Report of the Federal Aviation Administration to the United States

Congress pursuant to 49 U.S. Code 44501(c) 

2010 NARP 

February 2010 

The National Aviation Research Plan (NARP) is a report of the Federal Aviation Administration to the 

United States Congress pursuant to 49 United Sates Code 44501(c). The NARP, related appendices, and 

the R&D Annual Review may be found online at www.faa.gov/go/narp. 

Printed on paper made from 30% recycled materials 
Executive Summary - iv 

Preface - vi 

Chapter One • National Aviation System 

Mission - 2 

Vision - 3 

FAA Plans - 4 

Joint Planning and Development Ofce Plans - 5 

FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan - 7 

FAA Enterprise Architecture - 8 

FAA Flight Plan - 8 

Capital Investment Plan - 9 

National Aviation Research Plan - 9 

FAA Research and Development - 10 

Mission - 10 

Organizational Values - 10 

Goals - 11 

Chapter Two • Research and Development Goals 

R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible and Efcient - 22 

R&D Goal 2 - Clean and Quiet - 28 

R&D Goal 3 - High Quality Teams and Individuals - 34 

R&D Goal 4 - Human-Centered Design - 38 

R&D Goal 5 - Human Protection - 44 

R&D Goal 6 - Safe Aerospace Vehicles - 50 

R&D Goal 7 - Separation Assurance - 56 

R&D Goal 8 - Situational Awareness - 60 

R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge - 66 

R&D Goal 10 - World Leadership - 74 

C o n t e n t s C o n t e n t s 

Table of Contents i
 

External Portfolio Reviews - 111 

Acronyms and Abbreviations - 114 

ii Table of Contents 

Chapter Three • Alignment With NextGen 

NextGen Domains and Solution Sets - 80 

Air Trafc Operations Domain - 81 

Airport Development Domain - 83 

Aircraft and Operator Requirements Domain - 83 

NextGen Portfolio Management Process - 83 

FAA NextGen Research Requirements - 83 

Budget - 86 

Chapter Four • Research Business Management 

Sponsors - 90 

Programs - 90 

Research, Engineering, and Development (R,E&D) Appropriation - 91 

Facilities and Equipment (F&E) Appropriation - 96 

Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Appropriation - 98 

Operations (Ops) Appropriation - 98 

Budget - 99 

Partners and Other Research Mechanisms - 104 

Federal Government - 104 

Industry - 106 

Academia - 107 

International - 108 

Evaluation - 110 

Internal Portfolio Reviews - 110 
Appendices 

Program Descriptions - A 

Partnership Activities - B 

Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee - C 

Changes in NARP Chapter 2 Milestones - D 

Acronyms and Abbreviations - E 

Companion Volume - R&D Annual Review 

Table of Contents iii 
iv Executive Summary 

E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r y 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

targets for each goal. The targets are aggressive 

and challenge researchers to innovate, take risks, 

and seek non-traditional solutions. 

This year, as we celebrate 25 years of the NARP, it 

is appropriate to reect on what has been done and 

what is yet to do. There still remain signicant 

challenges requiring R&D to support the nation’s 

air transportation system today and in the future. 

The 2010 NARP presents an established research 

plan that highlights the results of the research 

and describes how FAA R&D programs are 

progressing toward achieving the R&D targets 

through 2016. This year’s NARP maintains 

continuity with the previous R&D goals and the 

milestones supporting those goals. It shows that 

The benets derived from a highly mobile 

citizenry and rapid cargo transport dictate that 

America’s air transportation system remains the 

best in the world. Being the best requires the 

constant introduction of new technologies and 

procedures, innovative policies, and advanced 

management practices into the aviation system as 

well as sustained investments in advanced research 

and technology development. The National Aviation 

Research Plan (NARP) is the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s (FAA’s) performance-based plan 

to ensure that its research and development (R&D) 

investments are well managed, deliver results, and 

are sufcient to address national priorities. 

To do this, the NARP uses ten crosscutting R&D 

goals to bridge the near-term FAA 2009-2013 

Flight Plan performance goals and objectives, the 

mid-term (2012-2018) FAA’s Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen) Implementation 

Plan domains and solution sets, and the far-term 

(2015-2025) goals and capabilities identied 

in the Joint Planning and Development Ofce 

(JPDO) NextGen Integrated Work Plan Executive 

Summary, Version FY12, (IWP) for the year 2025. 

This approach enables FAA to address the current 

challenges of operating the safest, most efcient air 

transportation system in the world while conducting 

the research needed to transform it into 

NextGen in the mid- and far-term. The 

ten R&D goals also help FAA focus 

its R&D on the biggest challenges 

facing the air transportation system, 

identify gaps in research, leverage 

R&D across the Agency, and measure 

progress toward achieving R&D 

in scal year 2011 FAA plans to invest a total of 

$366,046,000 in R&D. This investment spans 

the four FAA appropriations: $190,000,000 in 

Research, Engineering, and Development (R,E&D); 

$133,664,000 in Facilities and Equipment (F&E); 

$42,217,000 in the Airport Improvement Program 

(AIP); and $165,000 in Operations (Ops). The R&D 

portfolio is composed of 42 programs that address 

the research needs of 5 FAA lines of business: the 

Air Trafc Organization, Aviation Safety, Airports, 

the Aviation Policy, Planning and Environment 

Ofce, and Commercial Space Transportation. 

The 2010 NARP highlights 183 key milestones 

that show the importance of R&D to the goals of 

the Agency. Of those milestones, 76 support the 

implementation of NextGen. 

The 2010 NARP describes how FAA continues to 

be a good steward of the public’s investments in 

aviation R&D while delivering results that will 

enhance the safety and capacity of the nation’s 

air transportation system in an 

environmentally 

responsible manner 

today and into 

the future. 

Executive Summary v 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The issuance of the 2010 NARP marks the 25th 

anniversary of this publication. Twenty-ve years 

ago, in October 1985, the FAA published the rst 

research and development plan for the Agency 

titled The Federal Aviation Administration Plan 

for Research, Engineering, and Development. Then 

FAA Administrator, Donald D. Engen, wrote in 

the cover letter “This research, engineering, and 

development (RE&D) plan has been developed by 

the Federal Aviation Administration to meet the 

challenges that face the National Airspace System 

(NAS) through the year 2010.” 

Now it is 2010, and the FAA faces many new 

challenges moving into the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen). However, at 

the macro level, many research drivers, such as 

weather and human factors, remain the same 

as they were in 1985. Air trafc control (ATC) 

modernization was a high priority, then under the 

banner of NAS Modernization, and now as ATC 

transformation under the banner of NextGen. 

* OMB Circular A-11, “Preparation, Submission and

Execution of the Budget,” August 7, 2009, section 84, page 8

(www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/circulars). 

vi Preface 

Title 49 of the U.S. Code section 44501(c) 

requires the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) to submit the National 

Aviation Research Plan (NARP) to Congress 

annually with the President’s Budget. The Plan 

includes both applied research and development as 

dened by the Ofce of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A-11* and involves research 

activities funded in four appropriations accounts: 

Research, Engineering and Development; 

Facilities and Equipment; Airport Improvement 

Program; and Operations. 

P r e f a c e P r e f a c e 

And of course, aviation safety has been and will 

always be the major focus for the FAA, in our 

research programs and in our operations. 

What is different in 2010 is the level of technology 

available to address the current challenges, the 

technology that will become available based on 

today’s research and development (R&D) efforts, 

and the fast pace at which that technology 

changes. One of the current challenges is how 

to safely and efciently take advantage of rapid 

changes in technology, such as advanced software 

and digital systems, both in the aircraft and in air 

trafc operations. 

Twenty-ve years ago noise impact issues were at 

the forefront of aviation environmental research. 

Today, although noise impact issues remain a 

major research focus, climate change and the need 

for a sustainable and secure energy supply have 

also become key drivers of aviation environmental 

and energy research. 

The 2010 NARP describes the FAA’s research 

portfolio that will address today’s needs while 

laying the foundation to address the needs 

of NextGen. The plan will highlight selected 

examples describing research done in 1985 and 

what is ongoing today. 

Chapter 1 provides an overview of the national 

aviation system mission, vision, and goals that 

help FAA dene its R&D needs. It has been 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

updated to reect changes in NextGen planning 

and reects the importance of the near- and 

mid-term implementation in the NextGen 

Implementation Plan (NGIP) and FAA Enterprise 

Architecture (EA) as well as the far-term goals 

in the JPDO Next Generation Air Transportation 

System Integrated Plan. 

Chapter 2 includes a master schedule and a highlevel plan for each of the ten FAA R&D goals. It 

integrates the R&D programs with FAA’s R&D 

goals and details how those programs will achieve 

the R&D targets. It explains how the R&D targets 

will be validated and what milestones are required 

to achieve each target. The chapter includes a 

summary of the progress in scal year 2009 for 

each R&D goal. 

Chapter 3 describes how FAA NextGen R&D 

programs map to the domains and solution sets 

in the NGIP and the operational improvements 

in the IWP. FAA NextGen R&D programs and 

budget are the relevant subset of information 

presented in Chapter 2. 

Chapter 4 provides business information on the 

R&D sponsors, programs, budget, partnerships, 

and evaluation. It presents the programs and 

the budget organized according to the President’s 

budget submission for scal year 2011. 

Appendix A provides the detailed program 

descriptions for each R&D program, including 

intended outcomes, outputs, programmatic 

structure, partnerships, accomplishments, and a 

ve-year program plan. 

Appendix B provides detailed information on 

FAA partnerships with government, academic, 

and industry organizations. It lists information 

for scal year 2009, including active agreements 

with other government agencies, cooperative R&D 

agreements, patents, and grants. This appendix 

supports the partnership section in Chapter 4. 

Appendix C provides the recommendations of the 

Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory 

Committee (REDAC) listed according to the 

reports produced by the committee in scal year 

2009. The FAA response to each recommendation 

is included. This appendix supports the 

evaluation section in Chapter 4. 

Appendix D is a new appendix that provides 

a summary of all changes to the milestones in 

Chapter 2, with explanations for the changes. 

The appendix is aligned with the ten R&D goals 

in Chapter 2 to provide the reader complete 

transparency and maintain continuity with 

previous editions of the NARP. 

Appendix E provides a list of acronyms and 

abbreviations used in the 2010 NARP and 

its appendices. 

All appendices are included in a separate volume 

from the main body of the 2010 NARP. 

A companion document to the 2010 NARP, 

the R&D Annual Review, describes the 

accomplishments of the R&D programs in the scal 

year 2009. It aligns the accomplishments with the 

ten R&D goals presented in Chapter 2 of the NARP 

and the programs described in Appendix A. 

Preface vii 
C h a p t e r O n e C h a p t e r O n e 
N a t i o n a l Av i a t i o n N a t i o n a l Av i a t i o n 

S y s t e m S y s t e m 
Aviation is a vital resource for the United States because of its strategic, economic, and social 

importance. The aviation industry provides opportunities for business, jobs, economic development, 

law enforcement, emergency response, personal travel, and recreation. It attracts investment to local 

communities and opens new domestic and international markets and supply chains. 

To maximize these opportunities, the United States must maintain and improve upon an aviation system 

that is responsive to its rapidly changing and expanding transportation needs while ensuring the highest 

level of safety. Increased mobility, higher productivity, and greater efciency are possible through 

the introduction of new technologies and procedures, innovative policies, and advanced management 

practices. Collaborative, needs-driven research and development (R&D) is central to this process. R&D 

enables the United States to be a world leader in its ability to move people and goods by air safely, 

securely, quickly, affordably, efciently, and in an environmentally sound manner. 

MI S SION I S SION 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mission is to provide the safest, most efcient aerospace 

system in the world. The nation’s air transportation system provides a service: it moves anyone and 

anything (e.g., people, goods, aerospace vehicles) through the atmosphere between points on the earth’s 

surface and between the Earth and space. It does this for a wide range of users (e.g., passengers, 

shippers, general aviation) and purposes (e.g., business and personal travel, law enforcement, defense, 

emergency response, surveillance, research). 

The system is global, operates day and night, in peacetime and wartime, and in all but the most severe 

weather conditions. It consists of three major elements: aerospace vehicles (e.g., commercial, military, 

and unmanned aircraft, general aviation, space launch and re-entry vehicles, rotorcraft, gliders, hot air 

balloons); infrastructure (e.g., airports and airelds, air trafc management systems, space launch and 

re-entry sites); and people (e.g., aircrews, air trafc controllers, system technicians, ground personnel). 

Because the role and interactions of all of these elements determine the nature and performance of the 

system, it is important to consider all elements simultaneously in designing, developing, and operating 

the system. 

The air transportation system is designed, developed, maintained, and operated through the efforts of 

various federal, state, and local government organizations; industry; labor unions; academia; and other 

domestic and international organizations. The public also plays a key role by paying taxes and fees that 

are ultimately used by the government to regulate the aviation industry; develop, maintain, and operate 

the air trafc management system; and provide airport security and other public aviation services. 

2 Chapter 1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 1 3

In November 2003, the Secretary of Transportation 

set forth a vision to transform the nation’s air 

transportation system into one that is substantially 

more capable of ensuring America maintains 

its leadership in global aviation. That vision, 

created by the U.S. Departments of Defense (DoD), 

Transportation (DOT), Homeland Security (DHS), 

and Commerce (DOC); the FAA; the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); and 

the President’s Ofce of Science and Technology 

Policy (OSTP), is “A transformed aviation system 

that allows all communities to participate in the 

global marketplace, provides services tailored to 

individual customer needs, and accommodates 

seamless civil and military operations.”* 

To realize this vision, the air transportation 

system must accommodate an increasing number 

and variety of aerospace vehicles (e.g., unmanned 

aircraft systems, very light jets), a broader range of 

air and space operations (e.g., point-to-point, space 

launch and re-entry), and a variety of business 

models (e.g., air taxis, regional jets). It will do this 

across all airspace, at all airports, space launch and 

re-entry sites, and in all weather conditions, while 

simultaneously improving system performance and 

ensuring safety and security. 

* Letter to the President from Secretary of Transportation

Norman Y. Mineta, “America at the Forefront of Aviation:

Enhancing Economic Growth,” November 25, 2003. 

To achieve this vision, the Secretary of 

Transportation established a set of far-term 

national goals to transform the current aviation 

system by 2025 into a next generation air 

transportation system (NextGen) that will 

contribute substantially to continued economic 

prosperity, national security, and a higher standard 

of living for all Americans in the 21st century. 

These national goals are: 

• Enhancing economic growth and creating jobs

• Expanding system exibility and delivering

capacity to accommodate future demand 

• Tailoring services to customer needs

• Integrating capabilities to ensure our

national defense 

• Promoting aviation safety and

environmental stewardship 

• Retaining U.S. leadership and economic

competitiveness in global aviation 

VI SION 
 

 

 

 

FA A P L A N S 

The FAA uses complimentary planning documents, each developed and used for different purposes, to 

manage elements of its business. The scope of each document differs, as do their respective timescales 

for planning and action development. The FAA ensures compatibility and consistency between these 

documents. Figure 1.1 illustrates the relationship between the respective planning documents. The target 

and intent of the plans that are relevant to the FAA’s R&D programs are described after Figure 1.1. 

4 Chapter 1 

Figure 1.1: FAA Integrated Planning 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J O IN T P L A NNIN G A ND D E VE L O P M E N T
)

O F F I C E P L A N S 

In 2003, Congress created the Joint Planning 

and Development Ofce (JPDO)* to coordinate 

interagency planning related to NextGen. In 

addition, the ofce supports the Ofce of the 

Secretary of Transportation and its Senior Policy 

Committee, which is chaired by the Secretary of 

Transportation, and includes representatives from 

the DoD, DOT, DHS, DOC, FAA, NASA, and OSTP. 

Working with industry and academia, the JPDO 

established the following set of initial far-term 

system goals and objectives for NextGen**: 

* Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act,

Public Law 108-176, December 12, 2003.

** Joint Planning and Development Ofce, Next Generation 

Air Transportation System Integrated Plan (http://www.jpdo.

gov/library/NGATS_v1_1204r.pdf).
'

• Retain U.S. leadership in global aviation 

• Retain our role as the world leader 

in aviation 

• Reduce costs for air transportation 

• Enable services tailored to 

traveler and shipper needs
'

• Encourage performance-based, 

harmonized global standards for 

U.S. products and services to keep 

new and existing markets open 

• Expand capacity 

• Satisfy future growth in demand 

and operational diversity
'

• Reduce transit time and increase 

predictability (domestic curb-to-curb 

transit time cut by 30 percent) 

• Minimize the impact of weather and 

other disruptions (95 percent on time) 

• Ensure safety 

• Maintain aviation’s record as the 

safest mode of transportation
'

• Improve the level of safety of the 

U.S. air transportation system 

• Increase the safety of worldwide 

air transportation
'

• Protect the environment 

• Reduce noise, emissions, 

and fuel consumption
'

• Balance aviation’s environmental 

impact with other societal objectives 

• Ensure our national defense 

• Provide for the common defense, while 

minimizing civilian constraints 

• Coordinate a national response to threats 

• Ensure global access to civilian airspace 

• Secure the nation 

• Mitigate new and varied threats 

• Ensure security efciently serves demand 

• Tailor strategies to threats, balancing 

costs, and privacy issues 

• Ensure traveler and shipper 

condence in system security
'

Chapter 1 5
Integrated Work Plan Executive Summary, Version 

FY12, highlights the fundamental changes made 

since the release of Version 1.0 in September 2008 

and the efforts undertaken by the JPDO to validate 

and enhance the maturity of the IWP. 

the potential NextGen end-state could be, how it 

could operate, and when NextGen capabilities and 

potential improvements might be introduced. The 

JPDO periodically updates the outputs based on 

input and feedback from the aviation community, 

including the Federal government, industry, and 

the public. 

The most recent update to the IWP is summarized 

in the Fiscal Year 2012 Version of the NextGen 

IWP, released September 30, 2009. The NextGen 

of information is captured in JPDO-developed 

outputs: the NextGen Concept of Operations 

(ConOps), Enterprise Architecture (EA), and 

Integrated Work Plan (IWP). As unconstrained 

planning documents, these outputs describe what 

6 Chapter 1 

Based on these goals and objectives, the JPDO 

has compiled, developed, and maintains a 

comprehensive suite of planning information 

to foster communication, understanding, and 

consensus among the NextGen stakeholder 

community. The planning information takes 

into account the research, development, and 

implementation plans, commitments, and 

contributions of private industry and Federal 

partner agencies, as well as potential future 

solutions needed to reach NextGen. This collection 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FA A’ S N E X T G E N

I M P L E M E N T A T I O N P L A N

• Increase Safety, Security, and Environmental Performance 

• Transform Facilities 

FAA’s Next Generation Air Transportation System 

(NextGen) Implementation Plan (NGIP) outlines 

the Agency’s path to deliver mid-term (2010-2018) 

NextGen capabilities and their associated benets. 

The NGIP denes proposed system changes, guides 

these changes into use, and includes all FAA 

NextGen-related initiatives. 

The NGIP provides a structured framework for 

FAA to plan, execute, and implement NextGen. It 

is centered on improvements in three domains: 

Air Trafc Operations; Airport Development; and 

Aircraft and Operator Requirements. The NGIP is 

the single entry point for new initiatives from all 

FAA lines of business and focuses their efforts to 

achieve NextGen in a fully coordinated, integrated, 

and transparent manner. When projects reach 

sufcient technological and operational maturity, 

the NGIP will ensure their implementation into the 

National Airspace System (NAS). The Air Trafc 

Operations domain focuses on seven solution sets 

targeted to address capacity, efciency, safety, and 

security of air transportation operations. These are: 

• Initiate Trajectory-Based Operations 

• Increase Arrivals/Departures at High 

Density Airports
'

• Increase Flexibility in the Terminal Environment 

• Improve Collaborative Air Trafc Management 

• Reduce Weather Impact 

Each of these solution sets represents a portfolio of 

transformational capabilities and research 

requirements for the mid term. Each capability 

integrates activities from multiple programs in 

FAA and in other agencies. 

The Airport Development domain focuses on 

upgrading airport infrastructure to provide greater 

capacity and reduce delays in the most congested 

metropolitan airports. 

The Aircraft and Operator Requirements domain 

focuses on the performance requirements that 

aircraft and operators must meet to participate 

in NextGen. By aligning the aircraft and 

operator-related expectations of FAA’s nearterm commitments along with the mid-term 

capabilities described in the solutions sets, the 

Agency can better ensure that required safety and 

standardization activities are completed in a timely 

manner. This domain provides sufcient detail on 

aircraft capabilities to enable manufacturers and 

operators to identify related avionics investments 

and plan a logical migration for their aircraft. 

Chapter 1 7
8 C h a p t e r 1

 

 

 

 

 

C h

FA A E N TE R P R I S E 

A R C H I T E C T U R E 

The FAA Enterprise Architecture (EA) provides the 

overall architecture for the Agency. It has 

three parts: 

• The NAS Enterprise Architecture (NASEA) 

contains the systems and operational 

changes for the command and control of the 

NAS including mission support systems, 

design, management, and procedures.
'

• The NAS Regulatory EA contains systems 

and operational changes for the regulation 

of the NAS, including policy denition, 

procedure certication, environment 

regulation, and safety management.
'

• The Non-NAS EA contains information 

technology investments and operational 

changes for Agency business processes, 

including administrative, strategic, 

and nancial planning.
'

The NASEA is the set of of technical roadmaps 

describing how the current NAS will transition 

to NextGen. It provides the mid-term target 

architecture for 2018 and the transition strategy 

to achieve that architecture. It also provides the 

operational and technical framework for all FAA 

FA A F L I G H T P L AN

The FAA 2009-2013 Flight Plan describes the 

Agency’s overall near-term performance goals 

and objectives.* Since FAA has the day-to-day 

responsibility to promote the safe and efcient 

operation of the current aviation system, many 

Agency priorities (including research) are driven by 

Flight Plan goals and objectives. These are: 

• Increased Safety – Achieve the lowest possible 

accident rate and constantly improve safety. 

• Reduce commercial air carrier fatalities 

• Reduce general aviation fatalities 

• Reduce the risk of runway incursions 

• Ensure the safety of commercial 

space launches
'

• Enhance the safety of FAA’s 

air trafc systems
'

• Implement a Safety Management 

System (SMS) for FAA
'

• Greater Capacity – Work with local governments 

and airspace users to provide increased 

capacity in the United States airspace system 

that reduces congestion and meets projected 

demand in an environmentally sound manner. 

• Increase capacity to meet projected 

demand and reduce congestion 

• Increase reliability and on-time 

8 C h C h a p t e r 1 

plans, including the NGIP, the Flight Plan, the 

Capital Investment Plan, and the National Aviation 

Research Plan (NARP). FAA and JPDO have 

aligned FAA EA planning with the JPDO NextGen 

EA and IWP, and continue to maintain the 

alignment as FAA and JPDO plans are updated. 

performance of scheduled carriers 

• Address environmental issues associated

with capacity enhancements 

* Federal Aviation Administration, FAA 2009-2013 Flight

Plan, October 2008 (http://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/

media/ight_plan_2009-2013.pdf). 
Chapter 1 Chapter 9 

 

 

C A P I T A L I N V E S T M E N T P L A N

The FAA National Airspace System Capital 

Investment Plan for Fiscal Years 2011–2015 

describes the NAS modernization projects and 

lists the activities FAA intends to complete 

during that period.** It contains projects that 

modernize existing systems and projects that begin 

the transformation to NextGen, including R&D 

activities. It also contains the NASEA roadmaps 

that show the timetable for introduction of new 

technology to achieve the planned NextGen 

capabilities and capacity increases. 

N A TI O N A L AV I A T I O N 

R E S E A R C H P L A N

The NARP is FAA’s integrated, performance-based 

R&D plan that supports FAA’s near-, mid-, and 

far-term needs for the NAS. Previously, NARP 

priorities were driven primarily by the near-term 

operational needs of the aviation system as dened 

in the Flight Plan, with a large share of its R&D 

program focused on specic, near-term safety and 

capacity issues. The current NARP simultaneously 

addresses the critical, near-term requirements of 

the system while supporting the mid-term and farterm needs of NextGen. See Figure 1.1. 

C h apter 19

** Federal Aviation Administration National Airspace Systems 

Capital Investment Plan for Fiscal Years 2011-2015, Feb. 2010 

(http://www.faa.gov/about/ofce_org/headquarters_ofces/ato/

service_units/operations/sysengsaf/cip/) 

• International Leadership – Increase the safety 

and capacity of the global civil aerospace 

system in an environmentally sound manner. 

• Promote improved safety and regulatory 

oversight in cooperation with bilateral, 

regional, and multilateral aviation partners 

• Promote seamless operations around the 

globe in cooperation with bilateral, regional, 

and multilateral aviation partners 

• Organizational Excellence – Ensure the success 

of FAA’s mission through stronger leadership, 

a better-trained and safer workforce, 

enhanced cost-control measures, and improved 

decision making based on reliable data. 

• Implement human resources management 

practices to attract and retain a highly 

skilled, diverse workforce and provide 

employees a safe, positive work environment 

• Make the organization more effective 

with stronger leadership, a resultsoriented, high-performance workforce, 

and a culture of accountability 

• Improve nancial management while 

delivering quality customer service
'

• Make decisions based on reliable 

data to improve overall performance 

and customer satisfaction
'

• Enhance our ability to respond to crises 

rapidly and effectively, including securityrelated threats and natural disasters 
 

 

FAA RE SE A RCH A N D DE V E LO PM E N T 

FAA uses R&D to support policy and planning; regulation, certication, and standards development; 

and modernization of the NAS. As such, it conducts applied research and development as dened by the 

Ofce of Management and Budget Circular A-11. Applied research is dened as systematic study to gain 

knowledge or understanding necessary to determine the means by which a recognized and specic need 

may be met. Development is dened as systematic application of knowledge or understanding directed 

toward production of useful materials, devices, and systems or methods, including design, development, 

and improvement of prototypes and new processes to meet specic requirements.* 

M I S S I O N 

The FAA R&D mission is to “Conduct, coordinate, and support domestic and international R&D of 

aviation-related products and services that will ensure a safe, efcient, and environmentally sound global 

air transportation system.” It supports a range of research activities from materials and human factors to 

the development of new products, services, and procedures. 

O R G A N I Z A T I O N A L VA LUES

FAA has dened ve R&D organizational values that will enable it to better manage its programs and 

achieve its far-term R&D vision: “To provide the best air transportation system through the conduct of 

world-class, cutting edge research, engineering and development.” The Agency R&D portfolio has adopted 

the following values: 

• Goal driven – Achieve the mission. FAA uses R&D as a primary 

enabler to accomplish its goals and objectives.
'

• World class – Be the best. FAA delivers world-class R&D results that are high 

quality, relevant, and improve the performance of the aviation system.
'

• Collaborative – Work together. FAA partners with other government agencies, industry, and 

academia to capitalize on national R&D capabilities to transform the air 

transportation system.
'

• Innovative – Turn ideas into reality. FAA empowers, inspires, and encourages its people 

to invent new aviation capabilities. It creates new ways of doing business to accelerate 

the introduction of R&D results into new and better aviation products and services.
'

• Customer focused – Deliver results. FAA R&D programs deliver quality 

products and services to the customer quickly and affordably.
'

By aggressively espousing these values, FAA will generate the maximum benet from limited R&D 

resources to help achieve the national vision of a transformed aviation system. 

* OMB Circular A-11, “Preparation, Submission and Execution of the Budget,” August 7, 2009, section 84, page 8

(www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/circulars). 

10 Chapter 1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

opportunity for potential increased emphasis. Areas 

of opportunity for potential increased emphasis that 

have been identied are now able to be assessed by

the appropriate executive departments and agencies, 

as well as by the larger aeronautics community

through ongoing outreach by the Aeronautics 

Science and Technology Subcommittee of the 

Committee on Technology to the National Science 

and Technology Council. 

G O ALS

The FAA R&D portfolio supports both the day-today operations of the national aerospace system 

and the development of NextGen. Hence, far-term 

focus on NextGen will have to be balanced with 

the research needed to address the day-to-day 

safety and capacity issues of the national aerospace 

system. To achieve balance between the near, mid, 

and far term, FAA has dened ten crosscutting 

R&D goals to focus and integrate its programs. 

As shown in Table 1.1, the R&D goals are aligned 

with the near-term Flight Plan goals, the mid-term 

NGIP domains and solution sets, and the far-term 

goals identied in the JPDO Integrated Plan. 

These R&D goals are meant to challenge 

researchers to think far term and achieve 

future breakthroughs. The R&D portfolio 

can help transform the system by aiming for 

ideal performance rather than by focusing on 

incremental improvements to current capabilities 

that may not achieve NextGen. The FAA R&D 

goals are: 

In December 2006, the President of the United 

States established the rst National Aeronautics 

Research and Development Policy with the goal 

of advancing the U.S. technological leadership in 

aeronautics R&D. In accordance with the policy, in 

December 2007, the National Plan for Aeronautics 

R&D and Related Infrastructure dened the highest 

priority aeronautics R&D goals and objectives for 

the nation. These goals and objectives are intended 

to provide high-level guidance for foundational, 

advanced aircraft system, and air transportation 

system R&D through 2020. The FAA’s aviation 

research and development programs align with the 

National Plan in all areas with a focus on the nearterm objectives while laying the foundation for the 

mid- and far-term objectives. 

In December 2008, the Technical Appendix was 

released to provide additional technical content on 

the aeronautics R&D goals and objectives, and a 

preliminary assessment of current relevant federal 

aeronautics R&D activities to identify areas of 

• R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Efcient 

– a system that safely and quickly moves 

anyone and anything, anywhere, anytime 

on schedules that meet customer needs
'

• R&D Goal 2 - Clean and Quiet – a 

reduction of signicant aerospace 

environmental impacts in absolute terms 

• R&D Goal 3 - High Quality Teams 

and Individuals – the best qualied 

and trained workforce in the world 

• R&D Goal 4 - Human-Centered Design – 

aerospace systems that adapt to, compensate for, 

and augment the performance of the human 

• R&D Goal 5 - Human Protection – a 

reduction in fatalities, injuries, and adverse 

health impacts due to aerospace operations 

• R&D Goal 6 - Safe Aerospace 

Vehicles – a reduction in accidents 

and incidents due to aerospace vehicle 

design, structure, and subsystems 

• R&D Goal 7 - Separation Assurance 

– a reduction in accidents and incidents 

due to aerospace vehicle operations 

in the air and on the ground
'

• R&D Goal 8 - Situational Awareness 

accurate, and real-time information on aerospace 

operations, events, crises, obstacles, and weather 

• R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge – a 

thorough understanding of how the 

aerospace system operates, the impact of 

change on system performance and risk, 

and how the system impacts the nation 

• R&D Goal 10 - World Leadership – a 

globally recognized leader in aerospace 

technology, systems, and operations 

Chapter 1 11

– common, 
 

Table 1.1: Alignment of Goals 

Greater Capacity 

Flight Plan

Goals 

1-Fast, Flexible, 

 and Efficient 

FAA R&D 

Goals 

FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan

Domains and Solution Sets 

Airport Development Domain 

Air Traffic Operations Domain 

Initiate Trajectory-Based Operations 

Reduce Weather Impact 

Increase Flexibility in the 

Terminal Environment 

Increase Arrivals/Departures at 

 High Density Airports, Improve 

Collaborative Air Traffic 

 Management 

Transform Facilities 

Expand Capacity 

JPDO Integrated Plan

Goals 

J 

2-Clean and Quiet Protect the Environment 

Increased Safety 

4-Human-Centered Design 

5-Human Protection 

6-Safe Aerospace Vehicles 

7-Separation Assurance 

8-Situational Awareness 

9-System Knowledge 

Air Traffic Operations Domain 

Increase Safety, Security, 

and Environmental Performance 

Aircraft and Operator

Requirements Domain 

Ensure Safety 

  Secure the Nation 

Ensure our National Defense 

International

 Leadership 10-World Leadership  Retain U.S. Leadership

 in Global Aviation 

Organizational

Excellence 

3-High Quality Teams 

and Individuals 

Table 1.1 shows the primary relationship among the Flight Plan goals, FAA R&D goals, the NGIP 

domains and solution sets, and the JPDO far-term goals identied for NextGen. Each FAA R&D 

goal is aligned with its primary Flight Plan goal, recognizing that there may be other relationships. 

For example, R&D Goal 3 - High Quality Teams and Individuals is aligned with the Organizational 

Excellence goal; however, it also supports the Increased Safety and Greater Capacity goals. Similarly, 

R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge and R&D Goal 7 - Situational Awareness also align with the Greater 

Capacity goal, in addition to the Increased Safety goal. 

12 Chapter 1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrator Babbitt 

is sitting in the cockpit 

of the Virgin Galactic’s 

WhiteKnightTwo Virgin 

MotherShip Eve. The inset 

photo is the same aircraft 

in ight. 

Chapter 1 13

The FAA’s rst research and development plan, The Federal Aviation 

Administration Plan for Research, Engineering and Development, was 

published in October 1985. Then Administrator, Donald D. Engen, 

recognizing the importance of research in preparing for the future of 

aviation, wrote,

 “This research engineering 

and development (R,E&D) 

plan has been developed by the 

FAA to meet the challenges 

that face the national airspace 

system (NAS) through 2010. 

. . . The next several decades 

of ight will present many 

challenges and opportunities 

for improvement. It is essential 

that the aviation community 

maintain a comprehensive and 

far-ranging program to capitalize 

on our collective talents and 

opportunities for advances in the 

efciency and safety of our air 

transportation system.” 

Twenty-ve years later, the FAA continues to capitalize on 

challenges and opportunities to meet aviation needs in the 21st 

century. Administrator Randy Babbitt says, 

“Admiral Engen was right. The 

only way we’ll be able to handle 

what’s coming down the road is if we 

plan for it. The 25th Anniversary 

National Aviation Research Plan 

is a roadmap that helps make sure 

we’re pointed in the right direction. 

We’re facing challenges and 

changes that not too many people 

would have forecast 25 years ago, 

including human factors, fuel prices, 

greenhouse emissions and passenger 

totals stretching toward a billion. 

With all of these in one hand – 

and an unyielding need to keep 

increasing the margin of safety in 

the other – staying on track remains 

a formidable task. I’m condent 

that we can get where we need to 

go. I’m condent that this Plan will 

make sure that we do.” 

Administrator Engen 

is sitting in the cockpit 

of a Lockheed Jetstar I. 

The inset photo is a 

C-140 Jetstar used 

by NASA from 1964 

to 1989. 
C h a p t e r T w o C h a p t e r T w o 
R e s e a r c h a n d R e s e a r c h a n d 

D e v e l o pm e n t G o a l s D e v e l o p m e n t G o a l s 
number of R&D goals. 

. 

the nal demonstration. Some milestones reect existing efforts that are generally focused on near-term 

results, while others are new requirements that support mid- and far-term objectives. This dual-timeframe approach helps FAA balance its R&D programs so that it addresses near-term needs while making 

progress toward the mid-term and far-term goals. 

Finally, for each R&D goal, there is a funding summary by scal year (FY) and a list of the progress made 

during the past year. 

Figure 2.1 illustrates how the R&D targets integrate and focus FAA R&D programs through the R&D 

milestones to achieve the notional targets for 2025 while bridging the near-term goals of the Flight Plan 

with the mid-term goals of the NGIP and the far-term goals of the JPDO Integrated Plan. 

Table 2.1 shows which R&D programs directly support which R&D goals with milestones listed in the 

NARP. The intent is to identify clear responsibilities so that each program focuses on a specic, limited 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) research and development (R&D) plan is built around the 

ten R&D goals dened in the previous chapter. The master schedule and R&D goals help to align, plan, 

and evaluate R&D activities to support the near-term needs of the FAA Flight Plan and the Capital 

Investment Plan, the mid-term needs of FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan (NGIP), and the far-term 

needs described in the interagency JPDO Integrated Plan. This chapter describes how the R&D programs 

achieve the R&D targets for each R&D goal by identifying key milestones (or outputs) and summarizing 

progress made in the current year for each R&D goal. 

Each R&D goal has an R&D target. The R&D goals, with each target, were derived by rst comparing 

the performance targets in the near-term Flight Plan to the objectives of the far-term JPDO Integrated 

Plan to develop notional targets for 2025. These notional targets were rst derived in the 2007 NARP. 

The targets for capacity, from the 2004 JPDO Integrated Plan, provide the connection between the 

two plans and dene the targets for safety and organizational excellence. The targets for safety are 

needed to reduce the fatality rate considering capacity increases. The specic metrics are dened in 

Chapter 2, under R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge, in the section on Safety Evaluation. The targets 

for organizational excellence are those needed to provide increased capacity without incurring a 

commensurate increase in cost. 

The notional targets for 2025 were then used to develop the R&D goals and mid-term R&D targets. 

Achieving the R&D targets will demonstrate that it is possible to meet the notional targets by 2025. The 

R&D targets focus on the mid term to allow time to implement new regulations, standards, technologies, 

systems, and procedures by 2025. 

For each R&D goal, there is also a description of the methods (e.g., modeling, simulation, physical 

demonstration, initial standards) that will be used to validate the target. This is followed by some of 

the milestones required to achieve the target. These milestones are grouped in major areas for each 

R&D goal. Completion of these milestones will also be used to measure progress toward achieving the 

target. The program or programs responsible for completing each milestone are identied with each 

milestone. Appendix D, new this year, describes all changes to the milestones in each R&D goal and 

provides a rationale for the change. Additional research activities in each program are described in 

Appendix A. In all cases, the demonstration milestones require multiple programs to work together for 

16 Chapter 2 
regulations, standards, technologies) 

• Reduce costs and improve productivity

• Increase Employee Attitude Survey scores

• Increase Agency scores on the American

• Increased Safety

• Reduce commercial air carrier fatalities

• Reduce GA fatalities

• No commercial space launch

fatalities or injuries 

• Reduce the rate of runway incursions

• Reduce the rate of operational errors

• Manage and mitigate risk

• Greater Capacity

• Increase average daily airport

capacity to up to three-times 

• Increase on-time arrival rate to 95 percent

• Reduce gate-to-gate transit

time by 30 percent 

• Reduce the number of people

exposed to noise 

• Improve aviation fuel efciency

• International Leadership

• Reduce time and cost to market for

products and services (e.g., procedures, 

Notional Targets for 2025 (Based on 2004 levels) 

Chapter 2 17

• Increase the use of U.S. aviationrelated products and services 

• Organizational Excellence 

• Increase controller efciency to 

support notional capacity targets 

Customer Satisfaction Index 
18 Chapter 2 

Figure 2.1: Path to Achieving Notional Targets 
Chapter 2 19
20 Chapter 2 

Table 2.1: Map of R&D Programs in 2011 to R&D Goals 
Chapter 2 21
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 1 

FAST, F LEXIBLE , A ND EF F ICIE N T
)

A SYST E MT H AT SAF E LYA ND QUICK LY

MOVE SA N YON E A ND A N Y T HI NG , 

A N YWHERE , A N Y T I M E ON SCHE DUL E S T H AT 

M E ETCUSTOM ERN E E D S 

22 Chapter 2 

R & DT A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2016, demonstrate that the system will have the exibility to handle growth in demand up to three 

times current levels*

 and demonstrate that gate-to-gate transit time can be reduced by up to 30 percent. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N ** 

The approach includes developing and demonstrating NextGen capabilities according to the NGIP and 

continuing ongoing efforts related to increasing airport capacity and reducing costs. Validation of the 

R&D target will include a combination of modeling, analysis, full scale testing, and initial standards 

development. The capacity evaluation (under R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge) supports the interim 

assessment of progress and validation of this target. 

* The year 2004 is used as a baseline for consistency with the Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-

176) and the Next Generation Air Transportation System Integrated Plan submitted to Congress as required in that legislation.

** In this goal, demonstrate means to show that the methods and metrics developed are valid and that, with the system

improvements planned, it is possible to handle a signicant increase in system capacity, where three-times is used as an upper

limit (not a prediction) and is purposely aggressive, as R&D goals should be stretch goals. 

From Super Fast to Super Big and Super Small 

The 1985 FAA Plan 

anticipated supersonic and

hypersonic transport aircraft

operating in the NAS at

altitudes of 70,000 to 100,000

feet, respectively. The Plan set forth 

two initiatives to support the introduction of these vehicles

into the NAS, development of appropriate standards for

airports and aircraft certication guidance. 

How surprised would the authors of the 1985 Plan be to

see where technology developments have steered the 2010

research activities of the FAA. 

For a number of reasons, both economical and environmental,

the needs of the industry diverted from developing aircraft

with supersonic speeds to aircraft with super size (and lots of

passengers) and unmanned vehicles (with no passengers). 

The 1985 R,E&D plan used this image to symbolize future

advanced-technology aircraft. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 2 23

Turbulence - Re-categorization) 

An airplane the size of the Airbus 380 would have challenged the imagination of research

planners in 1985. Yet in 2010, the FAA is developing the standards for airports to handle these

enormous transport aircraft based in large part on taxiway deviation studies at Anchorage,

San Francisco, and JFK airports. At the same time FAA pavement research has developed and

validated design standards that will ensure long-life pavements. 

At the other end of the size spectrum, industry is pressuring the FAA to expedite certication 

and operational procedures that allow the introduction of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)

into the NAS. These UAS range in size from Global Hawks and Predators used by the military,

to micro-size aircraft measured in inches for commercial use, and every size in between.

Current research focuses primarily on establishing a regulatory framework that incorporates

the principles of the FAA Safety Management System. 

The Airbus A-380 

at the 2009 

AirVenture in 

Oshkosh, WI. 

UAS with 10.2 

foot wing span. 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Aviation weather 

— Reduce weather-related delays to 

increase on-time arrival rate and 

reduce transit time. (Weather 

Program) 

2010: Develop 0-6 hour advanced storm 

prediction algorithm. 

2010: Transition Rapid Refresh Weather 

Forecast Model for implementation 

at National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) National 

Centers for Environmental Prediction. 

2011: Demonstrate 0-6 hour advanced 

storm prediction algorithm. 

2013: Transition 0-6 hour advanced 

storm prediction algorithm for 

implementation. 

2013: Transition in-ight icing Alaska 

forecast and analysis capability for 

implementation. 

Separation standards 

— Reduce separation with procedures only. 

2008: Modify procedures to allow use of closely 

spaced parallel runways for arrival 

operations during non-visual conditions. 

(Wake Turbulence) [COMPLETED] 

2013: Modify procedures as requested to allow 

use of closely spaced parallel runways 

for arrival operations during nonvisual conditions. (NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence) 

— Develop new performance-based 

separation standards.
)

2009: Develop and simulate separation

procedures that vary according 

to aircraft capability and pilot 

training. (NextGen Demonstrations 

and Infrastructure Development) 

[COMPLETED, see third bullet under 

Progress in FY 2009] 

2013: Determine how best to incorporate the 

leader/follower based wake separation 

standards into the en-route and terminal 

automation platforms. (NextGen - Wake 

Handheld micro-aircraft are 

ready for civil applications. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NextGen demonstrations 

Develop and demonstrate NextGen technologies 

and concepts. 

— Demonstrate super-density operations. 

(NextGen Demonstrations and 

Infrastructure Development*

) 

2009: Demonstrate the addition of convective

weather (current and forecast) into 

Trafc Management Advisor (TMA) 

routing to increase throughput and 

efciency for large, super density 

airports. [COMPLETED, see rst 

bullet under Progress in FY 2009] 

— Demonstrate trajectory-based 

operations. (NextGen Demonstrations 

and Infrastructure Development) 

2008: Demonstrate improved trajectorybased operations in mixed-equipage, 

oceanic airspace with actual aircraft 

and procedures. [COMPLETED] 

2009: Demonstrate via simulation standard 

separation in a full-equipage, fully 

automated environment with no voice 

communication. [COMPLETED, see 

second bullet under Progress in FY 2009] 

Airport capacity 

— Increase airport capacity while 

reducing costs.
)

2008: Increase airport capacity.

(Airport Cooperative Research -

Capacity) [COMPLETED] 

2011: Develop guidebook to assist airport 

planners with aireld and airspace 

capacity evaluation. (Airport 

Cooperative Research - Capacity) 

2012: Develop new standards and guidelines 

for runway pavement 

design. (Airports Technology 

Research - Capacity) 

* The NextGen Demonstrations and Infrastructure Development 

program is no longer considered R&D after FY 2009. 

Wake turbulence 

— Demonstrate wake turbulence 

avoidance technologies and procedures. 

2010: Determine pilot and air navigation 

service provider (ANSP) situational 

aircraft separation display concepts 

required for implementation of the 

NextGen Trajectory-Based Operation 

(TBO) and High Density concepts. 

(NextGen - Wake Turbulence) 

2011: Rene the boundaries of the 

current six weight categories for the 

National Airspace System (NAS) 

eet mix and dene automation 

requirements to support those 

modications. (NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence - Re-categorization) 

2011: Determine optimal set of aircraft 

ight characteristics and weather 

parameters for use in setting wake 

separation minimums. (NextGen -

Wake Turbulence - Re-categorization) 

2012: Determine the NAS infrastructure 

requirements (ground and aircraft) 

for implementing the NextGen TBO 

and High Density concepts within 

the constraints of aircraft-generated 

wake vortices and aircraft collision 

risk. (NextGen - Wake Turbulence) 

2016: Develop the algorithms that will be 

used in the ANSP and ight deck 

automation systems for setting 

dynamic wake separation minimum 

for each pair of aircraft. (NextGen -

Wake Turbulence - Re-categorization) 

24 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R & DG O A L 1 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Capacity AIP 5,000 1,650 1,650 1,650 1,650 1,650 33% of total program 

— Airports Technology

Research - Capacity AIP 10,596 12,930 12,930 12,930 12,930 12,930 100% of total program 

4A09A 

Center for Advanced 

Aviation System

Development 

F&E 13,409 13,196 13,212 13,523 13,834 18,968 56% of R&D program

in FY 2010 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 10,085 10,004 10,094 10,194 10,248 10,305 70% of total program 

1A08B NextGen - New ATM 

Requirements F&E 13,200 23,000 31,200 32,000 50,100 51,900 100% of total program 

A12.b NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence R,E&D 10,631 10,685 10,742 10,799 10,800 10,801 100% of total program 

1A08E 

NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence - Recategorization F&E 2,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 100% of total program 

1A01C Operations Concept

Validation F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A01I Wake Turbulence 

Research F&E 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 combined with 1A08E after FY 2010 

A11.k Weather Program R,E&D 1,679 1,651 1,638 1,623 1,595 1,566 10% of total program 

Total ($000) 67,600 76,116 84,466 85,720 104,157 111,121 

P R O G R E S S I N R O G R E S S IN F Y 2 0 0 9 : F F Y 2 0 0 9 : FA S T , F L E X I B L E L E X I B L E , A N D E F F I C I E N T F F I C I E N T 

• Trafc Management Advisor Weather • Heavy Aircraft Dependent Paired 

Demonstration: Demonstrated the Instrument Approaches: Dened a NextGenintegration of weather forecasts into decision era wake turbulence mitigation procedure

support tools by incorporating weather concept that allows Boeing 757 and heavier

predictions into the TMA system. This aircraft to be the leader in dependent paired

laboratory proof-of-concept demonstration at instrument approaches to an airport’s closely

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, spaced parallel runways (CSPR). Use of the 

conducted in November 2008, showed procedure will require many airports to collect

incorporation of a predictive weather product additional, highly accurate information

into the TMA using a System-Wide Information concerning the crosswinds that are encountered,

Management-like interface. This will enhance or may be encountered, along the approaches to

TMA and support trafc ow during periods of their CSPR. This enhanced procedure allows

convective weather. (NextGen Demonstrations the air trafc controller to have more exibility

and Infrastructure Development) in assigning arriving aircraft to the airport’s

CSPR approaches during instrument ight rule

(IFR) operations. (NextGen - Wake Turbulence

and NextGen Demonstrations and 

Infrastructure Development) 

Chapter 2 25
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Dependent Paired Instrument Approaches 

To Closely Spaced Parallel Runways:

Approved procedure for dependent paired 

instrument approaches for use at airports having 

CSPR. When weather conditions require the use 

of IFR operations, the dependent paired 

instrument approach procedure allows the 

airports to continue to use their CSPR landing 

conguration. Formerly, because of wake 

turbulence concerns, they had to revert to using 

only one of their CSPR for landing operations. 

The procedure allows 10 to 15 more landings per 

hour than the airports’ single runway landing 

conguration. (NextGen - Wake Turbulence) 

• Flight Management Systems 4D

Trajectories Downlink for TBO: Collected 

and analyzed data from operational ights in

the NAS to help identify parameters of

importance for TBO. The four-dimensional 

trajectory (4DT) data was down-linked from a

Boeing 737NG aircraft equipped with GE

Aviation Flight Management Systems (FMS)

avionics. In describing TBO, the NextGen

Concept of Operations mentions key end state

transformations that include the exchange of

4DT data between capable aircraft and the

ANSP. Most current generation FMSs generate

4DT information on board the aircraft to provide

the basis for autoight systems to execute a

route from takeoff to touchdown. Some of these 

systems installed on various aircraft operating

in the NAS can also communicate the 4DT data 

to the airline operations center using existing

ground networks. However, the utility of this

4DT information in helping meet the operational

requirements as envisioned by the NextGen

concept for TBO has only recently begun to be

assessed. In 2009, to explore more fully the

NextGen concept of TBO, Continental Airlines

and Center for Advanced Aviation System

Development (CAASD) researchers worked

together to gain operational experience in the

use of down-linked 4DT data among air trafc 

specialists and airline operations personnel.

(CAASD) 

• Probabilistic Forecasts: Completed concept

development of methods that will enable

customized 1-3 hour probabilistic forecasts,

targeted initially for the OEP 35 Airports. This 

capability will use current observations and past

history to produce hourly forecasts in ve 

minutes. This approach will enable timely

forecasts and will be combined with modeling

techniques to extend the forecasts to 12 hours.

This capability will provide a valuable tool for

identifying hazardous ceiling and visibility

conditions that impact trafc capacity at the

airports’ terminals. (Weather Program) 

• Updated Wake Turbulence Mitigation 

Separation Standards: Developed a revised 

set of separation standards and associated safety 

and benet studies with EUROCONTROL to 

better address the changing air carrier eet mix 

operating at airports. Current wake turbulence 

mitigation separation standards used by air 

trafc control (ATC) have not changed in last 20+ 

years both in the United States and throughout 

the world, while the types of aircraft and the 

relative number of each type of aircraft has 

changed. In FY 2008, an analysis by the FAA 

and EUROCONTROL indicated that more 

runway operational capacity could be safely 

achieved by revising the ATC wake turbulence 

mitigation separation standards. After further 

analysis and coordination, these revised 

standards will be submitted to the International 

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for approval 

and adoption. (NextGen - Wake Turbulence 

- Re-categorization) 

• Oceanic Collaborative Trajectory 

Optimization Demonstration: Initiated 

demonstrations of collaborative trajectory

optimization in the oceanic environment. FAA 

and European partners used an optimization

process with assistance from automated prole 

optimization and deconiction tools as a step

toward an automated process for oceanic, fourdimensional trajectory-based operations. These 

ve-month long demonstrations measured the

benets of collaborative air trafc management

(ATM) with a more dynamic and proactive

application of the FAA’s Ocean 21 automation,

which allows the aircraft to y as close as

possible to the user preferred trajectories.

(NextGen Demonstrations and Infrastructure

Development) 

• Advanced Weather Radar Techniques:

Enhanced the national 3D radar mosaic 

algorithms to incorporate the super-resolution

radar data available from all NOAA WSR-88D 

radars. The resolution of the national 3D radar 

mosaic and derivative products was increased

from an update rate of 5 minutes to 2.5 minutes.

This increased update rate facilitates more

timely depiction of storms, their structure, and

their movement, which will enable users to plan

more effective and safer routes of ight that will

avoid hazardous convective areas. Additionally,

31 Canadian radars were integrated into the

national 3D radar mosaic to produce seamless

radar information along the U.S. and Canadian

border. This will support coverage for U.S.

ights into Canada as well as domestic U.S.

ights that y into Canada because of

hazardous weather over the Great Lakes. 

(Weather Program) 

26 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 2 27

Shadow UAS 

• Unmanned Aircraft System Demonstration:

Conducted a UAS demonstration project ight 

that collected data to verify and calibrate the 

Shadow UAS six-degree-of-freedom model. This 

ight of a Shadow UAS was performed at 

Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, AL. A ight test 

team from AAI Corporation operated the UAS as 

an activity under a Cooperative Research and 

Development Agreement (CRDA) with FAA. Data 

from the demonstration will be integrated with 

the FAA’s NAS models for follow-on laboratory 

simulations. The primary objectives of the 

evaluations and demonstrations are to provide 

data to support the evaluation and integration of 

UAS operations in the NAS. (NextGen 

Demonstrations and Infrastructure Development) 

• Multiple Precise Routes: Developed concept

for using an aircraft’s navigation capabilities to

follow one of multiple precise routes to an

airport’s CSPR. The concept is being developed

as a candidate airport wake turbulence

mitigation approach design for NextGen-era

increased CSPR airport operations. In FY 

2010, the terminal area CSPR approach design

will be evaluated for feasibility in terms of air

trafc controller tasks, air crew tasks and

required controller and pilot decision aids.

(NextGen - Wake Turbulence) 

• Turbulence Forecast Capability

Prototypes: Developed prototypes of clear-air

and mountain-wave turbulence forecast 

capability for all altitudes from the surface to

45,000 feet. The prototypes are model-based

and have turbulence nowcast capability that

ingests in-situ eddy dissipation rate data, pilot

reports, and the NEXRAD Turbulence

Detection Algorithm mosaic output. Both the 

turbulence forecast, updated hourly out to 12

hours, and the turbulence nowcast, updated

every 15 minutes, will allow users to plan more

effective and safer routes of ight that will

avoid hazardous turbulence areas. These 

capabilities are planned for inclusion as part of

the NextGen Initial Operational Capability.

