slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Aviation Safety and Security Program Overview and Perspective on University Programs PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Aviation Safety and Security Program Overview and Perspective on University Programs

Aviation Safety and Security Program Overview and Perspective on University Programs

262 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Aviation Safety and Security Program Overview and Perspective on University Programs

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. National Aeronauticsand Space Administration Aviation Safety and Security Program Overview and Perspective on University Programs • April 13, 2005 • Brian E. Smith • Chief, Aviation Safety & Security Projects Office • Ames Research Center Explore - Discover - Understand

  2. OUTLINE Overview of Current Aviation Safety & Security Program Current AvSSP University and Cost-Shared Partnerships Future (FY06-10) Acquisition Strategies

  3. Overview of Current Aviation Safety & Security Program

  4. Protect Air Travelers and the Public Protect the Environment Increase Mobility Protect the Nation Explore New Aeronautical Missions Aviation Safety & Security Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Objectives Programs Vehicle Systems Airspace Systems

  5. Decrease the aircraft fatal accident rate and the vulnerability of the air transportation system to threats and mitigate the consequences of accidents and hostile acts Aviation Safety & Security Program Goal: Objectives: • Develop and demonstrate technologies that reduce aircraft accident rates and reduce aviation injuries and fatalities when accidents do occur • Develop technologies that reduce the vulnerability of the National Airspace System to terrorist attacks while dramatically improving efficiency of security • Transfer these advanced concepts, technologies and procedures through a partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in cooperation with the U.S. aeronautics industry Outcomes: • By 2005, enable a reduction of the aviation fatal accident rate by 50% from theFY 91-96 average. • By 2009, enable a reduction in the vulnerability exposure of aircraft and other components in the air transportation system. • By 2012, facilitate the near real-time identification and resolution of risks and vulnerabilities in the air transportation system.

  6. AvSSP Planning History Aviation Safety Investment Strategy Team (ASIST) Process Overview Industry Input; Identify Major Accident Causes & Issues Workshop 1 Feb 18-21, 1997 Over 100 gov’t/industry organizations Five Sub-Teams produced 58 prioritized recommended investments These 58 were grouped into 23 Planning Elements in Three Investment Areas Workshop 2 Mar 5-6, 1997 Underlying Problems Workshop 3 Mar 24 -28, 1997 Solutions Five Teams Integrated Solution Set & Investment Options Workshop 4 Apr 15-17, 1997 Areas Three Investment Aeronautics & Space Transportation Technology Executive Council Apr 23, 1997 Aviation System Monitoring & Modeling Accident Prevention Accident Mitigation

  7. ASIST Participating Organizations Advanced Nav. & Position Corp. AIA AIAA Alaska Airlines Allied Signal Allison Engine Company ALPA AMA AOPA Air Safety Foundation ARCCA ARINC Arizona State Univ. ARNAV Systems, Inc. Assoc. of Flight Attendants ATA Aviation Research Inc. AvioniCom Battelle Bell Helicopter/ Textron Boeing Boeing Helicopter Group Boston University Cessna Aircraft Co. Delta Airlines DoD/ Air Force Safety Center DoD/ ARMY Safety Center DoD/ NAV Air DoD/ Naval Safety Center DoD/ NAVMAR DoD/ NAWCAD, Pax River DoD/ USAF, 416FLTS DoD/ USAF/WPAFB DoD/ WL/XPK DOT/ Volpe Center Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. ERC Inc. FAA/ AAR FAA/ AAR (LaRC ) FAA/ ACE FAA/ AFS FAA/ AIR FAA/ AND FAA/ ANM FAA/ ARA FAA/ ASD FAA/ ASY FAA/ AUA FAA/ AVR FAA/ AWR FAA/ CAMI FAA/ Technical Center Flight Data Co. GAMA General Electric Gulfstream Aerospace Helicopter Assoc. Inter. (HAI) Honeywell Hughes Jeppesen Johns Hopkins Univ. Litton/ APD Litton/ PRC Lockheed Martin McDonnell Douglas McDonnell Douglas Helicopter MITRE Corporation NARI NASA/ ARC NASA/ DRFC NASA/ HQ NASA/ JPL NASA/ LaRC NASA/ LeRC NATA NATCA Natl. Inst. for Aviation Research National Weather Service NAVAIR NBAA NCAR NOAA North Carolina A&T Univ. Northrop Grumman Northwest Airlines NRL NTSB - Seattle Field Office NTSB - Washington, DC Office OFCM - Fed. Coor. for Metrlgy Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Engines Regional Airline Assoc. Rockwell International RTI SAIC SAMA Sikorsky Aircraft TASC TechMatics, Inc. Teledyne Cont. UCLA University of Illinois Wichita State University Williams International

