AAcover.

qxd:AA Template 10/19/09 3:05 PM Page 1

10

November 2009
AEROSPACE AMERICA
NOVEMBER 2009

Defense acquisitions
A change in direction

Defining a subsidy
Choosing the pathway to space
A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS
toc.NOV2009.qxd:AA Template 10/15/09 11:53 AM Page 1

November 2009

DEPARTMENTS
COMMENTARY 3
Nuclear propulsion—The affordable alternative. Page 42

INTERNATIONAL BEAT 4
Air freight revival: Real or a mirage?

WASHINGTON WATCH 6
Controversy and doubts in defense and space.

INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 10
Defense giants reshape UAV industry.

SPACE UPDATE 12
Transforming human spaceflight.

ENGINEERING NOTEBOOK 16
Phantom Torso takes solar blasts for science.
Page 10
SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE 20
Cloud computing: Coming full circle.

OUT OF THE PAST 42

Page 12
CAREER OPPORTUNITIES 46

FEATURES
MILITARY ACQUISITIONS:THE SHIFTING TREND 25
Sweeping changes in the military’s approach to acquisitions will affect
nearly every major development and production program. Page 16
by J.R. Wilson Page32

CHOOSING THE PATHWAY TO SPACE 32

A presidentially appointed panel finds NASA’s human spaceflight program
has too little money and too few options. Page 36
by Frank Sietzen Jr.

DEFINING A SUBSIDY 36
What constitutes fair and unfair state support for airliner programs remains
unclear, even in recent rulings.
by Philip Butterworth-Hayes

BULLETIN
AIAA Meeting Schedule B2
AIAA Courses and Training Program B4
Page36
AIAA News B5
Meeting Program B15

COVER
The Obama administration has moved to restructure not just the direction and nature of DOD’s future acquisitions,
but also the processes under which those acquisitions will be made. See the story beginning on page 25.

Aerospace America (ISSN 0740-722X) is published monthly by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. at 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, Va. 20191-4344 [703/264-7577].
Subscription rate is 50% of dues for AIAA members (and is not deductible therefrom). Nonmember subscription price: U.S. and Canada, $163, foreign, $200. Single copies $20 each.
Postmaster: Send address changes and subscription orders to address above, attention AIAA Customer Service, 703/264-7500. Periodical postage paid at Herndon, VA, and at additional
mailing offices. Copyright © 2009 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., all rights reserved. The name Aerospace America is registered by the AIAA in the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office. 40,000 copies of this issue printed. This is Volume 47, No. 10.
 REGISTER TODAY! Early Bird Registration
Deadline:
7 December 2009
48th AIAA Aerospace Late Registration
Deadline:
Sciences Meeting 28 December 2009
Including the
New Horizons Forum
and
Aerospace Exposition
4–7 January 2010
Orlando World Center Marriott
Orlando,
Or ando,, FFlorida
rla lo
orida

2010 Conference Highlights:

• Over 275 Quality Technical
Sessions
• New Horizons Forum including
High-Level Keynote Speakers
• Aerospace Exposition featuring
over 50 exhibitors from Industry
and Government
• Industry and Government Panel
Sessions
• Receptions and Luncheons with
Multiple Networking Opportunities
• And much more…

w w w. a i a a . o r g / e v e n t s / a s m

09-0680.indd 1 10/1/09 2:32:06 PM

nov comment.qxd:AA Template 10/15/09
is a publication of the American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Elaine J. Camhi
Editor-in-Chief
Patricia Jefferson
Associate Editor
Greg Wilson
Production Editor
Jerry Grey, Editor-at-Large
Christine Williams, Editor AIAA Bulletin
Correspondents
Robert F. Dorr, Washington
Philip Butterworth-Hayes, Europe
Michael Westlake, Hong Kong
Contributing Writers
Richard Aboulafia, John Binder, James
W. Canan, Marco Cáceres, Edward Flinn,
Tom Jones, Théo Pirard, David Rockwell,
Frank Sietzen, J.R. Wilson
Fitzgerald Art & Design
Art Direction and Design
Craig Byl, Manufacturing and Distribution
David W. Thompson, President
Robert S. Dickman, Publisher
STEERING COMMITTEE
Michael B. Bragg, University of Illinois;
Philip Hattis, Draper Laboratory; Mark S.
Maurice, AFOSR; Laura McGill, Raytheon;
George Muellner, Boeing; Merri Sanchez,
National Aeronautics and Space Administra-
tion; Mary Snitch, Lockheed Martin
EDITORIAL BOARD
Ned Allen, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics;
Jean-Michel Contant, EADS; Eugene
Covert, Massachusetts Institute of Technol-
ogy; L.S. “Skip” Fletcher, Texas A&M Uni-
versity; Michael Francis, United Technologies;
Christian Mari, Teuchos; Cam Martin,
NASA Dryden; Don Richardson, Donrich
Research; Douglas Yazell, Honeywell
ADVERTISING
National Display and Classified:
Robert Silverstein, 240.498.9674
rsilverstein@AdSalesExperts.net
West Coast Display: Greg Cruse,
949.361.1870 / gcruse@AdSalesExperts.net
Send materials to Craig Byl, AIAA, 1801
Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA
20191-4344. Changes of address should be
sent to Customer Service at the same address,
by e-mail at custserv@aiaa.org, or by fax at
703/264-7606.
Send Letters to the Editor to Elaine Camhi
at the same address or elainec@aiaa.org
November 2009, Vol. 47, No. 10
11:43 AM Page 1
Nuclear propulsion–The affordable alternative
Planning for human solar system exploration has stubbed its toe, badly, on a sim-
ple bit of reality: The performance of chemical rocket propulsion is inadequate.
The mass ratio required to deliver something to Mars is over 20 times greater
than with nuclear propulsion. The added costs of necessary ferry flights and on-
orbit integration are fatal.
The debate on human space exploration, mired in overruns, highlights two
seminal drivers: long development time and high cost. Nuclear propulsion, proven
nearly to the point of flight qualification in the 1960s, offers the unique combina-
tion of high specific impulse and large energy density that can drastically cut Mars
mission costs. Propulsion technology change is therefore warranted, and also a dif-
ferent financial policy—one that rests on sustained national and collaborative inter-
national commitment, not shackled to unrealistic delivery dates that are clearly un-
achievable. The seminal cost driver of the Constellation program is the limited
performance of chemical propulsion.
Reactivation of nuclear rocket technology will involve decisions to locate test
and production facilities. If facilities at the Nuclear Rocket Development Station
near Las Vegas can be refurbished economically, significant savings would accrue.
Selection of new facilities might stumble into parochial conflicts and regional policy
differences, especially during hard economic times, and higher costs. But several
new testing approaches that yield significant cost reductions have been conceived
in the Center for Space Nuclear Propulsion at the Idaho National Laboratory.
Public fear of radiation injury is greatly overblown. Health physics authori-
ties note that this fear has caused radiation health hazard to be vastly overstud-
ied, overanalyzed, and oversurveyed. The development and testing of nuclear
rockets throughout the 1960s were, in fact, remarkably safe, despite vocal criti-
cisms bred in paranoia. No notable radiation injury occurred at NRDS. Experi-
ence with nuclear materials in space and ground fission power systems ensures
that nuclear rocket development will not present a public health hazard.
The successful development of nuclear rocket propulsion during the 1960s
resulted in a near-flight design, which was abandoned when the Nixon adminis-
tration terminated the Mars mission. The program has, since then, waited sev-
eral decades for a restart stimulus. The nuclear rocket has always been the rec-
ognized solution for Mars exploration; it is now an opportune time for a serious
reevaluation. Billions of dollars could be saved by this approach.
A detailed history of past nuclear rocket development is available on the
Aerospace America Website [www.aerospaceamerica.org].
To resuscitate this option, major decisions must be made, beginning with
recovery of the engineering data and equipment still available from remnants of
the extensive Rover/NERVA nuclear rocket testing and development programs
in the 1950s and 1960s. These decisions include test facility location, primary
and secondary fuel types, and nuclear rocket flight configuration. Historic ac-
complishments of Rover/NERVA provide a powerful jump start in each area,
with composite fuels as the primary approach. Cermets or multi-carbide fuels
would be a sound backup. A fast-track program ranging over six or seven years
to flight appears feasible.
Stanley V. Gunn, Rocketdyne engineer, Rover/NERVA, ret.
Ernest Y. Robinson, nuclear materials engineer, Lawrence Radiation Lab, ret.
BEATlayout-1.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09
Air freight revival: Real or a mirage?
IN JULY OF THIS YEAR THE AMOUNT OF
international air cargo handled by Chi-
nese airports rose 1.1% over the same
month in 2008—the first increase in a
year, according to the Civil Aviation Ad-
ministration of China.
It is generally agreed across the in-
dustry that when the civil aviation recov-
ery comes it will start in the burgeoning
economies of the Far East, and the first
signs of an upturn will occur in the air
freight markets. So is the good news
from China evidence of a real recovery
in civil aviation, or just another false
dawn?
Air cargo growth typically leads eco-
nomic and passenger traffic growth by
three to six months, according to Jim
Edgar, Boeing’s regional director, cargo
marketing, at the Asian Aerospace event
in Hong Kong in September. “This year,
we’re anticipating a deeper decline, and
it’ll be the first time in history that we’ll
have two years of decline back to back,”
he said. “The decline is slowing...things
are improving and we’re hopeful, but
there’s a way to go yet.”
According to the International Air
Transport Association (IATA), there is a
fragile recovery in the air freight sector,
but only as a result of lower yields and cut-
backs in capacity. The rising price of fuel
is threatening to choke the recovery be-
fore it is fully under way. “Since the low
point was hit last December, air freight
volumes have risen by 10%,” said IATA’s
September cargo market analysis. “Part
Rafiq Hariri Beirut International is now the
fastest growing aviation hub in the world, with
numbers rising for both freight and passengers.
4 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
2:49 PM Page 2
of the upswing came at the expense of
yields, which fell by nearly 20% in the first
half of 2009, as revenues on interna-
tional air freight markets also plunged by
some 40% over levels a year ago.”
Boom in Asia
Compared to North America and Eu-
rope, the economies of the Far East are
recovering relatively quickly from the
global recession. The domestic market
within the Far East is resilient. The Air-
port Council International (ACI) has re-
ported that domestic passenger travel
across the Asia Pacific area rose by
3.9% in the first six months of the year
compared to 2008, with June showing a
healthy rise of 7.2%.
India is about to transform itself from
a relatively small market to a major re-
gional air cargo hub, according to a re-
cent Frost & Sullivan study. International
and domestic Indian air cargo turnover
was about 1.77 million tonnes in 2007-
2008 but will increase at a compound
annual growth rate of roughly 8.3% by
2013. “Increasing globalization, integra-
tion of the world economy, and the
strengthening of India in the IT service
provider space has resulted in a booming
Indian economy, supporting a thriving
global economy,” according to Frost &
Sullivan analysts Arun Narayanan and
Chethan Kambi. “This has increased the
aggregate demand and is an important
driver for air cargo services.”
But it is too early yet to determine
whether modest economic growth levels
among Far Eastern states will act as a
catalyst to a wider recovery in the air
transport industry.
Aviation in the Far East
The early indications suggest Far East
domestic aviation markets are operating
in a distinctly different economic envi-
ronment to global aviation markets. The
Association of European Airlines, for
example, reported an overall drop of
16.8% in freight-tonne kilometers for
this July compared to July a year ago,
mainly as a result of falls in European-
Asia traffic, which dropped 23.2% in the
same month compared to 2008. Over-
all, Asia Pacific carriers will post losses of
$3.6 billion this year, according to IATA.
“The freight numbers tell an interest-
ing story. The sector is being boosted as
companies restock depleted inventories.
Once inventories are at desired levels in
relation to sales, improvements in de-
mand will level off until business and
consumer confidence returns. Given the
large amount of debt in all sectors of the
economy, instant relief is not in the fore-
cast,” said IATA’s chief executive officer
Giovanni Bisignani in September.
In a September cargo market analy-
sis, IATA said continued excess capacity
forced yields down by 21% in the second
quarter of this year, leading to a 40%
shrink in first-half revenues. One result
has been that some freight forwarders
were considering air freight, rather than
sea freight, for items not of high value.
According to Hong Kong Shippers’
Council director Sunny Ho, speaking at
the Airfreight Asia 2009 conference in
September, Hong Kong garment manu-
facturers were now turning to air freight
for U.S. customers experiencing low in-
ventory levels.
Airbus and Boeing will be watching
the fortunes of the Far East air cargo
sector with particular interest as they
both plan to introduce long-range, high-
capacity cargo aircraft—aimed particu-
larly at customers in the Asia Pacific re-
gion—in 2010. Airbus’ first A330-200F
freighter will be delivered soon after cer-
tification in the first quarter of the year;
delivery of Boeing’s first 747-8 freighter
is scheduled for the third quarter.
Planning difficulties
While long-term trends point to a growth
rate in the air freight market of more
than 5% a year, short-term fluctuations
in the demand and supply cycle can play
havoc with aircraft manufacturers’ plans.
BEATlayout-1.qxd:AA Template 10/19/09 2:27 PM Page 3

The first Airbus A330-200F is expected to be delivered in the first quarter of 2010. It also suggested the trend toward
more widebody freighters will continue:
“Large freighters are the aircraft of
choice on the large and fast-growing
flows originating in Asia. Today, 69% of
large freighter scheduled flights link Asia,
China, or Japan to the rest of the world.
As a consequence, the large freighter
segment is expected to see the highest
growth, with a yearly average increase of
5.9% over the forecast period, from 426
Airbus has had to put on hold the devel- director Robert Dahl. ACMG is predict- aircraft today….more than 50% of the
opment of an Airbus A380 freighter, de- ing transpacific air freight will grow at large freighters required are expected to
spite having orders for 27 of the type at around 7% a year. be new deliveries.”
the start of 2005, as program delays and Airbus, too, is confident about the (Continued on page 9)
a declining freight market have forced long-term health of the air
potential customers to develop survival, freight sector. But its latest air
rather than growth, plans. freight market forecast, released
The difficult market conditions began at the end of 2008, suggested
in May 2008, according to Boeing, and that the rise in price of oil
they led to a contraction in cargo traffic could slow down recovery.
of about 6% for the year, in comparison “During the summer of 2008,
to 2007 levels. Further declines were fuel prices rose to unprece-
recorded early this year. Combined with dented levels, leading to older
slowing world industrial production and aircraft being parked,” accord-
international trade, this has had a slight ing to its December 2008 air
downward impact on Boeing’s long-term cargo market forecast. “Indeed,
view of the freight market, leading to a around 400 freighter aircraft
5.4% cargo traffic growth rate, meas- were parked during the period
ured in revenue tonne-kilometers, in this September-October 2008 as a
year’s forecast. direct consequence of the ex- A milestone was reached in the assembly of the Boeing 747-8
Boeing is still optimistic about the tremely high fuel price and the freighter as mechanics completed installation of GEnx-2B
long-term demand for new freighter air- deteriorating demand.” engines on Airplane 1.
craft and expects global air cargo traffic
to return to growth next year amid a
broad economic recovery, with the U.S. CUSTOMERS AND ORDERS
Customer Country Orders
and China leading the way.
Airbus A330-200F
Aircastle U.S. Leasing company 12
The longer term Guggenheim Aviation Partners U.S. Investment fund company 2
The world will need to double the num- Intrepid Aviation Group U.S. Investment fund company 20
ber of freighters over the next 20 years, Avion Aircraft Trading Iceland Leasing company 6
Bank of China China Leasing company 5
according to a recent Air Cargo Man-
Matlin Patterson Group Advisers U.S. Investment fund company 6
agement Group (ACMG) study, with Etihad Abu Dhabi Operator 3
3,472 freighters needed for growth and Flyington Freighters India Operator 12
replacement from 2009 through 2028. MNG Airlines Turkey Operator 2
According to ACMG, 1,100 of these will ACT Airlines Turkey Operator 2
Alis Aerolinee Italiane Italy Leasing company 5
be “new-build” aircraft and 2,372 will be
Boeing 747-8F
conversions; the number of widebody
Cargolux Luxembourg Operator 10
freighters as a percentage of the overall Nippon Cargo Airlines Japan Operator 8
market will increase to reflect the grow- Air Bridge Cargo Airlines Russia Operator 5
ing importance of the Far East custo- Atlas Air U.S. Operator 12
mers serving global markets. “If domes- Cathay Pacific China Operator 10
Dubai Aerospace Enterprise Dubai Investment fund company 5
tic China grows 10% per year as Emirates Sky Cargo Dubai Operator 10
predicted, by 2028 this market will be Guggenheim Aviation Partners U.S. Investment fund company 4
larger than the domestic U.S. air cargo Korean Air Korea Operator 5
market is today,” says ACMG managing Note – order numbers are subject to sudden change.Table compiled in September 2009.

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 5

WATCH2.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 2:51 PM
Controversy and doubts in defense
and space
IN A MAJOR POLICY REVERSAL—SAYING THE
change was based on advice from Penta-
gon officers—President Barack Obama
personally told the leaders of Poland and
the Czech Republic in September that
the U.S. will abandon its longstanding
plan for a missile defense shield in East-
ern Europe.
The change ends Washington’s goal
of deploying 10 ground-based intercep-
tors in Poland and installing large, fixed-
site radar on Czech soil by 2017. The
two facilities were expected to work to-
gether to counter long-range ballistic
missiles launched from Iran. Although
the program was defensive, Moscow had
adamantly opposed having weaponry so
close to its frontiers in a region the for-
mer Soviet Union once dominated, and
the plan became a thorn in the side of re-
lations between Washington and Russia.
Obama attributed his decision to a
changed perception of the threat posed
by Iran’s missile and nuclear programs.
He said Washington now believes that
short- and medium-range missiles from
Iran pose a more immediate threat,
while an Iranian ICBM is many years far-
ther away than once projected. (In late
September Iran launched a series of
medium-range ‘test’ missiles of sufficient
Undersecretary of Defense for Policy
Michele Flournoy
6 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
Page 2
ington Post columnist Andrew Nagorski
that Washington was “walking away
from an agreement with two allies in
Central Europe and appearing to bend
to pressure from the Kremlin.” (Some in
Washington place Poland and the Czech
Republic in “Central” rather than “East-
ern” Europe, pointing out that Prague is
west of Vienna).
The Pentagon’s civilian boss insists
that Washington is not letting its friends
down. “Those who say we are scrapping
missile defense in Europe are either mis-
informed or misrepresenting what we
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates are doing,” said Secretary of Defense
Robert Gates in a press conference.
range to reach parts of Europe and U.S. “This shift has even been distorted as
bases in the gulf.) some sort of concession to Russia, which
Russia welcomed the change. Al- fiercely opposed the old plan. Russia’s
though Poland and the Czech Republic attitude and possible reaction played no
revel in their newfound role as allies of part in my recommendation to the pres-
the U.S., public opinion within both ident on this issue.”
Eastern European nations had been Gates emphasized that “American
mixed, at best. missile defense on the continent will con-
As expected, Capitol Hill conserva- tinue.” His proposed new missile de-
tives expressed displeasure over the de- fense plan will rely on sensors and inter-
cision. Perhaps unexpectedly, they also ceptor missiles based at sea, on land,
objected to the suddenness of the an- and in the air, but the emphasis will be
nouncement. Sen. John McCain (R- on the RIM-161 SM-3 Block 1-A Stan-
Ariz.), who has sometimes crossed the dard Missile carried by Navy Aegis-class
aisle to support Obama on other issues, warships and adaptable to operations
noted that “a late-night phone call was from land. Marine Corps Gen. James
all it took to tell our friends to take a Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint
hike.” Obama report-
edly reached Polish
Prime Minister Donald The emphasis in the new
missile defense plan will be
Tusk by phone at mid- on the Standard Missile.
night Tusk’s time.
In Capitol Hill testi-
mony, Pentagon policy
chief Michele Flournoy
apologized to lawmak-
ers for not briefing them
in advance. Flournoy
said the administration
rushed its announce-
ment because details
were beginning to leak.
Critics of the deci-
sion agreed with Wash-
WATCH2.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 2:51 PM
Chiefs of Staff, said that by 2015, a
land-based SM-3 based on the yet-
untested block 1-B version could be
placed in Poland, the Czech Republic,
“and in other NATO countries as well.”
Airlifter upgrade doubts
Two famous Air Force cargo haulers, the
C-130 Hercules and C-5 Galaxy, are en-
meshed in controversy as the Pentagon
and Capitol Hill debate the future of the
nation’s airlift fleet.
Air Force chief of staff Gen. Norton
Schwartz wants to kill the C-130H
Avionics Modernization Program (AMP).
At the same time, Air Force leaders and
some in Congress want to save the C-5
modernization program.
The C-130 is the proven, four-en-
gined turboprop craft that performs as a
“tactical airlift,” bringing supplies and
weaponry to crude airstrips close to the
front lines. Speaking to reporters about
the AMP, Schwartz said in September,
“The bottom line is, we can’t afford it.”
Boeing won the AMP contract in
June 2001, defeating the aircraft’s man-
ufacturer, Lockheed Martin. Boeing be-
gan low-rate initial production and has
delivered its first C-130H AMP avionics
simulator to Little Rock AFB, Ark.
Intended to modernize and, more
important, standardize cockpits of 222
C-130Hs, AMP has experienced cost
overruns and delays. A 2008 report by
the Government Accountability Office
was sharply critical of the program.
Schwartz says he wants a less costly up-
grade that will enable aging C-130Hs to
fly on international air routes. He cau-
tioned that “no decision is final,” but
since the DOD has succeeded in cutting
bigger programs such as the F-22 that
were more popular on Capitol Hill, ob-
servers expect Schwartz to get his way.
Less clear is what will happen to the
C-5 Galaxy fleet. The C-5 and its rival,
the C-17 Globemaster III, are the Air
Force’s outsized “strategic airlift” freight-
ers, carrying large cargoes on transconti-
nental and transoceanic missions.
The C-5 fleet numbers 111 aircraft,
out of 126 built (59 C-5As, 47 C-5Bs,
two C-5Cs, and three C-5Ms). A year
ago, as an economy move, the Air Force
Page 3
scrapped plans to reengine its
first-generation C-5As, which are
15 years older than its second-
generation Bs, but both models
are still scheduled for an avion-
ics modernization program (also
abbreviated AMP). Only C-5Bs
will also receive an engine up-
grade, replacing 41,000-lb-thrust
General Electric TF39-GE-1C
turbofan engines with 67,000-
lb-thrust GE CF6-80C2 engines.
An upgraded Galaxy transport
that emerges from both the The AMP is intended to modernize and standardize
cockpits of 222 C-130Hs.
AMP and reengining program is
designated C-5M Super Galaxy.
The C-5 is the only aircraft that can
carry some cargoes. But some in Con- tional wisdom that the aircraft, although
gress insist that the C-5M is not needed more reliable and economical, is not
and that C-5 funding should be diverted nearly so long ranged as its rival.
to building more C-17s instead, whether Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Rep.
the Pentagon requests them or not. Mike Castle (R-Del.) oppose this argu-
Boeing officials have said that if the ment. They believe the future of Dover
Pentagon does not order more C-17s, AFB, Del., long a fixture for the nation’s
the production line will shut down in July transatlantic airlift efforts, relies on con-
of 2011. tinuing to modernize older C-5s to the
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hi.) and Rep. C-5M. Castle told the Wilmington, Del.,
John Murtha (D-Pa.) are among C-17 News Journal that lawmakers regard con-
supporters. Inouye, who helped arrange tinued C-17 production “as a jobs pro-
for C-17s to be stationed in Hawaii, said gram” and that more are not needed.
the Globemaster III is a “great aircraft, Amid the C-5 versus C-17 debate, a
ideally suited for the vast distances of the C-5M Super Galaxy made a record flight
Pacific region”—defying the conven- on September 13. Carrying a payload of
On September 13 the Spirit of Normandy took off from Dover and broke eight records.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 7
WATCH2.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 2:51 PM
176,610 lb, a C-5M named The Spirit
of Normandy took off from Dover and
climbed to 41,188 ft in 23 min 53 sec, a
new world record for aircraft weighing
551,155-661,386 lb. Altogether, the C-
5M broke seven other records. The pilot
on the flight was Lt. Col. Scott Erickson,
the reservist in charge of C-5M training
at Dover.
At the beginning of October Con-
gress appeared poised to appropriate
funds for 10 more C-17s in FY10, even
though the administration does not want
them and the Pentagon did not request
them. The White House indirectly gave
lawmakers a green light by saying
Obama would not veto a bill funding
more C-17s. As for the C-130H AMP,
observers in Washington did not expect
the program to receive more funds.
Tanker program shift
Responsibility for procuring a new air re-
fueling tanker aircraft will go to the Air
Force rather than the Office of the Sec-
retary of Defense, Gates has decided. At
a September 24 Pentagon news confer-
ence, the Air Force announced some de-
tails about the latest KC-X program,
which will be the third effort to acquire a
new tanker since 2001.
Next summer, says Air Force spokes-
man Col. Michael Curphey, the compe-
tition will downselect the winner for 179
aircraft under the KC-X program. The
plan is for delivery of 15 tankers a year.
The first delivery will take place in 2015,
and the service will reach initial operat-
ing capability two years later. As the pro-
gram matures, the Air Force will evaluate
its future tanker needs and begin work on
a next phase, KC-Y. In similar fashion, a
final evaluation of requirements will take
place, as will a final phase, KC-Z. Al-
though not explicitly stated, KC-Y and
KC-Z will not necessarily end up being
the same aircraft as KC-X.
The tanker program will continue to
fuel differences on Capitol Hill between
supporters of a team headed by Boeing
and another led by Northrop Grumman
and EADS. Meanwhile, some U.S. air-
men continue to maintain and fly tankers
that are older than their grandparents:
Some of the 415 KC-135R Strato-
tankers in service today have FY59 serial
numbers and will eventually reach 80
years of service before being replaced.
8 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
Page 4
Human spaceflight
At a time when the spaceflight commu-
nity has been awaiting key policy deci-
sions by the Obama administration, the
watchdog GAO on September 25 re-
leased a harsh report concluding that
NASA is on unsure footing.
The administration was expected to
make a decision in the fall on whether or
not to proceed with “the Vision” or
adopt some other plan to put astronauts
into orbit aboard U.S. vehicles. The Vi-
sion—now called the Constellation pro-
gram—would build an Ares I launch
rocket and an Orion crew exploration
vehicle to replace the three-vehicle space
shuttle fleet. There was little good news
for the plan in either the GAO report or
Norman Augustine
the findings of a committee headed by
former aerospace executive Norman Au-
gustine. (See “Choosing the pathway to
space,” page 32.)
NASA still lacks a knowledge-based
acquisition strategy, a realistic cost esti-
mate, and sufficient funding for the Vi-
sion, the GAO stated. It noted that the
agency has not properly addressed tech-
nical challenges for Ares I and Orion,
such as limiting vibration during launch,
eliminating the risk of hitting the launch
tower during liftoff, and trimming weight
from Orion.
The GAO also criticized poorly
phased funding that risks monetary
shortfalls during every fiscal year through
2012. This means that planned work is
not being completed to support sched-
ules and milestones. Also, says the re-
Rep. Bart Gordon
port, “NASA does not know how much
Ares I and Orion will ultimately cost, and
will not know until technical and design
challenges have been addressed.”
Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), who
chairs the House Committee on Science
and Technology, requested the GAO
findings as part of his committee’s over-
sight of NASA acquisition efforts.
The GAO report amounts to “piling
on” findings by the presidentially ap-
pointed Augustine blue-ribbon panel.
Augustine ran into unexpected anger
and frustration from lawmakers when he
testified on Capitol Hill that neither
NASA’s current program, Constellation,
nor any of its likely alternatives can get
U.S. astronauts out of LEO without a siz-
able spending increase. His committee’s
written summary report begins by pro-
claiming, simply, that the nation’s hu-
man spaceflight program “appears to be
on an unsustainable trajectory.”
Critics of the Augustine panel say
the group discussed many options but
made no clear recommendation. One
NASA employee called the panel’s re-
port “wishy washy,” and summed up the
way many feel: “We don't know where
we stand,” she said. “We don't know
whether we’ll have a job next week. We
don’t know whether we’ll fly.”
At press time, the Ares I rocket was
about to undergo a major test, but—as
the situation has been with the human
spaceflight program for the past several
years—no one could say what might hap-
pen next. Robert F. Dorr
robert.f.dorr@cox.net
WATCH2.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 2:52 PM Page 5

(Continued from page 5) 2010 (9% of the total), according to the tional, where passenger numbers were
It is perhaps a sign of the times that of Center for Asia Pacific Aviation (CAPA). up 25% in the first eight months of the
the 69 A330-200Fs and 747-8Fs ordered Airlines in the United Arab Emirates are year over the same period in 2008, and
by air cargo airlines, just over half (35) have set to more than triple the number of air- freight handled rose to 47,221 tonnes,
been bought by Asian carriers, with Euro- craft based in the country over the next an increase of 9.6%.
pean airlines ordering 19, Middle Eastern two decades, according to CAPA. Du-
airlines 13, and U.S. operators 12. bai’s air cargo traffic grew by around 9% Managing new assembly lines
in 2008 over 2007, and air freight traf- The volatility of demand and supply in
Growth in the Middle East fic was up 6.1% for the first seven the short-term, however, is making it dif-
The Middle East is emerging as a key months of this year. Dubai is now the ficult for both Airbus and Boeing to man-
aviation growth area for both passenger fourth busiest international air cargo hub age the new freighter assembly lines.
and freight services. Between January in the world—ahead of Tokyo, Shanghai, Airbus has already delayed first deliveries
and June of this year, international air and Frankfurt. of the A330-200F from the second half
freight grew 3.5% year on year, accord- But it is not just in the oil-rich king- of 2009 into 2010. This has been
ing to an ACI report in September. This doms of the gulf where the Middle East caused by a need to meet an increased
year Middle East airlines will add 114 air- is defying the global aviation downturn. demand for passenger versions of the
craft to their fleets—equivalent to 8% of The fastest growing aviation hub in the aircraft, according to the company, fol-
total worldwide deliveries, and 122 in world is now Rafiq Hariri Beirut Interna- lowing a shortage of capacity created by
ongoing delays to the Boeing 787 pro-
gram. Some leasing customers, as a re-
sult, have switched their orders from
Events Calendar freighters to passenger aircraft.
NOV. 3-6 According to 2008 production
NDIA Aircraft Combat Survivability Symposium, Monterey, Calif. schedules, around 10 A330-200F air-
Contact: Meredith Geary, 703/247-9476; mgeary@ndia.org craft should be rolling off the Toulouse
production line in 2010—a schedule that
NOV. 15-20 will probably be revised considerably. It
Twentieth International Congress of Mechanical Engineering, will have to be altered further if there are
Gramado, Brazil. any more shocks to the global economy,
Contact: Joao Luis Azevedo, azevedo@iae.cta.br as nearly a third of A330-200F cus-
JAN. 4-7 tomers are investment funds.
Forty-eighth AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, including the New If Airbus’ parent company EADS
Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Orlando, Fla. wins the USAF KC-X military refueler
Contact: 703/264-7500 contract, EADS would move A330-
200F production to Mobile, Ala. EADS
JAN 20-21 has already started work on the $600-
AIAA Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems Conference (Secret/U.S. million plant, following the award of the
only), Monterey, Calif. initial contract, but that work has now
Contact: 703/264-7500 been halted pending a decision on the
JAN. 25-28 KC-X contract. EADS estimates it would
Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, San Jose, Calif. take 12-18 months to build the plant
Contact: Raymond Sears, 603/863-2832; r.w.sears@ieee.org and hire the 1,000 workers required.
The first A330-200Fs could potentially
FEB.2-4 be produced about six months after the
U.S. Air Force T&E Days, Nashville, Tenn. first military tanker, according to EADS.
Contact: 703/264-7500
FEB. 10-11 ✈✈✈
Thirteenth Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference, Despite the volatility in the markets, the
Arlington, Va. order backlog for both the A330-200F
Contact: 703/264-7500 and the 747-8F has proved relatively re-
silient. The large number of investment
FEB. 14-17
fund companies that have stuck with the
Twentieth AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, San Diego, Calif.
new Airbus and Boeing freighters—de-
Contact: A. Trask, trask@apogeeintegration.com
spite a lack of clear data on a recovery—
FEB. 23-26 suggest that the fundamentals remain
Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum, Laurel, Md. strong. Philip Butterworth-Hayes
Contact: Glen Robertson, 256/694-7941; gar@ias-spes.org Brighton, U.K.
phayes@mistral.co.uk

