material research stands to improve
safety and save lives. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) R&D could
benefit agriculture, search and rescue, fighting forest fires, mapping
and surveying, and even package delivery.
In order to realize these benefits, we must be ever-vigilant. NASA
and FAA will have to ensure that the research they support does not
duplicate private sector investments. For instance, industry has a
considerable incentive to develop safer, more reliable, and more
efficient aircraft. Federal intervention and support should be limited
to high-risk, high-reward research that the private sector cannot or
will not do on their own. Without such prioritization, valuable
resources risk being diluted among disparate tasks. This requires a
great deal of coordination between NASA and the FAA. Many of the
activities we will be discussing today are conducted by both these
agencies.
In 2003, Congress established the Joint Planning Development Office
(JPDO) to coordinate efforts between NASA, FAA, and other agencies to
develop the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). JPDO
functions were recently rolled into the NextGen program office, but the
issue highlights an overarching theme that Congress will have to
monitor. As budgets tighten, NASA should not be used as a piggy-bank
for other agency requirements. As many have pointed out in the past,
the first ``A'' in NASA is ``aeronautics.'' But we need to be clear--
aeronautics is more than just air traffic management, aviation
efficiency, and green fuels. NASA has a long and proud tradition of
pushing the boundaries of the possible, a legacy it should ensure
continues into the future. Similarly, we need to ensure FAA is focused
on safety and efficiency. That clearly requires coordination, but
hopefully it will not cause wasteful duplication or sacrifice cutting-
edge breakthroughs.
Aerospace and aviation research promise many benefits, but not
without challenges. NextGen continues to lack clearly defined cost,
schedule, and performance parameters. Last year, the FAA Inspector
General testified that the initial cost estimate of $40 billion split
between federal and private sector investment could double or triple,
and that implementation could take an additional decade. This is
unacceptable. Congress either needs better baselines and metrics to
track progress, or a different plan. In the interim, I fear that
valuable R&D funding, the seed corn of future prosperity, is being used
to simply maintain World War II-era systems.
The challenges are also near-term. While Congress waits for NextGen
details, reports of potential cyber vulnerabilities to aircraft and
NextGen systems proliferate in the press. While recent allegations may
be overstated, respected and knowledgeable experts, such as the
Government Accountability Office and the National Research Council,
have warned that cyber security should play a more prominent role in
NextGen development.
I want to conclude by thanking our witnesses for being here today
to discuss aeronautics and aviation research. This highly esteemed
panel will certainly inform the Committee's consideration of the
Research, Engineering, and Development activities at FAA. I look
forward to their testimony and appreciate their participation.
Chairman Babin. I now recognize the Ranking Member, the
gentlewoman from Maryland, for an opening statement.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and good
morning, and welcome also to our panel of witnesses. Also,
welcome to my colleague, Mr. LoBiondo from the Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee. I appreciate your participation
today.
Mr. Chairman, I really want to thank you for calling this
hearing to review the current state of U.S. civil aeronautics
research and development. But before I begin, I also want to
congratulate you on your Chairmanship of this Subcommittee. I
had a wonderful, what started out as a working relationship
with former Chairman Palazzo and quickly became a friendship,
and I look forward to the same relationship as we move forward.
I know that we share many goals, such as maintaining a robust
aerospace industry, ensuring that our modernization of the air
traffic management system is done safely, and sustaining the
strength of NASA and our space program going forward. I look
forward to working with you during what remains of this session
on identifying the common ground that will enable us to develop
policies and legislation reflective of this Committee's history
of bipartisanship.
A century ago, our nation had the foresight to create the
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA). NACA, which
became NASA, led many breakthroughs in research and design that
changed the course of aeronautics and aviation. Today, U.S.
civil aviation is a symbol of our nation's ingenuity and
ability to design, develop, and manufacture products that are
second to none in the world. And as many of my colleagues know,
aviation is vital to our economy and to our mobility, as
pointed out by the Chairman. In fact, the numbers are
staggering. Aviation contributes more than $1.5 trillion
annually to the U.S. economy. It supports 11.8 million direct
and indirect jobs, and, it is one of the few U.S. industries
that generates a positive trade balance, something we should
consider for today, a positive contribution of $78.3 billion in
2014.
However, it would be unwise for us to just rest on our
laurels. Countries with both mature and less mature
capabilities are investing in aviation and aeronautics for
their strategic contributions to technology, education,
workforce development, and global competitiveness. And the
market for air travel is changing, with growth in the Asia
Pacific region projected to dramatically expand world air
traffic by 2050.
With such growth also come challenges. For example, in
2013, U.S. airlines burned 16 billion gallons of jet fuel, and
the cost of delays to U.S. airlines during that same year was
$8.1 billion. Increasing fuel efficiency, lessening delays, and
minimizing negative environmental effects such as noise and
carbon emissions are at the heart of strengthening our civil
aviation system.
To that end, experts recognized 15 years ago that the
existing approach to managing air transportation was becoming
operationally obsolete, and there was a strong concern that the
National Airspace System was approaching capacity. Congress
established the Next Generation Air Transportation System
initiative--known as NextGen--in its 2003 Vision 100 Federal
Aviation Administration Reauthorization to address just these
concerns. But over the past ten years, FAA's overall progress
in developing NextGen has been slower than expected and the
agency is now focused on implementing industry recommendations
for near-term benefits.
Mr. Chairman, research and development is providing the
tools FAA will need to implement NextGen and improve the
nation's aviation system so that it can respond to changing and
expanding transportation needs. Because of the lengthy
gestation period needed to move forward from concept to
deployment, industry has often been reluctant or unable to
apply resources to high-risk, fundamental aeronautics R&D, an
investment which is the precursor to bringing new technologies
and capabilities to market.
As a result, the federal government, primarily NASA and
FAA, in partnership with industry and universities, plays a
critical role in carrying out the R&D that enables advances in
aviation. So it does concern me, as I am sure it also concerns
the Chairman, that Congress has yet to receive FAA's National
Aviation Research Plan for 2015, and even for 2014, despite
that fact that those plans are required to be submitted to
Congress no later than the time of the President's annual
budget submission. Majority and Minority Members on this
Committee need those FAA research plans to inform a
reauthorization of FAA's research and development activities,
to carry out oversight, and to assess the contributions that
R&D makes to NextGen's implementation.
For example, we need to know what kind of R&D activities
are planned in cybersecurity, software assurance, human
factors, and the certification of new technologies into the
National Airspace System, all critical areas for the future
viability and safety of the National Airspace System.
So I'm looking forward to hearing from our witnesses on the
status of aviation R&D activities, because, you see, Mr.
Chairman, we need to work together to leverage the expertise
and capabilities of government, industry, and our universities.
Our reliance on aviation is indisputable, but the challenges
are steep if we are to maintain our global preeminence as well
as the safety of the nation's aviation system. I'm confident
that properly funded research by NASA and FAA, in collaboration
with industry and university partners, will enable us to
achieve that goal.
Again, I want to thank our witnesses for appearing before
the Subcommittee, and I look forward to your testimony. I thank
you, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Edwards follows:]
Prepared Statement of Subcommittee on Space
Ranking Member Donna F. Edwards
Good morning, and welcome to our panel of witnesses. Mr. Chairman,
thank you for calling this hearing to review the current state of U.S.
civil aeronautics research and development.
But before I start, allow me to congratulate you on your
Chairmanship of this Subcommittee. I know that we share many goals,
such as maintaining a robust aerospace industry, ensuring that our
modernization of the air traffic management is done safely, and
sustaining the strength of NASA and our space program going forward.
I look forward to working with you this session on identifying the
common ground that will enable us to develop policies and legislation
reflective of this Committee's history of bipartisanship.