(Weather Program) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 2
)

CLEA NA ND QUIET
)

A RE DUCT IONOF S IG N I F ICA N T 

AERO SPACE E N VIRONM E N TAL I M PACTS I N 

AB S O LU T ET ER M S 

28 Chapter 2 

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2016, demonstrate that signicant aviation noise and emissions impacts can be reduced in absolute 

terms (to enable up to a three-times capacity increase*

) in a cost-effective way and reduce uncertainties in 

particulate matter and climate impacts to levels that enable appropriate action. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach has ve parts: measure current levels in the system, determine the target levels of noise 

and emissions, build models to assess and predict the impact of change, develop reduction techniques and 

assess their cost-benets, and develop environmental management systems for the NAS. Validation of 

the R&D target will include modeling, physical demonstrations, prototypes, full-scale tests, and software 

beta tests. The environmental evaluation milestones under R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge also support 

the interim assessment of progress and validation of this target. 

* In this goal, demonstrate means to show that the models and metrics developed are valid and that, with the system improvements 

planned, it is possible to reduce aviation noise and emission impacts even with a signicant increase in system capacity, where threetimes is used as an upper limit (not a prediction) and is purposely aggressive, as R&D goals should be stretch goals. 

From Noise Complaints to Global Environmental Challenges 

Aviation environmental and energy (E&E) issues have 

evolved dramatically over the last 25 years. The 1985 Plan 

envisioned a future that included supersonic, hypersonic,

and transatmospheric ights. There was no warning that 

environmental concerns would become a constraint on the 

growth of aviation. Although the role of aircraft emissions on the earth’s ozone 

layer was a concern, noise was the primary environmental topic of interest, 

and the climate impacts of aviation emissions were not even on the radar 

screen. With noise near airports as the primary driver, most E&E 

research focused on simpler noise certication procedures for 

aircraft, improved compatibility criteria for land use near 

airports, and methods to better quantify the reaction of 

airport neighbors to aviation noise. 

The Concorde Super Sonic Transport was

so loud that in 1977 the FAA issued a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Noise

and Sonic Boom Requirements. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 2 29

Today, noise is still an issue but climate impacts pose the most pressing challenge. Likewise, aviation fuel

efciency is still a concern but the need for sustainable and secure jet fuel supplies is now a key component

of the E&E portfolio. What is also new today is that aviation E&E issues are no longer addressed in

isolation. Optimally balanced solutions are being analyzed and designed after careful consideration of

associated interdependencies, tradeoffs, and associated costs and benets. The E&E research portfolio

includes a basket of solutions including advanced aircraft technologies, sustainable alternative fuels,

efcient operational procedures, market options, and policy and regulatory measures that are implemented

and controlled via an environmental management system (EMS). 

noise margin below Stage 4 Aircraft Noise 

Standards and is expected to use 20% less fuel than comparable 

aircraft. The Dreamliner is so fuel-efcient, for example, it can 

travel from San Francisco to New York carrying 275 passengers 

with comparable fuel economy to a 2010 Honda Accord traveling

the same distance with 3 passengers. 

First ight of the Boeing 787

Dreamliner on December 15, 2009 

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is 

expected to have a signicant cumulative 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Threshold levels 

— Determine acceptable levels of noise 

and emissions. 

2010: Develop new standards and 

methodologies to quantify and assess 

the impact of aircraft noise and 

aviation emissions. (Environment 

and Energy and Airport Cooperative 

Research - Environment) 

2011: Develop a new metric to quantify the 

environmental impacts of new aircraft 

types. (Environment and Energy) 

2011: Complete tests and data collection 

to determine if the right metrics 

are being used to assess the 

impact of aircraft noise. (NextGen 

Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2011: Determine how aviation-generated 

particulate matter and hazardous 

air pollutants impact local health, 

visibility, and global climate. 

(Environment and Energy, 

NextGen Environmental Research 

- Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and 

Metrics, and Airport Cooperative 

Research - Environment) 

2011: Investigate feasibility of new 

standards for aircraft noise 

and emissions certication. 

(Environment and Energy) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Baseline measurement 

— Measure current levels of aviation 

related noise and emissions. 

2009: Develop methodologies to 

quantify and assess the impact of 

Particulate Matter and Hazardous 

Air Pollutants. (Environment 

and Energy, Airport Cooperative 

Research - Environment) 

[COMPLETED, see the rst bullet 

under Progress in FY 2009] 

2011: Establish the relationship between 

aviation engine exhaust and the 

gases and particulate matter that 

are deposited in the atmosphere. 

(NextGen Environmental Research 

- Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and 

Metrics) 

2012: Expand noise data collection to very 

light jets, and supersonic aircraft. 

(Environment and Energy) 

2013: Obtain direct measurements of 

hazardous air pollutants and 

particulate matter data to update 

modeling tools. (Environment 

and Energy) 

Prediction 

— Develop models to predict the impact 

and benets of changes. 

2008: Develop and distribute the rst 

generation of integrated noise and 

emission prediction and modeling 

tools, including an environmental 

cost module. (Environment and 

Energy) [COMPLETED] 

2010: Develop a preliminary 

planning version of an Aviation 

Environmental Design Tool 

(AEDT) that will allow integrated 

assessment of noise and emissions 

impact at the local and global levels. 

(Environment and Energy) 

2010: Assess the impacts of aviation 

on regional air quality, including 

the effects of nitrogen oxide (NOx

) 

emissions from aircraft climb and 

cruise. (Environment and Energy) 

2011: Assess the level of certainty of 

aviation’s impact on climate change, 

with special emphasis on the effects of 

contrails. (Environment and Energy) 

2011: Complete development of rstgeneration ground plume model 

for aircraft engine exhaust. 

(Environment and Energy) 

2011: Enhance regional analysis 

capability in aviation environmental 

analysis tools. (NextGen -

Operational Assessments) 

2013: Update environmental assessments 

models to incorporate new noise 

metrics. (Environment and Energy) 

2014: Complete development and eld 

a fully validated suite of tools, 

including the AEDT and the Aviation 

Environmental Portfolio Management 

Tool (APMT). (Environment and 

Energy and Airport Cooperative 

Research - Environment) 

2014: Assess NAS-wide benets of 

environmental mitigation solutions 

comprised of new technologies, 

alternative fuels, advanced 

operational procedures, market 

measures, and options for policy 

and noise/emissions standards. 

(NextGen – Environment 

and Energy – Environmental 

Management System and Advanced 

Noise and Emission Reduction) 

30 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reduction techniques 

— Develop noise and emission reduction 

methods. 

2008: Enable implementation of a new 

continuous-descent approach noise 

abatement and fuel burn (emissions) 

reduction procedure at low-trafc 

airports during nighttime operations 

and optimize aircraft routing to reduce 

fuel usage. (Environment and Energy) 

[COMPLETED] 

2010: Develop algorithms to optimize ground 

and airspace operations by leveraging 

communication, navigation, and 

surveillance technology in the shortto medium-term to optimize aircraft 

sequencing and timing on the surface 

and in the terminal area. (NextGen 

Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2010: Complete detailed feasibility study, 

including economic feasibility, 

measure environmental impacts, 

and demonstrate drop-in potential 

for alternative fuels. (NextGen 

Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2011: Complete detailed feasibility study, 

including economic and environmental 

impacts and an assessment of 

potential of renewable alternative 

fuels for gas turbine engines. 

(NextGen Environmental Research 

- Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and 

Metrics) 

2013: Demonstrate optimized airport 

and terminal area operations that 

reduce or mitigate aviation impacts 

on noise, air quality, or water 

quality in the vicinity of the airport. 

(NextGen - Environment and Energy 

- Environmental Management System 

and Advanced Noise and Emissions 

Reduction and Airport Cooperative 

Research - Environment) 

2013: Identify and pursue the development of 

engine and airframe technologies that 

will be the most effective at producing 

environmental benets. (NextGen - 

Environment and Energy - Environmental 

Management System and Advanced Noise 

and Emissions Reduction) 

2013: Complete signicant demonstration of 

“drop-in” alternative turbine engine fuels. 

(NextGen Environmental Research -

Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2013: Establish engine design sensitivities 

by measuring particles emitted from 

combustor engine systems. (NextGen 

Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2013: Demonstrate airframe and engine 

technologies to reduce noise and 

emissions. (NextGen Environmental 

Research - Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, 

and Metrics) 

2014: Demonstrate optimized en route 

operations that enhance fuel 

efciency and reduce emissions. 

(NextGen - Environment and Energy -

Environmental Management 

System and Advanced Noise and 

Emissions Reduction) 

2014: Complete assessment of renewable 

alternative turbine engine fuels. 

(NextGen Environmental Research -

Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2015: Complete transition plans for 

renewable alternative fuels. (NextGen 

Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

2015: Assess environmental benets of rst 

round of Continuous Lower Energy, 

Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) airframe 

and engine technologies through 

integrated ight demonstration. 

(NextGen Environmental Research -

Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics) 

Chapter 2 31
 

 

Environmental Management 

— Develop environmental management 

systems for the NAS 

2013: Evaluate, rene, and apply 

Environmental Management 

System (EMS) decision support 

tools to aviation system. (NextGen 

- Environment and Energy -

Environmental Management 

System and Advanced Noise and 

Emissions Reduction) 

2015: Rene and update approaches 

for EMS performance tracking. 

(NextGen - Environment and Energy 

- Environmental Management 

System and Advanced Noise and 

Emissions Reduction) 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R & DG O A L 2 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Environment AIP 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 100% of total program 

A13.a Environment and Energy R,E&D 15,522 15,374 15,335 15,287 15,131 14,969 100% of total program 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A13.b 

NextGen Environmental 

Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and

Metrics 

R,E&D 26,509 20,600 20,691 20,778 20,752 20,726 100% of total program 

1A08D 

NextGen - Environment 

and Energy -

Environmental 

Management

System and Advanced

Noise and Emissions 

Reduction 

F&E 7,000 15,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 100% of total program 

1A08F NextGen - Operational

Assessments F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

Total ($000) 54,031 55,974 59,026 59,065 58,883 58,695 

P R O G R E S S I N 	) F Y2 0 0 9 :C L E A N A N D Q U I E T

• Guidance for Quantifying Speciated emissions from aircraft engines. Both 

Organic Gas Emissions from Airport documents are intended to provide a standard

Sources: Published a guidance document to approach that an airport community could use

develop emissions inventory of airport level for consistent inventory, analysis, and

emissions of hazardous air pollutants. In reporting of airport emissions. (Environment

addition, the FAA published a companion and Energy)

document to quantify speciated organic gas 

32 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• High-Level Tool for Prioritization of

Optimized Prole Descent 

Implementation Sites: Completed a datadriven methodology for the prioritization and

planning of Optimized Prole Descent (OPD,

also referred to as Continuous Descent Arrival 

or CDA) implementation sites NAS-wide. The 

tool ranks sites in accordance with overall 

benets of OPDs, where OPDs would be

simplest to implement, and where resources

are available to support immediate

planning and implementation of OPDs.

(Environment and Energy) 

• Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuel 

Initiative: Conducted three demonstration 

ights using a bio-jet fuel that advanced the

acceptance and understanding of alternative

aviation fuels. Commercial Aviation 

Alternative Fuel Initiative (CAAFI) played a

key leadership role in the introduction of

alternative aviation fuels with the issuance of a 

new specication for synthetic aviation fuel in

September 2009. The new specication, ASTM

International D7566, will allow the use of

semi-synthetic aviation fuel in commercial

airliners. (Environment and Energy) 

• Aircraft Noise Research Roadmap:

Developed a comprehensive research roadmap

to address four critical research areas needed 

to advance the state of knowledge and practice

on aircraft noise impacts: noise effects on 

health and welfare; noise impacts in National

Parks and wilderness; NextGen noise modeling

and unconventional aircraft; and the societal

cost of aircraft noise. The research roadmap

efforts in each of the four areas are at different 

levels of maturity. FAA will closely track

progress against the research roadmap to

prepare for any policy adjustments that may be

warranted by new knowledge gained from the

research. (Environment and Energy) 

• Guidebook on Preparing Airport

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories: 

Completed a study to provide airport operators 

with clear and cohesive guidance information 

and established uniform methodology to develop 

a source-specic inventory of airport greenhouse 

gas (GHG) emissions. There are increasing 

concerns about GHG emissions in the U.S. 

Several states and municipalities are taking 

legislative actions and implementing controls. 

At present there is no specic guidance or 

generally applied practice for computing airportlevel GHG emission inventories. (Airport 

Cooperative Research - Environment) 

• Aviation Climate Change Research

Initiative: Developed high-level research

priority recommendations for implementation

in FY 2010. The FAA worked closely with

other federal agencies to develop a solicitation

of research proposals from national and

international scientic communities. Key

elements of this solicitation include simulations 

and assessment of regional and global aviation

climate impacts for current ight activities and

future projections under changing climate

conditions, assessment of simplied aviation 

climate impacts models, and development of

contrail prediction capabilities in numerical

weather forecast models being used for

aviation navigation purposes. A panel of

interagency climate program managers and

experts has been assembled and is presently

reviewing the proposals. The panel will

provide recommendations for selection of

proposals on a competitive merit basis.

(Environment and Energy) 

• Alternative Aviation Fuel Experiment:

Characterized aircraft engine emissions during

combustion of a range of blended natural gas

and coal-based Fischer-Tropsch (FT)

alternative fuels. Researchers at Partnership

for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions

Reduction (PARTNER), an FAA/NASA/

Transport Canada-sponsored Center of

Excellence, participated in this Alternative

Aviation Fuel Experiment (AAFEX) project.

Preliminary analyses indicate that combustion

of FT fuels yields lower emissions of particulate

matter, hydrocarbons, and sulfur oxides as

compared to conventional jet fuels. Equally

important, they provide energy security and

sustainability. (Environment and Energy) 

• Managing Runoff From Aircraft and

Aireld Deicing and Anti-Icing

Operations: Developed planning guidelines 

incorporating an array of best management 

practices for the practical, cost-effective 

control of runoff from aircraft and aireld 

deicing and anti-icing operations. These 

guidelines will assist airports of all sizes and 

operational levels in designing (or redesigning) site-specic solutions. These 

guidelines will also serve as tools for airports 

to promote the use of sustainable, efcient 

management systems that reduce the 

potential presence of aircraft deicing and 

anti-icing uid (ADAF) in storm water runoff. 

(Airport Cooperative Research - Environment) 

Chapter 2 33
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 - 

 -

 

 

 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - – 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the potential for human error while increasing efciency. This goal contributes to the integrated 

demonstration under R&D Goal 4 - Human-Centered Design. 

R&D G OAL 3
)

HIGH QUAL I T Y TEA M SA ND INDIVIDUAL S
)

THE BE STQU AL I F I E DA ND TR AI N E D 

WOR K FORCEI N T HEWOR LD

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2016, demonstrate improvement in air navigation service provider (ANSP) efciency (e.g., 

greater number of aircraft) and effectiveness (e.g., fewer operational errors) through automation and 

standardization of operations, procedures, and information. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes continued, incremental pursuit of efciency gains in the en route phase of 

ight and pursuit of new knowledge and results that produce efciency gains in terminal and tower 

operational phases. Automation and new capabilities that are added through implementation of 

operational improvements are believed to provide incremental efciency benets, and there are likely 

interactions among these capabilities; however, the specic benets that accrue will need to be veried 

through human performance modeling and human-in-the-loop testing. The program will examine the 

roles of controllers and maintainers at increased capacity levels and how those roles are best supported 

by allocation of functions between human operators and automation to enhance safety and minimize 

34 Chapter 2 

FAA’s Flying Laboratories 

Just like today, many aviation research challenges in 1985 could be investigated only with specially

instrumented and recongurable airborne laboratories. Back then, the FAA research eet included 

a Boeing 727, two Convair 580 turboprops, and a Sikorsky S 76 helicopter. Wake turbulence 

research was a high priority program and remains so today. The photo on the left shows the S 76 

helicopter trailing smoke plumes that provide visible evidence of wake characteristics after test 

aircraft passage. These ying laboratories were essential components of research studies into 

Trafc Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), Microwave Landing Systems, and the effect of 

lightning strikes on avionics. Yes, FAA pilots regularly ew their aircraft into thunderstorms intent 

on being hit by lightning! Today, the FAA’s Flight Program Airborne Laboratories has traded in the 

Boeing 727 for a Bombardier Global 5000. The Sikorsky S 76 helicopter and both Convair 580s, now 

with glass cockpits, remain in service. These ying laboratories support a laundry list of NextGen 

communication, navigation, and surveillance programs including Path Arrival Management, Global 

Position Sattelite, WAAS/LAAS, and ADS B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast). 

These aircraft also support airport safety programs like runway incursion reduction, surface 

traction, heliport lighting, and painting and marking of airport surfaces. The background photo 

shows FAA’s ying laboratory N47 testing the Runway Status Lights during a simulated 

runway incursion at LAX. And just like in 1985, the most important part of 

these ying laboratories today is the team of pilots, engineers, scientists, and 

mechanics who plan the operation, congure the laboratory, and y the 

aircraft time and time again to meet the mission. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Selection criteria 

— Ensure ANSPs have the aptitude 

and capability required to manage 

air trafc in the future system. (Air 

Trafc Control/Technical Operations 

Human Factors) 

2012: Apply program-generated human 

factors knowledge to improve 

aviation system personnel selection 

and training. 

2015: Develop selection procedures to 

transform the workforce into a new 

generation of service providers that 

can manage trafc ows in a highly 

automated system. 

Demonstrate improvements in

ANSP efciency 

— Demonstrate improvements in ANSP 

efciency achieved by implementation 

of NextGen ground automation 

capabilities and aircraft equipage, 

use of data communications, and 

implementation of new decision support 

tools and automation. (NextGen - Air 

Trafc Control/Technical Operations 

Human Factors (Controller Efciency 

and Air Ground Integration)) 

2010: Dene anticipated controller workload 

reductions due to implementation of 

data communications. 

2010: Dene initial requirements and 

anticipated efciency benets for 

merging and spacing decision support 

tools to support continuous descent 

approach in the terminal area. 

2013: Analyze controller roles in a strategic 

air trafc environment for en route 

and terminal domains for the impact 

on personnel selection and training. 

2013: Demonstrate collaborative air trafc 

management efciencies enabled 

by common situation awareness 

between ight operators and ANSP. 

2013: Demonstrate increased ANSP 

efciencies through new procedures 

that allow ANSP personnel to manage 

and introduce routing, airspace, 

and trafc mix changes in the fourdimensional (position plus time), 

dynamic air trafc environment. 

2016: Perform an analysis of controller 

roles in terms of the services they 

provide during a given phase of ight 

as the differences between en route 

and terminal begin to blur.

Chapter 2 35
 

 

 

 

 

Increase to 130 percent* 2007: Identify the performance limitations  of the controller in the terminal and — Demonstrate 130 percent controller tower environments. [COMPLETED]

efciency. (Air Trafc Control/ 

Technical Operations Human Factors) 2008: Demonstrate efciency improvements  when controllers receive information

2007: Demonstrate how to reduce verbal on aircraft equipage, performance  communication workload between capabilities, and applicable

the pilot and controller for en route procedures in a mixed equipage

operations. [COMPLETED] environment. [COMPLETED] 

2008: Conduct initial simulation to 

determine what weather information 

* The year 2004 was chosen as a baseline for consistency with the is required by en route and tower 

Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-176) controllers to improve efciency. and the Next Generation Air Transportation System Integrated Plan [COMPLETED] submitted to Congress as required in that legislation. 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R & DG O A L 3 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

A11.i 

Air Trafc Control/

Technical Operations

Human Factors 

R,E&D 10,302 10,475 10,633 10,799 10,934 11,073 100% of total program 

4A09A 

Center for Advanced 

Aviation System

Development 

F&E 4,310 4,242 4,247 4,347 4,447 6,097 18% of R&D program

in FY 2010 

A11.g 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/

System Integration

Human Factors 

R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A08A 

NextGen - ATC/Technical

Ops Human Factors

(Controller Efciency and

Air Ground Integration) 

F&E 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 100% of total program 

Total ($000) 24,612 24,717 24,880 25,146 25,381 27,170 

P R O G R E S S I N F Y2 0 0 9 :

H I G H Q U A L I T Y TE A M S A N D I N D I V I D U A L S 

• Strategic Job Analysis Database: Assessed 

the probable impact of NextGen concepts of

operation, procedures, and technologies on the 

prole of innate abilities and other personal

characteristics (aptitudes) required to enter the

air trafc controller station (ATCS) occupation.

The primary focus in FY 2009 was on the

design and construction of two prototypes of

the Job Analysis Information Database 

(JAIdB). The rst prototype was constructed

for the tower cab controller job using Task

Architect Pro (v2.0), a commercial hierarchical

task analysis application. While the work of a 

tower cab controller was represented in Task

Architect reasonably well, the ability

requirements could not be addressed explicitly,

and it was not possible to link sub-activities to

abilities, as required in selection-oriented job 

36 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Medical Field Ofces in August and 

September of 2009, 

allowing clearance of 

some ATCS candidates 

who failed clinical color 

vision screening. (Air 

Trafc Control/

Technical Operations 

Human Factors) 

task analysis (JTA) practice and case law. The 

second prototype was built in Microsoft Access

2003. This prototype provided a means for

mapping sub-activities and tasks dened in 

two previous ATCS job analyses to subactivities and tasks dened in a third job

analysis. The prototype provided an explicit

linkage between sub-activities and abilities

required for successful performance. It also 

demonstrated the feasibility of linking to other

JTA data sources. However, as an Access

application, the prototype JAIdB is not

network aware and thus, cannot support

multiple users. It also does not support

multiple instances representing the job-byability relationships at different times (e.g.,

now, mid- and far-term). Finally, a market

survey of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) job

analysis applications was also conducted over

the summer of 2009. No viable COTS JTA 

application was identied through the market 

survey. (Air Trafc Control/Technical

Operations Human Factors) 

• New Practical Color Vision Tests for ATCS 

Applicants: Developed a construct-based 

job-sample test to assess an applicant’s ability 

to discriminate the colors deployed for critical 

tasks in current air trafc displays and 

transitioned it from research to operations. The 

Air Trafc Control Color Vision Test (ATCOV) 

was modied to more realistically represent 

targets currently deployed on critical air trafc 

displays. Also, the ATCOV was modied to 

better comply with the 1978 Uniform 

Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. 

It was concluded that the operational version of 

ATCOV is a true job-sample test, making use of 

display formats and color values deployed for 

critical functions on critical displays as dened 

by a review of published task analyses of ATCS 

duties. The Operational ATCOV was deployed 

to nine Regional Flight Surgeon Ofces and/or 

• Proactive Audit Approach to Support

Safety Management Systems in Airline

Maintenance and Ramp Operations:

Developed maintenance and ramp Line

Operations Safety Audit (LOSA) forms and

assisted with the creation of training materials

for the forms. LOSA aims to identify

precursors to maintenance or ramp events

during normal activity. These proactive

approaches, as opposed to post accident and

event investigation, are aligned with the

principles of risk management and Safety

Management Systems (SMS). For any

organization, SMS has the potential to

evaluate its vulnerability to error (including

those of its systems, processes, and personnel),

ascertain the validity and reliability of its

information, and consequently assess its

internal control. The research team tested the 

forms and training materials with the

assistance of industry personnel. Preliminary

ndings showed that ongoing maintenance

LOSA observations raise safety awareness in

the workforce and LOSA observers believed the 

process made them better mechanics.

Additionally, researchers discovered several

areas of improvement that the airlines should

address in their normal operations to

continuously improve safety and efciency.

(Air Trafc Control/Technical Operations

Human Factors) 

• Guidelines for an Aircraft Maintenance 

Aviation Safety Action Program:

Developed and issued A Practical Guide to 

Maintenance Aviation Safety Action Program

(ASAP) in response to an industry-wide desire

for a simple and practical source of information

regarding the assessment, development, and

operation of ASAPs across many areas of the

aviation maintenance community. Aviation 

Safety Action Programs (ASAPs) are a nonpunitive error-reporting program intended to

encourage reporting of errors made by

employee groups so that systemic solutions can

be developed and error-inducing conditions can

be minimized. In aviation maintenance, safety

is dependent on reliability of the maintenance

personnel and hardware. ASAPs acknowledge

the complexity of these human-machine

dynamics and human relationships and provide

a means to address errors that impact the

overall safety of aviation maintenance. Over 

the past several years, the number of ASAPs

has increased signicantly (currently 199 for

maintenance, pilot, cabin, dispatch, and

others). (Air Trafc Control/Technical

Operations Human Factors) 

Chapter 2 37
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 4
)

HU M A N-CE N TERE D DE S IG N
)

AERO SPACESYST E M ST H AT A DAPT TO, 

COM PE N SAT EFOR , A ND AUG M E N TT HE

PERFOR M A NCE OF T HEHU M A N 

38 Chapter 2 

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2016, demonstrate that operations (e.g., day and night, all weather), procedures, and information can 

be standard and predictable for users (e.g., pilots, controllers, airlines, passengers) at all types of airports 

and for all aircraft. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes identifying roles and responsibilities, dening human and system performance 

requirements, applying error management strategies, and conducting an integrated demonstration 

across multiple goal areas. Validation of the R&D target will include simulations and demonstrations to 

conrm the requirements and methodologies for human performance and error management. The nal 

demonstration will integrate weather-in-the-cockpit technologies, self-separation procedures, air trafc 

controller productivity tools, and network-enabled collaborative decision-making to increase capacity, 

reduce delays, and promote safety. 

From the ight deck to the air trafc controller workstation, many 

of today’s human factors challenges, such as crew performance,

human error management, training, and display design and 

integration, are similar to the challenges faced in 1985. However, 

a greater amount of increasingly complex operational information 

is now available to both pilots and controllers. These advances 

underscore the importance of human factors research in ensuring

systems and their operators function as specied. 

In 1985, cockpit resource management (CRM) research

focused on better communication between captains and

rst ofcers. Supported by FAA research, this practice

matured to include the cabin crew. Now the total 

operational environment is considered, with a focus on

threat and error management. This approach was adopted

worldwide and integrated into all segments of air carrier

training. In 1985, display design and integration focused

primarily on ight displays that were located on an

aircraft’s instrument panel. Now, research is focused on

integrating information from displays such as electronic

ight bags (EFBs), enhanced and synthetic vision, and

heads-up displays. 

From Cockpit Resource Management to 

Human System Integration 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M I L E S T O N E S Human Factors, NextGen - Air Trafc 

Roles and responsibilities 

— Dene the changes in roles and 

responsibilities, between pilots and 

controllers and between humans 

and automation, required to 

implement NextGen.
#

2011: Document ramp operational and safety 

techniques and how airport operators 

implement pavement maintenance 

programs. (Airport Cooperative 

Research - Capacity) 

2011: Develop initial mid-term analysis 

describing the relationship between 

human pilots and controllers with 

associated automated systems. 

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration, 

NextGen - Air Trafc Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors - Controller 

Efciency and Air Ground Integration) 

2012: Complete initial research to evaluate 

and recommend procedures for 

negotiations and shared decisionmaking between pilots and controllers. 

Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors (Controller Efciency and Air 

Ground Integration)) 

2016: Complete research to enable safe and 

effective changes to controller roles and 

responsibilities for NextGen procedures. 

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors, NextGen - Air Trafc 

Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors (Controller Efciency and Air 

Ground Integration)) 

Integrated demonstrations 

— Conduct incremental and full-mission 

demonstrations to increase the likelihood 

of successful implementation of research 

results. (NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors, NextGen - Air Trafc 

Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors (Controller Efciency and Air 

Ground Integration), William J. Hughes 

Technical Center Laboratory Facility) 

2017: Functional demonstration – 

demonstrate integrated pilot and 

controller functional capabilities. 

Chapter 2 39

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

After the air trafc controller strike in 1981, there was an inux of air trafc 

control new-hires, which drove the need for new forms of controller aptitude and

occupational knowledge testing. Human factors research activities successfully

culminated in the Air Trafc Selection and Training (AT-SAT) test. Now, 25

years later, the FAA is once again in a surge of hiring air trafc controllers in 

association with the cycle of increased retirements. 

NextGen places the focus of human factors efforts on automation and decision 

support tools. The 2010 human factors research portfolio makes extensive 

use of high delity simulation capabilities such as 

sophisticated eye tracker technologies and automated 

data collection to develop and test future concepts. In 

addition, human factors research in 2010 and beyond 

addresses the challenges of personnel selection, 

training, human error, workstation design, and the 

changing roles and responsibilities that are aligned in 

NextGen using a Human System Integration approach. 

(previous page) top – FAA radar training facility;

bottom – Controller using monochromatic display

circa 1985 

(this page) top – Eye-tracking technology for measuring 

scanning patterns; bottom – En route modernization 

automation monitor and control consoles 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2014: Develop initial guidance on training 

methods to support detection and 

correction of human errors in near- to 

mid-term NextGen procedures. 

2016: Complete research to identify and 

manage the risks posed by new 

and altered human error modes in 

the use of NextGen procedures 

2012: Initiate research to assess pilot 

performance in normal and nonnormal NextGen procedures, 

including single pilot operations. 

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors) 

2012: Develop human factors guidance for 

Automatic Dependent Surveillance – 

Broadcast (ADS-B) enabled Cockpit 

Display of Trafc Information 

(CDTI) certication and operational 

approval. (Flightdeck/Maintenance/ 

System Integration Human Factors) 

2012: Provide human factors guidance for 

the design of instrument procedures. 

(Flightdeck/Maintenance/System 

Integration Human Factors) 

2013: Complete research to identify human 

factors issues and potential mitigation 

strategies for the use of legacy 

avionics in NextGen procedures. 

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors) 

2016: Complete research to assess 

procedures, training, display, and 

alerting requirements to support 

development and evaluation of 

planned and unplanned transitions 

between NextGen and legacy 

airspace procedures. (NextGen - Air 

Ground Integration Human Factors) 

Human system integration 

— Dene human and system performance

requirements for design and 

operation of aircraft and air trafc 

management systems. 

2010: Initiate research to identify 

equipment categories for legacy ight 

deck avionics to support human 

factors evaluations of use of these 

systems in NextGen ight procedures. 

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors) 

Error management 

— Develop and apply error management

strategies, mitigate risk factors, and 

reduce automation-related errors. 

(NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors, NextGen - Air Trafc 

Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors (Controller Efciency and Air 

Ground Integration)) 

2012: Complete research to develop 

methods to mitigate mode errors in 

use of NextGen equipment. 

and equipment. 

40 Chapter 2 
 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R & DG O A L 4
)

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only.
'

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

A11.i 

Air Trafc Control/

Technical Operations

Human Factors 

R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Capacity AIP 0 1,700 1,700 1,700 1,700 1,700 34% of total program 

A11.g 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/

System Integration

Human Factors 

R,E&D 7,128 7,174 7,253 7,336 7,390 7,446 100% of total program 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.c 

NextGen - Air Ground 

Integration Human

Factors 

R,E&D 5,688 10,614 10,656 10,692 10,670 10,648 100% of total program 

1A08A 

NextGen - ATC/Technical

Ops Human Factors

(Controller Efciency and

Air Ground Integration) 

F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A08E 

NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence - Recategorization F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.e NextGen - Weather 

Technology in the Cockpit R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A11.h System Safety

Management R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A11.k Weather Program R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A14.b 

William J. Hughes

Technical Center 

Laboratory Facility 

R,E&D 4,588 3,717 3,785 3,857 3,920 3,986 100% of total program 

Total ($000) 17,404 23,205 23,394 23,585 23,680 23,780 

P R O G R E S S I N F Y2 0 0 9 :H U M A N - C E N T E R E D D E S I G N
)

• Dynamic Comprehension - Time on

Position and Mental Fatigue: Determined 

the amount of time necessary to develop

dynamic comprehension of the trafc situation 

following a position transfer. The purpose of

the study was to provide an empirical basis for

establishing minimum and maximum times on

position for en route controllers. Controllers 

commonly state that it takes time to develop a

feel for the trafc once they assume position

control. The results of this study suggest that

the feel that controllers are referring to may be

associated with calibrating their mental clock 

with the time it takes to execute their plan.

Controllers may have a plan when they assume

position control, but may be underestimating

the amount of time it will take to execute that 

plan. Results suggest that it takes between

5-10 seconds per aircraft for controllers to

adapt to the trafc demands of their sector 

once they assume position control. This range

serves as an initial basis for estimating the

minimum amount of time a controller should 

be on position before being relieved. (ATC/

Technical Operations Human Factors) 

Chapter 2 41
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Weather in the Cockpit Baselining and

Assessment: Assembled information on 

present, near-term, and anticipated weather 

information requirements for air transport 

ight decks, general aviation (GA) cockpits, 

and airline operations centers (AOC). Adverse 

weather is both a challenge for safe ight 

operations and a signicant limiting factor for 

airspace capacity. Predicting and avoiding 

adverse weather requires a great deal of 

attention from air transport pilots and airline 

operation centers. As cockpit and air trafc 

weather information systems and products 

enter the NAS, they should facilitate both 

near-term and future operations and provide, 

at a minimum, the same access to information 

that participants now have with the 

expectation that a wider breadth of 

information should become available to all 

users in the future. Civil Aerospace Medical 

Institute (CAMI) personnel evaluated the 

procedures, products, priorities, and 

communication methods used in AOCs. 

Dispatchers from the airlines gave very 

similar ratings of priorities across most of the 

weather factors. While there were small 

differences between the airlines, they all 

consulted several information sources to 

develop a weather picture relevant to their 

ights. Larger airline operations develop 

products of their own, usually based on data 

delivered from a commercial weather 

information source. The only differences of 

note were that dispatchers from the larger 

long-haul airlines gave somewhat higher 

priorities to some of the wind factors. 

(Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration 

Human Factors) 

• Automatic Dependent Surveillance –

Broadcast: Conducted a research study that

explored the intuitiveness, ease of learning,

and ease of remembering different proposed

trafc symbols. This task supports FAA

understanding of human factors issues related

to the use of Cockpit Displays of Trafc 

Information (CDTI) based on ADS-B. The goal

was to determine whether there are some 

general principles that should be followed for

the design of trafc symbols. Results of the 

study were considered by Federal Advisory

Committee RTCA Special Committee-186,

which is developing standards for these trafc 

displays, (Flightdeck/Maintenance/System

Integration Human Factors) 

• Electronic Flight Bags: Completed a study 

on human factors issues related to the 

implementation and integration of electronic 

ight bags (EFBs) into normal ight 

operations. The goal of the EFB research into 

these electronic display systems is to support 

the FAA in the development of EFB-related 

policies and guidance. The results showed 

that the majority of EFB-related safety events 

concerned use of charting applications, but in 

the updated report the emphasis shifts toward 

the use of performance calculations 

applications. Research results were presented 

at a conference and will be published and 

shared through EFB human factors 

workshops. (Flightdeck/Maintenance/System 

Integration Human Factors) 

• Data Communications, Human-in-the 

Loop Simulation and Part Tasks:

Completed en route human-in-the-loop (HITL) 

simulations to support the development of 

human-machine interface requirements for 

the Data Communications (Data Comm) 

system. This activity investigated the effect of 

trafc complexity on cognitive workload and 

provided new requirements for terminal and 

ight deck as well as updating requirements 

for the en route interface. (NextGen - Air 

Trafc Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors (Controller Efciency and Air 

Ground Integration)) 

42 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Surface Moving Maps: Conducted an 

operational evaluation to examine the impact of 

a Surface Moving Map with ownship position on 

a Class 2 or Class 3 EFB. This project supports 

the development of guidelines and approval 

criteria for surface moving maps depicting 

ownship position, regardless of whether they are 

installed or portable. Several advanced 

functions are being considered, including 

display of surface trafc and indications or 

alerts of potential runway incursions. 

Additional guidance is needed to establish 

minimum standards and best practices, as they 

are critical to support ight deck 

implementation and integration. The Volpe 

Center, which provided human factors support 

in this project, completed and published a 

formal survey of the surface moving map 

industry to understand current and proposed 

capabilities. (Flight Deck/Maintenance/System 

Integration Human Factors) 

• Future En Route Workstation III 

Simulation: Investigated Future En Route

Workstation (FEWS) III simulation concepts

based on NextGen plans to increase airspace

capacity. The concepts included increased use

of Area Navigation (RNAV) routes and the

delegation of self-spacing to the ight deck.

Researchers also included an aircraft grouping

procedure to enable two or more aircraft to be

controlled as a single unit, similar to the way

controllers manage military aircraft in

formation ight. Aircraft conducting these

procedures may require less controller

intervention than aircraft requiring

conventional control, thus enabling an

increased number of aircraft to be handled. 

This simulation evaluated the benets and 

feasibility of the concepts using a baseline

system and the FEWS system that provided

additional task support features. Results 

indicate that participants managed more

aircraft, reported lower workload, and held

aircraft less when using the FEWS system.

They also managed more trafc when aircraft 

were adhering to RNAV routes that had both

lateral and vertical conformance constraints. 

The participants reacted positively to the

self-spacing concept, but did not nd the 

grouping concept useful. These results indicate 

that FEWS and the use of full RNAVs allow 

controllers to safely and effectively manage a

much larger volume of aircraft in a sector.

(ATC/Technical Operations Human Factors) 

• Future Terminal Workstation-1: Evaluated 

the Future Terminal Workstation-1 (FTWS-1)

in a HITL simulation in which controllers 

participated in scenarios that reect future 

trafc volumes, equipage levels, and

workstation designs. The project was designed

to develop an FTWS-1 prototype workstation

for terminal approach control to support many

NextGen components. Benets were reported

from the use of advanced arrival routes with 

conformance monitoring. However, researchers 

observed interdependencies between some of

the independently developed tools and also that

the participants continued to use a vector

mindset rather than use a TBO. Initial data 

analysis for the FTWS-1 simulation is complete

and technical reports for the simulation will be

delivered in FY 2010. (ATC/Technical

Operations Human Factors) 

• Front Line Manager Best Practices:

Identied best practices of Terminal Radar 

Approach Control (TRACON) front line 

managers (FLMs) for promoting safety and 

preventing reportable errors throughout the 

NAS. This is the third study to look at FLM 

best practices. Previous studies looked at the 

subject in the en route and tower 

environments. Air trafc FLMs play an 

important role in meeting Flight Plan 

objectives for a safer workplace by facilitating 

prevention of reportable errors and runway 

incursions and providing necessary leadership 

to manage both controller performance and 

resources. Research focused on reviewing 

existing research data and performing an 

operational error analysis based on various 

contributing factors such as weather, training 

tasks, and implementation of new equipment 

and procedures. All of the facilities chosen for 

this phase had a history of low error rates and 

the participating FLMs had been identied as 

high performers in those facilities. The 

studies’ interview results and information 

analyses produced an integrated set of FLM 

best practices encompassing the en route, 

tower, and TRACON environments. These 

were used to develop a comprehensive set for 

the FLM Best Practices Quick Reference 

Guide to be distributed to all ATC FLMs 

within FAA in FY 2010. (ATC/Technical 

Operations Human Factors) 

Chapter 2 43
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 - 

 

R&D G OAL 5
)

HU M A N PROTECT ION
)

A RE DUCT IONI N FATAL I T I E S , I N JURI E S , 

A ND A DVER SE HEALT HI M PACTS DUETO 

AERO SPACE OPER AT ION S 

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2015, demonstrate a two-thirds reduction in the rate of aerospace-related fatalities and 

signicant injuries.* 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes preventing injuries during regular operations and protecting people in the event 

of a crash. Validation of the supporting milestones will include demonstrations, analysis, modeling, 

simulations, full-scale testing, and initial standards. Validation of the R&D target will include analysis of 

U.S. accident data. Results from R&D Goal 6 - Safe Aerospace Vehicles will contribute to the interim and 

nal measurements of the reduction. The safety evaluation (under R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge) will 

support the interim assessment of progress and validation of the R&D target. The demonstration will 

show that the R&D is sufcient to meet the targeted operational improvement. 

44 Chapter 2 

* The year 2004 was chosen as a baseline for consistency with the Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-

176) and the Next Generation Air Transportation System Integrated Plan submitted to Congress as required in that legislation. 

From Fighting Fire with Foam to Fighting Fire from Within 

Because post-crash res usually originate from large quantities of spilled fuel, the consequences

can be catastrophic. Reducing the risk they pose to passengers has been a high priority to the

FAA since 1985. Twenty years ago, research focused on equipping aircraft rescue and re ghting

(ARFF) vehicles with the ability to dispense water with aqueous lm-forming foam (AFFF) and

compatible dry chemical agents. 

Since that time, FAA researchers developed forward-looking infrared systems that help nd the 

crash site in poor visibility conditions and alert drivers to the presence of crash survivors near the 

aircraft. Researchers have also developed elevated waterways that can quickly penetrate an aircraft 

cabin fuselage and pump water directly into the cabin 

area. ARFF vehicles with high reach extendable 

turrets (HRET) with fuselage piercing nozzles 

Two ARFF vehicles 

ghting a test re with 

water and foam. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 - - 

 

Penetrating nozzle gets water 

into the cabin fast - lowering 

temperatures and extending 

Chapter 2 

extend survivability time for trapped 

passengers and provide a safer rescue 

environment for reghters. Over 650 

ARFF vehicles around the world now 

use the HRET system. 

Current research uses the FAA’s 

new Striker ARFF vehicle. The 

Striker is capable of precise mixing 

of water and foam agents, improved 

rear wheel steering for increased 

maneuverability, and an HRET with 

a 65 foot reach. The 65 foot reach will 

allow penetration of the second level of 

the Boeing 747 and Airbus 380. 

Testing the high-reach extendable

turret and penetrating nozzle at the

William J. Hughes Technical Center. 

survivability time for

passengers and crew.. 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Safe evacuation 

— Prevent injuries or fatalities during 

evacuations. 

2012: Dene composite fuselage re 

safety design criteria. (Fire Research 

and Safety) 

2012: Develop aircraft rescue and re-

ghting procedures and equipment 

standards to address double-decked 

large aircraft. (Airport Technology 

Research - Safety) 

2012: Validate mathematical models to 

evaluate whether aircraft designs 

meet requirements for evacuation 

and emergency response capability. 

(Aeromedical Research) 

Hazardous weather 

— Prevent injuries and fatalities due to 

hazardous weather.
)

2014: Develop data and methods 

supporting the evaluation of aircraft 

engines for operation in high ice 

water content environments. 

(Atmospheric Hazards - Aircraft 

Icing/Digital System Safety) 

Occupant restraint 

— Improve occupant restraint systems to 

reduce injuries and fatalities. 

2012: Establish design criteria for restraint 

systems that protect occupants 

at the highest impact levels that 

the aircraft structure can sustain. 

(Aeromedical Research, Advanced 

Materials/Structural Safety) 

45 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Human aeromedical safety and

health risk management 

— Identify and manage human 

aeromedical safety and health risks. 

2011: Assess role of airports and airlines 

in the spread of vector-borne 

diseases. (Airport Cooperative 

Research - Safety) 

2015: Incorporate aerospace medical 

issues in the development of 

safety strategies concerning 

pilot impairment, incapacitation, 

spatial disorientation, and other 

aeromedical-related factors that 

contribute to loss of aircraft control. 

(Aeromedical Research) 

2015: Develop advanced methods to 

extract aeromedical information for 

prognostic identication of human 

safety risks. (Aeromedical Research) 

2015: Develop a methodology to compile, 

classify, and assess aviation-related 

injuries, the mechanisms that 

resulted in these injuries, and their 

relationship to: autopsy ndings, 

medical certication data, aircraft 

cabin congurations, and biodynamic 

testing: Aerospace Accident 

Injury and Autopsy Data System. 

(Aeromedical Research) 

2015: Apply and develop advances in 

gene expression, toxicology, and 

bioinformatics technology and 

methods to dene human response to 

aerospace stressors. 

(Aeromedical Research) 

Cabin air quality 

— Reduce health risk to aircrew and 

passengers due to cabin environmental 

threats. (Aeromedical Research) 

2010: Develop and analyze methods to 

detect and analyze aircraft cabin 

contamination including chemicalbiological hazards and other 

airborne irritants. 

2010: Validate computational models of 

chemical air contaminants, such as 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 

to evaluate health and safety 

impacts on passengers and crew. 

2011: Apply and validate advanced air 

sensing technology for VOCs in the 

aircraft cabin environment. 

2011: Develop bleed air contamination 

models of engine compressors and 

high temperature air system for 

effects on the health and safety of 

passengers and crew. 

2012: Accomplish experimental projects in 

support of regulations, certication, 

and operations for existing Aviation 

Rulemaking Committees by 

providing data and guidance for 

new or revised regulation of airliner 

cabin environment standards. 

2012: Develop and validate chemical 

kinetic models for bleed air systems 

for health and safety effects on 

passengers and crew. 

46 Chapter 2 
Chapter 2 47

Commercial space 

— Identify the requirements for safe

commercial space transportation 

operations. (Commercial Space 

Transportation Safety) 

2008: Conduct a study to provide a basic 

understanding of what is necessary 

in an Informed Consent form for 

commercial space ight participants. 

[COMPLETED] 

Turbulence 

— Prevent injuries and fatalities due to

turbulence. (Weather Program) 

2012: Transition turbulence forecast 

capability for all ight levels for 

implementation. 

2012: Transition mountain-wave 

turbulence forecast capability for 

implementation. 

2013: Transition convectively-induced 

turbulence forecast capability for 

implementation. 

2016: Transition global turbulence forecast 

capability for implementation. 

Airports 

— Prevent injuries and fatalities due to

aircraft overrun. (Airport Technology 

Research - Safety) 

2011: Complete evaluation of new airport 

runway pavement groove shape 

to reduce risk of overrun due to 

hydroplaning. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R & DG O A L 5
)

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

A11.c Advanced Materials/

Structural Safety R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A11.j Aeromedical Research R,E&D 10,378 11,217 11,390 11,570 11,718 11,870 100% of total program 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Safety AIP 3,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 50% of total program 

— Airports Technology

Research - Safety AIP 4,157 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 35% of total program 

A11.d 

Atmospheric Hazards

- Aircraft Icing/Digital

System Safety 

R,E&D 1,345 1,991 2,003 2,015 2,017 2,019 30% of total program 

A11.a Fire Research and Safety R,E&D 6,551 6,074 6,174 6,279 6,367 6,459 84% of total program 

A11.k Weather Program R,E&D 1,511 1,485 1,474 1,461 1,436 1,410 9% of total program 

Total ($000) 26,941 28,267 28,541 28,825 29,038 29,258 

P R O G R E S S I N 	) F Y2 0 0 9 :H U M A N P R O T E C T I O N

• Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy

Data System Progress: Enhanced the 

Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy Data 

System (AAIADS) program to provide an early

operational benet to support accident 

investigation. The medical research team 

coordinated with accident investigators to 

develop detailed information regarding the 

accident and to assist the investigators in 

evaluating any medical factors that could have 

contributed to the accident. During the 

development of AAIADS, researchers 

determined that the data would provide 

investigators in the eld and in FAA ofces with 

medical certication information and autopsy

and toxicological ndings relative to fatal and 

high prole accidents. The autopsy program 

was tasked to identify accident victims, ensure 

that an autopsy was performed, and provide 

autopsy information to investigators. The 

autopsy team provided information to the 

medical research team, allowing the research 

physicians to combine the pilot’s medical 

certication history, ndings from the autopsy, 

and results from toxicological testing to 

establish a complete picture of the pilot’s health. 

While still in the development phase, the 

AAIADS program was able to support accident 

investigation and form the basis for future 

research. (Aeromedical Research) 

• Safe Evacuation: Completed the rst phase

of mathematical evacuation model development

and validation with a nal report to be

published in 2010. This project created a

versatile mathematical method that could 

simulate evacuation from all airliner models 

with various seating, door, and cabin designs.

The computational aircraft evacuation model

uses features such as the shortest distance to 

exits, speed of an evacuation cue line, gaps in

the evacuation cue line, evacuee behavior, and

ow rate at exits. (Aeromedical Research) 

48 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Centrifuge-Based Simulators in Pilot

Training: Completed a congressionallydirected assessment of a centrifuge-based

simulator to evaluate its effectiveness in 

training pilots to recover from an upset or

unusual attitude situation. The physiological

concept of the centrifuge-based simulator was

that the acceleration forces applied by the

centrifuge would replicate the acceleration

forces felt by the pilot in an actual upset

condition and would assist in recovery to

normal ight. The research program compared

the use of the centrifuge-based full cockpit

simulator with a computer-based desktop

simulator. Pilots trained with one of the two 

methods and then were own as passengers

through unusual attitudes in a Super

Decathlon acrobatic aircraft. Their ability to

correctly return the aircraft to normal ight

was subjectively and objectively measured.

Both training methods similarly improved the

pilots’ ability to recover indicating that groundbased training can improve in-ight upset 

recovery. The study’s ndings are available in 

two reports: An Experiment to Evaluate

Transfer of Upset-Recovery Training Conducted

Using Two Different Flight Simulation Devices,

(DOT/FAA/AM-09/17) and An Experiment to

Evaluate Transfer of Low-Cost SimulatorBased Upset-Recovery Training, (DOT/FAA/

AM-09/5). (Aeromedical Research) 

• Aircraft Laser Illumination Awareness for 

the Aviation Community: Prepared and 

released an informational training video, 

“Aircraft Laser Illumination Awareness for the 

Aviation Community.” In response to the 

growing trend of unauthorized aircraft laser 

illuminations, the FAA and the U.S. Air Force 

jointly produced this video to serve as a tool to 

educate and inform the aviation community of 

the dangers associated with these unauthorized 

laser incidents. It presents a brief history of 

cockpit laser events and discusses the potential 

hazards of laser exposure. The video also 

demonstrates strategies that ight crew 

members can adopt to safely manage and report 

a laser illumination. All cockpit illuminations 

depicted in the video were lmed in the Boeing 

737-800 full ight simulator equipped with a 

dual-laser delivery system as part of HITL pilot 

laser illumination ight tests at the FAA’s 

Flight Operations Simulations Laboratory. The 

training video supports ongoing efforts within 

the aviation community to address the risks 

associated with laser illuminations. This 

approach continues to highlight recommended 

best practices, procedures, and other 

rulemaking processes associated with laser 

safety. (System Safety Management) 

• 47 Years of Aerospace Toxicology

Research: Developed a comprehensive

reference source for topics related to aerospace

toxicology. The article addresses agricultural

aviation (aerial application), aviation

combustion toxicology, postmortem aviation

forensic toxicology, cabin air contamination,

and references for the period of 1960–2007.

The report entitled Aerospace Toxicology, An

Overview, (DOT/FAA/AM-09/8) can be found

online: http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/

medical/oamtechreports/2000s/media/200908.

pdf. (Aeromedical Research) 

• Cannabinoids in Fatal Aviation Accidents: 

Determined the effect of an increase in the 

delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of

commonly available cannabis on the

impairment of pilots involved in aviation

accidents. The National Institute on Drug

Abuse and the Ofce of National Drug Control

Policy reported a 1.5-fold increase in THC

content of seized cannabis from 1997-2001 to 

2002-2006. FAA research found a 2.7-fold 

increase in the mean blood THC concentration 

of specimens from aviation fatalities for the

same time periods. Further, it was found that

approximately 46 percent of the blood samples

positive for THC from 2002-2006 had

concentrations of THC greater than the

impairing concentration of THC, whereas only

25 percent exceeded that concentration

between 1997 and 2001. The results are 

described in the report Increased Cannabinoids 

Concentrations Found in Specimens from Fatal

Aviation Accidents Between 1997 and 2006,

(DOT/FAA/AM-09/12). (Aeromedical Research) 

• Detection and Prevention of Carbon 

Monoxide Exposure in GA Aircraft:

Identied protocols to quickly alert GA pilots to

the presence of excessive carbon monoxide (CO)

in the cabin and evaluated inspection methods

and maintenance practices to safeguard

against CO generation. Exposure to CO, which

is formed by the incomplete combustion of

carbon-containing materials such as aviation

fuels, is associated with headache, dizziness,

fatigue, and at elevated doses, death. Exhaust 

system failures in GA aircraft can result in CO 

exposure. This research focused on the 

detection and prevention of CO exposure in GA

aircraft. The research culminated with a 

specication for optimal detector type and

installation locations in the GA cockpit to

detect CO exposure. In addition, it dened best 

practices for inspection and maintenance of GA

aircraft exhaust systems to prevent CO

leakage. (System Safety Management) 

Chapter 2 49
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 6
)

SAFE AEROSPACE VE HICLE S 

A RE DUCT IONI N ACCIDE N TS A ND 

I NCIDE N TS DUETO AERO SPACE VE HICL E 

DE S IG N , STRUCT URE , OR SUB SYST E M S

50 Chapter 2 

R & DT A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2015, demonstrate damage and fault tolerant vehicles and systems. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes preventing accidents due to engine failures, structural failures, and system 

failures; developing a reproof cabin; integrating unmanned aircraft and commercial space vehicles 

into the NAS; and addressing safety problems specic to GA aircraft. Validation of the R&D target will 

include analysis, modeling, ight simulation, physical demonstration, prototypes, and initial standards. 

The results from this goal will contribute to the R&D target to demonstrate a two-thirds reduction in 

fatalities and signicant injuries under R&D Goal 5 - Human Protection. 

The Science of Aging 

Gracefully - From 

Metals to Composites 

The 1985 Plan anticipated aircraft of the 21st century with 

very different structural congurations and materials. Indeed, 

aircraft like the Boeing 787 and Airbus 380 live up to this 

expectation and make extensive use of advanced materials 

and fabrication processes. Crashworthiness and airworthiness 

research in 1985 centered around a crash dynamics program with 

an emphasis on passenger seat restraints and cabin oor strength 

in survivable impact scenarios. 

What the 1985 Plan did not anticipate was the Aloha Airlines

accident in 1988 where widespread fatigue damage led to an

in-ight loss of a 18-foot section of fuselage and the death of one

ight attendant. Almost immediately, the FAA research program

refocused on the continued airworthiness aspects of aging aircraft

with emphasis on inspection and maintenance. 

Pictured above are photos from the Aloha accident. 
 

 

 

 

 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Structures 

— Prevent accidents due to structural 

failures or re. 

