Federal Research and Technology for Aviation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Federal Research and Technology for Aviation September 1994 OTA-ETI-610 NTIS order #PB95-109195 GPO stock #052-003-01391-6 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Federal Research and Technology for Aviation, OTA–ETI-61O (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1994). For sale by the US. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documenta, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328 Foreword ithin the United States, only the federal government has the re- sources to support large-scale, applied research and develop- ment programs for aviation safety and infrastructure. Federally sponsored aviation research has received considerable congres- sionalw attention in the last decade due to the need to modernize and expand the U.S. airspace system, address aircraft safety and environmental issues, and respond to terrorism threats against air travelers. The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and its Subcommittee on Competitive- ness and Technology (now the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment and Aviation) asked the Office of Technolog y Assessment to take a compre- hensive look at the federal R&D that underpins the Federal Aviation Ad- ministration’s technology and regulatory development programs. Long- term research efforts and airline economics were special concerns. The study was also endorsed by the House Subcommittee on Aviation of the Committee on Public Works and Transportation, and the House Subcom- mittee on Government Activities and Transportation of the Committee on Government Operations. This report focuses on research and technology policy issues for aviation operations: safety, security, environmental protection, and the air traffic system. Achievements in science and technology have helped make the U.S. air transportation system the safest and most efficient in the world, but the system could be improved further. However, operational success in the complex aviation system depends on more than technological advances. If technological solutions are to be more timely and useful, federal aviation R&D programs will need more effective approaches to priority setting and analysis, and more active participation by operational” experts. This is cru- cial for the air traffic system, where technology decisions have not always meshed with operational requirements. In this report, OTA identifies vari- ous initiatives that Congress and federal agencies could consider in setting the national aviation R&D agenda, restructuring the management process for air traffic system R&D, and clarifying FAA’s role in long-term research and in international standards development for an increasingly global avi- ation system. OTA appreciates the invaluable advice and assistance of the many people who contributed to this project, including the advisory panel, con- tractors, and reviewers. ROGER C. HERDMAN Director ,,, Ill Najeeb E. Halaby, Chairman David Haase Willard G. Plentl, Jr. Chairman Executive Central Air Safety Director Safair International Chairman Division of Aviation for North Air Line Pilots Association Carolina Robert W. Baker Executive Vice President, Jonathan Howe Robert W. Simpson Operations Attorney Director American Airlines, Inc. Zuckert, Scoutt & Rasenberger Flight Transportation Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of William F. Ball ha us, Jr. Noreene Koan Technology President Chairperson, National Air Safety Martin Marietta Aero & Naval Committee Richard Swauger Systems Association of Flight Attendants Air Traffic Consultant Robert A. Davis Richard Livingston Patricia F. Wailer Vice President, Engineering Consultant Director Boeing Commercial Airplane Transportation Research Institute Group T. Al Ian McArtor University of Michigan President Donald D. Engen FEDEX Aeronautics Corp. President AOPA Air Safety Foundation Clinton V. Oster, Jr. Professor Edmund S. Greenslet School of Public and President Environmental Affairs ESG Aviation Services Indiana University Note: OTA appreciates and is grateful for the valuable assistance and thoughtful critiques provided by the advisory panel members. The panel does not, however, necessarily approve, disapprove, or endorse this report. OTA- assumes fuII responsibility for the report and the accuracy of its contents. Preject Staff Peter Blair1 PRINCIPAL STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF Assistant Director KEVIN DOPART Marsha Fenn Industry, Commerce, and Project Director Editor International Security Division Kelley Scott Lillian Chapman John Andelin2 Principal Analyst Division Administrator Assistant Director Science, Information, and Daniel Cohen Gay Jackson Natural Resources Division Analyst PC Specialist Emilia L. Govan Gregory Wallace Tina Aikens Program