A century ago, our nation had the foresight to create the National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA). NACA, which became NASA, led
many breakthroughs in research and design that changed the course of
aeronautics and aviation.
Today, U.S. civil aviation is a symbol of our nation's ingenuity
and ability to design, develop, and manufacture products that are
second to none. And, as many of my colleagues know, aviation is vital
to our economy and mobility.
The numbers are staggering:
Aviation contributes more than 1.5 trillion dollars
annually to the U.S. economy.
It supports 11.8 million direct and indirect jobs.
And, it is one of the few U.S. industries that generates
a positive trade balance--a positive contribution of 78.3 billion
dollars in 2014.
However, it would be unwise for us to rest on our laurels.
Countries with both mature and less mature capabilities are
investing in aviation and aeronautics for their strategic contributions
to technology, education, workforce development, and global
competitiveness. And, the market for air travel is changing, with
growth in the Asia Pacific region projected to dramatically expand
world air traffic by 2050. With such growth come challenges.
For example, in 2013, U.S. airlines burned 16 billion gallons of
jet fuel, and the cost of delays to U.S. airlines during that same year
was 8.1 billion dollars. Increasing fuel efficiency, lessening delays,
and minimizing negative environmental effects such as noise and carbon
emissions are at the heart of strengthening our civil aviation system.
To that end, experts recognized fifteen years ago that the existing
approach to managing air transportation was becoming operationally
obsolete, and there was strong concern that the National Airspace
System was approaching capacity.
Congress established the Next Generation Air Transportation System
initiative-now known as NextGen--in its 2003 Vision 100 Federal
Aviation Administration Reauthorization to address these concerns. Over
the past ten years, FAA's overall progress in developing NextGen has
been slower than expected and the agency is now focused on implementing
industry recommendations for near-term benefits.
Mr. Chairman, research and development--R&D--is providing the tools
FAA will need to implement NextGen and improve the nation's aviation
system so that it can respond to changing and expanding transportation
needs.
Because of the lengthy gestation period needed to move from concept
to deployment, industry has often been reluctant or unable to apply
resources to high risk, fundamental aeronautics R&D--an investment
which is the precursor to bringing new technologies and capabilities to
market.
As a result, the federal government, primarily NASA and FAA, in
partnership with industry and universities, plays a critical role in
carrying out the R&D that enables advances in aviation.
So it concerns me, as I am sure it also concerns the Chairman, that
Congress has yet to receive FAA's National Aviation Research Plan for
2015, and even for 2014, despite that fact that those plans are
required to be submitted to Congress no later than the time of the
President's annual budget submission.
Majority and Minority Members on this Committee need those FAA
research plans to inform a reauthorization of FAA's research and
development activities, to carry out oversight, and to assess the
contributions that R&D makes to NextGen implementation.
For example, we need to know what kind of R&D activities are
planned in cybersecurity, software assurance, human factors, and the
certification of new technologies into the national airspace system-all
critical areas for the future viability and safety of the National
Airspace System.
So I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on the status of
aviation R&D activities.
Because, Mr. Chairman, we need to work together to leverage the
expertise and capabilities of Government, industry, and our
universities. Our reliance on aviation is indisputable, but the
challenges are steep if we are to maintain our global preeminence as
well as the safety of the nation's aviation system. I am confident that
properly funded research by NASA and FAA, in collaboration with
industry and university partners, will enable us to achieve that goal.
Again, I want to thank our witnesses for appearing before our
Subcommittee, and I look forward to your testimony.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Ms. Edwards. I appreciate that,
and I too am looking forward to working with you.
I'd like to introduce our witnesses at this time, and the
first witness is Dr. Jaiwon Shin. He's the NASA Associate
Administrator for the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate.
Dr. Shin also co-chairs the National Science and Technology
Council's Aeronautics, Science, and Technology Committee and is
also a member of the FAA Research and Development Advisory
Committee.
And now I'd like to recognize the gentleman from New
Jersey, Mr. LoBiondo, who is the Chair of the Aviation
Subcommittee. Thank you for being here.
Mr. LoBiondo. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you, and
congratulations. Thank you for the opportunity to sit in on
this hearing this morning. Ms. Edwards, thank you very much.
Our committees have a lot in common with a lot of common goals
and very important issues to discuss, and that's why I'm very
pleased this morning to welcome and introduce Dennis Filler,
who is the Director of the Federal Aviation Administration's
premier facility in the world for traffic management and
federal laboratories. There are almost in total a little bit
under 5,000 people, incredibly dedicated people who are very
inspiring with the work that they do, again for the premier
facility in the world for safety and security research and
development. Dennis has an expertise with the FAA, joining it
in 1992. He is a United States Military Academy graduate from
West Point, and incredible skills in both people management but
maybe more importantly, understanding that which takes place
that sometimes is extremely complicated, and I enjoy hearing
the stories of when some of the incredible, smart engineers are
discussing their solutions. Dennis actually asked to have the
formulas explained to him so he can review their thought
process through this. So thank you for allowing Dennis Filler
of the FAA's Directorate to be able to testify today.
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you
being here this morning.
And Bill Leber is the Co-Chair for the Committee to Review
the FAA Research Plan on Certification of New Technologies into
the National Airspace System. In addition to serving in this
position, Mr. Leber is also the Vice President for Air Traffic
Innovations at PASSUR Aerospace Inc. Thank you for being here.
Mr. John Hansman is the T. Wilson Professor of Aeronautics
and Astronautics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
or MIT. He is also the Director of MIT's International Center
for Air Transportation and the Chair of FAA's Research and
Development Advisory Committee. Dr. Hansman is a fellow of the
American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Dr. Greg Hyslop is the Senior Member at the AIAA and Vice
President and General Manager of Boeing Research and Technology
and the Chief Engineer for Engineering, Operations, and
Technology at the Boeing Company.
And I now recognize Dr. Shin for five minutes. Dr. Shin.
TESTIMONY OF DR. JAIWON SHIN,
ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR,
AERONAUTICS MISSION DIRECTORATE, NASA;
AND MEMBER FAA RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Dr. Shin. Good morning. Chairman Babin, Ranking Member
Edwards, Chairman LoBiondo, and Congressman Knight, thanks so
much for this opportunity to testify about NASA's aeronautics
R&D activities.
NASA's Aeronautics Research Program is making air travel
cleaner, safer, and more efficient by developing revolutionary
technologies to address a growing demand for mobility, severe
challenges to sustainability of energy and the environment, and
the advances in information, communication and automation
technologies. NASA's research directly benefits the passengers
and businesses who rely on aviation every day in the U.S.
aviation industry to continue to grow and maintain global
competitiveness.
NASA develops game-changing concepts, algorithms and
technologies to safely increase throughput and efficiency of
the National Airspace System. We work in close partnership with
the FAA and the aviation community to enable and extend the
benefits of NextGen. Our research programs also focus on major
leaps in the safety, efficiency, and environmental performance
of subsonic fixed and rotary-wing aircraft to meet growing
long-term civil aviation needs and also pioneering low-boom
supersonic flight to achieve new levels of global mobility and
sustaining hypersonic competency for national needs.
Partnerships are an essential part of NASA aeronautics
activities. Our partners include but are not limited to other
government agencies, U.S. aviation industry, and universities.
One of our most important government partners is the FAA. Over
the last several years, NASA, the FAA, and other federal agency
members of the Joint Planning and Development Office, or JPDO,
by working together defined the vision for the NextGen and
established a roadmap to get there over the long term. The
FAA's Interagency Planning Office continues to lead the
coordination of several key technology focus areas such as the
prioritization of UAS-related research and development across
federal agencies.