2010: Develop certication methods for 

damage tolerance and fatigue of 

composite airframes. (Advanced 

Materials/Structural Safety) 

2011: Provide comprehensive guidance 

on lithium battery re safety. (Fire 

Research and Safety) 

2011: Apply damage-detection technologies 

for inspecting remote and inaccessible 

areas of in-service aircraft with metal 

structures. (Continued Airworthiness) 

2012: Dene criteria for use of embedded 

sensors in fault-tolerant 

structures. (Advanced Materials/ 

Structural Safety) 

Unmanned aircraft 

— Integrate unmanned aircraft systems 

(UAS) into the civil airspace. (Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems Research)
)

2012: Determine performance characteristics and 

operational requirements for UAS detect, 

sense, and avoid (DSA) technologies. 

2012: Analyze data on the safety implications of 

system performance impediments to UAS 

command, control, and communication 

(C3) in different classes of airspaces and 

operational environments. 

2013: Develop and conduct system-level 

proof-of-concept regulatory-based causal 

factor framework by applying Safety 

Management System (SMS) principles 

to support integration of UAS civil/ 

commercial operations in the NAS. 

2015: Conduct eld evaluation of DSA 

technology; C3 technologies; and ight 

Chapter 2 51

termination procedures. 

In 2010, the goal of the Continued Airworthiness Program is to understand and develop methods to counter the effects

of age and usage on the airworthiness of an aircraft over its lifetime, including potential effects of modications and 

repairs. Towards this goal, FAA established the Full-Scale Aircraft Structural Test Evaluation and Research (FASTER)

facility, a state-of-the-art core capability developed to perform structural testing of legacy and next generation fuselage 

structure. The facility has been effectively used to leverage resources through partnerships with other government

agencies, industry and academia, including NASA, Boeing, and Drexel University. 

On November 10, 2009, a residual strength test was conducted to characterize the damage-tolerance of a bonded repair

to a B727 fuselage panel containing a large two-bay crack with the central frame and tear strap severed. Test results 

revealed that a properly designed and installed bonded repair can effectively contain large damage under severe loads

in excess of ultimate load requirements. 

FASTER facility at the William J. Hughes Technical Center. 

Final preparations on a bonded repair before the

November 10, 2009 residual strength test. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial space 

— Identify the requirements for safe 

commercial space transportation 

vehicles. (Commercial Space 

Transportation Safety)
)

2010: Conduct a study to provide information 

on the capability, limitations, 

and considerations for GPS 

implementation in space launch and 

reentry environments, such as Space 

and Air Trafc Control, which will be 

used to help determine requirements 

for GPS usage and future technologies. 

2010: Conduct a study to identify means of 

preventing hazards (such as res and 

explosions) involving nontraditional 

monopropellants and oxidizers 

(specically hydrogen peroxide, 

H2

O2, and nitrous oxide, N2O) used 

in propulsion systems in commercial 

space applications 

2010: Conduct a study to provide guidance 

to AST and industry on the use of 

operational limitations and inspection 

requirements for suborbital reusable 

launch vehicles (RLVs) comprised of 

composite materials. The results of 

this study will help to develop effective 

rules for operations and maintenance 

for use of composite materials, as 

they apply to commercial space 

transportation. 

2010: Conduct a study to examine the 

operational environment, 

determine the number of sensors 

needed, dene the data recovery 

process, and provide black box 

survivability criteria for use in 

developing requirements for a black box 

system to be used in commercial space 

transportation systems (expendable 

launch vehicles and RLVs). 

2010: Conduct an assessment on the 

outputs from two specialized, 

independent system safety analyses 

conducted by separate parties to 

determine the optimal system safety 

method. The assessment will include 

the strengths and weaknesses, the 

hazard analysis depth, the hazard 

identication thoroughness, and the 

projected resource utilization. 

General aviation 

— Reduce GA accidents. 

2012: Complete development of methods 

and data for damage tolerance 

analysis of rotorcraft structure. 

(Continued Airworthiness) 

2013: Develop technical data on rotorcraft 

that provide guidance for certication 

of Health and Usage Monitoring 

Systems for usage credits. 

(Continued Airworthiness) 

2015: Evaluate and characterize all 

candidate replacement formulations 

for 100LL. (NextGen – Alternative 

Fuels for General Aviation) 

Systems 

— Prevent accidents due to system 

failures.
)

• Avionics 

2013: Evaluate development and 

integration techniques that will 

produce software for complex highly 

integrated systems that must comply 

with airworthiness requirements. 

(Atmospheric Hazards - Aircraft 

Icing/Digital System Safety) 

• Flight controls 

2011: Complete the study in usage, design, 

and training issues for rudder 

control systems in transport aircraft. 

(Continued Airworthiness) 

52 Chapter 2 
2 53 

 

C h 

 

Engines 

— Prevent engine failures. 

• In-ight icing 

2013: Develop methods for the 

airworthiness testing of engines in 

simulated high ice water content 

environments. (Atmospheric 

Hazards - Aircraft Icing/Digital 

System Safety) 

• Engine and component structures 

2010: Complete development of damagetolerant design methods as the basis 

for propeller structural design and 

assess impacts on propeller weight. 

(Continued Airworthiness) 

F U N D IN G R E Q U I R E M E N T S -

2012: Complete a certication tool*

 that 

will predict the risk of failure of 

rotor disks containing material 

and manufacturing anomalies. 

(Propulsion and Fuel Systems) 

• Uncontained engine failures 

2013: Develop and verify a generalized 

damage and failure model with 

regularization for aluminum and 

titanium materials impacted 

during engine failure events. 

(Aircraft Catastrophic Failure 

Prevention Research) 

* Design Assessment of Reliability With INspection (DARWIN) 

R & DG O A L 6 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

Chapter C h a p t e r 253

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

A11.c Advanced Materials/

Structural Safety R,E&D 4,935 2,566 2,596 2,628 2,650 2,672 100% of total program 

A11.e Continued Airworthiness R,E&D 10,506 10,369 10,422 10,475 10,473 10,470 96% of total program 

A11.f 

Aircraft Catastrophic

Failure Prevention 

Research 

R,E&D 1,545 1,165 1,171 1,177 1,177 1,176 100% of total program 

A11.d 

Atmospheric Hazards

- Aircraft Icing/Digital

System Safety 

R,E&D 3,137 4,645 4,673 4,701 4,705 4,711 70% of total program 

4A09A 

Center for Advanced 

Aviation System

Development 

F&E 718 707 708 724 741 1,016 3% of R&D program in

FY 2010 

— Commercial Space

Transportation Safety Ops 73 83 83 83 83 83 50% of total program 

A11.m 

NextGen - Alternative 

Fuels for General 

Aviation 

R,E&D 0 2,000 2,004 2,007 1,999 1,990 100% of total program 

A11.a Fire Research and Safety R,E&D 1,248 1,157 1,176 1,196 1,213 1,230 16% of total program 

A11.b Propulsion and Fuel

Systems R,E&D 3,105 2,332 2,357 2,383 2,399 2,416 100% of total program 

A11.l Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems Research R,E&D 2,912 3,103 3,116 3,129 3,125 3,121 84% of total program 

Total ($000) 28,179 28,126 28,305 28,502 28,564 28,884 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P R O G R E S S I N	) F Y2 0 0 9 :S A F EA E R O S P A C E VE H I C L E S

• Propulsion Malfunction – Information

Based Displays: Demonstrated an 

information-based engine-lubrication display

developed from the results of a pilot survey on

the use of cockpit propulsion indicators. FAA 

has an ongoing multi-year effort to study

propulsion malfunctions that precipitate

inappropriate crew response accidents and

incidents. This effort is in response to research

recommendations from a 1998 Aerospace

Industries Association (AIA) report. The 

current research directly supports the AIA

Propulsion Indications Task Team that is

working to develop recommendations for future

changes in 14 CFR 25.1305. The research also 

provided input for the propulsion section of the

recently published Advisory Circular (AC)

25-11. Phase 3 of this program was completed

in 2009. (Propulsion and Fuel Systems) 

• Turbine Engine Rotor-burst Mitigation:

Developed an analysis process to minimize the 

threat from uncontained turbine engine failures 

with Naval Air Warfare Center China Lake. 

Mitigation of hazard from uncontained turbine 

engine failures during the design layout of 

aircraft systems is required for all turbinepowered aircraft in their respective parts of 

Title 14 CFR XX.903. Uncontained engine 

failure events release high-energy fragments 

that can impact and disable critical systems and 

reduce the airworthiness of the vehicle. When 

multiple systems are disabled, the potential for 

an accident increases. System redundancy and 

separation and thoughtful component location 

in the design of an aircraft can make a 

signicant improvement in the ability to survive 

one of these high-energy events. (Aircraft 

Catastrophic Failure Prevention) 

• 14 CFR Part 135 Certicate Holder 

Functional Model: Developed the 14 CFR

Part 135 Certicate Holder Functional Model 

that identies the functions that should be 

performed by Part 135 certicate holders and 

the interactions among those functions. The 

Part 135 certicate holder functional model 

will serve as the foundation for FAA research 

efforts to support a system safety approach to

aviation safety oversight. The model also 

provides an important communications bridge

between FAA and the aviation industry.

(System Safety Management) 

• Uncontained Engine Debris Damage

Model Version 3.1: Developed the

Uncontained Engine Debris Damage

Assessment Model (UEDDAM) code version 3.1

for use by the FAA Transport Aircraft

Directorate. The UEDDAM, developed using

parts of existing military threat analysis tools,

is designed to support the airframe certication 

process and has tailored output that matches

the certication package requirements

identied in AC20-128. Version 3.1 includes 

improvements in items identied from industry

comments to improve usability and accuracy.

The Visualizer was upgraded to give a more

user-friendly view of the aircraft model being

analyzed. In addition, a conversion for

PATRAN, a nite element pre- and postprocessor, was developed in which a PATRAN

model can be converted for incorporation into

the UEDDAM code without building a new

compatible model. This greatly reduces

modeling set up time. In 2010, the nal major

revision to UEDDAM to complete the upgrade

to be compatible with the latest military

improvements will be performed. (Aircraft

Catastrophic Failure Prevention) 

• Engine Containment Analysis: Continued 

to develop a new LS-DYNA explicit nite 

element model called MAT224 by completing 

material testing for aluminum 2024. LS-DYNA 

is an advanced, general-purpose multiphysics 

simulation software package that can be used 

for modeling engine fragment impact on 

aircraft. MAT224 supports a goal to have a 

publicly available analysis tool with 

standardized generic models, user guides, 

training, software quality control process, and 

validated material models. This will allow FAA 

engineers to validate the proprietary tools,

streamline the certication process, and help 

mitigate fatalities and injuries when engine 

failures occur. Signicant progress has been 

made on the MAT224 model, and it has already

been adopted by one car manufacturer to 

improve crash analysis. A mesh regularization 

routine has been added which will greatly 

enhance the accuracy of the model for complex 

mesh geometries during failure. Also in FY 

2009, material tests were started on titanium 

6-4, the next material to be characterized under 

the FAA-NASA material characterization effort. 

(Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention) 

54 Chapter 2 
 

Chapter 2 55

• Aircraft Icing: Completed a study of the

characteristics and aerodynamic effects of

runback ice shapes on thermally protected

wings. The study was a joint effort with the

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

(UIUC), NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC),

the Ofce National d’Etudes et de Recherches 

Aerospatiales (ONERA), and Cessna Aircraft

Company. Previously, public domain data on

the aerodynamic effects of runback ice shapes

on thermally protected wings was limited. A 

thermally-protected wing model was tested in a

range of conditions in the NASA GRC Icing

Research Tunnel (IRT). Ice shapes were

documented with photographs, tracings, molds,

and castings. Based on the castings, simulated

ice shapes were developed for testing on a

full-scale wing in the ONERA F1 aerodynamic

wind tunnel, and for parametric subscale

studies in a UIUC aerodynamic tunnel. Ice 

shapes in supercooled large droplet (SLD)

conditions are sometimes large span-wise

ridges that form aft of the ice-protected area of

the wing, with a dramatic adverse effect on

wing aerodynamics. The runback shapes from

the IRT in this study were also span-wise

ridges, but were of shorter height, covered a

larger surface length, and had a more

streamlined geometry than the SLD ice ridges.

Consequently, the ow eld and aerodynamic

effects were generally not as adverse as for

span-wise SLD ridges, although still

signicant. The data and information from 

this study established a more extensive basis

for guidance addressing runback ice shapes on

thermally protected wings in the aircraft

certication process. (Atmospheric Hazards/

Digital System Safety) 

• UAS Concept of Regulatory-Based Causal

Factor Framework: Developed a concept for

a regulatory-based causal factor framework

that applies Safety Management System (SMS)

principles to UAS. SMS provides a process

that compensates for uncertainties due to a

lack of experience and actual operational data

required to perform safety risk analysis. It 

uses the existing regulations, which provide

the minimum safety standards, as a measure

to assess whether all potential risk areas, using 

the traditional event-driven approach, are

adequately addressed. (Unmanned Aircraft

Systems Research) 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 7
)

SE PA R AT ION ASSUR ANCE 

A RE DUCT IONI N ACCIDE N TS A ND 

I NCIDE N TS DUETO AERO SPACE 

VE HICL E OPER AT ION S I N T HEAIRA ND 

ON T HEGROU ND 

56 Chapter 2 

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2016, develop initial standards and procedures for self-separation. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes conducting research and development to support the standards, procedures, 

training, and policy required to implement the NextGen operational improvements leading to selfseparation. This goal does not develop technology but prepares for the operational use of the technology. 

Validation of the R&D target will include demonstrating that the research and development is sufcient 

for the initial policy and standards that are required to certify technology, procedures, and training 

needed to implement self-separation. 

The Study of Swirling Air: Past and Present 

Aircraft wake vortices, the swirls of air behind the aircraft, are an unavoidable consequence of

an aircraft’s generation of lift. These wake vortices require large separation distances between

landing aircraft to ensure safety. Minimizing separation distances, without compromising

safety, has been the objective of wake turbulence research since the 1970s. From the 1970s to 

the 1990s, wake physics was studied in wind tunnels and wake turbulence separation standards

research relied heavily on ight test data. Wake turbulence data collections were frequently done

using dedicated research aircraft, smoke generators and photography (as shown on the left) for

qualitative description of the wake ow eld. Data collection only occurred in good

weather when the aircraft was close enough to the airport that the researcher could

verify which aircraft was generating the wake vortices. 

Since 2000, the pulsed Light Detection and 

Ranging (LIDAR) sensor system (shown on 

the next page) automatically tracks and 

measures the parameters of an aircraft’s 

wake near the airport and several miles 

from the airport. The pulsed LIDAR sensor 

system is designed to operate 24 hours a 

day, 7 days a week without on-site stafng. 

These pulsed LIDAR systems measure and 

record wake turbulence tracks generated 

by aircraft during the airport’s normal 

operational day. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Reduced separation 

— Support procedures, equipage, 

training, and design to enable 

reduced separation. (NextGen - SelfSeparation Human Factors) 

2011: Complete initial research to evaluate 

the impact and potential risks 

associated with use of the Trafc 

Alert and Collision Avoidance System 

(TCAS) in NextGen procedures. 

2014: Complete research to identify likely 

human error modes and recommend 

mitigation strategies in closely 

spaced arrival/departure routings. 

2015: Complete research and provide 

human factors guidance to reduce 

arrival and departure spacing 

including variable separation in a 

Delegated separation 

— Support procedures, equipage, 

training, and cockpit design to enable 

delegated separation. (NextGen - SelfSeparation Human Factors) 

2011: Complete initial research to evaluate 

and recommend procedures, 

equipage, and training to safely 

conduct oceanic and en route pairwise delegated separation. 

2015: Enable reduced and delegated 

separation in oceanic airspace and 

high-density en route corridors. 

Aircraft wake vortex 

measured and tracked 

by LIDAR. 

The Wake Turbulence Research Program wake measurement database 

now includes over 280,000 LIDAR-recorded tracks. Advances in computer 

processing power during the decade have enabled the pulsed LIDAR sensor 

system to increase the quality of its data recording, allowing more detailed 

processing of the recorded wake tracks. With this new LIDAR data, the 

FAA has been successful in designing and implementing wake separation 

procedures in 2008 that safely allow more landings per hour on closely 

spaced parallel runways when using instrument landing procedures. In 

2009, the LIDAR data also aided in the simplication of the wake vortex 

separation standards associated with the Boeing 757 aircraft. 

Chapter 2 57

mixed equipage environment. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Surface/runway operations 

awareness 

— Support procedures, equipage, 

training, and design to enable 

enhanced aircraft spacing for surface 

movements. (NextGen - Self-Separation 

Human Factors) 

2012: Complete initial research to evaluate 

and recommend minimum display 

standards for use of enhanced and 

synthetic vision systems, as well as 

airport markings and signage, to 

conduct surface movements across a 

range of visibility conditions. 

2014: Evaluate and recommend minimum 

display standards and operational 

procedures for use of Cockpit 

Display of Trafc Information 

(CDTI) to support pilot awareness 

of potential ground conicts and to 

support transition between taxi, 

takeoff, departure, and arrival 

phases of ight. 

2016: Complete research to enable 

enhanced aircraft spacing for surface 

movements in low-visibility conditions 

guided by enhanced and synthetic 

vision systems, as well as cockpit 

displays of aircraft and ground 

vehicles and associated procedures. 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - G O A L 7 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

A11.i 

Air Trafc Control/

Technical Operations

Human Factors 

R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.d NextGen - Self-Separation

Human Factors R,E&D 8,247 9,971 10,009 10,043 10,022 10,000 100% of total program 

1A08E 

NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence Recategorization F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

Total ($000) 8,247 9,971 10,009 10,043 10,022 10,000 

P R O G R E S S I N 	) F Y2 0 0 9 :S E P A R A T I O N A S S U R A N C E

• Multi-Purpose Cockpit Display of Trafc 

Information: Developed a prototype multipurpose CDTI. NextGen will use the CDTI,

Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast 

(ADS-B), and other new technologies and 

procedures to enable delegation of some 

traditional ATC tasks to the cockpit. To take 

advantage of these advances, aircraft must 

rst be appropriately equipped and no single 

design supports the broad array of envisioned 

applications. The prototype development 

process included both the necessary 

algorithmic processing and the user interface 

that allowed CAASD researchers to conclude 

that the multi-purpose CDTI is feasible. The 

usability of the prototype was evaluated in a 

human-in-the lab experiment with favorable 

results. Additionally, the prototype was used 

in an evaluation of an ADS-B-based delegated 

separation application with favorable results. 

(CAASD) 

58 Chapter 2 
Chapter 2 59
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 8
)

SI T U AT IONA L AWA RENE S S 

C OM MON , ACCUR AT E , A ND REALT I M E T I N FOR M AT ION OFAERO SPACE 

OPER AT ION S , EVE N TS , CRI SE S , 

OB STACL E S , A ND WEAT HER

Dealing With Bad Weather – From Reporting to Predicting 

Bad weather events cause the same problems today that they did in 1985. Despite 

remarkable improvements in weather sensors and services, predicting system (NAS) 

capacity and planning routes free of adverse weather conditions are still a challenge. 

Weather research in 1985 focused on wind shear detection using Doppler Weather Radar,

hazardous weather warnings, cloud layer heights, and accurate location of gust fronts 

and storm activity. 

1985: DIFAX 

machines printed

out paper charts

containing

meteorological

data that was 

usually taped to a

wall for analysis

and forecasting. 

60 Chapter 2 

R & DT A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2015, demonstrate common, real-time awareness of ongoing air operations, events, crises, and weather 

at all types of airports by pilots and controllers. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes supporting development of standards and procedures for weather-in-the-cockpit 

to provide the ight crew awareness of weather conditions and forecasts; demonstrating wake turbulence 

procedures and technologies to support self-separation; and improving situational awareness at airports. 

Validation of the R&D target will include pilot-in-the-loop simulations, modeling, tests, physical 

demonstrations, and development of initial standards and procedures. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Airports 

— Ensure safe airport operations. 

2010: Develop system enhancements for 

runway status lights. (Runway 

Incursion Reduction) 

Weather situational awareness 

— Develop common situational awareness 

for weather. 

• Weather information improvements 

(Weather Program)
$

2010: Develop advisory material to install 

new visual guidance systems. 

(Airport Technology Research 

- Safety) 

2011: Develop performance standards for 

avian radar use on airports. (Airport 

Technology Research - Safety) 

2012: Develop guidance material for airport 

planning to ensure consistency 

from the operator’s perspective 

from airport to airport. (Airport 

Technology Research - Safety) 

2010: Develop CONUS ceiling, visibility, 

and ight category forecast capability. 

2012: Demonstrate 1-3 hour CONUS 

ceiling, visibility, and ight category 

forecast capability. 

2013: Transition in-ight icing Alaska 

forecast for implementation. 

2014: Demonstrate 1-12 hour CONUS 

ceiling, visibility, and ight category 

forecast capability. 

2016: Transition 1-12 hour CONUS ceiling, 

Today, FAA weather research activities include much better 

forecast capabilities for use by air trafc, dispatchers, and pilots;

integration of ground, airborne, and satellite weather observations 

in real time; and the development of policy, standards, and guidance 

needed to safely implement weather technologies in the cockpit to 

provide shared situational awareness and shared responsibilities. 

For example, in 2009, the FAA conducted a laboratory proof-ofconcept demonstration incorporating weather predictions into the

TMA systems, an automated decisionmaking support tool. With TMA, controllers

were able to plan rerouting of trafc around 

the forecasted weather. The demonstration 

also allowed ight management information

to stay visible in TMA. 

The images on the right show FAA

weather researchers at the William J. 

Hughes Technical Center analyzing

graphical information from the Route

Availability Planning Tool (RAPT) and

the Integrated Terminal Weather System

(ITWS). Both RAPT and ITWS have 

predictive weather capabilities. 

FAA researchers at the William 

J. Hughes Technical Center. 

Chapter 2 61

visibility, and ight category forecast 

capability for implementation. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

— Weather Technology in the Cockpit 

(WTIC)* (NextGen - Weather 

Technology in the Cockpit) 

2010: Develop NextGen mid-term concepts 

of operation and user requirements 

for the provision, integration, and use 

of weather information in the cockpit. 

2010: Assess bandwidth demand of 

graphical icing products (Current 

Icing Product and Forecast Icing 

Product) and graphical turbulence 

products (Graphical Turbulence 

Guidance) for potential delivery via 

existing and planned FAA data 

link services. 

2011: Identify, validate, and document 

datalink system attributes that may 

affect use of weather in the cockpit. 

* WTIC enables pilots and aircrews to engage in shared

situational awareness and shared responsibilities with

controllers, dispatchers, Flight Service Station specialists, and

others, pertaining to safe and efcient preight, en route, and 

post-ight aviation safety decisions involving weather. 

2012: Simulate and evaluate available 

cockpit weather technologies. 

2013: Develop prototype weather modules 

for ight deck. 

2014: Simulate, test, and evaluate cockpit 

use of weather decision support tools, 

including probabilistic forecasts. 

2014: Simulate, test, and evaluate fullyintegrated cockpit use of NextGen 

operational concepts, including WTIC. 

2015: Demonstrate the integration of 

navigation information and ight 

information, including weather 

information, into cockpit decisionmaking and shared situational 

awareness among pilots, dispatchers, 

and air trafc controllers supported by 

NextGen air and ground capabilities. 

62 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial space 2009: Conduct a study to survey the existing  technologies available for determining — Develop situational awareness for wind conditions from the upper 

commercial space transportation. troposphere to the stratosphere. The 

(Commercial Space Transportation study will address possible modications 

Safety) of radar wind proler to obtain winds 

2009: Review integrated operations of to greater altitudes than currently 

available. [COMPLETED, see second reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) bullet under Progress in FY 2009] from spaceports, joint use airport 

and spaceports, as well as the 2009: Conduct a study to determine the need 

airspace surrounding those facilities  to develop a temporal wind database

and provide recommendations to support the launch of windon how to safely integrate and weighted, unguided, suborbital rockets 

conduct routine RLV operations. launched from nonfederal launch sites. 

[COMPLETED, see rst bullet [COMPLETED, see third bullet under

under Progress in FY 2009] Progress in FY 2009] 

F U N D IN G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R&DGO AL 8 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

Chapter 2 63

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

— Airports Cooperative

Research - Safety AIP 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 coordination onlybeginning in FY 2011 

— Airports Technology

Research - Safety AIP 7,719 9,287 9,287 9,287 9,287 9,287 65% of total program 

A11.i 

Air Trafc Control/

Technical Operations

Human Factors 

R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

4A09A 

Center for Advanced 

Aviation System

Development 

F&E 1,676 1,650 1,652 1,690 1,729 2,371 7% of R&D program

in FY 2010 

A11.g 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/

System Integration

Human Factors 

R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A01D NAS Weather 

Requirements F&E 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,300 3,400 3,400 100% of total program 

1A08H NextGen - Staffed 

NextGen Towers F&E 0 6,000 0 0 0 0 100% of total program 

A12.e NextGen - Weather 

Technology in the Cockpit R,E&D 9,570 9,312 9,360 9,407 9,406 9,404 100% of total program 

1A01A Runway Incursion

Reduction F&E 11,000 5,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 100% of total program 

A11.k Weather Program R,E&D 13,599 13,369 13,265 13,149 12,921 12,686 81% of total program 

Total ($000) 46,564 45,617 37,563 39,833 39,743 40,148 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P R O G R E S S I N F Y2 0 0 9 :S I T U A T I O N A L A W A R E N E S S 

• Commercial Space Operations: Airspace,

Airport, and Spaceport Considerations:

Completed a case study entitled A Case Study

on Routine Space Vehicle Operations in the

NAS for NextGen. The top-level conclusion of

the study is that the ights believed to be

critical will have minimal impact on NAS

operations. The case study was developed to

depict typical operations in the 2025 timeframe

with an assumed ight rate of two ights a

week. The goal of the study was to uncover

any unique requirements that must be

considered in the development of NextGen so

that this type of commercial space tourism

would have minimal impact on the NAS as it

develops. Several issues that were believed to 

be critical prior to this study were found to

present minimal impact to the NAS.

Furthermore, export of this type of operation to

other geographic areas could be easily

integrated into the NAS in other areas,

especially those with lower trafc density than

the northern Florida area west of Jacksonville 

used in the study. Because of the unique

nature of these kinds of ights, individual

evaluations of other proposed sites would be

necessary, but there were no systematic issues

that would prevent export of this type of

operation to other locations. (Commercial

Space Transportation Safety) 

• High Altitude Wind Prediction and 

Measurement Technology Assessment:

Reviewed the principles and the operational 

characteristics of balloon and radar-based 

techniques for measuring upper air winds in 

support of launches and recoveries. Each 

technique has advantages and disadvantages. 

The most effective approach to meeting upper 

air wind requirements may involve a mixed 

set of instruments, each with different 

strengths. The best mix for generating highquality wind proles may consist of a Doppler 

Radar Wind Proler in combination with 

balloons. The former gives more timely

observations in a xed volume, while the 

latter provide higher resolution. (Commercial 

Space Transportation Safety) 

• Temporal Winds Database for Launch 

Sites: Conducted a study to evaluate the 

impact of temporal winds on unguided 

suborbital rockets. This study had two 

objectives: rst, to determine if a suitable 

temporal wind database exists at three inland 

launch sites of interest and, second, to 

determine how much temporal winds can 

change the planned impact point of an unguided 

suborbital rocket, whether it is a suborbital to 

30,000 feet or 360,000 feet. The change in 

planned trajectories was related to the monthly 

wind variation. Data was collected from 

existing temporal wind data from these stations 

and stations located at the Eastern Test Range 

and assessed a low altitude and high altitude 

unguided suborbital launch vehicle to determine 

the relationship between the temporal winds 

and the monthly winds. (Commercial Space 

Transportation Safety) 

• ATM Implications of UAS Operations in

Controlled Airspace: Completed analysis of

HITL simulation to begin to quantify ATCrelated human factors issues associated with 

UAS in Class A airspace. Demand for access to 

the NAS by UAS is increasing. However, UAS

have several unique operational characteristics

that could have an impact on air trafc 

management (ATM). The CAASD evaluation 

compared controller performance and workload

ratings while varying the ratio of UAS to

manned aircraft within the participant’s sector.

The results showed that workload increased as 

the ratio of UAS to manned aircraft increased. 

The controllers indicated that the increased 

workload was due primarily to the UAS not

being Reduced Vertical Separation Minima

compliant as well as UAS performance

differences. The participants also indicated

that they preferred to give control instructions

to the manned aircraft, but the results showed

that on average the participants issued more

commands to the UAS than manned aircraft,

which may have contributed to their increased

workload ratings. (CAASD) 

64 Chapter 2 
Chapter 2 65
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R&D G OAL 9
)

SYST E M KNOW LE DGE 

A T HOROUGHU NDER STA NDI NG OF 

HOWT HEAERO SPACE SYST E MOPER AT E S , 

T HEI M PACT OF CH A NGE ON SYST E M

PERFOR M A NCE A ND RI SK , A ND HOWT HE

SYST E MI M PACTS T HENAT ION

66 Chapter 2 

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

By 2016, understand economic (including implementation) and operational impact of system alternatives. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes developing the information analysis and sharing system to support FAA 

and NextGen safety initiatives; generating guidelines to help stakeholders develop their own safety 

management systems; and modeling activities to help measure progress toward achieving safety, 

capacity, efciency, and environmental goals. Validation of the R&D target will include analysis, 

modeling, prototypes, and demonstrations using safety, capacity, efciency, and environmental metrics. 

The evaluation efforts under this goal support the interim assessment of progress and validation of the 

R&D targets under the following: R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Efcient, R&D Goal 2 - Clean and 

Quiet, and R&D Goal 5 - Human Protection. 

From Blood Tests to Genetic Markers 

In 1985, aviation medicine research focused on the biomedical and human behavioral aspects

of the evolving National Airspace System (NAS). This included aerospace medical certication,

education, occupational health, and the performance of the human element in the civil aviation 

system. Of particular concern were the changing roles of pilots and controllers as increasing

levels of automation were introduced. Most of these research efforts were conducted at CAMI in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 

CAMI was, and continues to be, home to state-of-the-art laboratories for toxicological

research. From an initial focus on safety concerns and exposure to pesticides for cropduster pilots, CAMI quickly demonstrated a world-renowned capability in blood and tissue

analysis in fatal accident investigations including precision toxicology tests for alcohol

and a myriad of drugs. Blood tests done by CAMI researchers have also helped determine

whether aircraft occupants died from carbon monoxide poisoning from an exhaust leak or

whether they inhaled fumes from an in-ight re prior to an airplane crash. 

Today, the Functional Genomics Research Team at

CAMI uses advanced technologies to determine which

gene expression changes (or expression marker changes)

are due to aerospace medical factors such as the effects

of fatigue, hypoxia, medications, and alcohol. The 

expression markers discovered will be used to develop

biochemical tests that will enhance accident prevention

and investigation strategies. Gene expression research

at CAMI keeps the FAA at the forefront of scientic 

discovery in aerospace medicine and safety. 

Inhalation 

toxicity testing

(above); On-site

accident research 

team (right). 
 

 

 

 

 

M I L E S T O N E S 

Capacity and efciency

evaluation
$

— Develop methods, metrics, and models 

to demonstrate that the modernized 

system can handle anticipated 

increases in capacity.* 

2008: Demonstrate capacity increase to 

130% of baseline levels.** (Operations 

Concept Validation; System Capacity, 

Planning and Improvement) 

[COMPLETED] 

2011: Demonstrate capacity and efciency 

increase up to 166% of baseline 

levels. (Operations Concept 

Validation; NextGen - Operations 

Concept Validation - Validation 

Modeling; System Capacity, Planning 

and Improvement) 

* This supports demonstration of the R&D target under R&D 

2011: Develop a guidebook for airport 

operators and air cargo industry 

stakeholders that provides tools and 

techniques for measuring economic 

impacts of air cargo activities at the 

national, regional, and local level. 

(Airport Cooperative 

Research - Capacity) 

2013: Demonstrate capacity and efciency 

increase up to 230% of baseline 

levels. (Operations Concept 

Validation; NextGen - Operations 

Concept Validation - Validation 

Modeling; System Capacity, Planning 

and Improvement) 

2016: Demonstrate capacity and efciency 

increase up to 300% of baseline 

levels. (Operations Concept 

Validation; NextGen - Operations 

Concept Validation - Validation 

Modeling; System Capacity, Planning 

and Improvement) 

Chapter 2 67

Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Efcient. 

** The year 2004 was chosen as a baseline for consistency 

with the Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization 

Act (P.L. 108-176) and the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System Integrated Plan submitted to Congress 

as required in that legislation. 

background – CAMI research aircraft. 

foreground – Researchers at CAMI. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Information analysis and sharing 

— Develop an information management 

system to serve as the foundation 

for the analysis of data trends and 

the identication of potential safety 

hazards before accidents occur. 

(NextGen - System Safety 

Management Transformation) 

2009: Evaluate current information 

protection and assurance models 

and evaluate potential conicts with 

privacy and consumer advocacy 

groups. [COMPLETED, see rst 

bullet under Progress in FY 2009] 

2012: Validate the Net Enabled 

Operations (NEO) Architecture 

proof-of-concept for the sharing 

of aviation safety information 

among JPDO member agencies, 

participants, and stakeholders. 

2013: Complete the Aviation Safety 

Information Analysis and Sharing 

(ASIAS) pre-implementation 

activities, including concept denition, 

with other JPDO member agencies, 

participants, and stakeholders. 

— Develop a system to increase safety 

of commercial operations. (System 

Safety Management) 

2011: Develop automated tools to monitor 

databases for potential safety issues. 

2012: Demonstrate a working prototype 

of network-based integration of 

information extracted from diverse, 

distributed sources. 

Environmental assessment 

— Develop methods, metrics, and models 

to demonstrate that signicant 

aviation noise and emissions impacts 

can be reduced in absolute terms to 

enable the air trafc system to handle 

growth in demand up to three times 

current levels.* (NextGen - Operational 

Assessments) 

2009: Develop and implement NASwide regional environmental 

analysis capability within AEDT. 

[COMPLETED, See second bullet 

under Progress in FY 2009]** 

2010: Implement weather effects in AEDT 

environmental analyses. 

2012: Develop and implement NAS-wide 

cost-benet environmental analysis 

capability with APMT. 

2013: Explore options to integrate 

environmental assessment capability 

with NextGen NAS models. 

2016: Employ AEDT and APMT for NASwide environmental analyses. 

* This supports demonstration of the R&D target under R&D

Goal 2 - Clean and Quiet as it relates to the R&D target under

R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Efcient. 

** This 2009 milestone was funded by NextGen - 

Environment and Energy - Validation Modeling; starting 

in FY 2010, the remaining milestones will be funded by 

NextGen - Operational Assessments. 

68 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Safety management system 

— Produce guidelines for developing 

processes and technologies to 

implement a safety management system. 

2011: Complete study of risk-based eet 

management for small-airplane 

continued operational safety. 

(Continued Airworthiness) 

2011: Develop proof of concept for 

NextGen including a prototype to 

implement on a trial basis with 

selected participants that involve 

a cross-section of air service 

providers. (NextGen - System Safety 

Management Transformation) 

2011: Develop and validate a software 

tool to quantify risk and support 

engineering decision-making 

related to runway safety area 

requirements. (Airport Cooperative 

Research - Safety) 

2012: Develop risk management concepts, 

models, and tools for unmanned 

aircraft systems. (Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems Research) 

2012: Develop risk management 

concepts, models, and tools for 

transport category airplanes. 

(System Safety Management) 

2014: Demonstrate a National Level 

System Safety Assessment 

capability that will proactively 

identify emerging risk across 

NextGen. (NextGen - System Safety 

Management Transformation) 

Safety evaluation† 

— Develop methods and metrics to 

measure progress in reducing the 

rate of fatalities and signicant 

injuries by two-thirds.‡ (System Safety 

Management) 

2010: Demonstrate a one-third reduction in 

the rate of fatalities and injuries. 

2012: Demonstrate a one-half reduction in 

the rate of fatalities and injuries. 

2015: Demonstrate a two-thirds reduction 

in the rate of fatalities and injuries.§ 

Commercial space 

— Develop understanding of commercial 

space transportation system 

operations. (Commercial Space 

Transportation Safety)
)

2010: Conduct a study with current 

information related to the state of the 

commercial suborbital transportation 

industry with a focus on market 

demand, safety, operability, and 

international coordination. 

2010: Conduct a study to evaluate the 

adequacy of current rules and 

polices related to commercial space 

transportation, implement new rules, 

policy, and advisory materials, and 

identify barriers to industry caused by 

unnecessary or conicting regulations. 

† For these milestones, demonstrate means to show that the

methods and metrics developed are valid and that, with the

system improvements planned, it is possible to reduce the rate

of fatalities and injuries by the stated amounts.

‡ This supports demonstration of the R&D target under R&D

Goal 5 - Human Protection. 

§ These milestones have set targets that are purposely more

aggressive than those in the Flight Plan, as R&D goals should

be stretch goals. 

Chapter 2 69
F U N D IN G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R&DGO AL 9 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

A11.j Aeromedical Research R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Capacity AIP 0 1,650 1,650 1,650 1,650 1,650 33% of total program 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Safety AIP 0 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 50% of total program 

1A01E Airspace Management

Program F&E 3,000 1,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 100% of total program 

4A09A 

Center for Advanced 

Aviation System

Development 

F&E 3,831 3,770 3,775 3,864 3,953 5,420 16% of R&D program

in FY 2010 

— Commercial Space

Transportation Safety Ops 73 83 83 83 83 83 50% of total program 

A11.e Continued Airworthiness R,E&D 438 432 434 436 436 436 4% of total program 

A12.a Joint Planning and

Development Ofce R,E&D 4,322 4,288 4,326 4,369 4,392 4,417 30% of total program 

1A08F NextGen - Operational

Assessments F&E 7,500 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 100% of total program 

1A08C 

NextGen - Operations

Concept Validation -

Validation Modeling 

F&E 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 100% of total program 

1A08G 

NextGen - System

Safety Management

Transformation 

F&E 16,300 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 100% of total program 

1A01C Operations Concept

Validation F&E 8,000 4,000 8,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 100% of total program 

1A01B 

System Capacity,

Planning and

Improvement 

F&E 4,100 4,100 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 100% of total program 

A11.h System Safety

Management R,E&D 12,698 11,907 11,913 11,915 11,841 11,765 100% of total program 

A11.l. Unmanned Aircraft 

Systems Research R,E&D 555 591 594 596 595 594 16% of total program 

Total ($000) 71,223 72,320 82,774 80,913 80,950 82,364 

70 Chapter 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P R O G R E S S I N F Y2 0 0 9 :S Y S T E M K N O W L E D G E 

• Information Protection Assurance Models: 

Completed the evaluation of current information 

protection and assurance models to be used in 

ASIAS and evaluated potential conicts that 

might occur with privacy and consumer 

advocacy groups due to the use of ight-specic 

operational data. The results of the evaluations 

were used to develop the Military Flight 

Operations Quality Assurance ASIAS prototype 

plan that will add Department of Defense (DoD)

data to ASIAS and give DoD control over their 

own data and information. (NextGen - System 

Safety Management Transformation) 

• Aviation Environmental Design Tool:

Completed an alpha version of the AEDT for

seamless integration with NASA’s Airspace

Conict Evaluation Simulator (ACES) and

FAA’s airspace and airport simulation tool

(SIMMOD). The AEDT was provided to

investigators in support of NASA’s funded

research for next generation aircraft

technologies. Additionally, the AEDT

environmental analysis capability was

integrated with the FAA’s Terminal Area

Route Generation, Evaluation and Trafc 

Simulation. This integration will allow design

for new navigational procedures while

considering noise, fuel burn, and emissions.

AEDT’s improved modeling capability was used

at several major U.S. airports for

environmental analysis of CDA and Tailored

Arrivals. AEDT, being uniquely positioned for

interdependency analyses, also provided

impacts on ICAO/CAEP NOx

 Stringency

analyses on noise and fuel burn. (NextGen 

- Environment and Energy - Validation

Modeling)
'

• Multi-Sector Planner: Conducted high

delity simulations of the Multi-Sector Planner

(MSP) concept to assess roles, responsibilities,

and coordination requirements between ATM

positions and to determine tool and display

requirements for this proposed new position

that would use NextGen communications,

navigation, and automation improvements to

create efcient trajectory-based solutions to

ne-tune trafc management initiatives to

increase efciency and reduce delays. Concept

development experiments simulated en route

area supervisory and radar control positions,

and trafc management coordinator and MSP

positions over two en route centers. Simulation 

results will be available in FY 2010. 

(Operations Concept Validation) 

• NextGen Implementation Modeling and

Performance: Developed a process to

characterize the benet mechanisms associated 

with NextGen Operational Improvements

(OIs). The benet mechanisms and their 

relationships to one another were captured in

Benet Mechanism Inuence Diagrams

developed by CAASD researchers. As the FAA 

continues NextGen implementation, it is

essential that the modeling, simulation, and

performance assessment tools and

methodologies continue to provide insight into

the evolution of the NAS. The diagrams served

as a framework to communicate benet details 

to other stakeholders and to facilitate the 

quantication of each mechanism. CAASD 

researchers also developed a capability to build

36 days of base year and corresponding future

year demand schedules with more realistic

itineraries and reasonable turnaround times 

between ights in future years. An analysis of

NextGen OI-related factors found that changes

in key parameters such as individual airport

capacity or sector capacity of as little as 10 to

20 percent resulted in signicant shifts in 

NAS-wide delay depending upon the location

and connectivity of the location where the

adjustment was made. (CAASD) 

• Trafc Collision Avoidance System

Resolution Advisories: Completed a

research study into techniques and unique

approaches that will lead to new safety

enhancements, tools, processes, and

capabilities for identifying and assessing risks

associated with TCAS Resolution Advisories. 

Results will be used to guide focused

investigations at key airports, identify common

threads and contributing factors, categorize

rates by degree of risk, and so forth. (System

Safety Management) 

• Secure Internet-Based Data Portal: 

Developed a secure internet-based data portal 

that provides a mechanism to share ASIAS data 

and selected results with ASIAS participants. 

The portal will also provide access to a limited 

number of canned queries of selected databases. 

(System Safety Management) 

Chapter 2 71
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

72 Chapter 2 

• UAS Flight Termination and Emergency 

Recovery Systems Survey: Conducted a 

technology survey and regulatory gap analysis 

of UAS Flight Termination and Emergency 

Recovery systems while operating in the NAS. 

FAA researchers presented technical papers at 

international conferences including Association 

for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International 

(AUVSI)’s Unmanned Systems North America 

2009 Conference and SAE International 

AeroTech 2009 Congress and Exhibition. The 

FAA sponsored research presentation, titled: “A 

Technology Survey and Regulatory Gap 

Analysis of Emergency Recovery and Flight 

Termination for UAS” presented in the Airspace 

Standard session, won the AUVSI 2009 

Pathnder Chapter Best Paper Award. A nal 

technical report is near completion. (Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems Research) 

• Processes for Conducting Directed

Studies and Airline Benchmark Studies: 

Developed detailed processes that dene 

procedures used for conducting directed

studies, safety metric studies, and associated

tracking and airline benchmark studies.

Includes summarized experience from recent

analytical results on ASIAS in terms of

problem denition, interaction with

stakeholders (ASIAS Executive Board,

Commercial Aviation Safety Team, and Joint

Implementation and Data Analysis Team),

proper use of industry subject matter experts,

and safety metric standards. (System

Safety Management) 

• Safety Issues Studied: Conducted and 

summarized analytical studies on the status 

of work on safety metrics and benchmarks 

trends over time. Safety topics included 

aircraft loss of control, controlled ight into 

terrain, and approach and landing issues. 

(System Safety Management) 

• NextGen Towers: Conducted a HITL TalkAloud analysis at the Ronald Reagan

Washington National Airport training

simulator. The HITL Talk-Aloud analysis

examined the out-the-window information that 

controllers visually acquire while providing air

trafc services. The HITL Talk-Aloud will be 

used to validate the ndings from a cognitive

walkthrough and drive the functional and

physical architecture for NextGen Towers.

(NextGen - Operations Concept Validation

- Validation Modeling) 
Chapter 2 73
 

 

 

 

R & D T A R G E T T A R G E T 

A G LOBA L LY R ECOGNI Z E D LE A DE R I N G LOBA L LY R ECOG N I Z E D LE A DE R IN 

A E RO SPACE T ECH NOLOGY A E RO SPACE T ECH NOLOGY, SYST E M S , A ND 

OPE R AT ION S OPE R AT ION S 

WOR LD LE A DE R SHIP 

R&D G OA L 10 

By 2016, demonstrate the value of working with international partners to leverage research programs 

and studies in order to improve safety and promote seamless operations worldwide. 

M E T H O D O F V A L I D A T I O N E T H O D OF V A L I D A T I O N 

The approach includes managing research collaborations to increase value and leveraging research under 

the existing R&D programs to increase value. Validation of the R&D target will include developing 

agreements, reviewing past and current research collaboration, and conducting analyses. The research 

results listed under the subheading of Products are outputs of the other nine goals in this plan. The 

purpose of this goal is to help plan the use of these products in international partnering activities to 

produce the highest value. The method of validation for the individual research results is provided under 

the respective goal for each product. 

74 Chapter 2 
Chapter 2 75

M I L E S T O N E S I L E S T O N E S 

Management 

— Manage ongoing research. (System

Planning and Resource Management) 

2008: Publish the NARP, which documents 

the annual R&D budget portfolio, 

describes the activities of the R,E&D 

Advisory Committee, and contains 

the FY 2008-2013 FAA R&D plan. 

[COMPLETED] 

2009: Publish the NARP, which documents 

the annual R&D budget portfolio, 

describes the activities of the R,E&D 

Advisory Committee, and contains 

the FY 2009-2014 FAA R&D plan. 

[COMPLETED, see the two bullets 

under Progress in FY 2009] 

2010: Publish the NARP, which documents 

the annual R&D budget portfolio, 

describes the activities of the R,E&D 

Advisory Committee, and contains 

the FY 2010-2015 FAA R&D plan. 

— Leverage international research

collaboration. (System Planning and 

Resource Management) 

2010: Determine criteria for assessing the 

benets of the international research 

collaboration. 

2011: Develop a strategic mapping for 

international research collaboration. 

2011: Identify a process to measure quality, 

timeliness, and value of international 

research collaboration. 

2016: Determine nal value of 

international research collaboration. 




 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Products 

— Leverage research results.* 

2008: Modify procedures to allow use of 

closely spaced parallel runways for 

arrival operations during non-visual 

conditions. (Wake Turbulence) 

[COMPLETED] 

2010: Develop a preliminary 

planning version of an Aviation 

Environmental Design Tool 

that quanties and assesses 

interrelationships among noise and 

emissions at the local and global 

levels. (Environment and Energy) 

2011: Provide comprehensive guidance 

on lithium battery re safety. (Fire 

Research and Safety) 

2011: Determine how aviation-generated 

particulate matter and hazardous 

air pollutants impact local health, 

visibility, and global climate. 

(Environment and Energy, NextGen 

Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics, 

and Airport Cooperative Research 

- Environment) 

2012: Validate the NEO-Architecture 

proof-of-concept for the sharing 

of aviation safety information 

among JPDO member agencies, 

participants, and stakeholders. 

(NextGen - System Safety 

Management Transformation)) 

2014: Deploy the Aviation Environmental 

Portfolio Management Tool that will 

provide the cost/benet methodology 

needed to harmonize national aviation 

policy and environmental policy. 

(Environment and Energy) 

2015: Enable reduced and delegated 

separation in oceanic airspace and high 

density en route corridors. (NextGen - 

Self-Separation Human Factors) 

2015: Demonstrate the integration of 

navigation information and ight 

information, including weather 

information, into cockpit decisionmaking and shared situational 

awareness amongst pilots, 

dispatchers, and air trafc controllers 

supported by NextGen air and ground 

capabilities. (NextGen - Weather 

Technology in the Cockpit) 

2016: Demonstrate signicant 

improvements in air trafc controller 

efciency (e.g., greater number of 

aircraft) and effectiveness (e.g., 

fewer operational errors) through 

automation and standardization 

of operation, procedures, and 

information. (NextGen - Air Trafc 

Control/Technical Operations Human 

Factors (Controller Efciency and Air 

Ground Integration)) 

* These milestones were selected from the other nine goals to

show international collaboration. 

76 Chapter 2 
 

 

F U N D I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S - R & DG O A L1 0 

The funding levels listed for years 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. Programs with zero 

funding listed support this goal with FAA staff resources only. 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Notes 

— Airport Cooperative

Research - Environment AIP 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A13.a Environment and Energy R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A11.a Fire Research and Safety R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A08A 

NextGen - ATC/Tech

Ops Human Factors -

(Controller Efciency and

Air Ground Integration) 

F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A13.b 

NextGen - Environmental 

Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and

Metrics 

R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.d NextGen - Self-Separation

Human Factors R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A08G 

NextGen - System

Safety Management

Transformation 

F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

1A08E 

NextGen - Wake 

Turbulence - Recategorization F&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A12.e NextGen - Weather 

Technology in the Cockpit R,E&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 coordination only 

A14.a System Planning and

Resource Management R,E&D 1,766 1,733 1,717 1,700 1,668 1,634 100% total program 

Total ($000) 1,766 1,733 1,717 1,700 1,668 1,634 

P R O G R E S S I N 	) F Y2 0 0 9 :WO R L D L E A D E R S H I P

• Research, Engineering, and Development

Portfolio Management: Provided guidance

on the FAA FY 2011 R&D portfolio on October

2008. The R&D Executive Board (REB)

developed the proposed FY 2011 R&D portfolio

between November 2008 and February 2009.

The ve REDAC subcommittees reviewed the 

portfolio in February 2009, and the REDAC

provided its nal review of the FY 2011 R&D 

portfolio to the FAA on March 2009. ATO 

Executive Council approved the FY 2011

R,E&D budget on May 2009, and the Joint

Resources Council approved it on June 2009.

The FAA FY 2011 R,E&D budget was

submitted to the Ofce of the Secretary of

Transportation on July 2009, and to Ofce of 

Management and Budget on September 2009.

(System Planning and Resource Management) 

• 2009 National Aviation Research Plan: 

Submitted to Congress in June 2009. (System

Planning and Resource Management) 

Chapter 2 77
C h a p t e r T h r e e C h a p t e r T h r e e 
A l i g n m e n t w i t h A l i g n m e n t w i t h 

Ne x t G e n N e x t G e n 
 

80 Chapter 3 

The R&D portfolio supports a range of mid- to far-term NextGen needs. There are four sections to this 

chapter. The rst section provides denitions of NGIP domains and solution sets. The second section 

describes the NextGen portfolio management process. The third section describes how FAA NextGen 

R&D programs align with the Operational Improvements (OIs) identied in the NGIP. The fourth section 

presents FAA NextGen R&D program budget. 

This section denes the domains and solution sets of the NGIP. There are three domains: Air Trafc 

Operations; Aircraft and Operator Requirements; and Airport Development. Under the Air Trafc 

Operations domain, there are seven solution sets. The descriptions of the domains and solution sets were 

provided by the NextGen Integration and Implementation (I&I) Ofce. 

NE XT GEN DOM A I NS AND OM A I NS AND 

S OLU T ION SETS 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A I R TR A F F I C O P E R A T I O N S D O M A I N
)

This domain focuses on implementing transformational capabilities to improve the U.S. air trafc 

management system, which encompasses operational rules, regulations, and procedures as well as the 

infrastructure network of U.S. airspace; air navigation facilities, equipment, and services; airports or 

landing areas; aeronautical charts, information, and services; technical information; and manpower and 

material. The seven solution sets under the Air Trafc Operations domain are as follows. 

Initiate Trajectory-Based

Operations 

Trajectory-based operations (TBO) represents 

a shift from clearance-based to trajectory-based 

control. Aircraft will y negotiated trajectories and 

air trafc control moves to trajectory management. 

The traditional responsibilities and practices of 

pilots/controllers will evolve due to the increase 

in automation, support, and integration inherent 

in management by trajectory. This solution set 

focuses primarily on en route cruise operations, 

although the effects of the trajectory-based 

operations will be felt in all phases of ight. 

Currently, controllers using radar screens and 

limited computer decision support visualize 

trajectories to make cognitive judgments on 

how to maintain static separation standards 

between aircraft. With an increasing diversity of 

aircraft characteristics, using a single separation 

standard for all aircraft encounters is becoming 

increasingly inefcient, and it limits capacity. The 

current automation tools provide support for the 

controllers in managing separation. Performancebased services are a basic principle of NextGen. 

Performance-based assumes that separation 

standards might vary according to aircraft 

capabilities and pilot training. The automation tools 

will be updated to support the performance-based 

diversity of aircraft to increase controller efciently 

and be able to support an increase in capacity. 

Increase Arrivals/Departures at

High Density Airports 

The Increase Arrivals/Departures at High Density 

Airports solution set involves airports (and the 

airspaces that access those airports) in which: 

• Demand for runway capacity is high 

• There are multiple runways with both 

airspace and taxiing interactions, or 

• There are close-proximity airports with the 

potential for airspace or approach interference 

The above-dened airports require all the 

capabilities of the exible terminals and airspace 

plus integrated tactical and strategic ow 

capabilities. They may require higher performance 

navigation and communications capabilities for air 

trafc and the aircraft to support these additional 

operational requirements. 

Increase Flexibility in the Terminal

Environment 

The Increase Flexibility in the Terminal 

Environment solution set covers the terminal 

and airport operations ability to meet the need of 

both high-density terminals and other airports. 

Flexible terminal solutions focus on improvements 

to the management of separation at all airports. 

Such capabilities will improve safety, efciency 

and maintain capacity in reduced visibility highdensity terminal operations. Flexible terminal 

solutions will also improve trajectory management 

and advanced separation procedures employed 

when demand warrants. At airports where trafc 

demand is lower, and at high-density airports 

during times of low demand, operations requiring 

lesser aircraft capability are conducted, allowing 

access to a wider range of operators while retaining 

the throughput and efciency advantages of 

high-density operations. Both trajectory and non 

trajectory-based operations may be conducted 

within exible terminal operations. 