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 9

InsightsLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09
Defense giants reshape UAV industry
THE UAV INDUSTRY IS BEING TRANSFORMED
as the megadefense companies seek to
displace the small firms that have domi-
nated this sector until recently.
Through acquisitions, heavy research
spending, and teaming, large corpora-
tions are rapidly changing the face of the
industry. Smaller companies are being
snapped up as their larger competitors
seek to establish footholds in one of the
key growth markets of the future.
In April, Northrop Grumman purchased the
Killer Bee line of UAVs.
Explosive growth
For many years, the UAV sector was
treated as a relatively minor market with-
out the budget or large production runs
to attract large defense companies. The
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have led to
a military transformation in which fund-
ing and military adoption rates are mak-
ing UAVs an increasingly attractive mar-
ket. The number of such vehicles in
DOD inventories exploded from fewer
than 50 in 2000 to more than 6,000
last year.
Now UAVs rank with homeland se-
curity and cyber security as one of the
hot growth areas for defense companies.
They have the appeal of being a rela-
tively dependable growth area at a time
when the overall defense budget will be
under pressure.
The Teal Group forecasts that the
market will be worth $62 billion world-
10 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
2:53 PM Page 2
wide, with a 7.8% compound annual
growth rate over the period from 2009
to 2018. At a time when the overall de-
fense budget will be under pressure, that
is a relatively strong growth rate.
Not only is this market large and
growing, it is also easily accessible to U.S
contractors. The Teal forecast shows that
the U.S. will be dominant over the 2009-
2018 period. It will account for 72% of
R&D and 61% of procurement. Europe
will be the second largest market, closely
followed by Asia.
Boon for small companies
The explosive growth of the market in
recent years has created a unique indus-
trial environment in which small compa-
nies have thrived, successfully competing
with significantly larger ones.
General Atomics Aeronautical Sys-
tems grew to dominate the medium-alti-
tude long-endurance market with the
Predator drone and its variants. AAI’s
Shadow became the basic tactical UAV
of the Army. Insitu’s Scan Eagle became
WORLD UAV EXPENDITURES FORECAST
R&D and procurement
$ Billions
$9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
U.S. R&D Rest of world R&D U.S. procurement
a staple in Navy/Marine Corps services.
And AeroVironment became a giant in
small UAVs, winning every competition
for a U.S. military program of record in
this size category.
Not driven by the need to please
shareholders on a quarterly basis, these
small companies were willing to look at
potentially long payoff times. They spent
heavily on R&D and were willing to fo-
cus on small programs to develop their
market presence. The agility that came
from being small was critical in building
up their market positions.
Large firms follow
Until recently, larger companies pos-
sessed relatively modest footholds in the
UAV industry, particularly in production
programs. Northrop Grumman, through
its 1999 acquisition of Teledyne Ryan,
was the exception, having the developer
of the Global Hawk as its entry into the
industry. Northrop Grumman used that
acquisition as the seed of an effort that
made it the largest UAV company in the
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Rest of world procurement
InsightsLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 2:54 PM Page 3

world, with $1.3 billion in projected

2009 UAV revenues and two years of
UAV backlog.
With the growth of the UAV market,
large defense companies have followed
Northrop Grumman’s early example and
made a string of acquisitions of small
UAV developers and manufacturers. Ac-
quisitions have tremendous appeal, be-
cause there are relatively few new pro-
grams available to establish a company’s
position in the market. That makes a po-
sition on an existing program all the
more valuable. Smaller companies often
have a reputation for innovative UAV so-
lutions that also appeal to their larger
competitors.
In an acquisition that kicked off the
current wave of purchases, Textron pur-
chased AAI (United Industrial) in Decem-
ber 2007 for $1.1 billion. This made it
the main supplier of tactical UAVs to the
Army. Boeing followed in September
2008 with its acquisition of Insitu.
In recent months, the pace of acquisi- The Scan Eagle has become a staple of the Marines’ weapons portfolio.
tions has continued despite a worldwide
economic crisis that has dramatically cut
merger activity. Northrop Grumman pur- market position in UAVs. Northrop ing announced in August that it would
chased Swift Engineering’s Killer Bee line Grumman’s relationship with Swift Engi- team with Austria’s Schiebel to market its
of UAVs in April. In June, BAE Systems neering in research and marketing en- S-100 unmanned helicopter in the U.S.
acquired Advanced Ceramics, a manu- abled a company with an expertise in Boeing will be offering the S-100 for a
facturer of three small UAVs. racing vehicles to develop a concept for U.S. Special Forces Operations Com-
Even major subcontractors have a family of UAVs. That family, ultimately mand expeditionary surveillance pro-
been making their own acquisitions. acquired by Northrop Grumman, was gram. General Dynamics formed a joint
Rockwell Collins purchased Athena compelling enough that Raytheon devel- venture with Israel’s Elbit Systems in May
Technologies, a manufacturer of UAV oped its own teaming agreement with to offer Hermes and Skylark systems in
flight controls and navigation equipment, Swift for the Marine Corps STUAS the U.S.
in April 2008. In May 2009, Goodrich (small tactical unmanned aerial system)
acquired Cloudcap Technology, which competition. Larger projects
develops and manufactures stabilized While both of those teaming arrange- Major U.S. defense companies are also
camera systems. ments ultimately ended in the acquisition showing a considerable commitment to
This wave of acquisitions is only part of the smaller company, new relation- spending their own research money on
of the strategy shift by larger defense ships are constantly being unveiled. Boe- major projects to strengthen their market
companies to participate in a growth positions. Boeing is developing the
market. Company-funded R&D in UAVs Phantom Ray, a fighter-sized com-
is considerable. bat UAV, which it plans to flight
test in late 2010 with company
Teaming for success funding. The move shows Boe-
Teaming arrangements by larger compa- ing’s continued commitment to be-
nies to develop relationships with small, ing a power in unmanned combat
innovative UAV developers have be- aircraft despite its loss of the Navy-
come increasingly important. Boeing, led unmanned combat air system
for example, teamed with Insitu, a com- program to Northrop Grumman in
pany that initially marketed a UAV for lo- 2007. The Phantom Ray will con-
Boeing is teaming with Schiebel to
cating schools of tuna. The relationship tinue where the government-
market the S-100 in the U.S.
enabled the smaller firm to build a strong (Continued on page 15)

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 11

SPACEupdateLayout.qxd:AA Template
Transforming human spaceflight
DURING THE PAST FIVE AND A HALF YEARS,
U.S. space policy has been defined by
the Vision for Space Exploration an-
nounced by President George W. Bush
on January 14, 2004. The Vision, as it
came to be called, was essentially an ef-
fort to revitalize NASA following the loss
of the space shuttle Columbia on Febru-
ary 1, 2003, by setting some ambitious
goals for human spaceflight designed to
rekindle the American public’s excite-
ment for space exploration.
The long-term goals of the Vision
called for returning astronauts to the
Moon by 2020 and an eventual piloted
mission to Mars. The short- to medium-
term goals were to phase out the shuttle
fleet by 2010 and develop a replace-
ment human-rated vehicle by 2014.
From the start, our view of the Vi-
sion was that it was poorly conceived.
Too many critical questions were left
The first launch of the Falcon 9/Dragon is scheduled to be held by the end of this year.
12 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
10/14/09 3:21 PM Page 2
unanswered or answered incompletely,
including, “Why are we returning to the
Moon?” and “How much will it all cost?”
There was a kind of “groupthink” atti-
tude at NASA and within the U.S. space
industry that the Vision was a good idea,
and that the details of why we were un-
dertaking it and how we were going to
pay for it would simply become obvious
in time. In other words, that we would
cross those bridges when we got there.
Shaping and [under]selling a plan
And so the Bush administration pro-
ceeded to sell Congress on the worthi-
ness of the Vision. By the end of 2004,
the administration had succeeded in ob-
taining start-up funding from Congress
for the Vision, and in 2005 language
was included in the NASA Authorization
bill officially endorsing the Vision and
laying out the architecture for a return to
manned mission to the Moon. The ar-
chitecture was designated Project Con-
stellation, and it called for the develop-
ment of the Orion crew capsule and the
Ares family of expendable launch vehi-
cles, including the Ares I crew launch ve-
hicle and the larger, more powerful Ares
V cargo launch vehicle.
In August 2006, NASA awarded
Lockheed Martin Space Systems the
prime contract to build Orion. The fol-
lowing August, the agency awarded
Alliant Techsystems the contract to de-
velop the first stage of the Ares I rocket,
and Boeing a contract for the vehicle’s
upper stage. Plans are under way for
development of the Ares V, which is
scheduled to fly in 2018; however, no
contractors for that vehicle have yet
been named.
A superficial look at the Vision would
suggest that the main pieces are slowly
coming together. But the truth is that the
Vision is in trouble. The Bush adminis-
tration failed to fulfill its budget obliga-
tions to the program, leaving Constella-
tion with a funding shortfall of more than
$12 billion.
The target date for the maiden flight
of the Ares I/Orion vehicle is now 2015,
although we think that 2016-2017 is the
more realistic timeframe. Such a delay
would mean that the U.S. would not
have its own human spaceflight capabil-
ity for six or seven years following the fi-
nal mission of the space shuttle in 2010.
NASA would be completely dependent
on the Russians to transport its astro-
nauts to and from the international
space station aboard Soyuz rockets and
capsules for an extremely long period.
Initially, it was thought that the gap
between the end of the shuttle program
and the start of Ares I/Orion operations
would be no more than four years. We
think that the gap is more likely to be
nearly double that, assuming of course
that there are no major technical set-
backs. The delays we envision only take
into account the normal technical prob-
SPACEupdateLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 3:21 PM Page 3

lems and budgetary cutbacks that all

NASA programs of this magnitude and
complexity usually experience.

Closing the gap

So the question is, “How do you close
the gap?” How do you keep from having
to rely on the Russians to get access to a
station that has cost U.S. taxpayers
more than $100 billion to build, launch,
and assemble over the past quarter of a
century? One way, of course, would be
to delay the termination of the shuttle
program by two or three years and ap-
propriate over $3 billion more each year
for Project Constellation during 2011-
2014. The shuttle fleet would fly its final
mission sometime in 2012-2013 and
Ares I/Orion would come online some-
time in 2014-2015.
Rather than having budgets of be-
tween $18.5 billion and $19 billion per
year during the first half of the next
decade, NASA would have to be given at
least $22 billion annually, and probably
more. But given the extremely tight con-
straints of the overall budget, we do not Orbital Sciences is aiming for a maiden launch of Taurus II and Cygnus in 2010.
believe the Obama administration would
seek these levels of funding. At present,
the administration’s five-year plan for aiming for a maiden launch of its med- Griffin noted that both rockets could
NASA through FY14 calls for yearly ium-lift Taurus II and Cygnus capsule launch downsized capsules to the Moon,
budgets of slightly more than $18.6 bil- in 2010. Both systems are being devel- but not the type that would allow for car-
lion. The only exception is the $18.86 oped under contracts through NASA’s rying the kind of cargo mass needed for
billion planned for FY14. $500-million Commercial Orbital Trans- building and resupplying a lunar outpost
NASA could realize savings of $3 bil- portation Services (COTS) program. or some other kind of heavy construc-
lion annually after the end of the shuttle It is entirely possible that both Falcon tion that might be envisioned. Also,
program. That money, plus a few hun- 9/Dragon and Taurus II/Cygnus will be some industry studies have determined
dred million dollars more per year, could available for cargo resupply missions to that human-rating the rockets would take
be applied to Project Constellation to ISS by 2011. However, this does not five to seven years, saving no time com-
speed up development of Ares I/Orion solve NASA’s near-term manned space pared to proceeding with Ares I.
and have it ready by 2014-2015. But capability problem. NASA would have to
you would still be left with no U.S. hu- receive a sizable infusion of capital for Status quo woes
man space system during 2011-2013. COTS and quickly issue new contracts to The idea of simply sticking with the cur-
SpaceX and Orbital to push the develop- rent plan to end the shuttle next year
Options ment of crew-capable systems. and continue the Ares I/Orion program,
There is the possibility that U.S. com- Another option for reducing the gap targeting completion by 2016, is cer-
mercial spaceflight companies such as would be to outright cancel the Ares I tainly plausible. It is a little risky because
SpaceX (Space Exploration Technolo- and try to launch Orion aboard a crew- it assumes continued goodwill on the
gies) and Orbital Sciences could have hu- rated Boeing Delta IV or Lockheed Mar- part of the Russian government and a
man-rated launch vehicle/capsule sys- tin Atlas V rocket. This is a controversial continued interest in selling space
tems ready by the end of 2011, but we proposal that has been reviewed for sev- aboard its Soyuz capsules to NASA at
think this is an overly ambitious target. eral years. Former NASA administrator $47 million per seat. There is just some-
SpaceX is completing development on Mike Griffin concluded that switching to thing inherently unnerving about having
its heavy-lift Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon a Delta IV or Atlas V would not save to rely on another country to get access
capsule. The first Falcon 9/Dragon is money because the vehicles are too to one’s own space facility.
scheduled to be launched by the end of small for the Orion capsule, which would Plus, our sense is that the Ares pro-
this year. Meanwhile, Orbital Sciences is then have to undergo a costly redesign. gram is already in danger, mainly be-

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 13

SPACEupdateLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/15/09 1:27 PM Page 4
cause it is suffering from technical prob-
lems and cost overruns. Our under-
standing is that the design of the Ares I
may be problematic, primarily due to the
use of a single five-segment stack of
solid-fuel boosters as the first stage.
There are concerns about computer sim-
ulations that show that the vehicle would
vibrate excessively during liftoff.
One way to conceivably reduce the
cost of the Ares program would be to de-
sign one model that would be larger than
the Ares I but smaller than the proposed
Ares V. The argument against this ap-
proach is based on cost. While develop-
ing one vehicle, rather than two, would
be cheaper, operational costs would be
much greater because more launches
would be needed to carry the same
amount of mass that would have gone
up on the larger Ares V.
The commission
All of these options, as well as others we
have not explored, have been consid-
ered as part of a sweeping space policy
review by a 10-member blue-ribbon
panel chaired by former chief executive
of Lockheed Martin, Norman Augustine.
The review was ordered by President
Obama in May, and the panel submitted
its preliminary report to Congress in
September. The primary conclusion of
the report is that the current strategy for
U.S. human spaceflight is unsustainable
given the limited financial resources
NASA can realistically count on.
It is unclear yet what impact the Au-
gustine panel will have on the future of
Constellation specifically, and on U.S.
human spaceflight and exploration in
general. The panel’s report is under re-
view by Congress.
However, it is hard to imagine that
President Bush’s Vision will remain in-
tact. Given the more pragmatic nature of
President Obama and his preference for
working in collaboration with other
countries, our assumption would be that
ultimately the panel would have to make
a more convincing case about why the
U.S. should spend over $100 billion to
visit the Moon again and then spend
tens of billions of dollars more to do
something worthwhile there.
The case would have to involve some
sort of cooperative arrangement with an-
other country or countries, so that the
14 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
U.S. would not solely bear the costs and
risks of the venture. It would have to be
an approach that reflects the Obama ad-
ministration’s tendency to want to do
things in partnership with others rather
than going it alone.
It would not surprise us at all if the
outcome of the final report was a com-
plete scrapping of a return to the Moon
and termination of the Ares and Orion
programs altogether, and instead focus-
ing on transforming U.S. human space-
flight into a robust commercial industry
that could help spur economic growth
and fuel the development of other com-
mercial markets such as space tourism.
Any long-term vision for space ex-
ploration that does not allow commercial
industry to take the lead is extremely lim-
ited, given the relatively small size of
NASA’s budget and the prohibitive rela-
tive cost of developing human-rated
launch vehicle/capsule systems or reus-
able spaceplanes.
NASA has been the focal point of
U.S. human space exploration for the
past half century. It has dominated the
industry by being the primary customer
for hardware and services. In some
ways, though, this has suffocated the po-
tential evolution of the industry to allow
it to innovate and discover more practi-
cal reasons for sending humans into
space other than to simply be the first to
get there or for the sake of exploration
or scientific discovery—reasons the aver-
age person can relate to, such as profit,
adventure, and entertainment.
By emphasizing more reliance on
the nascent U.S. commercial spaceflight
industry, the panel would relieve NASA
of a huge responsibility that funding in-
adequacies prevent it from carrying out
efficiently and safely. It would also help
facilitate the evolution of human space-
flight by allowing for a more diverse set
of reasons why humans should go to
Earth orbit or travel to the Moon.
The traditional reasons NASA has
promoted are fine, but they are no
longer enough to excite the public and
keep its attention, particularly for expen-
sive and technically complex engineering
programs that require a decade to com-
plete and visions that take even longer to
attain. Marco Caceres
Teal Group
mcaceres@tealgroup.com
SPACEupdateLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/15/09 1:28 PM Page 5

(Continued from page 11) funded X-45 program ended with the
U.S. COMPANIES RANKED BY UAV SALES Northrop Grumman victory.
Lockheed Martin developed and built
$ Billions the $27-million P-175 Polecat with its
$1.5
own funds. The demonstrator, which
crashed in 2006, was intended to show
the company’s strength in rapid proto-
1.2
typing and in developing a stealthy UAV
that could potentially compete with
Global Hawk. Lockheed has subse-
0.9
quently been developing a fast, stealthy
UAV that it may offer in the MQ-X pro-
gram in approximately 2012.
0.6
General Atomics, with an estimated
$800 million of UAV revenues, ranks as
the second-largest UAV company thanks
0.3
to its production of Predator drones. The
Predator and its variants dominate the
U.S. medium-altitude long endurance
0.0
Northop General Atomics Boeing Textron AeroVironment segment. Philip Finnegan
Grumman Aeronautical Teal Group
Systems pfinnegan@tealgroup.com

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 15

NOTEBOOKlayout1109.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09
Phantom Torso takes solar blasts
for science
THE PHANTOM TORSO IS BACK, AND HAS
quite a story to tell.
“He” is an armless, legless, human-
shaped torso, a mannequin resembling a
mummy wrapped in bandages. Scientists
at ESA call him Matroshka, and like his
NASA counterpart, Fred, this manne-
quin is an intrepid space traveler. Now
that Matroshka has spent four months
on the ISS, scientists are learning about
the space radiation he endured there.
Lessons learned from Fred and Ma-
troshka have major implications for
NASA’s plans to set up a manned out-
post on the Moon and, eventually, to
send people to Mars. Protecting astro-
nauts from the harmful effects of space
radiation will be a critical challenge for
these extended missions. In order to de-
sign spacesuits, vehicles, and habitats
with enough shielding to keep astronauts
safe, mission scientists need to know
Fred is NASA’s version of the Phantom Torso.
16 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
3:23 PM Page 2
how much radiation—and what kinds—
humans actually absorb.
Scientists can use computers to esti-
mate the amount, but a computer model
and real life can be two wildly different
things. Until now, researchers were un-
sure whether their models accurately
predicted the radiation dose astronauts
would experience in space.
That is where the Phantom Torso
comes in. It has provided the real-world
test needed to prove that the models are
essentially correct. Francis Cucinotta,
chief scientist for NASA’s Space Radia-
tion Program, and his colleagues ana-
lyzed the measurements from hundreds
of radiation sensors embedded through-
out Matroshka’s body and found that the
models are actually quite good—accurate
to within 10% of the measured dose.
That means it is “all systems go” for us-
ing them to plan NASA’s return to the
Moon or even a trip to Mars.
Gauging the danger
The most dangerous kind of radiation
the astronauts encounter is galactic cos-
mic rays (GCR). These are bare atomic
nuclei, some as heavy as iron atoms, ac-
celerated to nearly the speed of light by
distant supernovas. Because of their
high velocity, high mass, and positive
electric charge, GCR particles can cause
tremendous damage to a person’s cells.
Moreover, traditional radiation shielding
cannot stop GCR particles.
But understanding the danger is not
as simple as merely knowing how much
radiation is out there. “What matters
most is how much radiation actually hits
a person’s vital organs,” says Cucinotta.
To reach those organs, particles of
radiation must first pass through the walls
of a spacecraft, an astronaut’s spacesuit,
and then skin and other body tissues. It is
a very complex interaction. Sometimes
these barriers will slow down or stop a
particle of radiation. Moreover, some-
times the collision between a particle and
a barrier will produce a shower of new
particles called “secondary” radiation.
Computer models must account for all
this activity.
Space station astronauts wear sen-
sors on their flight suits to record total
radiation exposure, but there is no prac-
tical way to measure how much radiation
actually reaches their vital organs. Fred
has sensors just about everywhere—even
on the inside.
The Phantom Torsos are made of a
special plastic that closely mimics the
density of the human body, sliced hori-
zontally into 35 1-in.-thick layers. Within
these layers, researchers have embedded
a total of 416 lithium-crystal dosimeters,
each of which measures the accumulated
radiation dose at one point in the body
over the course of the experiment. Fred
and Matroshka also contain several “ac-
tive” dosimeters located where vital or-
gans such as the brain, thyroid, heart,
colon, and stomach would be. These ac-
tive sensors keep a record of how the ra-
diation dose changes moment by mo-
ment. Together, these various sensors
thoroughly document how radiation
propagates through their bodies.
“The geometry and the composition
of the torso mimic the human body very
well,” Cucinotta says. “I think it is a very
good test.”
Maximizing safety
So now that these computer models
have been verified in the real world,
what do they say about keeping astro-
nauts safe in a lunar outpost or on Mars?
“Short lunar missions are fine,” says
Cucinotta, “but living in a lunar habitat
for six months starts to be problematic.
We are going to have to do a really good
job with radiation shielding and perhaps
medical countermeasures to have six-
month missions.”
Mars will be even tougher, these
models suggest. Some scenarios call for
missions that would last 18 months or
more. “Right now there is no design so-
lution to stay within safety limits for such
NOTEBOOKlayout1109.qxd:AA Template
a Mars mission,” says Cucinotta. “Putting
enough radiation shielding around a
spacecraft would make it far too heavy to
launch, so we need to find better light-
weight shielding materials. And we prob-
ably need to develop medical techniques
to counteract damage to cells caused by
cosmic rays.” One of the biggest obsta-
cles to progress in this area, he notes, is
“uncertainty in the types of cell damage
deep cosmic ray exposure can cause. We
still have a lot to learn.”
The solar flare factor
Another key question: How do solar
flares affect astronauts? Fred and Ma-
troshka have not experienced any in-
tense solar radiation storms during their
time onboard the ISS.
“The energy spectrum of solar
events and how the radiation dose
changes from organ to organ will be
very different from what we have seen
so far from cosmic rays,” says Cucinotta.
To find the answer, scientists have
recreated the intense radiation from gi-
ant solar flares right here on Earth. Ma-
troshka has been chosen as the volun-
teer who will experience the blast.
In 1972, Apollo astronauts narrowly
escaped a potential catastrophe. On Au-
gust 2, a large sunspot appeared and be-
gan to erupt repeatedly for more than a
week, producing a record-setting fusillade
of solar proton radiation. Only pure luck
saved the day. The eruptions took place
during the gap between Apollo 16 and
Matroshka is usually suited up in his white travel poncho.
10/14/09 3:23 PM Page 3
17, and astronauts missed the storm.
Researchers still wonder what would
have happened if the timing had been
just a little different. What if astronauts
had been caught unprotected on the sur-
face of the Moon?
NASA researchers are working to
find an answer to that question. At
Brookhaven National Laboratory in Up-
ton, N.Y., scientists are subjecting Ma-
troshka to a beam of protons to learn
how astronauts would be affected by the
type of radiation generated during the
1972 event.
“We want to know how close it
comes to a dangerously acute exposure,”
says Cucinotta. In the parlance of radia-
tion experts, “acute exposure” is brief but
intense—the radiation would strike the
body over a relatively short period rang-
ing from minutes to hours, much as a so-
lar flare would. This is different from the
“chronic exposure” astronauts normally
experience as they travel through space.
Sensors embedded in 35 different slices of the
Cosmic rays hit their bodies in a slow Phantom Torso measure the impact of radiation.
drizzle that is spread out over weeks or
months. With chronic exposure, the
body has time to repair or replace dam- At first glance, the 1972 event would
aged cells as it goes along, but an acute seem to fall into the acute category. It
exposure gives the body little time to was, after all, a solar flare. However,
cope with the damage. there is a complication—it was actually a
“The biological effects are very sen- series of flares producing a radiation
sitive to the dose rate,” Cucinotta ex- storm that was longer and less impulsive
plains. “A dose of radiation delivered than normal. Radiation exposure would
over a short amount of time is two to have been neither chronic nor clearly
three times more damaging than the acute, but somewhere in between. In this
same dose over a few days.” gray area, details about how much of the
radiation actually reaches a person’s vital
organs—vs. how much is blocked by a
spacesuit, skin, and muscles—can make
all the difference.
True blood
Matroshka is helping scientists under-
stand these details. In addition to its hun-
dreds of radiation sensors, this Phantom
Torso even has real human blood cells.
“We put blood cells in small tubes in
the stomach and in some places in the
bone marrow.” Some of these cells are
deep within the torso while others are
close to the surface where there is less
“tissue” to block radiation. Among the
questions they are asking is whether the
less shielded parts of the bone marrow
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 17
NOTEBOOKlayout1109.qxd:AA Template 10/15/09 1:31 PM Page 4

if several breaks occur trum of the protons in the 1972 event.

within a short period,
the damage can be ir-
reparable. At best, the
cell will then self-de-
struct; at worst, it will
go haywire and grow
out of control, becom-
ing cancerous.
To subject Ma-
troshka to a 1972-
style radiation storm,
The radiation beamline machine at NASA’s Space Radiation Lab in scientists have devised
Brookhaven, N.Y., will test the impact of protons on Matroshka. a way to simulate that
event using a high-en-
will be much harder hit, raising the risks ergy proton beam at NASA’s Space Ra-
of leukemia and other cancers. diation Lab in Brookhaven. The beam
Using real blood cells lets scientists fans out so that, at the point where Ma-
see how much the radiation damages the troshka sits, it is 60 cm across—large
cells’ DNA. High-speed particles of pro- enough to engulf the entire torso. By
ton radiation can smash into DNA, stepping the energy of the beam
breaking the string-like molecules. Cells through a series of energy levels, scien-
can usually repair these breaks; however, tists can mimic the unique energy spec-
In the upcoming experiment, led by
Guenther Reitz of the German Aero-
space Center in Cologne, Matroshka’s
radiation sensors will reveal how much
proton radiation reaches various parts of
the mannequin’s body. “With protons,
you might have an order of magnitude
difference from one part of the body to
another,” notes Cucinotta.
The readings will help mission plan-
ners figure out how much shielding is
necessary to protect real astronauts from
a 1972-style storm. The results will also
point researchers in the right direction
for medical treatments that might help
mitigate the effects of such an event.
Unlike a real astronaut, Matroshka
can withstand multiple flares with no
lasting side effects. A quick transfusion
of blood cells and Matroshka is ready for
another blast. Edward D. Flinn
edflinn@pipeline.com

AIAA Short Courses and Training

Continuing Education Units (CEUs)

AIAA is now proud to offer CEUs to all attendees of our

professional development short courses!

Use Your CEUs to:

® Advance Your Career
® Increase Your Marketability
AIAA voluntarily complies with the International
Association for Continuing Education and Training
(IACET) definitions and standards for awarding
CEUs. For more information on IACET standards,
please visit www.iacet.org

07-0164

For more information please visit www.aiaa.org/ceu

or contact Rachel.Suits@aiaa.org.
Register for any short course at www.aiaa.org/courses

18 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

 Aerospace America
ENTERS THE DIGITAL AGE!

T
imes change, and Aerospace America is changing
with them. AIAA now offers a digital version of the
Why Go Digital? magazine. This mirror image of the print version
offers several added benefits:

t
5JNFMJOFTT
PG
%FMJWFSZ Easy to use and search.

t
1PSUBCJMJUZ Instant electronic delivery.

t
"DDFTTJCJMJUZ No more wondering where your favorite issue is –

you’ll never lose an issue again.
t

&OWJSPONFOUBM

Want more information on an article? Click the
'SJFOEMJOFTT hyperlinks for further information.
t
4FBSDIBCJMJUZ Aerospace America will never be further away than
your personal computing device – no more wishing
t
i*O
5FYUw
)5.-
-JOLT you had remembered to bring the print copy with you.

.FNCFST To access the digital magazine, visit www.aiaa.org/myaiaa and log in. After
logging in, click the Aerospace America graphic on the top right to link to the digital version.

International members: Remember to visit www.aiaa.org/internationalprint

by 15 November if you wish to continue to receive the print version after
December 2009.

A M E R I C A

09-0457–3
SystemsLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09
Cloud computing: Coming full circle
AS WE MOVE TOWARD THE 21ST CENTURY’S
second decade, a changing approach to
the use of application software is under
way. The paradigm is similar to that of
the original IBM mainframe days. In the
early years of application software,
the programs were run on a computer
that might not be local to the user, but
the data would be stored locally on Hol-
lerith cards. This was not very different
from the current trend toward use of ap-
plication software, now known as cloud
computing.
Cloud computing involves the provi-
sion of dynamically scalable and often
virtualized resources as a service over the
Internet. Users do not need knowledge
of, expertise in, or control over the tech-
nology infrastructure in the “cloud” that
supports them.
Cloud computing customers do not
generally own the physical infrastructure
(large computer servers or data storage
servers) that hosts the software platform
in question. Instead, they avoid capital
expenditure by renting usage from a
third-party provider. They consume re-
sources as a service and pay only for the
resources they use.
Many cloud computing offerings use
the utility computing model, which is
similar to the way traditional utility serv-
ices such as electricity are consumed,
while others bill on a subscription basis.
A side effect of this approach is that
overall computer usage rises dramati-
cally, because customers need not plan
for peak load limits. Also, “increased
high-speed bandwidth” makes it possible
to receive the same response times from
centralized infrastructure at other sites.
The only performance gate is the broad-
band Internet bandwidth or speed.
To deliver services to customers, a
provider owns and operates live cloud
computing systems. Usually this requires
significant resources and expertise in
building and managing next-generation
data centers. Some organizations realize
a subset of the benefits of cloud comput-
20 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
3:24 PM Page 2
ing by becoming “internal” cloud pro-
viders and servicing themselves, although
they do not benefit from the same
economies of scale, and they must still
engineer for peak loads. The barrier to
entry is also significantly higher, with cap-
ital expenditure required; billing and
management also create some overhead.
Aerospace applications
Several cloud computing applications
and services are available for use in aero-
space-related fields.
•PowerFLOW On-Demand is offered
by Exa, a leader in the field of CFD. The
company supplies fluid flow simulation
and analysis software and services prima-
rily to the aerospace industry. Exa Power-
FLOW On-Demand provides a complete
digital test facility for aerodynamic, ther-
modynamic, and aeroacoustic testing.
Evaluating the interactions of fluid, heat,
and noise in one comprehensive simula-
tion can help engineers develop better de-
signs by reducing the time devoted to
trial-and-error physical modeling.
•MSC Software offers an on-demand
enterprise simulation solution in partner-
ship with IBM. Called MD on-Demand,
this product is based on MD Nastran,
widely considered the world’s most-uti-
lized enterprise simulation solution. By
combining it with IBM high-performance
computing systems, engineers can un-
leash MD on-Demand’s full virtual simu-
lation capabilities. IBM Computing on
Demand (COD) Centers enable engi-
neers to tap into virtually unlimited com-
puting power on an as-needed basis.
When combined with COD, the software
can provide increased business value,
cost savings, and flexibility.
•Google Business Apps provide
email, calendar/schedule management,
document editor, a spreadsheet, and a
presentation tool, offerings similar to Mi-
crosoft Office’s. Gmail is a free Webmail,
POP3, and IMAP service. Launched as
an invitation-only beta release on April
1, 2004, it became available to the gen-
eral public on February 7, 2007. By July
of this year it had 146 million users
monthly. The service was upgraded from
beta status on July 7. Gmail has a
search-oriented interface and a “conver-
sation view” similar to an Internet forum.
•Google Calendar, a free time-man-
agement Web application, became avail-
able on April 13, 2006, and exited the
beta stage in July of this year. It lets your
colleagues, family, and friends see your
calendar and view schedules that others
have shared with you. It also allows sync-
ing to your mobile phone’s built-in calen-
dar or a mobile version made for the
small screen that you access when you
are away from your desk. Invitations to
events can be based on the Google Cal-
endar, and invitees can RSVP by Calen-
dar or email.
SystemsLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 3:24 PM Page 3

•Google Docs is a Web-based word systems and services must now consider
processor, spreadsheet, presentation, the added need to understand what is be-
and form application. Users can create ing offered so they can react to changes
and edit these items online while collab- that those open services will provide.
orating in real time with other users. All In addition, cloud computing has
such documents can be created within been criticized for limiting the freedom
the application itself, imported through of users and making them dependent on
the Web interface, or sent via email. the provider, and some critics have al-
PowerFLOW On-Demand
They can also be saved to the user’s leged that it is only possible to use appli-
created this aerodynamic
computer in a variety of formats simulation of a Tatuus motorsports racecar. cations or services that the provider is
(OpenOffice, HTML, PDF, RTF, Text, Data are easily visualized with PowerVIZ on the willing to offer. In some cloud computing
Word). By default, they are saved to the surface of the model as well as slices across the provider cases, users have no freedom to
Google servers. vehicle wake. Image courtesy of Tatuus. install new applications and need ap-
Open documents automatically are proval from administrators to achieve
saved to prevent data loss, and a revision certain tasks. Overall, it limits both free-
history is kept automatically. Documents ship management) and other business dom and creativity.
can be tagged and archived for organiza- analysis services for small companies. Richard Stallman, founder of the
tional purposes. The service is officially Free Software Foundation, believes cloud
supported on recent versions of the Fire- Controversy and control computing endangers liberties because
fox, Internet Explorer, Chrome, and Sa- Because cloud computing does not let users sacrifice their privacy and personal
fari browsers running on Microsoft Win- users physically possess the storage of data to a third party. He has stated that
dows, Apple OS X, and Linux operating their data (the exception being the possi- cloud computing is simply a trap aimed
systems. bility that data can be backed up to a at forcing more people to buy into
Google Docs enables editing among user-owned storage device), responsibil- locked, proprietary systems that would
users and nonusers in real time. Spread- ity for data storage and control is in the cost them more and more over time.
sheet users, for example, can be notified hands of the cloud provider. Responsibil- And yet cloud computing applica-
of changes to any specified regions via ity for backup data, disaster recovery, tions offer the closest paradigm to the
email. The application supports the ISO and so on has been a long-standing con- traditional beliefs that the Free Software
standard OpenDocument format. It also cern for both cloud and in-house sys- Foundation prescribes: Free software is a
includes support for proprietary formats tems. Organizations that rely on these matter of the users’ freedom to run,
such as .doc, .xls, .docx, and .xlsx.
Google Forms can be used from either
the word processor or the spreadsheet Google Calendar lets others see your calendar and view schedules that others have shared with you.
applications.
•Microsoft Office in the Cloud. Micro-
soft plans to provide a series of applica-
tions in the cloud. Windows Live and Of-
fice Live will start with a Web portal that
will offer both existing Web-based ser-
vices for Windows and Office, as well as
new services now in development and
some currently being offered by Micro-
soft’s MSN portal. In any case, the plan
starts with its Hotmail application. Mi-
crosoft will eventually transition all its
MSN and Hotmail email users to its Win-
dows Live email service, but will con-
tinue to evolve the services provided on
the MSN portal.
Office Live incorporates the tradi-
tional Office products of Word, Excel,
and PowerPoint into its software as a
service model, thus integrating docu-
ment sharing and other collaborative
services with CRM (customer relation-

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 21

SystemsLayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09 3:24 PM Page 4

copy, distribute, study, change, and im-
prove the software. More precisely, it
means that the programs’ users have the
four essential freedoms:
•Freedom to run the program, for any
purpose.
•Freedom to study how the program
works, and change it to make it do what
you wish. Access to the source code is a
precondition for this.
•Freedom to redistribute copies so
you can help your neighbor.
•Freedom to improve the program,
and to release your improvements (and
modified versions in general) to the pub-
lic, so that the whole community bene-
fits. Access to the source code is a pre-
condition for this.
A program is free software if users
have all of these freedoms. Thus one
should be free to redistribute copies, with
or without modifications, either gratis or
charging a fee for distribution, to anyone
anywhere. Being free to do these things
means (among other things) that you do
not have to ask or pay for permission.
✈✈✈
In the past four decades, we have come
full circle in terms of application soft-
ware. Forty years ago application soft-
ware was fee based without ownership.
Cloud computing has brought us back to
that concept, although today the applica-
tions are significantly more sophisticated
and extensive. The future of application
software is hard to predict. Will it con-
tinue to be a purchased software license,
will it become software purely sold as a
service, or will it become (as the Free
Sofware Foundation would like) free to
all? Who knows? Much as we would like
to maintain the status quo, one thing we
do know is that the application software
industry will continue to evolve, based on
consumer preferences and on the impact
of future changes in the computer hard-
ware delivery paradigm.
On a personal note, this will be my last
Systems & Software column. I have en-
joyed writing it for the past 15 years and
am grateful for having had the opportu-
nity to do so. I have also learned much in
the process, and I hope my readers have as
well. I will sorely miss the conversations
I’ve had with all of you. As for both sys-
tems and the software to run them, they
are like entropy, always expanding and
ever-changing. John Binder
jbinderaero@via-s.com

NOTED IN BRIEF
MathWorks (Natick, Mass.) [http://www.mathworks.com] announced
the availablity of Release 2009b (R2009b) of its MATLAB and
Simulink product families. R2009b, which includes features for faster
performance and enhanced handling of large data sets, builds on com-
ponent-based modeling features in Simulink. It also updates 83 other
products, including PolySpace code verification products. Another key
highlight for the MATLAB product family is extended support for mul-
ticore and multiprocessor systems. MATLAB and Image Processing
Toolbox now offer more multithreaded implementations of functions,
and Statistics Toolbox adds parallel computing support for several
functions. For users with large data sets, MATLAB now offers the abil-
ity to perform FFTs on data sets larger than 2 GB. The Image Process-
ing Toolbox also has a function to support processing of arbitrarily
large TIFF images, and the Parallel Computing Toolbox includes a new
interface for working with large data sets distributed across a cluster.
Autocad (Chicago, Ill.) [http://www.autocad.com] introduced the lat-
est release of the Moldflow software suite for plastics injection mold-
ing simulation and optimization. Autodesk Moldflow 2010, second
release, offers enhanced performance, accuracy, and interoperability
with mainstream CAD applications. The software suite is among the
first in the CAE market to take advantage of the processing power of
high-performance graphics processing unit technology to solve com-
plex computations twice as fast. Sophisticated improvements to 3D
mesh analysis quality for parts and assemblies give plastics simula-
tions greater accuracy. Finally, native support for Autodesk Inventor
software and a variety of other CAD models improves the integration
of Moldflow with the product design and development process.
Autodesk (San Francisco, Calif.) [http://www.autodesk.com] an-
nounced the release of the Autodesk Algor Simulation 2010 prod-
ucts, providing a broad range of mechanical simulation tools to help
designers and engineers make critical decisions earlier in the design
process. Finite-element modeling tools and built-in material libraries
allow users to study initial design intent and simulate the behavior of
a digital prototype. In addition, the software supports direct associa-
tive data exchange with most CAD tools, so users can collaborate and
make iterative design changes without having to redefine simulation
data. There are four offerings: Simulation 2010 offers design valida-
tion and optimization with a range of engineering simulation tools in
a multi-CAD environment; CFD 2010 has the same functionality along
with fluid flow analysis, CFD, and mass transfer analysis; MES 2010
also features the full functionality along with nonlinear static and dy-
namic analysis, rigid-body motion analysis, and combined stress and
flexible-body motion analysis; and Professional 2010 has all the func-
tioning of the other three packages plus electrostatic analysis and the
ability to combine analysis types for full multiphysics simulations.
Mercury Computer (Chelmsford, Mass.) [http://www.mc.com] an-
nounced the availability of two new software offerings for multicore
application development: the MultiCore Plus (MCP) Pro Edition
software environment and the MultiCore MathPack library bundle.
Based on open standards, the MCP Pro Edition features a scalable,
modular architecture that supports a broad range of commercial and
rugged multicore and multicomputer systems to meet a variety of
size, weight, and power requirements for ISR and industrial inspec-
tion applications. With the powerful, easy-to-use Eclipse-based Open
Development Suite, application developers can configure, test, debug,
and profile from one integrated environment. MathPack is a library
bundle that includes the MC SAL (scientific algorithm library) and MC
VSIPL (vector signal image processing library). Both libraries can au-
tomatically use all available processor cores to ensure peak proces-
sor performance without user intervention, enabling high throughput
and low latency for demanding processor-intensive applications.