NASA's Air Traffic Management research has been developing
advanced ATM tools that will enable more accurate predictions
about air traffic, flow, weather, and routing. NASA also has
been working to ensure that these tools work well together and
demonstrate the potential of widespread use throughout the
system.
Our successful model for NASA/FAA collaboration is embodied
in Research Transition Teams, or RTTs. RTTs are designed to
enhance progress for NextGen advancement in critical areas and
effectively transition advanced capabilities to FAA for
implementation. RTTs serve as the bridge between NASA's long-
term, game-changing technology R&D and the FAA's R&D to support
near-term implementation and certification. Under RTTs, NASA
and FAA developed joint research plans and fund their
respective portions of the plan research according to the
nature of the research and their relatively capabilities.
Over the last four years, I am happy to report that NASA
has transitioned to five major technologies to FAA. NASA is
also researching unmanned aerial systems and, more broadly,
inclusive autonomous systems and technologies. NASA's UAS
Integration into NAS project is developing technologies that
address sense and avoid, communication, and human- machine
interaction challenges in order to enable safe and routine UAS
access to the NAS.
Through close coordination with FAA's UAS Integration
Office, industrial standards organizations and international
organizations, NASA's research provides validated findings that
inform the FAA's policy and rulemaking processes.
In order to safely enable widespread, small, civilian UAS--
which are less than 55 pounds--operations at low altitudes,
NASA has initiated research in UAS Traffic Management, or UTM.
The goal of UTM is to enable safe and efficient low-altitude
airspace operations by providing critical services such as
airspace design and geo-fencing, separation management, weather
and wind avoidance, routing, and contingency management.
Just as our aeronautics R&D investment over the last 100
years have shaped the aviation system of today, our current
portfolio is setting the foundation for the next 100 years of
aviation innovation. Business as usual is not going to
guarantee the United States' preeminence in the global market
nor will it enable us to meet these challenges. We must stay
with our proven formula of leadership through technological
superiority. NASA aeronautics has a unique and important role
in that formula. Long-term, revolutionary aeronautics research
has long provided the basis for new concepts and capabilities
leading to industry innovation and societal benefits.
ARMD will continue its role of undertaking research and
development that falls outside the scale, risk and payback
criteria that govern commercial investment.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I
look forward to answering any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Shin follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Dr. Shin.
I'd like to recognize Mr. Filler now for five minutes. Mr.
Filler.
TESTIMONY OF MR. DENNIS FILLER, DIRECTOR,
WILLIAM J. HUGHES TECHNICAL CENTER, FAA
Mr. Filler. Good morning. Chairman Babin, Ranking Member
Edwards, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Federal
Aviation Administration's aviation research and development
portfolio. I am Dennis Filler. I'm the Director of the William
J. Hughes Technical Center. I also serve as the FAA's Director
of Research. In that capacity, I am responsible for managing
the FAA's aviation research program.
Aviation is a vital resource for the United States. To
maximize the opportunities that the aviation industry provides,
the FAA must not only maintain, but continually improve, the
National Airspace System, or NAS. Collaborative, needs-driven
research, engineering and development is central to this
process. The FAA's research portfolio enables the United States
to remain a world leader in providing safe, efficient, and
environmentally sound air transportation.
FAA research, and specifically research conducted at our
Technical Center in Atlantic City, has contributed to making
aviation safer, both at home and abroad. For more than 50
years, the FAA's world-renowned researchers, scientists, and
engineers have developed technologies, standards, and
procedures that prevent inflight fires and improve
survivability. The National Transportation Safety Board
recognizes the Technical Center's contributions in fire safety
research saved lives during the horrific Asiana Airlines crash
in 2013.
In addition to making aviation safer, FAA research is
making it more efficient. Key NextGen foundational programs
such as ADS-B, ERAM, and DataComm have all been developed,
tested or began their nationwide deployment at the Technical
Center through our unique engineering, test, evaluation and
sustainment activities. Collectively, these programs will
deliver operational efficiencies into the National Airspace
System.
Our applied research is also delivering near-term benefits.
For example, our research into minimum wake turbulence
separation standards has allowed us to safely recategorize
distances needed between aircraft, which increases efficiency
and reduces flight delays. Because of wake RECAT, FedEx can
take advantage of a 13 percent increase in departure capacity
at Memphis, and at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport, Delta
Airlines projects reduced delays will save $14 to $19 million
in operating costs over a one-year period.
Greater efficiency also reduces the environmental impact of
aviation. The FAA is invested in accelerating new technologies
that reduce fuel burn, noise and emissions through the
Continuous Lower Energy Emissions and Noise program, or CLEEN.
This public-private partnership leverages limited federal funds
to develop technology to make today's aircraft fleet quieter
and more fuel-efficient.
Aviation is constantly evolving and there will always be a
need for applied research in response to these changing needs.
That is why we are conducting robust research around new
entrants to the airspace such as unmanned aircraft systems, or
UAS.
Recently, we announced the selection of a new Center of
Excellence for UAS, which will be led by a team from
Mississippi State University. The Center of Excellence will
focus on research, education and training in areas critical to
the safe integration of UAS into the nation's airspace. Also,
as part of the Pathfinder program, we're leveraging industry
interests in UAS applications to further explore other
integration opportunities. The trials performed in this program
could yield valuable data to further FAA-approved UAS
operations.
While we respect our past and its legacy, our vision is
firmly fixed on the future. We're committed to ensuring that
the United States continues to lead the world in the
development and implementation of aviation technology while we
continue to operate the safest and most efficient aviation
system in the world.
This concludes my statement. I'll be happy to answer any of
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Filler follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Mr. Filler. Thank you very much.
Now I recognize Mr. Leber for five minutes.
TESTIMONY OF MR. WILLIAM LEBER,
CHAIR, NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL REPORT TITLED
``TRANSFORMATION IN THE AIR--A REVIEW
OF THE FAA RESEARCH PLAN;''
AND VICE PRESIDENT,
AIR TRAFFIC INNOVATIONS, PASSUR AEROSPACE
Mr. Leber. Thank you, and good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Ranking Member, Members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak to you today on issues concerning civil
aeronautics research and the FAA reauthorization.
I'm here today in my capacity as one of the Co-Chairs of
the Committee of the National Research Council, which recently
reviewed an FAA research plan for certification of new
technologies. That report was requested in the FAA
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. It was released on
Monday, June 8, 2015.
Mr. Chairman, before commenting on the findings of our
report, I want to make clear that our committee had a very
narrow and limited charge. We were asked to review and comment
on this one research plan. The FAA has many other plans for
research and for other aspects of the implementation of
NextGen. We were not asked to and did not review those other
plans.
Our committee found that the February 2014 certification
research plan does not demonstrate how integration of aircraft,
ground systems, and procedures will occur in the National
Airspace System. It in particular omitted any substantive
discussion of the air segment. Successfully demonstrating how
integration will occur will create confidence in the
implementation and, we believe, attract stakeholder and
operator investment
Mr. Chairman, our committee believes that all stakeholders
will benefit substantially from the explanation of the end-to-
end processes necessary to certify, approve, and implement
advanced NextGen capabilities beyond the mid-term, that is,
five to seven years. In our view, a new FAA plan should outline
how the agency can best coordinate its research with other
relevant organizations, particularly NASA, which conducts
significant research of relevance on air traffic systems.
I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you about this
important National Research Council report, and I look forward
to addressing your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Leber follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Mr. Leber.
I recognize Dr. Hansman for five minutes.
TESTIMONY OF DR. R. JOHN HANSMAN,
T. WILSON PROFESSOR OF AERONAUTICS
& ASTRONAUTICS; DIRECTOR,
MIT INTERNATIONAL CENTER
FOR AIR TRANSPORTATION,
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY;
AND CHAIR, FAA RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Dr. Hansman. Good morning. Chairman Babin, Ranking Member
Edwards, and Members of the Committee, thanks for the
opportunity to be here today to talk about research and its
importance in aviation in the United States.