Improve Collaborative Air Trafc 

Management 

The Improve Collaborative Air Trafc Management 

(CATM) solution set covers strategic and tactical 

ow management, including interactions with 

operators to mitigate situations when the desired 

use of capacity can not be accommodated. The 

Chapter 3 81
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Potomac TRACON, Virginia 

Transform Facilities 

The ATO maintains and operates thousands 

of staffed and unstaffed operational facilities 

that the FAA must regularly upgrade and 

modernize. The largest facilities are the 21 en 

route centers, which house hundreds of employees 

and equipment to control aircraft ying in the en 

route airspace. The other operational facilities 

with signicant stafng are the more than 500 

towers and 167 Terminal Radar Approach Control 

(TRACON) facilities that control trafc departing 

and arriving at airports.

users and controllers to plan operations based on the 

CATM solution set includes ow programs and 

collaboration on procedures that will shift demand to 

alternate resources (e.g. routings, altitudes, and times). 

CATM also includes the foundational information 

elements for managing National Airspace System 

(NAS) ights. These elements include development 

and management of aeronautical information, 

management of airspace reservation, and management 

of ight information from pre-ight to post-analysis. 

Reduce Weather Impact 

The Reduce Weather Impact solution set allows 

predicted impact of weather, rather than attempting 

to mitigate the effects of weather once the weather 

has changed. Integrated weather observations and 

forecasts will lead to better decision making. 

Increase Safety, Security, and

Environmental Performance 

Increase Safety, Security, and Environmental 

Performance: Inherent in all evolving aspects of 

National Airspace System (NAS) operations and 

protocol are the three areas of safety, security, and 

the environment. Projected FAA investments in these 

three areas include: 

• Safety Management System (SMS) 

• Airspace and information security (Note: 

Since information security is already 

included in the baseline of each NAS 

program, only airspace security capabilities 

are discussed in this solution set.)
'

• Environmental Management System (EMS) 

and specic operational demonstrations 

All NAS programs will continue to follow NAS 

institutional processes and protocol in safety, 

information security, and environment. As 

technology and best practices in the NAS-installed 

baseline advance, these three areas will be 

upgraded accordingly. 

The FAA is evaluating the design and conguration 

of future NextGen facilities to support the planned 

NextGen improvements in service and the potential 

changes in airspace controlled by these facilities. 

It is important that these new facilities are sized 

correctly so the full benets of the NextGen 

architecture can be realized. The potential benets 

include accommodating NextGen capabilities such 

as Integrated Arrival and Departure Services, 

High Altitude Generic En Route Services, Flexible 

Airspace Management, Staffed NextGen Towers, 

and integrated business continuity services. 

82 Chapter 3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 3 83

A I R P O R T I R P O R T D E V E L O P M E N T E V E L O P M E N T 

D O M A I N O M A I N 

This domain focuses on adding new airport surface 

infrastructure at the OEP 35 airports and in the 15 

major U.S. metropolitan areas likely to experience 

the greatest congestion over the next two decades. 

The NGIP efforts will provide for signicant 

capacity increases, including new runways, runway 

extensions, and end-around taxiways; planning 

and environmental assessments; and growth in 

metropolitan areas. 

To enhance FAA performance and management control, the FAA NextGen I&I Ofce manages each 

NextGen investment. That ofce ensures effective and efcient application, planning, programming, 

budgeting, and execution of the FAA NextGen portfolio, including the NextGen R&D programs. The 

NextGen I&I Ofce is responsible for consolidated tracking and reporting of nancial and program 

information on all NextGen initiatives and manages the NextGen portfolio across all FAA lines of business 

using resource planning documents and automated nancial management tools. The NextGen I&I Ofce is 

also responsible for all NextGen-related decision-making processes and accountability across the Agency. 

A I R C R A F T A N D I R C R A F T A N D O P E R A T O R P E R A T O R 

R E Q U I R E M E N T S E Q U I R E M E N T S D O M A I N O M A I N 

This domain identied the gaps between current 

avionics capabilities and NextGen operational 

requirements to help the FAA focus future research 

and development and prioritize the development 

of new standards and criteria. The avionics 

requirements include communications, navigation, 

and surveillance capabilities and rened weather 

equipment and displays. 

In 2008, the FAA developed the framework for 

a NextGen equipage strategy, which describes 

the process to evaluate potential avionics 

requirements. The 2009 NGIP laid out a set 

of governing principles that the FAA believes 

are critical to achieve accelerated, wide-spread 

aircraft avionics equipage to enable NextGen 

capabilities. These principles provide focus 

toward an integrated strategy, centered on the 

installation of three core avionics capabilities 

for the midterm: Area Navigation (RNAV) and 

Required Navigation Performance, Automatic 

Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), and 

Data Communications (Data Comm). 

NE XT GEN PORT FOLIO ORT FOLIO 

MANAGE M EN T PROCE S S ROCE S S 

FAA N E XT GEN RE SE A RCH E SE A RCH 

REQUIRE M EN TS EQUIRE M EN TS 

FAA NextGen R&D programs are a subset of the FAA R&D portfolio that supports some of the goals, 

targets, and milestones listed in Chapter 2. Table 3.1 presents the links of the NextGen R&D 

programs to the mid- and far-term OIs in the NGIP solution set timelines. These NGIP OIs are 

identical to the OIs displayed in the NASEA’s service roadmaps. A NextGen R&D program may 

support more than one NGIP OI. 
84 Chapter 3 

Table 3.1: Mapping of FAA NextGen R&D Programs to FAA’s 

NextGen Implementation Plan for the Air Trafc Operations Domain 
Chapter 3 85
86 Chapter 3 

R&D NextGen Programs in F&E 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

R&D 

Goal 

1A08A NextGen - ATC/Tech Ops Human Factors (Controller

Efciency and Air Ground Integration) 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 3 

1A08B NextGen - New ATM Requirements 13,200 23,000 31,200 32,000 50,100 51,900 1 

1A08C NextGen - Operations Concept Validation -

Validation Modeling 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 9 

1A08D 

NextGen - Environment and Energy - Environmental

Management System and Advanced Noise and

Emissions Reduction 

7,000 15,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 2 

1A08E NextGen - Wake Turbulence - Re-categorization 2,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 1 

1A08F NextGen - Operational Assessments 7,500 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 9 

1A08G NextGen - System Safety Management

Transformation 16,300 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 9 

1A08H NextGen - Staffed NextGen Towers 0 6,000 0 0 0 0 9 

— NextGen - Initial Operation Test & Evaluation 100 0 0 0 0 0 9 

Total ($000) 66,100 95,000 100,200 101,000 119,100 131,496 

Key: 

FAA NextGen R&D program ve-year budget plan by line item and appropriation is summarized in 

Tables 3.2 and 3.3. Figures are shown in the thousands of dollars. 

Table 3.2: NextGen R&D Funding Levels in F&E* 

• R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Efcient

• R&D Goal 2 - Clean and Quiet

• R&D Goal 3 - High Quality Teams and Individuals

• R&D Goal 4 - Human-Centered Design

• R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge

BUDGET 
Chapter 3 87

Table 3.3: NextGen R&D Funding Levels in R,E&D* 

* The total R&D program is summarized in Tables 4.1 through 4.4 of Chapter 4 in this Plan. The funding levels listed for scal 

years 2012 through 2015 are estimates and subject to change. 

R&D NextGen Programs in R,E&D 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

R&D 

Goal 

A11.m NextGen - Alternative Fuels for General Aviation 0 2,000 2,004 2,007 1,999 1,990 6 

A12.a Joint Planning and Development Ofce 14,407 14,292 14,420 14,563 14,640 14,722 10 

A12.b NextGen - Wake Turbulence 7,605 10,685 10,742 10,799 10,800 10,801 1 

A12.c NextGen - Air Ground Integration Human Factors 5,688 10,614 10,656 10,692 10,670 10,648 4 

A12.d NextGen - Self-Separation Human Factors 8,247 9,971 10,009 10,043 10,022 10,000 7 

A12.e NextGen - Weather Technology in the Cockpit 9,570 9,312 9,360 9,407 9,406 9,404 8 

A13.b NextGen Environmental Research - Aircraft 

Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics 26,509 20,600 20,691 20,778 20,752 20,726 2 

Total ($000) 72,026 77,474 77,882 78,289 78,289 78,291 

Key: R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Ef • cient

• R&D Goal 2 - Clean and Quiet

• R&D Goal 4 - Human-Centered Design

• R&D Goal 7 - Separation Assurance

• R&D Goal 8 - Situational Awareness

• R&D Goal 10 - World Leadership
C h a p t e r F o u r C h a p t e r F o u r 
R e s e a r c h M a n a g e m e n t R e s e a r c h M a n a g e m e n t 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

90 Chapter 4 

This chapter summarizes the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) research and development 

(R&D) portfolio according to its FY 2011 budget submission. The chapter explains what FAA is doing 

(programs), how much it is spending (budget), how it performs its programs (partnerships), and how well 

it executes its programs (evaluation). 

S PON S OR S 

FAA R&D program supports regulation, certication, and standards development; modernization of 

the national airspace system (NAS); and policy and planning. To support FAA goals, R&D addresses 

the specic needs of sponsoring organizations, including Aviation Safety; the Air Trafc Organization; 

Airports; Commercial Space Transportation; and Aviation Policy, Planning and Environment. The Ofce 

of Research and Technology Development under NextGen and Operations Planning in the Air Trafc 

Organization manages the FAA research portfolio for the Agency. 

PROGR A M S RO G R A M S 

The R&D programs are funded in four appropriation accounts: Research, Engineering and 

Development (R,E&D); Facilities and Equipment (F&E); the Airport Improvement Program (AIP); 

and Operations (Ops). In general, the R,E&D account funds R&D programs that improve the NAS by 

increasing its safety, security, productivity, capacity, and environmental compatibility to meet the expected 

air trafc demands of the future.* R&D programs funded under the F&E account include R&D concept 

development and demonstration prior to an FAA investment decision. The AIP account generally funds 

airport improvement grants, including those emphasizing capacity development, and safety and security 

needs; and funds grants for aircraft noise compatibility planning and programs and low emissions airport 

equipment.** It also funds administrative and technical support costs to support airport programs. The 

commercial space transportation program’s R&D expenses are funded under the Ops account. 

The programs in the FY 2011 R&D budget request are listed by appropriation in the following sections. 

Appendix A provides detailed information for each program, including intended outcomes, outputs, 

programmatic structure, partnerships, and a ve-year program plan. 

* FAA Order 2500.8B, Funding Criteria for Operations, Facilities and Equipment (F&E), and Research, Engineering and

Development (R,E&D) Accounts, dated October 1, 2006.

** FAA Budget Estimates FY 2007 submitted for use by The Committees on Appropriations, Section 3D. – Grants-In-Aid for

Airports, page 3; and Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act, Public Law 108-176, December 12, 2003. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R E S E A R C H , E N G I N E E R I N G A N D D E V E L O P M E N T
)

( R , E & D) A P P R O P R I A T I O N
)

Fire Research and Safety (A11.a): 

The program develops technologies, procedures, 

and test methods that can prevent accidents 

caused by res and fuel tank explosions and 

improve survivability during a post-crash re. 

Near-term activities include improvements in 

re test methods and materials performance 

criteria, re detection and suppression systems, 

fuel tank explosion protection, and hazardous 

materials re safety. Far-term research focuses 

on the enabling technology for ultra-reresistant interior materials. 

Propulsion and Fuel Systems

(A11.b): 

The program develops and validates 

technologies, tools, methodologies, and 

materials to enhance the airworthiness, 

reliability, and performance of civil turbine 

and piston engines, propellers, and fuel 

management systems. 

Advanced Materials/Structural

Safety (A11.c): 

The program ensures the safety of civil 

aircraft constructed of advanced composite 

materials by developing analytical and testing 

methods to understand how design, load, and 

damage can affect composite structures and by 

developing maintenance and repair methods. 

The program also increases the ability of 

passengers to survive aviation accidents by 

improving the crash characteristics of aircraft 

structures through modeling and testing crash 

events, and verication of analytical crash 

prediction methodologies. 

Atmospheric Hazards-Aircraft Icing/

Digital System Safety (A11.d): 

The program develops technologies and methods 

to detect or prevent frozen contamination and 

predicts anti-icing uid failure and ensures safe 

operations in atmospheric icing conditions. It 

improves aircraft safety by ensuring the safe 

operation of advanced, ight-critical digital 

(software-based and programmable logic-based) 

airborne systems technology. It also assesses 

how this technology may be safely employed 

in ight-essential and ight-critical systems 

such as y-by-wire, augmented manual ight 

controls, navigation and communication 

equipment, and autopilots. 

Chapter 4 91
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Continued Airworthiness (A11.e): 

The program develops technologies, technical 

information, procedures, and practices to 

help ensure the continued airworthiness of 

aircraft structures, engines, and systems. 

It assesses the causes and consequences of 

fatigue damage of aging aircraft; ensures the 

continued safe operation of aircraft electrical, 

mechanical, and ight control systems; detects 

and quanties damage through nondestructive 

inspection techniques; updates and validates 

airworthiness standards; develops and 

validates guidance for health monitoring 

systems; and establishes damage-tolerant 

design and maintenance criteria. 

Aircraft Catastrophic Failure

Prevention Research (A11.f): 

The program develops technologies and 

methods to assess risk and prevent the 

occurrence of potentially catastrophic defects, 

failures, and malfunctions in aircraft, aircraft 

components, and aircraft systems. It also 

uses historic accident data to investigate 

turbine engine un-containment events and 

propulsion malfunctions. 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/System

Integration Human Factors (A11.g): 

The program provides the human factors 

research for guidelines, handbooks, Advisory 

Circulars (ACs), rules, and regulations that 

ensure safe and efcient aircraft operations. 

It improves task performance and training 

for aircrew, inspectors, and maintenance 

technicians; develops and applies error 

management strategies to ight and 

maintenance operations; and ensures 

that human factors are considered in 

certifying new aircraft and in designing and 

modifying equipment. 

System Safety Management (A11.h): 

The program monitors and analyzes aviation 

system operations and safety risks and 

develops risk management methodologies, 

prototype tools, technical information, 

procedures, and practices to improve aviation 

safety. It develops an infrastructure that 

enables the free sharing of de-identied, 

aggregate safety information from various 

government and industry sources in a 

protected, aggregated manner. It also conducts 

research to evaluate proposed new technologies 

and procedures that will improve safety by 

making relevant information available to the 

pilot during terminal operations. 

Air Trafc Control/Technical

Operations Human Factors (A11.i): 

The program identies and analyzes trends 

in air trafc operational errors and technical 

operations incidents and develops and 

implements strategies to mitigate errors and 

incidents. It manages human error hazards, 

their consequences, and recovery methods in 

early stages of system design or procedural 

development and assesses concepts and 

technology to modernize workstations and 

improve controller performance. 

92 Chapter 4 
 

Aeromedical Research (A11.j): 

The program identies pilot, ight attendant, 

and passenger medical conditions that indicate 

an inability to meet ight demands, both in the 

absence and in the presence of emergency ight 

conditions. It also denes cabin air quality and 

analyzes requirements for occupant protection 

and aircraft decontamination. 

Weather Program (A11.k): 

The program develops new and enhanced 

algorithms to improve weather information 

required for integration with decision-support 

tools to reduce the impact of adverse weather 

in the nation’s aviation system. The improved 

weather information enhances capacity 

and increases safety by supporting better 

operational planning by air trafc management 

(ATM), dispatchers, and pilots. 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Research (A11.l): 

The program ensures safe integration of 

unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into the 

nation’s aviation system. It also provides 

information to support certication procedures, 

airworthiness standards, operational 

requirements, maintenance procedures, 

and safety oversight activities for UAS civil 

NextGen – Alternative Fuels for 

General Aviation (A11.m): 

The program addresses the use of alternative 

and renewable fuels for GA to lessen aviation 

environmental impacts (air and water quality). 

The program develops data and methodologies 

to support certication of alternative aviation 

fuels for GA aircraft. 

Joint Planning and Development

Ofce (A12.a): 

The program plans and designs the next 

generation air transportation system 

by coordinating goals, priorities, and 

implementation requirements within the 

federal government and with the U.S. 

aviation community. 

NextGen - Wake Turbulence (A12.b): 

The program provides a better understanding 

of the wake turbulence generated by aircraft, 

develops mechanisms to reduce wake 

turbulence separation to enhance capacity 

safely, and develops requirements to implement 

these mechanisms. 

Chapter 4 93

applications and operations. 
NextGen - Air Ground Integration

Human Factors (A12.c): 

The program addresses ight deck and air 

trafc service provider integration for NextGen 

operational capabilities with a focus on those 

human factors issues that primarily affect the 

pilot side of the air-ground integration challenge 

(i.e., the challenge of ensuring that the right 

information is provided to pilots, at the right 

time, to make the right decisions, and to allow 

pilots to successfully collaborate with air 

navigation service provider (ANSP) personnel 

to operate in the NAS safely and efciently). 

Through the use of modeling, simulation, 

and demonstration, the program assesses 

interoperability of tools, develops design 

guidance, determines training requirements, 

and veries procedures for ensuring effective 

and efcient human system integration in 

transitions of NextGen capabilities. 

NextGen - Self-Separation Human

Factors (A12.d): 

The program addresses human performance 

and coordination requirements for pilots and 

ANSPs through development of the initial 

standards and procedures that will lead to an 

operational capability for separation assurance. 

It assesses the human factors risks and 

requirements associated with self-separation 

policies, procedures, and maneuvers, including 

interim operational capabilities for reduced and 

delegated separation and high-density airport 

trafc operations in reduced visibility using 

advanced ight deck technologies. Research 

results will provide the technical information 

and data needed to support the development 

of standards, procedures, and training by 

the Flight Standards service to implement 

enhanced spacing and separation operations. 

NextGen - Weather Technology in

the Cockpit (A12.e): 

The program enables the integration of cockpit, 

ground, and communication technologies, 

practices, and procedures to provide pilots with 

shared and relevant weather information to 

enhance common situational awareness. It 

will do this by aiding development of airborne 

decision-support tools to exploit the common 

weather picture, exchange weather information 

automatically with surrounding aircraft and 

ground systems, and facilitate the integration of 

weather information into the cockpit to support 

NextGen capabilities. The program develops 

policies and standards on hardware and 

software requirements, including guidelines 

and procedures for testing, evaluating, and 

qualifying weather systems for certication 

and operation on aircraft. It also addresses the 

human factors issues in developing policies, 

standards, and guidance, including training, 

procedures, and error management. 

Environment and Energy (A13.a): 

The program provides fundamental knowledge, 

and develops and validates methodologies, 

models, metrics, and tools. This program 

characterizes aircraft noise and emissions and 

their environmental impacts and provides 

guidance on their mitigation. It analyzes and 

balances the interrelationships between noise 

and emissions, considers local to global impacts, 

and determines economic consequences. The 

program also reduces scientic uncertainties 

related to aviation environmental issues to 

support decision making. 

94 Chapter 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

System Planning and Resource

Management (A14.a): 

The program manages the R&D programs to 

meet customer needs, to increase program 

efciency, and to reduce management and 

operating costs. It works to increase customer 

and stakeholder involvement in FAA programs 

and foster acceptance of U.S. standards and 

technology to meet global aviation needs. 

William J. Hughes Technical Center

Laboratory Facility (A14.b): 

The program provides well-equipped, routinely 

available facilities to emulate and evaluate 

eld conditions; performs human-in-the-loop 

simulations; measures human performance; 

evaluates human factors issues; and 

provides research aircraft that are specially 

instrumented and re-congurable. 

security. The program also supports research 

to determine the appropriate goals and metrics 

to manage NextGen aviation environmental 

impacts that are needed to support 

Environmental Management Systems (EMSs). 

Chapter 4 95

NextGen Environmental Research 

- Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and

Metrics (A13.b): 

The program develops solutions to mitigate 

aviation environmental impacts in absolute 

terms and increase fuel efciency. It matures 

aircraft technologies through the Continuous 

Lower Energy, Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) 

program to reduce noise and emissions at the 

source level. It assesses, demonstrates, and 

supports qualication of alternative aviation 

fuels that reduce emissions that impact air 

quality and climate change. Availability of 

alternative aviation fuels also increases energy 

William J. Hughes Technical Center 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F A C IL I T I E S A ND E Q U I P M E N T 

Runway Incursion Reduction

(1A01A): 

The program minimizes the chance of injury, 

death, damage, or loss of property caused by 

runway accidents or incidents. It selects and 

evaluates technologies, validates technical 

performance and operational suitability, and 

develops a business case to support program 

implementation. It improves pilot situational 

awareness with airport visual aids such as 

runway status lights, nal approach runway 

occupancy signals, and other enhanced airport 

lighting technologies. 

System Capacity, Planning and

Improvement (1A01B): 

The program delivers products and services to 

alleviate trafc congestion, system delays, and 

operational inefciencies in the aviation system 

through the development of new runways, 

new technologies, and modied operational 

procedures. It also develops performance metrics; 

implements performance measurement tools; and 

collects, processes, and analyzes data to measure 

and report performance on a routine basis. 

Operations Concept Validation

(1A01C): 

The program conducts modeling and simulation 

to validate new ATO operational concepts for 

the next generation of decision support systems 

for pilots and air trafc controllers. It validates 

performance requirements and identies 

research criteria at the system and subsystem 

level. It also assesses safety, identies risk, and 

takes actions necessary to reduce risk. 

NAS Weather Requirements (1A01D): 

The program analyzes mission needs and 

establishes weather requirements for the NAS to 

increase operational efciency and safety during 

weather events. It aligns requirements, priorities, 

programs, and resources and develops metrics to 

measure and understand the impact of weather 

on the system. It also evaluates weather-related 

services and technologies for the NAS. 

( F & E ) A P P R OPRI A TI O N 

Airspace Management Program

(1A01E): 

The program investigates and demonstrates 

new airspace concepts and procedures to 

increase national aviation system capacity. It 

focuses on the nation’s major metropolitan 

areas to shorten ight distances, to provide 

more fuel-efcient routes, and to reduce arrival 

and departure delays 

NextGen – Air Trafc Control/

Technical Operations Human

Factors (Controller Efciency and

Air Ground Integration) (1A08A): 

The program addresses human system 

integration and human performance issues 

related to improving controller efciency 

to yield greater trafc throughput without 

a commensurate increase in the number of 

ANSP. It examines how ANSP personnel can 

achieve higher efciency levels through the 

integration of automation, decision support 

tools, workstation displays, and procedures. It 

also addresses the air trafc service provider 

perspective and works together with the ight 

deck human factors program to address the airground integration required to transition from 

the current system to NextGen. It addresses 

changes in responsibilities and liabilities and 

examines new types of human error modes to 

manage safety risk. 

NextGen - New Air Trafc 

Management Requirements (1A08B): 

The program supports new procedures and 

technologies to increase efciency in the 

national airspace system and to provide three 

times current capacity levels. It develops data 

communication requirements and standards, 

conict resolution methods, procedures, and 

technologies to reduce aircraft separation, 

enhance surface management technologies, 

and develop procedures for low visibility 

conditions and decision support tools for air 

and ground operations. 

96 Chapter 4 
 

 

 

NextGen - Operations Concept

Validation - Validation Modeling

(1A08C): 

The program develops methods, metrics, and 

models to demonstrate that the system can 

handle growth in demand up to three-times 

current levels at higher efciency levels than 

today. It measures the improvements planned 

by NextGen under the seven solution sets and 

determines whether or not these 

improvements will provide the targeted levels of 

capacity and efciency. 

NextGen - Environment and Energy 

– Environmental Management

System and Advanced Noise and

Emissions Reduction (1A08D): 

The program supports development and 

implementation of the NextGen Environmental 

Management System (EMS). The EMS will 

dynamically manage NextGen environmental 

impacts and help to dene and identify 

optimum mitigation actions and their benets. 

The program also evaluates the benets of 

aviation environmental mitigation options 

and identies ways to integrate them into the 

NAS infrastructure and demonstrate any NAS 

adaptation required to realize their full benets. 

These options include new CLEEN aircraft 

technologies, alternative fuels, environmental 

and energy-efcient operational policies and 

procedures, environmental standards, and 

market-based measures. 

NextGen - Wake Turbulence - Recategorization (1A08E): 

The program develops enhanced methods to 

dene wake turbulence separation between 

aircraft. Wake characterization models 

will be developed to include various aircraft 

design parameters for dening wake vortices. 

Enhanced wake turbulence separation 

standards and procedures will be evaluated 

through eld measurements, analyses, and 

human-in-the-loop simulations. 

NextGen - Operational Assessments

(1A08F): 

The program researches and develops 

system-wide assessment of NAS performance, 

safety, and environmental impacts. The 

transition to NextGen requires the conduct 

of operational assessments to ensure that 

safety, environmental, and system performance 

considerations are addressed throughout the 

integration and implementation of NextGen. 

NextGen - System Safety Management 

Transformation (1A08G): 

The program develops a safety information 

analysis and sharing environment for NextGen 

to serve as the foundation for trend analysis 

and the identication and mitigation of 

potential safety hazards before incidents occur. 

It also produces guidelines for developing 

processes and technologies to implement a 

safety management system across NextGen. 

NextGen - Staffed NextGen Towers 

(1A08H): 

The program will enable ANSP personnel to 

provide surface and tower services by otherthan-direct visual observation. The program 

outlines a roadmap for the research and 

engineering activities needed to develop and 

evaluate the Staffed NextGen Towers (SNT) 

concept, verify its operational feasibility, and 

generate technical performance requirements 

for providing air trafc services through SNT. 

Center for Advanced Aviation 

System Development (CAASD)

(4A09A): 

The program identies and tests new 

technologies for application to air trafc 

management, navigation, communication, 

separation assurance, surveillance, and 

system safety; and conducts R&D and highlevel system engineering to meet FAA’s farterm requirements. 

Chapter 4 97
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Airport Cooperative Research

- Capacity: 

The program conducts research to provide better 

airport planning and design. Future aviation 

demand will rely on the ability of airports to 

accommodate increased aircraft operations, 

larger aircraft, and more efcient passenger 

throughput. This program will prepare for 

those future needs while simultaneously solving 

current and near-term airport capacity issues. 

Airport Cooperative Research

- Environment: 

Airport Technology Research

- Capacity: 

The program provides better airport planning 

and designs and improves runway pavement 

design, construction, and maintenance. It 

ensures new pavement standards will be ready 

to support safe international operation of nextgeneration heavy aircraft and makes pavement 

design standards available to users worldwide. 

Airport Technology Research

- Safety: 

The program increases airport safety by 

AIRPORT IMPROVE MENT M PROV E M E N T PROGR A M RO G R A M (AIP) A (AIP) APPROPRIATION PPROPR I AT ION 

98 Chapter 4 

A fundamental element of this program is to 

produce results that provide protection of aircraft 

passengers and airport personnel through 

improved safety training, airport design, and 

advanced technology implementation. 

The program examines the impact an airport 

has on the surrounding environment and 

advances the science and technology for 

creating an environmentally friendly airport 

system. Projects include the study of airportspecic aviation noise and emissions and their 

environmental impacts, developing strategies 

and guidance for green airports via reduction in 

noise and emissions, infrastructure, and benets 

of alternative aviation fuels at airport facilities, 

deicing management, and advanced noise and 

emissions databases. 

Airport Cooperative Research

- Safety: 

The program conducts research to prevent 

and mitigate potential injuries and accidents 

within the airport operational environment. 

conducting research to improve airport lighting 

and marking, reduce wildlife hazards near 

airport runways, improve airport re and 

rescue capability, and reduce surface accidents.
'

O P E R A T I O N S (O P S ) 

A P P R O P RI A TI O N 

Commercial Space

Transportation Safety: 

The program examines safety considerations 

for commercial space transportation, including 

those that involve crew and spaceight 

participants’ health and safety, spacecraft 

vehicle safety, launch and re-entry risks, public 

safety, and personal property risk.
'
BUDGET 

This section provides four tables that present the FAA R&D budget by appropriation, program sponsor, 

R&D category, and performance goal. It presents the FAA R&D request for the President’s Budget for FY 

2011. The funding levels listed for FYs 2012 to 2015 are estimates and subject to change. 

Appropriation Account – Table 4.1 shows the FAA R&D budget planned for FY 2011, including the 

ve-year plan through FY 2015, grouped by appropriation account. The previous section described the 

programs in each of the four appropriation types. The F&E budget in Table 4.1 includes three main 

line items: Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping (ATD&P), 1A01; NextGen System 

Development, 1A08; and the Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD), 4A09A. 

ATD&P and NextGen Systems Development have several programs under them. Both the F&E and the 

Ops appropriations have programs that are not R&D; however, only R&D programs are shown. 

Sponsoring Organization – Table 4.2 shows the FAA R&D budget planned for FY 2011, including the veyear plan through FY 2015, grouped by sponsoring organization. Sponsoring organizations are: Aviation 

Safety; Air Trafc Organization; Airports; Commercial Space Transportation; and Aviation Policy, 

Chapter 4 99

Planning, and Environment. 

R&D Category – FAA research includes both applied research and development as dened by the Ofce 

of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-11.* Table 4.3 shows the FAA R&D program according to 

these categories with the percent of applied research and development for FY 2011 through 2015. 

Performance Goal – Table 4.4 shows the FAA R&D budget by the performance goals dened in Exhibit 

II of the FAA budget request for FY 2011. The R&D programs apply to three performance goals – 

safety, reduce congestion, and environmental stewardship. Programs may support more than one goal; 

however, each program is listed only once under its primary goal for budget purposes. The table provides 

information on contract costs, personnel costs, and other in-house costs planned for FY 2011. 

* OMB Circular A-11, “Preparation, Submission and Execution of the Budget,” August 7, 2009, section 84, page 8 (www.

whitehouse.gov/OMB/circulars). 
100 Chapter 4 

Table 4.1: Planned R&D Budget by Appropriation Account 
Chapter 4 101 

Table 4.2: Planned R&D Budget by Sponsoring Organization 
102 Chapter 4 

Table 4.3: Planned R&D Budget by Research Category 
Chapter 4 103 

Table 4.4: Planned R&D Budget by Performance Goal (Budget Exhibit II) 
 

 

 

 

 

104 Chapter 4 

PA RT NE R SHIPS AND A RT N E R SH I P S A N D OT HE R 

RE SE A RCH E SE A RCH MECH ANI SM S ECH A N I SM S 

FAA enhances and expands its R&D capabilities by working with other government, industry, and academic 

organizations using a variety of mechanisms, such as partnerships, grants, and contracts. These research 

mechanisms help leverage critical national capabilities to ensure FAA attains its R&D goals. 

F E D E R A L E D E R A L GO V E R N M E N T O V E R N M E N T 

Other federal departments and agencies conduct aviation-related R&D that directly or indirectly 

supports FAA goals and objectives. To leverage this R&D, FAA uses formal agreements, such as 

memoranda of understanding/agreement (MOU/MOA); cooperative efforts, such as interagency 

research transition teams; and technical coordination, such as on-site personnel at eld ofces at other 

federal research laboratories and centers. The establishment of the multi-agency Joint Planning and 

Development Ofce (JPDO) shows how government can leverage the R&D capabilities of multiple 

agencies to transform the nation’s air transportation system. 

Joint Planning and Development Ofce 

The JPDO provides government-wide planning and 

coordination for NextGen. The JPDO members include: 

the Departments of Defense, Transportation, Homeland 

Security, and Commerce; FAA; NASA; and the Ofce of 

Science and Technology Policy. Its mission is to plan 

federal aviation R&D and focus it on the far-term needs of 

the nation’s air transportation system. Having developed 

the foundational NextGen documents, the JPDO is now 

focusing on the far-term NextGen vision to ensure FAA 

alignment with partner government agencies and other 

stakeholders that contribute to the NextGen effort. For 

more information, see http://www.jpdo.gov. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 4 105

Development in the NextGen and 

Operations Planning Service Unit 

at FAA headquarters. 

information, see http://www.epa.gov/geoss. 

The Climate Change Science Program 

Thirteen federal departments and agencies 

participate in the U.S. Climate Change Science 

Program to coordinate scientic research across 

a wide range of related climate and global change 

issues. The research addresses the Earth’s 

environmental and human systems, which are 

undergoing changes caused by a variety of natural 

and human-induced causes. The U.S. Climate 

Change Science Program Strategic Plan* provides 

the research areas and questions the program 

addresses. FAA supports this program by 

identifying the impact of aviation on the climate 

due to cruise altitude emissions in the upper 

troposphere and lower stratosphere. For more 

information, see http://www.climatescience.gov. 

* Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program,

report by the Climate Change Science Program and the

Subcommittee on Climate Change Research, July 2003 (http://

www.climatescience.gov). 

Global Earth Observation System of

Systems 

The Global Earth Observation System of 

Systems (GEOSS) provides an umbrella for 15 

federal departments and agencies and several 

White House ofces to work collaboratively to 

address a wide range of environmental issues, 

including those pertaining to aviation. These 

include enhanced weather observation, modeling, 

and forecasting; and air and water quality 

monitoring, modeling, and emissions. Under 

GEOSS, FAA works with the Environmental 

Protection Agency to address air quality and 

emissions issues facing aviation. For more 

Memoranda of Understanding/

Agreement 

Joint research activities are performed via 

Memoranda of Understanding/Agreement 

(MOUs/MOAs) that set forth areas for 

cooperative endeavor. An MOU is a highlevel agreement describing a broad area of 

research that fosters cooperation between 

departments or agencies and develops a basis 

for establishing joint research activities. An 

MOA is an agreement describing a specic 

area of research and is used to implement a 

broader MOU. An MOA includes interagency 

agreements (IAs) that are written agreements 

between FAA and other agencies in which FAA 

agrees to receive from, or exchange supplies or 

services with, the other agency. Appendix B 

lists current FAA MOUs, MOAs, and IAs. 

FAA Field Ofces 

FAA has eld ofces at the NASA Ames 

and Langley Research Centers to foster and 

provide technical coordination of research that 

contributes to modernization efforts and safety 

enhancements of the air transportation system. 

The rst eld ofce opened in 1971 at NASA 

Ames Research Center, located in Moffett 

Field, California. The second ofce opened in 

1978 at NASA Langley Research Center in 

Hampton, Virginia. Both ofces report to 

the Ofce of Research and Technology 
 

 

 

 

 

 

106 Chapter 4 

I N D U S T R Y N D U S T R Y 

FAA technology transfer activities meet the objectives of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act 

of 1980, the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986, the Technology Transfer 

Commercialization Act of 2000, Executive Order 12591 - Facilitating Access to Science and Technology, 

and Executive Order 12618 - Uniform Treatment of Federally Funded Inventions. The purpose is to 

transfer knowledge, intellectual property, facilities, equipment, or other capabilities developed by federal 

laboratories or agencies to the private sector. FAA does this through the following mechanisms: 

Cooperative Research and Development Agreements 

A Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRDA) is collaborative in nature and allows 

FAA to share facilities, equipment, services, intellectual property, personnel, and other resources with 

private industry, academia, or state and local government agencies. Appendix B provides a list of the 

Agency’s active FY 2009 CRDAs. For more information on using CRDAs, see www.faa.gov/go/ttp. 

Contracts and Cooperative Agreements 

FAA awards contracts and cooperative agreements to conduct applied research studies and to develop, 

prototype, demonstrate, and test new hardware and software. FAA also awards contracts to small 

businesses in compliance with the terms of the Small Business Innovation Research Program. 

Intellectual Property and Patents 

As part of its commitment to assist industry through technology transfer, FAA encourages the 

commercialization of its R&D products or results, known as intellectual property. Among the most 

transferred intellectual properties are inventions that may be protected by patents. Appendix B 

provides a list of current patents. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 4 107

A C A D E M I A C A D E M I A 

FAA has an extensive program to foster research 

and innovative aviation solutions through the 

nation’s colleges and universities. By doing so, 

it not only leverages the nation’s signicant 

investment in basic and applied research but also 

helps to build the next generation of aerospace 

engineers, managers, and operators. FAA efforts 

include the following mechanisms: 

Joint University Program 

This cooperative research partnership 

among three universities (Ohio University, 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and 

Princeton University) conducts scientic and 

engineering research on technical disciplines 

that contribute to civil aviation, including air 

trafc control theory, human factors, satellite 

navigation and communications, aircraft 

ight dynamics, avionics, and meteorological 

hazards. FAA and NASA benet directly 

from the results of the research, and, less 

formally, from valuable feedback from 

university researchers regarding the 

goals and effectiveness of government 

programs. An additional benet is the 

creation of a talented cadre of engineers and 

scientists who will form a core of advanced 

aeronautical experts in industry, academia, 

and government. For more information, see 

http://u2.princeton.edu/~jup. 

Aviation Research Grants 

All colleges, universities, and legally 

incorporated non-prot research institutions 

qualify for research grants. At FAA, the 

evaluation criteria for grant proposals 

include the potential application of research 

results to FAA’s far-term goals for civil 

aviation technology. Appendix B provides a 

summary of grants issued in FY 2009. For 

more information, see http://www.tc.faa.gov/ 

logistics/grants. 

Air Transportation Centers of

Excellence 

FAA currently has ve Air Transportation 

Centers of Excellence (COEs) through 

cooperative agreements with academic 

institutions to assist in mission-critical research 

and technology that focus on the areas of 

advanced materials, airliner cabin environment 

and intermodal research, airport technology, 

general aviation, and noise and emissions 

mitigation. A new COE for Commercial Space 

Transportation is under consideration for 

2010. Through these multi-year, collaborative, 

cost-sharing partnerships, government and 

university-industry teams leverage their 

resources to advance the technological future 

of the nation’s aviation community. Appendix 

B provides a summary of COE activities. For 

more information, see http://www.coe.faa.gov. 

Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute 

The Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute is a 

cooperative industry, government, and academic 

venture for investigation and standardization 

of aerospace vehicle systems to reduce life-cycle 

cost and accelerate development of systems, 

architectures, tools, and processes. For more 

information, see http://avsi-tees.tamu.edu. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EUROCONTROL 

The European Organization for the Safety 

of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL) is a 

civil and military organization with the goal 

to develop a seamless, pan-European Air 

Trafc Management (ATM) system. In 1986, 

EUROCONTROL and FAA established the 

I N T E R N A T I O N A L N T E R N A T I O N A L 

FAA uses cooperative agreements with European and North American aviation organizations to 

participate in air trafc management modernization programs and to leverage research activities that 

Transport Canada 

In the spring of 2004, Transport Canada joined 

FAA and NASA as a sponsor of the PARTNER 

(Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and 

Emissions Reduction) Center of Excellence. 

Transport Canada has studied and will continue 

to study air quality at Canadian airports to 

harmonize operations and promote a seamless air transportation system worldwide. 

rst memorandum of cooperation (MOC), which 

they updated in 1992 and again in 2004. The 

aim of the MOC and its governance structure 

is to broaden the scope of the cooperation 

between the two organizations and their 

respective partners in the areas of ATM 

research, strategic ATM analysis, technical 

harmonization, operational harmonization, and 

harmonizing safety and environment factors. 

AIRE 

The Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to 

Reduce Emissions (AIRE) was established in 

2007 and provides a foundation for cooperation 

between the FAA and the European Commission 

on research to aid the environment while 

making air transportation more efcient. I

addition to facilitating cooperation am

aviation authorities, AIRE also involv

partners, such as aircraft manufactu

operators, and providers of aviation n

services. In 2009, a ve-month trial 

oceanic routes was started with AIRE 

using a full range of fuel-saving and 

emissions-reducing tactics. 

develop and implement practices that reduce 

air pollution from airports. Canada, as a 

member state of the International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO), is working to reduce smogforming pollutants from the aviation sector and 

participates in the COE partnership to advance 

the state of knowledge in many key areas. 

n 

ong 

es industry 

rers, 

avigation 

on 

108 Chapter 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

more efcient altitudes; 

a series of demonstration ights, and initiated the 

development of shared performance metrics. The 

ASPIRE partnership will include demonstrations 

and implementation of key NextGen technologies 

and practices that have either demonstrated or will 

demonstrate environmental efciencies, including: 

• Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract

In-Trail Procedures: separation reductions

down to 10-15 nautical miles during climbs

and descents to improve the availability of 

Chapter 4 109

• Pre-Departure and In-Flight Oceanic

Trajectory Management 4-D: procedures and

automation to identify opportunities for ights 

to y more efcient proles based on real-time 

evaluation of airspace availability; and 

Tailored Arrivals: dynamic optimization of

aircraft approach proles, designed to reduce

periods of level-off during descent and to meet

the exible needs of the air trafc system at

congested airports. 

For more information, 

see http://www.aspire-green.com. 

ASPIRE 

The Asia and South Pacic Initiative to Reduce 

Emissions (ASPIRE) was established February 

18, 2008 as a partnership, with initial partners 

FAA, Airservices Australia, and Airways New 

Zealand; and demonstration partners SEAC 

Tahiti and Airports Fiji. The partnership seeks to 

reduce the impact of aviation on the environment 

in the Asia and South Pacic regions through 

technological innovation and best practice air 

trafc management. 

Since its inception, the initial ASPIRE partners 

have produced the ASPIRE Strategic Plan, executed 

• 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EVA LU AT ION
)

Since R&D tends to be far-term in nature, it does not lend itself to traditional return-on-investment 

analysis, such as net present value. The FAA conducts evaluation through formal and informal reviews 

by internal and external groups. 

I N TE R NAL P O RTFOLIO R E VI E W S 

The FAA R&D portfolio receives continuous internal review to ensure that it meets sponsor needs, is high 

quality, and is well managed. 

Process Improvements and Quality

Managgement 

The FAA uses methods such as ISO 9000 and 

models like the Integrated Capability Maturity 

Model to manage quality and evaluate and 

improve processes. 

Program Planning Teams 

To ensure effective engagement with research 

stakeholders, the FAA Ofce of Research and 

Technology Development uses program planning 

teams comprised of internal sponsors and 

researchers to review program outcomes and 

outputs, prioritize and plan research efforts, and 

recommend research priorities and programs. 

R&D Executive Board 

When R&D portfolio formulation is complete, 

the FAA R&D Executive Board (REB) provides 

portfolio approval. The REB is made up of 

senior executives representing the major 

R&D sponsors of the FAA. This process helps 

FAA establish research priorities to meet its 

strategic goals and objectives. 

Joint Resources Council 

The Joint Resources Council (JRC) is FAA’s 

corporate-level acquisition-decision-making 

body that provides strategic guidance to the 

R&D portfolio process and ensures that the 

research requirements support the FAA NAS 

program. The JRC reviews and approves the 

proposed R&D portfolio. 

The NextGen Review Board and the 

NextGen Management Board 

The NextGen Review Board provides oversight, 

status, prioritization, and guidance on existing 

and proposed NextGen initiatives. It is focused 

on making rm commitments to implement new 

operational capabilities in a coordinated, timely 

fashion. This assists with integration, timely 

rulemaking, identication of required policy 

changes, and understanding of funding impacts. 

It assesses funded NextGen R&D programs 

and drives budget plans. The NextGen Review 

Board provides recommendations to the 

NextGen Management Board. 

The NextGen Management Board, chaired 

by FAA’s Deputy Administrator, takes 

an enterprise approach to developing and 

executing FAA’s NextGen plan. With 

representatives from all key Agency lines 

of business, the Board has the authority to 

force timely resolution of emerging NextGen 

implementation issues. The Board’s 

focus includes: measuring the progress of 

deployments and of key activities that support 

decision-making; ensuring essential resources 

are available, including reprioritizing 

resources as necessary; issuing policies and 

guidance; and identifying leaders within their 

organizations who will be accountable for 

delivering system changes. 

For more information on both boards, see http:// 

www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/nextgen/. 

110 Chapter 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E X T E R N A L P O RTFOLIO R E VI E W S 

The FAA R&D portfolio receives periodic external review from advisory committees to ensure that it 

meets customer needs and is technically sound. FAA also seeks feedback from the National Academies 

and through user surveys and discussion groups. Researchers also present progress reports at public 

forums and science reviews, publish and present technical papers, obtain formal peer validation of 

science, and maintain and share lessons learned.
'

Research, Engineering, and

Development Advisory Committee 

Established in 1989, the Research, 

Engineering, and Development Advisory 

Committee (REDAC) advises the 

Administrator on R&D issues and assists 

in ensuring FAA research activities are 

coordinated with other government agencies 

and industry. REDAC considers aviation 

research needs in ve areas: NAS operations, 

airport technology, aircraft safety, human 

factors, and environment and energy.* A 

maximum of 30 members can serve on 

the REDAC and represent corporations, 

universities, associations, consumers, and 

government agencies. For more information, 

see http://research.faa.gov/redac/default.aspx. 

During 2009, the REDAC held two committee 

meetings and ten subcommittee meetings and 

produced two reports. Appendix C provides the 

recommendations from these reports and the 

Agency responses. 

* Aviation Safety Research Act of 1988, Public Law Number

100-591, November 3, 1988, and FAA Research, Engineering

and Development Authorization Act of 1990, Public Law

Number 101-508, November 5, 1990. 

Transportation Research Board 

The National Research Council established 

the Transportation Research Board (TRB) 

in 1920 as the National Advisory Board on 

Highway Research. In 1974, the Board was 

renamed TRB to reect its expanded services 

to all modes of transportation. The TRB 

mission is to promote innovation and progress 

in transportation through research. It fullls 

this mission through the work of its standing 

committees and task forces. The TRB manages 

the Airport Cooperative Research Program 

(ACRP) for FAA with program oversight and 

governance provided by representatives of 

airport operating agencies. 

The ACRP Oversight Committee announced 

their FY 2010 projects in August 2009. The 

30 projects will examine different research 

areas that target near-term solutions to 

problems facing airport operators and 

industry stakeholders, such as the Airports 

Council International. These projects include 

development of airport performance metrics, 

low-cost practices to reduce airport carbon 

footprint, airport development under oil price 

uncertainty, and assessment of the risks of 

runway safety areas and existing aireld 

separation standards. 

Chapter 4 111
112 Chapter 4 

Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee 

Established in 1984, the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee 

(COMSTAC) advises the FAA Administrator and the U.S. Department of Transportation 

on matters relating to the U.S. commercial space transportation industry, including 

R&D activities. Currently, the Committee has twenty-two members. Each 

member is recommended by the Administrator and appointed by the Secretary 

of Transportation for a two-year term. Members represent commercial 

launch providers of expendable and reusable launch vehicles, rocket 

propulsion, commercial launch site operations, satellite manufacturing 

and operations, space policy and education, space law, insurance 

and nance, state government and economic development, space 

advocacy, and space business and technical associations. The 

COMSTAC provides annual recommendations for commercial 

space transportation R&D projects and periodically 

reviews FAA commercial space R&D reports and 

activities. For more information, see: http://www. 

faa.gov/about/ofce_org/headquarters_ofces/ast/ 

advisory_committee. 

During 2009, the COMSTAC held two full 

committee meetings and ve working group 

meetings. The Committee produced the 

2009 Commercial Geosynchronous 

Orbit Launch Demand Forecast and 

a white paper entitled DoD Impact 

on U.S. Commercial Launch 

Services Competitiveness. 
 

 

 

Photo Credits 113

Photos by: 

Robert Bach pages - ii-iii, iv-v, 99, 104, 105, 107, 113

Michael Gross pages - 3, 14-15, 34, 39, 45, 51, 61, 78-79, 88-89

James P. Richardson page - 92 

Historical photos on pages 23,28, 34, 38, 44, 50, 56, 60, and 66 -

courtesy of the U.S. National Archives and Records

Administration, Record Group 237 

Historical Concept by: 

Theresa Kraus, Ph.D. 

C R E D I T S R E D I T S 

FAA Headquarters, Washington, DC 
 

A C RON Y M S A ND A B BREVIATION S

FASTER Full-Scale Aircraft Structural Test 

Evaluation and Research 

FEWS Future En Route Workstation 

FLM Front Line Manager

FMS Flight Management System

FT Fischer-Tropsch

FTWS Future Terminal Workstation 

FY Fiscal Year 

GA General Aviation 

GEOSS Global Earth Observation System of

Systems

GHG Greenhouse Gas 

GPS Global Positioning Satellites

GRC NASA Glenn Research Center 

HITL Human-In-The-Loop

HRET High-Reach Extendable Turret

I&I Integration and Implementation

IA Interagency Agreement

ICAO International Civil Aviation 

AAIADS Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy

Data System

AC Advisory Circular

ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program

ADS-B Automatic Dependent SurveillanceBroadcast
'

AEDT Aviation Environmental Design Tool

AIA Aerospace Industries Association

AIP Airport Improvement Program

Appropriation

AIRE Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to

Reduce Emissions
'

ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider

APMT Aviation Environmental Portfolio 

Management Tool

ARFF Aqueous Film-Forming Foam

ASAP Aviation Safety Action Program

ASIAS Aviation Safety Information Analysis

and Sharing

ASPIRE Asia and South Pacic Initiative to 

Reduce Emissions IFR 

ATC Air Trafc Control IRT 

ATCOV Air Trafc Control Color Vision Test ITWS 

ATCS Air Trafc Controller Station IWP 

ATM Air Trafc Management JAIdB 

AUVSI Association of Unmanned Vehicle JPDO 

Systems International JRC 

C3 Command, Control, and JTA 

Communication LIDAR 

CAASD Center for Advanced Aviation System LOSA 

Development MOA 

CAMI Civil Aerospace Medical Institute MOC 

CATM Collaborative Air Trafc Management MOU 

CDA Continuous Descent Arrival MSP 

CDTI Cockpit Display of Trafc Information N2O 

CLEEN Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions NARP 

and Noise NAS 

CO Carbon Monoxide NASA 

COE Center of Excellence 

COMSTAC Commercial Space Transportation NASEA 

Advisory Committee

COTS Commercial-Off-the-Shelf NEO 

CRDA Cooperative Research and Development NextGen 

114 Acronyms and Abbreviations 

CSPR Closely Space Parallel Runways

DARWIN Design Assessment of Reliability With

INspection

Data Comm Data Communications 

DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security

DOC U.S. Department of Commerce

DoD U.S. Department of Defense

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation

DSA Detect, Sense, and Avoid

E&E Environment and Energy

EA Enterprise Architecture

EFB Electronic Flight Bag

EMS Environmental Management System

EUOCONTROL European Organization for the Safety

of Air Navigation

F&E Facilities and Equipment Appropriation

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

Agreement 

NGIP 

NOAA 

OI 

OMB 

ONERA 

OPD 

Ops

OSTP 

PARTNER 

R&D 

R,E&D 

RAPT 

Organization

Instrument Flight Rule

Icing Research Tunnel

Integrated Terminal Weather System

Integrated Work Plan

Job Analysis Information Database

Joint Planning and Development Ofce 

Joint Resources Council 

Job Task Analysis

Light Detection and Ranging

Line Operations Safety Audit

Memorandum of Agreement

Memorandum of Cooperation

Memorandum of Understanding

Multi-Sector Planner 

Nitrous Oxide 

National Aviation Research Plan 

National Airspace System

National Aeronautics and Space

Administration 

National Airspace System Enterprise

Architecture 

Net Enabled Operations

Next Generation Air Transportation

System

FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan

U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration 

Operational Improvement

Ofce of Management and Budget

Ofce of National d’Etudes et de 

Recherches Aerospatiales

Optimized Prole Descent 

Operations Appropriation

Ofce of Science and Technology Policy

Partnership for AiR Transportation

Noise and Emissions Reduction 

Research and Development

Research, Engineering and

Development Appropriation

Route Availability Planning Tool 
Acronyms and Abbreviations 115 

REB Research and Development Executive

Board 

REDAC Research, Engineering, and

Development Advisory Committee

RLV Reusable Launch Vehicle 

RNAV Area Navigation

SLD Supercooled Large Droplet

SMS Safety Management System

SNT Staffed NextGen Towers 

SSM Safety Systems Management

TBO Trajectory-Based Operation

TCAS Trafc Alert and Collision Avoidance 

System 

The NARP, related appendices, and the R&D Annual Review may be found online at: 

www.faa.gov/go/narp 

THC Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannbinol

TMA Trafc Management Advisor

TRACON Terminal Radar Approach Control

TRB Transportation Research Board

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System

UEDDAM Uncontained Engine Debris

Assessment Damage Model

UIUC University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

WTIC Weather Technology in the Cockpit 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

2010 

National Aviation Research Plan 

(NARP) 

Appendices 

A - Program Descriptions 

B - Partnership Activities 

C - Research, Engineering, and 

Development Advisory Committee 

D - Changes in NARP Chapter 2 

Milestones 

E - Acronyms and Abbreviations 

February 1, 2010 

Report of the Federal Aviation Administration 

to the United States Congress 

pursuant to 49 U.S. Code 44501(c) 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item R&D Program Title Page 

R,E&D A11.a Fire Research and Safety A-1 

R,E&D A11.b Propulsion and Fuel Systems A-7 

R,E&D A11.c Advanced Materials/Structural Safety A-12 

R,E&D A11.d Atmospheric Hazards – Aircraft Icing/Digital System Safety A-18 

R,E&D A11.e Continued Airworthiness A-26 

R,E&D A11.f Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research A-32 

R,E&D A11.g Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors A-37 

R,E&D A11.h System Safety Management A-44 

R,E&D A11.i Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors A-52 

R,E&D A11.j Aeromedical Research A-59 

R,E&D A11.k Weather Program A-74 

R,E&D A11.l Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research A-80 

R,E&D A11.m NextGen – Alternative Fuels for General Aviation A-85 

R,E&D A12.a Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) A-89 

R,E&D A12.b NextGen - Wake Turbulence A-96 

R,E&D A12.c NextGen – Air Ground Integration Human Factors A-102 

R,E&D A12.d NextGen – Self-Separation Human Factors A-110 

R,E&D A12.e NextGen – Weather Technology in the Cockpit A-118 

R,E&D A13.a Environment and Energy A-124 

R,E&D A13.b NextGen Environmental Research – Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and 

Metrics A-136 

R,E&D A14.a System Planning and Resource Management A-144 

R,E&D A14.b William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility A-149 

F&E 1A01A Runway Incursion Reduction A-155 

F&E 1A01B System Capacity, Planning and Improvement A-160 

F&E 1A01C Operations Concept Validation A-165 

F&E 1A01D NAS Weather Requirements A-170 

F&E 1A01E Airspace Management Program A-175 

F&E 1A08A NextGen – Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors 

(Controller Efficiency and Air Ground Integration) A-180 

F&E 1A08B NextGen – New Air Traffic Management Requirements A-187 

F&E 1A08C NextGen – Operations Concept Validation – Validation Modeling A-192 

F&E 1A08D NextGen – Environment and Energy – Environmental Management 

System and Advanced Noise and Emissions Reduction A-196 

F&E 1A08E NextGen – Wake Turbulence – Re-categorization A-203 

F&E 1A08F NextGen - Operational Assessments A-208 

F&E 1A08G NextGen – System Safety Management Transformation A-212 

F&E 1A08H NextGen – Staffed NextGen Towers (SNT) A-217 

F&E 4A09A Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development (CAASD) A-221 

AIP * Airport Cooperative Research – Capacity A-227 

AIP * Airport Cooperative Research – Environment A-234 

AIP * Airport Cooperative Research – Safety A-241 

AIP * Airport Technology Research – Capacity A-246 

AIP * Airport Technology Research – Safety A-251 

OPS * Commercial Space Transportation Safety A-256 

*Budget line item numbers are not used for these programs within the Operations (OPS) and Airport Improvement Program (AIP) appropriations. 