  8. Strategic Foci Hostile Act Intervention & Prevention Aeronautics Research Aircraft Self-Protection & Preservation Human Error Avoidance Protecting Air Travelers and the Public ARC, LaRC LaRC, GRC System Vulnerability Discovery & Management Environmental Hazards Awareness & Mitigation LaRC, GRC, DFRC ARC, GRC, LaRC, DFRC, JPL LaRC, GRC, ARC, DFRC

  9. Accident Mitigation Aviation Safety Projects FY 2000-2005 Vehicle Safety Technologies System Safety Technologies Synthetic Vision Systems Aviation System Monitoring & Modeling Single Aircraft Accident Prevention Weather Safety Technologies System-Wide Accident Prevention Aircraft Icing Weather Accident Prevention

  10. NASA Aviation Security Research • NASA Contributions • Development of long-range, advanced technology • Leverage existing technology & expertise • Fill voids/niches as requested • Emphases • Detection of new vulnerabilities • Vulnerability mitigation for aircraft & systems • Security research viewed as an inherently Government activity. • Will not be discussing Aviation Security vis a vis University research.

  11. Joint Planning & Development Office (JPDO)Engagement and Observations Transforming the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NGATS) • The 108th Congress and President Bush enacted VISION 100 - Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-176). • An integrated, multi-agency plan to transform the nation’s air transportation system to meet the needs of the year 2025. • NGATS Initiative will address critical safety and economic needs in civil aviation while fully integrating national defense and homeland security improvements into this future system. AvSSP Engagement: • AvSSP participating in Security, Safety, Weather and Shared Situational Awareness IPT action plan development. • CAST Joint Implementation Measures Data Analysis Team (JIMDAT) providing input on Safety IPT goals, objectives and safety management framework. • AvSSP exploring safety modeling and analysis opportunities with the JPDO Evaluation and Analysis Team. Observations: • Weather IPT scope is metrology focused and does not include technologies such as Synthetic Vision Systems: recommend broadening the scope. • Security IPT moving slowly and has been DHS-centric to date. AvSSP can greatly contribute to the security roadmapping effort in the area of requirements and solution set development • Evaluation and Analysis activities create excellent opportunities for AvSSP support and contribution. Increased EAO – AvSSP engagement will provide mutual benefit.

  12. NGATS Institute Studies IPT Expert Participation JPDO Organization Senior Policy Committee REDAC ExecutiveCommittee FAA Administrator JPDO Board NGATS InstituteStakeholder Review Panel JPDO Director/ Deputy Dir Master IPT Partnership Management Business Management Sys Engineering & Integration Chief Architect Interagency IPT Leads NGATS Institute Executive Director Evaluations & Analysis Portfolio Management Interagency IPTs AvSSP-supported Integrated Product Teams AirportInfrastructure FAA AviationSecurity DHS Air TrafficManagement NASA SituationalAwareness DoD ? EnvironmentalProtection FAA Weather DOC Global Harmonization FAA SafetyManagement FAA