22 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

 “I launched an Estes Astron
Scout – I saw the smoke trail
go up in the air and thought
it was cool. Suddenly for
the first time I could
see how fins were
angles, nose cones
were parabolas.
Geometry had
value now and
I loved it.”

David Newill
AIAA Associate Fellow

In fascinating new videos, AIAA

A members rec
recall
the moment when aerospace
erospace captur
captured
Share the Inspiration their imagination. Share your story too, a
and
spread the passion
on for aerospa
aerospace.
www.aiaa.org/MyStory
/M
www.aiaa.org/MyStory

09-0124_WDYK_AA_mar.indd 1 2/25/09 10:48:27 AM

Project3:AIAA_MarsAdFln_CMYK_8.125x10.875 4/6/09 13:39 Page 1
25-WilsonTrends.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template
DEFENSE acquisitions
A Change in direction
he U.S. military’s approach to contracting
T and acquisition, especially for big-ticket
items such as aerospace, historically has
shifted with the political winds in Washington,
reflecting more directly than most the policies
and ideologies of the president.
Ronald Reagan poured billions of addi-
tional dollars into the Pentagon for more
warfighters and equipment, with a special em-
phasis on advancing new technologies. This
was a stark repudiation of the lackluster sup-
port the services received from both parties in
the post-Vietnam 1970s.
George H.W. Bush was the first president
to send the “Reaganized” military into a major
conflict. However, with the Cold War over and
the Soviet Union gone, he also began a pol-
icy of reductions in force and spending, often
through pushing program milestones to the
right. This policy would be greatly accelerated
by his successor, Bill Clinton.
Even before the events of September 11
plunged the nation into a multifront global
war in 2001, George W. Bush had brought
back many members of the Reagan team, and
with them another dramatic reversal, pushing
forward with a massive, all-services transfor-
mation. This would require new equipment
and the replacement of aging platforms.
In the years that followed, the military put
considerable focus on acquisition reform. This
was partly to lower costs and speed delivery of
new capabilities to warfighters in active com-
bat, and partly in response to a series of very
public meltdowns in bidding, contracting, ac-
quisition, and support. Even so, serious prob-
lems continued to develop, especially within
the Air Force.
Copyright© 2009 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
10/14/09 3:32 PM Page 3
Like his predecessors, President Obama is moving to reform
the military acquisitions process, which DOD, the services,
and Congress agree is now cumbersome and outdated.
New legislation, organizational restructuring, and different
approaches to contracting are among the sweeping
changes that will affect nearly every major development
and production program in the U.S. military.
A new direction
First under George W. Bush and now under
Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Robert
Gates has moved to restructure not just the di-
rection and nature of DOD’s future acquisi-
tions, but also the processes under which
those acquisitions will be made. Parts of Pres-
ident Obama’s approach build on new acqui-
sition commands set up in recent years by the
Army, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.
Much of the initial heat was brought to
bear by a report from the Gansler Commis-
sion, created by the secretary of the Army in
August 2007 to examine that service’s ability
to provide program and contract manage-
ment in support of expeditionary operations.
In part, it was that report that led to the cre-
ation of a two-star Army Contracting Com-
mand within the Army Materiel Command.
While the Gansler report specifically ad-
dressed the Army, the other services looked at
what value it might also have for their pro-
cesses as they conducted their own internal
reviews. For example, both the new Marine
Corps Program Executive Office (PEO) Land
Systems and the Coast Guard Acquisition Di- by J.R. Wilson
rectorate are seeking to correct problems, Contributing writer
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 25
25-WilsonTrends.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:32 PM Page 4
speed processes, enhance end-user input, and
generally overcome what the services, DOD,
and Congress agree is a cumbersome, out-
dated approach to acquisitions.
“From a broad acquisitions standpoint, a
lot of what the services are doing is comple-
mentary to what DOD as a whole is doing.
We see that at the Navy’s gate process, how
the Army is structuring some programs, and
how the Air Force and Marines are moving
forward,” says Ric Sylvester, deputy director
for acquisitions management in the office of
the under secretary of defense for acquisition,
technology and logistics.
“There will be some changes in the way
we relate to contractors,” he says. “Competi-
tive prototyping will change how they do
some things, which should help with some
“In today’s environment, maintaining our technological
and conventional edge requires a dramatic change
in the way we acquire military equipment.”
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
pricing. There will be differences in how they
approach some programs, because we will be
looking at stabilizing program requirements,
which will change what we’ve done in the
past. There will be a greater emphasis on cost
control and systems engineering.”
Focus on the warfighter
Sylvester emphasizes that while cutting costs
and speeding the progress from development
to fielding are key to both recent and future
changes, the ultimate focus remains on the
warfighter.
“The new Weapons System Acquisitions
Reform Act tries to strengthen the combatant
commander’s role in requirements genera-
tion, which is a good thing, although not a
new thing. The Joint Staff, through visits with
COCOMs [combatant commands] and the
primary lists they submit, has always looked
at that, although this [act] should strengthen
the COCOMs’ voice in what we do as we go
forward,” he says. “The whole acquisitions ef-
fort is focused on the warfighters as cus-
tomers, and their input is important. And get-
ting that done better is of benefit to them and
helps us all.
“Assuming we are successful in imple-
menting these reforms, weapons systems
should be able to be deployed when the
warfighters need them, and, with cost con-
trols, we will be giving them the requirements
we said we would give on the time schedule
26 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
promised without making tradeoffs. We also
will have a continuing process to deal with ur-
gent requirements.”
The legislation also created a new direc-
tor of independent cost assessment and re-
established the position of director of develop-
mental test and evaluation. Putting those or-
ganizational structures in place “won’t be a
simple process,” nor is it easy to predict how
long it will take before everything is in place
as directed, Sylvester adds.
The Pentagon’s past approach to acquisi-
tion problems also came under fire in a recent
report from the Defense Science Board
(DSB), which said DOD focused too much on
tinkering with the mechanics of the acquisi-
tions process and not enough on addressing
its root problems at a more basic level.
“Such problems, however, are really only
symptoms of the lack of experienced judg-
ment on the part of the department personnel
who structure acquisition programs in a way
that will almost certainly lead to failure,” said
the DSB report. It added that the current pro-
cess takes far too long and produces weapons
that are too expensive and often obsolete be-
fore they are even fielded.
“An even more important deficiency is
the process of determining what to buy. The
strategic plan for acquiring military capabilities
is only loosely aligned with national security
objectives and the military missions to achieve
them,” the report admonished.
Workforce and other requirements
Aerospace Industries Association president
Marion Blakey praised the new law, signed by
President Obama in May, as a significant step
in a broad effort to “make the acquisition sys-
tem more accountable and efficient,” espe-
cially with respect to increasing the acquisi-
tions workforce.
But Sylvester says the workforce problem
is larger than numbers alone.
“One of the biggest problems we’ve had
is in our workforce. We don’t have all the skill
sets we need,” he says. The cause is “a com-
bination of factors, including drawing down
the workforce in the last several years, people
retiring, and some broader global trends. Sci-
ence and math are not emphasized in the
U.S. as much as in other countries, which has
resulted in our not having the people we need
with the necessary skill sets to keep our eyes
on contracts and do the kind of analyses we
need to do,” he explains.
“We have talked to Congress about that,
and about getting a more robust workforce.
25-WilsonTrends.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template
We have a shortage of systems engineers,
which is not something we have emphasized
in the past as much as we should have. We
have a shortage of people who put the con-
tracts in place and a shortage of technical
people.
“We’ve seen this before, as the WW II
and Korean War generations moved on, caus-
ing us to refresh our skills. Now we are run-
ning into an emphasis on a smaller workforce
during the ’90s that did not replenish some
skills, and an aging workforce as the Vietnam
War generation ages. That is more difficult,
because of the leveling of our hiring efforts in
the past, and a different dynamic with a differ-
ent retirement system in which people are
more mobile.”
Gates’ FY10 DOD budget request re-
flected those criticisms. It included a major in-
crease in the size of the defense acquisition
workforce, converting 11,000 contractors
and hiring an additional 9,000 government
acquisition professionals by 2015—beginning
with 4,100 in FY10. Gates also announced
sweeping changes in program development
and acquisition across the services, saying
these would be accomplished through three
fundamental steps.
“First, this department must consistently
demonstrate the commitment and leadership
to stop programs that significantly exceed
their budget or that spend limited tax dollars
to buy more capability than the nation needs.
Our conventional modernization goals should
be tied to the actual and prospective capabili-
ties of known future adversaries—not [to] what
might be technologically feasible for a poten-
tial adversary given unlimited time and re-
sources. I believe the decisions I am propos-
ing accomplish this step,” Gates said in an-
nouncing his budget recommendations.
“Second, we must ensure that require-
ments are reasonable and technology is ade-
quately mature to allow the department to
successfully execute the programs. Again, my
C-17
10/14/09 3:32 PM Page 5
decisions act on this principle by terminating a
number of programs where the requirements
were truly in the ‘exquisite’ category and the
technologies required were not reasonably
available to affordably meet the programs’
cost or schedule goals.
“Third, [we must] realistically estimate
program costs, provide budget stability for the
programs we initiate, adequately staff the gov-
ernment acquisition team, and provide disci-
plined and constant oversight.”
Equally important, he added, is a con-
stant guard against “requirements creep”—
adding new capabilities or even missions to a
weapon system or platform after it has been
approved for development. That has been a
frequent complaint with regard to military air-
craft programs, especially those designated as
joint efforts, often to the point where one ser-
vice will pull out because additions by one have
taken the aircraft out of the weight, payload,
range, or speed requirements of the other.
Gates also called for stricter contract
terms and conditions—and a solid mechanism
for enforcing those.
“I am confident that if we stick to these
steps, we will significantly improve the per-
formance of our defense acquisition pro-
grams,” he predicted. “But it takes more than
mere pronouncements or fancy studies or re- Gates ordered an end to
production of both the F-22
ports. It takes acting on these principles by and C-17, but increased the
making tough decisions and sticking to them buy for the F-35.
going forward.”
More personnel,
but less hardware
In the first six months of the
Obama administration, Gates
followed his own advice, with
major impacts on a number of
aircraft and space programs.
Some cases could be seen as a
plus for the contractor, such as
increasing the number and ca-
pabilities of manned turboprop
F-35
F-22
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 27
25-WilsonTrends.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:32 PM Page 6
“If you named a half dozen things that, if any one fails we won’t
have an adequate capability in 20 or 30 years, acquisition
reform certainly would be one of those.”
Rear Adm. Gary T. Blore
assistant commandant for acquisitions
U.S. Coast Guard
aircraft used for ISR (intelligence, surveillance,
and reconnaissance) missions in Southwest
Asia. Others involve not more platforms but
more people, such as recruiting and training
more maintenance crews and pilots to sup-
port increased helicopter operations in
Afghanistan.
With special operations forces growing in
both number and use since the events of Sep-
tember 11, 2001, Gates also called for more
special-forces-optimized aircraft for transport,
mobility, and refueling, along with a 5% in-
crease in personnel.
Two of the biggest and most controversial
changes involved the only two new manned
aircraft programs currently in production by
the U.S.—a good news/bad news decision for
Lockheed Martin, prime contractor on both
the F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter and the
F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter.
Saying he is “committed to building a
fifth-generation tactical fighter capability that
can be produced in quantity at sustainable
cost,” Gates ordered an increase in F-35 fund-
ing and buys, from FY09’s 14 aircraft and
$6.8 billion to 30 aircraft and $11.2 billion in
FY10. The overall numbers now stand at 513
F-35s in the current five-year defense plan
The Transformational Satellite
program was canceled in favor
of this Advanced Extremely High
Frequency satellite.
28 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
and an ultimate buy of 2,443 for the Navy,
Air Force, and Marines.
The Air Force was hardest hit in terms of
programs that were chopped to help fund the
F-35 buildup. Gates ordered an end to pro-
duction of both the F-22, at only 187 aircraft
(including four recommended in the FY09
supplemental budget), and the C-17 Globe-
master III airlifter, saying the 205 already
fielded or in production are sufficient. In addi-
tion, he canceled development work on a pro-
posed next-generation bomber and ordered
retirement of the Air Force’s 250 oldest tacti-
cal fighter aircraft in FY10 and cancellation of
a second airborne laser prototype aircraft,
shifting the existing aircraft and effort into an
ongoing R&D program.
He also announced plans to rebid the
KC-X aerial refueling tanker and terminate
the Combat Search and Rescue X helicopter.
Both programs were at the center of major
contract criticisms and were instrumental in
the forced resignations of Air Force Chief of
Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley and Secretary
Michael W. Wynne in June 2008—the second
time in four years top USAF officials had re-
signed because of contracting blow-ups.
This June, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen.
Norton Schwartz told a Heritage Foundation
event the service had learned its lessons and
was working to correct its internal problems.
“The bottom line is we have taken les-
sons from that very searing experience and
we intend to be very much more rigorous here
once the secretary of defense decides, one,
what the acquisition strategy will be, and two,
who will execute that strategy,” he said,
adding the Air Force was seeking both a
“broader array of talent” internally and a
panel of outside experts to raise the level of
supervision on the source selection process
and increase quality control.
The Air Force also took a hit in space,
with its $26-billion Transformational Satellite
program canceled in favor of buying two
more Advanced Extremely High Frequency
satellites as alternatives.
The Marine Corps did not dodge the ax,
either, with termination of the planned USMC
VH-71 presidential helicopter. Gates said the
program had doubled in price to more than
$13 billion for 23 aircraft, was six years be-
hind schedule, and might not even deliver the
requested capability. However, because the
current fleet of VH-3 presidential helicopters
is 30-40 years old, he directed the immediate
development of options for an FY11 follow-
on program.
25-WilsonTrends.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09
The Navy fared signifi-
cantly better, with 31 new
Boeing F/A-18E/F Super
Hornets ordered for FY10 in
addition to the F-35 boost.
Gates also announced that
the Navy Aircraft Carrier
program would be shifted to
a five-year build cycle, which
he said would put it on a
“more fiscally sustainable
path” to producing 10 new Orders were also increased
carriers after 2040. for the F-A18E/F.
These actions have im-
pacted not only aviation but virtually every
major development and production program
in the U.S. military. The speed and scope of
the changes left Congress, service brass, con-
tractors, and even some allies—many of whom
depend on U.S. programs to advance their
own military capabilities—debating the plan’s
merits, how best to comply, and whether to
attempt to thwart some of the proposals, es-
pecially the F-22 and C-17 terminations.
Contracting and restructuring
Meanwhile, the individual services continue to
grow and modify their new in-house contract-
ing capabilities, significantly bolstered by
Gates’ plan to increase the defense acquisition
workforce. That is seen as a major assist in
their efforts to coalesce and better coordinate
the process.
“The primary reason was to get as much
contracting as possible under one command.
By putting them together, we have even more
expertise in breadth and power to bring the
command and control of those to bear on any
contracting problem the Army may have,”
Jeff Parsons, executive director of the new
Army Contracting Command, tells Aerospace
America. “If you look at our expeditionary
contracting capability in the past, there was
no true centralized command and control or
ownership of resources.”
Deployed units now also have a reach-
back capability into the contracting structure,
to draw on U.S.-based expertise and assis-
tance to support deployed units for a broad
range of activities, including helicopters and
UAVs, two of the most heavily used military
assets in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Marine Corps traditionally has looked
to the Army for acquisition of much of its
equipment, but the evolution of corps respon-
sibilities in Southwest Asia led Marine Com-
mandant Gen. James T. Conway to create the
corps’ first Program Executive Office. PEO
3:32 PM Page 7
Land Systems is strictly fo-
cused on acquisition and
support, however, leaving
the contracting side sepa-
rate and in the hands of
what Acting PEO Daniel
Pierson calls an existing
“core competency” within
the Marine Corps.
“The Navy has 13
PEOs, the Air Force 11,
and the Army a bunch,
but the Marines only have
one,” he notes. “In the
past, we relied heavily on the Army and,
when it comes to airplanes, the Navy. Even
as technology advanced and the roles and
missions of the individual services evolved,
the Marines never strayed away from the con-
cept of taking that beach and not needing a
lot of stuff. But now we have had to acquire
some unique things the other services could
not buy.”
PEO Land Systems initially was tasked
with eight existing Acquisition Category I and
II programs—those designated by the secre-
tary of defense as major programs, most with
high-dollar research, development, test, and
acquisition budgets. Together, they have a Fu-
ture Years Defense Program estimated value
of $5.6 billion and include the ground/air
task-oriented radar (G/ATOR) and the com-
mon aviation command and control system.
At the same time, the PEO is moving the
corps toward a structure of “competency
alignment” similar to that of the Naval Air
Systems Command.
“Competency alignment is by functional
domain—program management, engineering,
logistics, financial management, contracting—
each with a functional director who reports to
the SYSCOM (Systems Command) com-
mander,” Pierson explains. “Aside from a very
small core, all the people who work in our
programs are assigned to us but aligned with
SYSCOM, with each competency director re-
sponsible for that domain. We have compe-
tency leads for each functional area within the
PEO who report back to SYSCOM compe-
tency directors. So we don’t own all the peo-
ple, but they are matrixed to us.
“When you look at studies that have been done, you see 80%
or more of cost growth on big programs has to do with
requirements changes.”
Terry Marlow
vice president–acquisition policies
Aerospace Industries Association
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 29
25-WilsonTrends.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:33 PM Page 8
“Being tough-minded on acquisition reform is part of being
serious about a strong defense.”
Deputy Secretary of Defense
William J. Lynn III
“We’re also moving toward progression
management, to manage the workforce bet-
ter. In the past, everyone belonged to the pro-
gram manager and product group directors,
so this is quite a paradigm shift for the com-
mand. We’re taking it a bite-size at a time with
SYSCOM, sorting out a lot of issues.”
The new structure has enabled a far
greater degree of focus on the programs
themselves, rather than on peripheral issues
such as staffing. This has made it easier to
identify and deal with problems up front,
rather than after a program has been running
for months or even years, Pierson adds.
The Coast Guard also found itself boxed
into some program problems as it sought to
upgrade equipment to meet new and shifting
demands for homeland security, law enforce-
ment at sea, and combat deployment. What
had begun as an effort to move forward
quickly and efficiently, under an umbrella
structure called Deepwater, quickly became
mired in controversy, delays, and criticism. As
with the Marines, a new commandant—Adm.
Thad W. Allen, who assumed command in
May 2006—ordered a sweeping reorganiza-
tion, putting all Coast Guard programs under
a new Acquisition Directorate in July 2007.
“Clearly our acquisition programs were
not working as efficiently within Deepwater as
they should,” Rear Adm. Gary T. Blore, the
assistant commandant for acquisitions, ac-
knowledges. “We had a separate acquisition
organization running traditional projects—
such as the original helicopters—so we knew
how to do acquisition, but we had allowed our
acquisition and engineering community to
downsize perhaps more, in retrospect, than
was appropriate.”
Allen believes the new directorate will
provide a major boost to the Coast Guard—
the service upon which most of the world’s
navies are patterned—as it seeks to replace
one of the world’s oldest sea and air fleets.
“Our acquisition organization until re-
cently was not properly structured or staffed
to acquire the complex systems needed to re-
place our aging assets. The new directorate is
a one-stop shop responsible for managing a
$27-billion investment portfolio that includes
over 20 major acquisition projects, including
the Deepwater program office. With the sup-
30 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
port of Congress, we’ll add 65 more positions
to that directorate this next year,” Allen says.
“But a real commitment to change lies in
an organizational culture, core values, and
structure. And real modernization is commit-
ting to make a series of future investments
over time to meet the changing and growing
demands we face. In the world in which we
live and operate, we must create a change-
centric service that is capable of continual
adaptation.”
A strategic focus
In December 2008, the Professional Services
Council (PSC) released a survey of its member
firms on “Acquisition in Transition: Workforce,
Oversight and Mission.” PSC officials say the
results clearly show President Obama will face
a growing and high-priority acquisitions envi-
ronment as he contends with annual govern-
ment procurements of some $450 billion.
“This report is unique, because it repre-
sents the voices of the acquisition community
in their own words,” project lead Diane Den-
holm says. “Now, more than ever, it is imper-
ative that acquisition leaders have a seat at the
table if the critical issues facing the federal
government are to be addressed.”
The concerns raised by the survey re-
spondents echo some of those voiced by
Gates and some that the services have sought
to address through their new acquisition com-
mands. An example is the need for hands-on
oversight by well-trained professionals, from
the very beginning of a program rather than
after a problem arises.
“There are a lot of things we put in place
the last few years that we need to continue to
emphasize and execute, such as competitive
prototyping and configuration steering boards
to make sure we have stable requirements,”
Sylvester concludes. “The issue now is execu-
tion. The thrust the secretary has given us
now is to move a lot of our thinking up front,
to concentrate on how much we want to
spend and on what kinds of systems.
“We need to get that strategic focus on
procurement, what kinds of systems we want,
what they are supporting, where we can make
some adjustments in implementing the
changes in the legislation—which are impor-
tant to supporting where we want to go with a
lot of these processes. The secretary has said
we need to look at the kinds of things we will
be engaged in from a strategic view, and let
those drive where we go. That is a change
from what we’ve done in the past.”
New and Best-Selling Books from AIAA

“An
“A
An excellent way to get a solid
grounding in the complex and
challenging acquisition process.”
—Jacques S. Gansler, Ph.D., University
of Maryland, and former Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology and Logistics
Management of Defense Acquisition
Projects
Rene G. Rendon and Keith F. Snider
Naval Postgraduate School
2008, 292 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-950-2
List Price $64.95
AIAA Member Price: $49.95
A History of Two CIA Projects. Based
oon interviews, memoirs, and oral histories
of the scientists and engineers involved,
aas well as recently declassified CIA
documents, and photographs, reports, and
d
technical drawings from Lockheed and
te
Convair, this is a technical history of the
C
eevolution of the Lockheed A-12 Blackbird.
FFrom RAINBOW to GUSTO: Stealth and
tthe Design of the Lockheed Blackbird
Paul A. Suhler
2009, 300 pages, Paperback, 1SBN: 978-1-60086-712-5
List Price $39.95
AIAA Member Price $29.95

W
While the focus of this book is on ground “I urge all who are serious about
combat system vulnerability, many of the
co understanding the development of the
pprinciples, methodologies, and tools national security space arena to read it.”
discussed are also applicable to the air
d
—Roger D. Launius
aand sea system communities.
Smithsonian Institution
F
Fundamentals of Ground Combat
SSystem Ballistic Vulnerability/Lethality Shades of Gray: National Security and
P H. Deitz, Harry L. Reed Jr.,
Paul the Evolution of Space Reconnaissance
J. Terrence Klopcic, and L. Parker Temple III
James N. Walbert
Ja 2005, 554 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-723-2
Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 230 List Price $29.95
2009, 384 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-60086-015-7 AIAA Member Price: $24.95
List Price $119.95
AIAA Member Price: $89.95

Also From AIAA

Weaponeering: Conventional Weapon System Effectiveness The Missile Defense Equation: Factors for Decision Making
Morris Driels, Naval Postgraduate School Peter J. Mantle, Mantle & Associates, LLC
2004, 466 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-665-5 2004, 525 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-609-9
List Price: $99.95 List Price: $99.95
AIAA Member Price: $74.95 AIAA Member Price: $74.95

The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability Analysis Effective Risk Management: Some Keys to Success, Second Edition
and Design, Second Edition Edmund H. Conrow, CMC, CPCM, PMP
Robert E. Ball, Naval Postgraduate School 2003, 554 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-581-8
2003, 889 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-582-5 List Price: $84.95
List Price: $104.95 AIAA Member Price: $64.95
AIAA Member Price: $79.95
Approximate Methods for Weapon Aerodynamics
Mathematical Methods in Defense Analyses, Third Edition Frank G. Moore, Naval Surface Warfare Center
J. S. Przemieniecki, Air Force Institute of Technology Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, Vol. 186
AIAA Education Series 2000, 464 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-399-9
2000, 421 pages, Hardback, ISBN: 978-1-56347-397-5 List Price: $119.95
List Price: $104.95 AIAA Member Price: $89.95
AIAA Member Price: $79.95

Order online at www.aiaa.org/books

09-0682
32-SEITZENlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:34 PM Page 2
Choosing the
pathway to
space
I
t may have been obvious to many in
the civil space community, but it took
a presidentially commissioned panel to
make it unambiguous: The path to
space that NASA has been following
since January 2004—once termed the
Vision for Space Exploration and subse-
quently emerging as Project Constellation—is
unsustainable. The commission, chaired by
Norm Augustine and populated by a host of
experienced space engineers and former as-
tronauts, laid out a series of scenarios in a
September 8 summary report that called into
question the viability of that policy if not its
technical merits.
The missing element is money. The pro-
gram, said the report, “appears to be on an
unsustainable trajectory. It is perpetuating the
perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not
match allocated resources. Space operations
are among the most complex and unforgiving
pursuits ever undertaken by humans. It really
is rocket science. Space operations become all
the more difficult when means do not match
aspirations. Such is the case today.”
Originally tasked with keeping its review
within the budget established last May by the
Obama administration—a budget billions of
dollars smaller than what the Bush administra-
tion initially proposed—the Review of U.S.
Human Spaceflight Plans Committee was
by Frank Sietzen Jr. forced to ask the White House to let them
Contributing writer roam a bit more freely in budget alternatives.
32 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 Copyright© 2009 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
What followed became a stark picture of
a space program that was locked in LEO with
little chance of achieving the grandiose explo-
ration goals set by the previous president to
return to the Moon and then continue on to
Mars. The committee concluded that the ulti-
mate goal of space exploration is to chart a
path for human expansion into the solar sys-
tem. Mars, it said, was the ultimate destination
of U.S. astronauts in space, but should not be
the first such destination beyond LEO. And
while the Moon could be within reach by the
late 2020s, given sufficient funds, the com-
mittee laid out other scenarios that, for the
same funds, could include other deep space
manned missions, too.
The group developed five alternatives for
NASA’s human spaceflight program. It found
that human exploration beyond LEO is not vi-
able under the FY10 budget guideline, but is
possible under a less constrained budget that
ramps up to approximately $3 billion a year
above the FY10 numbers and continues that
extra funding until 2014, after which it would
grow only 2.4% annually for inflation. Fund-
ing at that higher level would allow either an
exploration program to explore the Moon
first, or a program that follows a “flexible
path” of exploration. Either could produce re-
sults in a reasonable timeframe, starting in the
middle of the 2020s. The committee weighed
in on the merits of developing a heavy-lift
booster, commercial alternatives for crew de-
32-SEITZENlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template
A presidentially
appointed panel finds
NASA’s human spaceflight
program has too little
money and too few
options.
livery to the ISS, and the inclusion of interna-
tional partners in future exploration missions.
It also assessed the status of the shuttle and
station programs. While the industry is awash
with reactions to the summary, as of this writ-
ing the White House has not commented.
Reality check on current programs
The panel first looked at options regarding the
space shuttle and international space station.
Currently, NASA plans to retire the shuttle
fleet after six more flights, the last scheduled
for September 2010, with no funds in the
FY11 budget for continuing operations much
beyond that date. The group noted that the
projected flight rate is nearly twice that of the
actual flight rate since shuttle operations re-
sumed in July 2005.
The panel suggested that a more realistic
schedule be adopted and urged the adminis-
tration to find the funds to fly out the remain-
ing missions into 2011. They soberly pre-
dicted that, after the shuttle’s retirement, the
gap in U.S. access to space by astronauts will
be at least seven years long. One option pre-
sented was to continue to fly the shuttle at a
minimum annual flight rate until it is replaced
by a new vehicle or vehicles. Should that op-
tion be pursued, the panel noted, NASA
should conduct a thorough review of shuttle
recertification and reliability to ensure that the
risk associated with that extension would be
acceptable. With many shuttle suppliers now
10/14/09 3:34 PM Page 3
exiting their manufacturing and production “I want to go to Mars,
capabilities, this option would be increasingly
expensive if selected.
but let’s go the
The group was concerned that the ISS right way!”
could be vulnerable once the shuttle is retired. Jeff Greason
After shuttle retirement, the ISS would rely on
a combination of international and new and
unproven commercial vehicles for cargo
transport. Because this planned commercial
resupply capability will be crucial to both ISS
operations and use, it may be “prudent to
strengthen the incentives to the commercial
providers to meet the schedule milestones.”
The report strongly suggested that the
station’s return on investment to both the
U.S. and its international partners would be
“significantly enhanced” by a life extension to
2020, saying that it seemed foolish to deorbit
the station after 25 years of assembly and
only five years of operational life. Not to do
so, the panel said, would significantly impair
U.S. ability to develop and lead future interna-
tional space missions.
The only problem with this recommenda-
tion: The current budget funds station opera-
tions until only 2015.
Constellation status
The committee then compiled all of the sta-
tus reports obtained during its site visits to
NASA facilities and assessed the status of the
emerging Constellation program and vehi-
cles. The panel found that the original budget
32-SEITZENlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:35 PM Page 4

Background vehicle and the Orion crew exploration vehi-

On May 7 John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology cle have slipped, and work on the Ares V
Policy, sent a letter to NASA Acting Administrator Chris Scolese requesting that he assemble
heavy lifter and Altair lunar lander has been
“an independent review of ongoing U.S. human spaceflight plans and programs” and
alternatives, to ensure that the nation “is pursuing the best trajectory for the future postponed. The group said the emerging
of human spaceflight.” technical problems facing Ares I could be
Holdren tasked NASA with identifying and characterizing a range of options that solved but would add to the vehicle’s develop-
would span the reasonable possibilities for continuation of U.S. human spaceflight activities ment cost.
beyond retirement of the shuttle fleet. Those options should explore a new U.S. capability The 2005 schedule showed Ares I and
for supporting use of the ISS; supporting missions to the Moon and other destinations Orion available to support the ISS in 2012,
beyond LEO; and stimulating commercial spaceflight capabilities, all fitting within the
only two years after shuttle retirement. But
current budget.
On June 1, Scolese responded by establishing the charter of the Review of U.S. Human the current schedule now shows that date as
Spaceflight Plans Committee. Ten members, appointed by NASA, would comprise the 2015, and an independent assessment of the
panel, chaired by retired Lockheed Martin executive Norm Augustine. They would include technical, budgetary, and schedule risk to the
engineers, academic experts, former astronauts, and commercial space entrepreneurs. Constellation program performed for the
The charter tracked the charge given NASA in Holdren’s May 7 letter: Conduct an committee by the Aerospace Corporation in-
independent review of U.S. manned spaceflight programs from the shuttle and station to dicated a further delay of at least two years.
beyond Earth orbit, and examine the appropriate amount of research and complementary
robotic activities needed to make human spaceflight more productive and affordable over
This means those vehicles, designed specifi-
the long term. It asked that the panel specifically evaluate “options for extending ISS cally to support the ISS post-shuttle, will not
operations beyond 2016.” be available before the station’s currently
Augustine divided the panel into four subgroups, with each member assigned to two. planned demise. And the manned spaceflight
Sally Ride chaired the ISS-Shuttle subgroup, Edward Crawley headed the Exploration Beyond gap will be seven years, not two.
LEO subgroup, Gen. Lester Lyles chaired the Integration subgroup, and Bohdan Bejmuk The committee endorsed the designs of
headed up the LEO Access group. The subgroup reports would be folded into the full
the CLV and CEV. But it had concerns about
panel’s final document.
Orion’s recurring costs, noting the design was
Chair: Norman Augustine considerably larger than previous Apollo craft.
Dr. Wanda Austin Dr. Christopher Chyba Dr. Charles F. Kennel It hinted that a smaller and lighter four-person
Mr. Bohdan Bejmuk Dr. Edward Crawley Gen. (ret.) Lester Lyles Orion could reduce operational costs, but that
Dr. Leroy Chiao Mr. Jeff Greason Dr. Sally Ride such a late-stage redesign would likely result in
over a year of additional development delay
and a significant increase in cost.