A-i 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item R&D Program Title Page 

R,E&D A11.c Advanced Materials/Structural Safety A-12 

R,E&D A11.j Aeromedical Research A-59 

R,E&D A11.i Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors A-52 

R,E&D A11.f Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research A-32 

AIP * Airport Cooperative Research – Capacity A-227 

AIP * Airport Cooperative Research – Environment A-234 

AIP * Airport Cooperative Research – Safety A-241 

AIP * Airport Technology Research – Capacity A-246 

AIP * Airport Technology Research – Safety A-251 

F&E 1A01E Airspace Management Program A-175 

R,E&D A11.d Atmospheric Hazards – Aircraft Icing/Digital System Safety A-18 

F&E 4A09A Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development (CAASD) A-221 

OPS * Commercial Space Transportation Safety A-256 

R,E&D A11.e Continued Airworthiness A-26 

R,E&D A13.a Environment and Energy A-124 

R,E&D A11.a Fire Research and Safety A-1 

R,E&D A11.g Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors A-37 

R,E&D A12.a Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) A-89 

F&E 1A01D NAS Weather Requirements A-170 

R,E&D A11.m NextGen – Alternative Fuels for General Aviation A-85 

R,E&D A12.c NextGen – Air Ground Integration Human Factors A-102 

F&E 1A08A NextGen – Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors 

(Controller Efficiency and Air Ground Integration) A-180 

F&E 1A08D NextGen – Environment and Energy – Environmental Management 

System and Advanced Noise and Emissions Reduction A-196 

F&E 1A08B NextGen – New Air Traffic Management Requirements A-187 

F&E 1A08F NextGen - Operational Assessments A-208 

F&E 1A08C NextGen – Operations Concept Validation – Validation Modeling A-192 

R,E&D A12.d NextGen – Self-Separation Human Factors A-110 

F&E 1A08H NextGen – Staffed NextGen Towers (SNT) A-217 

F&E 1A08G NextGen – System Safety Management Transformation A-212 

R,E&D A12.b NextGen - Wake Turbulence A-96 

F&E 1A08E NextGen – Wake Turbulence – Re-categorization A-203 

R,E&D A12.e NextGen – Weather Technology in the Cockpit A-118 

R,E&D A13.b NextGen Environmental Research – Aircraft Technologies, Fuels, and 

Metrics A-136 

F&E 1A01C Operations Concept Validation A-165 

R,E&D A11.b Propulsion and Fuel Systems A-7 

F&E 1A01A Runway Incursion Reduction A-155 

F&E 1A01B System Capacity, Planning and Improvement A-160 

R,E&D A14.a System Planning and Resource Management A-144 

R,E&D A11.h System Safety Management A-44 

R,E&D A11.l Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research A-80 

R,E&D A11.k Weather Program A-74 

R,E&D A14.b William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility A-149 

*Budget line item numbers are not used for these programs within the Operations (OPS) and Airport Improvement Program (AIP) appropriations. 

A-ii 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.a Fire Research and Safety $7,231,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Fire Research and Safety Program helps achieve FAA’s strategic goal of increasing 

aviation safety by reducing the number of accidents associated with aircraft fires and by mitigating the effects of a 

post-crash ground fire. The program develops technologies, procedures, test methods, and fire performance criteria 

that can prevent accidents caused by hidden in-flight fires and fuel tank explosions and improve survivability during a 

post-crash fire. Fire safety research focuses on near-term improvements in fire test methods and materials 

performance criteria, fire detection and suppression systems, aircraft fuel tank explosion protection, and long-range 

development of ultra-fire resistant cabin materials. 

Agency Outputs: The FAA issues aircraft fire safety rules that govern material selection, design criteria, and 

operational procedures. The new test methods, reports, and journal publications produced by the Fire Research and 

Safety Program describe the technical basis for these regulations and offer guidance for regulatory compliance. FAA 

provides industry with state-of-the-art safety products and information as a result of its research. FAA research also 

produces new materials and government-owned patents. 

Research Goals: The FAA will work to reduce the number of accidents and incidents caused by in-flight fire in both 

passenger-carrying and all-cargo (freighter) aircraft, to prevent fuel tank explosions, and to improve survivability 

during a post-crash fire. Near term research will focus on improved fire test standards for interior and structural 

materials, improved fuel tank inerting systems and extended inerting applications, and new or improved fire 

detection and extinguishment systems. Additionally, long-term research will be conducted to develop the enabling 

technology for a fireproof aircraft cabin constructed of ultra-fire resistant materials. The following milestones directly 

support the ultimate strategic goals of in-flight fire prevention, fuel tank explosion prevention and improved postcrash fire survivability: 

•	 By FY 2011, provide comprehensive guidance for fire safety of high energy density lithium batteries in 

passenger carry-on items and aircraft power systems. 

•	 By FY 2012, define composite fuselage fire safety design criteria 

•	 By FY 2013, demonstrate the improvements in post-crash fire survivability, provided by ultra-fire resistant 

materials using full-scale test simulations. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Fire Research and Safety Program works with the following industry 

and government groups: 

•	 Aircraft Safety Subcommittee of the FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

These representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the 

program’s research activities. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – The FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure 

that the program’s research projects support new rule making and development of alternate means of 

compliance for existing rules. 

•	 Aircraft manufacturers (U.S. and foreign), airlines, foreign airworthiness authorities, chemical companies, 

material suppliers, and aircraft fire safety equipment manufacturers meet regularly to share information on 

interior material fire tests and improvement of fire detection and suppression systems. 

•	 National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) – The FAA works with and supports NTSB on in-flight fire 

incidents, on-site accident investigations, and related testing. 

•	 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) – The FAA works with PHMSA to 

cooperatively develop requirements/guidelines for the safe transport of hazardous materials (current focus 

on lithium batteries). 

A-1 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

R&D Partnerships: Fire Research and Safety Program R&D partners include: 

•	 FAA-sponsored International Systems Fire Protection Working Group – R&D involves fuel tank protection, 

hidden fire safety, fire/smoke detectors, halon replacement, and lithium battery fire hazards. 

•	 FAA-sponsored International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group – R&D involves development and 

standardization of improved material fire tests. 

•	 Interagency working group on fire and materials – promotes technology exchange among U.S. Government 

agencies and prevents unwarranted duplication of work. 

•	 Interagency agreement with the National Institute of Standards and Technology – develops fire retardant 

mechanisms and rapid screening tools for flammability. 

•	 Memorandum of cooperation with the British Civil Aviation Administration – R&D involves a variety of fire 

safety research efforts. 

•	 Cabin safety research technical group – cooperates in and coordinates cabin safety research conducted 

and/or sponsored by the international regulatory authorities. 

•	 Arrangements with Fortune 100 companies to share development costs for new fire resistant materials. 

Accomplishments: The FAA operates the world’s most extensive aircraft fire test facilities. The FAA certification 

engineers receive training in these facilities each year and, at the request of the NTSB, program personnel participate 

in major fire accident and incident investigations. The Fire Research and Safety Program annually publishes over 

two-dozen reports and papers (available to the public on-line at http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/reports.asp) highlighting 

research results that have led to major improvements in aircraft safety. 

Outstanding program accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Developed guidance for the extinguishment of lithium battery fires in passenger carry-on items. 

•	 Developed hazardous gas emission criteria for post-crash fire exposure of a burn-through resistant fuselage, 

including composite construction. 

•	 Evaluated non-intrusive oxygen measurement technology in aircraft fuel tanks. 

•	 Developed analytical model to predict wing fuel tank flammability. 

•	 Developed an improved flammability test method and criteria for aircraft electrical wiring. 

•	 Evaluated the behavior of lithium cells in aircraft battery systems subjected to fire threats. 

•	 Evaluated the behavior of small prototype fuel cells under development for personal items when subjected 

to fire threats. 

•	 Evaluated the effectiveness of graphite-oxide nanoparticles as an additive approach to non-halogen fire 

retardant materials. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Measured and compared the flammability of composite and aluminum wing fuel tanks under simulated flight 

conditions. 

•	 Measured and compared the heat transfer from an in-flight fire in composite and aluminum fuselage 

constructions. 

•	 Developed safe acute exposure limits for gaseous halocarbon extinguishing agents in ventilated aircraft 

• Developed a one-dimensional thermo-kinetic burning model for combustible materials. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Developed a cabin crew training video for fighting in-flight fires. 

•	 Characterized the flammability of epoxy-graphite structural composites. 

•	 Developed and standardized a next generation burner for insulation burn-through resistance. 

• Evaluated the flammability of non-halogen, ultra-fire resistant plastics. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Evaluated the cabin hazards caused by outgassing from a composite fuselage material subjected to a 

simulated post-crash fuel fire. 

•	 Determined the fire hazards of lithium ion batteries shipped as air cargo. 

A-2 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Conducted engine nacelle fire extinguishment tests to determine the suitability of a promising new 

environmentally friendly agent, NOVEC 1230, as a replacement for the currently used halon. 

Previous Years: 

•	 Developed and demonstrated a simple and cost effective fuel tank inerting system. 

•	 Determined the limiting concentration of oxygen to prevent fuel tank explosions. 

•	 Developed improved and new flammability tests for thermal acoustic insulation, measuring in-flight fire 

resistance and post-crash burn-through resistance, respectively. 

•	 Developed minimum performance test standards for halon replacement agents. 

•	 Developed and demonstrated an onboard cabin water spray system for significantly improving post-crash 

fire survivability. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Fire Safety Improvements 

•	 Determine the cost/benefit of freighter on-board fire detection and suppression systems. 

•	 Evaluate adequacy of certification tests used to demonstrate freighter smoke/fire detection compliance with 

regulatory requirements. 

•	 Examine the effectiveness of depressurization to control in-flight fires in freighter aircraft. 

•	 Develop a small-scale test that measures the in-flight fire resistance of composite fuselage materials. 

•	 Evaluate the hazards of magnesium alloy seat structure during full-scale post-crash fire tests. 

• Evaluate the relative fire hazards of state-of-the-art fuel cell technology. 

Fire Resistant Materials 

•	 Develop and validate burning model for charring and laminated/composite materials. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

•	 Research on in-flight fire safety will continue to address all-cargo (freighter) aircraft, responding to 

improved freighter fire safety recommendations issued by NTSB, related to fire detection and suppression. 

•	 Research will address the fire hazards of lithium batteries in passenger items, aircraft systems, and 

transported as cargo. The safe transport of lithium batteries will be emphasized, supporting a joint 

PHMSA/FAA plan which outlines needed research and planned rulemaking.
 

•	 FAA’s unique fire test facilities will support the mandated replacement of halon extinguishing agents in 

aviation proposed by ICAO. Specific dates will be required for the use of halon replacement agents in 

handheld extinguishers, engines, and cargo compartments. 

•	 Research related to the fire behavior of structural composites is driven by the new Boeing 787, the first 

large transport aircraft with a composite fuselage and wings. New test methods (e.g., in-flight fire 

resistance) will be standardized. 

•	 Research will continue on the improvement of existing required flammability tests and the development of 

new tests for novel applications of materials that may impact future aircraft fire safety; namely, new 

magnesium alloy seat structure and other applications which may offer potential large weight savings. 

•	 Research will be undertaken to examine the impact of alternative aviation fuels (e.g., biofuels) on fire 

safety. The initial emphasis will be on fuel tank flammability. 

•	 Long-term, applied research will continue to develop the enabling technology for ultra-fire resistant interior 

materials and facilitate the transfer of that technology to the private sector through patents, reports, 

publications, and international standards. In addition, work will continue on the development of a numerical 

computer model to simulate full-scale aircraft fire tests to determine the improvement in post-crash fire 

survivability provided by ultra-fire resistant interior materials. 

New Initiatives 

No new initiatives are planned in FY 2011. 

A-3 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Fire Safety Improvements 

•	 Determine the feasibility of cost effective fire suppression systems in freighter aircraft. 

•	 Evaluate the effectiveness of current and advanced fire extinguishing agents against lithium battery fires. 

•	 Provide comprehensive guidance on lithium battery fire safety in passenger items and aircraft systems. 

•	 Determine the effectiveness and safety of approved and developmental halon replacement agents for the 

extinguishment of cabin fires with hand-held extinguishers. 

•	 Standardize the new composite flammability test method for in-flight fire resistance. 

•	 Develop a flammability test method for seat structure (e.g., magnesium alloy), if warranted. 

• Determine and compare the fuel tank flammability envelope for candidate alternative fuels and Jet A fuel. 

Fire Resistant Materials 

•	 Fabricate cabin components and assemblies of ultra-fire resistant materials (seat sets, wall/ceiling panels, 

carpeting) and measure component fire behavior. 

•	 Extend the FAA thermal-kinetic burning model (ThermaKin) to two-dimensional to simulate flame spread in 

aircraft cabins for current and ultra-fire resistant materials. 

A-4 
 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 154,998 

FY 2010 Enacted 7,799 

FY 2011 Request 7,231 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

30,094 

200,122

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

Fire Research and Safety 2,816 3,355 2,961 3,495 2,750 

Personnel Costs 3,588 3,650 3,443 3,940 4,118 

Other In-house Costs 234 345 246 364 363

 Total 6,638 7,350 6,650 7,799 7,231 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

6,182 

0 

6,638 

0 

6,638 

0 

7,350 

0 

7,350 

0 

6,650 

0 

6,650 

0 

7,799 

0 

7,231 

0 

7,231 

A-5 
A11.a - Fire Research and Safety FY 2011 Program Schedule 

Product and Activities Request FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 ($000) 

061-110 Fire Research & Safety 

Fire Resistant Materials 300 

Demonstrate numerical burning model for ♦ composites used in AC 

Extend ThermoKin burning model to 2-D for ◊ flame spread in cabins 

Measure fire behavior of current and fire ◊ resistant components and assemblies 

Demonstrate 3-D ThermaKin model for AC ◊ cabins using component fire data 

Evaluate improvement in post-crash fire 

survivability provided by ultra-fire resistant ◊ materials using full-scale fire test 

simulations 

Fire Safety Improvement 2,450 

Examine prototype fuel cell technology for ♦ fire safety risks 

Evaluate freighter fire detection certification ♦ tests 

Determine cost/benefit of freighter ♦ detection/suppression systems 

Examine effectiveness of depressurization ♦ for cargo fire control 

Develop in-flight fire resistance test for ♦ composite materials 

Full-scale tests on magnesium seat structure ♦ 

Determine the feasibility of cost/effective ◊ freighter fire suppression systems 

Evaluate the effectiveness of 

current/advanced agents against lithium ◊ 

batteries 

Provide comprehensive guidance on lithium ◊ battery fire safety 

Determine effectiveness of halon 

replacement agents in hand-held ◊ 

extinguishers 

Standardize composite in-flight fire test ◊ method 

Develop a small-scale test for seat structure, ◊ if warranted 

Determine fuel tank flammability envelope ◊ for alternative fuels 

Define composite fuselage fire-safety design 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

criteria 

Develop a prototype fire hardened cargo 

container for the shipment of lithium 

batteries 

Determine an optimal halon replacement 

agent for cargo compartments based on fullscale fire tests 

Determine the effect of alternative fuels on 

postcrash cabin fire safety 

Develop detection/extinguishing system to 

suppress hidden in-flight fires 

Examine fire safety aspects of aircraft 

oxygen systems 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 4,481 

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 7,231 7,799 7,231 7,350 7,475 7,580 7,689 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-6 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.b Propulsion and Fuel Systems $2,332,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Propulsion and Fuel Systems Program helps achieve FAA’s strategic goal of increasing 

aviation safety by reducing the number of accidents associated with the failure of aircraft engines, components, and 

fuel systems. The program develops technologies, procedures, test methods, and criteria to enhance the 

airworthiness, reliability, and performance of civil turbine and piston engines, propellers, fuels, and fuel management 

systems. To improve safety, the program conducts research needed to develop tools, guidelines, and data to 

support improvements in turbine engine certification requirements. 

Agency Outputs: The FAA issues certification standards, Advisory Circulars, and reviews the specifications and 

practices recommended by recognized technical societies (ASTM International, SAE International) to maintain the 

airworthiness of aircraft engines, fuels, and airframe fuel management systems. The agency also publishes 

information and sponsors technology workshops, demonstrations, and other means of training and technology 

transfer. The Propulsion and Fuel Systems Program provides the technical information, R&D resources, and technical 

oversight necessary for the agency to enhance the airworthiness, reliability, and performance of propulsion and fuel 

systems. 

Research Goals: The main research area within the Propulsion and Fuels Program is to ensure the structural 

integrity and durability of critical rotating engine parts in turbine engines throughout their service life. This research 

is providing analytical tools to meet the requirements of Advisory Circular AC33.14-1, “Damage Tolerance for High 

Energy Turbine Engine Rotors”, allowing aircraft turbine engine manufacturers to assess the risk of fracture and 

manage the life of rotor disks. Research is also being conducted to establish an improved understanding of other 

material factors and manufacturing anomalies that can shorten the fatigue life of rotor disks. 

•	 By FY 2012, develop a design methodology for use by industry to prevent cold dwell fatigue in turbine 

engine rotor disks and define a technique to assess the risk of the current aircraft fleet for cold dwell 

fatigue. 

•	 By FY 2012, develop a certification tool that will predict the risk of failure of rotor disks containing material 

and manufacturing anomalies. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Propulsion and Fuel Systems Program works with the following 

industry and government groups: 

•	 Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the program’s 

activities. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s research projects support new rule making and development of alternate means of 

compliance with existing rules. 

•	 The Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) – working subcommittees on rotor integrity and rotor 

manufacturing.
 

•	 The National Transportation Safety Board – Recommendations A-90-89 and A-90-90, recommend that a 

damage tolerance philosophy be implemented in the design and maintenance of failure critical engine parts, 

and A-98-28 recommends that FAA in cooperation with industry address the uncontained engine failures 

caused by cold dwell fatigue. 

R&D Partnerships: Propulsion and Fuel Systems Program R&D partners include: 

•	 Turbine Rotor Material Design Program - Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) has teamed with Pratt and 

Whitney, General Electric, Honeywell, and Rolls Royce to provide DARWINTM (Design Assessment of 

Reliability With INspection), a probabilistic-based rotor life and risk management certification tool. 

•	 The AIA working subcommittees on rotor integrity and rotor manufacturing. 

A-7 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Accomplishments: Outstanding program accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Released an enhanced version of the DARWINTM probabilistic rotor design code with capabilities for 

automatic rotor modeling. 

•	 Completed experiments to calibrate and verify analytical methods for time-dependent crack growth and 

thermo-mechanical fatigue crack growth. 

•	 Test results on Swift Enterprises high-octane, bio-renewable aviation gasoline were published showing that 

the fuel provided slightly better detonation performance than 100LL, and slightly lower power output than 

100LL and resulted in higher engine operating temperatures. Overall the performance of the fuel showed 

promise and justifies further research. 

•	 Continued laboratory characterization and engine ground testing of candidate unleaded fuels to replace 

100LL avgas. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Released an enhanced version of the DARWINTM probabilistic rotor design code with capabilities for surface 

damage of turned surfaces and blade slots. 

•	 Published final report on full scale engine tests of 45 fuel formulations provided by the CRC. The results 

were used to develop a predictive model used for testing unleaded fuel components and determined that 

unleaded fuels require 3 more octane numbers than leaded fuels for comparable full-scale engine 

detonation performance. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed an enhanced version of the DARWINTM code with the following new features: new analysis mode 

for titanium hard alpha anomalies, probabilistic treatment of multiple anomalies, and a crack formation 

module. 

• Completed full scale engine tests of 45 fuel formulations provided by the CRC. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Continued the enhancement of the DARWINTM probabilistic rotor design code. 

•	 Completed research on an experimental GA fuel provided by Exxon-Mobil under a cooperative research and 

development agreement; results demonstrated that amine-based additives show some promise as a 

replacement for 100LL. 

•	 Completed research investigating the feasibility of using ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), an ethanol fuel 

blend, as a GA fuel; results showed there are significant range penalties associated with this fuel that make 

it an undesirable replacement for 100LL. 

FY 2005: 

• Completed an enhanced version of the DARWINTM code that addresses multiple subsurface defects in 

turbine engine rotor disks. 

Previous Years: 

•	 Populated a rotor manufacturing induced anomaly database for use by the engine industry in sharing 

lessons learned in the manufacture of critical rotating engine parts to prevent future accidents caused by 

manufacturing defects. 

•	 Completed an industrial demonstration of the pool power controller for the vacuum arc remelting process 

that will aid in producing defect-free titanium material for the manufacturer of turbine engine rotor disks. 

•	 Completed research on the performance in a GA piston engine of 30 unleaded fuel formulations specified by 

the CRC Unleaded Aviation Gasoline Development Group. The research showed that none of the candidate 

formulations match the detonation suppression capability of 100LL. 

•	 Demonstrated, verified, and industrialized the probabilistic rotor design and life management code known as 

DARWINTM for titanium alloys that provides turbine engine manufacturers a tool to augment their safe life 

approach. 

•	 Demonstrated and verified the DEFORMTM defect deformation code for analysis of titanium alloy defects 

during the rotor disk forging process. 

A-8 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Proved that the fleet octane requirement is the single most critical parameter for development of high 

octane unleaded aviation gasoline and that the motor octane rating of any potential candidate must be 100 

or greater. 

•	 Defined detonation detection procedures that were adopted by the American Society for Testing and 

Materials as a test standard (ASTM D6424) for use on candidate unleaded replacement fuels. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Turbine Engine Research 

•	 Released an enhanced version of the DARWINTM probabilistic rotor design code with second generation 

capabilities for automatic rotor modeling. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

•	 Continue to advance DARWINTM, the probabilistically based turbine engine rotor design and life 

management code to enhance its predictive capability. This code is an FAA approved means to support a 

damage tolerant based certification enhancement to the current safe life design approach. 

•	 Continue to develop advanced damage tolerance methods for turbine rotor disks through experimentation 

and modeling to address the effects of complex time-temperature stress histories, small crack sizes, 

anomalies in nickel alloys, crack geometries, and surface residual stress on fatigue crack growth life. 

•	 Continue to develop a design methodology for use by industry to prevent cold dwell fatigue in turbine 

engine rotor disks and define a technique to assess the risk of the current aircraft fleet for cold dwell 

fatigue. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Turbine Engine Research 

• Release an enhanced version of the DARWINTM probabilistic rotor design code with capabilities for high 

temperature crack growth and the ability to introduce anomalies at shop visits and during service. 

A-9 
 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 101,585 

FY 2010 Enacted 3,105 

FY 2011 Request 2,332 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 9,555 

Total 116,577 

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

Propulsion And Fuel Systems 2,592 2,463 2,415 1,579 1,200 

Personnel Costs 1,366 1,476 1,168 1,400 1,047 

Other In-house Costs 90 147 86 126 

 Total 4,048 4,086 3,669 3,105 2,332 

OMB Circular A-11, FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Conduct of Research and Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request Development ($000) 

Basic 0 0 0 0 0 

Applied 5,741 4,086 3,669 3,105 2,332 

Development (includes prototypes) 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 4,048 4,086 3,669 3,105 2,332 

A-10 

85
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.b - Propulsion and Fuel Systems FY 2011 Program Schedule 

Product and Activities Request 

($000) 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

063-110 Propulsion and Fuel Systems 

Turbine Engine Research 1200 

Develop a certification tool that will predict the risk ♦ ◊ ◊

of failure of rotor disks containing material and 

manufacturing anomalies 

Release an enhanced version of the DARWINTM ♦

probabilistic rotor design code with second 

generation capabilities for automatic rotor 

modeling 

Release an enhanced version of the DARWINTM ◊

probabilistic rotor design code with capabilities for 

high temperature crack growth and the ability to 

introduce anomalies at shop visits and during 

service. 

Develop design methodology for use by industry to ♦ ◊ ◊

prevent cold dwell fatigue in turbine engine rotor 

disks and define a technique to assess the risk of 

the current aircraft fleet for cold dwell fatigue. 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 1,132 

Total Budget Authority 2,332 3,105 2,332 2,357 2,383 2,399 2,416 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-11 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.c Advanced Materials/Structural Safety $2,566,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Advanced Materials/Structural Safety Program helps FAA achieve its strategic goal of 

increasing aviation safety by preventing accidents that would occur as a result of structural failure. The Advanced 

Materials/Structural Safety Program assesses the safety implications of new and present day composites, alloys, and 

other materials, and associated structures and fabrication techniques that can help to reduce aviation fatalities. The 

program also develops advanced methodologies for assessing aircraft crashworthiness. 

Agency Outputs: The Advanced Materials/Structural Safety Program provides technical support for rule making 

and develops guidance to help the aviation industry comply with agency regulations. 

Advanced Materials 

The FAA establishes rules for the certification of safe and durable materials for use in aircraft construction. While the 

rules are the same for composite or metal structures, different behavioral characteristics of structural materials call 

for different means of compliance. Although Advisory Circular AC 20-107B, “Composite Aircraft Structure” has been 

published, advances in technologies and materials require periodic updates and expansion of the Advisory Circular. 

The FAA Chief Scientist and Technical Advisor disseminates current technical information developed in this program 

to regulatory personnel through technical reports, handbooks, guidance, and policy. The goal of this data exchange 

is to allow regulatory processes to keep pace with industry advances and benefit from state-of-the-art technology 

and design. This provides the most efficient safety and certification information to the FAA certification service and 

industry. 

Structural Safety 

The FAA revises or updates crashworthiness-related Federal Aviation Regulations to accommodate new information 

for overhead stowage bins, auxiliary fuel tanks and fuel systems, aircraft configurations, seat and restraint systems, 

and human tolerance injury criteria. The FAA through this program is developing alternative methods to streamline 

the certification process (i.e. certification by analysis and component tests in lieu of full-scale tests). 

Research Goals: To prevent accidents associated with the airframe use of advanced materials and to improve the 

crashworthiness of airframes in the event of accidents, the Advanced Materials/Structural Safety research focuses on 

developing analytical and testing methods for standardization; understanding how design, loading, and damage can 

affect the remaining life and strength of composite aircraft structures; developing maintenance and repair methods 

that are standardized and correlated with training and repair station capabilities; enhancing occupant survivability 

and reducing personal injury from accidents; improving crash characteristics of aircraft structures, cabin interiors, 

auxiliary fuel tanks, fuel systems, and occupant seat and restraint systems; and improving the efficiency of aircraft 

certification through the use of better analytical modeling of crash events.
 

•	 By FY 2011, develop preliminary full-scale test and analysis protocols for repeated loads and damage 

threats. 

•	 By FY 2012, assess the risks and technical issues associated with severe blunt impact (e.g., ground service 

vehicle collisions). 

•	 By 2011, develop side facing aircraft seat neck injury criteria for low tension/high lateral moment upper 

neck loading. 

•	 By FY 2012, establish design criteria for restraint systems that protect occupants at the highest impact 

levels that the aircraft structure can sustain. 

•	 By FY 2012, quantify critical sandwich panel degradation mechanisms (e.g., disbonding, fluid ingression, 

freeze/thaw). 

•	 By FY 2013, develop criteria for damage tolerance assessments of laminated composite structures. 

•	 By FY 2012, define criteria for use of embedded sensors in fault tolerant structures. 

•	 By FY 2013, generate methodology for demonstrating aircraft structure crashworthiness certification by 

analysis. 

A-12 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 By FY 2014, evaluate field bonded and bolted repair practices to update related guidance and training for 

composite aircraft structures. 

•	 By FY 2014, evaluate the ability of models to predict off-axis and multiple terrain impacts. 

•	 By FY 2015, evaluate existing and emerging bonded airframe technology to update guidelines and 

standards.
 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Advanced Materials/Structural Safety Program complies with or 

cooperates with the following legislation and industrial and government groups: 

•	 Public Law 100-591, the Aviation Safety Research Act of 1988, and House of Representatives Report 100­

894 – sets priorities to develop technologies, conduct data analysis for current aircraft, and anticipate 

problems related to future aircraft. 

•	 The Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) – this FAA committee and its subcommittees help to 

ensure the effectiveness of the agency’s rule making by identifying R&D requirements and priorities, 

providing guidance for the update of documents, such as the Advisory Circular (AC) AC20-107B and 

encouraging industry’s full participation in implementing new rules. 

•	 Aircraft Safety Subcommittee of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the program’s 

activities. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s research projects support new rule making and development of alternate means of 

compliance for existing rules. 

R&D Partnerships: The Advanced Materials/Structural Safety Program benefits from a close working relationship 

with the Joint Center of Excellence (COE) for Advanced Materials and Structures (JAMS) lead by Wichita State 

University and the University of Washington. The research performed under this program is leveraged by the 

monetary and intellectual contributions of its partners including many major commercial aviation companies. 

Advanced Materials 

FAA sponsors with the cooperation of other government agencies and industry, a primary, authoritative handbook 

(Composite Materials Handbook 17) facilitating the statistical characterization data of current and emerging 

composite materials. This international reference tool is the best available data and technology source for testing 

and analysis, and also includes guidance on data development, design, inspection, manufacturing and product usage. 

On recommendations by regulatory guidance, material data contained in this handbook are acceptable for use in the 

certification process. 

Structural Safety 

The program maintains cooperative interagency agreements in the structural safety area with the U.S. Army and 

Navy in the analytical modeling area. 

Memoranda of cooperation and exchange of personnel have been established between the program and the French, 

Italian, and Japanese governments in the crash testing area. The program has worked closely with Drexel University 

to develop dynamic crash computer modeling codes for transport airplane structures. 

Accomplishments: The Advanced Materials/Structural Safety Program provides technical reports (available on-line 

at http//actlibrary.tc.faa.gov), handbooks, ACs, and certification guidance to FAA organizations, aircraft 

manufacturers, maintainers, and operators. Outstanding program accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Documented the technical basis for draft AC 20-107B updates through cooperative efforts with industry on 

bonded structures, damage tolerance, and maintenance practices (e.g., workshops in 2004 through 2008). 

•	 Assessed the scaling affects on dynamic properties of composite materials. 

•	 Work with Commercial Aircraft Safety Team (CAST) to determine bounds of the threats from airport service 

vehicle collisions as related to research on high energy blunt impact. 

•	 Determined typical strain rates of aircraft seats during dynamic loading. 

•	 Compared the Hybrid II anthropomorphic test dummy response to the FAA Hybrid III response for use in 

future certification by analysis modeling. 

A-13 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Demonstrated geometric dependence of composite materials for crash response (flat specimens and curved 

specimens) 

FY 2008: 

• Developed chemical characterization tests to ensure adequate surface preparation for bonded joints. 

•	 Developed safety criteria for damage tolerance of fiber/metal laminates and friction stir welded joints. 

•	 Assessed the severity of control surface stiffness degradation and its effect on dynamic characteristics. 

•	 Developed analytical method to evaluate anthropomorphic test device (ATD) model results for crash testing 

•	 Completed research of computer modeling of aircraft water impacts to help determine revised rotorcraft 

water impact and ditching standards. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Evaluated analytical methods to predict residual strength of composite sandwich structures following an 

impact event. 

•	 Established feasibility of embedded sensors to track damage in composite structures. 

•	 Evaluated aging composite aircraft by a destructive evaluation and testing. 

•	 Developed an updated ATR 42-300 model to analyze critical fuselage frame failure observed in the vertical 

drop test. 

•	 Developed occupant protection criteria for side facing seats commonly used in business jets. Currently, no 

criteria exist. 

•	 Evaluated the use of reticulated foam to mitigate post-crash fires using full-scale sled tests. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Developed software for analyzing bonded joints that can be used by the general aviation industry. 

•	 Developed a web-based course on maintenance of composite airframe structures. 

•	 Developed analytical models that predict durability of braided materials. 

•	 Generated data on human neck injury criteria for side-facing aircraft seats that may be used to develop 

safety criteria for business jet with side-facing seats. Currently, no criteria exist for these seats. 

Previous years: 

•	 Developed an aircraft seat cushion replacement methodology that may have the potential to replace future 

requirement for full-scale sled test currently required when replacing aircraft seat cushions. 

•	 Established common practices for bonded joints in composites structures that served as a basis for a policy 

memo. 

•	 Developed data on the procurement and processing of composites that resulted in a published Advisory 

Circular. 

•	 Analyzed data from ATR42-300 drop test to help establish crashworthiness criteria for commuter aircraft. 

•	 Developed an economical data reduction method, characterizing statistically composite materials through 

shared databases, that is now used worldwide by the general aviation industry. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Advanced Materials 

•	 Continued work with industry to develop consensus for a damage tolerance and fatigue certification 

protocol. 

•	 Initiate work to expand developments in composite training with the initial emphasis on levels of safety 

awareness. 

•	 Initiate studies for the types of threats to composite aircraft structures while at the service gate and on the 

flight line. 

•	 Generate composite material dynamic properties important to crashworthiness. 

•	 Continue work with the FAA Office of Aviation Safety (AVS) in support of AC 20-107B by providing next level 

of protocols, data and guidance through research initiatives. 

A-14 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

• Initiate work with new material forms (e.g., discontinuous fiber composites) that have found application in 

primary aircraft structures. 

Structural Safety 

•	 Continue to develop analytical modeling techniques of aircraft crash conditions. 

•	 Continue to review of the need for off axis analysis capabilities to assist in certification of structures for 

crashworthiness. 

•	 Initiate discussions with EASA and other foreign regulators to evaluate modeling for rotorcraft impact on 

water, soft soil and hard surface. 

•	 Develop guidelines (SAE 5765) to support the use of certification by analysis to streamline aircraft seat 

certification. 

•	 Develop analytical modeling techniques to evaluate head injury criteria to support stream lining of aircraft 

seat certification. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

The program will continue to focus on damage tolerance and fatigue issues of composite airframes. This includes 

assessment of impact damage threats (e.g., in-flight hail, ground vehicle collisions). In addition it will focus on the 

aging of composite materials. Composite control surfaces degradation on transport airplanes will be explored and 

linked to aircraft safety issues. Quality control procedures will be studied for adhesive joints. Important field 

variables will be evaluated for bonded and bolted repairs. Researchers will also explore savings in maintenance 

costs, of using embedded sensors to monitor in-service damage and will investigate the long-term safety of friction 

stir-welded parts and fiber/metal laminates proposed for use in new aircraft. In addition, they will collect data for 

new materials and applications, such as ceramics and high temperatures. 

Research will continue to develop analytical models of aircraft crash events. This will focus on the development of 

criteria and methodologies to validate analysis techniques and assess the effectiveness of the analysis to properly 

describe the crash event. 

New Initiatives 

No new initiatives are planned in FY 2011. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Advanced Materials 

•	 Document accepted certification methodology for damage tolerance and fatigue. including full-scale test and 

analysis protocols for repeated loads and damage threats 

•	 Develop training and conduct workshops to review progress in damage tolerance, adhesive joints and 

maintenance. 

Structural Safety 

•	 Develop analytical modeling protocols and methodologies of aircraft structures crash conditions for 

certification use 

A-15 
 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 101,001 

FY 2010 Enacted 4,935 

FY 2011 Request 2,566 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 10,546 

Total 119,048 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Advanced Materials 

Structural Safety

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

1,211 

 165 

1,394 

73 

2,843 

6,054 

0 

945 

84 

7,083 

1,838 

0 

1022 

60 

2,920 

3,855 

0 

1004 

76 

4,935 

1,250 

0 

1,218 

98

2,566 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total

 0 

2,843 

 2,843 

0 

7,043 

7,083 

0 

2,920 

2,920 

0 

4,935 

2,448 

0 

2,566 

2,566 

A-16 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.c – Advanced Materials/Structural 

Safety 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

062-111 Advanced Materials Structures 

Advanced Materials 

Generate composite material dynamic 

properties important to crashworthiness. 

Continue to provided data to the FAA 

Office of Aviation Safety (AVS) in support 

of AC 20-107B 

Continued work with industry to develop 

consensus for a damage tolerance and 

fatigue certification protocol. 

Initiate work to expand developments in 

composite training with the initial 

emphasis on levels of safety awareness. 

Initiate studies for the types of threats to 

composite aircraft structures while at the 

service gate and on the flight line. 

Document accepted certification 

methodology for damage tolerance and 

fatigue. including full-scale test and 

analysis protocols for repeated loads and 

damage threats 

Develop training and conduct workshops 

to review progress in damage tolerance, 

adhesive joints and maintenance. 

Initiate work with new material forms 

(e.g., discontinuous fiber composites) 

that have found application in primary 

aircraft structures. 

1,250 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

◊

◊

062-110 Structural Safety 

Structural Safety 

Continue to develop analytical modeling 

techniques of aircraft crash conditions. 

Continue to review of the need for off 

axis analysis capabilities to assist in 

certification of structures for 

crashworthiness. 

Develop analytical modeling techniques 

to evaluate head injury criteria to support 

stream lining of aircraft seat certification. 

Develop analytical modeling protocols 

and methodologies of aircraft structures 

crash conditions for certification use 

Develop guidelines (SAE 5765) to support 

the use of certification by analysis to 

streamline aircraft seat certification. 

Initiate discussions with EASA and other 

foreign regulators to evaluate modeling 

for rotorcraft impact on water, soft soil 

and hard surface. 

0 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 1,316 

Total Budget Authority 2,566 4,935 2,566 2,596 2,628 2,650 2,672 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-17 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.d Atmospheric Hazards - Aircraft Icing/Digital System Safety $6,635,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Atmospheric Hazards/Digital System Safety Research Program supports FAA’s strategic 

goal of increased safety by reducing the number of accidents or potential accidents associated with aircraft icing and 

failures to software-based digital flight controls and avionics systems in preparation for the Next Generation Air 

Transportation System (NextGen). The program develops and tests technologies that detect frozen contamination, 

predict anti-icing fluid failure, and ensure safe operations both during and after flight in atmospheric icing conditions.
 

To improve digital system safety, researchers are proactive in ensuring the safe operation of emerging, highly 

complex software-based digital flight controls and avionics systems. 

A major goal of the program is to reduce aviation’s vulnerability to all in-flight icing hazards through the application 

of its research to improve certification criteria. Commercial airplanes are not yet certified to fly in icing conditions to 

an icing envelope that includes supercooled large droplet (SLD) icing conditions. The program’s researchers have 

contributed to the development of technical data and advisory materials to correct this omission. A study by the 

Engine Harmonization Working Group indicates that over 100 in-service engine events, many resulting in power loss 

and at least six in multiple engine flameouts, occurred in high ice water content environments over the period 1988 

to 2003. A current collaborative research effort will address this issue. 

The program will develop new guidelines for testing, evaluating, and qualifying digital flight controls and avionics 

systems for the certification of aircraft platforms. Additionally, the program supports development of policy, 

guidance, technology, and training needs of the Aircraft Certification Service and Flight Standards Service that will 

assist and educate FAA and industry specialists in understanding digital systems safety and assessing how it may be 

safely employed in systems such as fly-by-wire, augmented manual flight controls, navigation and communication
 

equipment, and autopilots. 

Agency Outputs: The FAA establishes rules for the certification and operation of aircraft that encounter icing 

conditions as well as rules for the use of software, digital flight controls, and onboard avionics systems. The agency 

uses the research results to generate ACs, and various other forms of technical information detailing acceptable 

means for meeting requirements, to guide government and industrial certification and airworthiness specialists and 

inspectors.
 

Research Goals: To reduce the number and severity of accidents, or potential accidents, associated with icing and 

failures to software-based digital flight controls and avionics systems, the program develops and assesses ways to 

ensure that airframes and engines can safely operate in atmospheric icing conditions, and ensure the proper 

operation of software, electronic hardware, and digital systems. 

Atmospheric Hazards 

•	 By FY 2011, complete characterization of high ice water content atmospheric environments potentially 

hazardous to engines. 

•	 By FY 2012, complete experimental work on the physics of engine icing in high ice water content 

environments. 

•	 By FY 2013, develop methods for the airworthiness testing of engines in simulated high ice water content 

environments. 

•	 By FY 2014, develop data and methods supporting the evaluation of aircraft engines for operation in high 

ice water content environments. 

Digital System Safety 

•	 By FY 2011, determine potential safety, security, and certification issues of connecting aircraft systems to 

external systems, onboard network security and integrity. 

•	 By FY 2011, develop new methods of evaluation for airborne electronic hardware to include semiconductor 

device wear out, system effects produced by microprocessors, reliability prediction, and lifecycle 

A-18 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

maintenance, while dealing with commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technology in complex and safety-critical 

systems. 

•	 By FY 2013, evaluate development and integration techniques that will produce software for complex highly 

integrated systems that must comply with airworthiness requirements. 

•	 By FY 2013, evaluate airborne electronic hardware techniques and tools for qualification, verification, and 

assurance to develop additional evaluation methods that may improve the certification process for airborne 

electronic hardware. 

•	 By FY 2013, evaluate alternatives to existing verification and validation techniques; improved techniques will 

provide a way to identify system requirement errors early in the development process before 

implementation into the system. 

•	 By FY 2014, determine applicability of safety engineering and reliability engineering to software 

development assurance standards (i.e., Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment 

Certification (DO-178B). 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Atmospheric Hazards/Digital System Safety Research Program 

collaborates with a broad segment of the aviation community to improve aircraft certification, inspection, and 

maintenance, including: 

•	 Aircraft Safety Subcommittee of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the activities of 

the Atmospheric Hazards/Digital System Safety Research Program. 

•	 Technical Community Representatives Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s R&D projects support new rule making and the development of alternate means of 

compliance with existing rules. 

•	 Ice Protection Harmonization Working Group and Engine Harmonization Working Group of the FAA Aviation 

Rulemaking Advisory Committee – groups that ensure the effectiveness of the agency’s rule making. 

Members of the working group and full committee identify research requirements and priorities. 

•	 G-12 Aircraft Ground Deicing Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) – this subcommittee 

assists in updating holdover time guidelines and establishing standards for de/anti-icing methodologies, 

deicing fluids, and ground ice detection. 

•	 SAE AC-9C Aircraft Icing (In-flight) Subcommittee – this subcommittee assists in establishing guidance and 

standards for icing test and simulation methods. 

•	 RTCA (formerly known as Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) – members of this U.S. Federal 

Advisory Committee and its special committees (SC) help to ensure the effectiveness of the agency’s 

rulemaking by identifying research requirements and priorities and providing guidance for Aircraft 

Certification Office engineers and the update of documents, such as avionics software, and electromagnetic 

hazards. 

•	 Certification Authorities Software Team (CAST) – a group of international certification software and AEH 

specialists who collaborate and make recommendations to regulatory authorities on the resolution of 

software and AEH aspects of safety. 

•	 Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) Volpe National Transportation Center – U.S. 

DOT organization that is leading information security research for U.S. transportation and is providing 

collaborative research inputs for the FAA research in aeronautical system security that supports the onboard 

network security goal. 

R&D Partnerships: The program maintains a number of cooperative relationships: 

•	 NASA Glenn Research Center – includes various cooperative efforts on aircraft icing activities. 

•	 Transport Canada – based on an international agreement on research on aircraft ground deicing issues. 

•	 Environment Canada – based on an international memorandum of cooperation for research on in-flight icing 

conditions. 

•	 National Research Council of Canada - based on an international memorandum of cooperation for research 

on engine and airframe icing. 

•	 Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) – partner in field campaign in Darwin, Australia to obtain data in 

high ice water content (HIWC) environments 

A-19 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute (AVSI) – cooperative industry, government, and academia venture for 

investigation and standardization of aerospace vehicle systems to reduce life-cycle cost and accelerate 

development of systems, architectures, tools, and processes. 

Accomplishments: Significant program accomplishments include: 

Aircraft Icing 

FY 2009: 

•	 Completed the development of methods for simulation of ice pellet and some mixed conditions for 

determination of fluid failure and allowance times. 

•	 Completed investigation of runback ice formation and size and velocity effects on aerodynamic impact of 

runback ice for thermal ice protection for simulated flight conditions. 

•	 Continued planning for collaborative flight research to acquire atmospheric data for high ice water content 

environments. 

•	 Continued experimental work on the physics of engine icing in high ice water content environments. 

•	 Completed the development of methods for simulation of ice pellet and some mixed conditions for 

determination of fluid failure and allowance times. 

•	 Initiated development of methods to test engines in simulated high ice water content environments. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Completed analysis of data from propeller icing test at McKinley Climatic Laboratory to provide data for 

guidance to ensure safe flight of propeller aircraft in icing conditions. 

•	 Continued research to characterize high ice water content environments for engines to ensure their safe 

operation in such conditions. 

•	 Continued experimental work on the physics of engine icing in high ice water content environments 

•	 Developed improved methods for simulation of ice pellet, mixed, and other conditions for determination of 

fluid failure and holdover times. 

•	 Continued study of aerodynamic effects of runback ice for thermal ice protection for simulated flight 

conditions. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Conducted propeller icing test in McKinley Climatic Chamber and processed and published data. 

•	 Conducted testing at flight Reynolds numbers on full-scale airfoil model of simulated runback ice for a 

thermal ice protection system. 

•	 Developed technical data for the use of ground ice detectors. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Developed snow generation system to test the time of effectiveness of modern de/anti-icing fluids in a 

controlled laboratory environment. 

•	 Completed development of facility simulation capability for SLD icing testing to show safe operation in SLD 

environments in accordance with new proposed rules. 

•	 Completed documentation and analysis of residual and inter-cycle ice for pneumatic boots at low airspeeds 

to provide data for guidance to ensure safe operation of pneumatic boots on low speed aircraft in icing 

conditions. 

FY 2005: 

• Investigated and documented characteristic features of runback ice for thermal ice protection systems to 

provide data for guidance to ensure safe operation of thermally protected aircraft in icing conditions. 

A-20 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Enhanced in-flight icing simulation capability at the McKinley Climatic Laboratory suitable for testing of full 

scale engines and rotor blades for substantiation of safe operation of engines and helicopters in icing 

conditions. 

Digital System Safety 

FY 2009: 

•	 Determined additional microprocessor evaluation issue that showed there is no consistent method to 

evaluate the safety of systems using these devices at the component or subsystem level and that a systemlevel analysis is required to mitigate this issue at the system level; results used to provide important inputs 

into a Microprocessor Selection and Evaluation Concepts Document. 

•	 Completed the evaluation of Phase 3 onboard network security and integrity issues, which found wired and 

wireless access points to the networks of the aircraft control domain and airline information services domain 

of recently developed large transport aircraft and determined that operational maintenance security 

requirements will impact these two domains plus the in-flight entertainment domain. The results were fed 

into the Phase 4 research effort that includes work with RTCA SC-216. 

•	 Determined that AEH tools can be qualified effectively through an electronic hardware validation all of the 

system requirements and an independent assessment of the tool’s outputs. The results will be used for 

developing policy and guidance. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Determined additional microprocessor evaluation issues pertaining to risk and safety that included advancing 

past the stage of the use of a feature modeling approach to assure microprocessor system safety to a 

system-level behavioral approach; results used to provide important inputs into a Microprocessor Selection 

and Evaluation Concepts Document. 

•	 Evaluated AEH tools to determine the major safety issues in the qualification process and AEH items for 

sufficiency of verification coverage analysis that includes development of criteria. The results will be used 

for developing policy and guidance. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed research of COTS component integration and verification for integrated modular avionics (IMA) 

systems on a generic aviation platform. The results are useful for FAA and industry practitioners of 

integrating IMA systems on aircraft, and will lead to more effective systems development and enhance the 

certification of digital flight controls and avionics systems. The results are published in a technical report 

and handbook. 

•	 Developed and documented evaluation criteria for airworthiness of newly proposed databases that will 

define a suitable approach to develop and evaluate data networks for safety-critical avionics; results will 

provide guidance to FAA certification engineers. 

•	 Defined and documented a safe, secure process for implementing LANs onboard aircraft; results will provide 

a network assurance process for FAA certification engineers. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Completed research on object-oriented technology (OOT) in aviation that will provide input for policy and 

guidance on the use of OOT systems and support harmonization with international certification authorities 

on the use of OOT. 

•	 Evaluated the criteria and use of microprocessors in aviation and the identification of safety concerns for 

microprocessors; results will be used to develop test methods for modern, complex microprocessors that will 

improve the process of certifying aircraft avionics. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Studied deterministic operations of Ethernet equipment and provided evaluation criteria for the certification 

of Ethernet databases; results were incorporated into a handbook that provides network designers with 

guidelines for developing Ethernet databases that will be deployable in certifiable avionics systems. 

•	 Completed research on software development tools that led to a handbook for developers and certifying 

authorities to use to evaluate the tools from the system and software safety perspective and provided a 

basis for future software development tool qualification guidelines. 

A-21 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Completed research on software verification tools that identified specific evaluation criteria that could be 

used to determine whether the performance of the tool was acceptable and thereby improve the ability of 

the certification engineer to qualify software using these tools. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Aircraft Icing 

•	 Initiated collaborative flight research to acquire atmospheric data for high ice water content environments. 

•	 Continued experimental work on the physics of engine icing in high ice water content environments. 

•	 Completed the development of methods for simulation of ice pellet and some mixed conditions for 

determination of fluid failure and allowance times 

•	 Initiated the evaluation of Remote Onboard Ground Ice Detection System (ROGIDS) for pretakeoff 

contamination check and other applications. Results will be used to develop data package for advisory 

material. 

•	 Continued development of methods to test engines in simulated high ice water content environments. 

•	 Initiated research on aerodynamic effects of ice on 3-D lifting surfaces 

Digital System Safety 

•	 Evaluated Phase 5 onboard network security and integrity issues to insure security protection requirements 

are consistent with aircraft safety. 

•	 Continued to evaluate of COTS technology in complex and safety-critical systems for obsolescence and life 

cycle maintenance of aviation electronics. 

•	 Continued to evaluate verification and validation techniques for safety-critical digital systems. 

•	 Completed investigation into the feasibility of using reverse engineering as a viable alternate means of 

compliance for achieving objectives of DO-178B. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

Researchers will continue to refine laboratory methods to determine anti-icing fluid holdover times and allowance in a 

variety of environmental conditions, including new mixed conditions. Investigation of the enhancement and 

validation of icing simulation methods, with an emphasis on engine testing in high ice water content conditions, will 

continue. Researchers will also continue to evaluate onboard network security and integrity issues, software 

development techniques and tools (combined integration and development techniques for highly-integrated aircraft 

systems with verification and validation techniques), and, COTS technology in complex and safety-critical systems. 

New Initiatives 

None. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Aircraft Icing 

•	 Reduced Accidents During Flight In Glaciated, Mixed-phase and Supercooled Large Drop (SLD) Icing 

Conditions 

− Conduct analysis of data for characterization of high ice water content environments potentially 

hazardous to engines. 

− Continue experimental work on the physics of engine icing in high ice water content environments. 

− Develop data and methods supporting the evaluation of aircraft engines for operation in high ice 

water content environments. 

− Continue development of methods to test engines in simulated high ice water content environments. 

•	 Reduced Accidents During Flight In 14 CFR Part 25, Appendix C Icing Conditions
 

− Continue research on aerodynamic effects of ice on 3-D lifting surfaces.
 

A-22 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Reduced Accidents During Takeoffs In Icing Conditions 

− Continue the development of improved methods for simulation of ice pellet and mixed conditions for 

determination of fluid failure and holdover times and allowance times. 

− Continue evaluation of ROGIDS for pretakeoff contamination check and other Begin developing data 

and methods to support the evaluation of aircraft engines for operation in high ice water content 

environments 

Digital System Safety 

•	 Software Development Techniques and Tools 

− Determine software development assurance level for highly integrated aircraft systems 

− Evaluate model-based development criteria considered by industry and address technical and 

certification issues. 

− Continue to evaluate verification and validation techniques for safety-critical digital systems. 

− Complete investigation into the feasibility of using reverse engineering as a viable alternate means of 

compliance for achieving objectives of DO-178B. 

•	 Onboard Network Security and Integrity 

− Complete Phase 5 onboard network security and integrity issues to insure security protection 

requirements are consistent with aircraft safety and certification. Continues input to RTCA SC-216. 

This is a multi-phase activity. 

•	 Airborne Electronic Hardware Design Techniques and Tools 

− Continue to evaluate AEH techniques and tools for qualification, verification, and assurance. 

• COTS Technology in Complex & Safety-Critical Systems 

−	 Continue to evaluate COTS technology in complex and safety-critical systems for obsolescence and 

life cycle maintenance of aviation electronics. 

A-23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 91,657 

FY 2010 Enacted 4,482 

FY 2011 Request 6,635 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 26,842 

Total 129,616 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Digital System Safety 

Atmospheric Hazards – Aircraft Icing 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

842 

1,316 

1,614 

76 

3,848 

737 

1,052 

1,653 

132 

3,574 

1,080 

1,811 

1,832 

115 

4,838 

1,158 

1,526 

1,660 

138 

4, 482 

2,200 

1,919 

2,308 

208

6,635 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

3,848 

0 

3,848 

0 

3,574 

0 

3,574 

0 

4,838 

0 

4,838 

0 

4,482 

0 

4,482 

0 

6,635 

0 

6,635 

A-24 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.d – Atmospheric Hazards – Aircraft 

Icing/Digital System Safety 

Product and Activities 

064-110 Digital System Safety 

Digital System Safety 

Determine software development assurance 

level 

Evaluate model-based development criteria 

Evaluate verification and validation techniques 

Investigate the feasibility of using reverse 

engineering. 