  13. Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (HQ) Aviation Safety & Security (HQ) Airspace Systems (HQ) Vehicle Systems (HQ) Current Safety Projects (end in FY 05) Vehicle Safety Technologies (LaRC) System Safety Technologies (ARC) Weather Safety Technologies (GRC) Current Security Projects (end in FY09 Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability Mitigation (LaRC) 2005 Secure Aircraft System for Information Flow (GRC) System Vulnerability Detection (ARC) Planned Safety Projects from March 04 Planning Workshop Aircraft Systems Self-Diagnosis and Self-Reliance (LaRC) Integrated Flight Deck Information Systems (LaRC) Integrated Safety Data for Strategic Response (ARC) High Temperature Hazard Mitigation (GRC) Threat and Human Error Management (ARC) Design Tools & Ops for In-Flight Icing (GRC)

  14. Transformation of AvSSP Starting in FY06 • Emphasis on “barrier-breaking” technologies and/or paradigm-shifting research. • Fewer projects than planned during March 2004 Industry/Gov’t workshops. • More emphasis on unique role of NASA (“as only NASA can”); example: Industry/FAA Voluntary Aviation Safety Information-sharing Process (VASIP) • Designed to provide means for aviation industry and FAA sharing of safety-related information to proactively identify, analyze and correct safety issues • Develops a technical process to extract de-identified safety data from any participating airline FOQA and ASAP programs, aggregate it through distributed databases and make it accessible to appropriate industry stakeholders for analysis • NASA identified as having the institutional background, resources and personnel capable of developing this technical aggregation framework, as well as the analytical tools to support the process • Barriers can be socio-political in nature.

  15. AvSSP Research Transition Plan: FY05-FY07+Approach:fewer Projects consistent with resources FY06 Transition Activities in Formulation FY06+ Projects From March 04 Workshop Phase I Final Year FY05 Projects Transformational FY07 Paradigm Planning & Prep for Competed Projects Applied/Operational & Basic Research Implementation Risk Reduction for Phase I Vehicle Safety Technologies (LaRC) Competed Demonstration Projects starting in FY07 Aircraft Systems Self-Diagnosis and Self-Reliance (LaRC) System Safety Technologies (ARC) Self-Preserving Aircraft Aviation Safety Integrated Flight Deck Information Systems (LaRC) Weather Safety Technologies (GRC) Safe Single-Pilot Operations Threat and Human Error Management (ARC) FY06 Ongoing Activities Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability Mitigation (LaRC) Integrated Safety Data for Strategic Response (ARC) Integrated Safety Data for Strategic Response (ARC) Safety & Security Information Sharing System Vulnerability Detection (ARC) High Temperature Hazard Mitigation (GRC) Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability Mitigation (LaRC) thru FY09 Aviation Security Cyber Secure Air Transportation System Vulnerability Detection (ARC) thru FY09 Secure Aircraft System for Information Flow (GRC) Design Tools & Ops for In-Flight Icing (GRC) Directed Research Secure Aircraft System for Information Flow (GRC) thru FY09 Foundational Research Program Aviation Safety Reporting System (ARC/FAA) Aviation Safety Reporting System (ARC/FAA)

  16. Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (HQ) Aviation Safety & Security (HQ) Airspace Systems (HQ) Vehicle Systems (HQ) Current Safety Projects (End in FY 05) Vehicle Safety Technologies (LaRC) System Safety Technologies (ARC) Weather Safety Technologies (GRC) Ongoing Security Projects Aircraft & Systems Vulnerability Mitigation (LaRC) Secure Aircraft System for Information Flow (GRC) System Vulnerability Detection (ARC) Future Projects from FY07 Program Operating Plan Self-Preserving Aircraft FY 07-12 Safe Single-Pilot Operation FY 07-11 Cyber Secure Air Transportation FY 10-14 Safety and Security Information Sharing FY 07-12