estimates made in January 2004, along with Where to go beyond LEO

the vehicle designs established in the 2005
Exploration Systems Architecture Study,
were a reasonable plan for human explo-
ration. But many of those estimates were
based on funding being made available by
shuttle retirement in 2010 and the decom-
missioning of ISS in early 2016.
Since those early projections, the devel-
opment schedules of the Ares I crew launch
The future of the ISS is dependent on which option goes forward.
The panel considered a series of possible tar-
gets for U.S. manned spaceflight beyond
Earth orbit. Three paths were identified:
•Mars First, with a Mars landing, perhaps
after a brief test of equipment and procedures
on the Moon.
•Moon First, with lunar surface exploration
focused on developing the capability to ex-
plore Mars.
•A Flexible Path to inner solar system loca-
tions, such as lunar orbit, Lagrange points,
near-Earth objects, and the moons of Mars,
followed by surface exploration of the Moon
and/or Mars.
Humans to Mars followed by colonization
was highlighted as the ultimate goal of U.S.
manned spaceflight. “Mars is unquestionably
the most scientifically interesting destination
in the inner solar system,” the report said. But
the planet is not an easy place to visit with ex-
isting technology and without a substantial in-
vestment of resources, and the panel stated
flatly that it is not the best first destination be-
yond Earth orbit.
By exploring the Moon first, the panel
found, NASA could develop the operational

34 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

32-SEITZENlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template
experience and technology for landing on, liv-
ing on, and launching from another planetary
surface. Astronauts could acquire an under-
standing of human adaptation to another
world and apply this to Mars missions.
The report listed two main strategies for
exploring the Moon. Both begin with a few
short sorties to various lunar locations to scout
the region and test landing and ascent sys-
tems. The next step would be to build a Moon
base. Over many missions, a small colony of
habitats would be assembled, and explorers
would stay for extended periods, conducting
scientific studies and prospecting for re-
sources. In the second strategy, these sorties
would continue on to different sites, with as-
tronauts spending weeks and eventually
months at each. Additional equipment would
have to be brought on each trip, but explo-
rations would cover more diverse sites and do
so in greater detail.
In the third, or “flexible” path, the crews
would visit sites for the first time and deepen
the operational knowledge of space missions,
all while traveling to destinations farther and
farther from Earth. Potential missions would
include lunar orbit, the Lagrange points, near-
Earth objects, and entering orbit around Mars.
Manned spacecraft such as Orion could ren-
dezvous with a Martian moon, then coordi-
nate with or control robotic landers on the
planet’s surface, without the complication of
the time delay between the Earth and the
vicinity of Mars.
The Flexible Path represents a new ex-
ploration strategy for NASA. It would provide
a series of scientifically valid missions to keep
the public engaged and political leaders sup-
portive. Its flexibility would allow different op-
tions as exploration progresses, including a re-
turn to the Moon’s surface, or a continuation
to the surface of Mars.
The committee found that both the Moon
First and the Flexible Path are viable explo-
ration strategies and not necessarily mutually
exclusive. And all paths share one other ele-
ment: Each would require a further $3 billion
a year every year until 2014.
Option families
Within these paths, five option families were
identified for consideration. They include one
based on the program of record, Constella-
tion, but with sufficient funds to meet the orig-
inal Bush goals, and four possible alternatives.
Augustine said he was asked to provide
two options that fit within the existing FY10
budget profile: a NASA budget that is flat or
10/14/09 3:35 PM Page 5
“If Santa Claus brought us this system
tomorrow, fully developed, and the budget
doesn’t change, our first action would be
to cancel it.”
Jeff Greason
decreases through 2014, then increases only
at 1.4% a year thereafter, less than the 2.4%
a year used to estimate inflation. The first two
options are constrained to that budget.
•Option 1: Program of record as assessed
by the committee, constrained to the FY10
budget. This is Project Constellation, with
only two changes the committee deemed nec-
essary: Providing funding for the shuttle into
FY11, and including sufficient money to deor-
bit the ISS in 2016.
Although this is the current plan, the group
found no money in the budget for actually do-
ing it. When constrained to this budget pro-
file, Ares I and Orion are not available until af-
ter the ISS has been destructively deorbited.
Worse, the heavy-lift Ares V is not available
until the late 2020s, and there is no money to
develop the Altair lunar lander and lunar sur-
face systems until well into the 2030s, if ever.
(Continued on page 41)
AUGUSTINE MEETS THE HILL
Norm Augustine took his summary report “NASA has been working for more than
on the future of the U.S. human spaceflight four years on the Constellation program, a
program to Capitol Hill September 15-16 in development program in support of which
back-to-back hearings in the House and Congress has invested billions of dollars
Senate. At the September 15 House Com- over that same period. I think that good
mittee on Science and Technology hearing, public policy argues for setting the bar
a lukewarm reception turned hostile when pretty high against making significant
several members defended the existing changes in direction at this point.”
Constellation program and questioned why Giffords ridiculed Augustine’s asser-
Augustine’s panel proposed so many alter- tion that the need for more NASA funding
natives. “I have to say that I am extremely was uncovered by his panel. “But we didn’t
frustrated—in fact, I am angry,” said Rep. need an independent commission to tell us
Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who chairs the that. That’s been painfully obvious for
subcommittee on space and aeronautics. some time now,” she told Augustine.
“With all due respect to Mr. Augustine and The panel received a warmer recep-
his panel, I have to say that I think we are tion the next day at a hearing before the
no further ahead in our understanding of Senate subcommittee on science and space.
what it will take to ensure a robust and “Now the president needs to provide the
meaningful human spaceflight program visionary leadership required to continue
than we were before they started their American leadership in space exploration.
review,” she stated. That means not just the necessary funding
“At this point, my focus is on the fu- to take us beyond low Earth orbit, but a
ture and finding the best path forward,” plan to keep our workforce and industrial
said Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), chairman base engaged and productive,” said the
of the full committee. Gordon expressed subcommittee’s chairman, Sen. Bill Nelson
skepticism regarding any need for change. (D-Fla.).
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 35
36-HAYESlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:36 PM Page 2

Defining a subsidy
Aircraft manufacturers face worsening economic conditions, new competition
from abroad, and major budgetary shortfalls just when research for the next
generation of airliners urgently needs increased government funding.Yet even
the World Trade Organization has not been clear about what constitutes fair
and unfair state support for civil aircraft research.

O n September 4 the World Trade Organization

(WTO) issued an interim ruling on a 2004
complaint by the U.S. over alleged unfair
launch aid loans to Airbus by European gov-
ernments. However, the ruling is likely to
make the issue of what constitutes fair, or un-
come more heated over the coming months.
Moreover, the European Union has indicated
that Europe’s governments will continue to
support the A350 program regardless of the
WTO ruling.

fair, state support to civil aircraft programs CRITICAL FUNDING NEEDS

more, rather than less, complex.
There are major transatlantic differences
of interpretation on what the confidential rul-
ing says and what the implications are for fu-
ture state support measures. Some U.S. news
reports have suggested that WTO has ruled
the $23 billion in European government loans
to Airbus over the past 40 years were unfair
subsidies and, in some cases, violated a ban
on export aid. Other reports, from Europe,
denied there had been a clear-cut result at all.
Meanwhile an EU counterclaim against
the U.S., alleging that Boeing received unfair
state support in the form of tax breaks and a
defense grant, is still being considered by the
WTO and is understood to be about six
months behind the U.S. case against Airbus.
But with the governments of Germany,
France, the U.K., and Spain considering a
plan to provide €3.3 billion of new launch-aid
by Philip Butterworth-Hayes loans to support development work on the
Contributing writer Airbus A350 XWB, this issue is likely to be-
Both Boeing and Airbus face a funding crisis.
They will need billions of dollars of R&D
money to build new single-aisle aircraft to re-
place their Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 fam-
ilies sometime toward the end of the next
decade. Yet they face a major shortfall in fund-
ing over the next five years as airlines cancel
or defer orders for new aircraft—at a time
when the first serious research funds are re-
quired. What is worse, they have new compe-
tition in the form of the COMAC 919, from
CACC (Commercial Aircraft Corporation of
China). This 150-seat airliner could be in pro-
duction by 2014, some years before the new
Boeing and Airbus single-aisle replacements,
and will likely be very heavily supported by the
Chinese government.
Another potential new competitor is Rus-
sia’s Irkut MC-21, an aircraft family with pas-
senger capacity of 150, 181, and 212 seats,
scheduled for introduction in 2016.
So it is not surprising that the issue of

36 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 Copyright© 2009 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
36-HAYESlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template
Europe’s governments will continue to support the A350 program regardless of the WTO ruling.
what constitutes fair and unfair state funding
for new civil aircraft programs has once again
become an issue of major concern on both
sides of the Atlantic. After all, both Boeing’s
and Airbus’ single-aisle aircraft are their es-
sential revenue-generating programs, with
more than 6,000 of both types ordered.
In recent new programs, Airbus has re-
ceived around a third of the required develop-
ment funds from governments in the form of
repayable launch-aid loans, which European
industry and government officials say do not
breach international trade agreements.
But the U.S. has said it will act if Euro-
pean governments go ahead with their plan
to inject funds into the A350 program. “If
they do move forward, we will respond
quickly and swiftly and file another action
within the WTO,” according to U.S. WTO
representative Ron Kirk, speaking in Paris in
June 2009.
Given the speed with which the WTO
process is currently operating, it may be 2013
before the committee assessing this next po-
tential dispute makes its final ruling on the is-
sue —just in time for the A350 to roll out of
the hangar. This aircraft would require around
€11 billion in production investment, accord-
ing to many industry estimates.
10/14/09 3:36 PM Page 3
There are at least eight ways in which
manufacturers can access government funds
to research, build, and sell airliners, and all
may constitute fair or unfair subsidies, de-
pending on the viewpoint.
Many of these instruments are used in
varying degrees by Boeing and Airbus. But in
Europe there is growing acknowledgment that
the current dire economic situation means
manufacturers will need access to large
amounts of state aid—though not in the form
of direct government grants, which would
breach international trade agreements—if they
are to retain their current strong position in
the civil aerospace sector.
According to Allan Cook, president of
the Aerospace and Defense Industries Associ-
ation of Europe, speaking in June, “Our sec-
tor is not asking for any government
bailout....we do need EU institutions and na-
tional governments across Europe to increase
investment in our industry, and in particular to
increase their level of financial support for re-
search and development activities.”
In terms of supporting small- and medium-
sized enterprises (SMEs) down the supply
chain as they struggle to cope with the liquidity
crisis, “a loan program for aerospace SMEs
would be particularly welcome,” he said.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 37
36-HAYESlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:36 PM Page 4

of 2011, conduct flight testing in 2013, and

Russia’s Irkut MC-21 is a
potential competitor in Thus there is a new urgency to ensure
the single-aisle market.
that government-funded research programs
produce key competitive technologies in time
for the next generation of airliners. In this, the
Clean Sky Joint Undertaking will be critical.
CLEAN SKY’S SMART AIRCRAFT
Clean Sky is a €1.6-billion research effort,
funded half by the European Commission and
half by industry, involving 54 aerospace com-
panies, 15 research centers, and 17 universi-
ties. Although most of the results of the effort
will arrive too late for the A350 if the tight
deadlines are met, they might be available for
the A320 replacement.
The aim of Clean Sky’s smart fixed wing
aircraft (SFWA) research team is to reduce fuel
burn and emissions by around 10-20% and
noise by 5-10 dB. Unlike previous EC-funded
research programs, Clean Sky has a very am-
bitious target for moving from theoretical re-
search into flight tests. The idea is to acceler-
ate the development of current research
rather than work on entirely new concepts,
and to select the key technologies at the start
analyze the data from these tests in 2014.
According to the commission, “The ob-
jective of the SFWA ITD [integrated technol-
ogy demonstrator] is not to start up new re-
search, but to take existing research much
further. Technologies that have been devel-
oped through research partly funded by the
EC over the last 20 years will be matured and
enhanced to a technology readiness level that
can be implemented on the next generation
of civil aircraft.”
Among the technologies to be advanced
is a new “smart wing” design that makes use
of passive and active flow and load control
technologies to reduce the drag of the wing in
cruise. SFWA will also examine the impact on
aircraft architecture—such as a modification to
the rear empennage—of new geared turbofan
or open-rotor engine concepts. These should
be available within the current timescale of the
A320 and 737 replacement.
European industry leaders have been
keen to ensure the tight deadlines are not go-
ing to be missed.
“Clean Sky has been struggling to get off
the ground,” said Cook, speaking in July.
“The program has been mired in administra-
tive difficulties, with industry partners finding
it hard to deal with severe constraints imposed
by internal commission regulations….I am
glad to say that this message has been heard
by the European Commission. We have now
received reassurance that commission services
are exploring solutions to meet industry’s re-
quests, and we noted with satisfaction that an
ad-hoc group had been set up within the com-
mission to facilitate and speed up decision-
making on Clean Sky-related issues.”

Clean Sky research areas

•The SMART Fixed Wing Air-
craft program will deliver active
wing technologies and new aircraft
configurations to support open-
rotor and geared turbofan engine
designs.
•The Green Regional Aircraft
program will deliver a low-weight
aircraft design using “smart”
structures. It will also research low
external noise configurations and
the integration of technology
developed in other EC-backed
research programs, in areas such as
engines, energy management, and
new system architectures.
•The Green Rotorcraft program
will deliver innovative rotor blades
and engine installation for noise
reduction, lower airframe drag,
integration of diesel engine tech-
nology, and advanced electrical
systems for elimination of noxious
hydraulic fluids and fuel consump-
tion reduction.
•The Sustainable and Green
Engines program will design and
build five engine demonstrators to
integrate technologies for low-
noise and lightweight low-pressure
systems, high efficiency, low NOx
and low weight cores, and novel
configurations such as open rotors
and intercoolers.
•Systems for Green Operations
will focus on all-electrical aircraft
equipment and systems architec-
tures, thermal management, capa-
bilities for “green” trajectories and
missions, and improved ground
operations to give any aircraft the
capability to fully exploit the bene-
fits of Single European Sky.
•The Eco-Design program will
focus on green design and produc-
tion, withdrawal, and recycling of
aircraft, by optimal use of raw
materials and energies, thus im-
proving the environmental impact
of the whole product’s life cycle.

38 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

36-HAYESlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:36 PM Page 5

U.K. FACTORIES FACE COMPETITION tracts outside the consortium members.

Another area where more European state aid
will be required is in building factories and
providing new equipment for A350 work.
One result of the economic crisis has
been increased competition among key sup-
pliers to retain long-term contracts. While Air-
bus partners have now developed an estab-
lished network of manufacturing sites for the
A350, which could also serve as a basis for
A320 replacement work, there is growing
competition for major new production con-
Probably the largest, and potentially the
most profitable, is the contract to supply
wings. This has traditionally been centered on
the U.K. sites in Filton (now owned by GKN)
and Broughton—owned by Airbus UK. The
U.K. government provided £530 million in
launch investment aid to develop the West
Factory in Broughton, where A380 wings are
assembled. More funds will be needed to pro-
vide facilities for the A350 XWB wing—
although at this writing it was unclear how

Airbus consortium partner workshares on the A350 XWB

Supplier Plant/company location Work package Comment
Airbus UK Broughton, U.K. Wings The Broughton site is responsible for
assembling wings for all Airbus aircraft.
Airbus France Toulouse, France Structures and final assembly Airbus started construction work on the
Nantes, France final assembly line for the A350 XWB in
January.The 74,000-m2 factory will house
the first stages of final assembly for the
A350 XWB: the joining up of the fuselage
and wings. Toulouse is responsible for the
customer definition of cabins, design, and
painting. Nantes produces the center wing
box for all Airbus aircraft.
Airbus Spain Getafe, Spain Structures, components, The Getafe plant specializes in the assembly
Puerto Real, Spain and surfaces and equipping of the horizontal tail plane
Illescas, Spain for all Airbus aircraft, and the design,
development, and manufacture of
composite materials.
Airbus Deutschland Hamburg, Germany Structures and final assembly Bremen houses the process chain for the
Bremen, Germany high-lift elements of Airbus wings and
Stade, Germany builds forward and aft fuselages, where it
Buxtehude, Germany manufactures sheet-metal parts like clips
and thrust crests for all Airbus aircraft.The
tails for all Airbus aircraft are produced at
Stade. Stade also produces other
components from CFRP.The Airbus site
at Buxtehude houses cabin and cargo
customization.
Premium Aerotec Nordenham, Germany Structures A former Airbus concern, now sold to the
Varel, Germany private sector.The company is providing
Augsburg, Germany the fuselage structure for the A350 XWB.
The structures are for the floor and aft
pressure bulkhead, adding to existing work
it has to build forward section elements
and aft side shells (see below).The aft press
bulkhead will be made from CFRP and will
be the third aircraft structural component
developed and manufactured by the
company using the vacuum-assisted
process—an infusion process it has
developed in-house and patented.
Premium Aerotec Nordenham, Germany Structures A former Airbus concern, now sold to the
Varel, Germany private sector.The Nordenham facility—
Augsburg, Germany which manufactures forward and aft
fuselages—is the central facility for
manufacturing fuselage shells for all Airbus
aircraft.Varel supplies complex machined
aircraft structural components to all seven
Airbus sites in Germany.
Aerolia Saint-Nazaire, France Structures A former Airbus concern, now sold to the
Méaulte, France private sector. The site at Méaulte, near
Paris, is responsible for assembling the nose
sections of all Airbus aircraft.

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 39

36-HAYESlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template 10/14/09 3:36 PM Page 6

Eight ways to access government money for new airliner projects

•Obtain competitive technologies from high-level, quasi-academic research
programs pioneered by government-funded bodies such as NASA or the
European Commission.
•Obtain support from regional government bodies to build new facilities or
invest in technology upgrades to existing manufacturing centers.
•Access increasing amounts of work from small and medium-sized enterprises
down the supply chain that have their own discrete sources of government
financial support.
•Obtain direct government launch aid to support new programs, on the
basis that retaining strategic technologies and skills is in the national interest.
•Borrow from banks that have received money from governments specifically
to help finance aerospace companies.
•Rely increasingly on export credit guarantees and other government
financing methods that support aircraft sales campaigns.
•Use strategic partners in third-party countries who have access to large
government grants.
•Use technologies that have been developed for military use—financed by
defense departments—for civil applications.

much the U.K. government would make avail- FUNDING COMMITMENTS

China unveiled the COMAC C-919
at the Asian Aerospace 2009
air show in Hong Kong.
able to Airbus UK to develop new facilities,
and whether this would take the form of a
straight loan or reimbursable launch aid.
In June the Welsh assembly agreed a
£28.6-million investment in new composite
manufacturing facilities at Broughton.
But with BAE Systems no longer a mem-
ber of the core Airbus consortium, there are
possibilities for companies outside the U.K. to
take over this lucrative work. Airbus and the
U.K. government may have invested heavily
in wing manufacturing
plants over the past
few years, but many in
the U.K. are now wor-
ried that without a
substantial govern-
ment commitment to
provide new facilities,
this work will move
elsewhere.
“To sustain our fu-
ture contribution to a
balanced British econ-
omy, further action is
now required from industry and the govern-
ment in partnership,” says Ian Godden, chief
executive of the Society of British Aerospace
Companies. “With the global market for the
new single-aisle replacement for the Airbus
A320 and Boeing 737 alone worth an esti-
mated $1 trillion over the next 20 years, with
the total market at over $2.6 trillion, this is an
opportunity that the U.K. literally cannot af-
ford to miss.”
Godden is concerned that if the U.K. does
not recommit to buying the A400M military
transport, “the probability that in 15 years’
time the U.K. is a fully fledged composite wing
manufacturer will reduce substantially.…If the
U.K. government does not fund [the work],
then Germany and Spain will pick it up.”
The political pressure on the U.K. gov-
ernment to find funds for new civil aircraft
manufacturing has never been more intense.
In France, government commitments to civil
aircraft manufacturing are much clearer. Of
the approximately €3.3 billion pledged, in
principal, by France, Germany, Spain, and
the U.K. to the A350, Germany is to con-
tribute €1.1 billion and France €1.4 billion,
reflecting France’s slightly larger workshare.
This early and strong commitment will also
mean German industry’s contribution to the
A320 replacement will probably be greater
than the workshare allocated to current Airbus
programs, according to German officials.
In January of this year the French press
reported that the government planned to in-
ject €5 billion into banks to finance aircraft
purchases. Les Echos reported that the
French government would inject the money
into banks that have a history of lending to the
aviation sector—Calyon, Societe Generale,
and BNP Paribas are examples.
Meanwhile, Airbus sales have also re-
ceived a boost from extra support given by
European export credit agencies. These will
back about half of Airbus deliveries in 2010,
up from 40% for this year, Airbus COO John
Leahy has said. The use of government-
backed export credit guarantees is becoming
increasingly important on both sides of the At-
lantic. The U.S. Export-Import Bank may
boost guarantees on bank loans for Boeing
aircraft this year by more than 70%.
✈✈✈
With Europe’s large aircraft manufacturing
sector coming under increasing pressure from
new competitors in Canada, Brazil, and
China, the importance of obtaining research
and infrastructure funds from governments to
maintain a competitive edge has never been
greater, especially given the exceptionally dif-
ficult economic climate. But defining what is
fair and unfair state support has proved elu-
sive. With new manufacturers entering the
market, it is likely to become even more
murky in the future than at present.

40 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

36-HAYESlayout.qxd:AAFEATURE-layout.Template
•Option 2: ISS and lunar exploration, con-
strained to the FY10 budget. This option ex-
tends the ISS to 2020, and conducts a pro-
gram of lunar exploration using a smaller
version of Ares V. It assumes a shuttle flyout
in FY11, and includes a technology develop-
ment program, a program to develop com-
mercial crew services to LEO, and money for
enhanced utilization of ISS. This option does
not deliver heavy-lift capability until the late
2020s and does not have funds to develop the
systems for lunar landing or exploration.
The remaining three alternatives are sized
to a larger budget profile—one the panel
judged more appropriate for a program de-
signed to carry humans beyond LEO. It adds
$3 billion above the FY10 guidance each year
to FY14, then slows to a 2.4% inflation ad-
justment a year.
•Option 3: Baseline case—implementable
program of record. This is an executable ver-
sion of Constellation. It consists of the content
and sequence of the existing program—deor-
biting the ISS in 2016, developing Orion,
Ares I, and Ares V, and beginning lunar ex-
ploration. The committee made only two ad-
ditions—budgeting for the flyout of the shuttle
in 2011, and ISS deorbit. The assessment is,
under this funding profile, that the option de-
livers Ares I/Orion in FY17, with human lu-
nar return in the mid-2020s.
•Option 4: Moon first. This keeps the
Moon as the first destination. It extends ISS
life to 2020 using commercial crew-carrying
vehicles and funds technology advancement.
There are two variants to this option: Variant
4A retires the shuttle in FY11 and develops
the Ares V Lite heavy-lift booster for lunar
missions. Variant 4B includes the only fore-
seeable way to eliminate the gap in U.S. hu-
man-launch capability: It extends the shuttle to
2015 at a minimum safe-flight rate. It also de-
velops a heavy-lift booster that is more directly
shuttle-derived. Both variants of Option 4 per-
mit human lunar return by the mid-2020s.
•Option 5: Flexible Path. This option fol-
lows the Flexible Path as exploration policy. It
flies the shuttle into FY11, extends the ISS un-
til 2020, funds technology development, and
develops commercial crew services to LEO.
There are three variants within this option
(they differ only in the heavy-lift booster design
selected). Variant 5A develops Ares Lite, the
most capable of the heavy-lift vehicles in this
option. Variant 5B employs an EELV-heritage
commercial heavy-lift rocket and assumes a
significantly smaller role for NASA. It has
lower operational costs but requires major re-
10/19/09 2:34 PM Page 7
structuring of NASA. Variant 5C uses a shut- Pathway to space
(Continued from page 35)
tle-derived heavy-lift vehicle, taking maximum
advantage of existing infrastructure, facilities,
and production capabilities.
All variants of Option 5 begin exploration
along the Flexible Path in the early 2020s,
with lunar flybys, visits to Lagrange points and
near-Earth objects, and Mars flybys occurring
at a rate of about one mission a year, and a
possible rendezvous with Martian moons or
human lunar return by the mid-to-late 2020s. “So you have a
heavy-lift vehicle
All paths lead to funding
The committee found that no strategy com- in 2028, but
patible with the FY10 budget profile allows absolutely
manned spaceflight to continue in any mean- nothing to put
ingful way. But with a budget increasing by $3 in it to send to
billion annually above the FY10 budget levels,
both the Moon First and Flexible Path strate-
the Moon.”
gies begin human exploration on a reason- Sally Ride
able, though not aggressive, timetable. The
panel believed an exploration program that
will be a “source of pride for the nation” re-
quires more money annually for NASA.
Regardless of the pathways selected, the
group strongly urged the design and develop-
ment of some form of heavy-lift booster to
support manned spaceflight.
“I think it would be fair to say that our view
is that it would be difficult with the current
budget to do anything that's terribly inspiring
in the human spaceflight area.”
Norm Augustine
It also suggested that the U.S. make
greater use of international cooperation and
partnerships beyond any missions from LEO.
And it found attractive the prospect that se-
lection of a commercial crew spacecraft devel-
opment effort to lower costs for access to the
station would help to develop a new commer-
cial space industry for the nation.
✈✈✈
As was the case following the 2003 Columbia
disaster, NASA and the U.S. civil space
program again face the prospect of a new di-
rection. Whatever option the Obama adminis-
tration chooses, neither a blue-ribbon panel,
nor NASA, nor the White House will have the
final say as to what the nation does in space.
“Whatever space program is ultimately se-
lected, it must be matched with the resources
needed for its execution,” said the report.
And that choice remains, as it should,
with the public at large.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 41
42-OOPlayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09
25 Years Ago,
November 1984
Nov. 8-16 The
space shuttle
Discovery is launched
from the Kennedy Space-
flight Center on STS 51A with
commander Frederick H. Hauck, pilot
David M. Walker, and three mission
specialists. Crewmembers retrieve two
satellites from orbit, Palapa B2 and
Westar VI, for return to Earth. They
also launch Canada’s Telesat-H and the
Hughes Synsom-IV-1 communication
satellites. NASA, Astronautics and
Aeronautics, 1979-84,
pp. 516-517.
Nov. 10 The Spacenet 2 communica-
tions satellite, owned by GTE, is
placed into orbit by Ariane V11. The
same booster also carries the Marecs
B-2 maritime communications satellite
into orbit for ESA. NASA, Astronautics
and Aeronautics, 1979-84, p. 517.
Nov. 27 Miss Baker, the South
American squirrel monkey that flew
with U.S.-born rhesus monkey Able
in a test spaceflight on a Jupiter
rocket on May 28, 1959, up to 300
mi., dies of kidney failure. She is
buried at the Space and Rocket Center
in Huntsville, Ala. Astronautics and
Aeronautics, 1979-84, p. 519;
E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and
Astronautics 1915-60, pp. 109-110.
50 Years Ago, November 1959
Nov. 4 NASA launches
a second Little Joe II
all-solid-fuel test launch
vehicle at its Wallops
Island, Va., facility. The
purpose is to test the
Project Mercury escape
system mounted on a tower on a
2,000-lb boilerplate model of the
capsule. Flight, Nov. 20, 1959, p. 569.
42 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009
4:18 PM Page 2
Nov. 5 The North American X-15 rocket-powered research aircraft (No. 2)
achieves its third powered flight, with Scott Crossfield at the controls.
E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics 1915-60, p. 114; D. Jenkins,
X-15, p. 609.
Nov. 5 The Air Force successfully launches Atlas, Jupiter, and Thor missiles
from Cape Canaveral, Fla. All three reach the full design ranges down the Atlantic.
Flight, Nov. 13, 1959, p. 538.
Nov. 7 The Air Force’s Discoverer VII satellite is boosted into polar orbit, although
the capsule is not recovered. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics 1915-60,
p. 114.
Nov. 8 A British Avro Vulcan B-1 bomber returns
to England after a 30,424-mi. round-
the-world flight. During the trip the
plane took part in the opening cere-
mony of the new airport in Wellington, N.Z.
The Aeroplane, Nov. 20, 1959, p. 498.
Nov. 10 A five-stage sounding rocket called Strongarm, with a
150-lb scientific payload, is launched from NASA’s Wallops Island,
Va., facility to an altitude of 1,050 mi. and gathers data on
electron density in the upper atmosphere. Strongarm uses an
Honest John motor as the first stage, two Nike boosters as the
second and third stages, a modified Recruit rocket as the fourth,
and a scale Sergeant as the fifth stage. E. Emme, ed., Aeronau-
tics and Astronautics 1915-60, p. 114; D. Baker, Spaceflight and
Rocketry, p. 96.
Nov. 11 The president of England’s Royal Aeronautical Society receives a letter
announcing that Henry Kramer, chairman and managing director of Microcell, is
offering a £5,000 prize for the first successful flight of a man-powered aircraft.
The rules are posted by the society in 1960. The Kramer Prize’s monetary award
grows considerably, is opened to persons beyond Britain, and is finally won years
later by the U.S. amateur cyclist and hang-glider pilot Bryan Allen. He pilots the
plane, designed by Paul McCready and named the Gossamer Condor, on Aug. 27,
1977. Flight, Nov. 20, 1959, p. 500; R. Reed, Wingless Flight, p. 13: M. Grosser,
Gossamer Odyssey, passim.
Nov. 11 It is announced that radio signals are successfully reflected back to Earth
from Venus with a 250-ft-diam radio telescope at Jodrell Bank of the University of
Manchester, England. The Aeroplane, Nov. 13, 1959, p. 459.
Nov. 16 Air Force Capt. Joseph W. Kittinger Jr. makes a parachute
jump of 76,400 ft from the Excelsior I open balloon gondola,
setting a world record. The Aerospace Year Book, 1960, p. 26;
Flight, Dec. 4, 1959, p. 658.
Nov. 20 The Discoverer VIII reconnaissance satellite is placed into
polar orbit, but its capsule is not recovered. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics
42-OOPlayout.qxd:AA Template 10/14/09
and Astronautics 1915-60, p. 115.
Nov. 23 The Boeing 720 four-engine
medium-range jet transport aircraft
makes its first
flight, though
it does not enter
scheduled
service with
United Airlines until July 5, 1960.
FAA Historical Chronology, p. 64.
Nov. 26 The attempted launch of
the Pioneer V lunar probe fails when
the plastic shroud of the Atlas-Able
4B launch vehicle separates 45 sec
after liftoff. The vehicle breaks up 25
seconds later. The Aeroplane, Dec. 4,
1959, p. 566; D. Baker, Spaceflight
and Rocketry, p. 96.
Nov. 27 The Hiller X-18 tilt-wing VTOL
research transport aircraft makes its
first flight, at Edwards AFB, Calif. The
Aerospace Year Book, 1960, p. 457.
Nov. 28-29 Optical observations and
photos of Venus are taken from an
altitude of 81,000 ft through a special
mechanism on a 16-in. telescope car-
ried on the Office of Naval Research
Strato-Lab High IV balloon. Conducting
the experiments aboard the 172-ft-
diam helium-filled balloon are scientists
Charles B. Moore Jr. and Cmdr.Mal-
colm Ross. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics
and Astronautics 1915-60, p. 115;
Flight, Dec. 11, 1959, p. 706.
75 Years Ago, November 1934
Nov. 4 Congress gives belated
recognition to Emory Bronte’s
4:18 PM Page 3
An Aerospace Chronology
by Frank H. Winter and
Robert van der Linden
National Air and Space Museum
achievement in navigating the first civilian aircraft across the Pacific from
California to Hawaii in 1927, presenting him with the Distinguished Flying Cross.
Pilot Ernest Smith received a similar award five years ago. Aviation, December 1934.
Nov. 16 President Albert Lebrun of France opens the 14th Paris Air Show, which
features greater than usual shows of nationalism by participating countries.
Dominating Germany’s exhibit is a gigantic swastika on the fin and rudder of a
larger Junkers trimotor float plane, with more
swastikas displayed on other planes. Across
the exhibit hall is the symbol of the
USSR, a 10-ft-high red star sitting
atop a model of the Maxim Gorki,
the eight-engined Soviet flying
propaganda machine. The French
display an unusual number of
fighter-bombers, which seem to be a symbolic answer to the German bombers
allegedly in development from Junkers passenger planes. The propagandistic
tendency of the Soviets is especially apparent, notes one reviewer, considering
the USSR does not sell airplanes or engines to other nations at these shows. The
Aeroplane, Nov. 21, 1934, pp. 607-632.
Nov. 17 Capt. Fred Nelson wins the Mitchell Trophy Race, averaging 216.8 mph
over the four circuits of the 20-mi. course at Selfridge Field, Mich. All contestants
in this military event, last held three years ago, use low-wing Boeing P-26 pursuit
planes powered with supercharged Wasp engines. The Curtiss Trophy is awarded
for the first time this year and goes to Lt. Thomas Gaughan Jr. for circling the
20-mi. course three times at an average speed of 191.4 mph. Aviation, December
1934, p. 404.
Nov. 18 The Navy issues a contract to Northrop for the XBT-1, a two-seat scout
plane and 1,000-lb dive bomber. The initial prototype leads to the Douglas SBD
Dauntless series of dive bombers, introduced to the U.S. fleet in 1938 and used
throughout WW II. E. Emme, ed., Aeronautics and Astronautics 1915-60, p. 32.
Nov. 30 The USSR announces it will establish its first dirigible line between
Moscow and Sverdlovsk, a distance of 1,000 mi. It will use a semirigid dirigible
with three motors of 250 hp each. The airship will carry 18 passengers, with
mail, and is expected to cover the route in 16 hr. Flight, Nov. 8, 1934, p. 1168.
And During November 1934
—According to a German press report, 32 American officers will be
engaged as instructors to the Russian air force. Flight, Nov. 8, 1934, p. 1178.
100 Years Ago, November 1909
Nov. 29 The Etrich Taube (“Dove”), designed and built by Igo Etrich,
completes its first flight. The Taube monoplane is the first Austrian aircraft to fly
in that country. Its graceful bird-like design inspires many
imitators and is widely produced in Germany.
A. van Hoorebeeck, La Conquete de L’Air, p. 81.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 43
AA_NOV2009_COPP.qxd:Layout 1 10/14/09 4:22 PM Page 2

44 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

AA_NOV2009_COPP.qxd:Layout 1 10/14/09 4:22 PM Page 3
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND AEROSPACE ENGINEERING
The Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
(MAE) at the University of Florida is seeking to hire multiple
tenured/tenure-track faculty. Outstanding candidates at all levels
will be entertained in the following focus areas: energy,
nanoengineering, biomechanical engineering, and dynamics and
controls. Candidates must possess an earned Ph.D. in Mechanical
or Aerospace Engineering or a closely related discipline and
demonstrate ability to create and sustain internationally recognized
research programs in their fields of expertise.
The MAE Department currently has approximately
52 faculty, 375 graduate students, and annual expenditures in
excess of $20 million. Persons joining the Department will find
outstanding facilities, a collaborative and collegial work
environment, and a strong dedication to diversity and excellence
in research and education. Potential applicants seeking more
information are encouraged to visit our website at
http://www.mae.ufl.edu.
Candidates should submit applications electronically to the
Search Committee Chair at maesearch@mae.ufl.edu.
Applications should include: 1) formal letter of interest,
2) complete resume/curriculum vitae, 3) statement of research
and teaching plans, and 4) names and contact information for
at least three references. Applications should be submitted by
October 1, 2009 when the search committee will begin reviewing
applications. Acceptance and review of applications will continue
until a qualified applicant pool is identified.
As part of the application process, applicants are invited to
complete an online confidential and voluntary self-disclosure card
referencing one of the following position numbers 00009192,
00007430 or 00007432. This information is used as a means of
recording or tracking candidate applications and is accessible to
the university’s Faculty Development Office when needed to fulfill
reporting obligations. A self-disclosure card can be found at
http://www.hr.ufl.edu/job/datacard.htm.
The University of Florida is an Equal Opportunity Employer
dedicated to building a culturally diverse faculty and staff.
We strongly encourage minorities, women, and members
of other under-represented groups to apply.
AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 45
AA_NOV2009_COPP.qxd:Layout 1 10/14/09 4:22 PM Page 4

46 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

AA_NOV2009_COPP.qxd:Layout 1 10/14/09 4:22 PM Page 5

AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009 47

AA_NOV2009_COPP.qxd:Layout 1 10/14/09 4:22 PM Page 6

48 AEROSPACE AMERICA/NOVEMBER 2009

 AIAABulletin NOVEMBER 2009
AIAA Meeting Schedule B2
AIAA Courses & Training B4
Program Schedule
AIAA News B5
AIAA Publications B14
AIAA Meeting Program B15
AIAA Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems
Conference
U.S. Air Force T&E Days

AIAA Courses and Training B29

Program
Standard Conference Information B32

Lt. Gen. Tom Sheridan, Commander, SMC, and local students tour the Main Ex-
hibit Hall at the Space 2009 Conference and Exhibit. More information about
what the students experienced at Education Alley, held at the Space 2009 Con-
ference, can be found on page B8.