Evaluate onboard network security and 

integrity 

Evaluate AEH techniques and tools for 

qualification, verification, and 

Evaluate COTS technology in complex and 

safety-critical systems 

Determine applicability of safety engineering 

and reliability engineering 

064-111 Atmospheric Hazards-Aircraft Icing 

Aircraft Icing 

Characterize high ice water content 

atmospheric environments for engines and 

conduct analysis 

Conduct experimental work on the physics of 

engine icing in high ice water content 

environments. 

Develop data and methods supporting the 

evaluation of aircraft engines for operation in 

high ice water content environments 

Develop methods to test engines in simulated 

high ice water content environments 

Conduct research on aerodynamic effects of 

ice on 3-D lifting surfaces. 

Develop improved methods for simulation of 

ice pellet, mixed, and other conditions for 

determination of fluid failure and holdover 

times and allowance times 

Evaluate ROGIDS for pre-takeoff 

contamination check and other applications; 

develop data package for SAE spec and 

advisory material 

Conduct research on aerodynamic effects of 

ice on 3-D lifting surfaces. 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

Total Budget Authority 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

2,200 

1,919 

2,516 

6,635 

FY 2010 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

4,482 

Program Schedule 

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊ ◊

◊ ◊

6,635 6,675 6,715 

FY 2014 

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

6,722 

FY 2015 

◊

◊

6,730 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-25 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.e Continued Airworthiness 10,801,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Continued Airworthiness (formerly known as the Continued Airworthiness/ Aging Aircraft 

Program) contributes to FAA’s strategic goal of increasing aviation safety by reducing the number of accidents 

associated with failure of aircraft structure, engines, and systems. The program promotes the development of 

technologies, procedures, technical data, and performance models to prevent accidents and mitigate accident 

severity related to civil aircraft failures as a function of their continued operation and usage. The program is focused 

on long-term maintenance of the structural integrity of fixed wing aircraft and rotorcraft, continued safety of aircraft 

engines, development of inspection technologies, and safety of electrical wiring interconnect systems (EWIS), 

mechanical systems, and flight controls. 

Agency Outputs: The FAA issues rules and advisory materials for regulating aircraft design, construction, 

operation, modification, inspection, maintenance, repair, and safety. Further understanding of the technologies, 

procedures, technical data, and analytical models produced by the Continued Airworthiness Program provide a major 

source of technical information used in developing these regulations and related advisories. Through this research,
 

FAA also works with industry to provide the aviation community with critical new safety technologies and data. 

Research Goals: The goal of the Continued Airworthiness Program is to understand and develop methods to 

counter the effects of age and usage on the airworthiness of an aircraft over its lifetime, including potential effects of 

modifications and repairs. The program conducts research in developing technologies and processes, and assesses 

current practices in order to eliminate or mitigate the potential failures related to aircraft aging processes, thereby 

reducing the number and severity of accidents. 

To satisfy these goals the program conducts research to assess causes and consequences of airplane structural 

fatigue, corrosion, and other structural failures, and develop effective analytical tools to predict the behavior of these 

conditions. This includes research on nondestructive inspection (NDI) technologies being developed to detect these 

conditions. Similar research is conducted on aircraft engines and rotorcraft. Aircraft systems research to understand 

the causes and consequences of EWIS and mechanical systems failures, and the relationship of these failures to 

other aircraft systems and safety completes the program. 

•	 BY FY 2011, complete a study of safe life and risk-based fleet management for small-airplane continued 

operational safety. 

•	 By FY 2011, assess performance of in-situ damage detection technologies for inspection of remote and 

inaccessible areas in aircraft. In-situ monitoring provides the means to monitor structural behavior and 

identify damage not normally found between major maintenance checks. 

•	 By FY 2011, complete study to assess need for new rudder design standards in transport category aircraft 

and need for new pilot training standards with regard to rudder usage. 

•	 BY FY 2012, assess performance of traditional and advanced inspection systems necessary for evaluating 

the strength of bonded aircraft structures. The continued airworthiness of bonded aircraft structures, 

whose use is increasing, will require technologies to find hidden damage in these joints. 

•	 By FY 2013, develop technical data on rotorcraft that provide guidance for certification of Health and Usage 

Monitoring Systems (HUMS) for usage credits. 

•	 By FY 2013, develop a predictive methodology for damage tolerance risk assessment and risk management 

for continued operational safety of small airplanes. 

•	 By FY 2013, assess performance of an advanced inspection system for identifying environmental damage of 

composite structures, such as by chemical, UV, and water ingress. 

•	 By FY 2014, provide technical data to develop guidelines for implementing structural health monitoring 

(SHM) in commercial transport category airplanes. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Continued Airworthiness Program coordinates with an extensive 

network of government and industry groups, including: 

A-26 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review program activity, 

progress, and plans. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s research projects support new rule making and the development of alternate means of 

compliance with existing rules. 

•	 Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committees – industry representatives propose cost-effective rulemaking and 

research to address aircraft safety issues. 

•	 Aircraft manufacturers, operators, foreign airworthiness authorities, academia, and industry trade groups 

consult on a wide range of current and future aging aircraft and continued airworthiness issues. 

R&D Partnerships: The Continued Airworthiness Program activities are closely coordinated with industry, NASA, 

and the Department of Defense (DoD). The FAA maintains interagency agreements with NASA, the U.S. Navy, the 

U.S. Air Force, and the Department of Energy. The FAA, DoD, and NASA have co-sponsored 12 joint Aging Aircraft 

Conferences. 

The FAA collaborates closely with several private and public organizations, including: 

•	 Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization (MMPDS) Government/Industry Steering 

Group – a joint government and industry working group that funds and develops the metallic materials 

properties handbook. 

•	 Cooperative Research and Development Agreement with Boeing for joint research on structural integrity of 

bonded repair and emerging structural technologies. 

Accomplishments: The Continued Airworthiness Program conducts a broad array of projects to meet the goals 

described above. Technical reports documenting the accomplishments of most projects are available on-line at 

http://actlibrary.tc.faa.gov. 

Outstanding program accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Developed a comprehensive analysis tool for the risk assessment and risk management of small airplane 

continued operational safety with regard to fatigue crack initiation. 

•	 Completed initial phase of joint research with Boeing on the structural integrity of bonded repair technology 

at FAA’s full-scale structural test and evaluation (FASTER) facility 

•	 Completed studies to quantitatively determine the impact of process variables on the performance of FPI 

and integrate results into industry inspection standards. 

•	 Completed initial evaluation of thermal acoustic technology as a potential replacement for FPI in inspecting 

critical engine components. 

•	 Completed testing of single-element, dual-load-path flight control linkages from transport category aircraft 

for corrosion and other anomalies that could affect safety. 

•	 Completed upgrade of Arc Fault Evaluation Laboratory to accommodate more sophisticated separation and 

segregation testing of aircraft wiring (EWIS research). 

FY 2008: 

•	 Developed software for predictive methodology for the risk assessment and risk management of small 

airplane continued operational safety with regard to fatigue crack initiation. 

•	 Completed assessment of reliability of various advanced inspection technologies in detecting second layer 

cracks in typical transport aircraft fuselage structure. 

•	 Completed validation and demonstration of HUMS processes and methods for flight regime recognition on 

Bell 206 rotorcraft using the HUMS AC. 

•	 Completed initial study on certification standards and design issues for rudder control systems. 

•	 Completed an advanced risk assessment tool for conducting hazard analysis of EWIS systems. The tool 

used a probabilistic method to support compliance with FAR 25.1309 requirements. 

A-27 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed the airworthiness evaluation of an aged Raytheon Beech 1900D. 

•	 Completed the destructive and extended fatigue testing of fuselage sections from a retired Boeing 727. 

Results support formulation of policy on use of teardown data for airworthiness certification. 

•	 Conducted the field test of a magnetic carpet probe for rapid and wide-area inspection of aircraft engine 

critical rotating components. 

•	 Completed assessment of ASTM and new fatigue crack growth test methods for use in addressing rotorcraft 

fatigue life. 

•	 Developed methodology to evaluate mechanical systems on current transport category aircraft for safety 

and reliability. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Completed development of the MMPDS Handbook of FAA accepted material properties, which replaces MILHDBK-5 previously cancelled by the DoD. The MMPDS Handbook is an essential reference for aircraft 

manufacturer design engineers and is used by FAA for aircraft certification. 

•	 Completed aircraft wire degradation research on common types of aircraft electrical wire as a function of 

laboratory controlled aging processes. Data generated are used to evaluate potential methods of 

monitoring wire performance in aircraft and wire reliability assessment methods. 

•	 Completed research on the use of composite doublers as a safer, more cost-effective means for repair of 

damaged metallic aircraft structure. 

•	 Completed development of a low cost, field prototype, generic scanning and imaging system that can be 

readily coupled to existing aircraft inspection devices, thereby improving flaw detection in metal and 

composite structure. 

•	 Completed second-phase development of a magnetic carpet probe for rapid and wide-area inspection of 

aircraft engine critical rotating components. This technology is a potential replacement of fluorescent 

penetrant inspection (FPI). 

Previous Years: 

•	 Established the FAA Arc Fault Evaluation Laboratory and initiated the evaluation of advanced circuit 

protection technologies and experiments to quantify damage created by arc fault conditions. 

•	 In cooperation with industry, developed, validated, and facilitated the adoption of improved inspection 

procedures for detecting cracks and corrosion in rotorcraft. 

•	 Demonstrated phased array inspection technology for critical engine titanium forgings. Phased array 

technology reliably detects smaller material flaws in critical engine component forgings. 

•	 Developed rotorcraft component damage part database that allows determination of the origin and causal 

factors of rotorcraft structure and component failures. 

•	 Developed the fatigue crack growth database that is used in support of damage tolerance assessments of 

airframe structure. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Developed and validated a model-assisted probability of detection methodology to determine quantitative 

inspection reliability data, eliminating the need to conduct expensive and time consuming tests currently 

required to establish inspection reliability. Accurate probability of detection data is critical to determining the 

life of safety critical components. 

•	 Continued development of probabilistic structural risk assessment and risk management methodologies for 

small airplanes. 

•	 Continued damage tolerance and durability research for emerging structural technologies such as integral 

structure fabricated by friction stir welding to ensure safety, support maintenance, and support future 

certification policies and guidance. 

•	 Developed technical data for certification process for rotorcraft HUMS systems using condition-based 

maintenance approach for mechanical systems. 

A-28 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Completed interim reliability assessments of conventional and advanced inspection devices to detect hidden 

flaws in thick, complex composite laminates. 

•	 Completed study on usage, design, and training issues for rudder control systems in transport aircraft. 

•	 Completed development of damage-tolerant design methods for aircraft propellers 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

The FY 2011 funding request will support Continued Airworthiness Program research requirements that contribute to 

FAA’s aviation safety goal. The program will continue its focus on providing data on developing technologies, 

technical information, procedures, and practices that help ensure the safety of aircraft structures and systems in the 

civil aircraft fleet. Research will continue on the development of certification processes for HUMS systems for 

rotorcraft, and on monitoring the development of health monitoring systems for commercial airplanes. Research will 

continue on the development and evaluation of risk assessment and risk management methods for the continued 

operational safety of small airplanes. Research will continue on flight controls and mechanical systems, focusing on 

assisting pilots with advanced displays and systems to avoid problems in both transport category and general 

aviation airplanes. Researchers will also continue efforts on investigation of nondestructive inspection techniques for 

critical engine components. Research on nondestructive inspection of structures will continue its focus on the 

development of methods and technologies to assure the long term safety of metallic, composite, and bonded 

structures. Finally, research will begin on advanced electrical power systems for NextGen use. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Developed EWIS separation and segregation advisory guidance. This research supports development of 

guidelines for the design and modification of aircraft EWIS and improves safety by ensuring that adequate 

clearances for EWIS separation and segregation are provided in EWIS installation. 

•	 Complete a study of safe life and risk-based fleet management for small airplane continued operational 

safety. 

•	 Continue damage tolerance and durability research for emerging structural technologies to ensure safety, 

support maintenance, and support future certification policies and guidance. 

•	 Continue to lead the MMPDS steering group in updating metallic properties handbook. 

•	 Continue research to develop rotorcraft data that provide guidance for the certification of HUMS systems for 

usage credits. 

•	 Develop technical data on regulatory issues for ongoing fly-by-wire and fly-by-light working groups. 

•	 Continue research to develop the potential of advanced or emerging NDI techniques for critical engine 

components. 

•	 Assess advanced inspection systems to perform large area inspection of composite airplane components. 

•	 Develop enhanced models of full stall departure characteristics for transport airplanes. 

•	 Develop functional, safety, and certification information for advanced flight displays to meet NextGen 

trajectory management needs. 

•	 Continue research on minimum performance criteria and certification requirements for automatic envelope 

protection and automation systems for general aviation. 

•	 Conduct research to develop technical data to evaluate and assess commercial aircraft health monitoring 

systems for certification and continued airworthiness requirements. 

•	 Develop technical data for standards on NextGen electrical power systems and components. 

A-29 
 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 405,544 

FY 2010 Enacted 10,944 

FY 2011 Request 10,801 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 43,582 

Total 470,871 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted 

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Continued Airworthiness 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

14,211 

4,159 

251 

18,621 

11,679 

3,946 

320 

15,945 

9,839 

4,447 

303 

14,589 

6,847 

3,831 

266 

10,944 

6,949 

3,517 

335

10,801 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

18,621 

0 

18,621 

0 

15,945 

0 

15,945 

0 

14,589 

0 

14,589 

0 

10,944 

0 

10,944 

0 

10,801 

0 

10,801 

A-30 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11e –Continued Airworthiness FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Product and Activities 

065-110 Continued Airworthiness 

Structural Integrity and Inspection 

Systems Research 3718 

Develop risk-based fleet management 

methods for small-airplane continued 

operational safety 

Conduct research on application of damage 

tolerance methods to emerging structural 

technologies 

Continue to lead the MMPDS steering group 

in updating metallic properties handbook 

Assess damage detection technologies for 

remote/inaccessible areas in aircraft 

Investigate advanced NDI systems for 

composite and bonded structures. 

Rotorcraft Structural Integrity and Safety 1150 

Establish guidance for certification of HUMS 

applications for usage credits 

Investigate regulatory issues for ongoing flyby-wire and fly-by-light working groups 

Continued Airworthiness of Aircraft 

Engines 569 

Develop monitoring of machining process to 

prevent manufacturing-induced surface 

anomalies on critical engine components 

Develop potential of advanced NDI 

techniques for critical engine components. 

Continued Airworthiness of Aircraft 

Systems 1512 

Provide technical guidance on pilot rudder 

usage, design, and training issues 

Develop enhanced models of full stall 

departure characteristics for transports 

Develop data for advanced flight displays to 

meet NextGen trajectory management needs 

Continue research on envelope protection 

and automation systems for general aviation 

Assess EWIS separation and segregation 

standards and develop advisory guidance 

Develop technical data to evaluate and 

assess aircraft health monitoring systems 

Develop technical data for standards on 

NextGen electrical power systems and 

components 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 3,852 

Total Budget Authority 10,801 

FY 2010 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

10,944 

FY 2011 

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

10,801 

Program Schedule 

FY 2012 FY 2013 

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

10,856 10,911 

FY 2014 

◊

◊

◊

10,909 

FY 2015 

◊

◊

10,906 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-31 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.f Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research $1,165,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program supports FAA’s strategic goal of 

increasing aviation safety by reducing the number of fatal accidents from uncontained engine failures and engine 

malfunctions. The program develops technologies and methods to assess risk and prevent occurrence of potentially 

catastrophic defects, failures, and malfunctions in aircraft, aircraft components, and aircraft systems. Its researchers 

assess the use of advanced materials to protect aircraft critical systems and passengers in the event of catastrophic 

engine failures. The program also uses historical accident data and National Transportation Safety Board 

recommendations to examine and investigate: 

•	 Turbine engine uncontainment events, including the mitigation and modeling of aircraft vulnerability to 

uncontainment parameters stated in AC 20-128, Phase II. 

•	 Fan blade out analysis and other engine related impact events like bird strike and ice ingestion. 

•	 Propulsion malfunction indications in response to Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) recommendations 

and proposed solutions. 

Agency Outputs: With technical data from the Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program, FAA establishes 

certification criteria for aircraft and revises regulations to certify new technologies. The agency also publishes ACs to 

outline acceptable means for meeting these rules. The program’s objective is to ensure safe aircraft operation in the 

public domain. 

Research Goals: To reduce the number of fatal accidents from uncontained engine failures, the program develops 

data and methods for evaluating aircraft vulnerability to uncontained engine failures and provides analytical tools for 

protecting identified critical systems that may need shielding from uncontained engine debris. Through the LSDYNA 

Aerospace Users Group, FAA is working with industry to establish standards for finite element analysis and guidance 

for use in support of certification. 

•	 Continue through 2014, the FAA/NASA/Industry sponsored quality control program for modeling aircraft 

impact problems. 

•	 By 2013 develop and verify a generalized damage and failure model with regularization (MAT 224) for 

aluminum and titanium materials impacted during engine failure events. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The program collaborates with a broad cross section of the aviation 

community, including: 

•	 Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the program’s 

activities. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s research projects support new rule making and development of alternate means of 

compliance with existing rules. 

•	 The Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) – helps to ensure the effectiveness of the agency’s 

rule making. Members of the subcommittee and full committee identify research requirements, priorities, 

and provide guidance for the update of documents such as AC20-128, and encourage industry’s full 

participation in implementing new rules. 

R&D Partnerships: The Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program partners with industry and other 

government agencies including: 

•	 NASA and industry in support of the development and validation of explicit finite element analysis. The 

industry participates in the LSDYNA Aerospace Users Group to support quality control reviews of the code 

and also critique research objectives in material testing, model development and verification. NASA and 

FAA are teamed to develop high quality test data and analytical models that support the Aerospace Users 

Group efforts. The end goal is to develop guidance for the use of LSDYNA in the certification process. 

A-32 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 The AIA Transport Committee – with participation of FAA and industry, has examined propulsion system 

malfunctions, identified inappropriate crew response, and recommended development of specific regulations 

and advisory materials to correct safety hazards. 

Accomplishments: Results of Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program research provide the technical basis 

for FAA rule changes and new or modified ACs. Researcher results are also provided to airframe and engine 

manufacturers and designers. 

Engine Uncontainment Research 

FY 2009: 

•	 Continued FAA/NASA/industry sponsored quality control program for modeling aircraft problems in the 

manufacturer’s supported finite element code (LSDYNA). 

•	 Completed testing of 2024 aluminum necessary to populate the new Material Model 224 failure map in 

LSDYNA. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Continued FAA/NASA/Industry sponsored quality control program for modeling aircraft problems in the 

manufacturer's supported finite element code (LSDYNA) 

•	 Continued to improve material models for incorporation into the LSDYNA code that are verified and 

accepted by the aerospace users group as standardized models. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed testing and modeling of fabrics used in gas turbine engine containment systems. Test results 

will be compared with analytical results from fabric model version 3.1 

•	 Completed testing and material model development for aluminum using the Johnson-Cook formula. 

•	 Developed an oversight process that ensures consistent results as computers and programs continue to 

evolve for generic aerospace problems run in LSDYNA 

FY 2006: 

•	 Delivered the UEDDAM, version 3.0 for evaluation of uncontained engine debris hazards to aircraft. 

UEDDAM uses a Monte Carlo approach to perform the vulnerability analysis in design cases where the 

released multiple fragments are analyzed. 

• Conducted a workshop for the Department of Defense and ARAC on UEDDAM in November 2005. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Developed fabric attachment data and designs for fuselage shielding. Fabric material models were used to 

design full scale shields to be tested in an aircraft fuselage. 

•	 Completed full-scale fabric shielding demonstration test of various fabric attachment designs in a retired 

commercial airplane at Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC), China Lake. 

Previous Years: 

•	 Conducted a workshop for engine certification engineers on non-linear finite element modeling of turbine 

engine containment systems at the Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO). 

•	 Completed a collaborative effort with NASA, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Air Force to perform the first fullscale engine disk crack detection demonstration. 

•	 Developed test data and improved analytical modeling of fabric shielding with revision to the fabric material 

model. 

•	 Conducted a workshop for engine certification engineers on non-linear finite element modeling of turbine 

engine containment systems at the Boston ACO. 

•	 Developed a significant database of small and full-scale test data to understand the interaction of multiple 

ballistic fabric layers in engine fan blade out containment systems. 

Propulsion Malfunction 

FY 2009: 

•	 Propulsion malfunction research completed a demonstration of the information-based display for the engine 

lubrication system. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Continued to develop an information-based oil display system. 

A-33 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed detailed study of propulsion malfunctions classified as mechanical damage. Research developed 

a set of indications that can be added to the flight deck as indications and annunciations to inform the crew 

that a malfunction exists on a specific engine. This effort recommended a focused follow-on effort to study 

an information based oil system display. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Completed detailed study of propulsion malfunctions classified as Sustained Thrust Anomalies. Research 

developed a set of indications that can be added to the flight deck as indications and annunciations to 

inform the crew that a malfunction exists on a specific engine. 

Previous Years: 

•	 Completed an in-depth analysis of 80 in-service propulsion system malfunctions and developed 

recommendations for potential propulsion indication improvement.
 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop a modular Uncontained Engine Debris Damage Assessment Model (UEDDAM) (version 4) to be 

compatible with Department of Defense code upgrades for supportability and incorporate industry 

recommended improvements. 

•	 Continue FAA/NASA/industry sponsored quality control program for modeling aircraft problems in the 

manufacturer’s supported finite element code (LSDYNA). 

•	 Complete development of Material Model 224 for fragments impacting 2024 aluminum structure. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

Research will continue on the NASA/FAA/industry program for modeling aircraft engine failures in LSDYNA. The 

FAA/NASA/academia will continue to evaluate improved material models and incorporate them into LSDYNA upon 

acceptance by the Aerospace Users Group. Users’ guidelines and training will continue to be developed and made 

available through George Washington University. 

New Initiatives 

No new initiatives are planned in FY 2010. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Engine Uncontainment Research 

•	 Continue FAA/NASA/industry sponsored quality control program for modeling aircraft problems in the 

manufacturer’s supported finite element code (LSDYNA). 

•	 Complete testing of titanium necessary to populate the material failure map of LSDYNA MAT224 

•	 Continue collaboration with NAWC China Lake to maintain the UEDDAM code 

A-34 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 36,510 

FY 2010 Enacted 1,545 

FY 2011 Request 1,165 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 4,701 

Total 43,921 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Aircraft Catastrophic Failure 

Prevention Research 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

947 

533 

32 

1,512 

1,684 

482 

36 

2,202 

0 

415 

21 

436 

947 

555 

43 

1,545 

750 

384 

31

1,165 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

1,512 

0 

1,512 

0 

2,202 

0 

2,202 

0 

436 

0 

436 

0 

1,545 

0 

1,545 

0 

1,165 

0 

1,165 

A-35 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.f - Aircraft Catastrophic Failure 

Prevention Research FY 2011 

Request 

Program Schedule 

Product and Activities ($000) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

066-110 Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention 

Research 

Engine Uncontainment Research 750 

Continue FAA/NASA/industry sponsored 

quality control program for modeling aircraft 

problems in the manufacturer’s supported ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

finite element code (LSDYNA) 

Complete development of Material Model 224 

for fragments impacting 2024 aluminum ♦

structure 

Develop modular UEDDAM Code (version 4) ♦

Continue collaboration with NAWC China Lake 

to maintain the UEDDAM code ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Complete Testing of Titanium necessary to 

populate the material failure map in LSDYNA ◊

MAT224 

Complete verification of MAT 224 for 

Aluminum and Titanium ◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 415 

Total Budget Authority 1,165 1,545 1,165 1,171 1,177 1,177 1,176 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-36 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Target-Level Request 

A11.g Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors $7,174,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety and Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: The Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors Program helps achieve 

FAA’s Flight Plan goals for increased safety and greater capacity by: 

•	 Developing more effective methods for pilot, inspector, and maintenance technician training. 

•	 Enhancing the understanding and application of risk and error management strategies in flight and 

maintenance operations. 

•	 Increasing human factors considerations in certifying new aircraft and in equipment design and 

modification. 

•	 Improving pilot, inspector, and maintenance technician task performance. 

•	 Developing requirements, knowledge, guidance, and standards for design, certification, and use of 

automation-based technologies, tools, and support systems. 

•	 Addressing human task/performance and human-system task/performance requirements associated with 

transitioning NextGen capabilities. 

Agency Outputs: The Human Factors Research and Engineering Program provides the research foundation for FAA 

guidelines, handbooks, advisory circulars, rules, and regulations that help to ensure the safety and efficiency of 

aircraft operations. It also develops human performance information that the agency provides to the aviation 

industry for use in designing and operating aircraft, and training pilots and maintenance personnel. 

Research Goals: 

By FY 2012: 

•	 Develop flight path and energy state management guidance for air carrier flight deck training systems and 

procedure design. 

•	 Provide human factors guidance for Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) equipment design 

and operation. 

•	 Provide human factors guidelines for advanced instrument procedure design and use. 

•	 Provide guidance for fatigue mitigation in the maintenance environment. 

•	 Define the work, task, education, and training requirements for the NextGen era aircraft maintenance 

technician. 

•	 Address human automation integration issues regarding the certification of pilots, procedures, training, 

maintenance, and equipment associated with enhanced communication/navigation/surveillance (CNS)/Air 

Traffic Management (ATM) operations necessary to achieve NextGen capabilities. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: Program researchers work directly with colleagues in FAA, other 

government agencies, academia, and industry to support the following R&D programs and initiatives: 

•	 NASA’s Aviation Safety Program. 

•	 The FAA’s Voluntary Safety Program Office initiatives including Advanced Qualification Program (AQP), Flight 

Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA), and Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP). 

•	 The FAA/Industry Safer Skies initiative – analyzes U.S. and global data to find the root causes of accidents 

and proposes the means to prevent their occurrence. 

•	 The FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – Representatives from industry, 

academia, and other government agencies annually review the activities of the program and provide advice 

on priorities and budget. 

A-37 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

R&D Partnerships: The Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human Factors Program collaborates with 

industry and other government programs through: 

•	 Joint Safety Analysis Teams and Joint Safety Implementation Teams within the Safer Skies Agenda – 

coordinated with NASA and industry, these efforts stress human factors issues in developing intervention 

strategies for the reduction of air carrier and general aviation accidents. 

•	 DoD Human Factors Engineering Technical Advisory Group – FAA participates in this group to promote a 

joint vision for automation and related technical areas. 

•	 Domestic and international aviation maintenance industry partners like Boeing, Continental Airlines, British 

Airways, and the International Association of Machinists– the emphasis is on achieving research results that 

can be applied to real-world problems. 

•	 Society of Automotive Engineers G-10 subcommittees – FAA participates on all of the Society’s 

subcommittees involving human factors to adapt their findings to aviation standards, guidelines, etc. 

•	 Fifteen FAA cooperative research agreements with universities supporting research on air carrier training, 

flight deck automation, aviation accident analysis, general aviation, and aviation maintenance technician and 

inspector training. 

Accomplishments: The program’s accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Completed study addressing non-alert symbology for Airborne Separation Assurance Systems to assist RTCA 

SC-186 Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) Working Group in addressing non-concurrence in the 

preliminary Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) document. 

•	 Developed countermeasures crew multi-tasking. 

•	 Developed best practices for Line Operations Safety Audits (LOSA). 

•	 Completed Aviation Maintenance Safety Action Program Maintenance Program Development Handbook. 

• Developed small unmanned aerial systems (UAS) Maintenance Handbook. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Conducted research and provided results to SAE International Aerospace Behavioral Engineering Technology 

Committee to update an aerospace industry recommended practice on electronic symbols. Aerospace 

recommended practices are used by industry to demonstrate means of compliance with FAA regulations. 

•	 Completed Human Factors Analysis and Classification System on-line database. This provides capability for 

FAA personnel to access key human factors information associated with NTSB accident investigations from 

1990-2006. 

•	 Completed research on electronic flight bag (EFB) related safety events. Results will be used to update an 

Advisory Circular and a new Flight Standards handbook on EFBs. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed development of human factors Certification Job Aid for FAR Parts 25 and 23 flight decks. 

•	 Completed development of the Human Factors Certification Job Aid and made it available to the aviation 

community through a web site application. 

•	 Disseminated to the scientific community findings regarding simulator platform motion and its impact on 

pilot performance during specific maneuvers. 

•	 Completed an international survey of human factors programs in maintenance organizations, providing 

information on training, error management, fatigue management, and other issues for FAA and industry. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Updated the Human Factors Certification Job Aid with Part 25 Advisory Circulars and information on design 

of flight deck equipment, tasks and procedures, and testing assumptions. The job aid helps government 

and industry to minimize the likelihood of design induced human performance errors. 

•	 Developed practical customized assessment tools to help FAA certifiers and inspectors, system designers 

and operators standardize and streamline evaluations of electronic flight bags. 

•	 Improved a LOSA methodology that has been adopted by the International Civil Aviation Authority (ICAO) to 

help air carriers identify human-centered safety vulnerabilities. 

A-38 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Information Management and Display 

•	 Developed research platform and initiated instrument procedures design research project addressing 

charting and depiction of performance based navigation procedures. 

•	 Conducted usability assessment of surface moving maps that display township position in surface 

operations.
 

•	 Updated human factors guidance for electronic flight bag certification, operational approval and training, 

based on performance data. 

•	 Developed guidance to address human factors issues associated with use of synthetic vision for primary and 

multifunction displays. 

•	 Developed proactive methods for general aviation data collection to facilitate risk assessment and accident 

prevention. 

Human-Centered Automation 

•	 Developed research platform to support research that will provide guidance for use by FAA Certification and 

Flight Standards personnel to evaluate traffic displays and traffic applications/operations that use ADS-B 

technology. 

•	 Investigated automation and new technology impacts on aviation maintenance process, safety, tasks, 

technician skills, and need for regulation. 

•	 Developed advanced automation training tools for pilots reflecting results of an industry study and 

Performance-Based Operations Aviation Rule-Making Committee (PARC) team data. 

• Developed human factors guidance for advanced autopilots and automation technologies in small airplanes. 

Human Performance Assessment 

•	 Developed the Maintenance LOSA safety audit tools for maintenance and ramp operations that will evaluate 

a maintenance organization’s effectiveness. 

•	 Developed guidance materials, tools, and administrative process to manage and/or regulate aircraft 

maintainer fatigue. 

•	 Provided human factors guidance for the operation of UAS within the NAS. 

•	 Continued to develop improved methods to report, record and analyze flight safety data to reduce the 

likelihood of air carrier incidents and accidents. 

Selection and Training 

•	 Continued development of international standards for simulator fidelity. 

•	 Developed training for visual approaches for low-time pilots. 

•	 Developed best practices for Voluntary Safety Data teams. 

•	 Determined the appropriate training intervals to reduce pilot skill decay. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The program will continue to focus on providing technical information and advice to improve pilot, inspector, 

maintenance technician, and aviation system performance. The emphasis will remain on developing guidelines, 

tools, and training to enhance error capturing and mitigation capabilities in the flight deck and maintenance 

environments, and on developing human factors tools to ensure that human performance considerations are 

adequately addressed in the design, certification, and operational approval of flight decks, equipment, and 

procedures. Additional emphasis will be placed on encouraging maintenance shops and repair stations to have 

human factors maintenance programs and to offer maintenance human factors training. 

Ongoing Activities 

Information Management and Display 

•	 Identify human factors issues in instrument procedures design. 

•	 Develop guidance for moving map displays in surface operations. 

•	 Develop guidance to address human factors issues associated with using synthetic vision for primary and 

multifunction displays. 

A-39 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Human-Centered Automation 

•	 Develop human factors guidance for ADS-B equipment certification and operational approval. 

•	 Investigate and revise technician skill, knowledge, and work force needs for emerging aviation and groundair integrated maintenance personnel and determine potential for new guidance materials and updated 

regulation. 

•	 Develop advanced automation training tools for pilots reflecting results of an industry study and 

Performance-Based Operations Aviation Rule-Making Committee (PARC) team data. 

• Develop human factors guidance for advanced autopilots and automation technologies in small airplanes. 

Human Performance Assessment 

•	 Design a safety audit tool for maintenance and ramp operations to evaluate a maintenance organization’s 

effectiveness. 

•	 Identify effective methods for mitigating maintainer fatigue. 

• Provide human factors guidance for the operation of UAS within the NAS. 

Selection and Training 

•	 Develop guidance and training material to improve consistency of safety team decisions. 

•	 Identify training and checking approaches for jet upset recovery using advanced and existing simulators. 

•	 Continue development of international standards for simulator fidelity. 

New Initiatives 

Human-Centered Automation 

•	 Investigate safety and task impacts and process changes to maintenance caused by automation, new 

technologies, and air-ground integration. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Information Management and Display 

•	 Completed instrument procedures design research project addressing charting and depiction of performance 

based navigation procedures and produce draft report. 

•	 Complete usability assessment of surface moving maps that display township position in surface operation 

report. 

•	 Update human factors guidance for electronic flight bag certification, operational approval and training 

based on performance data. 

•	 Develop guidance to address human factors issues associated with using synthetic and enhanced vision to 

support equivalent visual operations. 

Human-Centered Automation 

•	 Develop human factors guidance for ADS-B equipment certification and operational approval. 

•	 Investigate and revise technician skill, knowledge, and work force needs for emerging aviation and groundair integrated maintenance personnel and determine potential for new guidance materials and updated 

regulation. 

•	 Investigate safety and task impacts and process changes to maintenance caused by automation, new 

technologies, and air-ground integration. 

•	 Develop human factors guidance for advanced autopilots and automation technologies in small airplanes. 

•	 Develop advanced automation training tools for pilots reflecting results of an industry study and 

Performance-Based Operations Aviation Rule-Making Committee (PARC) team data. 

Human Performance Assessment 

•	 Test and field the Maintenance LOSA safety audit tool for maintenance and ramp operations that will 

evaluate a maintenance organization’s effectiveness. 

•	 Deliver and implement guidance materials, tools, and administrative process to manage and/or regulate 

aircraft maintainer fatigue. 

•	 Provide human factors guidance for the operation of UAS within the NAS. 

•	 Develop mitigation strategies for human factors issues that are contributing to very light jet incidents. 

A-40 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Selection and Training 

• Validate training for visual approaches for low-time pilots. 

• Develop guidance and training material to improve consistency of safety team decisions. 

• Identify training and checking approaches for jet upset recovery using advanced and existing simulators. 

• Continue development of international standards for simulator fidelity. 

A-41 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 220,528 

FY 2010 Enacted 7,128 

FY 2011 Request 7,174 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 29,425 

Total 264,255 

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/System 

Integration Human Factors 4,954 5,957 4,714 3,995 3,623 

Personnel Costs 2,902 3,066 2,587 2,919 3,309 

Other In-house Costs 143 177 164 214 242

 Total 7,999 9,200 7,465 7,128 7,174 

OMB Circular A-11, FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

Conduct of Research and Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Development ($000)

Basic 0 0 0 0 0 

Applied 7,999 9,200 7,465 7,128 7,174 

Development (includes prototypes) 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 8,099 9,200 7,465 7,128 7,174 

A-42 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.g – Flightdeck/Maintenance/System 

Integration Human Factors 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Information Management and Display 

Identify human factors issues in instrument 

procedures design 

Develop guidance for moving map displays in 

surface operations 

Update human factors guidance for electronic 

flight bag certification, operational approval 

and training based on performance data 

Develop guidance to address human factors 

issues associated with using synthetic and 

enhanced vision to support equivalent visual 

operations 

Human-Centered Automation 

Develop human factors guidance for ADS-B 

equipment certification and operational 

approval 

Investigate automation and new technology 

impacts on aviation maintenance process, 

safety, tasks, technician skills, and need for 

regulation 

Develop advanced automation training tools 

for pilots reflecting results of an industry 

study and Performance-Based Operations 

Aviation Rule-Making Committee (PARC) team 

data 

Develop human factors guidance for advanced 

autopilots and automation technologies in 

small airplanes 

Human Performance Assessment 

Design a safety audit tool for maintenance 

and ramp operations to evaluate a 

maintenance organization’s effectiveness. 

Identify effective methods for mitigating 

maintainer fatigue 

1,100 

1,073 

730 

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

Provide human factors guidance for the 

operation of unmanned aerial vehicles within 

the NAS l 

Develop mitigation strategies for human 

factors issues that are contributing to very 

light jet incidents 

Selection and Training 

Develop guidance and training material to 

improve consistency of safety team decisions 

Identify training and checking approaches for 

jet upset recovery using advanced and 

existing simulators 

Continue development of international 

standards for simulator fidelity 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

720 

3,551 

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 7,174 7,128 7,174 7,253 7,336 7,390 7,446 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual 

A-43 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.h System Safety Management $11,907,000 

Goals:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety.
 

Intended Outcomes: The System Safety Management Program (formerly known as the Aviation Safety Risk 

Analysis Program) helps achieve FAA’s strategic goal of increasing aviation safety by promoting and expanding safety 

information sharing and safety risk management initiatives efforts. The program develops risk management 

methodologies, prototype tools, technical information, and safety management system procedures and practices that 

will improve aviation safety. In addition, the program aims to develop an infrastructure that enables the free sharing 

of de-identified, aggregate safety information that is derived from various government and industry sources in a 

protected, aggregated manner. It also conducts operational research to leverage proposed new technologies and 

procedures that may enhance pilot and aircraft safety during terminal operations. 

Agency Outputs: The program will develop an infrastructure that enables the free sharing of de-identified, safety 

information that is derived from various government and industry sources in a protected, aggregated manner. In 

addition, the program is providing methodologies, research studies, and guidance material that provide aviation 

safety inspectors, aircraft certification engineers, analysts, and managers the capabilities of systematically assessing 

potential safety risks and applying proactive solutions to reduce aviation accidents and incidents. The program is 

also conducting operational research and analysis to maintain or improve safety and improving terminal area 

efficiency. 

Research Goals: To reduce the number of aviation accidents and incidents by developing a secured safety 

information and analysis system that provides access to numerous databases, maintains their currency, enables 

interoperability across their different formats, provides the ability to identify future threats, conducts a causal analysis 

of those threats, and recommends solutions. 

•	 By 2011, develop automated tools to monitor each database for potential safety issues and to analyze 

disparate data drawn from multiple sources, enhancing discovery, identification, and evaluation of safety 

risks. 

•	 By 2012, demonstrate a working prototype of network based integration of information extracted from 

diverse, distributed sources. 

•	 By 2013, develop advanced infrastructure and laboratory for conducting and sharing analysis tools and 

aggregated safety information that allows industry stakeholders to perform standardized data analysis and 

vulnerability discovery on a wide variety of diverse sets of data. 

•	 By 2013, develop a collection of enterprise business objects that provides a system view of real-time NAS 

facility operations combined with available ASIAS baseline data. 

•	 By 2014, develop a user interface that allows safety oversight personnel the capability to monitor National 

Airspace System (NAS) facility operations. 

•	 By 2015, demonstrate a two-thirds reduction in the rate of fatalities and injuries* 

To reduce the risk for passengers and crews and enhance the traffic control process in the terminal area operations, 

human-in-the-loop (pilot/controller) simulation, evaluations and operational flight data analysis will be conducted. 

•	 By 2011, complete an evaluation air traffic and flight procedures for terminal area operations using pilot-inthe-loop flight simulator 

•	 By 2012, develop methods to model unusual attitude encounters outside the normal operating envelope, 

allowing FAA to approve advanced flight simulators that more realistically model the behavior of an actual 

aircraft. 

•	 By 2012, identify new navigation technologies and data requirements for the development of new 

procedures to enhance the capacity and safety of the terminal area.
 

•	 By 2013, identify contributing factors and develop models for landing performance of selected make, model, 

and series aircraft using standard operating practices to improve the safety and capacity in terminal areas. 

*

 The two-thirds reduction in the rate of aviation fatalities and injuries is based on a 2004 baseline. 

A-44 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The program encourages broad industry and government participation 

across all projects. 

•	 Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the program’s 

activities. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s research projects support new rule making and the development of alternate means of 

compliance with existing rules. 

•	 The Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) Safety Working Group – a national-level integrated 

safety management framework that addresses all facets of the air transportation system, building safety 

design assurance into operations and products. 

•	 Commercial Aviation Safety Team – a FAA/industry collaborative effort to develop and implement datadriven safety initiatives. 

•	 Airline industry groups to ensure that research capabilities are properly focused and benefit stakeholders 

beyond commercial aviation industry including, but not limited to, manufacturers of very light jets and other 

advanced aircraft systems. 

R&D Partnerships: The Program partners with industry, academia, and other governmental agencies, including: 

•	 National Aeronautics and Space Administration via collaborative agreements to integrate advanced research 

text and digital analysis products into the Aviation Safety Information and Analysis Sharing (ASIAS) research 

efforts. 

•	 The Civil Aviation Authority of the Netherlands to conduct joint research on aviation system safety initiatives 

via a Memorandum of Cooperation. 

•	 Technical expertise from air carriers to provide industry reviews and recommendations regarding safety and 

efficiency of terminal area operations as well as air carriers’ cooperation with data sharing agreements and 

governance models that allow for the free sharing of aviation data in accordance with approved voluntary 

safety information sharing agreements. 

•	 Center of Excellence for General Aviation Research (CGAR) via Grants to increase data and tools available 

for cooperative GA safety analyses among industry stakeholders. 

Accomplishments: Significant accomplishments from prior years include: 

Risk Management Decision Support 

FY 2009: 

•	 Completed a model which identifies and incorporates the gap analysis between 14 CFR Parts 121, 135, 145; 

maps to the two top levels of ACOSM, and can be interfaced with International Aviation Transportation 

Association Operational Safety Audit (IOSA). 

•	 Determined injury ratios for well-defined unsafe conditions (e.g., structure failure, electrical system failure, 

landing gear vibration, powerplant failure, and so forth) on aircraft systems or components. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Defined a modified air carrier operations systems model (ACOSM ) model that incorporates the regulations 

and relationships between Title XIV of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Parts 121, 145, 135, 91, 

191, 61, 141 and is compatible with the top level architecture of IOSA). 

•	 Completed a gap analysis of FAA Safety Management System standards, FAA and international regulatory 

standards. 

•	 Released a prototype decision support system that provides the FAA with improved certificate management 

and oversight capabilities. The major products will be identification of databases within FAA purview, 

redesigned databases, and possible location of and access to existing databases needed to populate the 

described methodology. 

•	 Developed a technology transfer plan for the updated prototype software tool that contains the integrated 

framework and methodology for the identification, classification, and assessment of aviation maintenance 

and flight operations hazards; Added a repair station node which links to the prototype. 

A-45 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

• Continue risk management concept, model and analytical tool development in support of commercial and 

general aviation. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Produced technical descriptions of the various business relationships between 14 CFR 121 operators and 14 

CFR 145 repair stations; the models will be used to identify the hazards and assess the risks involved these 

types of relationships. 

•	 Completed a prototype software tool that contains an integrated framework and methodology for the 

identification, classification, and assessment of aviation maintenance and flight operations hazards. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Released a working prototype of an integrated framework that describes the methodology for identification, 

classification, and assessment of aviation system hazards and risks. 

•	 Developed a preliminary methodology which provides a baseline assessment of the current safety oversight 

for effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability and identifies data inputs and could provide metrics such as 

the responsiveness of the air carriers to corrective and preventive actions, effects of oversight on safety 

precursors, inspection output and inspector workload and readiness. 

Aviation Safety Information and Analysis Sharing 

FY 2009: 

•	 Completed the ASIAS CONOPS that is focused on the new data sharing concepts among commercial aviation 

stakeholders. 

•	 Developed an ASIAS architecture for the implementation of emerging technologies and system to support 

the sharing of information between commercial aviation stakeholders. 

•	 Developed automated tools to monitor databases for potential safety issues. 

•	 Developed prototype ASIAS system and associated reports that show the benefit of using diverse textual 

and digital data sets for analyzing commercial aviation safety metrics and enhancements. 

•	 Conducted analytical studies including Runway Safety Study, Terrain Area Warning System Study, Airline 

Benchmarks and Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) Safety Enhancement Metrics 

FY 2008: 

•	 Created Governance structure and mechanisms for utilizing airline data to look at safety issues across 

multiple commercial aviation carriers. 

•	 Identified studies to be completed in FY-08 related to Runway Safety and Terrain Area Warning Systems 

•	 Identified initial set of core metrics for monitoring known risks identified through Commercial Aviation Safety 

Team (CAST) safety enhancements 

•	 Identified initial set of commercial airline industry benchmarks that allow airlines to understand how their 

operations are performing in comparison to other airlines participating in the ASIAS program 

• Completed initial acquisition of new types of data for analyzing safety issues around the airport and runway. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Released first draft of the ASIAS Concept of Operations (CONOPS) that is focused on the new data sharing 

concepts among commercial aviation stakeholders. 

Aircraft Maintenance - Maintainability and Reliability 

FY 2009: 

• Developed technical data to be used for the development of standards for carbon monoxide detection 

devices and inspection methods to determine the integrity of exhaust systems. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Proposed a new quality management system to perform and monitor tool calibration at maintenance 

facilities; the new system will improve safety by reducing aircraft maintenance errors due to the use of outof-tolerance tools. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Completed enhancements to the Maintenance Malfunction Information Reporting (MMIR) System with 

capability to collect usage and flight profile data – the helicopter industry and FAA are using the MMIR data 

to improve maintenance reliability and product design. 

A-46 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Safety Analysis Methodology 

FY 2007: 

• Completed a methodology to provide a different level of certification credit for design features intended to 

reduce flight crew errors. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Provided technical data on standard probabilities of certain environmental and operational conditions to 

support transport airplane certification for safety assessment purposes. 

Terminal Area Safety 

FY 2009: 

•	 Developed testing procedures and requirements to identify required navigational performance (RNP) 

constraints with regard to operation on Radius-to-Fix (RF) legs. 

•	 Evaluated air traffic and flight procedures for terminal area operations by using human-in-the-loop flight and 

air traffic simulators. 

•	 Produced video on “Aircraft Laser Illumination - awareness for the aviation community”. 

• Analyzed operational landing distance performance of a typical regional jet aircraft model. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Completed the evaluation of stopping distances for two typical subsonic narrow body jet aircraft in 

commercial operations. The data will aid in understanding causes of aircraft overruns.
 

•	 Conducted a survey of area navigation (RNAV) and flight management systems to determine the current 

and projected capabilities with regard to radius-to-fix (RF) path terminators. 

•	 Conducted bench test of currently RF-capable RNAV and flight management systems against a 

representative group of terminal and instrument approach procedures to evaluate capabilities and 

constraints for RF path terminators. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed flight evaluation of the critical terminal area situations under which red Land and Hold Short 

Operations lights must be illuminated and extinguished during high capacity operations at an airport by 

using pilot-in-the-loop flight simulation. 

•	 Developed assessment tools and procedures to evaluate pilot workload during various flight conditions by 

using the LifeShirt® technology in simulated flight operations. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Developed methods to identify commercial aircraft touchdown points during commercial operations by using 

instrument landing systems (ILS) or non-ILS information, these methods will aid in understanding causes of 

aircraft overruns and runway excursions. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Provided measures of pilot reaction to laser illumination collected using FAA’s B-737 flight simulator to 

support AC 70-1 “Outdoor Laser Operations” and AC 70-2 “Reporting of Laser Illumination of Aircraft”. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Risk Management Decision Support 

•	 Demonstrated a one-third reduction in the rate of fatalities and injuries through the development of an 

analytical method and associated metrics. 

•	 Completed a safety impact assessment of very light jets (VLJs) in the NAS. 

Aviation Safety Information and Analysis Sharing 

•	 Expanded ASIAS architecture to include the sharing of air traffic information and air carrier information 

among industry stakeholders. 

•	 Continued development of automated tools to monitor databases for potential safety issues. 

•	 Expanded prototype system to include the concepts of sharing information and applications among industry 

stakeholders from an enterprise-level, allowing diverse industry stakeholders to analyze data on an industrywide basis rather than individual organizational level. The prototype system will contain a technical process 

A-47 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

to query de-identified safety data from any participating airline Flight Operations Quality Assurance or 

Aviation Safety Action Program, aggregate it through a distributed database and make it accessible to 

appropriate industry stakeholders. The ASIAS prototype will be demonstrated in 2012. 

•	 Conducted analytical studies, e.g., aircraft hazard analysis, determination of risk values for potential unsafe\ 

conditions, and flight crew intervention design credit, using ASIAS and other aviation safety data 

Terminal Area Safety 

•	 Completed testing procedures and requirements to identify required navigational performance (RNP) 

constraints related to terminal area operations. 

•	 Evaluated air traffic and flight procedures for terminal area operations by using the pilot-in-the-loop flight 

simulators. 

•	 Completed evaluating risks associated with undesired laser cockpit illumination. 

•	 Analyzed the operational landing distance performance of selected aircraft make/model/series. 

•	 Develop models of unusual attitude (wake, stall) encounters outside the normal operating envelope, 

allowing FAA to approve advanced flight simulators that more realistically model the behavior of an actual 

aircraft. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

Government, industry, and academia aviation safety subject matter experts will be invited to demonstrate a working 

prototype of a network-based integration of information extracted from diverse, distributed sources. The research 

will continue to develop innovative, advanced tools and methodologies that will for the first time be able to convert 

and integrate aviation safety data that is currently distributed across multiple organizations and archives into 

information on the operational performance and safety of the aviation system. Using ASIAS and other aviation safety 

data, analytical studies to identify safety issues and verify mitigation and safety enhancements will continue. 

Research and analysis will continue to ensure that the FAA maintains a desired level of safety while accommodating 

the need for more efficient use of the terminal area. 

New Initiatives 

None 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Aviation Safety information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) 

•	 Continue to develop an advanced infrastructure and laboratory for conducting and sharing analysis tools and 

aggregated safety information that allows industry stakeholders to perform standardized data analysis and 

vulnerability discovery on a wide variety of diverse sets of data. 

•	 Continue development of automated tools to monitor databases for potential safety issues. 

•	 Expand prototype system to include the concepts of sharing information and applications among industry 

stakeholders from an enterprise-level, allowing diverse industry stakeholders to analyze data on an industrywide basis rather than individual organizational level. The prototype system will contain a technical process 

to query de-identified safety data from any participating airline Flight Operations Quality Assurance or 

Aviation Safety Action Program, aggregate it through a distributed database and make it accessible to 

appropriate industry stakeholders. The ASIAS prototype will be demonstrated in 2012. 

•	 Conduct analytical studies, e.g., aircraft hazard analysis, determination of risk values for potential unsafe 

conditions, and flight crew intervention design credit, using ASIAS and other aviation safety data. 

•	 Develop methods and risk models to evaluate advanced aircraft systems and component integration. 

A-48 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

NAS Facility Services Data 

•	 Develop a Facility Operations Module that includes enterprise-level business objects that store and make 

accessible data elements that are specific to NAS safety oversight. 

•	 Develop a flexible user interface that provides safety oversight personnel the capability to monitor NAS 

facility operations as they occur with respect to failures, risk and other off-nominal occurrences. 

Terminal Area Safety 

•	 Continue testing procedures and requirements to identify RNP constraints related to terminal area 

operations. 

•	 Conduct multiple operational evaluations of new technologies and procedures using human in the loop 

flight and air traffic simulators to improve flight safety and terminal area efficiencies 

•	 Analyze the operational landing distance performance of selected aircraft make/model/series. 

•	 Develop models of unusual attitude encounters outside the normal operating envelope, allowing FAA to 

approve advanced flight simulators that more realistically model the behavior of an actual aircraft. 

•	 Identify new cockpit centric navigation technologies and data for the development of new procedures to 

enhance the safety and capacity within the terminal area. 

A-49 
 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 91,403 

FY 2010 Enacted 12,698 

FY 2011 Request 11,907 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 47,434 

Total 163,442 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

System Safety Management 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

3,232 

1,947 

113 

5,292 

6,402 

2,892 

223 

9,517 

9,608 

2,669 

211 

12,488 

9,879 

2,531 

288 

12,698 

8,926 

2,652 

329

11,907 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total

0 

5,292 

0 

 5,292 

0 

9,517 

0 

9,517 

0 

12,488 

0 

12,488 

0 

12,698 

0 

12,698 

0 

11,907 

0 

11,907 

A-50 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.h - System Safety Management 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

060-110 System Safety Management 

Risk Management Decision Support 

Develop method and associated metrics to 

measure progress in reducing the rate of 

fatalities and injuries 

Conduct System Safety Assessment of VLJs 

Aviation Safety Information Analysis and 

Sharing 

Complete ASIAS CONOPS focused on the new 

data sharing concepts among commercial 

aviation stakeholders. 

Develop advanced infrastructure and laboratory 

for conducting and sharing analysis tools and 

aggregated safety information 

Develop automated tools to monitor databases 

for potential safety issues 

Develop prototype ASIAS system and 

associated reports 

Conduct analytical studies using ASIAS and 

other aviation safety data 

Develop methods and risk models to evaluate 

advanced aircraft systems and component 

integration. 