  17. Safety & Security Information Sharing Self-Preserving Aircraft Summaries of FY07 Competed Demonstrations Addresses capabilities for detecting, managing, and mitigating events, failures, and errors that would otherwise lead to hazardous situations and could result in injury and death of people. In designing self-preserving aircraft systems, a verification and validation basis for certification must be developed. Demonstrations should occur on real/virtual “obstacle courses” where hazard precursors are staged and vehicle adaptability and performance are observed. Demonstrate government/industry sharing of key safety risk and security vulnerability information and demonstrate a working prototype of network-based integration of information sources allowing assessment of risk within the National Aviation System. This prototype will be scalable within the proprietary firewalls of a single operator to NAS-wide functionality, will be flexible across both strategic and tactical timeframes, and should overcome obstacles to interoperability of distributed data sources. Safe Single-Pilot Operations Cyber Secure Air Transportation Current and evolutionary flight deck systems, operational concepts, and technologies do not promote optimal pilot situation awareness, workload allocation, and decision-making. Demonstrate reliable adaptive automation and pilot interfaces that prevent unsafe flight situations due to breakdown between human/machine interface and technologies to enable general aviation and single crew cargo operations with safety equivalent to two-crew operation. Demonstrate improved human and automation reliability. Demonstrate a robust cyber attack-proof e-aircraft (i.e., one that is fully capable of exploiting all characteristics of a fully digital airspace) operating in a future, digital secure NAS network to enable secure network operations with no loss in efficiency due to security measures. Ensure security risk reduction technologies that enhance efficient NAS operations by demonstrating seamless, fully secured, mobile, scaleable networks.

  18. Current AvSSP University and Cost-Shared Partnerships

  19. Historical AvSSPUniversity Partnerships, FY04 in $K Langley Research Center $3,213 Hampton, VA Ames Research Center $4,359 Moffett Field, CA Glenn Research Center $2,524 Cleveland, OH TOTAL Program University Procurement $10,096 Approximately 12% of FY04 Procurement directly funds University Research; equivalent to 6% of Total Program Full-Cost dollars; itemized list of recipients in Back-Up Charts

  20. FY04 AvSSP University Contracts, Cooperative Agreements, Grants & Purchase Orders Contracts 4 Purchase Orders 33 59 Cooperative Agreements 21 Grants

  21. Future (FY06-10) Acquisition Strategies

  22. AvSSP Business / Acquisition Strategy(Circa 1998, Updated 2005) • NASA ARMD objective: cost-sharing preferred, ie., NASA should “not pay for all of anything” • Joint NASA/FAA/industry workshops called for moving from investment areas to specific implementation options (1997 ASIST) • - Technical discussions • - Identified appropriate Government/industry/academic roles • - Facilitated industry team-building • Used standard competitive procurements where required specifications are known • Used workshop results to intelligently structure NRA solicitations for new technology developments • - Cost-sharing is selection factor • - Emphasis on motivation/time/team for implementation/commercialization • Established Cooperative Agreements as preferred arrangement with selected NRA offerors • Aviation Safety 2000-2005 NRA’s were highly successful in leveraging NASA funds, securing partner commitment • to R&D products, & handing-off of mature technologies.

  23. FY06-10 Budget Prospectus • Significant cuts from current FY05 $906M Aeronautics Research budgets in out years. • Major reductions in Vehicle Systems Program • Significant transformations in acquisition strategies within Airspace Systems & AvSSP data from Feb. 7 budget release now in public domain

  24. Future Acquisition Strategies • Increased pressure for competitive selection similar to past NASA Research Announcement (NRA) process. • By FY07, ~50% of total Full-Cost budgets will be “Competed.” • Remainder considered to be “Directed” funding and “Foundational” research. • Currently only ~25% of total Full-Cost budget is considered “Procurement” available for technical work. • AvSSP currently has no specific acquisition targets for University work in the out-years. • A significant percentage of the new Foundational Research Program will target University partners.