Research and development is vital to maintaining the
safety, efficiency, environmental performance, and security of
aviation in the United States and the rest of the world. The
FAA oversees and operates the largest and most complicated
National Airspace System in the world, and it needs R&D to
maintain and improve the performance of the system.
As Chair of the REDAC Committee, I'll just mention some of
the things that we have identified to the FAA of some of the
strategic areas that we think are important. One that's been
mentioned is the integration of UAS in the NAS. Another has
also been mentioned, the efficient operational approval of new
capabilities into the system to enable things like NextGen, so
we have the technologies. We have to figure out how we actually
get them operationally approved.
Human factors of increasingly automated systems as the
Asiana accident represents, we have more automation in
airplanes. We have to understand how humans interact with these
things, both in the air and on the ground.
Data integrity and cybersecurity has also been mentioned.
Cybersecurity is an emerging concern in aviation. It's been
around for a long time. Some of the vulnerabilities may be
overstated but this is clearly an important area for research.
There's also opportunities we feel to leverage Big Data.
You know, the airspace system actually generates one of the
nicest sets of data that's out there, and it gives us an
opportunity to understand the dynamics of this complicated
system.
Also, the other thing that the FAA needs to do is do
research to be prepared to either use or approve new
technologies as they emerge. For example, additive
manufacturing, as we start to think about building airplanes
with printing technology, do we have the understanding to make
those approvals? Or the impact of portable devices, the iPhones
and iPads that we all carry around, can change how cockpits and
airplanes are operated, but there are systemic issues in terms
of both vulnerability and how those would interact with the
rest of the system, so we need to be doing research to support
all those.
I'm happy to take any further questions or talk in more
detail.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Hansman follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Dr. Hansman.
Now I recognize Dr. Hyslop for five minutes.
TESTIMONY OF DR. GREG HYSLOP,
SENIOR MEMBER, AMERICAN INSTITUTE
FOR AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS;
VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER,
BOEING RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY;
CHIEF ENGINEER, ENGINEERING,
OPERATIONS & TECHNOLOGY,
THE BOEING COMPANY
Dr. Hyslop. Thank you, Chairman Babin, Ranking Member
Edwards, and distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you
for the opportunity to testify about the importance of the
Federal Aviation Administration's research, engineering, and
development programs to our nation's continued leadership in
aviation.
While I currently serve as Vice President and General
Manager of Boeing Research and Technology, I'm speaking to you
as a member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, the world's largest aerospace professional
society serving more than 30,000 individual and 95 corporate
members.
The FAA is of significant importance to AIAA, so I'm
pleased that Congress is moving forward with legislation to
extend the agency's programs. Reauthorization with adequate
funding levels will ensure that our nation remains the world
leader in aerospace innovation.
I've gained a great appreciation in my career for the
important role that research and development plays in driving
innovation. It is imperative that we continue to make strong
investments in R&D. Wherever R&D goes, innovation and economic
growth follow.
More than half of our economic growth is due to
technological innovation, yet U.S. government R&D as a
percentage of our GDP has fallen by 60 percent since 1964. In
contrast, China's R&D investment is the fastest growing of all
advanced countries and is forecast to overtake the European
Union and the United States by the end of this decade.
It is important to note that when we fail to invest in new
R&D programs, we risk losing talent and expertise that has
taken us decades to cultivate and would be difficult to
reconstitute. Our engineering talent is not a fixed asset. It
is made up of people who need challenging new projects.
It also is important to note that declines in government
R&D funding discourage young people from pursuing careers in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. It is no
mystery why U.S. engineering ranks were wide and deep in the
1960s and 1970s when U.S. R&D spending strong and the United
States space program was prompting countless students to pursue
STEM careers.
We are on the cusp of implementing a major advancement in
transportation that could be just as exciting: a space-based
air traffic management system. Creating such a system will have
the same kind of impact on air travel that the Interstate
Highway System had on surface transportation. The Next
Generation Air Transportation System will enable more efficient
airline operations and yield annual cost savings in the
billions of dollars. Now is the time for Congress to make
strong financial commitment and set a firm timetable for
NextGen's completion.
NextGen also is an integral part of the industry's plan for
reducing airplane CO2 emissions. Commercial aviation
accounts for two percent of manmade carbon emissions, but that
percentage will increase as air traffic grows unless NextGen is
completed. According to the International Air Transport
Association, cutting flight times by just one minute per flight
would prevent 4.8 tons of CO2 emissions every year.
Sustainable biofuels are another important element of the
industry's emissions reduction plan. Industry and government
have partnered to create, test, and evaluate biofuels. As the
supply of biofuels increases, their price will decline,
spurring airline use. We've made good progress but still have a
lot of work ahead of us. It is important that the U.S.
government stay involved in the development of sustainable
biofuels.
The third element of our industry's emissions reduction
strategy is something the aerospace sector has been doing since
its inception: developing ever-more-efficient airplanes. There
are solid business reasons behind our work. Airlines always
want greater efficiency. Now there are important environmental
reasons as well for lighter, more aerodynamic airframes and
more fuel-efficient engines. Government has important roles to
play in these efforts so it is vital that Congress continues to
fund long-lead research projects related to airframe and engine
efficiency.
Finally, it is important that the FAA keep up with and
enable the pace of innovation occurring in the aerospace
sector. One program designed to maximize FAA resources is under
study. Government and industry are researching how to move
toward a systems engineering approach to airplane and engine
certification. The end result of such a move would be a better,
more efficient certification process, one that encourages
innovation and accelerates the incorporation of innovative
product enhancements.
Over the last century, the United States has been
synonymous with global aviation leadership, and we can continue
that legacy, but we cannot afford to rest on our laurels and
simply say ``remember when research and development was a
national priority.'' The research programs at the FAA and NASA
are critical to the work of the men and women of AIAA. The
realization of NextGen, biofuels, more efficient jet engines,
and lighter, more aerodynamic airplanes all require
collaboration and partnership and a reliable stream of
government investment in aviation's future.
Thank you again for inviting me to speak here today, and I
look forward to discussing this topic with you further.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Hyslop follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman Babin. Okay. Thank you, Dr. Hyslop. I appreciate
that. And I thank all the witnesses for your testimony, and I
recognize myself for five minutes.
This question is for Mr. Filler and Dr. Shin. Since 2008,
Congress has provided more than $1.5 billion in developmental
projects intended to explore new concepts and evaluate
alternatives to reduce uncertainty and risk associated with
NextGen programs. However, unlike major acquisition programs,
these projects do not have formally approved cost and schedule
milestones and do not receive the program oversight given to
other procurement programs. Last year, the Department of
Transportation's IG Office testified that the initial 2004
estimates of $40 billion shared equally by the public and
private sectors could double or even triple. The IG's Office
also warned that the initial 2025 implementation date could
slip by as much as a decade. Just this week, the IG announced a
review of NextGen.
In lieu of cost and schedule milestones, how do FAA and
NASA ensure that this effort is on budget and meeting its
objectives? Dr. Shin or Mr. Filler, whichever one of you would
like to go first.
Mr. Filler. NASA and FAA do coordinate through a variety of
forums. In our research efforts--Dr. Shin is a member of our
R&D Advisory Committee--the program he mentioned earlier, the
ASTS, we also work on research efforts in that forum. We
routinely receive products and technology transfers through the
Research and Technology program, the RTTs, and integrate those
into NextGen planning. NextGen is not a static plan that has a
finite destination. It is constantly evolving as time
progresses, demands change, and likewise we adapt our programs.