NAS Facility Service Data 

Develop Facility Operations Module 

Develop a flexible user interface that provides 

safety oversight personnel the capability to 

monitor NAS facility operations 

Terminal Area Safety 

Develop testing procedures and requirements to 

identify RNP constraints 

Evaluate air traffic and flight procedures for 

terminal area operations by using human-inthe-loop flight and air traffic simulator 

Evaluate devices and risks associated with 

undesired laser cockpit illumination 

Identify contributing factors and develop 

models for landing performance of selected 

make/model/series aircraft using standard 

operating practices to improve the safety and 

capacity in terminal areas 

Develop models of unusual attitude encounters 

outside the normal operating envelope 

Identify new cockpit centric navigation 

technologies and data for the development of 

new procedures to enhance the safety and 

capacity within the terminal area 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

0 

5,320 

2,320 

1,286 

2,981 

♦

♦

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 11,907 12,698 11,907 11,913 11,915 11,841 11,765 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-51 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Request 

A11.i Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors $10,475,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and Organizational 

Excellence.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations (ATC/TO) Human Factors Program supports FAA 

strategic goals for increased safety and greater capacity by developing research products and promoting the use of 

those products to meet the future demands of the aviation system. The human factors research program for FY 2011 

will emphasize the concept of Human System Integration (HSI) and safety aspects of the functions performed by air 

traffic controllers and technical operations personnel. The HSI concept will address the interactions between 

workstation design, personnel selection, training, and human error/safety. The program will examine the roles of 

controllers and maintainers at increased capacity levels and how those roles are best supported by allocation of 

functions between human operators and automation to enhance safety and minimize the potential for human error.
 

The ATC/TO program generates requirements for human interface characteristics of future air traffic and technical 

operations (maintainer) workstations and enhances our understanding of the role that system design plays in 

mitigating human error including operational errors, runway incursions, and errors that result in NAS equipment 

outages. Additionally, researchers are developing effective methods to present weather information to air traffic 

specialists for severe weather avoidance and accident prevention, developing methods to select new air traffic service 

providers and maintainers so that the applicant screening process is valid, reliable, and fair, and improving humansystem integration in the maintenance arena to increase reliability and availability of the NAS. 

The research program works to improve system safety by:
 

•	 Developing: 

−	 A technical operations Human-System Integration roadmap that complements the introduction of 

advanced technology and automated capabilities as the NAS increases dependence on automation and 

leased services for critical data sources in the NAS that were formerly controlled by the FAA. 

−	 Methods to identify new potential human error problems as the air traffic service providers’ roles and 

responsibilities change as a result of increasing automation levels. 

−	 Organizational changes to transform the technical operations Air Traffic Organization (ATO) safety 

culture. 

−	 Effective methods to present air traffic specialists weather information for accident prevention through 

severe weather avoidance. 

•	 Improving: 

− Effectiveness of safety analyses that concentrate on detecting the potential for human error during the 

concept and research phases of system development. 

− Methods to select and train new air traffic service providers and maintainers. 

The program works to improve the ATC and technical operations contribution to system capacity by: 

•	 Developing: 

−	 Integrated workstations that allow technical operations specialists to meet increased availability and 

service demand. 

−	 Methods to assess the value of proposed changes to workstations to determine if human-in-the-loop 

performance is enhanced. 

−	 Advanced workstation concepts for maintenance workstations that use automation and advanced 

technology to increase availability of the NAS, decrease the probability of system outages, and decrease 

the cost of air traffic services. 

•	 Improving: 

−	 Human-system integration in a manner that allows air traffic service providers and pilots to 

cooperatively manage traffic loads as cockpit technology and air traffic workstations are more closely 

connected to efficiently move NAS air traffic. 

A-52 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

−	 Allocation and sharing of roles and responsibilities between air traffic service providers and pilots as 

technology evolves to meet future demands. 

Agency Outputs: The Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors Research Program provides 

leadership and products to motivate NAS evolution to assure that the system’s human component will reliably 

perform to meet the flying public’s needs. Outputs include: 

•	 Air traffic workstations and concepts that increase workforce productivity by identifying key workload factors 

that must be mitigated to enable the humans in the system to manage the future NAS traffic flow. 

•	 Human reliability analytical tools and methods to assess and mitigate the potential for human error. 

•	 Assessments of the effectiveness of fatigue risk management strategies. 

•	 ATO safety culture transformation through research in the Technical Operations community to identify 

effective interventions to move the ATO toward a “Just Culture.” 

•	 Future air traffic service provider and maintainer personnel selection criteria to enhance screening process 

efficiency and effectiveness. 

•	 Guidelines and standards for design of computer-human interfaces used in Technical Operations. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By FY 2011, complete a study to determine the feasibility of performing a quantitative analysis of human 

reliability in the air traffic domain. 

•	 By FY 2011, initiate a study to determine the effectiveness of fatigue management changes in air traffic 

control. 

•	 By FY 2012, improve computer-human interface design to reduce information overload and resulting errors. 

•	 By FY 2012, apply program-generated human factors knowledge to improve aviation system personnel 

selection and training. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The ATC/ATO Human Factors research program receives requirements 

from its internal FAA sponsoring organizations, primarily the following FAA ATO Air Traffic/Technical Operations 

research groups: 

•	 Advanced Air Traffic Systems Requirements Group – En Route and Terminal Service units as well as System 

Engineering in Operations Planning, operational personnel and systems developers articulate human factors 

research requirements for measuring the proposed technology benefits to controllers and maintainers. FAA 

Flight Standards and Aircraft Certification organizations participate in the research requirements definition 

associated with pilot/controller interface with air-ground integration weather aspects as the FAA moves 

toward a vision of the future NAS. 

•	 Individual and Team Performance Requirements Group – ATO Safety, En Route, Terminal, Technical 

Operations and System Engineering service units participate to identify human performance research needs 

involving fatigue, safety culture, human error hazard identification, age, operational errors, runway incursion 

prevention, and supervisor practices. 

•	 Advanced Technical Operations Systems Requirements Group – The Technical Operations, En Route, and 

Terminal service units recommend NAS infrastructure operational and maintenance research including ATC 

systems maintenance displays, controls, and maintainability features specification. 

•	 Personnel Selection and Training Requirements Group – ATO Technical Training and Development, Human 

Resources, FAA Academy, Workforce Services, and the Financial Services groups address personnel 

selection and training including the ability to successfully screen applicants for controller positions and for 

reduced training cost and time. 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 Collaborative research with NASA includes fatigue risk management, training effectiveness, and innovative 

human error safety analytical techniques. 

•	 Collaboration with EUROCONTROL includes joint development of a Human Reliability Assessment Tool, 

participation in semi-annual Air Traffic Management (ATM) Seminars, and leadership of an Action Plan 15 

Safety workgroup to identify ATM human factors issues. 

•	 Cooperation with the ICAO-endorsed NOSS Collaborative (Normal Operations Safety System/Threat & Error 

Management) to assess controller safety. 

A-53 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

• Cooperative research agreements are in place with Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Georgia Institute 

of Technology, St. Louis University, Ohio State University, and American Institutes for Research. 

Accomplishments: Program highlights include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Developed a tool for human reliability analysis in collaboration with EUROCONTROL human factors experts 

to assess the impact of changes to air traffic management planned by both the US and European air traffic 

service providers. 

•	 Delivered a human factors specification/standard for the design of TO workstations. 

•	 Initiated a Human System Integration study of the impact future air traffic maintenance concepts on the 

Technical Operations workforce. 

•	 Conducted simulations to determine the appropriate use of data communications in terminal airspace. 

•	 Conducted preparations for an air-ground integration simulation regarding improved weather products at 

the controller workstation to enhance safety in the NAS. 

•	 Calculated safety risks of an operational error (OE) occurring as a function of the amount of time spent on 

position. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Completed tower simulation infrastructure to support NextGen human factors research for the airport 

domain. 

•	 Application of en route workstation research concepts that are being transferred to the operational arena as 

the data communications program matures through the initial integration of this technology. 

•	 Completion and dissemination of a tower supervisor best practices study to suppress the potential for 

runway incursions and operational errors. 

•	 Validated the Human Error Safety Risk Assessment (HESRA) research tool on a wake turbulence system in 

the early stages of development to manage safety risk prior to system development and fielding. This 

research tool will be transferred to the operational domain via the Safety Management System (SMS) 

toolbox. 

•	 Completed first stage of safety culture enhancement by transfer of the technical operations aviation safety 

action program (ASAP) to the operational domain. 

•	 Completed data collection for the technical operations work force anthropometric measurement database. 

•	 Developed a maintenance domain alerts and alarms human factors design standard. 

•	 Conducted a NOSS trial in a FAA facility to demonstrate the utility of the concept and provide unique safety 

data for the participating facility. 

•	 Initiated a maintainable and extensible job/task analysis information database providing the ability to 

access, update, and report requirements in parallel with NextGen development. 

•	 Developed and validated a technically sound computer-based practical color vision test that relates to ATC 

tasks. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed simulations that evaluate capacity enhancements when en route workstations are provided with 

data communications and aircraft self-spacing and self-separation provisions. 

•	 ATC safety alerts study completion in response to National Transportation Safety Board concerns that 

controllers are not responding properly to prevent mid-air collisions and controlled flight into terrain 

accidents. 

•	 Tower situation display demonstration with integrated flight data to reduce display clutter and integrate 

tower controller tasks. 

•	 Initiation of a tower controller external vision requirements study to support staffed virtual tower 

development with no direct airport surface view. 

•	 Safety Culture improvement project expansion to more facilities enabling the technical operations 

community to improve safety 

•	 Transfer of the National Air Traffic Professionalism Program (NATPRO) to the En Route service unit as a 

research product that is making the transition to the operational domain. 

A-54 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Updated en route and terminal job task analyses and developed air traffic controller performance standards. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Developed a human factors display standard that will be used as a system design requirements document to 

leverage past lessons learned and aid the move toward a common display platform for all air traffic domains 

where similar display requirements exist. 

•	 Conducted simulations and analyses of controller time-on-position as it relates to operational errors. The 

analyses will seek to find the minimum time on position that provides an adequate level of situation 

awareness and the maximum time beyond which mental fatigue induces human error. 

•	 Refined a tool for human reliability analysis in collaboration with EUROCONTROL human factors experts to 

assess the impact of changes to air traffic management planned by both the US and European air traffic 

service providers. 

•	 Conducted a survey to determine the effectiveness of controller fatigue management changes introduced in 

FAA Orders during 2009 

•	 Continued a Human System Integration Study of the impact future air traffic maintenance concepts on the 

Technical Operations workforce. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST 

The program will continue to provide research that will operate in concert with other human factors system 

development activities that are focused on the NextGen solutions being proposed for the future NAS. This research 

program addresses human performance issues in ATC systems acquisition, design, operation, and maintenance over 

the next several years with an emphasis on safety, training and personnel selection as part of the Human System 

Integration concept. The human factors research program will continue to emphasize the safety aspects of NAS 

enhancements as NextGen changes emerge and change the interactions between the actors and systems in the NAS. 

The proactive analysis of human error causal factors continues to be the focus of a portion of this research program. 

Advanced Air Traffic Systems 

•	 To support the Agency goal to reduce General Aviation (GA) accidents the Flight Standards organization in 

collaboration with the ATO Safety service unit has requested that the Human Factors Research Program 

develop human factors display requirements for controller weather information. Weather is a major factor 

in GA fatalities and controllers are in a unique position to aid pilot decision-making. 

•	 The ATO Terminal service unit has noted that there are a plethora of alerts and alarms in airport traffic 

control towers. Many new systems, including NextGen systems, are proposing to bring new displays and 

alerts to the tower on a piecemeal basis. The Terminal service unit has requested the development of a 

human factors display standard for tower air traffic control alerts. 

Individual and Team Performance 

•	 In response to NTSB concerns regarding controller fatigue the Human Factors research program has worked 

with the ATO to institute changes to controller scheduling policy. The ATO Safety service unit has requested 

that we determine the effectiveness of controller fatigue mitigation strategies associated with changes to 

controller scheduling requirements. 

•	 An important component of the ATO safety program concerns the enhancement of our safety culture. The 

Technical Operations Safety Culture Transformation project in this research program has been successful 

and the initial phase is making the transition to an operational program. The technical operations service 

unit has requested that we continue work in human error reduction and reporting by expanding the 

application to the management portion of the organization. 

Advanced Technical Operations Systems 

•	 The Technical Operations service unit has indicated that maintenance technicians are confronted with as 

many as 40 different interfaces with non-standard characteristics that must be memorized and manipulated. 

This service unit has offered a research requirement to standardize the user interface by developing human 

A-55 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

factors requirements for a standard graphical user interface on maintenance work stations and system 

displays used by maintainers. 

•	 The future concept of operations for maintenance of air traffic systems will involve an increase reliance on 

conducting maintenance from remote locations. The Technical Operations service unit has requested the 

continued development of human factors information requirements for remote maintenance monitoring. 

Personnel Selection and Training 

•	 The ATO is making significant investments in the procurement of new training simulators for tower cab 

controllers. The Terminal service unit has requested that we complete a training effectiveness evaluation 

methodology and apply the methodology to a new tower simulator by 2011. 

•	 Previous color vision tests for air traffic controllers were not job related and not tied to the use of color on 

air traffic displays. The aero medical representatives in the controller selection process have requested the 

continued testing and validation of a newly developed occupational test of ATC specialist color vision that is 

job related. 

•	 Potential changes to the air traffic system purport to encompass a shift in the job of the controller due to 

the increased use of automation and new concepts in traffic management and aircraft navigation. If these 

changes take place there may be a need for new controller selection criteria. The identification of the new 

criteria requires a Strategic Job Analysis for air traffic controllers. 

•	 The FAA is rapidly changing the types of technology and maintenance concepts used by air traffic systems. 

The technical operations community has identified the need to review the selection criteria for maintenance 

personnel by performing an update of the air traffic systems maintainer Job Task Analysis. 

New Initiatives 

New research will focus on human factors engineering design aspects of HSI. This will also require an updated 

maintenance concept including increased availability of NAS systems, a maintainer personnel roadmap and a 

concerted effort to reduce the effects of human error during the maintenance process: 

•	 Update the Human Factors Design Standard. This document was published in 2003 and is cited as a design 

standard in every major FAA procurement that has a human interface. Planned publication for the 

document is 2013 and will be coordinated with the Department of Defense Mil-Std-1472 update currently 

under way. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Advanced Air Traffic Systems 

•	 Developing human factors display requirements for weather information as technology provides weather 

information to the cockpit as well as the controller work station. 

•	 Developing a human factors display standard for tower air traffic control displays. 

Individual and Team Performance 

•	 Determine the effectiveness of controller fatigue mitigation strategies associated with changes to scheduling 

requirements. 

•	 Continue work in human error reduction and reporting by expanding the application of research in 

transformation of the ATO safety culture. 

Advanced Technical Operations (TO) Systems 

•	 Develop human factors requirements for a standard graphical user interface on maintenance work stations 

and system displays used by maintainers. 

•	 Continue development of human factors information requirements for remote maintenance monitoring 

Personnel Selection and Training 

•	 Complete a training effectiveness evaluation methodology and apply to a new tower simulator. 

•	 Complete the development and testing of a occupational test of ATC specialist color vision 

•	 Complete the Strategic Job Analysis for air traffic controllers 

•	 Complete an update of the air traffic systems maintainer Job Task Analysis 

A-56 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 182,574 

FY 2010 Enacted 10,302 

FY 2011 Request 10,475 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 43,439 

Total 246,790 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

4,130 

5,285 

239 

4,333 

5,443 

224 

4,142 

6,128 

299 

4,389 

5,617 

296 

4,302 

5,800 

373

 Total 9,654 10,000 10,469 10,302 10,475 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes)

 0 

9,654 

0 

0 

10,000 

0 

0 

10,469 

0 

0 

10,302 

0 

0 

10,475 

0 

Total 9,654 10,000 10,469 10,302 10,475 

A-57 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.i – Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

082-110 Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors 

Advanced Air Traffic Systems 

Developing human factors display 

requirements for weather information 

Developing a human factors display standard 

for tower air traffic control displays 

Update to Human Factors Design Standard 

850 

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

Individual and Team Performance 

Determine the effectiveness of controller 

fatigue mitigation strategies 

Continue research in transformation of the 

ATO safety culture 

1,200 

♦

♦

◊

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Technical Operations (TO) 

Develop human factors standard graphical 

user interface on maintenance work stations 

Development of human factors information 

for remote maintenance monitoring 

1,202 

♦

♦

◊

◊ ◊

Personnel Selection and Training 

Complete a training effectiveness evaluation 

methodology and apply to a new tower 

simulator 

Complete the development and testing of a 

occupational test of ATC specialist color 

vision 

Complete the Strategic Job Analysis for air 

traffic controllers 

Complete an update of the air traffic 

systems maintainer Job Task Analysis 

1,050 

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 6,173 

Total Budget Authority 10,475 10,302 10,475 10,633 10,799 10,934 11,073 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-58 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.j Aeromedical Research $11,217,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety. 

Intended Outcomes: 

Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) Aeromedical Research Program 

The Aeromedical Research Program supports FAA’s Flight Plan Goal for Increased Safety by: 

•	 Investigating and analyzing injury and death patterns in civilian flight accidents and incidents to determine 

their cause and develop preventive strategies. 

•	 Supporting FAA regulatory and medical certification processes that develop safety and health regulations 

covering all aerospace craft occupants and their flight environments. 

•	 Recommending and developing equipment, technology, and procedures for optimal:
 

− Evacuation and egress of humans from aerospace craft; 

− Dynamic protection and safety of humans on aerospace craft; and
 

− Safety, security, and health of humans on aerospace craft. 

Research program outcomes include improved safety, security, protection, survivability and health of aerospace craft 

passengers and aircrews. The Aeromedical Research Program supports FAA’s Flight Plan goals to reduce air carrier 

fatalities, reduce the number of fatal accidents in general aviation and support FAA organizational excellence by: 

•	 Exploiting new and evaluating existing bioaeronautical guidelines, standards, and models for aerospace craft 

cabin equipment, procedures, and environments. 

•	 Providing research data to serve as the basis for new regulatory action in evaluation of existing regulations 

to continuously optimize human performance, health, and safety at a minimum cost to the aviation industry. 

•	 Analyzing pilot medical and flight data, information from accidents and incidents, and advanced biomedical 

research results to propose standards and assess certification procedures that optimize performance 

capability. 

•	 Evaluating the complex mix of pilot, flight attendant and passenger activities in a wide range of 

environmental, behavioral, and physiological situations to propose standards and guidelines that will 

enhance the health, safety, and security of all aerospace travelers. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

The Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program supports FAA’s Flight Plan Goal for Increased Safety by: 

•	 Developing and testing adaptive environmental control techniques to enable a safe and healthy cabin air 

environment including during in-flight incidents. 

•	 Validating software tools and methods to mitigate possible air contamination incidents during flight and 

ground operations. 

•	 Developing advanced air chemistry models for interaction of atmospheric ozone and volatile organic 

compounds. 

•	 Developing advanced methods to automatically analyze textual safety reports and extract system 

performance information for prognostic identification of safety risks for system operators and designers. 

•	 Developing advanced scientific models and experimental data of airborne and surface transmission of 

existing and emerging infectious diseases within aircraft. 

•	 Evidence-based development of appropriate hazard identification and risk management criteria guidelines to 

maximize safety and health in the air transportation system in response to infectious disease. 

•	 Recommending and developing equipment, technology, and procedures for optimal: 

A-59 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Evidence-based development of appropriate policy, regulations and guidelines to maximize safety and health 

from the cabin air quality environment; 

•	 Identifying hazards and characterizing risks of the major infectious diseases likely to be carried on-board 

aircraft; 

•	 Providing air quality incident identification to alert crew to potential problems and provide signals to the 

environmental control system for appropriate response; and 

•	 Providing for safety, security and health of passengers and crewmembers on commercial aircraft. 

Agency Outputs: Agency outputs proceed from the FAA Office of Aviation Medicine (AAM), specifically, 1) the Civil 

Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) and 2) the FAA National Air Transportation Center of Excellence (CoE) for 

Research in the Intermodal Transportation Environment (RITE). 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

CAMI’s Aeromedical Research Program provides research data to assess new technology, and evaluate existing 

bioaeronautical guidelines, standards, and models for aerospace craft cabin equipment, procedures, and 

environments. Aeromedical research serves as the basis for new regulatory action and evaluation of existing 

regulations to continuously optimize human performance and safety at a minimum cost to the aviation industry. This 

research program analyzes pilot medical and flight data, information from accidents and incidents, and advanced 

biomedical research results to propose standards and assess certification procedures that optimize performance 

capability. This research program is conducted by in-house resources, specifically the CAMI Aerospace Medical 

Research Division and supports Airliner Cabin Environment Research efforts. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

The FAA National Air Transportation Center of Excellence (CoE) for Research in the Intermodal Transportation 

Environment (RITE) was formulated in response to issues raised in a 2002 National Research Council Report 

regarding Airliner Cabin Environment and the Health of Passengers and Crew during normal and events outside the 

normal operational envelope. RITE addresses public, aircrew, and congressional concerns regarding these issues 

including: disease transmission, contaminant transport, ozone (including chemical reactivity of aircraft cabin 

interiors), pesticides (residual and sprayed), and contaminants that may be carcinogenic used as additives in 

hydraulic and lubricating fluids in aircraft engines and Auxiliary Power Units (APUs) and identified as possible 

neurological toxins in crew members. RITE also conducts R&D on cabin air quality sensors, advanced environmental 

control systems, and on chemical and biological agents, disinfection techniques and aircraft materials compatibility 

with disinfection processes. The research is primarily conducted by universities and the industry. Established in 

2004 by the FAA Administrator, RITE is led by Auburn University, with Harvard and Purdue Universities as Technical 

Co-Leads. Other member universities include Boise State University, Kansas State University, the University of 

California at Berkeley, and the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. 

The FAA and RITE are uniquely positioned to provide evidence based research data to assess new technologies, 

provide hazard identification and risk assessment for aircraft cabin environmental events and provide appropriate 

guidelines, propose standards, and models for aircraft cabin equipment, procedures, and environments. The airliner 

cabin environment research program serves as the basis for new regulatory action and evaluation of existing 

regulations to continuously optimize the safety and health of passengers and crewmembers at a minimum cost to the 

aviation industry. 

Research Goals: 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

•	 By 2012, validate mathematical models to evaluate whether aircraft designs meet requirements for 

evacuation and emergency response capability. 

•	 By 2012, establish design criteria for restraint systems that protect occupants at the highest impact levels 

that the aircraft structure can sustain. 

•	 By 2015, apply and develop advances in gene expression, toxicology, and bioinformatics technology and 

methods to define human response to aerospace stressors. 

A-60 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 By 2015, incorporate aerospace medical issues in the development of safety strategies concerning pilot 

impairment, incapacitation, spatial disorientation, and other aeromedical-related factors that contribute to 

loss of aircraft control. 

•	 By 2015, develop advanced methods to extract aeromedical information for prognostic identification of 

human safety risks. 

•	 By 2015, develop a methodology to compile, classify, and assess aviation-related injuries, the mechanisms 

that resulted in these injuries, and their relationship to: autopsy findings, medical certification data, aircraft 

cabin configurations, and biodynamic testing: Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy Data System 

(AAIADS) 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 By 2011, apply and validate advanced air sensing technology for volatile organic compounds in the aircraft 

cabin environment. 

•	 By 2011, develop bleed air contamination models of engine compressors and high temperature air system 

for effects on health and safety of passengers and crew. 

•	 By 2012, complete experimental projects in support of regulatory, certification, and operations for existing 

Aviation Rulemaking Committees by providing data and guidance for new or revised regulation of airliner 

cabin environment standards. 

•	 By 2012, develop and validate chemical kinetic models for bleed air systems for health and safety effects on 

passengers and crew. 

•	 By 2013, develop advanced data and mathematical models for cabin air purification systems. 

•	 By 2015, establish design criteria for aircraft cabin air quality sensing systems. 

•	 By 2015, demonstrate advanced methods to remove contaminants from bleed air and non-bleed air 

ventilation systems. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

•	 Directly supports the bioaeronautics agenda set forth in the Executive Office of the President, National 

Science and Technology Council, National Plan for Aeronautics Research and Development and Related 

Infrastructure (NPARDRI), released 1/10/2008. 

•	 Directly supports the bioaeronautics agenda set forth in the Executive Office of the President, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and Office of Science & Technology Policy (OST) FY 2009 Administration 

R&D Budget Priorities, 8/14/2007 (EOP). 

•	 Provides research for FAA, European Aviation Safety Authority and Transport Canada under the Aircraft 

Cabin Safety Research Plan. This is a coordinated, living plan to maximize the cost/benefit of aerospace 

craft cabin safety research nationally and internationally. 

•	 Supports multi-year collaborative studies by FAA and other government and industrial entities to evaluate 

flight crew and passenger symptomatology, disease, and impairment. 

•	 Supports the NextGen Implementation Plan, Smart Sheets, Solution Set Increased Safety, Security and 

Environmental Performance, Safety Management Systems. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 The Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program directly supports the FAA’s Statutory Authority, 49 USC 

40101D, 44701A, 40 FR 29114 DOT, 49 CFR 830.5, Public Law 106-81, 14 CFR 1.1, 21, 25, 121, 125, and 

135 to protect the health and safety of passengers and crewmembers. 

•	 The Executive Office of the President, National Science and Technology Council, National Plan for 

Aeronautics Research and Development and Related Infrastructure. 

•	 The Executive Office of the President, OMB and OST FY 2009 Administration R&D Budget Priorities. 

•	 White House Implementation Plan for National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza. 

•	 World Heath Organization International Health Regulations agreed to by the Secretary, Department of 

Transportation 

A-61 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Supports multi-year collaborative studies by FAA, other government agencies, and industrial entities to 

evaluate airliner cabin environment to protect the safety and health of passengers and crewmembers. 

•	 Supports the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act of the 21 Century section 725; Public 

Law 106-181. 

•	 Supports the FAA National Air Transportation Center of Excellence for Research in the Intermodal Transport 

Environment 

•	 Supports the White House Implementation Plan for National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza. 

•	 Provides collaborative research with the Civil Aviation Authority-United Kingdom on cabin air quality. 

•	 Supports the Health and Human Services Implementation Plan to characterize viral subtypes and enable 

detection and investigation of suspected cases and detect increase in disease activity in the aircraft cabin 

environment. 

R&D Partnerships: 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

•	 Direct collaboration with the DoD, NASA, and NTSB on accident investigation, crashworthiness, in-flight 

turbulence, aerospace medicine, ocular injury from lasers, and exposure to cosmic radiation. 

•	 Develops Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRDA) and Memorandums of 

Understanding/Agreement (MOA/U) with industry to ensure collaborative projects benefiting both FAA and 

the aviation industry. 

•	 Participates in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) aerospace medical advisory groups, the European 

Union, and many academic institutions and government laboratories. 

•	 Established National Research Council (NRC) postdoctoral programs to conduct research in molecular 

biology, bioinformatics, environmental physiology, and other aviation medicine fields at CAMI. 

•	 Established a professional relationship with over 90 organizations and 55 committees including holding 

fellowships and other leadership positions. These scientific, medical, and bioengineering relationships 

include working in partnership on a multitude of efforts with these organizations including the following: 

- Cabin Safety Harmonization Working - Civil Aviation Medical Association 

Group - American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

- Seat Certification Streamlining Effort - American Ophthalmological Society 

- The National Safety Council - Society of Forensic Toxicologists 

- Society of Automotive Engineers - American Academy of Forensic Science 

- Aerospace Medical Association 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

RITE has over 30 industry partners participating in the research and development effort. RITE researchers and 

Office of Aerospace Medicine staff members collaborate with leading organizations associated with aerospace 

medicine, aviation health, airliner cabin environment and safety, including: 

•	 Direct coordination and collaboration with the DoD 

•	 Direct coordination and collaboration with Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security 

Administration 

•	 Environment Protection Agency 

•	 Health and Human Services 

•	 Centers for Disease Control and Protection 

•	 National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety 

•	 International Civil Aviation Organization. 

•	 International Aviation Transportation Association 

•	 Air Transport Association 

•	 Boeing 

•	 Delta 

A-62 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Honeywell 

•	 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers 

•	 American Society for Testing and Materials International 

•	 Memorandum of Cooperation with the Civil Aviation Authority-United Kingdom to collaborate and coordinate 

airliner cabin environment research in sampling and analyzing air quality in aircraft cabins. 

•	 Develops cooperative research and development agreements with industry to ensure collaborative projects 

benefiting both FAA and the aviation industry. 

•	 Participates and coordinates airliner cabin environment research with Air Transportation Association Medical 

Committee and Cabin Technical Operations Committee. 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2009 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

Aeromedical Systems Analysis 

•	 Obesity in Civil Aviation – Cross-functional Study: demographic findings in obese pilots, Body Mass Index of 

insulin-dependent Pilots, toxicology, medical certification, and autopsy Findings. 

•	 Internet Research Assistant Panel Review –Open Source Software and Aeromedical Websites. 

•	 Successfully testified for the FAA in 2 court proceedings regarding research on spatial disorientation. 

•	 Collaborated with National University of Colombia (NUC): Ischemic Heart Disease in Airline Transport Pilots. 

•	 Under the ongoing FAA adoption of SMS, developing Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) techniques to use 

with aeromedical certification decision making. Collaboration with NASA. 

•	 Completed the Segmented Regression Analysis for detecting sharp changes (“breakpoints”) of a response 

function at an increase or decrease of an influential factor. This approach allows the assessment of 

regulatory changes. 

•	 Collaborated with Ministry of Health, Iraq: Psoriasis and Coronary Artery Diseases in the U.S. Civilian Pilot 

Population. 

•	 Collaborated with NUC and 4th Military Medical University of China: review of aeromedical certification 

records - Diabetes. 

•	 Performed Aviation Safety 2008: Year in Review. 

•	 Aircraft Accident – Injury and Autopsy Data System (AA-IADS): Functional Requirements Phase completed; 

Design Phase initiated. 

•	 FAA AAM Aerospace Accident Review Program: Developed centralized medical aircraft accident review 

program to acquire/store pilot medical information for all fatal and high profile accidents. 

•	 Evaluated Next-Generation Vision Testers for Aeromedical Certification of Aviation Personnel (pilots, 

maintenance personnel, and inspectors). These new visual screeners (testers) have been implemented by 

AAM for the aeromedical certification of pilot applicants. 

•	 Revised the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z136.6: American National Standard for Safe Use 

of Lasers Outdoors. 

•	 Developed an Aerospace Standard (AS) to establish performance criteria for control measures to prevent 

harmful exposure of flight crew. 

•	 Monitored and assessed visual effects and operational problems resulting from pilot exposure to laser and 

high-intensity lights.
 

Accident Prevention and Investigation
 

•	 Developed new procedure for screening human specimens from aviation accidents. The old method required 

the use of 2 different pieces of equipment and took twice as long as the new method that only requires the 

use of 1 instrument. 

A-63 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Artificial formation of carbamazepine from oxcarbazepine: Helped to differentiate the two compounds 

derived from this anticonvulsant and mood stabilizing drug. It is used primarily in the treatment of epilepsy 

and bipolar disorder. 

•	 Distribution of OxycontinTM (oxycodone) in postmortem fluids and tissues – Collaboration with Biochemistry 

Research Team. This information will help elucidate the significance of an oxycodone concentration in a 

tissue specimen when no blood is available for analysis (35% of analyses). 

•	 Assessment of the 2nd seven years of FAA’s Postmortem Forensic Toxicology-Proficiency Testing Program. 

This research verifies that CAMI maintains continuous state-of-the art analytical capabilities for aviation 

related toxicological substances. 

•	 Revised Alcohol Testing in the Workplace - Book Chapter. Medical Review Officer Handbook – Chapter 3: 

“Laboratory Procedures and Analysis” 9th Edition, Quadrangle Research, Research Triangle Park, NC. 

•	 Aerospace toxicology overview for the period of 1960–2007. This review addresses the historical aspects 

and recent advances in the field. 

•	 Toxicological findings in fatally injured obese diabetic pilots involved in aviation accidents. These findings 

will be helpful in adjudicating aeromedical certification issues associated with obese and/or diabetic pilots. 

•	 Assessed the Increased Cannabinoids Concentrations Found in Specimens From Fatal Aviation Accidents 

Between 1997 and 2006. 

•	 Developed first-generation gene-expression-based assay for fatigue using a limited sample set. 

•	 Investigated RNA source for gene expression from buccal cells - non-invasive, easy to collect, facilitates 

experimental design. 

•	 Investigated physiological effects of 6,000 ft and 7,000 ft cabin altitudes on compromised passengers with 

chronic and stable cardiac/ pulmonary disease. Performed cytokine analysis. Supports ACER Program. 

•	 Explored hypoxia-induced expression changes from decreased cabin oxygen levels at altitudes significant to 

the aviation industry. 

Protection and Survival 

•	 Computer simulation of airliner emergency evacuation: Continued application of the cabin evacuation model 

to assess factors that predict evacuation event outcomes. Utilize the model to evaluate changes to aircraft 

cabin layouts and procedural changes that would have impacted an evacuation in a negative manner. Apply 

lessons learned to research and the development of improved safety training programs. 

•	 Evaluated the Comprehension of Symbolic Exit Signs (design and presentation context) by the general 

public. 

•	 Inflation Performance of Emergency Escape Slides at High Altitude. Assisted in the evaluation of highaltitude performance of a set of slides from a single airplane type, in order to gain specific performance 

information that can be used to develop computation correction factors to assist certification of slides for 

operations at high-elevation airports and to support potential technical revision of TSO C69. 

•	 Evaluated the Effective Presentation Media for Passenger Safety Briefings. 

•	 Aviation Child Restraints: Combined sled tests and computer modeling to develop specifications and test 

requirements to support certification of advanced aviation child restraint systems and revision of TSO-C100. 

•	 Side Facing Seat Certification: Developed comprehensive technical requirements from existing research 

results to support new certification policy. 

•	 Head/Neck Injury Potential: Assessed head/neck injury potential for various aircraft interiors. Expansion of 

FAA Technical Center side impact project to include head/neck injury potential in the fore/aft direction. 

Aviation Physiology 

•	 Computer simulation of airliner emergency evacuation: Continued application of the cabin evacuation model 

to assess factors that predict evacuation event outcomes. Utilize the model to evaluate changes to aircraft 

cabin layouts and procedural changes that would have impacted an evacuation in a negative manner. Apply 

lessons learned to research and the development of improved safety training programs. 

•	 Developed programs used worldwide to determine radiation exposures of air travelers. 

•	 Worked with NASA and NOAA in providing information to pilots on exposures from galactic and solar cosmic 

radiation. 

•	 Maintained the FAA Solar Radiation Alert System. 

A-64 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 Completed a laboratory study of ozone reactions with common aircraft cabin materials as well as ozone 

reactions with clothing, perfumes, skin oils, etc. Determined that resultant carbonyls, dicarbonyls, acids, 

and miscellaneous other volatile organic compounds adversely affect perceived air quality and may affect 

passenger and crew health. 

•	 Completed initial experimental campaign of airliner pesticide sampling measurements on both domestic and 

international flights. 

•	 Performed statistical analyses on physiological data from study of the effects of 7000 ft cabin altitudes on 

health-compromised, older people. Found a ~ 50% decrease in arterial blood oxygen at simulated altitudes 

as compared with the ground level baseline. Determined that age is the most highly correlated parameter, 

i.e., older people tend to desaturate more. 

•	 Performed statistical analyses of 4300+ health surveys of flight attendants for underlying and occupationalrelated health conditions. Quantified the percentage that reported one or more work related 

injuries/illnesses last year and determined that respiratory symptoms were the greatest cause of visits to 

medical providers. 

•	 Completed measurements of cabin air quality (ozone, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, volatile organic 

compounds, PM2.5, etc.) on 40 flight segments. 

•	 Tricresyl phosphate sensor: Tricresyl phosphate is one of the key bleed air contaminants of potential 

concern. Refined the successful laboratory technique and packaged the components to enable a future 

demonstration of the technology in a bleed air simulator. 

•	 Determined exhaled bioaerosol characteristics and used the data to develop a computational model of 

airborne disease transmission on aircraft 

•	 Developed an experimental protocol and laboratory facility to assess potential hydrogen embrittlement of 

high strength steels due to exposure to vaporized aircraft disinfectants. 

•	 Completed a preliminary flammability study on the effects of hydrogen peroxide on common aircraft textiles. 

•	 Completed a feasibility study of the ability of modern atmospheric databases and models to predict 

atmospheric ozone and improve the ability of airline flight planners to meet ozone regulations.
 

FY 2008 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

Aeromedical Systems Analysis 

•	 The aerospace Medical Research Scientific Information System (SIS) software was documented for use by 

aeromedical research scientists. 

•	 Completed phase I of a cross functional study of diabetes in civil aviation. 

•	 Continued the development of an Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy Data System (AAIADS) – realized 

significant coordination & collaborative activities. 

•	 Accepted FAA Accident Autopsy Program responsibilities. 

•	 Completed the program on quality control and assurance concerning the use of the CAMI Data Imaging and 

Workflow System (DIWS). 

•	 Completed the Quality Control and Assurance Software Tool (computer code) to facilitate risk management 

processes in medical certification of aircrew. 

•	 Examined the frequency and rate of aviation-related laser incidents by year and location. 

•	 Evaluated All-Strobe Approach Lighting Systems. 

•	 Evaluated new design Optometric Test Devices. 

•	 Provided recommendations regarding Infrared Radiation Transmittance and Pilot Vision Through Civilian 

Aircraft Windscreens 

•	 Provided Safety Considerations for High-Intensity Lights Projected into the Navigable Space: SAE G10-T 

Working Group: Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) document. 

•	 Assessed the Medical Certification Of Civilian Pilots Fitted With Multifocal Contact Lenses and those 

Considering Laser Eye Surgery. 

A-65 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Assessed Aircraft accidents and incidents associated with visual effects from bright light exposures during 

low-light flight operation 

• Assessed Laser Exposure Incidents: Pilots Ocular Health And Aviation Safety Issues. 

Accident Prevention and Investigation
 

•	 Compared usage of both illegal drugs and abused prescription medications in pilots involved in civil aviation 

accidents with that of the general population in the United States. 

•	 Examined the Vitreous Fluid and/or Urine Glucose Concentrations in 1,335 Civil Aviation Accident Pilot 

Fatalities. 

•	 Completed the formulation of the ISO 27368 Blood Gas Analysis International Standard. 

•	 A new equation was developed to prevent false negative drug results. 

•	 Biomarker Response to Altitude: The test phase of two studies to assess gene expression changes that 

occur as a result of exposure to decreased oxygen levels have been completed. 

•	 Biomarker Response to Alcohol: Gene expression studies have been developed to identify biomarkers 

associated with alcohol consumption of levels up to 0.08%. 

•	 Biomarker Response to Fatigue: A preliminary study of the effects of fatigue was undertaken in collaboration 

with the United States Air Force. 

Protection and Survival
 

•	 Evacuation Models: A computer simulation of airliner emergency evacuation was developed and 

demonstrated for both narrow and wide body aircraft. 

•	 Comprehension of Safety Material and Signs - Commercial Airliner “EXIT” signs and symbols were evaluated. 

•	 Comprehension of Safety Briefing Card Pictorials and Pictograms was evaluated. 

•	 Mathematical Prediction of the Effectiveness of Emergency Evacuation Aids (slides) – model continued 

development 

•	 Assessed the inflation Performance of Emergency Escape Slides at High Altitude. 

•	 Occupant Seat/Restraint Models: Measures of accuracy for dynamic mathematical models have been 

developed and tested. 

•	 Side Facing Seat Safety Criteria: A study of the injury potential of side facing seats using a specialized 

anthropomorphic test dummy has been completed. 

•	 Assessed head and neck injury potential for occupants of typical aircraft seats and interior configurations 

during forward impacts. 

Aviation Physiology 

•	 Software: Refined equations used for the calculation of radiation doses received by pilots and crew were 

completed and implemented into the early warning radiation alert system. 

•	 Determined the cosmic radiation exposure of aircraft occupants on simulated high-latitude flights during 

solar proton events from 1986 through 2008. 

•	 In conjunction with Harvard University, a study was completed on the effect of normal cabin altitude in an 

older (50-80 years old) and less than healthy (smokers/cardiac conditions) passenger population. 

•	 Supported the field evaluation of whole airliner decontamination technologies; wide-body aircraft with dualuse application for railcars in support of the RITE effort. 

•	 Contributed to the development of Guidelines for Life Support Equipment and Cabin environment issues - 

crew and passenger safety requirements for very high altitude air or spacecraft. 

•	 Contributed to training recommendations for occupants of orbital or suborbital vehicles. 

•	 Conducted a review of Technical Order and AC addressing the exposure of pilots & crew to excessive levels 

of carbon monoxide. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 Aircraft Decontamination System: Complete field evaluations of an aircraft thermal decontamination 

system. The system uses the complementary dual decontamination technologies of thermal desorption 

(high temperature and relative humidity) and vaporized hydrogen peroxide to kill a full spectrum of 

biological agents. The evaluations were performed on a McDonnell Douglas DC-9 and a Boeing-747 aircraft. 

•	 In conjunction with CAMI, a study was completed to assess the physiological effects of 7,000 ft cabin 

altitudes on passengers with chronic and stable cardiac and/or pulmonary disease. 

A-66 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Extensive study ongoing of the chemicals deposited on high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters during 

airliner service; identification of key markers of contamination. 

•	 Development of miniature sensor array for chemical and physical assessment of the aircraft cabin. 

•	 Laboratory demonstration of an electrochemical sensing technique for the detection of tricresyl phosphate - 

one of the principal chemicals of concern during contamination of bleed air from jet engine lubricants. 

•	 Identified previously unanticipated ozone reaction chemistry to form volatile organic compound 

contaminants. 

•	 Collected 4,000 health surveys of flight attendants for underlying and occupational related health conditions 

and begun statistical analysis air quality incidents. 

•	 Developed protocol for measuring critical cabin pressures for at-risk passengers and crewmembers. 

•	 Developed protocol for onboard pesticide sampling. 

•	 Initiated research collecting baseline data for volatile organic compound contaminants on loaded filters. 

•	 Completed materials compatibility studies of aluminum aerospace alloys and airliner cabin textiles with 

prototype decontamination technology. 

FY 2007 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

•	 Evaluated the medical aspects of extending first-class FAA medical certificate to 12 months for pilots under 

age 40. 

•	 Development of software and procedures to support quality assurance evaluation of airman medical records. 

•	 Development of an Aircraft Accident/Injury and Autopsy Data System (AA-IADS). 

•	 Evaluated aircraft windscreen transmittance characteristics as they relate to emerging laser technologies 

employed in the NAS. 

•	 Performed analysis of civilian air show accidents. 

•	 Evaluated the effectiveness of simulators in upset recovery training. 

•	 Determined the distribution of fluoxetine, vardenafil, glucose, hemoglobin A1c, and sedating antihistaminics 

levels in postmortem cases from aviation accidents. 

•	 Determined molecular changes as a result of decreased cabin oxygen levels at altitudes with significance to 

both the aviation industry and military pilots. 

•	 Provided engineering/biodynamic requirements to support revision to TSO-C100 and SAE AS5276. 

•	 Supported development of a cabin evacuation design computer model for very large transport aircraft by 

developing passenger management strategies using research data from flight attendant location trials. 

•	 Evaluated presentation media for maximum effectiveness in passenger safety briefings. 

•	 Initiated collaborative research with industry partners to develop modeling strategies and validation 

techniques applicable to aircraft seat certification by analysis. 

•	 Reviewed accidents involving Commemorative Air Force Aircraft 1968 to 2005. 

•	 Evaluated design requirements for pulse oxygen systems to support development of engineering 

certification criteria. 

• Determined the clinical aspects of radiation exposure resulting from a terrorist attack. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 Collected extensive ozone measurements in aircraft cabins during flight. 

•	 Developed advanced computer simulations for evaluation of airflow and contaminant transport inside 

aircraft cabins. 

•	 Developed an 11-row airliner mock-up for experimental validation of computational models. 

•	 Completed development and full scale demonstration of prototype biological decontamination system for 

narrow-body and wide-body aircraft using thermal heat and vaporized hydrogen peroxide. 

•	 Evaluation completed for a range of commercial off-the-shelf biosensors for aircraft cabin environment. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

A-67 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

Aeromedical Safety Management System 

•	 Completed application of Aerospace Medical Research Scientific Information System (SIS): DIABETES. 

• Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy Data System (AAIADS) continued development. 

Accident Prevention and Investigation
 

•	 Gene Expression Changes in Response to Fatigue: Continued to develop methods and tools. 

•	 Analyzed post-mortem aviation accidents specimens for fatigue gene expression. 

•	 Assessed prevalence of abused drugs. 

•	 Developed analytical procedures to assess the smoke toxicity of advanced materials for post-crash 

survivability. 

•	 Developed analytical procedures to assess alternative aviation fuels vapor toxicity. 

Protection and Survival 

•	 Completed Aviation Child Restraint Certification: Develop the specifications and test requirements - TSOC100. 

•	 Completed Evaluation of Passenger Aircraft Safety and Emergency Information Resources. 

•	 Completed Mathematical Prediction of Emergency Evacuation Performance. 

•	 Completed assessment of Inflation Performance of Emergency Escape Slides at High Altitude. 

•	 Seat Cushion Component Test Methods: Develop methods for replacement of worn seat cushions. 

Aviation Physiology 

•	 Completed methodology to evaluate Pulse Oxygen Systems. 

•	 Completed evaluation of Hypoxia Training Devices: Compared learning experience and symptoms when 

using portable devices (tent, mask) and an altitude chamber to make an individual hypoxic. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 Developed and collected data to identify technologies and/or operational procedures to reliably bring cabin 

ozone and cabin pressure levels within current FARs or to address potential rulemaking activities for revising 

cabin pressure and ozone regulations. 

•	 Quantified the effects of cabin pressure on individuals at risk due to age and/or health status. 

•	 Conducted preliminary assessment of the compatibility of aircraft materials, such as high strength steels and 

aerospace composites materials, with decontamination technology to determine which products are safe to 

use on aircraft and which could damage the aircraft materials and potentially compromise the continued 

airworthiness of the aircraft. 

•	 Demonstrated the feasibility of detecting tricresyl phosphate (TCP) from hot air streams to determine 

whether TCP levels that could affect health of the crew can be detected in aircraft cabins. 

•	 Developed state-of-the-art computer simulation for influenza transmission within aircraft cabins to 

determine where bioaerosol droplets may be spread in addition to nearby infected passengers. 

•	 Conducted preliminary assessment of the effectiveness of new influenza control methodologies to mitigate 

spread of influenza to passengers and crew members. 

•	 Evaluated exposure risk for pesticides and volatile organic compound contaminants to determine levels of 

contaminants and the potential health effects to humans. 

•	 Collected and analyzed data on airliner cabin environment relative humidity, temperature, ozone, carbon 

dioxide, volatile organic compounds, and sound levels to determine levels and potentially revise or create 

new regulations. 

•	 Collected baseline data for volatile organic compound contaminants on loaded aircraft filters to determine 

what can be detected on aircraft filters and what, if any, effects there may be from the contamination to 

passengers and crew members. 

•	 Developed and analyze methods to detect and analyze aircraft cabin contamination including chemicalbiological hazards and other airborne irritants. 

A-68 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Validated computational models of chemical air contaminants, such as volatile organic compounds, to 

evaluate health and safety impacts on passengers and crew. 

•	 Provided scientific knowledge base on medical effects of combined exposures to carbon monoxide, carbon 

dioxide and ozone from mild hypoxic conditions associated with reduced air pressures. 

•	 Evaluated toxicological aspects of cabin environmental (air) quality: development of reference laboratory to 

support aircraft cabin air contaminants analysis. 

•	 Validated computational models of air contaminants, volatile organic compounds; biological and viral 

contaminants to evaluate health impacts on passengers and crew. 

•	 Characterized the potential impact on aircraft fuel efficiency gains due to new environmental control system 

materials, sensing systems and methodologies. 

•	 Developed updated scientific databases of atmospheric ozone concentrations and route planning tools. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

Ongoing Activities 

•	 Validate mathematical models to evaluate whether aircraft designs meet requirements for evacuation and 

emergency response capability. 

•	 Establish design criteria for restraint systems that protect occupants at the highest impact levels that the 

aircraft structure can sustain. 

•	 Apply advances in gene expression technology, toxicology, and bioinformatics to define human response to 

aerospace stressors including alcohol, drugs, hypoxia, and fatigue. Develop methods to collect and assess 

environmentally responsive genes and their protein products in the context of normal and abnormal 

physiologic states. Utilize machine learning techniques to develop a robust gene-set predictive for these 

stressors, towards a "genomics black-box" to support accident investigation and minimize risk to human 

safety and health. 

•	 Incorporate aerospace medical issues in the development of safety strategies concerning upset recovery, 

controlled flight into terrain (CFIT), and other forms of loss of aircraft control: As adaptive-control 

techniques are developed, assess pilot performance relative to aeromedical considerations - e.g., transfer 

of training from various classroom methodologies in the ground, to operations in static and dynamic 

simulators emulating physiologically stressful flight conditions (e.g., altitude and acceleration/acrobatic 

maneuvers), and ultimately in-flight. 

•	 Develop advanced methods to extract aeromedical information for prognostic identification of human safety 

risks. Evaluate factors pertinent to aeromedical safety including disqualifying pathologies; pilot age; fatigue; 

the physiologic basis of issues commonly labeled "pilot error" such as spatial disorientation, loss of 

situational awareness, and confusion; assessment of toxicological findings in terms of historical medical 

certification data; detection and aeromedical assessment of new medications and their interactions; 

effectiveness of emergency response procedures and equipment; and special issues (stow-always, type 

aircraft, laser/radiation threats, and commercial space transportation). Enable evidence-based medical 

certification and effective knowledge management. Develop new metrics to better understand aeromedical 

certification trends and future requirements to facilitate this process, including related education/training 

programs. 

•	 Develop a methodology to compile, classify, and assess aviation-related injuries, the mechanisms that 

resulted in these injuries, and their relationship to: autopsy findings, medical certification data, aircraft cabin 

configurations, and biodynamic testing: Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy Data System (AAIADS). 

New Initiatives 

•	 Injury Criteria for Obliquely Oriented Seats: Occupant injury mechanisms and test methods and 

instrumentation and/or modeling techniques required to assess the injury potential. 

•	 Prevention of Injuries That Impede Egress: Unconsciousness related to measurable impact parameters; 

Relationship between test measurements and probability of injury established; Injury mitigation capabilities 

of available technologies evaluated; Leg injuries related to measurable impact parameters; Relationship 

between test measurements and probability of injury established, Injury mitigation capabilities of available 

technologies evaluated; and derive injury criteria. 

A-69 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Develop and maintain analytical tools; empirical data and scientific expertise to support regulatory actions; 

standards development; accident investigations; and enhanced safety of airplane interior arrangements and 

emergency equipment/ operations. 

•	 Identification, assessment, and development of improved evacuation equipment and evacuation aids, such 

as lighting, aural way-finding systems, and symbolic information media. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

Ongoing Activities 

•	 Evaluate synergistic health effects of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and ozone under mild hypoxic 

conditions. 

•	 Collect and analyze data on airliner cabin environment relative humidity, temperature, ozone, carbon 

dioxide, volatile organic compounds, and sound levels to determine potential health effects. 

•	 Evaluation of exposure risk for pesticides and volatile organic compounds contaminants. 

•	 Collect baseline data for measuring volatile organic compound contaminants on loaded aircraft filters. 

•	 Develop advanced air chemistry models for interaction of atmospheric ozone and volatile organic 

compounds and their effects on cabin air quality. 

•	 Develop real-time intelligent sensing of cabin air quality on airliners. 

•	 Develop advanced microstructured catalytic materials for ozone conversion. 

•	 Apply advances in weather modeling to predict atmospheric ozone disturbances that could affect cabin air 

quality. 

•	 Asses risk and manage the infectious disease transmission on airliners. 

•	 Continue preliminary assessment of aircraft material compatibility of high strength steels and aerospace 

composites materials with disinfection technologies. 

•	 Quantify the effects of cabin pressure on individuals at risk due to age and/or health status. 

•	 Evaluate and identify technologies and/or operational procedures to reliably bring cabin ozone and cabin 

pressure levels within current FARs. 

New Initiatives 

•	 Develop and test adaptive environmental control techniques to enable a safe and healthy cabin air 

environment including in-flight incidents. 

•	 Validate software tools and methods to mitigate air contamination incidents during flight and ground 

operations. 

•	 Identify potential impacts of more fuel efficient advanced airliner environmental control system and related 

engine designs on cabin air quality. 

•	 Assess role of advanced weather modeling technology to predict atmospheric ozone disturbances in the 

aircraft cabin. 

•	 Preliminary assessment of the efficacy of new influenza control methodologies. 

•	 Evaluate viral outbreak mitigation strategies and methodologies for cost effect reduction of impact to the air 

transportation system. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

CAMI Aeromedical Research Program 

Aeromedical Systems Analysis 

•	 Provide incidental medical findings and injury description and injury mechanisms analysis to support the 

development of prevention and mitigation strategies: Aircraft Accident Injury and Autopsy Data System (AAIADS). 

•	 Conduct a Risk Assessment of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) use in civil aviation. 

Accident Prevention and Investigation 

•	 Quantify the effects and impact of fatigue in aviation using gene expression research. 

•	 Determine the usefulness of blood from aviation accidents as a RNA source for gene expression analysis. 

A-70 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Determine the prevalence of psychotropic drugs in pilot fatalities from civil aviation accidents. 

•	 Assess unapproved medications found in fatally injured pilots involved in homebuilt-aircraft accidents. 

• Correlate the incidence of quinine positives in aircraft fatalities with elevated serotonin metabolite ratios. 

Protection and Survival 

•	 Develop methods to qualify replacement elements for worn seat cushions used in energy absorbing seats. 

•	 Develop Mathematical Prediction of Emergency Evacuation Performance. 

•	 Conduct the performance evaluation of Inflatable Emergency Equipment for Ditching Scenarios. 

Aviation Physiology 

•	 Calculate galactic cosmic radiation dose rates in the atmosphere at altitudes above 60,000 feet. 

•	 Develop a Windows version of the CARI program. 

•	 Evaluate and develop oxygen system guidelines for high altitude aircraft. 

Airliner Cabin Environment Research Program 

•	 Provide scientific knowledge base on medical effects of combined exposures to carbon monoxide, carbon 

dioxide and ozone from mild hypoxic conditions associated with reduced air pressures. 

•	 Evaluate toxicological aspects of cabin environmental (air) quality: development of reference laboratory to 

support aircraft cabin air contaminants analysis. 