  25. Comparison of Current and FutureAvSSP Acquisition Strategies FY05 Full-Cost Model FY07 Model Procurement:$’s available for in-house & out-of-house research Non-Procurement: Salaries Travel Institutional Support 25% Competed Demonstrations:Including: Salaries Travel Institutional Support Directed Research: Including: Salaries Travel Institutional Support Foundational Research Program ~75% 75% ~5% ~20%

  26. Challenges within the New Strategy • NASA Institutions may be in direct competition with outside entities for 50% of future research dollars. • Research and institutional segments of NASA will need to partner with Universities, industry & Other Government Agencies to win some significant percentage of Competed Acquisitions. • NASA aviation safety research has addressed needs of: • Manufacturers (airframe, engine, avionics) • Airlines (crew procedures, fatigue, maintenance, training) • Air traffic control (facility day-to-day operations) • ARMD will need to determine level of support for operational research needed to… • Maintain safety in an environment of continuous change within those segments of aviation that are currently enjoying historically-low accident rates, namely, Part 121 commercial-transport operations. Changes may come in the form of introduction of new aircraft, new airspace operational paradigms, new avionics, changing pilot demographics, evolving security threats, airline cost-cutting, and a host of other factors. • Improve safetyin those segments of aviation that are viewed as the least safe, namely, GA, public-safety aircraft, single-pilot light jets, etc.

  27. AcademiaNASA BRIDGEOperational Community System Safety Technologies, System Wide Accident Prevention (SWAP) Sub-Project Overhaul of Southwest Airlines procedures resulted in a 60% reduction of problems in line ops. After Insertion of SWAP Training Procedures VP of Southwest Airlines has invited AvSS Division Manager, George Finelli, to SW HQ at DFW to give him kudos on NASA SWAP tools that made this possible.

  28. AcademiaNASA BRIDGEOperational Community NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System General Accomplishments • Since the implementation of the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) in 1976, over 637,000 reports have been submitted by pilots, mechanics, air traffic controllers, cabin attendants, and other aviation personnel. • The ASRS is the largest repository of aviation human factors incidents in the world. • The ASRS has accomplished over 7,100 database searches for government agencies, students, universities, research organizations, international organizations, aircraft manufacturers, etc. • Since 1976, the ASRS has issued over 3,400 safety alert messages in the form of Alert Bulletins & For Your Information Notices. Approximately, 47% of the addressee responses indicated that a follow-up action was taken as a result of the safety alert message. Example Operational Impacts • Identified and alerted the FAA Office of Aviation Safety & the National Business Aviation Association to the increasing frequency of Teterboro Airport (TEB) departure conflicts with Newark Airport (EWR) arrivals. NBAA has notified its members to be on alert for amended altitudes and headings, while the FAA has instructed its controllers to ensure clear and concise  communications be initiated especially as they relate to TEB 5 IDP amendment procedures. • Issued several ASRS Alert Bulletins to Embraer concerning EMB135/145 cockpit seat lock failures. FAA Flight Standards response indicated possible issuance of an AD to address the problem. Example NTSB Accident Support • Accomplished a database search request on TCAS conflict incidents for the NTSB in support of the investigation of the B757 and Tu154 mid-air collision over Germany.

  29. Upcoming Activities • Aviation Safety and Security Program Sub-Committee of the Aeronautics Research Advisory Committee Meeting scheduled Q2 2005. • Replanning of current AvSSP portfolio consistent with available resources. • Non-Advocate Review of portfolio in late FY05 or early FY06 in preparation for AvSSP II start.

  30. Concluding Remarks • • Significant paradigm-shifting work has been • accomplished in the 5 years of Aviation Safety; • FY05 is the final year of implementation. • • First year of implementation for Aviation • Security projects going very well • - Subprojects are well coordinated with • customers/partners • - Vulnerability assessment is providing • a firm foundation for implementing activities in all technical areas • • Construction of future Aviation Safety R&D portfolio well underway; awaiting final FY 2006 and out budgets to complete. • Increased emphasis on Competed Acquisitions in out-years of AvSSP II. • As is currently the case, University research will play a key role in AvSSP research portfolio albeit on a competitive basis.