AIAA Directory
AIAA HEADQUARTERS AIAA Western Office To join AIAA; to submit address changes, mem-
1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500 999 North Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 440 ber inquiries, or renewals; to request journal
Reston, VA 20191-4344 El Segundo, CA 90245 fulfillment; or to register for an AIAA conference.
www.aiaa.org 800/683-AIAA or 310/726-5000 Customer Service: 800/639-AIAA†
310/726-5004 FAX

Other Important Numbers: Aerospace America / Greg Wilson, ext. 7596* • AIAA Bulletin / Christine Williams, * Also accessible via Internet.
Use the formula first name
ext. 7575* • AIAA Foundation / Dave Quackenbush, ext. 7514*, Suzanne Musgrave, ext. 7518* • Book Sales / last initial@aiaa.org. Example:
800/682-AIAA or 703/661-1595, Dept. 415 • Corporate Members / Merrie Scott, ext. 7530* • International megans@aiaa.org.
† U.S. only. International callers
Affairs / Megan Scheidt, ext. 3842*; Emily Springer, ext. 7533* • Editorial, Books / Heather Brennan, ext. 7568* •
should use 703/264-7500.
Editorial, Technical Journals / Amanda Maguire, ext. 7507* • Education / Lisa Bacon, ext. 7527* • Exhibits /
Cecilia Capece, ext. 7570* • Honors and Awards / Carol Stewart, ext. 7623* • Proceedings / 800/682-AIAA or Addresses for Technical
703/661-1595, Dept. 415 • Professional Development / Patricia Carr, ext. 7523* • Public Policy / Steve Howell, Committees and Section Chairs
ext. 7625* • Section Activities / Chris Jessee, ext. 3848* • Standards, Domestic / Michele Ringrose, ext. 7515* • can be found on the AIAA Web
Standards, International / Erin Kahn, ext. 7645* • Student Programs / Karen Thomas, ext. 7520* • Technical site at http://www.aiaa.org.
Committees / Betty Guillie, ext. 7573*
We are frequently asked how to submit articles about section events, member awards, and other special interest items in the AIAA Bulletin. Please contact
the staff liaison listed above with Section, Committee, Honors and Awards, Event, or Education information. They will review and forward the information to
the AIAA Bulletin Editor.
 DATE MEETING LOCATION CALL FOR ABSTRACT
(Issue of AIAA Bulletin in PAPERS DEADLINE
which program appears) (Bulletin in
which Call
for Papers
appears)

2009
3–6 Nov† National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Aircraft Combat Monterey, CA
Survivability Symposium Contact: Meredith Geary, 703.247.9476, mgeary@ndia.org
15–20 Nov† 20th International Congress of Mechanical Engineering Gramado, Brazil (Contact: Joao Luiz Azevedo,
azevedo@iae.cta.br, www.abcm.org.br/cobem2009)

2010
4–7 Jan 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Orlando, FL Jan 09 3 Jun 09
Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition (Oct)
20–21 Jan AIAA Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems Conference (Nov) Monterey, CA
(SECRET/U.S. ONLY)
25–28 Jan† The Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS) San Jose, CA,
Contact: Dr. Raymond Sears, 603.863.2832, r.w.sears@ieee.org
2–4 Feb U.S. Air Force T&E Days (Nov) Nashville, TN May 09 17 Aug 09
10–11 Feb 13th Annual FAA Commercial Space Transportation Conference Arlington, VA
14–17 Feb† 20th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting San Diego, CA Sep 09 5 Oct 09
Contact: A. Trask, trask@apogeeintegration.com;
http://space-flight.org/AAS_meetings/2010_winter/2010%20winter.html
23–26 Feb† Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF-2010) Laurel, MD Jul 09 15 Jul 09
Contact: Glen Robertson, 256.694.7941, gar@ias-spes.org,
www.ias-spes.org
6–13 Mar† 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference Big Sky, Montana
Contact: David Woerner, 818.726.8228;
dwoerner@ieee.org; www.aeroconf.org
22–24 Mar 8th U.S. Missile Defense Conference and Exhibit Washington, DC
12–15 Apr 51st AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Orlando, FL May 09 10 Aug 09
Dynamics, and Materials Conference
18th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference
12th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference
11th AIAA Gossamer Systems Forum
6th AIAA Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Specialist Conference
20–22 Apr AIAA Infotech@Aerospace 2010 Atlanta, GA Jun 09 23 Oct 09
25–30 Apr SpaceOps 2010 Conference: Delivering on the Dream Huntsville, AL May 09 1 Aug 09
Hosted by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center and organized by AIAA
May† ASTRO’ 10–15th CASI Conference on Astronautics Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Contact: G. Languedoc, 613.591.8787, www.casi.ca/conferences
11–12 May Inside Aerospace—An International Forum for Aviation and Space Leaders Arlington, VA
12 May 2010 Aerospace Spotlight Awards Gala Washington, DC
13–15 May† Fifth Argentine Congress on Space Technology Mar del Plata, Argentina
Contact: Pablo de Leon, 701.777.2369, Deleon@aate.org,
31 May–2 Jun† 17th St. Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Saint Petersburg, Russia
Navigation Systems Contact: Prof V. Peshekhonov, www.elektropribor.spb.ru,
elprib@online.ru
1–4 Jun† 4th International Conference on Research in Air Transportation Budapest, Hungary
(ICRAT 2010) Contact: Andres Zellweger, dres.z@comcast.net, www.icrat.org
7–9 Jun† 16th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference Stockholm, Sweden
Contact: Hans Bodén, hansbod@kth.se
8–10 Jun† 3rd International Symposium on System and Control in Aeronautics Harbin, People’s Republic of China
and Astronautics (ISSCAA 2010) Contact: Zhenshen Qu, ocicq@126.com, http://isscaa.hit.edu.cn

B2 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

 DATE MEETING LOCATION CALL FOR ABSTRACT
(Issue of AIAA Bulletin in PAPERS DEADLINE
which program appears) (Bulletin in
which Call
for Papers
appears)
14–18 Jun† ASME TurboExpo 2010 Glasgow, Scotland, UK (Contact: www.turboexpo.org)
28 Jun–1 Jul 27th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Chicago, IL Jun 09 5 Nov 09
Testing Conference
28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference
40th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference
41st AIAA Plasmadynamics and Lasers Conference
42nd AIAA/ASME Joint Thermophysics and Heat Transfer Conference
5th AIAA Flow Control Conference
28 Jun–2 Jul† 8th International LISA Symposium Stanford, CA. (Contact: Sasha Buchman, 650.725.4110,
www.stanford.edu/group/lisasymposium)
30 Jun–3 Jul† ICNPAA 2010—Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil
Aerospace and Sciences Contact: Prof. S. Sivasundaram, 386.761.9829, seenithi@aol.com
11–15 Jul 40th International Conference on Environmental Systems Barcelona, Spain Oct 09 2 Nov 09
18–25 Jul† 28th Scientific Assembly of the Committee on Space Research Bremen, Germany
(COSPAR 2010) Contact: www.cospar2010.org
25–28 Jul 46th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit Nashville, TN Jul 09 19 Nov 09
25–28 Jul 8th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference & Exhibit Nashville, TN Jul 09 19 Nov 09
2–5 Aug AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference Toronto, Ontario, Canada Jul 09 27 Jan 10
AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference
AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference
AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference
AIAA Atmospheric and Space Environments Conference
7–13 Aug† 2010 International Heat Transfer Conference Washington, DC (Contact: Avram Bar-Cohen, 301.405.3173;
abc@umd.edu; www.nano.org/ihtc14.pdf)
13–15 Sep 10th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Fort Worth, TX Sep 09 8 Feb 10
(ATIO) Conference and
13th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference
19–24 Sep† 27th Congress of the International Council of the Nice, France 31 July 09
Aeronautical Sciences Contact: www.icas.org
28–30 Sep AIAA SPACE 2010 Conference & Exposition Anaheim, CA
28th AIAA International Communications Satellite Systems Conference (ICSSC–2010)
20–22 Oct† 20th International Conference on Adaptive Structures and Technologies Hong Kong
Contact: Prof Wei-Hsin Liao, +852 2609 8337,
icast2009@mae.cuhk.edu.hk, www.icast2009.org
16–18 Nov AIAA Missile Sciences Conference Monterey, CA
SECRET/U.S. ONLY

To receive information on meetings listed above, write or call

AIAA Customer Service, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston, VA 20191-4344;
800.639.AIAA or 703.264.7500 (outside U.S.). Also accessible via Internet at www.aiaa.org/calendar.
†Meetings cosponsored by AIAA. Cosponsorship forms can be found at http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=292.

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B3

 DATE COURSE VENUE LOCATION

2009
1 Dec–30 Apr 10 Introduction to Computation Fluid Dynamics Distance Learning
1 Dec–30 Apr 10 Advanced Computation Fluid Dynamics Distance Learning
1 Dec–30 Apr 10 Computational Fluid Turbulence Distance Learning
1 Dec–30 Apr 10 Heat Transfer* Distance Learning

2010
8–9 Jan Best Practices in Wind Tunnel Testing* Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Computational Multiphase Flow Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Fluid–Structure Interaction Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Flow Control for Specialists Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Large Eddy Simulations: Theory, Applications, and Advanced Topics Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Microfluidics and Nanofluidics, Fundamentals and Applications Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Modeling Flight Dynamics with Tensors Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
8–9 Jan Systems Engineering Fundamentals Aerospace Sciences Conference Orlando, FL
18–19 Jan Making Decisions in Missile Defense* Strategic and Tactical Missile Conf Monterey, CA
18–19 Jan Tactical Missile Design-Integration Strategic and Tactical Missile Conf Monterey, CA
31 Jan–1 Feb Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty Analysis T&E Days Conference Nashville, TN
31 Jan–1 Feb Systems Engineering Fundamentals T&E Days Conference Nashville, TN
1 Feb–31 Jul Introduction to Spaceflight Distance Learning
1 Feb–31 Jul Fundamentals of Aircraft Performance & Design Distance Learning
10–11 Apr Aeroelasticity: State-of-the-Art Practices Structures et al. Conferences Orlando, FL
10–11 Apr Modern Modeling of Aircraft Structures* Structures et al. Conferences Orlando, FL
10–11 Apr The Fundamentals of Composite Structure Design* Structures et al. Conferences Orlando, FL
10–11 Apr Introduction to Non-Deterministic Approaches Structures et al. Conferences Orlando, FL
10–11 Apr Tensegrity Systems* Structures et al. Conferences Orlando, FL
18–19 Apr Unmanned Aviation in the 21st Century Infotech@Aerospace Atlanta, GA
26–27 Jun Modern Design of Experiments Fluids Conferences Chicago, IL
26–27 Jun Basic Fluids Modeling with Surface Evolver Fluids Conferences Chicago, IL
26–27 Jun Computational Heat Transfer (CHT) and Thermal Modeling Fluids Conferences Chicago, IL
26–27 Jun Stability and Transition: Theory, Modeling and Applications Fluids Conferences Chicago, IL
29–30 Jul Liquid Propulsion Systems Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN
29–30 Jul Hydrogen Safety Course* Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN
29–30 Jul NPSS: A Practical Introduction* Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN
29–30 Jul Advanced Solid Rockets Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN
29–30 Jul Air Breathing Pulse Detonation Engine Technology* Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN
29–30 Jul Tactical Missile Design-Integration Joint Propulsion Conference Nashville, TN
31 Jul–1 Aug System Identification Applied to Aircraft—Theory and Practice GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug Robust and Adaptive Control Theory GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug Automated Modelling and Simulation of Dynamic and Control Systems Using GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada
the Bond Graph Method in Aerospace Applications*
31 Jul–1 Aug Advanced Space Vehicle Control and Dynamics* GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug Emerging Principles in Fast Trajectory Optimization GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada
31 Jul–1 Aug Mathematical Introduction to Integrated Navigation Systems with Applications GNC Conferences Toronto, Ontario, Canada

* = New Course

B4 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 5

“space” component, has been hosted by SAE. As part of their busi-

THE GLOBAL SOCIETY
The AIAA Vision is to be “the shap-
ing, dynamic force in the aero-
space profession—the forum for
innovation, technical excellence
and global leadership.” Within the
Board of Directors, on staff, and in
many other areas of the Institute,
the “global” challenge is never far
from our thoughts. We have three
Directors-at-Large with international
focus, a Region 7 (International)
Director, and a Vice President
(International). The International
Activities Committee is an impor-
tant, very active Standing
Committee of the Board. Many Technical Committees have mem-
bers from outside the United States; we have professional or stu-
dent members in 86 countries, about 17% of each; we’re involved
with ISO and ICAS and the IAF—there’s no question that we’re
committed to a significant international presence.
However, serving a profession that is becoming more global
every day, it’s fair to ask “what are you actually doing today, and
what about tomorrow?” The answer has lots of pieces—let’s start
with Europe. Europe is our largest geographical presence outside
North America, with over 2700 members. We also have eight cor-
porate members with headquarters in Europe. We have bilateral
agreements with 3AF in France, RAeS in the United Kingdom, and
DGLR in Germany.
We have held cosponsored events in each of these countries in
the past several years, including International Space Planes and
Hypersonics Systems and Technologies in Bremen last month. In
addition, we have a similar agreement with the Council of European
Aerospace Societies (CEAS); President-Elect Mark Lewis was co-
chair with Prof. Szodruch, President of CEAS, of a session that was
held at the CEAS biannual meeting addressing increased collabora-
tion among national associations. President Dave Thompson was
also in Europe last month, following up on an annual visit we
received from SAFRAN executives and meeting with Pierre Betin,
an AIAA Honorary Fellow and long-time international leader. In the
education arena, we sponsor awards and participation in an annual
European student conference that involves 26 universities from 9
countries. The overall international winner is eligible to compete at
the Aerospace Sciences Meeting. Many areas for increased collab-
oration are equally appropriate elsewhere around the world, but the
topics where we are focusing attention now include air traffic man-
agement, space debris, space exploration, Earth observation, avia-
tion-related environmental issues, and international standards. A
major step in this direction will be the 40th International Conference
on Environmental Systems. This gathering, which has a very large
ness realignment, AIAA will take over this event starting next July in
Barcelona.
Our “presence” in Asia and the Pacific Rim is much less well
developed, but growing in ways that have enormous potential. Our
largest national membership outside the United States is Japan,
with over 1000 members. Australia and South Korea are also in the
“top ten.” The International Astronautical Congress was in Korea
this year, and I had the opportunity to attend for the first time. Past
President Paul Nielsen had signed an agreement with our Korean
counterpart (KSAS) that is similar to the one we have with JSASS
in Japan. It was a good opportunity to meet the leadership of these
societies. Following IAC, we went to Beijing to sign a collaborative
agreement with the Chinese Aviation Industry Press for Chinese
translation of aviation and aeronautics titles originally published by
AIAA. These translations may take the form of full or partial transla-
tions; the latter could also benefit students and young engineers
who will be interacting with American counterparts in the future. It
appears this pilot collaboration could expand into aeronautics, and
we also met with the leadership of the Chinese Society for
Astronautics to explore areas for future interactions, including pub-
lishing and conferences.
Our membership in Australia, over 400, is very active. I expect
that Ian Tuohy, Chair of the Adelaide Section, travelled the furthest
to attend the Regional Leadership Conference in conjunction with
JPC in July. Australia has hosted our second International Student
Conference each year.
Our activity in South America is mostly through bilateral agree-
ments with local societies. The approach has been to work with the
local aerospace communities, primarily in Brazil, Argentina, and
Chili, focused on a pre-existing activity held in Argentina each year.
Last year, the event was organized by the Argentine Association for
Space Technology (AATE), and AIAA was a cosponsor. As is the
case in other regions, Historic Site dedications provide another
opportunity to “show our brand” and interact with the professionals
in the area.
There are many areas and countries with a vibrant aerospace
economy and workforce where we have tremendous growth poten-
tial—Russia, Eastern and Central Europe, and India are obvious
examples, but there are several others. In some cases, we are
working with the Department of State on the appropriate avenues
for interaction, but in these and everywhere else, we are hampered
by our own lack of familiarity with those at the other end of the com-
munications. And this is an area where we need your help. Please
feel free to contact me at BobD@AIAA.org or Megan Scheidt at
MeganS@AIAA.org with your insights, points of contacts, and sug-
gestions. Closer collaboration with our international colleagues will
help our profession, our industries, and our nation—and that’s our
mission at AIAA.
Bob Dickman
bobd@aiaa.org

CONGRESSMAN GRIFFITH (AL-5) ADDRESSED THE ALABAMA/MISSISSIPPI

SECTION IN SEPTEMBER
Congressman Parker Griffith (AL-5) spoke to the Alabama/Mississippi Section in Huntsville on
3 September at a luncheon for over 140 local AIAA members. He discussed the future of
NASA Human Space Flight and Missile Defense Programs in Huntsville.
Congressman Griffith spoke about how keeping space program funded at its highest lev-
els are paramount to U.S. success. He stated, “In our world’s history, he who has had the
high-ground, has always had the upper hand. . . . American supremacy in space equals
supremacy in intelligence, missile defense, future technologies, education, trade and eco-
nomic development.”
He then answered detailed policy and legislative questions on programs of key impor-
tance to Huntsville, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, and the U.S. Army Missile
Defense Agency.

AIAA BULLETIN /NOVEMBER 2009 B5

November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 6

AIAA HISTORIC AEROSPACE SITES RECOGNIZES

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE
In February 2009, Eglin Air Force Base, FL, was recognized as
an AIAA Historic Aerospace Site for its rich heritage of aviation
research and development activities and operational history. The
AIAA Historic Aerospace Sites Committee was established in 1999
by the AIAA Board of Directors to recognize and preserve notewor-
thy and significant cultural and technological contributions made in
both aeronautics and astronautics. The 2009 AIAA Historic
Aerospace Sites Committee was responsible for this year’s selec-
tions, which included Eglin AFB, NASA Ames Research Center, the
North American/Rockwell Downey Industrial Site, the Igor Sikorsky
Airport and Vought-Sikorsky Plant, and the Honeysuckle
Creek/Tidbinbilla/Orroral Valley Tracking Stations in Australia.
Since 1935, Eglin Air Force Base has played a prominent role in
U.S. air power history. It originated as the Valparaiso Bombing and
Gunnery Base, activated on 14 June 1935, under the command of
Capt. Arnold H. Rich, and was renamed Eglin Field on 4 August
1937, in honor of Lt. Col. Frederick I. Eglin, U.S. Air Corps. The
two primary missions of the base during 1935 to 1941 were bomb-
ing and gunnery training for new pilots and testing of the Army Air
Corps aircraft and other aircraft systems. The Air Corps Tactical
School (ACTS) conducted its first gunnery training on 27 March
1936, and later the Tennessee and Alabama National Guard sent
units to the new base for training.
In 1940, the Department of Agriculture transferred nearly
400,000 acres of the Choctawhatchee National Forest to the War
Department, which gave Eglin room for an Air Corps Specialized
Flying School to conduct training missions and an Air Corps
Proving Ground to test aircraft and weapons. The Air Proving Armament Museum to celebrate this notable honor for Eglin Air
Ground Command (APGC), established in 19 May 1941, provided Force Base. The officiating party for the ceremony consisted of the
suitability testing of Air Force aircraft, armaments, and related sys- Air Force Program Executive Officer for Weapons and
tems between 1945 and 1957. In December 1957, the Air Force Commander of the Air Armament Center, Maj. Gen. C.R. Davis;
combined the Air Proving Ground Command with the Air Force the AIAA Region II Director, Mr. Alan Lowrey; and the former Air
Armament Center to form the Air Proving Ground Center. The Force Historian, Dr. Richard Hallion, the keynote speaker. The
Center, now known as the Air Armament Center (AAC), built the chair for the AIAA Northwest Florida Section, Dr. Gregg Abate,
Eglin Gulf Test Range to allow use of airspace over part of the acted as Master of Ceremonies for the event. There are over 200
Gulf of Mexico for safe target impact of new air-delivered weapons. members of AIAA represented by the Northwest Florida Section,
With the advent of the 21st century, AAC and other organizations which spans from Lake City, FL, in the east to Pensacola, FL, in
now located at Eglin Air Force Base continue to develop, evolve, the west. Dr. Abate, who has served in the section for over 20
and provide state-of-the-art munitions and supporting system test- years and has been chair for the last two, states, “It is safe to say
ing, personnel training, and other combat support capabilities for that the selection of Eglin AFB as a historic aerospace site is the
the Air Force, DOD, industry, and U.S. allies. single greatest accomplishment achieved by our section.” Local
A dedication ceremony including bronze plaque provided by the corporate contributors provided the bulk of the funding for the
national organization was held on 10 September, at the Air Force granite pedestal. The national organization, the local section in
cooperation with the the Eglin History, Protocol, and Public Affairs
Offices,and the AirForce Armament Museum and its foundation
organization, provided the pedestal, interior display, program, and
reception for this event.

Dr. Hallion, Mr. Lowrey, and Maj. Gen. C.R. Davis with plaque unveiling. Mr. Lowrey addressing the Eglin ceremony attendees.

B6 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

November09News.qxd 10/22/09 5:36 PM Page 7

TEACHERS EXPERIENCE AEROSPACE EDUCATION AT PASSPORT TO THE FUTURE

Teachers from around the country spent a day and a half at the Passport to the Future Teacher Workshop (sponsored by the Lockheed
Martin Corporation, held in conjunction with the 45th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit), learning how to bring
STEM lessons associated with aerospace engineering to their classroom. Sessions were taught by three AIAA Foundation Educator
Achievement winners, representatives from the National Institute of Aerospace, the Challenger Learning Center, Johns Hopkins Applied
Physics Lab, NASA Ames Research Center, Pitsco, and the AIAA Precollege Outreach Committee. The keynote address was given by Dr.
Mark Lewis, former Chief Scientist of the Air Force and Aerospace Department Chair at the University of Maryland.
A networking reception hosted by Lockheed Martin featured former astronaut, Bruce McCandless, who recounted his experiences in the
space program. A panel of female Lockheed Martin engineers spoke with the teachers about their jobs and what inspired them to take their
career paths.
For more information about STEM education resources available to educators through AIAA, please contact Lisa Bacon at lisab@aiaa.org.

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B7

November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 8

EDUCATION ALLEY AT AIAA SPACE 2009

CONFERENCE INSPIRES STUDENTS

For three days in September, over 2500 students, teachers, and

parents from throughout the Los Angeles area were inspired to
think about what the future of space exploration may hold for
them by attending this year’s “Education Alley.” Sponsored by
The Aerospace Corporation, The Boeing Company, the National
Institute of Aerospace, Raytheon, Wyle, SpaceX, and the X
PRIZE Foundation, the event was held in conjunction with the
AIAA SPACE 2009 Conference and Exposition in Pasadena.
Education Alley featured more than 20 exhibitors, and a wide
variety of fun and exciting hands-on activities. To see the virtual
exhibit hall, visit www.NIAnet.org/AIAAeducationalley.
The “STEM to Stars” Student Press Conference featured
employees and engineers from The Aerospace Corporation,
SpaceX, Wyle, and JPL, and student “reporters” quizzed them
about their jobs and how they prepared for them. There was Linda Butler from Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab helps future engi-
also a live television feed from NASA’s “DESERT RATS” robotic neers/scientists try on clean room suits.
testing in the Arizona desert, which enabled students from
around the country to participate in this exciting event. Dr. Scott
Parazynski, former NASA astronaut and Mt. Everest explorer, my students. Most of my students are from the lowest SES fami-
recounted his experiences exploring space and Earth. Also fea- lies. The field trip opened their eyes. In the classroom, we
tured were presentations from the Air Force Research learned about Mae Jemison, but my students never dreamed
Laboratory, The Aerospace Corporation, the National Air & that they would have a chance to shake hands with a real astro-
Space Museum Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, and NASA. naut. If you were there, you would see the stars inside my stu-
Volunteers from the San Gabriel, Los Angeles and Orange dents’ eyes!”
Country AIAA sections, AIAA Space TC members, SMC, The Over the last seven years, Education Alley has reached thou-
Aerospace Corporation, The Boeing Company, and Booz Allen sands of students. To find out about sponsorship opportunities
Hamilton served as tour guides and answered questions about for next year’s Education Alley, please contact Cecilia Capece
their careers, as students explored Education Alley and the at ceciliac@aiaa.org or 703.264.7570.
main exhibit halls. To learn more about AIAA pre-college programs that support
A West Vernon Elementary School teacher, Sungwan So, education in the “STEM” subjects of science, technology, engi-
commented on how inspiring Education Alley was: “Thank you neering, and mathematics, please contact Lisa Bacon at
very much for providing such a wonderful fieldtrip experience to lisab@aiaa.org or 703.264.7527.

Students from Pasadena enjoyed their field trip to this year’s Education Alley.