But NASA and FAA do coordinate routinely, if not quarterly,
I'll say monthly, through a variety of forums and throughout
all our many, many levels in the agency to make sure that we
are constantly in sync with each other.
Dr. Shin. Yes, Chairman. Thank you for that question. NASA,
as I mentioned in the oral testimony, is the organization that
develops enabling revolutionary technologies, so we are indeed
our country's depository for research and development for all
types of aeronautics technologies. So in particular, on the air
traffic management and safety side, we are heavily coordinating
with FAA, and in fact, my perspective is, FAA is the most
important customer for NASA in the civil aviation side and DoD
is the most important partner for us in dual-use technologies.
So as Dennis Filler just mentioned about RTTs and also I
mentioned in the opening testimony that it is a big change for
NASA and FAA to work together through this RTT.
I can share stories from maybe ten years ago. We used to
develop NASA technologies in hoping that FAA will incorporate
and implement that. Sometimes it works, sometimes it didn't
work because we didn't have the coordination and collaboration
from day one. So we changed that, and that's the essence of our
research transition team, as I mentioned. So we coordinate from
day one that FAA air traffic controllers, managers, technical
people work together to devise the research plan together and
update and refine.
So just one quick example is that EDA, we call Efficient
Descent Advisor. This is the technology that allows aircraft to
have a continuous descent without throttling up and down and
following the path that is somewhat of a reverse wedding cake,
if you will. So that saves a tremendous fuels and also reduces
community noise. So that type of technology could save $300
million per year in fuel savings if the technology is
implemented across fleet and airports. So that's the kind of
impact research that we are doing with FAA.
Chairman Babin. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
Our Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Maryland, Ms.
Edwards, is going to allow the gentleman from Virginia, Mr.
Beyer, to ask the first question, and I understand you have to
leave, so I'll recognize----
Mr. Beyer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking
Member Edwards.
Mr. Filler, I understand the FAA is starting work on a
multiyear effort to update the scientific evidence on the
relationship between aircraft noise exposure and its effect on
communities around airports. This will be done by contacting
residents by phone, by mail, and it's indicated that you'll not
disclose which communities will be polled to preserve the
scientific integrity of the study. According to FAA, a key goal
of the survey is to determine whether the agency should
reevaluate the noise metrics that it uses, and while I
appreciate the need for scientific evidence, I remain
incredibly concerned about the nature of the citizen complaints
about the aircraft noise that is not being well understood.
I represent National Airport, and we hear this every day.
As you know, aircraft noise is currently measured on a scale
that averages all community noise during a 24-hour period with
a tenfold penalty on noise that occurs during night and early
morning hours. Now, all this methodology works if you're
looking for a long-term average noise level. It doesn't help if
you're trying to measure the noise impact of a plane that's
flying over your house. In that type of situation, you want to
find a way to measure peak decibel level and frequency.
So Mr. Filler, my question is, how will the study address
those concerns, you know, the inability to have a picnic in
your backyard or have a conversation on your front porch?
Mr. Filler. Sir, I know that these considerations are being
evaluated right now in the FAA's Environment and Energy
program. Specifically, I can't answer your question directly. I
don't have the technical expertise personally in this domain
but I can assure you we'll be glad to take the question back
and get you a more thorough answer.
Mr. Beyer. All right. Thank you very much.
Dr. Shin, is NASA doing any research on reducing aircraft
noise? What can we look forward to in the future?
Dr. Shin. Yes, that is one of our main research topics at
NASA, as you point out, because the community noise is a big
issue around the world, not just U.S. airports, and our issue
is more acute because all the major airports in the United
States are landlocked. So we have all the houses around the
airports. And to compound the problem, as the Congressman
accurately pointed out, it is a perception issue as well. So
it's not entirely scientific approach. So there is an
international noise measurement standard, so we are following
that to reduce the noise, but still, there is a strong concern
about communities around the airport with airplanes flying over
their houses. So we are working both from operational
procedures. So how can we effectively route airplanes around
the communities to land safely but with less noise? That's part
of that EDA that I talked about, Efficient Descent Advisor. So
operational side, we work on that, but also vehicle side,
engine noise. We have just--actually Boeing should take credit
to put that Chevron nozzle which reduces the engine noise
substantially. So we are working on also aircraft technologies
to reduce noise.
Mr. Beyer. And the Boeing headquarters is right next to
National Airport, so they're motivated.
Dr. Hyslop, yesterday the EPA announced that it's going to
try to regulate the emissions from airplanes. Aviation is one
of the fastest growing sources of greenhouse gases right now.
What are we doing technologically and operationally to reduce
the emissions from our aircraft?
Dr. Hyslop. Thank you, Congressman. And the committee--or
the company is very committed to reducing emissions of aircraft
because we recognize we have that responsibility. There's a
number of technologies that are in work, and I can highlight
several. Dennis talked about the CLEEN program, which is a
program we have done in conjunction and partnership with the
FAA where we look at not only aerodynamic efficiencies to
reduce fuel burn. We look at different materials. We just
completed a flight test last year with a different kind of
engine nozzle out of a ceramic material that will address
acoustics. We've done a significant amount of work in biofuels
looking at various forms and sources for where those biofuels
come from, and since the number one cost of operating an
airliner is still going to be fuel, there is a constant drive
from us and the engine companies to become more and more
efficient all the time, which is really why things like the 787
Dreamliner and what really drove a lot of those technologies
behind those aircraft and will continue to drive them into the
future.
So between aerodynamics and biofuels and new materials that
would enable those, there's significant work underway in
conjunction with FAA and NASA.
Mr. Beyer. Thank you, Doctor, and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Ms. Edwards.
Chairman Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Beyer.
And I'd like to now recognize the gentleman from
California, Mr. Knight.
Mr. Knight. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate seeing Dr.
Shin here today. It's always good to see you and hear your
testimony. I have a couple questions about where we are and
where we're going to be in the next ten years as far as
airliner flight. You know, it seems like for the last 40 years,
we've almost been stuck in the mud. In 1970, if I went to go
across country, it probably took me 4-1/2 days. Today it takes
me 4-1/2 hours. We're much cleaner, we do this more
economically but we are a little bit stuck technologically.
I know that NASA has done many programs. Back in the early
2000s, you did a Quiet Spike program that worked on dispersing
the sonic boom and making it so maybe we could travel across
the country supersonic at some period of time. Is that
something that NASA is still working toward? Is that something
that maybe the private industry--we have about 20 billionaires
out there that are just driving to become millionaires by
getting into the aerospace and space industry. Maybe we want to
incorporate some of them too to look at this.
Dr. Shin. It's good to see you again, Congressman Knight,
as well. Thank you for that question, because the speed will
become important. As Chairman and both Ranking Member mentioned
about growth in Asia Pacific region in mobility and the
distance, as we call it, tyranny of distance, will become
important factor in aviation. So to that end, we have been
working--NASA has been working in developing low-boom
supersonic flight technologies. The focus on low boom is
because currently we have a law internationally and also in the
United States that doesn't allow supersonic flight over land.
So unless we change that rule to certain--meeting the certain
target rather than complete ban, the private industry I highly
doubt will jump into this venture. As you pointed out, there
are many interested private industry partners who would like to
see this new capability. So that's where NASA is focusing,
trying to develop scientific database that by design we can
actually build low-boom supersonic airplane, not through some
kind of gimmicks but actual design, and then provide that
database to FAA and international rulemaking agencies,
organizations for their consideration to change the rule. Then
I think our industry's ingenuity and the agility will provide
that opening up the new capability.
Mr. Knight. Thank you.