  31. Back-up Charts

  32. Coordination withHomeland Security-Related Organizations Department of Transportation • Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) • Interagency Communications Team • Regular and direct coordination • Aircraft Airworthiness; Air Traffic; Safety R&D Program • Continuing strong partnerships developed in Aviation Safety Program and Airspace Systems Program Homeland Security Presidential Directive(s) Interagency Working Groups • Federal Critical Infrastructure Protection R&D Plan (HSPD-7) • Cyber Security Infrastructure Protection R&D Plan Working Group member. Federal R&D Plan due President Dec. 2004 • Transportation Sector CIP R&D Plan Although, not member of working group, reviewing draft • Comprehensive Terrorist-Related Screening Procedures Report (HSPD-11) • Member of team developing strategies to enhance effectiveness of screening activities, Report due President Nov 2004. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) • Border & Transportation Security Directorate – Transportation Security Administration (TSA) • Transportation Security Laboratory • Regular & direct participation in several NASA technical working groups (TWGs) • Transportation Security Policy & Security Technology Office • Interactions at Program & HQ levels; MOU in-process • Strategic Management & Analysis • Developing partnership for vulnerability assessments • Currently scheduling a senior management NASA/TSA courtesy visit and briefing • Border & Transportation Security Directorate – Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) • Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) • Direct interaction at technology level, requirements negotiation at user level; MOU in-process • Science & Technology Directorate • Limited discussions, need to further develop • System Engineering Development • Technical & Programmatic discussions with Counter-MANPADS director • Discussions with Cyber Security Office • Chief Information Officer • Limited discussions, and invited to join working group to strengthen sharing of terrorism information • Business Liaison Director • Limited discussions

  33. Coordination withHomeland Security-Related Organizations White House Homeland Security Council, Border and Transportation Security Directorate • Regular member on interagency working group ATF, FBI, USSS, NORAD, NORTHCOM, FAA, TSA, OSD, OMB, DOT, DHS) Other Interagency • Interagency Homeland Air Security (IHAS) Steering Group • (Co-leads: White House Homeland Security Council & JTAMDO; membership: NORAD, NORTHCOM, FAA, TSA, FBI, USSS, OSD, ASD-HD, ICE, FAMS) • IHAS Steering Group and National Capital Region Working Group • Regular participation by NASA Program Office & technical personnel Department of Defense (DoD) • Air Force, Navy, Army • Direct coordination between relevant NASA & DoD technical activities; leveraging NASA-DoD partnerships & existing MOAs • I.e., Hanscome AFB, Eglin AFB, Wright-Patterson AFB, NAVAIR, AFRL, JTAMDO, Draper, NEADS, TRADOC, Tyndal AFB, ACC, NAVCAN, OSD AS&C, OSD-HD, • Joint Aircraft Survivability Program Office (JASPO) • Regular & direct participation by JASPO & Service personnel in NASA TWGs • U.S. Northern Command and NORAD • Joint Interagency Coordination Team member • regular member of various tiger teams • participates in exercises such as AV 04 • National Innovative Technology & Mission Assurance Center (NITMAC) • MOU in-process




  37. NASA Advisory Council to the Administrator Aerospace Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) Advisory body to Aero Enterprise regarding plans, policies, and programs D. Swain, Chair and B. Neumann, Exec. Sec. Aeronautics Technology Subcommittee (ATS) To assess programs, provide advice on appropriateness of the goals and objectives, assess adequacy of progress and quality of effort, and recommend changes David Crow, Chair and Terry Hertz, Exec Sec Small Aircraft Transportation Sys SC Aviation Safety Reporting System SC Mark Anderson Bill Borger Mike Benzakein Chris Hart John Hansman Jack Clemons John O’Brien Mark Miller Ron Swanda Richard Trusis Safety Working Group John O’Brien, Chair