B8 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 9
AIAA FOUNDATION ANNOUNCES WINNERS OF ITS
ANNUAL GRADUATE AWARDS
AIAA and the AIAA Foundation are pleased to announce the recip-
ients of the 2009 AIAA Foundation Graduate Awards. The founda-
tion presents 14 graduate awards to students enrolled in graduate
programs in aeronautics and astronautics.
Each year, the AIAA Foundation presents four Orville and
Wilbur Wright Graduate Awards. These $10,000 awards, given in
memory of Orville and Wilbur Wright’s achievements and contribu-
tions to the evolution of flight, are presented to students complet-
ing master’s or doctoral thesis work, or to students who have com-
pleted a master’s research project. The winners are:
• Daniel Grebow, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
• Jacqueline O’Connor, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
• Jason Roadman, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
• David Weise, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO
The Foundation also presents a series of $5,000 awards spon-
sored by various AIAA Technical Activity Committees.
• Xiaoli Bai, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, is the recipi-
ent of the John Leland Atwood Graduate Award. The award, spon-
sored by endowments from Rockwell and Boeing North America,
Inc., and named in memory of John Leland “Lee” Atwood, former
chief executive officer of Rockwell, North American, is presented to
a student actively engaged in research in the areas covered by the
65 technical committees of AIAA.
• Justin Locke, The Pennsylvania State University, State College,
PA, is the recipient of the Martin Summerfield Propellants and
Combustion Award. The AIAA Foundation presents this award, in
memory of Dr. Martin Summerfield, an early American rocket pio-
neer and co-founder of Aerojet, to a student actively pursuing
research on propellants and combustion.
AIAA FOUNDATION’S UNDERGRADUATE SCHOLARSHIPS
AIAA and the AIAA Foundation are pleased to announce the
recipients of the 2009 undergraduate scholarships. Thirty scholar-
ships are awarded to students enrolled in undergraduate degree
programs in aeronautics and astronautics.
The AIAA Foundation presents two $2,500 Next Century of
Flight scholarships to students pursuing degrees in aeronautical
science. The winners are:
• Mark Cutler, senior, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
• Daniel Ironside, senior, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO
The Foundation presents five $2,000 scholarships named for
past presidents of AIAA. The winners are:
• Robert L. Crippin Scholarship: Adrian Akerson, senior, Embry
Riddle Aeronautical University, Prescott, AZ
• Sam F. Iacobellis Scholarship: Ashley Clark, senior, University of
Washington, Seattle, WA
• E. C. “Pete” Aldridge Scholarship: Shelly Jiang, senior, University
of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
• L. S. “Skip” Fletcher Scholarship: David Karp, senior, Princeton
University, Princeton, NJ
The AIAA Foundation presents two $2,000 scholarships,
named for individuals who have contributed greatly to the field of
aerospace science. The winners are:
• Dr. James Ranking Digital Avionics Scholarship: Brent Pomeroy,
senior, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY
• Leatrice Gregory Pendray Scholarship (This scholarship is present-
ed to the Foundation’s top female scholarship applicant): Anne
Rush, senior, University of Alabama, Huntsville, AL
The Foundation also presents three $2,000 scholarships
named for the presenting AIAA Technical Committee.
• Daren Pais, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, is the recipient of
the Guidance, Navigation, and Control Graduate Award. The
Guidance, Navigation and Control Technical Committee presents
this award to a student engaged in work in conjunction with the
committee’s subject areas.
• Vijay Ramasubramanian, University of Maryland, College Park,
MD, is the recipient of the Gordon C. Oates Air Breathing
Propulsion Award. The AIAA Air Breathing Technical Activities
Committee presents this award, named in honor of the late Gordon
C. Oates, a professor in the Department of Aeronautics at the
University of Washington, to a student researching in the field of air
breathing propulsion.
• Carl Seubert, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, is the recipient
of the Willy Z. Sadeh Graduate Student Award in Space
Engineering and Space Sciences. The Sadeh family presents this
award, name for Dr. Willy Z. Sadeh, a pioneer in the field of space
engineering, to a student specializing in space-based research.
In addition to its named awards, the AIAA Foundation presents
four awards for outstanding scholarship in fields covered by AIAA’s
65 technical committees. These open topic winners are:
• Aizaz Bhuiyan, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, for his
research topic “High Resolution Optical Measurements in
Aerodynamic and Propulsion Systems”
• Jonathan Mihaly, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena,
CA, for his research topic “Hypervelocity Impact”
• Johanna Przyblowski, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, CA, for her research topic “High Energy Ions in Electric
Thrusters”
• Dustin Wood, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, for his research
topic “Advanced Combined Cycle Propulsion”
For information on the AIAA Graduate Awards program, please
contact Stephen Brock, AIAA Student Program Specialist, at
703.264.7536 or at stephenb@aiaa.org.
Space Transportation Technical Committee
• Rachel Oberto, senior, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Digital Avionics Technical Activities Committee
• Clayton Bargsten, junior, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
Liquid Propulsion Technical Activities Committee
• Judith Bailey, senior, Auburn University, Auburn, AL
The Foundation presents nine $2,000 scholarships to juniors in
their next to last year of undergraduate study. The winners are:
• Sean Currey, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
• Lisselle Joseph, The Virginia State University and Polytechnic
University, Roanoke, VA
• Adam Keith, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
• Stephanie Lengyel, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University,
Prescot, AZ
• Scott Neidrick, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona, FL
• Nathaniel Price, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
• Nyika Simbarashe, University of Missouri—Columbia, MO
The Foundation presents five $2,000 scholarships to sopho-
mores in their third to last year of undergraduate study. The win-
ners are:
• Chibueze Amanchukwu, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
• David Austerberry, Creighton University, Omaha, NE
• Kaylan Burleigh, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
• Libin Daniel, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Prescot, AZ
• Noel Esenwa, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
• Gretchen Herberling, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY
• Kyle Willis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA
For more information on the AIAA Undergraduate Scholarship
Program, please contact Stephen Brock, AIAA Student Program
Specialist, at 703.264.7536 or stephenb@aiaa.org.
AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B9
November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 10
PENINA AXELRAD HONORED WITH 2009 KEPLER
AWARD
Penina Axelrad, professor of Aerospace Engineering Sciences
at the University of Colorado, was honored on 25 September at
The Institute of Navigation GNSS 2009 conference with the pres-
tigious 2009 Kepler Award. Axelrad’s achievements were
described by the selection committee as “continued contributions
in the field of satellite navigation; dedication to the education of
future generations of navigation engineers; and extensive service
to professional societies including The Institute of Navigation.”
Axelrad has an extensive history of significant contributions to
the field of satellite navigation, including receiver autonomous
GPS integrity monitoring (RAIM), GPS bistatic radar, satellite for-
mation flying using GPS, GPS-based orbit and satellite attitude
determination, and multipath characterization, modeling and miti-
gation, according to ION. She has authored or co-authored 37
peer reviewed journal papers relating to satellite navigation, writ-
ten 85 conference papers, and served as an author/associate
editor of AIAA’s GPS “Blue Book”—the two-volume textbook
Global Positioning System: Theory and Applications.
Axelrad has been educating navigation engineers for the past
17 years at the University of Colorado. Her current research
interests include GPS technology and applications for real-time
satellite orbit and attitude determination, GPS surface reflections,
GPS multipath characterization and mitigation, orbital dynamics
and spacecraft rendezvous. She is a senior member of The
Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, a Fellow of AIAA
and The Institute of Navigation, and is a past president of The
Institute of Navigation. She was the recipient of the 1996 AIAA
Sperry Award and 2003 ION Tycho Brahe Award. She received a
Ph.D. in Aeronautics and Astronautics from Stanford University
and S.B. and S.M. degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING PRESENTED
EXTRAORDINARY IMPACT AWARDS
During its 2009 annual meeting, the National Academy of
Engineering (NAE) presented two awards for extraordinary
impacts on the engineering profession. The Academy’s Founders
Award was given to John Casani, who has made important con-
tributions to deep space exploration, and Sheila Widnall
received the Arthur M. Bueche Award for leadership in expand-
ing the opportunities for women and minorities in engineering.
The awards were presented at a ceremony on 4 October.
Academy’s Founders Award Winner
AIAA Honorary Fellow Casani is an NAE member and special
assistant to the director at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory
(JPL). He received the Founders Award for “distinguished innova-
tion and leadership in robotic spacecraft engineering and project
management that has enabled the first four decades of planetary
and deep space exploration.” The award recognizes outstanding
professional, educational, and personal achievement to the benefit
of society, and it includes $2,500 and a gold medallion.
Since 1956, Casani’s career has spanned the entire history of
planetary exploration at JPL, and he is considered by his peers to
have defined planetary flight project management. In addition to
technical work, Casani has served as an ambassador for the deep
space program, publishing many articles in both professional jour-
nals and the popular press, and has used frequent television inter-
views to excite the public about the nation’s space program.
Casani has received a number of citations from NASA,
including the Outstanding Leadership Medal twice for his contri-
butions as Voyager project manager, and later for leadership as
spacecraft system manager of the 1973 Mariner 10 Mission to
B10 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009
Venus and Mercury; and the Exceptional Service Medal for sig-
nificant engineering achievements contributing to the Mariner 4
Mission to Mars. He has been presented with the AIAA Space
System Award. He also received the National Space Club’s
Astronautics Engineer Award for his “outstanding direction of the
Voyager project.”
Bueche Award Winner
AIAA Fellow Sheila Widnall, a member of NAE and Institute
Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was pre-
sented the Arthur M. Bueche Award for “a remarkable academic
career in fluid dynamics combined with the highest levels of pub-
lic service, and for championing the role of women in engineer-
ing.” She will receive $2,500 and a gold medallion in recognition
of her active involvement in determining U.S. science and tech-
nology policy, especially in relation to women and minorities, and
contributing to the enhancement of the relationship between gov-
ernment and universities.
Widnall served as secretary of the Air Force from 1993 to
1997 and was the first woman to lead a branch of the U.S. mili-
tary. During her time in this role, she co-chaired the Department
of Defense Task Force on Discrimination and Sexual
Harassment. The report of the military’s equal opportunity system
written by this task force was the most in-depth investigation of
this issue up to that time and led to far-reaching changes in mili-
tary policy.
Widnall became the first woman to serve as president of AIAA
in 2000. She also served as president of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in 1988. It
was in this role at AAAS that Widnall delivered her influential
“Voices from the Pipeline” speech, a watershed moment in equity
issues for women in science and engineering.
In addition to her efforts in expanding roles for women and
minorities, Widnall has an impressive background in fluid
mechanics, performing groundbreaking research on aerodynam-
ics of high-speed ground transportation vehicles, helicopter
noise, aircraft-wake studies, and turbulence. She was elected to
the NAE in 1985 and served as the NAE vice president from
1998 to 2005.
Widnall received the AIAA Lawrence Sperry Achievement
Award in 1972; the Outstanding Achievement Award in 1975
from the Society of Women Engineers; the Washburn Award in
1987 from the Boston Museum of Science; and the NAE
Distinguished Service Award in 1993. She was inducted into the
Women in Aviation Pioneer Hall of Fame in 1996; was named
New Englander of the Year by the New England Council in 1996;
and received the Spirit of St. Louis Medal from the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers in 2001.
CALL FOR PAPERS
ICNPAA 2010 World Congress: Mathematical
Problems in Engineering, Sciences and Aerospace
INPE, Brazil, 30 June–3 July 2010
On behalf of the International Organizing Committee, it
gives us great pleasure to invite you to the ICNPAA 2010
World Congress: 8th International Conference on
Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Aerospace and
Sciences, which will be held at INPE (National Institute
for Space Research), Sao Jose dos Campos (SP), Brazil,
during 30 June–3 July 2010. This is an AIAA cospon-
sored event.
Visit the Web site: www.icnpaa.com for all details.
November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 11
OBITUARY
AIAA Fellow Died in June
Theodore H. H. Pian, a retired aeronautics and astronautics
professor and prominent researcher in the field of finite element
methods, died on 20 June. He was 90.
A native of Shanghai, China, Theodore Hsueh Huang Pian
grew up in Pianjin and earned a bachelor’s degree in engineer-
ing in 1940 at Tsing Hua University in Beijing. After graduating,
Dr. Pian worked in Chinese aircraft manufacturing on the Burma
Road during World War II before coming to the United States in
1943.
In 1944, he earned a master’s degree in aeronautics and astro-
nautics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and briefly
worked as a stress analyst for Curtiss Airplane Division in Buffalo.
The same year, he joined the Marines in anticipation of serving as
a translator for the American troops in the event they returned to
China to liberate the country from Japanese control. The war
ended in 1945 before Dr. Pian could be deployed.
In 1945, Dr. Pian returned to MIT to work on his doctorate in
aeronautics and astronautics, which was awarded in 1948.
Remaining at MIT, Dr. Pian rose from teaching assistant and
research associate in the department of aeronautics and astro-
nautics to full professor in 1966. As a professor at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Theodore H. H. Pian was
known for his prolific research and willingness to lend guidance to
students and colleagues.
Former colleagues said Dr. Pian focused his research at MIT
on the structural analysis of aircraft, including elastic-plastic creep,
shear-lag, stresses, and the bending of plates. Many techniques
he helped to develop are still in use.
During his career, Dr. Pian lectured at 46 universities in the
United States, as well as at 55 other universities in countries
including China, Japan, India, Israel, Germany, Britain, and
Canada. He also served as a visiting professor at 10 foreign uni-
versities and was named an honorary professor at several engi-
neering schools and aeronautical institutes in China.
In 1974, Dr. Pian received the von Karman Memorial Prize for
outstanding contributions to aerospace structural-material technol-
ogy, one of many honors he modestly accepted during his career.
By the time he retired, Dr. Pian had authored more than 200 pro-
fessional papers and wrote or edited several books in the field of
finite element methods. He was a member of numerous national
and international professional societies, including the National
Academy of Engineering and AIAA.
To submit articles to the AIAA Bulletin, please contact your
staff liaison with Section, Committee, Honors and Awards,
Event, Precollege, or Student information. They will review
and forward the information to the AIAA Bulletin Editor. See
the AIAA Directory on page B1 for contact information.
To include photographs of AIAA activities and members,
we ask that you send high-resolution color photographs
(300 dpi jpeg or tiff images). (Hint: Don’t take something off
the Web or something that starts out at low resolution and
simply change it to 300 dpi. Original artwork must be of high
resolution.)
AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B11
November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 12
CALL FOR AWARD NOMINATIONS
Recognize the achievements of your colleagues by nominating
them for an award. Nominations are now being accepted for the
following awards, and must be received at AIAA Headquarters no
later than 1 February 2010.
The nomination form can be downloaded from www.aiaa.org,
or AIAA members may submit nominations online by logging into
www.aiaa.org, “MY AIAA.”
Aerospace Guidance, Navigation, and Control Award
Presented to recognize important contributions in the field of
guidance, navigation, and control.
Aerospace Power Systems Award
Presented for a significant contribution in the broad field of aero-
space power systems, specifically as related to the application of
engineering sciences and systems engineering to the production,
storage, distribution, and processing of aerospace power.
Aircraft Design Award
Presented to a design engineer or team for the conception, defi-
nition, or development of an original concept leading to a signifi-
cant advancement in aircraft design or design technology.
de Florez Award for Flight Simulation
This award is presented for an outstanding individual achieve-
ment in the application of flight simulation to aerospace training,
research, and development.
Energy Systems
Presented for a significant contribution in the broad field of ener-
gy systems, specifically as related to the application of engineering
sciences and systems engineering to the production, storage, dis-
tribution, and conservation of energy.
F. E. Newbold V/STOL Award
Presented to recognize outstanding creative contributions to the
advancement and realization of powered lift flight in one or more of
the following areas: initiation, definition and/or management of key
V/STOL programs; development of enabling technologies including
critical methodology; program engineering and design; and/or
other relevant related activities or combinations thereof which have
advanced the science of powered lift flight.
George M. Low Space Transportation Award
This award honors the achievements in space transportation by
Dr. George M. Low, who played a leading role in planning and
executing all of the Apollo missions, and originated the plans for
the first manned lunar orbital flight, Apollo 8.
Hap Arnold Award for Excellence in Aeronautical Program
Management
The award is presented to an individual for outstanding contribu-
tions in the management of a significant aeronautical or aeronauti-
cal related program or project.
Mechanics and Control of Flight Award
This award is presented for an outstanding recent technical or
scientific contribution by an individual in the mechanics, guidance,
or control of flight in space or the atmosphere.
Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Award
Presented to an individual for outstanding contributions to the
development and/or application of techniques of multidisciplinary
design optimization in the context of aerospace engineering.
Otto C. Winzen Lifetime Achievement Award
The award is presented for outstanding contributions and
achievements in the advancement of free flight balloon systems or
related technologies.
B12 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009
Piper General Aviation Award
This award is presented for outstanding contributions leading to
the advancement of general aviation.
Space Science Award
The Space Science Award is presented to an individual for
demonstrated leadership of innovative scientific investigations
associated with space science missions.
Space Operations and Support Award
This award is presented for outstanding efforts in overcoming
space operations problems and assuring success, and recognizes
those teams or individuals whose exceptional contributions were
critical to an anomaly recovery, crew rescue, or space failure.
Space Systems Award
The Space Systems Award is presented to recognize outstand-
ing achievements in the architecture, analysis, design, and imple-
mentation of space systems.
von Braun Award for Excellence in Space Program
Management
This award gives national recognition to an individual(s) for out-
standing contributions in the management of a significant space or
space-related program or project.
AIAA proudly participates with other technical societies and
organizations in the selection of recipients for the following awards.
The deadline date for nominations is shown below.
Robert J. Collier Trophy Award
Nominations due to AIAA by 15 January
Presented for the greatest achievement in aeronautics or astro-
nautics in America, with respect to improving the performance, effi-
ciency, or safety of air or space vehicles, the value of which has
been thoroughly demonstrated by actual use during the preceding
year. NAA and AIAA sponsor the award.
J. Leland Atwood Award
Nominations due to AIAA by 1 January
This award is bestowed annually upon an aerospace engineer-
ing educator in recognition of outstanding contributions to the pro-
fession. AIAA and ASEE sponsor the award.
Daniel Guggenheim Medal
Nominations due to AIAA by 1 February
The industry-renowned Daniel Guggenheim Medal was estab-
lished in 1929 for the purpose of honoring persons who make
notable achievements in the advancement of aeronautics. AIAA,
ASME, SAE, and AHS sponsor the award.
Elmer A. Sperry Award
Nominations due to AIAA by 1 February
The award is given in recognition of a distinguished engineering
contribution, which, through application proved in actual service,
has advanced the art of transportation whether by land, sea or air.
AIAA, IEEE, SAE, ASME, SNAME, and ASCE sponsor the award.
William Littlewood Memorial Lecture
Nominations due to AIAA by 1 February
The William Littlewood Memorial Lecture perpetuates the mem-
ory of William Littlewood, who was renowned for the many signifi-
cant contributions he made to the design of an operational
requirements for civil transport aircraft. The topics for the Lecture,
which is presented in even years, shall deal with a broad phase of
civil air transportation considered of current interest and major
importance.
For further information, contact Carol Stewart, Manager, AIAA
Honors & Awards, at carols@aiaa.org or at 703.264.7623.
November09News.qxd 10/15/09 9:58 AM Page 13

CAREER AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP—LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR THE FUTURE OF AEROSPACE
Join the Career and Workforce Development Committee in this exciting workshop. Beginning with Keynote Speaker Jim Skakoon,
author of Unwritten Laws of Engineering, the morning sessions are focused on personal development topics and activities focused
on enhancing your career. The afternoon sessions shift to workforce development topics and activities to develop and grow the
aerospace workforce for the near and long term. If you are interested in laying the foundation for your next career move or in help-
ing cultivate the next generation of aerospace engineers, this is the workshop to attend.
Keynote Speaker Jim Skakoon, author of Unwritten Laws of Engineering
Networking
Navigating Unplanned Career Changes
Developing Goals & Setting the Course
Career Enhancement Tools & Resources—The AIAA Toolbox
Building a Great Resume
Enhancing Career Value
Planting the Seeds—Engineers as Mentors
Supply Chain Management—Repairing STEM Education
Comparison & Analysis of Degrees for the Aerospace Field
AIAA Resources for Education Outreach / Workforce Development
This workshop will be held on Tuesday, 5 January, in conjunction with the 48th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit in
Orlando, FL.

AIAA WELCOMES NEW MEMBERS, JOINED JULY/AUGUST 2009

Region I Long Island David McReavy Joseph Bryant Region II Central Florida
Kiel Davis Ricardo Mediavilla Christian Chilan Steven Barney
Baltimore Alabama/Mississippi
Sean Michael Frawley Kevin Missar Gregory E. Colbert Steven Barnoske
Andrew Goldfinger David K. Austin
Edward D. Horowitz Richard Montiel Addison Dennis Cole Sanjay Chopra
Thomas E. Hammel David D. Chafee
Jerome Kator Veronica Morgan-McHenry Kim Constantikes Roben David
Robert Leibfried Kent T. Chojnacki
Richard Krause Dusty Lee Motz Tarek El-Wakil Raymond Hernandez, Jr.
Kurt Lindstrom Kenneth G. Davis
Joseph Mitchell Shanir Nasridashi Helen Greiner Anthony Marciniak
Bruce Macomber, Jr. Bill Dickerhoff
Hiroshi Ogawa Christopher Netwall Seiji Hayashi Emilio Rivera, Jr.
Daniel Martinec Jan Phillippe Eiras
James Nugent Thomas Hoffman Mark Stephen
Arber Masati National Capital Vernie Erwin
Michael Osborn, II Steven Jilcott, Jr.
Brian Morse Gino Antonelli Thomas W. Hancock Greater New Orleans
Kathleen K. Paige Anne M. Joyce
Reni Raju George Assaf Eric W. Herbert David Regan
Neelam D. Patel Konrad Juethner
Carl Shanholtz Maggie Atkinson Richard Howard Roger Simpson
Darrell Frederick Paul, Jr. Laura Major
Joseph Skura Mike Baden-Campbell Robert L. Jassey Kern Witcher
Robert A. Pearce Christopher M. Moe
Robert Staniewicz Athina Balta Douglas Clement Jones
Mark J. Piegza Neil Mushaweh
Robert Steele Nathan Bickford Linda S. Kezer Northwest Florida
Nathan Rickman Michael Pien
Ken Tappe Perry C. Casto, Jr. John E. Lowery Lucas Bennett
Claire Robinson Leonard Polizotto
David Allen Termohlen, Sr. Sharon Chase James Russ McMurry Tom Brantley
Joseph Ellery Roehl Ajay Raghavan
Matthew Van Orden Carolyn Cross Keith Ryan James Clifton
Juan Roman-Velazquez Mark Rumizen
James DeArmon James Michael Spires Christopher T. Denzer
Central Pennsylvania John C. Rood Rosanna Sattler
Erin Driscoll Stanley Thomas Mark Green
J. Eric Boyer Gregg A. Rubinstein Trent Shackelford
Leonard A. Dudzinski Bruce Tiller Jeffery Hess
Adam Joseph Kelly William Schneider Arthur Tardif
James Brian Duffy Michael Turok Anthony Illig
Neeraj R. Kumbhakarna Lance Sherry Brian Ticknor
Pat DuMoulin Billy J. Walker Stephen E Kelley
Tongxun Yi James A. Smith Kenneth Veduccio
Darren Durkee Justin L. Walls Mitchell Kieffer
Marcus Smith Glenn Walker, Jr.
Connecticut Leona Ebbay Jerod E. Whisenant Michael McGlockton
Chris Sortzi
Robert Gitzen Danner Allen Eramya Niagara Frontier Matthew B. Wilson Eric Soarborough
Roy Stephan
Jesse Newman Chris D. Erickson Dana Beyeler Zachary A. Stolp
Thomas Sullivan
Eelco Scholte Thomas Farrell Heidi Garrison Atlanta Eric Werkowitz
William Szymczak
Domingo Sepulveda Arthur Richard Feinberg Richard L. Boyd Richard Young
Nathan Taylor
Meiliang Wu James Frelk Northeastern New York Rashaad E. T. Jones
Kris K. Teaford Palm Beach
Elaine Gresham Travis Slack Brian Kestner
Greater Philadelphia Troy Tschirhart Scott Matthew Armstrong
Joan Grewe Giuseppe Messina
Eric Harkleroad Ellison Urban Northern New Jersey Matthew Long
Katherine Harback Eric Upton
Kyle McDaniel Arthur Verbin Paul Boldt Anthony Pollak
Dany Harel Aaron Warnke
Dennis J. Reinhardt Cinda Verbin Ronald W. Bounds
David T. Hart Greg Walker Savannah
Sergey Semenov James W. Jud Cape Canaveral
Michael Hatfield Erin Michelle Walter Heather Burke
David Van Hise Daniel Kling Maryum F. Ahmed
Robert V. Hemm, Jr. Eric Wieman Joseph T. Lombardo
Dipankar Sahoo Marvin E. Gardner, Jr.
Hampton Roads John Higginbotham Aaron Winters Sharath K. Reddy
Peter Kent
Sherilyn A. Brown Ralph Iovinelli Michael Wood Southern New Jersey Mark Wilbert Monaghan
Aaron Finch Craig M. Johnson Kenneth Wright Robert E. Becker Tennessee
Derek D. Nolek
Shirley Jones Maureen Keegan Michael Y. Yang Norman J. Malnak Don M. Clark
Gary Rohrkaste
Owen Lewis Denney J . Keys Melba York Howard Pearlman Quinton Hunt
Steven Smith
Ty Marien Zaman Khan Tai Sen Zuang Charlie Zimmerman Cindy McCoy
Jessica Tandy
Jeffrey Mecham Dou Long Christopher Vallee
Ryan Neuhart Howard A. MacEwen New England Southern Tier Carolina
Mark Markovetzki Philippe A. Bonnefoy Andrew Berner Continued in December 09
Ray Rhew Brent Barbee
Harry I. Martin, Jr. Michelle Boudreau Casey Carter Bulletin
Donald Streater Aaron Herrnstein
Hazari I. Syed Julio E. Martinez De Andino Claire Bryant N. Eva Wu Johnston W. Peeples

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B13

New and
Forthcoming Titles
AIAA eBooks!
More than 200 AIAA books—including formerly out-of-print titles—are now available in e-book format for viewing online
or downloading to your computer. Purchase chapters or the entire book. Check them out today at http://ebooks.aiaa.org.

From RAINBOW to GUSTO: Stealth and the Design of the Computational Modelling and Simulation of Aircraft and
Lockheed Blackbird the Environment: Volume I: Platform Kinematics and
Paul A. Suhler Synthetic Environment
Library of Flight Series Dominic J. Diston
2009, 300 pages, Paperback AIAA Education Series
ISBN-13: 978-1-60086-712-5 2009, 384 pages, Hardback
AIAA Member Price: $29.95 ISBN: 978-1-60086-704-0
List Price: $39.95 AIAA Member Price: $74.95
List Price: $94.95
Out of This World: The New Field of Space Architecture
A S. Howe and Brent Sherwood, with cover art by Syd Mead Finite Element Structural Analysis: New Concepts
J.S. Przemieniecki, Air Force Institute of Technology (Ret.)
Library of Flight Series
2009, 400 pages, Hardback AIAA Education Series
ISBN-13: 978-1-56347-982-3 August 2009, 138 pages, Hardback
AIAA Member Price: $89.95 ISBN-13: 978-1-56347-997-7
List Price: $119.95 AIAA Member Price: $69.95
List Price: $89.95
Proceedings of the 50th Colloquium on the Law of Outer
Space Fundamentals and Applications of Modern Flow Control
Conference Proceeding Series, 1 volume Ronald D. Joslin and Daniel Miller
2008, Hardback Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 231
ISBN-13: 978-1-56347-962-5 2009, 231 pages, Hardback
AIAA Member Price: $89.95 ISBN: 978-1-56347-983-0
List Price: $140.00 AIAA Member Price: $79.95
List Price: $104.95
Aircraft Engine Controls: Design, System Analysis, and
Health Monitoring Link Fundamentals of Kalman Filtering: A Practical Approach,
Link C. Jaw, Scientific Monitoring, Inc. and Jack D. Third Edition
Mattingly, Mattingly Consulting Paul Zarchan and Howard Musoff, MIT Lincoln Laboratory
AIAA Education Series Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 232
2009, 384 pages, Hardback 2009, 882 pages, Hardback
ISBN: 978-1-60086-705-7 ISBN: 978-1-60086-718-7
AIAA Member Price: $74.95 AIAA Member Price: $104.95
List Price: $99.95 List Price: $134.95

Analytical Mechanics of Space Systems, Second Edition Selected Aerothermodynamic Design Problems of
Hanspeter Schaub, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Hypersonic Flight Vehicles
University and John L. Junkins, Texas A&M University Ernst H. Hirschel and Claus Weiland
AIAA Education Series Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics Series, Vol. 229
2009, 800 pages, Hardback 2009, 540 pages, Hardback
ISBN: 978-1-60086-721-7 ISBN: 978-1-56347-990-8
AIAA Member Price: $79.95 AIAA Member Price: $89.95
List Price: $104.95 List Price: $119.95

Small Satellites: Past, Present, and Future

View complete descriptions H. Helvajian and S. Janson, The Aerospace Corporation
and order 24 hours a day at Aerospace Press Series
2009, 876 pages, Hardback
www.aiaa.org/new ISBN: 978-1-884989-22-3
AIAA Member Price: $114.95
List Price: $149.95

B14 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

 AIAA Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems Conference
New Directions in Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems
SECRET/U.S. ONLY
20–21 January 2010
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, CA

Synopsis
The AIAA Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems Conference will offer an excellent opportunity to hear senior Department of
Defense, Army, Navy, and Air Force leadership, Congressional staff, and other noted authorities from the strategic and tactical missile
community speak about the most important issues and challenges at hand. The conference offers a careful balance between policy and
programs, as speakers explore budget challenges, emerging requirements, threats, industrial base, and other issues. A question-and-
answer period will follow each presentation to permit audience interaction with our national security leadership and with those charged
with the responsibility of keeping it strong.
Program session topics include:
• National defense priorities,
• The threat,
• Acquisition reforms and guiding principles,
• User and provider perspectives on strategic and tactical missile programs and on missile defense programs, and
• Research and development efforts and opportunities
This important conference promises to be invaluable to industry and government personnel concerned with offensive and defensive
missile systems.

Special Events Accompanying Persons’ Program

Registration Reception
A light reception will be held during registration hours on
Tuesday, 19 January, 1700–1900 hrs, in the Pebble/Beach
Rooms at the Hyatt Regency Monterey.
Welcome Reception
A welcome reception will be held Wednesday, 20 January,
1800–1930 hrs, in the Monterey Grand Ballroom at the Hyatt
Regency Monterey. The cost of the reception is included in the
conference registration fee where indicated. Additional tickets
may be purchased upon registration or at the AIAA on-site regis-
tration desk.
Continental Breakfasts
Continental breakfasts for all attendees will be available
Wednesday and Thursday, 20 and 21 January, at 0700 hrs at
Naval Postgraduate School.
Luncheons
Luncheons for conference participants will be held
Wednesday, 20 January, 1230–1315 hrs, and Thursday,
21 January, 1145–1245 hrs, in Hermann Hall at the Naval
Postgraduate School. The cost of the luncheons is included in
the conference registration fee where indicated. Additional tick-
ets may be purchased upon registration or at the AIAA on-site
registration desk.
Networking Coffee Breaks
Networking coffee breaks for conference participants will be
held Wednesday and Thursday mornings and afternoons at
Naval Postgraduate School. Times are indicated in the program.
AIAA would like to extend its thanks to ATK for
its support of this year’s conference.
Accompanying persons are invited to meet at 0900 hrs on
Wednesday, 20 January, at the Hyatt Regency Monterey.
Information about local attractions, activities, tours, shows, and
restaurants will be available. Coffee and tea will be served.
Registration Information
AIAA is committed to sponsoring world-class conferences on
current technical issues of the day in a safe and secure envi-
ronment. As such, beginning January 2010, all delegates will
be required to provide conference registrars with identification
prior to receiving a conference badge and associated materials.
All delegates need to provide a valid photo ID (driver’s license
or passport) when they check in. Students are also required to
show a valid student ID. We thank you for your participation and
look forward to a continued program of excellence in safe and
secure environments.
All participants are urged to register online at www.aiaa.org/
events/strattac, or you may use the registration form found on
page B19. Registering in advance says conference attendees
up to $200. A check made payable to AIAA or credit card infor-
mation must be included with your registration form. A PDF reg-
istration form is also available on the AIAA Web site. Print, com-
plete, and mail or fax the form with payment to AIAA. Address
information is provided.
Early-bird registration forms must be received by 21
December 2009, and regular registration forms wlll be accepted
until 15 January 2010. Preregistrants may pick up their materi-
als at the advance registration desk. All those not registered by
15 January 2010 may do so at the on-site registration desk. All
nonmember registration prices include a one-year AIAA mem-
bership. For questions, please contact Penny Ritch, conference
registrar, at 703.264.7510 or pennyr@aiaa.org.
Cancellations must be received no later than 28 December
2009. There is a $100 cancellation fee. Registrants who cancel

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B15

 General Chair
Blake Larson
President, Space Systems
ATK
Co-Chair
David G. Ahern
Director, Portfolio Systems
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L)
Program Chair
Joseph B. Connell
Director, Business Development
Missile Defense and Strategic Systems, Washington Operations
ATK
Program Committee
Stan Hlavka Ted Kerzie Vin Tedesco
Raytheon The Boeing Company Lockheed Martin Corporation
Rodney Keefer Bob Leginus Libby Yezzi
Northrop Grumman Corporation Cobham Analytic Solutions Aerojet
Randall Soileau
Modern Technology Solutions, Inc.

beyond this date or fail to attend the conference will forfeit the Tactical Missile Design—Integration
entire fee. AIAA Member $1095 $1200 $1275
The Security Clearance Certification Form is separate Nonmember $1195 $1300 $1375
from the conference registration form. Submitting a Security *Attend a two-day professional development course and
Clearance Certification Form does not register you for the con- receive free registration to the conference sessions with
ference. You must register through AIAA and submit a Security approved security clearance.
Clearance Certification Form to ATK.
All registrants must provide a valid photo I.D. when they check Extra Tickets
in. For student registration, valid student I.D. is required. Wednesday Luncheon $30
Registration fees are as follows: Wednesday Reception $75
Thursday Luncheon $30
By 21 Dec 09 22 Dec–12 Jan On-Site
Full Conference On-Site Registration Hours
AIAA Member $580 $680 $780 On-site registration will be held as follows:
Nonmember $715 $815 $915
Includes sessions, Wednesday and Thursday luncheons, and Monday, 18 January (courses only) 0730–1400 hrs Hyatt Regency
Tuesday and Wednesday receptions. Tuesday, 19 January 1700–1900 hrs Hyatt Regency
Wednesday, 20 January 0700–1700 hrs NPS
Full Conference—Full-Time Government Employee Thursday, 21 January 0700–1600 hrs NPS
Government $580 $680 $780
Includes sessions, Wednesday and Thursday luncheons, and Security Clearance Certification Form
Tuesday and Wednesday receptions. Attendance at this conference is restricted to U.S. citizens
who possess a final SECRET security clearance verified by the
Discounted Group Rate
Security Office Coordinator. It is extremely important that each
$522 per person $522 per person $522 per person
attendee (including aides, executive officers, assistants, etc.)
10% discount off AIAA member rate for 10 or more persons
properly complete and submit the Security Clearance Form
from the same organization who register and pay at the same
found on page B21. Mail or fax your completed form to:
time with a single form of payment. Includes sessions and all
catered events. Complete, typed list of registrants must be sub- Alliant Techsystems (ATK)
mitted to registrar prior to event or onsite. Visitor Control—AIAA
Attn: Dale Woolheater
Naval Postgraduate School Faculty and Students
P.O. Box 51203
$0 $0 $0
Pacific Grove, CA 93950-6203
Includes sessions only, with approved security clearance.
Fax: 831.372.1069
Online registration is unavailable for this option. Advance forms
SMO Code for JPAS: 1Y9606
received by fax or on-site registration only.
PHOTOGRAPHS ARE REQUIRED: Applicant’s name,
Professional Development Courses organization, and photograph will be used by ATK to issue the
Making Decisions in Missile Defense conference badge. Photo will be matched to security clearance
AIAA Member $1095 $1200 $1275 information. Submit a JPEG digital photograph (from middle
Nonmember $1195 $1300 $1375 of chest to top of head), 300 dpi or greater, 2” x 2” or larger in
size, to ATK via e-mail at dale.woolheater@atk.com.

B16 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

 Professional Development
AIAA is offering the following professional development short courses on 18–19 January 2010 in conjunction with the confer-
ence. Attend the short course and receive free registration to the conference (sessions only), with approved security clearance.
Making Decisions in Missile Defense (Instructor: Peter Mantle)
This course treats in a consistent manner the various key factors that must be taken into account when deciding on the form of
missile defense for any nation. It first takes the technical factors of performance, cost, schedule, and risk, and determines which
system out of a set of candidate systems provides the best solution based on a given set of easily understood criteria. These tech-
nical solutions are then modified, in a controlled and transparent manner, by such modifiers as political factors, national require-
ments and other less tangible factors. All factors are presented with historical background trends for contextual appreciation and
with known values that can be either statistical state-of-art values or user input values as needed. Engineering formulation of equa-
tions and data is provided sparingly where necessary for technical background and for sensitivity analyses.
Tactical Missile Design—Integration (Instructor: Eugene L. Fleeman)
This is a self-contained short course on the fundamentals of tactical missile design and integration. The course provides a sys-
tem-level, integrated method for missile aerodynamic configuration/propulsion design and analysis. It addresses the broad range
of alternatives in meeting performance, cost and other measures of merit requirements such as robustness, lethality, accuracy,
observables, survivability, and reliability. Methods are generally simple closed-form analytical expressions that are physics-based,
to provide insight into the primary driving parameters. Configuration-sizing examples are presented for rocket, turbojet, and ramjet-
powered missiles. Typical values of missile parameters and the characteristics of current operational missiles are discussed. Also
discussed are the enabling subsystems and technologies for tactical missiles, the current/projected state of the art, and launch
platform integration. Videos illustrate missile development activities and performance. Attendees will vote on the relative emphasis
of types of targets, types of launch platforms, topics, and one-on-one/round-table discussion.
For full course descriptions please visit www.aiaa.org/courses.

The deadline for receipt of all Security Clearance Certification
Forms is 28 December 2009. Early submittal of the Security
Clearance Certification Form is strongly recommended. Several
hundred forms must be reviewed and processed. To prevent
delays, please submit your form by the deadline. You will receive
an e-mail confirming receipt and approval of your clearance.
Note: Hand-carried Security Clearance Certification Forms
will not be accepted at the conference site.
The Security Clearance Certification Form is separate
from the conference registration form. Submitting a Security
Clearance Certification Form does not register you for the con-
ference. You must register through AIAA.
A security badge is required for admittance to the conference
sessions. Each attendee will be required to produce a driver’s
license or military I.D. prior to receiving a conference badge.
Security Restrictions: Notes may not be taken during the con-
ference sessions. No electronic devices—including cell phones,
radios, PDAs, laptops, cameras, video/audio recording equip-
ment, and pagers—are allowed in the session rooms.
Hotel Reservations
AIAA has made arrangements for a block of rooms at the
Hyatt Regency Monterey, One Old Golf Course Road, Monterey,
CA 93940, phone: 831.372.1234, fax: 831.375.3960. Room
rates are $169 per night for singles or doubles. Please identify
yourself with the AIAA conference. These rooms will be held for
AIAA until 28 December 2009 or until the block is full. After 28
December, any unused rooms will be released to the general
public. You are encouraged to book your hotel room early.
Government Employees—There are a limited number of sleep-
ing rooms available at the government per diem. I.D. is required.
Help Keep Our Expenses Down (And Yours Too!)
AIAA group rates for hotel accommodations are negotiated as
part of an overall contract that also includes meeting rooms and
other conference needs. Our total event costs are based in part
on meeting or exceeding our guaranteed minimum of group-rate
hotel rooms booked by conference participants. If we fall short,
our other event costs go up. Please help us keep the costs of
presenting this conference as low as possible—reserve your
room at the designated hotel listed in the Preliminary Program
and on our Web site, and be sure to mention that you’re with the
AIAA conference. Meeting our guaranteed minimum helps us
hold the line on costs, and that helps us keep registration fees
as low as possible. All of us at AIAA thank you for your help!
Meeting Site
The conference will be held at the Naval Postgraduate School
(NPS) in Monterey, CA. Described as the “greatest meeting
between land and sea,” Monterey County encompasses some
of California’s most stunning scenery and world-renowned
attractions, such as the Monterey Bay Aquarium, Cannery Row,
Fisherman’s Wharf, and 17-Mile Drive. For tourist information,
visit the Monterey County Convention & Visitors Bureau at www.
montereyinfo.org.
Car Rental
Hertz Car Rental Company saves members up to 15% on
car rentals. The discounts are available at all participating Hertz
locations in the United States, Canada, and where possible,
internationally. For worldwide reservations, call your travel
agent or Hertz directly at 800.654.2200 (U.S.) or 800.263.0600
(Canada). Mention the AIAA members savings CDP #066135 or
visit www.hertz.com. Don’t forget to include the CDP number.
Parking and Transportation
Parking facilities will not be available at Naval Postgraduate
School for conference attendees. The Hyatt Regency Monterey
is located directly across the highway from NPS. Shuttle bus
transportation will be available from the hotel conference center
to NPS each day of the conference. The cost is included in the
conference registration fee.
Certificate of Attendance
Certificates of Attendance are available for attendees who
request documentation at the conference itself. Please request
your copy at the on-site registration desk. AIAA offers this ser-
vice to serve the needs of the professional community better.
Claims of hours or applicability toward professional education
requirements are the responsibility of the participant.