And Dr. Hyslop, I've worked with AIAA. It's a great
organization. You hit me with one of the comments that you made
about our STEM students and our engineering students and maybe
we're not as like we were in the 1950s and 1960s. I think that
part of it is the advent of computers, that computers are very
cool today, and a lot of our engineering students are going
into that type of field as opposed to in the 1950s and 1960s
they went on to aeronautical engineering or something like
that. Where do you think we're dropping the ball on this?
Because I don't know any Congressman or legislator out in the
States that don't talk about STEM? It is the buzz phrase today.
It is what we want. We are seeing the jump in young ladies
being involved in engineering. I would venture to guess in
1960, if you were a young woman and you were becoming an
engineering student, you were one in a thousand. Today you're
probably one in five. So we've made huge advancements in that,
and those are just my--don't look those up but I'm betting that
they're a lot closer. So where are we dropping the ball on
this?
Dr. Hyslop. Well, that's a very good question, Congressman.
I think--I was at a STEM event with fifth graders in Houston a
few weeks back, and we have to communicate to them the
excitement that comes from aerospace and working on these kind
of products and being part of these kind of teams and bring
these products to life. But I think you really--instead of
focusing on the student, we really have to focus on the
teachers, and we probably need to focus on the families that
support the student because unless you take a full rounded view
of that to make sure the teachers are comfortable teaching
STEM-type subjects at very low levels and that the families
know where to get--if they can't provide the support, they know
where they can get help to help them support that student as
they're going through those courses.
In my opinion, I think it's--we may be too focused on the
student and not enough on the faculty and on the families so
that we've got a more balanced approach to the whole issue.
Mr. Knight. I appreciate that very much.
Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chairman Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you, and well stated.
I'd like to recognize the gentlewoman from Maryland,
Ranking Member Ms. Edwards.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and again,
thanks to the witnesses.
Just a comment on the last discussion with--about STEM. The
American Association of University Women just this last week,
just a couple of days ago, released an amazing report about
women and girls and their participation in STEM fields, and the
problem that we're seeing really begins in about first grade
where for a variety of reasons, girls make a decision very
early on that they are not science and math students. And so we
have to disengage from that. But the problems that actually
continues--the problem continues through the lower grade
levels, and then even into college and even in the workplace.
Once a woman is in as an engineer, there're a variety of
factors that lead to her making a decision that that's not for
her. And so we have a lot to do because the fact is that we
are--according to this AAUW report, we are losing a significant
portion of our economy precisely because women and girls are
not engaged in the STEM fields, and the 21st century, frankly,
is all about that, whether it's in aviation or others of our
R&D fields. And so, if there's some point at which we can have
a hearing and really discuss the factors that are leading to
that and how we can more greatly engage women and girls, that
would be a good conversation. And the problem is particularly
acute for students of color, and so we've got a lot to do.
Otherwise we're going to lose a major part of our workforce.
Mr. Filler, I want to go back to this issue of the plan
that was supposed to be transmitted to the--by the President to
the Congress 2014 and 2015, because this is very problematic.
We're trying to look at how we engage in this next generation
of technology for aviation but we don't even get the benefit in
the Congress of a plan that's required by statute, not in 2014
and not in 2015. And so can you give us a definitive date by
which we can expect what has been due since 2014?
Mr. Filler. Yes, ma'am. As far as a definitive date, I can
tell you that both plans have left the FAA. The delay was
because we totally restructured both of these plans, and
subsequent to that, the internal coordination required to clear
the plans took much longer than what we ever anticipated. I can
assure you that we have in fact started on the 2016 plan.
Ms. Edwards. Wait. Congress would like to see 2014 and 2015
before we get to see 2016.
Mr. Filler. Yes, ma'am, both 2014 and 2015 have left the
Federal Aviation Administration.
Ms. Edwards. Okay.
Mr. Filler. Okay?
Ms. Edwards. I hear what you're saying. I guess I'm trying
to figure out where we should drive to pick it up and when it's
going to be delivered to Congress, and I don't mean to be
flippant about this but when we've required something by
statute, it's precisely because we need that in order to be
able to make an assessment about what we're doing on resource
allocation and whether plans are going according to plan.
I mean, one of my frustrations, frankly, has been since
that I've been on this Committee and in Congress, we've been
talking about NextGen as though it is going to be a
transformation of the industry, and yet what we're hearing
sounds much more like it's a little tweak here and there, a
couple of upgrades not a transformation.
Mr. Leber, I'm a little bit curious about the nature of
your testimony because you focus very specifically on the
limited scope that you had as the Academies. How should your
work and analysis really inform what it is that we're doing?
Mr. Leber. Thank you, Congresswoman. I encourage the
Committee to read the report thoroughly. We clearly had
challenges getting information, and so we--it took a while for
the FAA, first of all, to produce the report. Then we had--we
had asked for speakers at some of our earlier meetings. We were
unable to obtain them. Ultimately, we did have those speakers
address the committee, and we appreciated that. But it was
clear to the committee that this research report was not given
the priority we thought it deserved as something that the
Congress specifically asked for in the reauthorization.
Ms. Edwards. Do you think that there's a gap in terms of
the FAA and NASA understanding the value of the Academies in
informing how we go forward?
Mr. Leber. Through the course of our investigation, NASA's
work with the Academies was cited repeatedly as exemplary and
effective. But yes, in answer to your question, Congresswoman,
it appeared to us that there was a significant gap in the way
the agency, the FAA, interacts with the Academy and the way
NASA interacts.
Ms. Edwards. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I hope we
can explore further about the way that we close that gap
because the Academies play an important role in us figuring out
the direction and the critical analysis that needs to take
place in terms of how we develop our R&D capability.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Babin. Okay, and I'd like to recognize Mr.
LoBiondo, the Aviation Subcommittee Chair on the Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee.
Mr. LoBiondo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My question is for--questions are for Mr. Filler. With
cybersecurity being today and increasingly becoming extremely
critical for us as a nation, Dennis, can you tell us what is
the Tech Center doing today? What can it be doing additionally?
What should it be doing additionally to help deal with this
cybersecurity problem? And then I have a UAS question if you--
depending on the time that's left.
Mr. Filler. Thank you, Congressman. In the realm of cyber,
currently we are working on research initiatives looking into
the certification of aircraft technologies with cyber
implications, how to take in and understand the current means
and methods that are being employed, how software is developed,
and then likewise how they are in fact tested and certified for
use onboard aircraft systems. So that is ongoing research that
is happening.
Recently, we have built a cyber test facility--we call it
the CyTF--at the William J. Hughes Technical Center. Since we
have the capability of every operational development system
within the National Airspace System, we are going to use the
CyTF to look at new and emerging vulnerabilities and threats to
existent and developmental NAS systems.
Likewise, please keep in mind that every system that goes
into the National Airspace System has as part of its
foundational building blocks cyber concerns already built in to
every platform. Cyber is not a static threat. It is dynamic and
therefore it requires continuous evaluation and research to
make sure that we can counter these emerging or zero-day
threats, things that we haven't seen before. What we're doing
is actually turning the entire Technical Center into a cyber
test facility where we can attack each of our representative
systems with various threats to be able to find out how our
systems respond and then what countermeasures we have to
develop and put into our system to be able to counter what is a
very dynamic situation.
In the future, we need to continue to work in large
technologies from DoD, from DHS, and anywhere else through
cooperative research and development agreements and make sure
that we continue to adopt these technologies and apply them
because that's what FAA research is all about: applying
technologies that are out there commercially or developed
through other governmental agencies that have the leads in many
of these areas to make sure that we are continually ensuring
that aviation remains safe and secure.
Mr. LoBiondo. So is it safe to say that for the FAA, the
Tech Center is the tip of the spear for cybersecurity issues?