Director Research Analyst Administrative Secretary Energy, Transportation, and Infrastructure Tamara Kowalski CONTRIBUTING STAFF Secretary Elizabeth Sheley In-House Contractor Jeanne Olivier Detailee, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey CONTRACTORS Dale Atkinson Global Aviation John Rhea Consultant Associates, Ltd. Consultant Andrew Pickens J. Lynn Helms Robert W. Simpson AVCOMM, Inc. International Consultants, Ltd. Flight Transportation Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology Richard Golaszewski Michael J. Prather Rokaya A. A1-Ayat Gellman Research Department of Geosciences Institute of Transportation Studies Associates. Inc. University of California, University of California, Berkeley Irvine 1 After Augu\t 1993. 2 Through Au.gu\t 1993. Reviewers Thomas Accardi Terry Hertz Paul Polski Federal Aviation Administration National Aeronautics and Space Federal Aviation Administration Administration Jim Bryson Martin Pozesky U.S. Environmental Protection Mark Hofmann Federal Aviation Administration Agency Federal Aviation Administration Robert Rovinsky Frank J. Colson Herbert Jasper Federal Aviation Administration Department of Defense McManus Associates, Inc. Constantine Sarkos William B. Cotton Nicholas Krull Federal Aviation Administration United Airlines, Inc. Federal Aviation Administration Arthur Shrantz James L. Crook Mary Ann Kruslicky National Center for Atmospheric Air Traffic Control Association U.S. General Accounting Office Research Jack Durham Paul Larson David Swierenga U.S. Environmental Protection Federal Aviation Administration Air Transport Association of Agency America Alfred W. Lindsey John Fearnsides U.S. Environmental Protection Maris Vikmanis The Mitre Corp. Agency Wright-Patterson Air Force Base John Fischer David Lockwood Stein Weissenberger Congressional Research Service Global Aviation Associates, Ltd. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Richard Golaszewski John McLucas Gellman Research Associates, Aerospace Consultant Robert Whitehead Inc. National Aeronautics and Space David Morrissey Administration Ed Hazelwood Federal Aviation Administration ATC Market Report Carlton Wine Federal Aviation Administration John O’Brien Air Line Pilots Association c ontents 1 Summary and Policy Conclusions 1 Findings 9 Policy Conclusions 25 Conclusion 32 2 Institutional and Management Issues for Civil Aviation Research and Technology 35 Organizational Framework 35 Interagency Coordination on Aviation R&D 46 Technology Development and Implementation for ATC 52 Conclusions 69 3 Data and Analysis for Aviation R&D 73 Historical Payoffs of Aviation R&D 74 Weighing Current Issues 82 Issues in Setting Priorities 95 Predicting Future Problems 101 Federal Aviation Data and Assessment Resources 103 Conclusions 116 4 Research and Technology Issues 117 Crosscutting Research Issues 118 New Functions and Technology Options 130 Conclusions 156 5 Economic Issues for Aviation Operations 157 The U.S. Airline Industry 157 Air Traffic Control Equipment Manufacturing 172 Conclusions 174 APPENDIXES A Abbreviations 177 B Workshop Participants 181 INDEX 185 vii Summary and Policy Conclusions 1 mericans have extremely high, and often conflicting, ex- pectations for air transportation. We want plenty of flights to many destinations, but have little tolerance for aircraft A noise above our homes; we insist that airlines be as safe as possible, but demand ever lower ticket prices; and many of us want to leave or arrive at similar times, but are annoyed by con- gested roads and terminals and delayed flights. Compared with aviation systems around the world, U.S. air transportation comes closest to meeting this wide range of exact- ing standards (see figure 1-l). Benefiting from decades of public and private research and technology investment, passengers and freight can travel by air across the United States today more safe- ly, for less cost, and with less environmental impact than ever be- fore (see figure 1-2). Research and technology development have contributed to these positive results and now promise further gains. However, to better anticipate new safety and efficiency challenges to the aviation system and to promptly modernize the U.S. air traffic control (ATC) system federal aviation re- search and development (R&D) must encompass more than technology. The early and continuing advice of operational ex- perts must be part of this process, and operational issues, as well as technological ones, must be within its scope. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) plays a pivotal role in improving the performance of the aviation system. FAA’s 11 2 I Federal Research and Technology for Aviation Fatal accident record by region (Scheduled passenger flights, 1977-89) Operating costs for selected airlines (1991 ) 30 United States T_ 3 ■ Swissair North America II JAL Latin America