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B17

 Preliminary Program
Wednesday, 20 January 2010 1700 hrs
Strategic and Tactical Missile Systems: The Joint View
0800 hrs Speaker: RADM Archer M. Macy, Jr., USN, Director, Joint
Welcome Remarks Integrated Air and Missile Defense Organization, Arlington, VA
Speaker: David Ahern, Director, Portfolio Systems Acquisition,
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L), U.S. 1745 hrs
Department of Defense, Washington, DC Remarks and Adjournment
Speaker: Blake Larson, President, Space Systems, ATK,
1800 hrs
Magna, UT
Welcome Reception
0815 hrs
Keynote Address: Policy Perspective Thursday, 21 January 2010
Speaker: The Honorable Michele Flournoy, Under Secretary 0800 hrs
of Defense for Policy, U.S. Department of Defense, Welcome Remarks and Announcements
Washington, DC (invited)
0815 hrs
0900 hrs View from Strategic Command
The Missile Threat Speaker: Gen Kevin P. Chilton, USAF, Commander, U.S.
Speaker: Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer Strategic Command, Offutt AFB, NE (invited)
for Science and Technology, National Intelligence Council,
Washington, DC 0900 hrs
View from U.S. Northern Command
0945 hrs Speaker: Gen Gene Renuart, Jr., USAF, Commander,
Networking Coffee Break NORAD and U.S. Northern Command, Peterson AFB, CO
1015 hrs 0945 hrs
Acquisition Priorities and Guiding Principles Networking Coffee Break
Speaker: The Honorable Ashton B. Carter, Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (AT&L), 1015 hrs
U.S. Department of Defense, Washington, DC (invited) Navy Strategic Missiles
Speaker: RADM Stephen E. Johnson, USN, Director,
1100 hrs Strategic Systems Programs, U.S. Navy, Arlington, VA (invited)
Congressional Perspective
Speaker: Charles J. Houy, Staff Director, Committee on 1100 hrs
Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC (invited) Air Force Strategic Missiles
Speaker: Lt Gen Frank G. Klotz, USAF, Commander, Air
1145 hrs Force Global Strike Command, Barksdale AFB, LA (invited)
R&D for Missile Systems
Speaker: Zachary J. Lemnois, Director, Defense Research 1145 hrs
and Engineering, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense Luncheon
(AT&L), U.S. Department of Defense, Washington, DC (invited)
1245 hrs
1230 hrs Navy Surface Tactical Missiles
Luncheon Speaker: RDML Frank Pandolfe, USN, Director, Surface
Warfare Division (N86), U.S. Navy, Washington, DC (invited)
1330 hrs
Missile Industrial Base Policy 1330 hrs
Speaker: Brett Lambert, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense Missile Defense: The User’s View
for Industrial Policy, U.S. Department of Defense, Speaker: LTG Kevin T. Campbell, USA, Commander, Army
Washington, DC Space and Missile Defense Command, Huntsville, AL (invited)
1415 hrs 1415 hrs
Missile Defense Networking Coffee Break
Speaker: LTG Patrick O’Reilly, USA, Director, Missile Defense
Agency, Washington, DC (invited) 1445 hrs
Air Force Tactical Missiles
1500 hrs Speaker: Maj Gen Charles Davis, USAF, Commander, Air
Networking Coffee Break Armament Center, and Program Executive Officer for
Weapons, Eglin AFB, FL
1530 hrs
Army Strike Missiles and Missile Defense 1530 hrs
Speaker: BG Genaro Dellarocco, USA, Program Executive Topic TBD
Officer Missiles and Space, U.S. Army, Redstone Arsenal, AL Speaker: TBD
1615 hrs 1615 hrs
Navy Strike Weapons Closing Remarks and Adjournment
Speaker: RDML William Shannon, USN, Program Executive
Officer Unmanned Airborne Systems and Weapons, U.S. Visit www.aiaa.org/events/strattac for the
most up-to-date list of speakers and program information.
Navy, Patuxent River, MD

B18 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

AIAA Strategic and Tactical
Missile Systems Conference
SECRET/U.S. ONLY

Monterey, California 20–21 January 2010

REGISTRATION FORM (or register online at www.aiaa.org)
All registrants please complete the information below.
Select your registration options below. Payment by check, credit
2 card, or money order—payable to AIAA—must accompany
registration. To pay the member rate, your membership must be in
good standing.
10403B

1 Conference Badge Name First/Given Name M.I. Last/Family Name

—REGISTRATION OPTIONS—
ALL REGISTRANTS MUST PROVIDE A VALID ID (DRIVER’S LICENSE OR PASSPORT) WHEN THEY
CHECK IN. FOR STUDENT REGISTRATION, VALID STUDENT ID IS ALSO REQUIRED.

Organization Name/Division/Mailstop Early Bird by 21 Dec 09 By 12 Jan 10 On-site

AIAA Non- AIAA Non- AIAA Non-

Address
Member Member Member Member Member Member

City State Country/Zip/Postal Code OPTION 1: FULL CONFERENCE

$580 $715 $680 $815 $780 $915
Includes sessions, Wednesday and Thursday luncheons, and Tuesday
E-mail Address Daytime Phone Number and Wednesday receptions.

Fax Number (include country code) Job Title/Rank

OPTION 2: FULL CONFERENCE—FULL-TIME GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
$580 $680 $780
Includes sessions, Wednesday and Thursday luncheons, and Tuesday
AIAA MEMBERSHIP: If you are registering for this conference or one of the collocated
3 professional development short courses at the nonmember rate, included with your registration
fee is one year of AIAA membership. Sign below and go to www.aiaa.org and click on My
and Wednesday receptions. Does not include AIAA membership
for nonmembers.

AIAA to update your contact information. OPTION 3: DISCOUNTED GROUP RATE

Included in your AIAA membership will be periodic communications about AIAA benefits, $522 per person $522 per person $522 per person
products, and services. Check here if you prefer not to receive membership information via 10% discount off AIAA member rate for 10 or more persons from the
e-mail. same organization who register and pay at the same time with a single
form of payment. Includes sessions and all catered events. Complete,
From time to time, we make member information available to companies whose products or
typed list of registrants must be submitted to registrar prior to event or
services may be of interest to you. Check here if you prefer not to have your name and onsite.
address used for non-AIAA mailings.
Signature_____________________________________________Date__________________ OPTION 4: NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL FACULTY AND STUDENTS
Check here if you are renewing or reinstating your membership. (You must pay full nonmember $0 $0 $0
conference fee.) Includes sessions only, with approved security clearance. Online
registration is unavailable for this option. Advance forms received by fax
or on-site registration only.
RETURN FORM TO:
4 1) For fastest, easiest 2) By mail: return completed 3) By fax: send the signed,
OPTION 5: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSE WITH FREE
CONFERENCE REGISTRATION*
service, register form with payment to completed form with credit
Making Decisions in Missile Defense
online at AIAA card payment to
$1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
www.aiaa.org P.O. Box 79240 703.264.7657
Tactical Missile Design—Integration
Baltimore, MD 21279-0240
$1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
*Attend the 2-day professional development course and receive “free”
Registration forms must be received by 21 December 2009 to receive lower early-bird rate. registration to the conference sessions with approved security clearance.
Registration forms cannot be processed without full payment.
Cancellations must be received in writing no later than 28 December 2009. There is a $100 EXTRA TICKETS
cancellation fee. Registrants who cancel beyond this date or fail to attend will forfeit the entire Wednesday Luncheon $30 No. of tickets_____
fee. For questions, call 800.639.AIAA (2422) or 703.264.7500 (outside U.S.). Wednesday Reception $75 No. of tickets_____
Thursday Luncheon $30 No. of tickets_____

5
Check here if you need to make special arrangements due to a disability.
Attach requirements on a separate sheet of paper. Form of Payment

ALL REGISTRANTS
6 FORM OF PAYMENT

AIAA Member No.__________________________________________

MUST PROVIDE A
VALID ID (DRIVER’S LI-
CENSE OR PASSPORT)
† Purchase Order † American Express WHEN THEY CHECK TOTAL DUE: $ _______________________
† Check † VISA IN.FOR STUDENT
† Travelers Check † MasterCard REGISTRATION, VALID
† Wire Transfer † Diners Club STUDENT ID IS ALSO
REQUIRED.

Credit Card Number:

REGISTER ON
______________________________________________________________ OUR WEB SITE
www.aiaa.org/
Expiration Date ___________Month ________ Year ______
events/strattac
Signature: _____________________________________________________ Select “Register
Now” to access Please note that photographs and video taken by or on behalf of AIAA
E-mail address of cardholder for receipt: the secure online of event activities and attendees shall be the property of AIAA. By regis-
registration form. tering for this event, you consent to the use by AIAA of any photograph
______________________________________________________________ Credit card only. or video in which you appear, including for promotional purposes, in
print, digital, and other format, without notice or compensation to you.
 FOR NONMEMBER CONFERENCE ATTENDEES ONLY
If you pay the full nonmember conference fee, you will receive a one-year AIAA membership and 12 issues of Aerospace America* by completing
this form, including your signature and date. Offer valid within six months of conference start date.
*Fifty percent of membership dues is designated for subscription to Aerospace America and is nondeductible therefrom.
Indicate your company’s primary business Indicate your principal job title by inserting one code from below into the box:
7 by inserting one code from below into the
box:
8 YOUR JOB CATEGORY
PRIMARY BUSINESS A1 Corporate/Senior Management D1 Vice President - Manufacturing & Production
A2 Other Management D2 Manufacturing & Production Engineer
A3 Military D3 Manufacturing & Production Engineering Man-
A4 Rrogram Management ager
Aerospace Manufacturing B1 Vice President – R & D E1 Sales Engineer
1A Military Aircraft B2 Technical/Research Director E2 Engineering Information Specialist
1B Commercial Aircraft B3 R & D Engineer E3 Other Engineer
1C Business and Private Aircraft C1 Vice President –Engineering/Design E4 Test & Evaluation Engineer
1D Helicopters C2 Project/Product Engineer E6 Professor/Educator
1E Missiles C3 Engineering Manager E7 Consultant
1F Spacecraft C4 Design Engineer E8 All Other Personnel
1F2 Space Commercialization C5 Design Support FS Return to Full-time Study
1F3 Satellites C6 Systems Engineer R Retired
1G Powerplant and Propulsion Systems
1H Avionic/Electronic Components &
Subsystems
1I Electro/Mechanical Systems
1J Hydraulic/Pneumatic Systems
EDUCATION RECORD
1K Flight Controls & Instrumentation
1L Other Parts/Components &
Degree Attained Field of Study College or University Year
Subsystes

Government
2A DoD *Full-time students indicate expected graduation/degree to qualify for student membership.
2A1 U.S. Army Birthdate ______________
2A2 U.S. Air Force
2A3 U.S. Navy Indicate your three major areas of professional interest by inserting codes from below into the three boxes:
2A4 U.S. Marine Corps
2B Department of Energy
2C Department of Transportation
9 FIRST SECOND THIRD
2D Department of Homeland Security
2E NASA
2F Other Government Engineering & Tech- 0345 Marine Systems & 0610 Space Operations &
Technology Support
2G Non U.S. Government nology Management 0350 Multidisciplinary 0615 Microgravity & Space
2G1 Non U.S. Military 0100 Economics Design Optimization Processes
0105 History 0355 Hypersonic Systems 0620 Space System
Air Transportation 0110 Legal Aspects of Aero-
3A Trunk, Regional & International 0360 Flight Testing 0625 Space Transportation
nautics & Astronautics 0365 Electronic Equipment 0630 Space Sciences &
3B Business & General Aviation 0115 Management
Suppliers Design Astronomy
0120 Society & Aerospace 0370 Ground Support Equip- 0635 Space Automation &
4A Materials Technology
4B Engineering or Manufacturing ment Robotics
0125 Technical Information 0375 Aircraft Maintenance 0640 Weapon System Ef-
Equipment Services
4B1 Hardware (Computers) 0380 Reliability fectiveness
0130 Systems Engineering 0385 Test & Evaluation 0645 Human Factors Engi-
4B2 Software 0135 Environmental Assur- 0390 Standards Engineering neering
ance/Compliance 0395 Producibility & Cost 0650 Satellite Design,
Services
Engineering Integration & Test
5A Consulting or Government Service Aerospace Sciences 0396 Production Engineering 0655 Launch Operations
Contracting 0200 Aeroacoustics
5B Research & Development 0660 Laser Technology &
0205 Aerodynamic Decel- Information Systems Applications
5C Education erator Systems
5D Science 0400 Aerospace Electronics 0665 Space Tethers
0210 Applied Aerodynamics 0405 Aerospace Maintenance 0670 Space Colonization
6 Others Allied to the Field 0215 Astrodynamics 0410 Intelligent Systems 0675 Space Tourism
0220 Atmospheric & Space 0420 Information & Command & 0680 Terraforming
Environments Control Systems
0225 Atmospheric Flight 0425 Communications Structures, Design & Test
Mechanics Systems 0700 Computer-Aided
(please specify) 0235 Fluid Dynamics 0430 Computer Systems Enterprise Solutions
0240 Guidance, Navigation 0435 Digital Avionics Sys- 0701 Survivability
& Control tems 0705 Design Engineering
0245 Aerodynamic Measure- 0440 Sensor Systems 0710 Design Technology
ment Technology 0445 Software Systems 0715 Modeling & Simulation
Please do not 0250 Plasmadynamics &
Lasers
0450 Support Systems 0725 Ground Testing
0455 System Effectiveness & 0730 Meshing, Visualiza-
0255 Sounding Rockets Safety tion, & Computational
duplicate your 0265
0270
Thermophysics
Remote Sensing &
0460 Space Logistics Environments
0465 Micro/Nanotechnology 0735 Materials
Applications 0745 Structural Dynamics
0275 Thermodynamics Propulsion & Energy 0750 Structures
0280 Computational Fluid 0500 Aerospace Power 0755 Adaptive/Smart Struc-
Dynamics Systems tures
0505 Air Breathing Propulsion 0760 Radar Absorbing
Aircraft & Air Trans- 0510 Electric Propulsion Materials & Structures
portation Systems & 0515 Liquid Propulsion 0765 Gossamer Spacecraft
registration Operations
0300 Air Transportation
0520 Propellants &
Combustion
0770 Non-Deterministic Ap-
proaches
Systems 0525 Solid Rockets
0530 Terrestrial Energy
by both faxing and 0305
0310
Aircraft Design
Aircraft Operations Systems
0315 Aircraft Safety 0535 Nuclear Thermal
Propulsion
mailing your form. 0316
0320
Balloon Technology
General Aviation 0540 Hybrid Rockets
Systems 0545 Energetic Components
0325 Helicopter Design & Systems
Thank you. 0330 Lighter-Than-Air Sys-
Space & Missiles
tems
0335 Unmanned Systems 0600 Life Sciences & Sys-
0340 V/STOL Aircraft tems
Systems 0605 Missile Systems
StratTacSecurityForm.qxd 10/15/09 10:26 AM Page 31

AIAA STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL MISSILE SYSTEMS CONFERENCE

20–21 January 2010
Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California

SECURITY CLEARANCE CERTIFICATION FORM

Conference attendance requires U.S. citizenship and at least a final SECRET security clearance.

Applicant’s Name __________________________________________________________________________________________

(Please print or type) (Last) (First) (Middle)

Social Security No. ____________________________________________ Citizenship __________________________________________

Birthplace ________________________________________________________________ Birthdate ________________________________

If birthplace is not U.S., show how citizenship was acquired and where. Include Naturalization Certificate Number, if applicable.

Citizenship Acquired ________________________________________________________ Where __________________________________

Naturalization Certificate Number (if applicable) ____________________________________________________________________________

Affiliation ____________________________________________________ Title ______________________________________________

(Company, Military Activity, or Government Agency)

Affiliation Address ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

(Street) (City) (State) (Zip Code)

E-mail Address __________________________________________________________________________

Date ________________________________________ Signature __________________________________________________________

NOTE—PENALTY FOR MISREPRESENTATION: Title 18 United States Code makes it a criminal offense, punishable by a maximum of 5 years
imprisonment, $10,000 fine or both, to make a false statement or representation to any department or agency of the United States. This
includes any statement knowingly made by an employer or employee herein that is found to be incorrect, incomplete, or misleading in any
important particular.

Must be submitted by 28 December 2009.

Mail or fax to:
SECURITY RESTRICTIONS
Alliant Techsystems (ATK)
Visitor Control—AIAA Notes may not be taken during the conference sessions. Electronic devices—including
Attn: Dale Woolheater cell phones, radios, PDAs, laptops, cameras, video/audio recording equipment, and
P.O. Box 51203 two-way pagers—are not allowed in the conference sessions. One-way pagers must be
Pacific Grove, CA 93950-6203
placed on “vibrate” during the conference sessions.
Fax: 831.372.1069
SMO Code for JPAS: 1Y9606

PHOTOGRAPHS ARE REQUIRED: Applicant’s name, organization, and photograph will be used by ATK to issue the conference badge. Photo will be
matched to security clearance information. Submit a JPEG digital photograph (from middle of chest to top of head), 300 dpi or greater, 2” x 2” or larger in
size, to ATK via e-mail at dale.woolheater@atk.com.

Badges for all conference sessions will be issued at the Hyatt Regency Monterey on Tuesday, 19 January, from 1600 to 1900 hrs; and in King Hall, at the
Naval Postgraduate School on Wednesday, 20 January, from 0700 to 1700 hrs; and Thursday, 21 January, from 0700 to 1200 hrs.

An e-mail will be sent to the above e-mail address confirming receipt and confirmation of your clearance.
Note: You will be required to show photo identification for conference registration
(state driver’s license, military I.D. card [DD Form 2], or company photo I.D.).

Security Use Only

JPAS Information:

Clearance Level: _______________________ Verified by: _______________________

Date Granted: _______________________ Verified on: _______________________

 U.S. Air Force T&E Days
Assessing the Strategic Posture of the Air Force T&E Enterprise
2–4 February 2010
Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center
Nashville, TN

Conference Overview
The Air Force T&E Days conferences are attended by test and evaluation professionals from the U.S. military services, allied nations,
industry partners, and academia. They are popular because they offer a highly technical forum with unique opportunities to network with
fellow professionals, discuss state-of-the-art advances in research, and share the latest test and analysis results directly from the field.
T&E Days 2010 will be the sixth consecutive conference focused on instituting an enterprise approach to performing test and evalu-
ation in support of weapon systems research, development, test, acquisition, and evaluation. The purpose of the T&E Enterprise is to
transform the way test and evaluation is conducted to meet future weapon system research, development, test, evaluation, and acquisi-
tion requirements. Previous T&E Days themes were Shaping Capabilities of the Future (2004), Transforming the T&E Enterprise (2005),
Aligning the Enterprise (2007), Furthering the Effectiveness of the Air Force T&E Enterprise (2008), and Operationalizing the Air Force
T&E Enterprise Across Air, Space, and Cyberspace (2009). An additional purpose of Air Force T&E Days is to showcase the results of a
year-long T&E Enterprise collaborative effort.
The objectives of T&E Days 2010 are to:
• Share lessons learned, process and policy changes, and improved capabilities that promote effective T&E execution;
• Discuss T&E requirements needed to support future weapon system development and acquisition;
• Identify potential solutions to gaps in current T&E capabilities;
• Encourage T&E partnership opportunities across Air Force commands and among industry partners; and
• Foster technical workforce expertise and development through training, technical presentations, and discussions.
Through these objectives, T&E Days 2010 will continue to refine and implement the T&E Enterprise concept throughout the Air Force.
As this paradigm shift unfolds, more emphasis will be placed on T&E resources and the efficient use of these resources in order to provide
war-winning capabilities on time, on cost. T&E Days 2010 will provide the forum that brings together the key players from the centers and
resources essential to assessing the strategic posture of the Air Force T&E Enterprise.

Exhibits must be received by 5 January 2010. Preregistrants may pick

Join AIAA and its industry partners as we focus on the latest
advancements in testing and evaluation. Use this opportunity to
meet the decision makers at the very core of the flight test and
ground test communities and get in at the ground level of the
event that will become the “must-attend-event” for test and eval-
uation. Exhibits will feature a more interactive display area as
half-hour breaks have been added to the hall for more network-
ing opportunities among conference attendees and exhibitors.
Bring the tools and technologies of your business to the ultimate
customer—the warfighter. Please contact Fernanda Tilleria for
more information: 703.264.7622 or fernandat@aiaa.org.
Exhibit Hours
Tuesday, 2 February 1000–1600 hrs
Reception 1730–1930 hrs
Wednesday, 3 February 1000–1700 hrs
Conference Certificate of Attendance Available
Certificates of Attendance are available for attendees who
request documentation at the conference. AIAA offers this ser-
vice to better serve the needs of the professional community.
Claims of hours or applicability toward professional education
requirements are the responsibility of the participant. Please
request your copy at the on-site registration desk.
Registration
All participants are urged to register on the AIAA Web site
at www.aiaa.org/events/tedays, or you may use the registra-
tion form provided on page B27. Registering in advance saves
conference attendees time and money increments of $100. A
check made payable to AIAA or credit card information must be
included with your registration form. Early-bird registration forms
up their materials at the advance registration desk. The late reg-
istration deadline is 28 January 2010. All those not registered
by 28 January 2010 may do so at the on-site registration desk.
Nonmember registration prices include a one-year AIAA mem-
bership, with the exception of the government rate, which does
not include AIAA membership. If you require more information,
please call 703.264.7500 or e-mail Yvonner@aiaa.org.
All registrants must provide a valid photo ID (driver’s
license or passport) when they check in. For government
registration, a government ID is required; for student regis-
tration, valid student ID is also required.
The registration fees are as follows:
By 5 January By 28 January On 1 Feb
Full Conference (AIAA/ITEA Member)
$545 $645 $745
Includes sessions, exhibits, Tuesday evening exhibits recep-
tion, Tuesday luncheon and Wednesday award luncheon, and
single-user access to online proceedings.
Full Conference (Nonmember)
$680 $780 $880
Includes sessions, exhibits, Tuesday evening exhibits recep-
tion, Tuesday luncheon and Wednesday award luncheon, and
single-user access to online proceedings.
Full Conference Government (A/D military, U.S. Civil Service,
and international government employees; ID required)
$545 $645 $745
Includes sessions, exhibits, Tuesday evening exhibits recep-
tion, Tuesday luncheon and Wednesday award luncheon, and
single-user access to online proceedings.

B22 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

 Hosted by
Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC) and AIAA

Supported by
Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC)
46th Test Wing at the Air Armament Center (AAC)
Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC)
Space and Missile Systems Center, Space Development and Test Wing (SDTW)
Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC)
Air Combat Command (ACC)
Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)
Air Mobility Command (AMC)

Sponsored by
Aerospace Testing Alliance
Jacobs Technology

General Chair
Maj Gen David W. Eidsaune
Director, Air, Space and Information Operations,
Headquarters Air Force Materiel Command,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio
Technical Co-Chairs
Robert Arnold Dan Roth Edward M. Kraft
46th Test Wing, AAC Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC) Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC)

Program Committee
Philip Stich Col. Gary M. Konnert
Aerospace Testing Alliance Air Force Research Laboratory
Chris Jones Maj. Dan Ryan
Northrop Grumman Space and Missiles Systems Center
Keith A. Branch Kelly Adams
The Boeing Company Air Combat Command

Technical Program Committee

AIAA Flight Test Technical Committee AIAA Ground Test Technical Committee AIAA Space Systems Technical Committee
Ralph Grimit Joe Patrick Jeff Puschell
Raytheon Company Lockheed Martin Corporation Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems
Thomas Yechout David Cahill Jerry Sellers
U.S. Air Force Academy Aerospace Testing Alliance Teaching Science & Technology, Inc.

Full-Time Undergraduate Student (AIAA/ITEA Member) Extra Tickets

$0 $10 $10 Tuesday Luncheon: $52
Includes sessions, exhibits, & Tuesday evening reception only. Tuesday Evening Exhibit Reception: $72
Wednesday Awards Luncheon: $52
Full-Time Undergraduate Student (Nonmember) Extra Online Proceedings: $65
$30 $40 $50
Includes sessions, exhibits, & Tuesday evening reception only. Professional Development Registration Fees
By 4 January After 4 January On-site
Full-Time Graduate & Ph.D. Student (AIAA/ITEA Member) AIAA Member $1095 $1200 $1275
$70 $100 $130 Nonmember $1195 $1300 $1375
Includes sessions, exhibits, & Tuesday evening reception only.
Full-Time Graduate & Ph.D. Student (Nonmember) Tour Information
$100 $130 $160 There is a tour planned. Please go to the AIAA Web site
Includes sessions, exhibits, & Tuesday evening reception only. (www.aiaa.org/events/tedays) for more information and pay-
ment options.
AIAA Retired Members
$40 $50 $60 Registration Hours
Includes sessions, exhibits, & Tuesday evening reception only. Registration will be held in the foyer at the foyer at the
Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center.
Discount Rate
$490 N/A N/A Sunday, 31 January (courses only) 0730–1500 hrs
Advance only. One complete, typed list plus individual regis- Monday, 1 February 1600–1900 hrs
tration forms for 10 or more persons from the same organization Tuesday, 2 February 0700–1700 hrs
must be provided. Includes conference and exhibit participation, Wednesday, 3 February 0700–1700 hrs
food functions, and single-user access to online proceedings. Thursday, 4 February 0700–1530 hrs
Membership not included. No substitutions.

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B23

 Professional Development
On 31 January–1 February, AIAA is offering the following professional development short courses in conjunction with the confer-
ence. Attend the short course and receive free registration to the conference (sessions only).
Experimentation, Validation and Uncertainty Analysis (Instructors: Hugh W Coleman, University of Alabama in Huntsville
and W. Glenn Steele, Mississippi State University)
Dr. Hugh Coleman and Dr. Glenn Steele have updated their comprehensive two-day course to include material from the 3rd
edition (2009) of their award-winning book and ASME V&V20-2008: Standard for Verification and Validation in Computational
Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer. The course presents experimental uncertainty analysis techniques based on 1)1995 ISO GUM,
2) 2005 Standard ASME-PTC19.1 Test Uncertainty, and 3) 2008 JCGM GUM Supplement: Evaluation of Measurement Data—
Propagation of Distributions Using a Monte Carlo Method in a well-paced sequence honed in over 90 presentations at companies,
research laboratories, and government institutes in the United States, Canada, Europe, and South America. The course covers
the planning, design, debugging, and execution of experiments used to validate a model, solve a problem, or characterize system
behavior. Cases in which the experimental result is determined only once or multiple times in a test are addressed and illustrated
with examples from the authors’ experience.
Systems Engineering Fundamentals (Instructor: John C. Hsu, The Boeing Company)
In today’s globalized environment, manufacturing and designing companies compete for business. To be successful, companies
need to practice strategies that minimize the possibility of degradation of product quality, cost overrun, schedule slippage, cus-
tomer dissatisfaction, and system development failures. In this course, you will learn why we need systems engineering; the sys-
tems engineering fundamentals, including requirements analysis and development, functional analysis and allocation, and design
decision analysis based on requirements; risk, opportunity and issue management throughout the development and design cycle;
Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule and Work Breakdown Structure for development and design management;
technical performance measurement for measuring, tracking, and validating design; interface management across in-house disci-
plines, supplier, and customer; and verification and validation of your products.
For full course descriptions please visit www.aiaa.org/courses.

Notice on Visas Hotel Accommodations

If you plan to attend an AIAA technical conference or course
held in the United States and you require a visa for travel, it is
incumbent upon you to apply for a visa with the U.S. Embassy
(consular division) or consulate with ample time for processing.
To avoid bureaucratic problems, AIAA strongly suggests that you
submit your formal application to U.S. authorities a minimum of
120 days in advance of the date of anticipated travel.
To request a letter of invitation, please fill out and submit the
online Invitation Letter Request Form. You can also request a
letter of invitation by contacting:
ATTN: Customer Service
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500
Reston, VA 20191-4344
703.264.7500 • 703.264.7657 FAX
E-mail: custserv@aiaa.org
AIAA cannot directly intervene with the U.S. Department of
State, consular offices, or embassies on behalf of individuals
applying for visas.
AIAA has reserved a block of rooms at the host hotel:
Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center, 2800
Opryland Drive, Nashville, TN 37214, phone: 615.889.1000 or
888.777.6779. Please contact the hotel directly to make your
reservations, or book your room online by clicking on the link
in the travel and accommodations section of the T&E Web site
(www.aiaa.org/events/tedays). Room rates are $117 per night
for single or double occupancy, plus applicable taxes and a
$15 per night resort fee, which includes Internet access, use of
the fitness center, local phone calls, etc. The block will be held
for T&E Days attendees until 8 January 2010 or until the room
block is full, whichever comes first. Please make sure to ask for
the AIAA T&E Days room block to receive the group rate.
Government attendees: At the current time, the federal per
diem rate is the same as the conference rate.
Sponsorship Opportunities
Available packages offer elevated visibility, effective market-
ing and branding options, along with direct access to prominent
decision makers from the aerospace community. Contact Cecilia
Capece at ceciliac@aiaa.org or 703.264.7570 for more details.

For complete conference information,

visit the Web site at www.aiaa.org/events/tedays.

B24 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

 Working Group and Technical Session Program Overview
Tuesday, 2 February
0800–0900 hrs
Opening Remarks
Edward M. Kraft, SL, USAF T&E Days Technical Co-Chair,
Technical Advisor, AEDC
Conference Welcome
Maj Gen David W. Eidsaune, USAF T&E Days General Chair,
Director, Air, Space and Information Operations, Headquarters Air
Force Materiel Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH
Opening Keynote Speaker
Gen Norton A. Schwartz, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force,
Washington, DC
0900 hrs
Working Group 1: 2009 Summary
Chair: Maj Gen Stephen T. Sargeant, Commander, Air Force
Operational Test and Evaluation Center, Kirtland Air Force Base,
NM
1015 hrs
Networking Coffee Break
1045 hrs
Working Group 2: Electronic Warfare
Chair: Col Russell Kurtz, Commander, USAF AFMC, Electronic
Warfare Group, 412 Test Wing, AFFTC
Co-Chair: Abigail Reuter, Deputy Director, Electronic Warfare
Group, 412 Test Wing, AFFTC
0900–1200 hrs
Technical Sessions
Flight Test Programs
Holloman High Speed Test Track
1200–1330 hrs
Luncheon
1330 hrs
Invited Panel Session—“The Time for High Speed Weapons”
Moderator: Dr. Mark Lewis, Willis Young Professor, University of
Maryland, President Elect, AIAA
Today, more than ever before, mature technologies and validat-
ed mission requirements are intersecting in favor of a high-speed
weapon. For the past decade, the T&E infrastructure has been
leveraged to enable several focused hypersonic flight experi-
ments which will demonstrate the feasibility of weapons in this
class. The results of these experiments will form our decisions
regarding how to leverage our test infrastructure for a weapon
system acquisition and development. This session chronicles
several infrastructure improvements that provided needed risk
reduction for these flight experiments, describes several near-
term flight experiments, and outlines a strategy to go from prom-
ising technology to the field.
Panelists:
Dr. Richard P. Hallion, Former USAF Historian, “T&E Enables
Flight”
Dr. Natalie Crawford, RAND Corporation, “Matured and
Integrated Hypersonic Technologies will find Users”
Maj Gen Curtis M. Bedke, Commander, Air Force Research
Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, “What’s
Different Today?”
Dr. John B. Foulkes, Director, Test Resource Management
Center, “How the T&E Community is Posturing for the
Potential Success of Hypersonics”
Technical Sessions
Ground Test
Ground Test, Flight Test, and M&S: Propulsion Integration
(Invited Session)
Space T&E Technologies and Techniques
1730–1930 hrs
Opening Exhibit Reception
Wednesday, 3 February
0800–0810 hrs
Opening Remarks
Edward M. Kraft, SL, USAF T&E Days Technical Co-Chair, and
Technical Advisor, AEDC
0810–0845 hrs
Plenary Session
Distinguished Speaker (TBD)
0845 hrs
Working Group 3: Propulsion T&E (APA)
Chair: Theodore G. Fecke, SES, Technical Adviser, Propulsion,
Engineering Directorate, Aeronautical Systems Center
1000 hrs
Networking Coffee Break
1030 hrs
Working Group 4: Armament
Chair: Steven Lightfoot, Technical Advisor, 780 Test Squadron
0845–1145 hrs
Invited Panel Session: Space T&E—Today’s Challenges,
Tomorrows Opportunities
Moderator: Peter Montgomery, ATA
Technical Session
Information Technology Advancements for Ground Test
1145–1330 hrs
Awards Luncheon
Presenting the AIAA Design-Build-Fly winner and will feature
the Best Paper competition with cash prizes provided to the
author(s) of the top papers. Papers will be judged on technical
significance, technical content, verification/validation of technol-
ogy and/or processes, significance to current events, and clarity.
1330 hrs
Invited Panel/Paper Session: Enterprise Common Methods:
Design of Experiments (DOE) Organizational Experiences
and Practices
Since 2004, a hallmark of the USAF T&E Enterprise is a vision
to collaborate on adopting best practices among the centers:
business, organization, facilities, and methods of test. The intent
of this session is to update T&E Enterprise senior leadership and
our contractor partners on the progress the Enterprise is making
in learning and practicing a scientific approach to test: DOE.
Moderator: Gregg Hutto, 46th Test Wing, AAC
This session will include two parts: a 90-minute panel discussion
on organizational experiences with DOE; and an exploration of
some common misconceptions about what DOE is and is not.
The panel discussion will feature senior leaders from the 53d
Wing, AFOTEC, the 46th Test Wing, AFFTC, AEDC, and the Air
Guard/Air Reserve Test Center (AATC). The panel will discuss
organizational experiences in DOE teaching, promotion, projects
and policy.
AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B25
The following presenters will explore the truth about some com- 1000 hrs
mon misconceptions concerning DOE: Networking Coffee Break
Dr. Jim Simpson, 53d Wing
Dr. Pete Parker, NASA Langley 1030 hrs
Greg Hutto, 46th Test Wing Working Group 6: Space T&E
Chair: Gary “Gus” Gardner, YF-03 (DAFC), Director, Space Test
Technical Sessions Integration Office
Ground Test Facilities
Ground Test, Flight Test, and M&S: Weapons Separation and 0845–1145 hrs
Plume Simulation Technical Sessions
Netcentric Developments Flight Test Capabilities
Test/Program Management
Thursday, 4 February
0800–0810 hrs 1145–1200 hrs
Opening Remarks Closing Remarks
Edward M. Kraft, SL, USAF T&E Days Technical Co-Chair, and
Technical Advisor, AEDC 1230–1730 hrs
AEDC Windshield Tour and Jack Daniels Social
0810–0845 hrs AEDC is planning a windshield tour of their facilities and finishing
Plenary Session with a dinner at the famous Jack Daniels Distillery. Please see
Distinguished Speaker (TBD) conference Web site for more information: www.aiaa.org/events/
tedays.
0845 hrs
Working Group 5: C4ISR
Chair: Lt Col Charles Knofczynski, USAF, AFMC, Commander,
46th Test Squadron, AAC
Co-Chair: Robert Knowles, Technical Advisor, 46 Test Squadron

48th AIAA Aerospace

Sciences Meeting www.aiaa.org/events/asm
Including the
New Horizons Forum
and
Aerospace Exposition
4–7 January 2010
Orlando World Center Marriott
Orlando, Florida

Early Bird Registration Deadline: 7 December 2009

09-0509

09-0509.indd 1 8/12/09 3:22:35 PM

B26 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

U.S. Air Force T&E Days

Nashville, Tennessee 2–4 February 2010

REGISTRATION FORM (or register online at www.aiaa.org)
All registrants please complete the information below.
Select your registration options below. Payment by check, credit
2 card, or money order—payable to AIAA—must accompany
registration. To pay the member rate, your membership must be in
good standing.
104004B

1 Conference Badge Name First/Given Name M.I. Last/Family Name

—REGISTRATION OPTIONS—
ALL REGISTRANTS MUST PROVIDE A VALID ID (DRIVER’S LICENSE OR PASSPORT) WHEN THEY
CHECK IN. FOR STUDENT REGISTRATION, VALID STUDENT ID IS ALSO REQUIRED.