Mr. Filler. Yes, sir.
Mr. LoBiondo. A follow-up question is, there's a lot of
excitement and a lot of discussions about the UAS integration
into the national airspace. Can you tell us what the FAA Tech
Center is uniquely qualified to do in relationship to UAS
integration?
Mr. Filler. On UAS integration, we have a UAS laboratory,
and it has many representative UAS systems. We have every
system within the NAS, and so we are in fact exploring
integration of UAS into the NAS by using very advanced
simulation technologies to interact with existing elements of
the NAS and then also future concepts.
So just last year, we completed a very extensive test
program with the Department of Defense on integrating their UAS
into operation in the National Airspace System. It was a very
detailed, very exhaustive, very thorough simulation that went
through many domains of flight and looking at ways that for
example, the Department of Defense can safely integrate UAS and
use them in the National Airspace System. We use a very
exhaustive test methodology to test various proofs of concepts
and see what works and what doesn't work to assure that we have
continued safe integration of UAS.
Mr. LoBiondo. Thank you, Mr. Filler.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to sit on the
Committee, and as our Committee moves to the actual
presentation of the reauthorization bill, we look to you for a
close working relationship in a very bipartisan way with your
Committee and the Science Committee to move forward. Thank you
very much.
Chairman Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you very much for visiting
this morning and your line of questioning.
And also we have--I'd like to recognize at this time the
gentleman from Texas, Mr. Veasey.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate everybody
being here today, and I wanted to ask Dr. Shin a question
because I know that UAS integration into the NAS is an
important facet of your work, and how does NASA's work
contribute to FAA's ability to regulate future UAS operations?
Dr. Shin. Yes. Thank you for that question, Congressman.
We have started UAS integration into NAS project about five
years ago, so we have been developing, as I mentioned in the
opening statement, the sense-and-avoid technologies, also
communication and human-machine interaction, and we're also
building live virtual constructive test environment to test all
the technologies. So we have been heavily involved in the
rulemaking by supporting technical data and knowledge and
technologies so that FAA and RTCA can make the rules within
capabilities of the system. So that's what we have been working
in very close partnership with FAA.
Also, we have initiated last year for helping the community
to allow safe and routine access of the small UAS at the much
lower altitude, perhaps below 700 feet. That's where a lot of
commerce interest is, as we've been hearing on the news media.
So our role again is trying to provide enabling technologies
and in partnership with FAA to allow these operations in a safe
and effective manner.
Mr. Veasey. And something else I wanted to ask you too is,
how do you envision leveraging the research results from both
the COE for UAS and the FAA test sites?
Dr. Shin. Yes. Our project manager for UAS integration into
NAS that I just mentioned has visited and his team has visited
all six FAA UAS test sites, and we are evaluating what sort of
partnership and collaboration is possible, and as I mentioned,
we are also developing that live virtual constructive test
environment where we can actually insert virtual aircraft,
manned or unmanned, also with manned aircraft, and we can do
these tests at multiple sites across the country. So that's why
we call it live virtual constructive environment.
I think there's a great potential for NASA to collaborate
with these UAS test sites using that framework and so we are
actively looking into all possibilities.
Mr. Veasey. Okay. Thank you very much.
My next question is for Dr. Hansman. Regarding the mixing
of unmanned aircraft systems and manned aircraft operations,
you indicate in your prepared statement that the future UAS
operations will require formal concepts of operations and
procedures for such mixing to occur. Specific to that research,
you say that the REDAC is concerned that the ``fundamental work
to support this has been deferred or neglected.'' Can you
elaborate exactly on what type of fundamental work has been
deferred or neglected and the implications of FAA not
supporting this research?
Dr. Hansman. Sure. So there are multiple classes of UAVs
that have different requirements, so as Dr. Shin mentioned,
there's a lot going on at the low altitude--low-altitude small
UAVs. There is a current rule out for line-of-sight operations.
There's work being done at NASA beyond line of sight. The
bigger challenge actually occurs when you have slightly larger
UAVs that want to operate in the airspace that manned airplanes
want to operate on, and there's really--it's not clear what the
right procedures are going to be. Are you basically going to
treat them as manned airplanes, IFR targets, and have to
operate under those rules? What happens when the operator loses
communication with the UAV? What are the procedures and things
like that?
So this has been an area that's actually fundamentally
hard, and people have been sort of doing the easy job, doing
the low-altitude job, and they haven't really dug in on the
fully integrated UAV and the NAS. So that was the particular
we're worried about.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you. Thank you very much. My time has
expired. Mr. Chairman, I thank you.
Chairman Babin. Thank you. Thank you very much.
I think we'll go back through one more time a line of
questioning, and I would like to follow up with a little bit
that has already been talked about somewhat. We're aware of
many recent reports that individuals claim to have been able to
hack into airline inflight entertainment systems, taking
control of aircrafts' flight control systems, and while these
claims may be greatly exaggerated, again, if you'd elaborate
more than a while ago, what is FAA, NASA and the industry doing
to prevent this from happening? This is for Mr. Filler, Dr.
Hyslop and Dr. Shin.
And to follow that through, do you believe that government
is doing enough? Because I noted in Mr. Leber's report that NRC
has mentioned that cybersecurity should be more of a
consideration.
Mr. Filler. Sir, the----
Chairman Babin. Mr. Filler.
Mr. Filler. Thank you. The FAA takes the cybersecurity
threat very seriously. As I mentioned earlier, yes, we do have
active research ongoing looking at the increasing interaction
of automation systems onboard the aircraft and the use of
interconnected electronics. As systems become more and more
connected, the interaction effects provide opportunities for
new threats to emerge and be able to have vulnerabilities
exposed. We are looking to make sure that there are no
vulnerabilities, so as the threat changes, we're working with
all of the agencies involved to include intelligence agencies
on how these emerging threats are coming out and making sure
that our current airframes and systems are maximally protected.
Again, though, it is a very dynamic and a very challenging
problem--it's not that you get to point X and you are done.
It's ongoing just as each of us are equally aware of, we apply
patches to all of our computer operating systems daily if not
at least weekly. Likewise, we'll have to make sure that all of
our systems are fully secured. So right now we do have very
active, ongoing research to make sure that these threats are
not posing any risk to aviation, and to date, we've
demonstrated very safe and efficient flights throughout the
National Airspace System. So, thus far we've been able to do a
very good job.
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Mr. Filler.
Dr. Hyslop?
Dr. Hyslop. Yeah, Congressman. There's close collaboration
across the industry to ensure the entire aviation system is
secure from a cyber perspective, and the best practices and
threat information is shared amongst everyone on a regular
basis.
Speaking now for my company, in the United States, Boeing
has led the establishment of an Aviation Information Sharing
Analysis Center. Members include Airbus, nearly all U.S.
domestic airlines and Air Canada and a number of other non-U.S.
airlines as well as airports are considering membership. This
group receives regular cyber threat briefings from all the
appropriate agencies and the FAA plus members are able to
rapidly share emerging threats as they see on their own
networks with each other. So there's significant amount of
interaction amongst industry and the governments on this
important issue.
Chairman Babin. Okay. Thank you.
And Dr. Shin?
Dr. Shin. Yes. Only a couple points to add. As we are
introducing, as the Chairman pointed out, introducing more
autonomous systems and more software-laden systems in the
airplane, NASA is also working on verification and validation
to help industry to develop the software, not only cost-
effectively but also safe and secure, and we develop a lot of
software as well for control systems or other aircraft systems,
so we are also ensuring that our technologies will be secure
and safe. That's one point.
But the second point is, through that interagency planning
office that FAA's running in place of JPDO now has Homeland
Security as a member, and so the overall and coordinated effort
led by Homeland Security Department working with FAA and other
federal agencies and industry, as Dr. Hyslop mentioned, I think
we are doing everything we can to make airplanes safe.