Organization Name/Division/Mailstop Early Bird by 5 Jan 10 By 28 Jan 10 On-site Beginning 1 Feb 10

AIAA/ITEA Non- AIAA/ITEA Non- AIAA/ITEA Non-

Address
Member Member Member Member Member Member

City State Country/Zip/Postal Code OPTION 1: FULL CONFERENCE

$545 $680 $645 $780 $745 $880
Includes sessions, exhibits, Tuesday evening exhibits reception, Tuesday
E-mail Address Daytime Phone Number luncheon and Wednesday award luncheon, and single-user access to
the online proceedings.
Fax Number (include country code) Job Title/Rank
OPTION 2: FULL CONFERENCE—GOVERNMENT ONLY
$545 $645 $745
AIAA MEMBERSHIP: If you are registering for this conference or one of the collocated
3 professional development short courses at the nonmember rate, included with your registration
fee is one year of AIAA membership. Sign below and go to www.aiaa.org and click on My
A/D military, U.S. Civil Service, and international government
employees; ID required. Includes sessions, exhibits, Tuesday evening
exhibits reception, Tuesday luncheon and Wednesday award luncheon,
AIAA to update your contact information. and single-user access to the online proceedings. Does not include
AIAA membership for nonmembers.
Included in your AIAA membership will be periodic communications about AIAA benefits,
products, and services. Check here if you prefer not to receive membership information via OPTION 3: FULL-TIME UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT
e-mail.
$0 $30 $10 $40 $10 $50
From time to time, we make member information available to companies whose products or
Includes sessions, exhibits, and Tuesday evening reception.
services may be of interest to you. Check here if you prefer not to have your name and
address used for non-AIAA mailings. OPTION 4: FULL-TIME GRADUATE OR PH.D. STUDENT
Signature_____________________________________________Date__________________ $70 $100 $100 $130 $130 $160
Check here if you are renewing or reinstating your membership. (You must pay full nonmember Includes sessions, exhibits, and Tuesday evening reception.
conference fee.)
OPTION 5: FULL-TIME AIAA RETIRED MEMBER
$40 N/A $50 N/A $60 N/A
RETURN FORM TO:
4 1) For fastest, easiest 2) By mail: return completed 3) By fax: send the signed,
Includes sessions, exhibits, and Tuesday evening reception.

service, register form with payment to completed form with credit OPTION 6: DISCOUNTED GROUP RATE—ADVANCE ONLY
online at AIAA card payment to $490 per person
www.aiaa.org P.O. Box 79240 703.264.7657 One complete, typed list plus individual registration forms for 10 or
Baltimore, MD 21279-0240 more persons from the same organization must be provided. Includes
conference and exhibit participation, food functions, and single-
user access to online proceedings. Membership not included. No
Registration forms must be received by 5 January 2010 to receive lower early-bird rate. substitutions.
Registration forms cannot be processed without full payment.
Cancellations must be received in writing no later than 15 January 2010. There is a $100 OPTION 7: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COURSE WITH FREE
cancellation fee. Registrants who cancel beyond this date or fail to attend will forfeit the entire CONFERENCE REGISTRATION*
fee. For questions, call 800.639.AIAA (2422) or 703.264.7500 (outside U.S.). Experimentation, Validation and Uncertainty Analysis
$1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Systems Engineering Fundamentals

5
Check here if you need to make special arrangements due to a disability. $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Attach requirements on a separate sheet of paper. Form of Payment *Attend the 2-day professional development course and receive “free”
registration to the conference sessions and exhibits.

FORM OF PAYMENT ALL REGISTRANTS EXTRA TICKETS

6 AIAA Member No.____________________________________________
MUST PROVIDE A
VALIDID (DRIVER’S LI-
Tuesday Luncheon
Tuesday Evening Exhibit Reception
$52
$72
No. of tickets_____
No. of tickets_____
ITEA Member No._____________________________________________ CENSE OR PASSPORT)
Wednesday Awards Luncheon $52 No. of tickets_____
† Purchase Order † American Express WHEN THEY CHECK Extra Online Proceedings $65 No. of copies_____
IN.FOR STUDENT
† Check † VISA
REGISTRATION, VALID ATTENTION ITEA MEMBERS: To receive the member price for this
† Travelers Check † MasterCard STUDENT ID IS ALSO conference, please fax your registration form with ITEA member
† Wire Transfer † Diners Club REQUIRED.
number to AIAA Customer Service at 703.264.7657.

Credit Card Number:

REGISTER ON
_________________________________________________________________ OUR WEB SITE TOTAL DUE: $ _______________________
www.aiaa.org/
Expiration Date ___________Month ________ Year_____________________ events/tedays
Select “Register
Signature:________________________________________________________ Now” to access Please note that photographs and video taken by or on behalf of AIAA
the secure online of event activities and attendees shall be the property of AIAA. By regis-
E-mail address of cardholder for receipt: registration form. tering for this event, you consent to the use by AIAA of any photograph
Credit card only. or video in which you appear, including for promotional purposes, in
_________________________________________________________________ print, digital, and other format, without notice or compensation to you.
 FOR NONMEMBER CONFERENCE ATTENDEES ONLY
If you pay the full nonmember conference fee, you will receive a one-year AIAA membership and 12 issues of Aerospace America* by completing
this form, including your signature and date. Offer valid within six months of conference start date.
*Fifty percent of membership dues is designated for subscription to Aerospace America and is nondeductible therefrom.
Indicate your company’s primary business Indicate your principal job title by inserting one code from below into the box:
7 by inserting one code from below into the
box:
8 YOUR JOB CATEGORY
PRIMARY BUSINESS A1 Corporate/Senior Management D1 Vice President - Manufacturing & Production
A2 Other Management D2 Manufacturing & Production Engineer
A3 Military D3 Manufacturing & Production Engineering Man-
A4 Rrogram Management ager
Aerospace Manufacturing B1 Vice President – R & D E1 Sales Engineer
1A Military Aircraft B2 Technical/Research Director E2 Engineering Information Specialist
1B Commercial Aircraft B3 R & D Engineer E3 Other Engineer
1C Business and Private Aircraft C1 Vice President –Engineering/Design E4 Test & Evaluation Engineer
1D Helicopters C2 Project/Product Engineer E6 Professor/Educator
1E Missiles C3 Engineering Manager E7 Consultant
1F Spacecraft C4 Design Engineer E8 All Other Personnel
1F2 Space Commercialization C5 Design Support FS Return to Full-time Study
1F3 Satellites C6 Systems Engineer R Retired
1G Powerplant and Propulsion Systems
1H Avionic/Electronic Components &
Subsystems
1I Electro/Mechanical Systems
1J Hydraulic/Pneumatic Systems
EDUCATION RECORD
1K Flight Controls & Instrumentation
1L Other Parts/Components &
Degree Attained Field of Study College or University Year
Subsystes

Government
2A DoD *Full-time students indicate expected graduation/degree to qualify for student membership.
2A1 U.S. Army Birthdate ______________
2A2 U.S. Air Force
2A3 U.S. Navy Indicate your three major areas of professional interest by inserting codes from below into the three boxes:
2A4 U.S. Marine Corps
2B Department of Energy
2C Department of Transportation
9 FIRST SECOND THIRD
2D Department of Homeland Security
2E NASA
2F Other Government Engineering & Tech- 0345 Marine Systems & 0610 Space Operations &
Technology Support
2G Non U.S. Government nology Management 0350 Multidisciplinary 0615 Microgravity & Space
2G1 Non U.S. Military 0100 Economics Design Optimization Processes
0105 History 0355 Hypersonic Systems 0620 Space System
Air Transportation 0110 Legal Aspects of Aero-
3A Trunk, Regional & International 0360 Flight Testing 0625 Space Transportation
nautics & Astronautics 0365 Electronic Equipment 0630 Space Sciences &
3B Business & General Aviation 0115 Management
Suppliers Design Astronomy
0120 Society & Aerospace 0370 Ground Support Equip- 0635 Space Automation &
4A Materials Technology
4B Engineering or Manufacturing ment Robotics
0125 Technical Information 0375 Aircraft Maintenance 0640 Weapon System Ef-
Equipment Services
4B1 Hardware (Computers) 0380 Reliability fectiveness
0130 Systems Engineering 0385 Test & Evaluation 0645 Human Factors Engi-
4B2 Software 0135 Environmental Assur- 0390 Standards Engineering neering
ance/Compliance 0395 Producibility & Cost 0650 Satellite Design,
Services
Engineering Integration & Test
5A Consulting or Government Service Aerospace Sciences 0396 Production Engineering 0655 Launch Operations
Contracting 0200 Aeroacoustics
5B Research & Development 0660 Laser Technology &
0205 Aerodynamic Decel- Information Systems Applications
5C Education erator Systems
5D Science 0400 Aerospace Electronics 0665 Space Tethers
0210 Applied Aerodynamics 0405 Aerospace Maintenance 0670 Space Colonization
6 Others Allied to the Field 0215 Astrodynamics 0410 Intelligent Systems 0675 Space Tourism
0220 Atmospheric & Space 0420 Information & Command & 0680 Terraforming
Environments Control Systems
0225 Atmospheric Flight 0425 Communications Structures, Design & Test
Mechanics Systems 0700 Computer-Aided
(please specify) 0235 Fluid Dynamics 0430 Computer Systems Enterprise Solutions
0240 Guidance, Navigation 0435 Digital Avionics Sys- 0701 Survivability
& Control tems 0705 Design Engineering
0245 Aerodynamic Measure- 0440 Sensor Systems 0710 Design Technology
ment Technology 0445 Software Systems 0715 Modeling & Simulation
Please do not 0250 Plasmadynamics &
Lasers
0450 Support Systems 0725 Ground Testing
0455 System Effectiveness & 0730 Meshing, Visualiza-
0255 Sounding Rockets Safety tion, & Computational
duplicate your 0265
0270
Thermophysics
Remote Sensing &
0460 Space Logistics Environments
0465 Micro/Nanotechnology 0735 Materials
Applications 0745 Structural Dynamics
0275 Thermodynamics Propulsion & Energy 0750 Structures
0280 Computational Fluid 0500 Aerospace Power 0755 Adaptive/Smart Struc-
Dynamics Systems tures
0505 Air Breathing Propulsion 0760 Radar Absorbing
Aircraft & Air Trans- 0510 Electric Propulsion Materials & Structures
portation Systems & 0515 Liquid Propulsion 0765 Gossamer Spacecraft
registration Operations
0300 Air Transportation
0520 Propellants &
Combustion
0770 Non-Deterministic Ap-
proaches
Systems 0525 Solid Rockets
0530 Terrestrial Energy
by both faxing and 0305
0310
Aircraft Design
Aircraft Operations Systems
0315 Aircraft Safety 0535 Nuclear Thermal
Propulsion
mailing your form. 0316
0320
Balloon Technology
General Aviation 0540 Hybrid Rockets
Systems 0545 Energetic Components
0325 Helicopter Design & Systems
Thank you. 0330 Lighter-Than-Air Sys-
Space & Missiles
tems
0335 Unmanned Systems 0600 Life Sciences & Sys-
0340 V/STOL Aircraft tems
Systems 0605 Missile Systems
 Upcoming AIAA Professional Development Courses
1 December 2009–30 April 2010
Distance Learning Courses
Four self-paced courses available in the convenience of your home or office. Students receive instructions for completing the course, a course notebook,
problem sets, and accompanying texts. Over five months, you’ll follow a proven curriculum of reading and homework assignments.

Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics (Instructor: Klaus A. Hoffmann)

This comprehensive, three-part series of courses will prepare you for a career in the rapidly expanding field of computational fluid dynamics and fluid turbulence.

Advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (Instructor: Klaus A. Hoffmann)

The aim of this course is to extend the concepts of numerical schemes to a system of equations typically expressed in a vector form. The content of this
course is equivalent to a one-semester graduate course. Furthermore, you must have had an introductory course in CFD, e.g., the AIAA Introduction to
Computational Fluid Dynamics Course.

Computational Fluid Turbulence (Instructor: Klaus A. Hoffmann)

A course in intermediate/advanced CFD and a course in fluid mechanics at upper division undergraduate or graduate level are required.

Heat Transfer (Instructor: Robert K McMordie)

“Heat Transfer” provides the basics of heat transfer along with information on numerical techniques used in heat transfer analyses. Numerous automated
analyses including radiation view factor calculations, film coefficient computations, and fluid flow analysis. There is a large data base of thermal physical
properties. Much of this data is given as a function of temperature in the form of polynomial equations.

8–9 January 2010

Free Conference Registration to the Aerospace Sciences Conference, Orlando, Florida,
when you sign up for one of these Courses!
Best Practices in Wind Tunnel Testing (Instructors: Allen Arrington; David Cahill; and Mark Melanson)
This course provides an overview of important concepts that are used in many wind tunnel test projects. The course is based largely on AIAA standards
documents that focus on ground testing concepts. In particular, the course will address project management aspects of executing a testing project, the use
and calibration of strain gage balances, the use of measurement uncertainty in ground testing, and the calibration of wind tunnels.

Computational Multiphase Flow (Instructors: S. Balachandar; Eric Loth; and Kyle Quires)
This course will include a survey of multiphase flow computational fluid dynamics, with particular attention to turbulent flows. This will include comparison
of various “tools” (numerical methods) in terms of “performance” (accuracy with respect to specific predicted characteristics) and “cost” (required computa-
tional resources). The course will first examine multiphase applications, fluid physics, models, and governing equations. This will be followed by an over-
view of numerical methods as a function of flow conditions and desired results. Detailed discussion of the numerical approaches will be discussed in order
of increasing particle size ranging from mixed-fluid and Fast Eulerian for small particles to point-force techniques for non-equilibrium intermediate-size
particles, to resolved-surface techniques for large particles.

Flow Control for Specialists (Instructors: Louis Cattafesta; Clancy Rowley; David Williams; Daniel N. Miller)
The techniques of active flow control are becoming more sophisticated as fluid dynamics, control, and dynamical systems theory merge to design control
architectures capable of solving challenging flow control applications. The two-day course will examine advanced topics in active flow control, placing
particular emphasis on “how to do flow control.” This course complements the AIAA Modern Flow Control I Short Course, but Flow Control I is not a pre-
requisite. A brief history of flow control, modern dynamical systems, and control theory related to closed-loop flow control and performance limitations will
be discussed. State-of-the-art actuator and sensor design techniques will be covered. Case studies will be presented that describe recent success stories
about the implementation of active flow control on advanced aircraft. The course lecturers, coming from industry and academia, have extensive back-
grounds in flow control.

Fluid-Structure Interaction (Instructor: Rainald Löhner)

This course will give an overview of the phenomena that govern fluid-structure interaction, as well as numerical methods that can be used to predict them.
A wide range of phenomena, ranging from aeroelasticity to weapon fragmentation, will be covered.

Large Eddy Simulations: Theory, Applications, and Advanced Topics (Instructors: Fernando F. Grinstein; Ugo Piomelli; and Jack R. Edwards)
This course will provide an introduction to the large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows, as well as the discussion of some advanced topics. The first day
will be devoted to the introductory discussion, including theory and applications of this method. During the second day, two special topics will be dis-
cussed, namely LES techniques based on alternative (non-conventional) approaches to subgrid-scale modeling and hybrid RANS/LES methods.

Modeling Flight Dynamics With Tensors (Instructor: Peter H. Zipfel)

Establishing a new trend in flight dynamics, this two-day course introduces you to the modeling of flight dynamics with tensors. Instead of using the clas-
sical “vector mechanics” technique, the kinematics and dynamics of aerospace vehicles are formulated by Cartesian tensors that are invariant under time-
dependent coordinate transformations.
This course builds on your general understanding of flight mechanics, but requires no prior knowledge of tensors. It introduces Cartesian tensors,
reviews coordinate systems, formulates tensorial kinematics, and applies Newton’s and Euler’s laws to build the general six-degrees-of-freedom equations
of motion. For stability and control applications, the perturbation equations are derived with their linear and nonlinear aerodynamic derivatives. After taking
the course you will have an appreciation of the powerful new “tensor flight dynamics,” and you should be able to model the dynamics of your own aero-
space vehicle.

Microfluidics and Nanofluidics: Fundamentals and Applications (Instructors: A. T. Conlisk; Minami Yoda; David Mott; Arfaan Rampersaud; and Thomas
Doligalski)
Microfluidics is rapidly emerging as an enabling technology, having applications ranging from unmanned aerial vehicles to ink jet printing to biochemical
sensing, filtration and purification processes, to drug discovery and delivery. Given the emerging importance of micro- and nanoscale transport phenom-
ena, this course will provide working level engineers, faculty and managers with an overview and understanding of the fundamental fluid mechanics, heat

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B29

and mass transfer, and chemistry involved in such devices, as well as the chemistry and engineering principles governing the design of micro- and nano-
fluidic devices. Case studies will be presented in which the fundamental flow physics at micron and nanometer length scales is used to design innovative
devices that could not function at larger length scales.

Systems Engineering Fundamentals (Instructor: John C. Hsu)

In today’s globalized environment, manufacturing and designing companies compete for business. To be successful, companies need to practice strate-
gies that minimize the possibility of degradation of product quality, cost overrun, schedule slippage, customer dissatisfaction, and system development
failures. In this course, you will learn why we need systems engineering; the systems engineering fundamentals, including requirements analysis and
development, functional analysis and allocation, and design decision analysis based on requirements; risk, opportunity and issue management throughout
the development and design cycle; Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule and Work Breakdown Structure for development and design man-
agement; technical performance measurement for measuring, tracking, and validating design; interface management across in-house disciplines, supplier,
and customer; and verification and validation of your products.

18–19 January 2010

Free Conference Registration to the Strategic and Tactical Missile Conference, Monterey, California
when you sign up for one of these Courses!

Making Decisions in Missile Defense (Instructor: Peter Mantle)

This course treats the various key factors that must be taken into account when deciding on the form of missile defense for any nation in a consistent
manner. It first takes the technical factors of performance, cost, schedule, and risk and determines which system out of a set of candidate systems
provides the best solution based on a given set of easily understood criteria. These technical solutions are then modified, in a controlled and transpar-
ent manner, by such modifiers as political factors, national requirements, and other less tangible factors. All factors are presented with both historical
background trends for contextual appreciation and with known values that can be either statistical state-of-the-art values or user input values as needed.
Engineering formulation of equations and data is provided sparingly where necessary for technical background and for sensitivity analyses.

Tactical Missile Design—Integration (Instructor: Eugene L. Fleeman)

This is a self-contained short course on the fundamentals of tactical missile design and integration. The course provides a system-level, integrated method
for missile aerodynamic configuration/propulsion design and analysis. It addresses the broad range of alternatives in meeting performance, cost, and other
measures of merit requirements such as robustness, lethality, accuracy, observables, survivability, and reliability. Methods are generally simple closed-
form analytical expressions that are physics-based, to provide insight into the primary driving parameters. Configuration-sizing examples are presented for
rocket, turbojet, and ramjet-powered missiles. Typical values of missile parameters and the characteristics of current operational missiles are discussed.
Also discussed are the enabling subsystems and technologies for tactical missiles, the current/projected state-of-the-art, and launch platform integration.
Videos illustrate missile development activities and performance. Attendees will vote on the relative emphasis of types of targets, types of launch plat-
forms, topics, and one-on-one/roundtable discussion.

18–19 January 2010

Free Conference Registration to the U.S. Air Force T&E Days 2010 in Nashville, Tennessee
when you sign up for one of these Courses!
Systems Engineering Fundamentals (Instructor: John C. Hsu)
In today’s globalized environment, manufacturing and designing companies compete for business. To be successful, companies need to practice strate-
gies that minimize the possibility of degradation of product quality, cost overrun, schedule slippage, customer dissatisfaction, and system development
failures. In this course, you will learn why we need systems engineering; the systems engineering fundamentals, including requirements analysis and
development, functional analysis and allocation, and design decision analysis based on requirements; risk, opportunity, and issue management throughout
the development and design cycle; Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule and Work Breakdown Structure for development and design man-
agement; technical performance measurement for measuring, tracking, and validating design; interface management across in-house disciplines, supplier,
and customer; and verification and validation of your products.

Experimentation, Validation, and Uncertainty Analysis (Instructors: Dr. Hugh Coleman and Dr. Glenn Steele)
The instructors have updated their comprehensive two-day course to include material from the 3rd edition (2009) of their award-winning book and ASME
V&V20-2008: Standard for Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer. The course presents experimental uncertainty
analysis techniques based on 1)1995 ISO GUM ,2) 2005 Standard ASME-PTC19.1 Test Uncertainty, and 3) 2008 JCGM GUM Supplement: Evaluation of
Measurement Data—Propagation of Distributions Using a Monte Carlo Method in a well-paced sequence honed in over 90 presentations at companies,
research laboratories, and government institutes in the United States, Canada, Europe, and South America. The course covers the planning, design,
debugging, and execution of experiments used to validate a model, solve a problem, or characterize system behavior. Cases in which the experimental
result is determined only once or multiple times in a test are addressed and illustrated with examples from the authors’ experience.

1 February 2010–31 July 2010

Distance Learning Courses
Two self-paced courses available in the convenience of your home or office. Students receive instructions for completing the course, a course notebook,
problem sets, and accompanying texts. Over five months, you’ll follow a proven curriculum of reading and homework assignments.

Fundamentals of Aircraft Performance and Design (Francis Joseph Hale)

Why do aircraft look and fly the way they do? This course will give you an introduction to the major performance and design characteristics of conven-
tional, primarily subsonic, aircraft. At the end of the course, you will be able to use the physical characteristics of an existing aircraft to determine both its
performance for specified flight conditions and the flight conditions for best performance.

Introduction to Space Flight (Francis Joseph Hale)

By the time you finish this course, you will be able to plan a geocentric or interplanetary mission to include the determination of suitable trajectories, the
approximate velocity budget (the energy required), the approximate weight (mass) and number of stages of the booster, and the problems and options
associated with the terminal phase(s) of the mission. You’ll learn fundamental concepts and analytical expressions.

B30 AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009

 AIAA Courses and Training Program
Registration Form

Select your registration options below. Payment by

REGISTRATION FORM (or register online at www.aiaa.org)
B1109 2 check, credit card, or money order—payable to AIAA—
must accompany registration. To pay the member rate,
your membership must be in good standing.
All registrants please complete the information below. —REGISTRATION OPTIONS—
AIAA Non- AIAA Non- AIAA Non-
Member Member Member Member Member Member
1 Conference Badge Name First/Given Name M.I. Last/Family Name DISTANCE LEARNING COURSES (1 DECEMBER–30 APRIL 2010)
Early Bird by 1 Nov 09 Late by 1 Dec 09 On-site Beginning 1 Dec 09
Organization Name/Division/Mailstop
Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics
Address $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1200 $1300
Advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics
City State Country/Zip/Postal Code
$1145 $1245 $1250 $1350 $1250 $1350
E-mail Address Daytime Phone Number Computational Fluid Turbulence
$1195 $1295 $1250 $1350 $1250 $1350
Fax Number (include country code) Job Title/Rank Heat Transfer
$1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1200 $1300

3 AIAA MEMBERSHIP: If you are registering for one of the collocated professional
development short courses at the nonmember rate, included with your registration fee is
one year of AIAA membership.
COURSES OFFERED AT THE ASM 2010 CONFERENCE
Attend any professional development course and receive “free” registration to the conference sessions only
Early Bird by 9 Dec 09 Late by 5 Jan 10 On-site Beginning 8 Jan 10
Included in your AIAA membership will be periodic communications about AIAA
benefits, products, and services. Check here if you prefer not to receive membership Best Practices in Wind Tunnel Testing
information via e-mail. $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
From time to time, we make member information available to companies whose products Computational Multiphase Flow
or services may be of interest to you. Check here if you prefer not to have your name $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
and address used for non-AIAA mailings. Flow Control for Specialists
Signature_____________________________________________Date__________________ $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Check here if you are renewing or reinstating your membership. (You must pay the full Fluid-Structure Interaction
nonmember conference fee.) $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Large Eddy Simulations: Theory, Applications, and Advanced Topics
RETURN FORM TO: $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375

4 1) For fastest, easiest

service, register
online at
2) By mail: return completed
form with payment to
AIAA, Professional Development
3) By fax: send the signed,
completed form with credit
card payment to
Modeling Flight Dynamics with Tensors
$1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Microfluidics and Nanofluidics: Fundamentals and Applications
www.aiaa.org/courses 1801 Alexander Bell Dr., Ste 500 703.264.7657 $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Reston, VA, 20191 Systems Engineering Fundamentals
Cancellations Substitutions may be made at any time. Cancellations must be postmarked $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
four weeks before the course start date and are subject to a $100 cancellation fee to cover
administrative overhead. AIAA reserves the right to cancel any program due to insufficient COURSES OFFERED AT STRATEGIC AND TACTICAL MISSILE CONFERENCE
registration or any situation beyond its control. Each course will be reviewed three weeks Attend any professional development course and receive “free” registration to the conference sessions only
prior to the start date and may be canceled if a minimum enrollment has not been reached. Early Bird by 21 Dec 09 Late by 17 Jan 10 On-site Beginning 18 Jan 10
Participants will be notified immediately and a full refund will be issued. AIAA cannot be
responsible for expenses incurred because of course cancellation. AIAA reserves the right Making Decisions in Missile Defense
to substitute speakers in the event of unusual circumstances. For additional information, call $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Dan Medina at 703.264.7642 or 800.639.2422; FAX 703.264.7657; E-mail: danielm@ Tactical Missile Design—Integration
aiaa.org.
$1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375

5 Check here if you need to make special arrangements due to a disability.

Attach requirements on a separate sheet of paper.
COURSES OFFERED AT U.S. AIR FORCE T&E DAYS
Attend any professional development course and receive “free” registration to the conference sessions only
Early Bird by 4 Jan 10 Late by 29 Jan 10 On-site Beginning 31 Jan 10

6 FORM OF PAYMENT:
AIAA Member Number: ___________________________
Purchase Order American Express
All registrants must provide
a valid ID (driver’s license or
passport) when they check in.
Systems Engineering Fundamentals
$1095 $1195 $1200
Experimentation, Validation and Uncertainty Analysis
$1300 $1275 $1375

For student registration, valid $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1275 $1375
Check VISA student ID is also required.
Travelers Check MasterCard DISTANCE LEARNING COURSES (1 FEBRUARY–31 JULY 2010)
Wire Transfer Diners Club 5% Group Discounts Early Bird by 1 Jan 10 Late by 1 Feb 10 On-site Beginning 1 Feb 10
Deduct 5% for three or
Credit Card Number: more students from the Fundamentals of Aircraft Performance and Design
same organization, if $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1200 $1300
______________________________________________ Introduction to Space Flight
registered simultaneously,
Expiration Date: _________Month _______ Year _____ prepaid, and postmarked $1095 $1195 $1200 $1300 $1200 $1300
four weeks before the first .
Signature: _____________________________________ day of the course. Please Please indicate if you qualify for the:
E-mail address of cardholder for receipt: register each person on a __ Prepaid Group Discount (One 5% discount per registrant)
separate form. Photocopies
______________________________________________ are acceptable. TOTAL DUE: $ _______________________

AIAA BULLETIN / NOVEMBER 2009 B31

StandardConferenceinfoleftpage.qxd 10/14/09 1:49 PM Page 56
Standard Information for all AIAA Conferences
This is general conference information, except as noted in the individual
conference preliminary program information to address exceptions.
Photo ID Needed at Registration
All registrants must provide a valid photo ID (driver’s license
or passport) when they check in. For student registration, valid
student ID is also required.
Conference Proceedings
This year’s conference proceedings will be available in two for-
mats: after-meeting DVD and online proceedings. The cost is includ-
ed in the registration fee where indicated. If you register in advance
for the online papers, you will be provided with instructions on how
to access the conference technical papers. For those registering on-
site, you will be provided with instructions at registration. The after-
meeting DVD will be mailed six to eight weeks after the conference.
Journal Publication
Authors of appropriate papers are encouraged to submit them
for possible publication in one of the Institute’s archival journals:
AIAA Journal; Journal of Aircraft; Journal of Guidance, Control,
and Dynamics; Journal of Propulsion and Power; Journal of
Spacecraft and Rockets; Journal of Thermophysics and Heat
Transfer; or Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and
Communication. WriteTrack will be replaced by ScholarOne
Manuscripts (Thomson Reuters) during 2009. More information
about the transition is available on the WriteTrack home page.
Speakers’ Briefing
Authors who are presenting papers, session chairs, and co-
chairs will meet for a short briefing at 0700 hrs on the mornings of
the conference. Continental breakfast will be provided. Please
plan to attend only on the day of your session(s). Location will be
in final program.
Speakers’ Practice
A speaker practice room will be available for speakers wishing
to practice their presentations. A sign-up sheet will be posted on
the door for half-hour increments.
Timing of Presentations
Each paper will be allotted 30 minutes (including introduction
and question-and-answer period) except where noted.
Audiovisual
Each session room will be preset with the following: one LCD
projector, one screen, and one microphone (if needed). A 1/2”
VHS VCR and monitor, an overhead projector, and/or a 35-mm
slide projector will only be provided if requested by presenters on
their abstract submittal forms. AIAA does not provide computers or
technicians to connect LCD projectors to the laptops. Should pre-
senters wish to use the LCD projectors, it is their responsibility to
bring or arrange for a computer on their own. Please note that
AIAA does not provide security in the session rooms and recom-
mends that items of value, including computers, not be left unat-
tended. Any additional audiovisual requirements, or equipment not
requested by the date provided in the preliminary conference infor-
mation, will be at cost to the presenter.
Employment Opportunities
AIAA is assisting members who are searching for employment
by providing a bulletin board at the technical meetings. This bulletin
board is solely for “open position” and “available for employment”
postings. Employers are encouraged to have personnel who are
attending an AIAA technical conference bring “open position” job
postings. Individual unemployed members may post “available for
employment” notices. AIAA reserves the right to remove inappro-
priate notices, and cannot assume responsibility for notices for-
warded to AIAA Headquarters. AIAA members can post and
browse resumes and job listings, and access other online employ-
ment resources, by visiting the AIAA Career Center at
http://careercenter.aiaa.org.
Committee Meetings
Meeting room locations for AIAA committees will be posted on
the message board and will be available upon request in the reg-
istration area.
Messages and Information
Messages will be recorded and posted on a bulletin board in
the registration area. It is not possible to page conferees. A tele-
phone number will be provided in the final program.
Membership
Professionals registering at the nonmember rate will receive a
one-year AIAA membership. Students who are not members may
apply their registration fee toward their first year's student mem-
ber dues.
Nondiscriminatory Practices
The AIAA accepts registrations irrespective of race, creed, sex,
color, physical handicap, and national or ethnic origin.
Smoking Policy
Smoking is not permitted in the technical sessions.
Restrictions
Videotaping or audio recording of sessions or technical exhibits
as well as the unauthorized sale of AIAA-copyrighted material is
prohibited.
Department of Defense Approval
The DoD Public Affairs Office has determined that, for purpos-
es of accepting a gift of reduced or free attendance, these events
are widely attended gatherings pursuant to 5 CFR 2635.204(g).
This determination is not a DoD endorsement of the events nor
approval for widespread attendance. If individual DoD Component
commands or organizations determine that attendance by particu-
lar personnel is in DoD interest, those personnel may accept the
gift of free or reduced attendance. As other exceptions under 5
CFR 2635.204 may allow the acceptance of gifts, DoD personnel
are urged to consult their Ethics Counselor.
International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
AIAA speakers and attendees are reminded that some topics
discussed in the conference could be controlled by the
International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). U.S. Nationals
(U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents) are responsible for
ensuring that technical data they present in open sessions to non-
U.S. Nationals in attendance or in conference proceedings are not
export restricted by the ITAR. U.S. Nationals are likewise respon-
sible for ensuring that they do not discuss ITAR export-restricted
information with non-U.S. Nationals in attendance.
 New!
1FSTPOBM
t
'MFYJCMF
t
1PSUBCMF
t
5SVTUFE
AIAA eBooks
Gain the portability, flexibility, and personalization that AIAA eBooks
provide. Now available from AIAA—your trusted source for aerospace
research for more than 75 years.

t
More than 200 titles
GSPN
UIF
AIAA Education Series
BOE
UIF

Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics
TFSJFT‰including formerly
out-of-print volumes from the 1960s and beyond.

t
3FBE
JU
online PS download JU
UP
ZPVS
DPNQVUFS

t
PDF format‰FBTJMZ
SFBE
UISPVHI
UIF
free Adobe software.

t
"WBJMBCMF
BU
UIF
chapter level
JO
BEEJUJPO
UP
UIF
entire book.

t
Print, copy, cut, paste!
TPNF
SFTUSJDUJPOT
BQQMZ

t
"*""
.FNCFST
SFDFJWF
B
25% discount
PGG
PG
MJTU
QSJDF

t
.BLF
OPUFT
TFBSDI
BOE
FYQPSU
DJUBUJPOT

t
3FDFJWF
FNBJM
BMFSUT
BOE
344
GFFET

Start reading today at

http://ebooks.aiaa.org
Institutions wishing to purchase access should contact Adrian Fair at
adrianf@aiaa.org, 888.854.6853, or 703.264.7505.
Collections are available for all titles, by series, or by subject.
 Rapid
RapidPrototyping
Prototyping Autocoding HILTesting
HIL Testing

Rapid
RapidPrototyping
Prototyping Autocoding HILTesting
HIL Testing

Rapid
RapidPrototyping
Prototyping Autocoding HILTesting
HIL Testing

Rapid
RapidPrototyping
Prototyping Autocoding HILTesting
HIL Testing

HondaJet-aero-Ad_1-1-page_212x282mm_01_090326_E.indd 1 26.03.2009 17:20:20