Chairman Babin. Thank you, Dr. Shin.
And also, since the report was so critical, I'd like to let
Mr. Leber have an opportunity to give us his view there.
Mr. Leber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We had a specific focus on confidence and timeliness of
implementing things in the National Airspace System. We went
through various aspects of the report, but there was a clear
gap there, and it was not clear to us in the report itself, the
10-page research plan, that this issue was being adequately
focused on. So we called it out in our recommendations.
Chairman Babin. Okay, sir. Thank you.
And I'd like to go through one more time here and recognize
the gentlewoman from Maryland, Ranking Member, Ms. Edwards.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you very much.
I want to follow up with Dr. Hansman from the earlier line
of questions. What are the implications of not having the
research plan available for several years now?
Dr. Hansman. So in terms of the NARP plan as----
Ms. Edwards. Yes.
Dr. Hansman. So within the REDAC, the internal elements
have actually been briefed to the REDAC so there has been
internal communication. So I think that from that standpoint,
there hasn't been a problem.
There was a bit of a problem, which I indicated in my
report, in that there are multiple lines of funding where
research is funded within the FAA. So there's the R&D budget,
there's also F&E budget, airports, NAS ops. It's actually very
difficult for us as the REDAC, and I actually think for the
agency itself, to maintain a strategic view of its research
portfolio because it's carved into different pieces and there
is clearly stovepipes within the agency within different parts
of the agency. So I do think that's a challenge for the agency
itself and then for advisory committees like REDAC.
Ms. Edwards. And so then that leads to the next question.
What do you think are the key issues and research areas that
the Committee ought to prioritize in the R&D section of FAA's
next reauthorization, and why?
Dr. Hansman. Well, this is now into the personal opinion. I
think that the expectations on REDAC or expectations on NextGen
are somewhat out of whack with reality and probably always have
been. I think that one of the things that's not appreciated is
how difficult it is to make improvements to a system which is
incredibly safe and actually reasonably efficient. So the real
challenge we have is, we have the technologies. There's no
question we have ADS-B, we have all of the ground technologies.
We sort of know what to do in the technical side. We actually
have ideas on what the--how we should operate but unable to get
those approved in a way that you can guarantee that we won't
degrade the safety of the system is an incredible challenge,
and I think that's why the report that Bill talked about, the
intent of the Congress was to try to push the FAA to really
think about that. I think that there is some institutional
resistance to do that, and I think it's well intentioned. They
want to maintain the safety of the system. They don't want to
be pushed. They don't want to do things that take risk. And
safety is the number one priority. So I think----
Ms. Edwards. Because you're talking about developing not a
parallel system but integrating these new technologies into an
existing system.
Dr. Hansman. Yeah, you have an existing system that flies
every day, 24 hours a day, that has accident rates that are
unprecedented in any level of transportation. So when you come
in with some whacko new technology that someone wants to put in
and say well, you know, let's do this, the FAA legitimately
says well, wait a minute, okay, we need to do that. So do they
have the--that's part of the reason for the importance of the
research. They have to have done enough research so that they
can say no, no, you can't do that for this reason. They also
need to think about are there process ways that would allow
them to test the technology, start to bring it in, in some
evaluation way that would allow you to get it into the system
faster than ten years from now, 20 years from now.
Ms. Edwards. Mr. Leber, do you have a perspective about
that or about other areas of R&D that should be prioritized?
Mr. Leber. Well, Congresswoman, I'm not sure I can improve
on John's eloquent expression there. I think it was spot on.
But I will just say that we have a cultural challenge, not a
technological challenge. We have a communications, maybe--well,
a communications challenge, I think. So we need to find ways to
overcome the goodness that the FAA brings in its absolute
vanguard of safety. They are beyond successful. And that goes
for the entire industry, not just the FAA. But we need to
overcome our communications and cultural resistance to change
because the world is going to change and we're going to have to
change aviation with it if we're going to lead.
Ms. Edwards. And then Dr. Hansman and other witnesses if
you want, do you have a perspective on the extent to which the
NextGen office I guess as a coordinating kind of entity is
effectively carrying out its joint planning responsibilities?
Is there another balance that needs to be struck?
Dr. Hansman. I think the NextGen office is actually-- with
its current administration has actually been doing a pretty
good job. They--because of the pressure and because of the fact
that NextGen is behind and hasn't delivered, as you guys have
indicated, have shifted to a short-term focus. So it's--these
are the things. They've clearly prioritized the things so
that--that are short term to get something on the table, get
some results.
I do have a concern that you then start to lose some of the
long-term focus, so you're not investing on the things that we
need to do in the future or emerging opportunities or issues.
So that would be the concern.
Ms. Edwards. Yeah. I mean, I guess my concern as I
expressed earlier is that sure, you do these short-term things
but then it becomes a sort of system that's about upgrading as
opposed to transforming.
Dr. Hansman. Yeah, I just--if I could, I think the reality
was, it was always going to be an upgrading instead of
transforming, that the expectations at the beginning were
probably unrealistic. They were aspirational, and given the
reality of implementation, the challenges of implementation, I
think it's--they have to do this really on a worldwide basis,
that some of the ideas were probably a little bit aggressive.
So I think that--and part of this is, we can't shut off the
system. We have to run. So I think we actually have to figure
out how to do effective, highly leveraged transitions of the
existing system that will really improve the performance where
you need it.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Babin. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
I'd like to--oh, the gentleman from Texas is gone too and
so is the gentleman from California. So we will--if there's
anything else--is there anything else we need to do?
I want to thank the witnesses for being here, for your
testimony, and for your questions of folks here, and the record
will remain open for two weeks for additional written comments
and written questions from other Members.
So without any further ado, this meeting is adjourned.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 10:27 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Appendix II
----------
Additional Material for the Record
Prepared statement of Committee Ranking Member
Eddie Bernice Johsnon
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this morning's hearing on
``Transforming America's Air Travel'' and welcome to the chairmanship
of the Space Subcommittee. I look forward to what I hope will be a
strong, bipartisan partnership on addressing the important space and
aeronautics issues facing our nation.
Mr. Chairman, as Members of Congress we fly a lot, often weekly,
between our Districts and Washington, D.C. Like millions of other
Americans who travel on commercial airlines, we can appreciate the
importance of our nation's strong safety record in civil aviation.
This record is the result of hard work and a steadfast commitment
by the FAA and the civil aviation community to the safety of our
nation's airspace system, and I commend them on their dedication.
However, as a Member of both this Committee and the Transportation
Committee, I know that the world of aviation is rapidly changing.
New technologies and capabilities, such as unmanned aircraft
systems, present significant opportunities for economic growth. Yet
they also present challenges in their safe integration into the
national airspace system.
And, while the NextGen initiative is intended to enable our
aviation system to respond to growing capacity, it too has its own
challenges. Pilots and air traffic controllers will need to interact
with new sources of information and increased use of automated systems
that will require changes in how they make decisions.
In short, Mr. Chairman, the changes to our aviation system will not
be simply technological, they will be cultural. Because it is people
who are at the heart of safety, and the ongoing transformation of
aviation in the U.S. will require not just research and development,
but also an evolution of our workforce and the training that we provide
to it.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on what is needed to
foster the skills that our workforce will need in order to fulfill the
potential of new capabilities while mitigating any risks that the
transformation of our aviation system will involve.
In summary, Mr. Chairman, aviation and aeronautics research is
vital to the well-being of this nation. We need to ensure that NASA and
FAA have the resources they will need to continue to make progress in
the coming years.
It is an investment that will pay dividends far into the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
[all]