•	 Validate computational models of air contaminants, volatile organic compounds; biological and viral 

contaminants to evaluate health impacts on passengers and crew. 

•	 Characterize the potential impact on aircraft fuel efficiency gains due to new environmental control system 

materials, sensing systems and methodologies. 

•	 Develop updated scientific databases of atmospheric ozone concentrations and route planning tools. 

A-71 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 140,813 

FY 2010 Enacted 10,378 

FY 2011 Request 11,217 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012­ 46,548 

2015) 

Total 208,956 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

CAMI Aeromedical Research 

Airliner Cabin Environment 

Research 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

1,504 

0 

5,313 

145 

6,962 

1,712 

0 

5,893 

155 

7,760 

2,038 

0 

6,177 

180 

8,395 

3,811 

0 

6,342 

225 

10,378 

2,847 

1,700 

6389 

281

 11,217 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

6,962 

0 

6,962 

0 

7,760 

0 

7,760 

0 

8,395 

0 

8,395

0 

10,378 

0 

10,378 

0 

11,217 

0 

11,217 

A-72 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.j – Aeromedical Research 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

086-110 CAMI AEROMEDICAL RESEARCH 

(CAMI) 

1. Validate mathematical models to evaluate 

whether aircraft designs meet requirements for 

evacuation and emergency response capability. 

2. Establish design criteria for restraint systems that 

protect occupants at the highest impact levels that 

the aircraft structure can sustain. 

3. Apply and develop advances in gene expression, 

toxicology, and bioinformatics technology and 

methods to define human response to aerospace 

2,847 

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

stressors. 

4. Incorporate aerospace medical issues in the 

development of safety strategies concerning pilot 

impairment, incapacitation, spatial disorientation, 

and other aeromedical-related factors that 

contribute to loss of aircraft control. 

5. Develop advanced methods to extract 

aeromedical information for prognostic identification 

of human safety risks. 

6. Develop a methodology to compile, classify, 

and assess aviation-related injuries, the 

mechanisms that resulted in these 

injuries, and their relationship to: 

autopsy findings, medical certification 

data, aircraft cabin configurations, and 

biodynamic testing: Aerospace Accident 

Injury and Autopsy Data System 

(AAIADS). 

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

086-111 Airliner Cabin Environment Research 

1. Develop and analyze methods to detect and 

analyze aircraft cabin contamination. 

2. Computational models of air contaminants, 

volatile organic compounds, biologicals 

and virals 

3. Advanced air sensing technology for volatile 

organic compounds. 

4. Bleed air contamination models of engine 

compressors and high temperature air 

system. 

5. Support of regulatory, certification, and 

operations for existing Aviation 

Rulemaking Committees. 

6. Chemical kinetic models for bleed air 

systems for health and safety effects on 

passengers and crew. 

1,700 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 6,670 

Total Budget Authority 11,217 10,378 11,217 11,390 11,570 11,718 11,870 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-73 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.k Weather Program $16,505,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety and Greater Capacity; and supports the Next 

Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) weather operational improvements. 

Intended Outcomes: The Weather Program contributes to FAA’s strategic goals for increased safety and capacity. 

The Weather Program provides improved weather information to minimize impacts on NAS operations. The Weather 

Program supports NextGen goals through research of the advanced forecast capabilities detailed in the NextGen 

Integrated Work Plan (IWP) and the FAA NextGen Implementation Plan 2009. Efforts undertaken in collaboration 

with the National Weather Service (NWS) and NASA, increase FAA’s ability to provide the operational improvements 

required for NextGen. These improvements include short-term and mid-term forecasts of naturally occurring 

atmospheric hazards, such as turbulence, severe convective activity, icing, and restricted visibility. Improved 

forecasts enhance flight safety, reduce air traffic controller and pilot workload, enable better flight planning, increase 

productivity, and enhance common situational awareness.
 

Agency Outputs: The Weather Program provides new and improved weather products that support legacy NAS 

systems, NWS, and near term NextGen capabilities as well as enablers necessary for mid-term and far-term term 

benefits. Weather products are enhanced by upgrading algorithms for existing NAS platforms such as the Weather 

and Radar Processor, the Integrated Terminal Weather System, the Operational and Supportability Implementation 

System, and the Enhanced Traffic Management System. The NWS platforms also use the algorithms developed. 

Research is an integral element in providing the advanced forecast and nowcast information that can be integrated 

into decision support tools. This information will be transitioned by the FAA’s Reduce Weather Impact (RWI) 

portfolio to accomplish this. The information will be developed in accordance with the NextGen Network Enabled 

Weather (NNEW) dissemination standards. This will allow universal access to weather information through net centric 

capabilities. 

The Weather Program will develop advanced forecast capabilities consistent with the operational improvements 

specified in the NextGen IWP and FAA NextGen Implementation Plan 2009. To support transition of these advanced
 

capabilities to operations, the Weather Program will utilize the Network-Enabled Verification System (NEVS) to verify 

the performance of these capabilities as well as live demonstrations of these scientific advancements. These 

advanced capability requirements for NextGen include the following: 

•	 Advanced Convective weather forecast - high-resolution, deterministic & probabilistic 0-8 hour forecasts for 

convection for aviation end users 

•	 Hourly (Nowcasts) & 0-18 hour probabilistic forecasts of turbulence for use by Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), 

Aviation Operations Centers (AOC), & the pilot in the cockpit to enhance safety and capacity 

•	 Hourly (Nowcasts) & 0-12 hour probabilistic forecasts for in-flight icing including its severity for use by ATC, 

AOC, and the pilot in the cockpit for preflight planning 

•	 Analysis and 0-12 hour probabilistic forecasts of ceiling, visibility, & flight category for use by ATC, AOC, & 

the pilot in the cockpit, & to support estimation of capacity resources at airports as well as increased GA 

safety 

The weather capabilities developed by the FAA provide the following benefits: 

•	 Depiction of current and forecasted in-flight icing areas – enhances safety and regulatory adherence 

•	 Interactive data assimilation, editing, forecast and dissemination tools – improves aviation advisories and 

forecasts issued by the NWS as well as accessibility to users of aviation weather information 

•	 Depiction of current and forecast precipitation type and rate – enhances safety in the terminal area 

•	 Depiction of current and forecast terminal and en route convective weather – enhances terminal and en 

route capacity 

•	 Short-term prediction and forecast of ceiling and visibility in the national area – enhances en route safety 

•	 In-situ, remote detection, and forecast of en route turbulence, including clear-air turbulence – enhances en 

route safety 

A-74 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Research Goals: Research is on-going to provide weather observations, warnings, and forecasts that are more 

accurate, accessible, and efficient, and to meet current and planned regulatory requirements. The goals of the 

focused research endeavors are: 

•	 By FY 2012 to meet the NextGen requirements for 2013 IOC segment one; to develop timely and accurate 

deterministic and an initial set of probabilistic aviation weather forecasts for operational use by ATM, 

dispatchers, and pilots. 

•	 By FY 2016 in support of NextGen segment two requirements, increased maturity of probabilistic 

forecasting; integration of ground, airborne, and satellite weather observation information in real time; 

methods to translate greater weather uncertainty and longer look ahead times; levels into operational 

impact linked to advances in risk based decision-making tool from Single Authorative Source (SAS). 

•	 By FY 2020 in support of NextGen segment three requirements, enhanced accuracy of net-enabled 

deterministic and advanced probabilistic weather forecast information assimilated into NAS decision making. 

Weather observations integrated into an operational network from ground, airborne, and satellite sensors 

for extended weather forecast that will be disseminated in real-time from a mature SAS for operational use 

by ATM, dispatchers, and pilots. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Weather Program works within FAA, industry and government groups 

to assure its priorities and plans are consistent with user needs. This is accomplished through: 

•	 Guidance from the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) Next Generation Air Transportation 

System initiative and the Integration and Implementation Office with the FAA. 

•	 Guidance from the FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee. 

•	 Inputs from the National Aviation Weather Initiatives, which are strongly influenced by other NAS drivers 

including “Safer Skies” and Flight Plan Safety Objectives. 

•	 Inputs from the aviation community, such as the annual National Business Aircraft Association 

/Friends/Partners in Aviation Weather Forum, JPDO, RTCA, and scheduled public user group meetings. 

•	 Close collaboration with FAA organizations internal to the Agency such as the Air Traffic Organization 

Oceanic and Off-Shore Programs Office, various FAA Aviation Safety Offices. 

•	 Feedback received from documents and publications. 

R&D Partnerships: The Weather Program collaborates with the Department of Commerce in promoting and 

developing meteorological science, and in fostering support of research projects through the use of private and 

governmental research facilities. The program also leverages research activities with members of industry, 

academia, and other government agencies through interagency agreements, university grants, and Memorandums of 

Agreement. 

Partnerships include: 

•	 National Center for Atmospheric Research (in-flight icing, convective weather, turbulence, ceiling and 

visibility, ground de-icing, modeling, weather radar techniques). 

•	 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration laboratories (convective weather, turbulence, modeling, 

weather radar techniques, quality assessment/verification). 

•	 Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory (convective weather). 

•	 National Weather Service’s Aviation Weather Center and Environment Modeling Center (modeling). 

•	 NASA Research Centers (in-flight icing, turbulence, satellite data). 

•	 Universities (modeling). 

•	 Airlines, port authorities, cities (user assessments). 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Obtained approval to test Alaskan in-flight icing forecast capability. 

•	 Completed guidance for certification of weather radars with forward-looking turbulence detection capability. 

•	 Developed prototype Network-Enabled Verification Service for meeting System-Wide Information 

Management architecture requirements. 

A-75 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2008: 

•	 Implemented an experimental rapid refresh Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model. 

• Implemented turbulence detection algorithm into NEXRAD operations. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Implemented in-flight icing severity nowcast capability operationally 

•	 Obtained approval of turbulence detection algorithm by NWS NEXRAD System Recommendation and 

Evaluation Committee for operational implementation. 

•	 Provided Helicopter Emergency Medical Services Aviation Digital Data Service (ADDS) enhancement to 

enable emergency medical services pilots to make NO-GO weather decisions. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Obtained approval of in-flight icing severity nowcast capability for operational use. 

•	 Implemented four-hour winter precipitation capability into Weather Support to Decision Making System. 

• Implemented terminal convective weather forecast capability into Integrated Terminal Weather System. 

FY 2005: 

•	 Implemented improved accuracy and resolution of data on upper winds, temperature, and moisture through 

13 kilometer rapid-update-cycle analyses and forecasts at the NWS. 

• Implemented in-flight icing nowcast capability with higher resolution into ADDS. 

Previous Years: 

•	 Achieved the Department of Commerce 2003 Silver Medal. 

•	 Implemented operationally new capabilities of: 

•	 Current and up to two-hour forecast of convective weather. 

•	 Current and up to 12-hour forecast of in-flight icing conditions 

•	 Current and up to 12-hour forecasts of clear-air turbulence above 30,000 feet. 

•	 Up to 12-hour forecast of marine stratus burn-off at San Francisco International Airport. 

•	 Implemented operationally at the NWS the enhanced ADDS with a flight path tool depicting vertical cross 

sections of weather along user-specified flight routes. 

•	 Completed convective storm growth and decay field tests in Dallas, Orlando, Memphis, and New York. This 

research resulted in the accurate short-term prediction of the initiation, growth, and decays of storm cells, 

and enhanced the strategic and tactical flow management planning that allows more effective routing of 

traffic to and from airports and runways. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Upgraded in-flight icing forecast and nowcast severity capability for WRF rapid refresh. 

•	 Developed High Ice Water Content algorithm and provide support to field program in Puerto Rico. 

•	 Transitioned probabilistic and mountain-wave turbulence forecast capability for implementation on 

operational ADDS. 

•	 Developed CONUS 0-6 hour advanced storm prediction capability via NextGen Net-Enabled Weather 

standards. 

•	 Transitioned CONUS display of ceiling, visibility, and flight category analysis capability for implementation on 

operational ADDS. 

•	 Transitioned Rapid Refresh Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) model for implementation into NWS 

operations. 

•	 Utilized rapid refresh WRF model forecasts to produce probabilistic forecasts for convection, and ceiling and 

visibility. 

•	 Integrated Canadian radar data into real-time national 3D mosaic. 

•	 Demonstrated initial operating capability for Network-Enabled Verification System (NEVS) utilizing advanced 

storm prediction capability data. 

•	 Conducted quality assessment evaluations, utilizing automated verification tools, of weather research 

capabilities to support the FAA/NWS NextGen Weather Evaluation Capability process. 

A-76 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Developed specification for operational approval of liquid water equivalent technology for ground icing 

guidance. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

The weather program will continue to develop/enhance forecast/nowcast capabilities, to support FAA safety and 

capacity Flight Plan goals and meet NextGen requirements, through the conduct of applied research in naturally 

occurring atmospheric hazards including turbulence, severe convective activity, icing, and restricted visibility. In FY 

2011, additional turbulence forecast capabilities are being developed to enhance en route safety and capacity, an 

advanced convective weather forecast is be developed to enhance terminal and en route capacity, an in-flight icing 

forecast capability for Alaska is being developed to enhance safety especially for general aviation, and a ceiling and 

visibility forecast capability is being developed to enhance en route safety especially for general aviation and a 

volcanic ash dispersion forecast capability is being developed to enhance en route safety and capacity. Capabilities 

developed transition to NWS, FAA, and industry weather systems. 

New Initiatives 

No new initiatives are planned in FY 2011 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Utilize High Ice Water Content prototype algorithm to support field program. 

•	 Develop 0-6 hour advanced probabilistic storm prediction capability. 

•	 Approval of convectively-induced turbulence capability for operational use on ADDS. 

•	 Develop CONUS ceiling, visibility, and flight category forecast capability. 

•	 Test radar-based freezing drizzle algorithm. 

•	 Conduct quality assessment evaluations, utilizing NEVS, of weather research capabilities to support the 

FAA/NWS NextGen Weather Evaluation Capability (NWEC) process. 

•	 Evaluate liquid water equivalent technology system for measurement of freezing rain, freezing drizzle, snow, 

and ice pellets. 

•	 Test 3KM High Resolution Rapid Refresh WRF Model at NOAA. 

A-77 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 388,581 

FY 2010 Enacted 16,789 

FY 2011 Request 16,505 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 64,224 

Total 486,099 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted 

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Weather Program 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

18,432 

1,035 

78 

19,545 

15,936 

863 

89 

16,888 

15,855 

979 

134 

16,968 

15,750 

862 

177 

16,789 

15,547 

712 

246

16,505 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2006 

Enacted

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes)

Total 

0 

19,545 

0 

19,545 

0 

16,888 

0 

16,888 

0 

16,968 

0 

16,968 

0 

16,789 

0 

16,789 

0 

16,505 

0 

16,505 

A-78 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.k – Weather Program – FY 2011 Program Schedule 

Product and Activities Request 

($000) 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

041-110 Aviation Weather Analysis and Forecasting 5.700 

Convective Analysis and Forecast Improvement 

Developed CONUS 0-6 hr adv storm pred cap via NNEW stds ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Develop 0-6 hr adv probabilistic storm prediction capability ◊

Integrated Canadian radar data into real/time national 3D ♦

mosaic 

Test radar-based freezing drizzle algorithm ◊

Analysis and Forecast Improvement 7.304 

Upgraded in-flight icing fc & nc severity for WRF RR ♦

Developed HIWC alg & provide support to field program ♦

Utilize HIWC prototype alg to support fld prog in Australia ◊

Transition AK in-flight icing forecast capability for ◊

implementation on operation ADDS. 

Obtain FAA approval to test global in-flight icing forecast ◊

capability 

Transitioned rapid refresh WRF model for implem. into NWS ♦

Utilized RR WRF model fcs for probabilistic conv & C&V ♦

Test 3KM High Resolution Rapid Refresh WRF model at NOAA ◊

Transition probabilistic and mountain wave turbulence ♦

forecast capability for implement on operational ADDS 

Approval of convectively-induced turb capability for oper use ◊

Transitioned CONUS display of ceiling, vis. & flt. category ♦

analysis capability for impl. on oper. ADDS 

Develop CONUS ceiling, visibility, and flight category forecast ◊

capability 

Obtain FAA approval to test AK C&V forecast ◊ ◊

Verification and Technology Implementation 2.543 

Demonstrate IOC for NEVS utilizing adv storm prediction ♦

capability data 

Conduct QA evaluations, utilizing NEVS for NWEC process ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Implement FAA approved products at the AWC ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Developed specification for operational approval of liquid ♦

water equivalent for ground de-icing guidance 

Evaluate liquid water equivalent technology system for msr of 

freezing rain, frz drz, snow and ice pellets ◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 958 

Total Budget Authority 16,505 16,789 16,505 16,377 16,233 15,952 15,662 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-79 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.l Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research $3,694,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Increased Safety and NextGen Implementation Initiatives 

Intended Outcomes: The Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Research Program supports FAA’s strategic goal of 

increasing safety by conducting research needed to ensure the safe integration of the UAS in the NAS. It also 

supports FAA efforts in NextGen implementation by studying safety implications of new aircraft technology to the 

NAS and supporting the development of new regulatory standards to implement these new technologies. The 

program’s research activities focus on new technology assessments, methodology development, data collection and 

generation, laboratory and field validation, and technology transfer.
 

Agency Outputs: Researchers are developing methodologies and tools to establish regulatory standards on UAS 

design and performance characteristics while operating in the NAS. They are evaluating technologies, conducting 

laboratory and field tests, performing analyses and simulations, and generating data to support standardization of 

UAS civil operations. New standards are being implemented to establish UAS certification procedures, airworthiness 

standards, operation requirements, inspection and maintenance processes, and safety oversight responsibilities.
 

Policies and guidance materials are also being published to equip FAA certification engineers and safety inspectors 

with the knowledge and tools they need to ensure the safe integration of UAS into the NAS. 

Research Goals: To safely integrate UAS into the NAS, FAA needs to develop airworthiness standards, devise 

operational requirements, establish maintenance procedures, and conduct safety oversight activities. The program is 

structured into seven research areas: technology survey; system safety; detect, sense and avoid (DSA); control, 

command, and communication (C3); flight termination, certification and airworthiness standards, and maintenance 

and continuing airworthiness issues. The research began with a baseline survey to determine the existing 

technologies used in UAS and needs of corresponding regulatory standards. Technologies used to avoid mid-air 

collisions due to UAS operations will be examined and tested. Communications issues that may arise due to the 

introduction of UAS into the NAS, as well as necessary safety procedures for the flight termination of UAS, will be 

researched. A system safety approach based on regulatory framework will be developed to identify the potential 

hazards, perform risk assessments, and evaluate mitigation strategies for UAS safe operations in the NAS. Data 

systems will be established to collect data on UAS design, operation, and maintenance that will provide technical 

information to support the development of design and operation standards and provide technical basis for safety 

oversight. 

•	 By FY 2012, determine performance characteristics and operational requirements for DSA technologies. 

•	 By FY 2012, analyze data on the safety implications of system performance impediments to C3 in different 

classes of airspaces and operational environment. 

•	 By FY 2012, develop risk management concepts, models, and tools for unmanned aircraft systems. 

•	 By FY 2015, conduct field evaluations of UAS technologies in an operational environment, including DSA, C3, 

and flight termination technologies. The documented results will be used to develop certification and 

airworthiness standards. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: Full and safe integration of UAS into civil aviation requires FAA to work 

closely with other government and private agencies that have experience in developing and operating UAS: 

•	 FAA Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee Aircraft Safety Subcommittee – 

subcommittee representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the 

activities of the program. 

•	 Technical Community Representatives Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

results derived from these research activities will be implemented to meet the stated Agency Outputs as 

outlined above. 

•	 Department of Defense (DoD) – the DoD is the largest UAS user requesting unrestricted access to the NAS. 

The FAA will collaborate with DoD through Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Interagency 

Agreements (IA) to leverage resources and implement new technologies for civil applications. 

A-80 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Other Government agencies including Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Commerce 

(DOC), state government agencies, and independent organizations that utilize UAS for national security, 

earth science and oceanic studies, and commercial applications. 

•	 JPDO – the JPDO has identified UAS integration to NAS and new aircraft technology as one of the emerging 

challenges to the nation’s air transportation system. In particular, the NextGen related research will be 

coordinated with the JPDO Aircraft Working Group activities in support of aircraft equipage requirements 

and necessary enablers to fully utilize NextGen capabilities. 

•	 RTCA Special Committee 203 (Unmanned Aircraft Systems – members of this U.S. Federal Advisory 

Committee and its special committees (SC) help to ensure the effectiveness of the agency’s rulemaking by 

identifying command and control as well as sense and avoid requirements 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 IA’s with other government agencies (DoD, DHS, DOC, state governments) and Memorandum of 

Cooperation (MOC) with foreign civil aviation authorities.
 

•	 FAA Air Transportation Center of Excellence – various consortiums of university and industry partners who 

conduct R&D for FAA on a cost-matching basis, which currently consists of seven centers in different 

technical disciplines. 

•	 The Civil Aviation Authority of the Netherlands to conduct joint research on UAS initiatives via an MOC. 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Continued technology surveys on UAS designs and operations. 

•	 Continued technology surveys on UAS flight termination and recovery. 

•	 Determined performance characteristics and operational requirements for DSA technologies. 

•	 Established UAS data collection and information system 

•	 Initiated the development of regulatory-based causal factor framework (RCFF) to establish a SMS approach 

to assess UAS safety risk analysis and mitigation strategies. 

•	 Continued FAA-US Air Force joint flight tests to study on-board DSA technology. 

•	 Continued to identify potential safety implications of system performance impediments to C3. 

•	 Developed risk management concepts, models, and tools for unmanned aircraft systems. 

•	 Performed risk analysis to determine impacts of specific hazards, mitigation strategies, recommended 

approaches, safety measurements, and oversight requirements. 

FY 2008: 

•	 Completed technology surveys of UAS propulsion systems and regulatory gap analyses. 

•	 Completed survey of existing DSA capabilities and regulatory requirement analysis. 

•	 Developed UAS hazard categorization and analysis system (HCAS) within the regulatory framework including 

standard taxonomy. 

•	 Completed the second sets of FAA-United States Air Force (USAF) joint flight tests to study on-board DSA 

technology with multiple sensors and data fusion system. 

•	 Conducted technology survey on UAS designs and operations. 

•	 Begin determining potential safety implications of system performance impediments to C3. 

•	 Conducted technology survey on UAS flight termination and recovery. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Completed the first set of FAA-USAF joint flight tests to evaluate a DSA technology. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Technology Surveys 

•	 Completed technology surveys on UAS designs and operations. 

•	 Completed technology surveys on UAS flight termination and recovery. 

A-81 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Detect and Avoid 

•	 Determined performance characteristics and operational requirements for DSA technologies. 

•	 Initiated the system-level safety risk assessment of UAS DSA technologies. 

• Continued FAA-USAF joint flight tests to study on-board DSA technology. 

Command and Control 

• Determined potential safety implications of system performance impediments to C3. 

Safety Management System - Risk Modeling 

•	 Using RCFF, established a SMS approach to assess UAS safety risk analysis and mitigation strategies. 

•	 Developed risk management concepts, models and tools for unmanned aircraft systems. 

•	 Performed risk analysis to determine impacts of specific hazards, mitigation strategies, recommended 

approaches, safety measurements, and oversight requirements. 

•	 Developed the UAS data collection and information system and conducted system safety analysis on specific 

UAS operations. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities: 

Researchers will continue the development of methodologies to study UAS system safety while operating in the NAS 

while interacting with existing NAS users. Will continue the development of the regulatory-based causal factor 

framework (RCFF) concept, which, once developed, will provide a systematic means to conduct safety risk analyses 

and assess risk mitigations. Researchers will apply the RCFF approach to determine safety requirements of DSA 

technologies utilized on various types of UAS operating in different classes of airspace. Researchers will also apply 

the RCFF approach to assess C3 safety leading to UAS airworthiness requirements. 

New Initiatives: 

None. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Detect and Avoid 

•	 Determine performance characteristics and operational requirements for DSA technologies. Included will be 

the development and evaluation of specific DSA technologies including both on-board and ground based 

systems in compliance of regulatory requirements (airworthiness and flight operations). 

•	 Determine system-level safety requirements of UAS DSA technology by applying the RCFF approach. 

• Continue FAA-USAF joint flight tests to study on-board DSA technology. 

Command and Control 

•	 Continue to identify potential safety implications of system performance impediments to C3. 

•	 Develop and evaluate UAS C3 technologies to ensure operational safety including data link requirements, 

frequency spectrum technology, availability and reliability, communicating with ATC, and interactions with 

other NAS users by applying the RCFF approach. 

Safety Management System - Risk Modeling 

•	 Continue using RCFF to establish a SMS approach to assess UAS safety risk analysis and mitigation 

strategies. 

•	 Continue development of risk management concepts, models, and tools for unmanned aircraft systems. 

•	 Perform risks analyses to determine impacts of specific hazards, mitigation strategies, recommended 

approaches, safety measurements, and oversight requirements. 

•	 Continue development of UAS data collection and information system and conduct system safety analysis on 

specific UAS operations. 

•	 Initiate the collection of UAS operation data and perform analyses to develop technical information required 

to support establishment of regulatory standards 

Minimum Requirements for UAS Control Stations 

•	 Develop information to support the definition of minimum human factors requirements for UAS control 

stations. 

A-82 
 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) $5,996 

FY 2010 Enacted 3,467 

FY 2011 Request 3,694 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 14,870 

Total 28,027 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted 

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Unmanned Aircraft System Research 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

1,200 

0 

0 

1,200 

2,768 

136 

16 

2,920 

735 

1,080 

61 

1,876 

2,368 

1,024 

75 

3,467 

2,450 

1,135 

109

3,694 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total

0 

1,200 

0 

 1,200 

0 

2,920 

0 

2,920 

0 

1,876 

0 

1,876 

0 

3,467 

0 

3,467 

0 

3,694 

0 

3,694 

A-83 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.l – Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

Research 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

069-110 Unmanned Aircraft System Research 

Technology Surveys 

Completed technology survey on UAS 

designs and operations 

Completed technology survey on UAS 

flight termination and recovery 

Detect and Avoid 

Determine performance characteristics 

and operational requirements for DSA 

technologies 

Joint USAF-FAA flight tests on DSA 

technology 

Conduct system-level safety risk 

assessment of UAS DSA technology 

applying RCFF approach 

Command and, Control 

Determine potential safety implications of 

system performance impediments to C3 

Develop and evaluate UAS C3 

technologies to ensure operational safety 

including data link requirements, 

frequency spectrum technology, 

availability and reliability, communicating 

with ATC, and with other NAS users 

Conduct C3 field tests and evaluate 

technologies 

Flight Termination 

Determine requirements, risks, and 

mitigation strategies for flight termination 

Conduct flight termination procedure field 

test and evaluate technologies 

Safety Management System – Risk 

Modeling 

Using RCFF, establish a SMS approach to 

assess UAS safety risk analysis and 

mitigation strategies 

Develop risk management concepts, 

models and tools for unmanned aircraft 

systems 

Perform risks analyses to determine 

impacts of specific hazards, mitigation 

strategies, recommended approaches, 

safety measurements, and oversight 

requirements 

Develop UAS data collection and 

information system and conduct system 

safety analysis on specific UAS operations 

Collect UAS operation data and perform 

analyses to develop technical information 

required to support establishment of 

regulatory standards 

Minimum Requirements for UAS Control 

Stations 

Develop information to support the definition of 

minimum human factors requirements for 

UAS control stations. 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

0 

1,350 

300 

0 

500 

300 

1,244 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦ ◊

◊ ◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

◊ ◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

Total Budget Authority 3,694 3,467 3,694 3,710 3,725 3,720 3,715 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-84 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A11.m NextGen – Alternative Fuels for General Aviation $2,000,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: 

The NextGen - Alternative Fuels for General Aviation will address the use of alternative and renewable fuels for GA to 

lessen aviation environmental impacts (air and water quality). These activities will be coordinated with the FAA 

Office of Aviation Policy, Planning, and Environment (AEP). The program also conducts research to test new 

unleaded fuels and piston engine modifications to seek a safe alternative to current leaded aviation gasoline (avgas). 

Agency Outputs: 

The FAA issues certification standards and Advisory Circulars, and reviews the specifications and practices 

recommended by recognized technical societies (ASTM International, SAE International) to maintain the 

airworthiness of aircraft engines, fuels, and airframe fuel management systems. The agency also publishes 

information and sponsors technology workshops, demonstrations, and other means of training and technology 

transfer. The NextGen - Alternative Fuels for General Aviation provides the technical information, R&D resources, 

and technical oversight necessary for the agency to enhance the airworthiness, reliability, and performance of 

propulsion and fuel systems. 

Research Goals: 

The elimination of lead emissions from piston powered aircraft is the primary goal of this research. Various 

alternatives to achieve this goal will be explored through this research, including: 

•	 Investigation of unleaded replacement alternatives to current leaded avgas (100LL) used in piston engines. 

To the greatest extent possible the replacement alternative(s) should be equivalent in performance to 100LL 

and be a seamless, transparent change to a general aviation (GA) pilot. 

•	 Technologies for modification of piston engines to enable their safe operation using unleaded fuel. 

•	 Qualification and certification methodologies for alternative fuel safety performance. 

•	 Investigation of fleet lead emissions which will support evaluation of various approaches to for achieving 

emissions reductions. 

Expected milestones include: 

•	 By FY 2012, complete fleet impact study of imminent lead removal from aviation gasoline and impact on 

certification methodologies. 

•	 By FY 2012, complete feasibility assessment of reducing the current lead levels in aviation gasoline as a 

temporary measure toward full lead removal and impact on certification methodologies. 

•	 By FY 2014, complete upgrades to engine test facilities to enable piston engine performance and detonation 

evaluation across the entire operating envelope, including high altitude, high/low temperature, and high/low 

humidity conditions. 

•	 By FY 2014, develop an unleaded aviation gasoline anti-knock rating method that allows for correlation to 

the leaded octane ratings of existing piston engines. 

•	 By FY 2014, complete engine tests on representative high power density engines to characterize safety 

impacts from operation on reduced octane alternative unleaded aviation fuel. 

•	 By FY 2015, develop engine test methods to evaluate the performance, durability and operability of 

unleaded aviation gasolines. 

•	 By FY 2015, develop and validate analytical test methods to evaluate the fit-for-purpose of unleaded 

aviation gasolines. 

•	 By FY 2015, evaluate the technology of modifying general aviation piston engines to run on unleaded fuels. 

•	 By FY 2015, evaluate and characterize all candidate replacement formulations for 100LL. 

A-85 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 By FY 2015, complete research on safety impact of variations to current aviation specification from use of 

biofuels. 

•	 By FY 2015, complete research comparing use of high aromatic biofuels to current aviation gasoline on CO, 

CO2, and NOx greenhouse gas pollutants. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The NextGen-Alternative Fuels for General Aviation works with the 

following industry and government groups: 

•	 Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety of the Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – 

representatives from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review the program’s 

activities. 

•	 Technical Community Representative Groups – FAA representatives apply formal guidelines to ensure that 

the program’s research projects support new rulemaking and development of alternate means of compliance 

with existing rules. 

•	 The Coordinating Research Council (CRC) Unleaded Aviation Gasoline Development Group – representatives 

from ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, ChevronTexaco, British Petroleum, Cessna, Hawker Beechcraft, Teledyne 

Continental, and Lycoming Engines facilitate two-way transfer of technology between government and 

industry to benefit all participants. 

•	 Aerospace manufacturers 

•	 Aerospace repair stations and maintenance organizations 

•	 Aerospace industry associations 

•	 Private, commercial, government, and military operators 

•	 International airworthiness authorities 

•	 Standards development groups, such as ASTM International 

•	 Academia and national laboratories 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 CRC Unleaded Aviation Gasoline Development Group – includes ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, ChevronTexaco, 

British Petroleum, Cessna, Hawker Beechcraft, Teledyne Continental, and Lycoming Engines; this group 

facilitates two-way transfer of technology between government and industry to benefit all participants. 

•	 General Aviation Manufacturers Association Future Avgas Strategy and Transition Plan (GAMA FAST) – 

includes engine and airframe OEMs; this group is developing a plan for the introduction of unleaded fuel to 

replace 100LL and assess the impact on the current fleet of aircraft and engines. 

•	 The FAA General Aviation Center of Excellence in conjunction with direct grants with the Embry Riddle 

Aeronautical University and the University of North Dakota – this relationship will support flight testing and 

engineering analysis of candidate unleaded fuels. 

Accomplishments: 

None, this is a new program starting FY 2011. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

•	 Laboratory characterization and engine ground testing of candidate unleaded fuels to replace 100LL avgas. 

•	 Conduct research into technology of modifying general aviation piston engines to run on unleaded fuels. 

•	 Investigate fleet lead emission impacts as a function of various lead reduction options. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Conduct initial feasibility study, including economic feasibility, environmental impacts, and assessment of 

potential for GA aircraft renewable alternative fuels. 

•	 Provide data and report on laboratory characterization and engine ground testing of candidate unleaded 

fuels to replace 100LL avgas. 

•	 Conduct research into technology of modifying general aviation piston engines to run on unleaded fuels. 

•	 Provide data and report on laboratory characterization and engine ground testing of ultra-low lead fuels to 

replace 100LL avgas. 

A-86 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 0 

FY 2010 Enacted 0 

FY 2011 Request 2,000 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 8,000 

Total 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

NextGen – Alternative Fuels for 

General Aviation 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,000 

0 

0 

2,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,000 

0 

2,000 

A-87 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A11.m – NextGen – Alternative Fuels 

for General Aviation 

Products and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 

2010 

FY 

2011 

FY 

2012 

FY 

2013 

FY 

2014 

FY 

2015 

NextGen – Alternative Fuels for General 

Aviation 2,000 

Study fleet impact of imminent lead removal 

from aviation gasoline. ◊ ◊

Assess feasibility of reducing the current 

lead levels in aviation gasoline as a 

temporary measure toward full lead 

removal. 

◊ ◊

Upgrade engine test facilities to enable 

piston engine performance and detonation 

evaluation across the entire operating 

envelope. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Develop unleaded aviation gasoline antiknock rating method that correlates to the 

leaded octane ratings of existing piston 

engines. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Develop engine test methods to evaluate 

the performance, durability and operability 

of unleaded aviation gasolines. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Develop and validate analytical test methods 

to evaluate the fit-for-purpose of unleaded 

aviation gasolines. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Conduct engine tests on representative high 

power density engines to understand 

potential safety impacts from operation on 

GA alternative fuels. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Evaluate technology of modifying GA piston 

engines operating with GA alternative fuels. ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Evaluate and characterize candidate GA 

alternative fuels as replacements for 100LL. ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Complete research on safety impact of 

variations to current aviation specification 

from use of alternative fuels. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Complete research comparing use of high 

aromatic biofuels to current aviation 

gasoline on CO, CO2, and NOx greenhouse 

gas pollutants. 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

Total Budget Authority 2,000 0 2,000 2,004 2,007 1,999 1,990 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-88 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A12.a Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) 14,292,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: As the steward of NextGen, the JPDO seeks to address long-term imbalances in aviation 

capacity and demand. At the same time, it seeks to ensure that the future operating environment is safe, well 

managed, environmentally responsible, and harmonized with international standards. JPDO’s mission is to lead the 

transformation of today’s aviation system into that of the future, the scope of which contributes to all of FAA’s 

current strategic goals. 

NextGen is expected to yield significant benefits in terms of delay reduction, fuel savings, additional capacity, 

improved access, enhanced safety, and reduced environmental impact. Last year we estimated that NextGen would 

reduce delay by 35-40 percent in 2018 compared to what the system would experience without NextGen. We are 

currently preparing an updated, detailed breakdown of the near- to mid-term NextGen benefits. This analysis will be 

completed in the near future, and updated annually in conjunction with FAA’s budget submission. 

Agency Outputs: The JPDO is responsible for defining and facilitating the implementation of NextGen. At this stage 

in the transformation, outputs are a series of plans and analyses that define a proposed end-state and a path for 

achieving it. The objective is to drive collaborative decisions—involving government and industry—that will ultimately 

achieve the transformation. 

Research Goals: 

FY 2011 

•	 Continue to refine NextGen foundational documents: Concept of Operations, Enterprise Architecture, and 

Integrated Work Plan within the Joint Planning Environment (JPE). 

•	 Enhance the JPE planning information to reflect integration of net-enabled weather into automation decision 

making, enhanced operational scenarios that describe information sharing and procedures between flight/ 

airline operations and NextGen trajectory based flight processing including air navigation service provider, 

flight operations center, and flight crew roles and responsibilities. 

•	 Continue development of an inter-agency integrated surveillance architecture, concept of operations and 

funding profile, and governance process recommendation. 

•	 Continue coordination of Network Enabled information sharing standards for participating agencies & 

organizations including multi-agency governance processes. 

•	 Develop FY2013 formulation package to support NextGen resource planning and performance 

measurement; track and ensure that partner agencies are implementing programs that support a transition 

to the end-state architecture as defined in the Integrated Work Plan. 

•	 Develop FY2013 formulation package to support NextGen resource planning and development of the 

NextGen business case. 

•	 Develop FY2013 NextGen business case including results of environmental mitigation methods and benefits. 

•	 Continue Dynamic Airspace Configuration research transition planning that facilitates a concept for efficient 

partitioning of airspace and allocation of resources to meet far-term NextGen Capacity needs. 

•	 Continue to coordinate and conduct demonstrations that will test operational concepts, address operational 

challenges, and provide alternatives for architectural trade-offs. Update the JPE to include demonstration 

results. 

FY 2013-2015 

• Continue research and development to support all NextGen solution sets. 

FY 2016 and Beyond 

•	 Continue development to support all NextGen solution sets. 

•	 Identify alternatives as a result of needed research that may be immature. 

A-89 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The JPDO is truly a collaborative enterprise. Employees from NASA and 

the Departments of Transportation, Commerce, Defense, and Homeland Security actively lead and/or participate in 

JPDO activities. Similarly, the JPDO Board includes executives from each department/agency, as well as the White 

House Office of Science and Technology Policy. And the Senior Policy Committee includes Secretaries, Deputy 

Secretaries, and/or Administrators from the participating organizations, as well as the Director of the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy. 

The private sector is also an integral part of JPDO’s work. In FY 2006, the NextGen Institute was established as an 

alliance of major aviation stakeholder communities. The Institute operates under guidelines set forth in the funding 

agreement between FAA/JPDO and the host organization, the National Center for Advanced Technologies. The 

agreement states that the Institute will be governed by a 16-member council that is broadly representative of the 

aviation community. The Institute supports JPDO by recruiting and assigning industry experts to participate in 

forums and perform funded technical work. The Institute has already hosted a series of workshops to gather input 

on research, demonstrations, operational concepts, and financial implications. The Institute performs a variety of 

tasks in support of the planning process including studies, demonstration support, and strategic assessments and 

recommendations for NextGen design issues. 

Accomplishments: Major accomplishments and associated benefits of the JPDO efforts include the following: 

FY 2009 

•	 Deployed the web-based Joint Planning Environment (JPE) a portal that presents and relates NextGen 

Enterprise Architecture, Concept of Operations, Integrated Workplan, and Business Case information. 

•	 Enhanced the JPE to reflect a federated architecture for participating agencies’ Enterprise Architectures. 

•	 Developed FY 2011 Formulation Package to support NextGen resource planning and development of the 

NextGen business case. 

•	 Developed FY 2011 NextGen business case and released NextGen foundational documents consistent with 

FY 2011 plans and priorities: Concept of Operations, Enterprise Architecture, and Integrated Work Plan. 

•	 Continued to coordinate with aviation and aeronautics research programs to ensure that research results in 

decisions that influence the most effective investment and implementation decision-making. 

•	 Multi-sector Planner Research Transition Team defined roles & responsibilities that support efficient traffic 

flow for mid-term operations (2010-2018). 

•	 Consistent with the refined foundational documents, continued to identify and facilitate all preimplementation activities to support identification and resolution of policy issues, optimized technology 

transfer, risk management and a broad range of analysis to support decision making. 

•	 Tracked and coordinated changes with partner agencies to ensure that implementing programs supported a 

transition to the end-state architecture as defined in the Integrated Work Plan. 

•	 Continue to coordinate and conduct demonstrations that validated operational concepts, addressed 

operational challenges, and provided alternatives for architectural trade-offs. Demonstrations explored 

human factors and safety characteristics of trajectory-based operations, high density airport operations, 

airspace security, and globally interoperable system integration 

FY 2008 

•	 Developed FY 2010 Formulation Package to support NextGen resource planning and development of the 

NextGen business case. 

•	 Developed FY 2010 NextGen business case 

•	 Released the Enterprise Architecture and Concept of Operations supporting FY 2010 planning. 

•	 Released the Integrated Work Plan Version 1, which outlines the steps necessary to achieve the Concept of 

Operations. 

•	 Expanded NextGen Business Case including initial life-cycle cost/benefit analysis. 

•	 Refined program processes including risk management. 

•	 Defined Net Enabled Information Sharing (NEIS) framework and multi-agency governance 

•	 Established NextGen Network Enabled Weather Program Office and multi-agency governance 

•	 Defined Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing Concept and multi-agency governance 

•	 Established four Research Transition Teams: Trajectory Management, Integrated Arrival/Departure/Surface, 

Multi-sector Planner, and Dynamic Airspace Configuration, that defined initial plans for research transition 

from NASA to the FAA in these areas. 

A-90 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2007 

•	 Released Version 2 of the Enterprise Architecture and Concept of Operations. 

•	 Released the initial baseline version of the Integrated Work Plan, which outlines the steps necessary to 

achieve the Concept of Operations. 

•	 Completed the first NextGen Research and Development Plan, a 5-year view of the research and investment 

activities required to revise, coordinate, and cost the research and implementation agendas. 

• Completed the first NextGen business case (Exhibit 300). 

FY 2006 

•	 Developed the NextGen Block-to-Block Concept of Operations and coordinated it through the NextGen 

stakeholder community for comment and feedback. 

•	 Developed the NextGen Block-to-Block Enterprise Architecture, aligned the Architecture with the Concept of 

Operations, and began coordination and review through the NextGen stakeholder community. 

•	 Baselined the Operational Improvement Roadmap to set research targets for the Integrated Product Teams. 

•	 Published the NextGen FY 2008 Agency Budget Guidance for Research and Implementation, which begins to 

align programs to NextGen and identify key research areas. 

•	 Delivered the FY 2005 Progress Report to Congress describing the JPDO’s progress in carrying out the 

NextGen Integrated Plan. 

•	 Developed initial JPDO Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) to facilitate interaction with other 

agencies and stakeholders. 

•	 Established the Architecture Integration Council, which includes the chief architects for all partner agencies. 

This body will ensure the cooperation and engagement of the relevant agencies’ chief architects during 

development of the NextGen architecture. 

FY 2005 

•	 Made significant progress in resource alignment within the federal government and U.S. industry to develop 

and implement the NextGen in the most expedient and cost-effective manner. 

•	 Produced and updated the NextGen Integrated Plan as the long-term strategic business plan, detailing 

goals, objectives, and requirements for eight transformational areas. 

•	 Established and staffed—with federal and industry participants—eight integrated product teams to work 

collaboratively with government and industry to develop research agendas and strategies for achieving 

NextGen. 

•	 Performed the first major evaluation of the Operational Vision in Portfolio Segments, to validate the ability to 

deliver two to three times today’s capacity. 

•	 Established the NextGen Operational Improvement Roadmap to guide the transition from today’s system to 

the next generation. 

•	 Developed initial NextGen Segment Portfolios of policy, research and modernization requirements based on 

the OI Roadmap. 

FY 2004 

•	 Initiated resource alignment within the federal government and U.S. industry to develop and implement the 

NextGen in the most expedient and cost-effective manner. 

•	 Produced the outline for the Integrated National Plan as the long-term strategic business plan for NextGen 

that detailed NextGen goals and objectives, and requirements for transformation in eight specific areas, 

each individually significant yet interdependent on the others. 

•	 Produced the framework for establishing with federal and industry participants eight integrated product 

teams that would work collaboratively with government and industry to plan for and develop research 

agendas and strategies for achieving NextGen. 

•	 Established the framework for the NextGen Operational Improvement (OI) Roadmap to guide the transition 

from today’s system to the NextGen. 

•	 Developed initial plan for the NextGen Segment Portfolio’s of needed policy, research and modernization 

requirements based on the NextGen OI Roadmap. 

A-91 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Updated the Joint Planning Environment (JPE) a portal that presents and relates NextGen Enterprise 

Architecture, Concept of Operations, Integrated Workplan, and Business Case information. 

•	 Developed FY2012 Formulation Package to support NextGen resource planning and development of the 

NextGen business case. 

•	 Developed FY2012 NextGen business case and released NextGen foundational documents consistent with FY 

2011 plans and priorities: Concept of Operations, Enterprise Architecture, and Integrated Work Plan. 

•	 Continued to coordinate with aviation and aeronautics research programs to ensure that research results in 

decisions that influence the most effective investment and implementation decision-making. 

•	 Consistent with the refined foundational documents, continued to identify and facilitate all preimplementation activities to support identification and resolution of policy issues, optimized technology 

transfer, risk management and a broad range of analysis to support decision making. 

•	 Tracked and coordinated changes with partner agencies to ensure that implementing programs supported a 

transition to the end-state architecture as defined in the Integrated Work Plan. 

•	 Continue to coordinate and conduct demonstrations that validated operational concepts, addressed 

operational challenges, and provided alternatives for architectural trade-offs. Demonstrations explored 

human factors and safety characteristics of trajectory-based operations, high density airport operations, 

airspace security, and globally interoperable system integration 

•	 Continued development of the Enterprise Architecture and Concept of Operations aligned with the 

Integrated Work Plan. The Enterprise Architecture is a structured documentation of NextGen, capturing the 

activities, capabilities, data interchanges, and salient relationships associated with NextGen. The Concept of 

Operations provides a textual operational description of NextGen in the 2025 timeframe. This is a key 

source to inform and initiate a dialog with the stakeholder community. 

−	 The Integrated Work Plan provides a long-term transition plan from the current system to that reflected 

in the Enterprise Architecture and Concept of Operations. It provides a framework to support ongoing 

planning and will be refined over the planning process to detail analysis of implementation alternatives, 

risks, costs and benefits as well as prioritization and allocation of resources. 

− These documents will provide the necessary foundational information to define implementation and 

research guidance to NextGen partner agencies. 

•	 Engaged the Senior Policy Committee on near-term, high priority policy decisions in support of FY012 

planning. Continue to use the NextGen Institute to access world-class private sector expertise, tools, and 

facilities for application to NextGen activities and tasks. The studies to be conducted by the Institute in FY 

2010 will further address strategic trade studies that consider the technical, economic, operational, policy, 

organizational, and temporal dimensions of the NextGen design space. 

•	 Conducted detailed planning and coordinate demonstrations to be undertaken in FY 2010, including Oceanic 

Trajectory-Based Operations, High Density Airport Operations, Domestic Trajectory-Based Operations, 

Network Enabled Weather, and Global Interoperability. These demonstrations will test operational concepts, 

demonstrate technologies that could address operational challenges, and provide alternatives for 

architectural tradeoffs. 

•	 Continued system-of-system modeling, simulation, and evaluation to ensure benefits, costs, and trade-offs 

across the full range of NextGen goals. 

•	 Continued outreach efforts aviation trade associations and non-traditional organizations (e.g., groups 

representing both leisure and business travelers) to solicit views as to how NextGen can best meet the 

needs of the traveling public. 

•	 Updated, coordinate, and validate NextGen concepts. 

•	 Coordinated aviation and aeronautics research programs to achieve the goal of more effective and directed 

research that will result in only performing the most promising and applicable research. 

•	 Set goals, priorities and metrics and reporting structure, and coordinate research activities within JPDO 

member agencies and with U.S. aviation and aeronautical firms. 

•	 Facilitated the transfer of technologies from research programs that are ready for implementation (e.g., 

NASA and DoD Advanced Research Projects Agency program) to the federal agencies with operational 

responsibilities and to the private sector, as appropriate. 

•	 Continued to refine research plans, which will describe research and supporting activities required to drive 

implementation decisions to effect the NextGen transformation. 

A-92 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Continued refining foundational documents—Concept of Operations, Enterprise Architecture, and Integrated 

Work Plan—in response to the outcome of demonstrations, research, changes in agency budgets, etc. 

•	 Continued modeling planned improvements to test their efficacy in accomplishing NextGen goals. 

•	 Conducted analyses, trade studies, and demonstrations to select the best approaches/alternatives for 

transforming the current air transportation system to NextGen. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

•	 Continue modeling, simulation, and evaluation to ensure benefits, costs, and trade-offs are understood 

across the full range of goals. 

•	 Revise, coordinate, and cost the research and implementation agendas for subsequent years. 

•	 Refine NextGen business case and work with agencies and industry on research areas and implementation 

of NextGen-related programs. 

•	 Continue refining foundational documents—Concept of Operations, Enterprise Architecture, and Integrated 

Work Plan —in response to the outcome of demonstrations, research, changes in agency budgets, etc. 

•	 Refine NextGen metrics. 

•	 Plan FY 2012 operational demonstrations. 

• Continue alignment of agency goals and objectives with NextGen goals and objectives. 

New Initiatives 

•	 Coordinate demonstrations that will test operational concepts, demonstrate technologies that could address 

operational challenges, and provide alternatives for architectural tradeoffs. 

•	 Facilitate the transfer of technologies from research programs that are ready for implementation (e.g., 

NASA, FAA, DHS and DoD Advanced Research Projects Agency program) to the federal agencies with 

operational responsibilities and to the private sector, as appropriate. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Planning and Agency/Industry Alignment 

•	 Update, coordinate, and validate NextGen concepts. 

•	 Coordinate aviation and aeronautics research programs to achieve the goal of more effective and directed 

research that will result in only performing the most promising and applicable research. 

•	 Set goals, priorities and metrics and reporting structure, and coordinate research activities within JPDO 

member agencies and with U.S. aviation and aeronautical firms. 

•	 Facilitate the transfer of technologies from research programs that are ready for implementation (e.g., NASA 

and DoD Advanced Research Projects Agency program) to the federal agencies with operational 

responsibilities and to the private sector, as appropriate. 

Systems Integration and Transformation Analysis 

•	 Continue to refine research plans, which will describe research and supporting activities required to drive 

implementation decisions to effect the NextGen transformation. 

•	 Continue refining foundational documents—Concept of Operations, Enterprise Architecture, and Integrated 

Work Plan—in response to the outcome of demonstrations, research, changes in agency budgets, etc. 

•	 Continue modeling planned improvements to test their efficacy in accomplishing NextGen goals. 

•	 Conduct analyses, trade studies, and demonstrations to select the best approaches/alternatives for 

transforming the current air transportation system to NextGen. 

A-93 
 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 72,893 

FY 2010 Enacted 14,407 

FY 2011 Request 14,292 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 58,345 

Total 159,937 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Joint Planning & Development Office 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

16,112 

1,867 

121 

18,100 

12,910 

1,256 

155 

14,321 

11,221 

2,663 

610 

14,494 

11,528 

2,622 

257 

14,407 

10,819 

3,152 

321

14,292 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

18,100 

0 

18,100 

0 

14,321 

0 

14,321 

0 

14,494 

0 

14,494 

0 

14,407 

0 

14,407 

0 

14,292 

0 

14,292 

A-94 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A12.a - Joint Planning & Development 

Office 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Joint Planning & Development Office 

Planning and Agency/Industry 

Alignment: 

Update and carry out an integrated plan 

for a Next Generation Air Transportation 

System. 

Coordinate and facilitate the transfer of 

technologies from aeronautics research 

programs and direct research that will 

result in achieving NextGen. 

Systems Integration and Transformation 

Analysis: 

Accomplish the coordination to create 

and carry out the plan to achieve more 

directed programs through applicable 

research and systems integration. 

1,049 

268 

2,087 

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Develop Enterprise Architecture for 

systems-of systems engineering and 

expand lower levels of the enterprise. 

Evaluate and validate cross IPT, 

integrated system-wide concepts, 

procedures, policies, business cases, etc. 

to assure potential alternatives exist that 

could meet all the National Plan 

Objectives. 

Conduct policy analyses that focus on 

early decisions to establish guiding 

principles for the transformation 

Model the planned system improvements 

to validate their efficacy in accomplishing 

the NextGen goals. Update roadmaps and 

research agenda’s as required. 

2,084 

1,855 

1,287 

344 

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Assist agencies in selecting the best 

approaches/alternatives for transforming 

the current air transportation system to 

NextGen; 

Conduct and report interagency budget 

analysis and progress 

1,345 

500 

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 3,473 

Total Budget Authority 14,292 14,407 14,292 14,420 14,563 14,640 14,722 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-95 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Request 

A12.b NextGen - Wake Turbulence $10,685,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: The NextGen Wake Turbulence Program addresses FAA’s goal for capacity and the DOT 

reduced congestion strategic goal outcome of “Meet new and growing demands for air transportation services 

through 2011 and beyond.” The program provides the research to achieve near-term objectives of increasing airport 

runway capacity by reducing aircraft wake separation minima under certain conditions. The program also provides 

the research and analysis to answer the NextGen era questions of: 

•	 What wake turbulence mitigations will be required in implementing Trajectory Based Operations? 

•	 How can more aircraft be accommodated in high demand airspace (terminal and en-route) and still be safe 

in terms of wake turbulence? 

In FY 2011, the NextGen Wake Turbulence Research will continue its NextGen near term and mid-term research 

agenda, addressing wake turbulence restrictions in today’s terminal and en route airspace and in the future NextGen 

airspace designs. Program outcomes include: 

• Increased runway capacity in Instrument Meteorological conditions and capacity for more flights in high 

usage airspace, and 

More capacity efficient wake separations are provided to aircraft with the same or reduced safety risk. 

Agency Outputs: The NextGen -Wake Turbulence Program conducts applied research to improve, in terms of flight 

efficiency and safety, aircraft separation processes associated with today’s generalized and static air navigation 

service provider (ANSP) wake turbulence mitigation based separation standards. As an example, during periods of 

less than ideal weather and visibility conditions, implementation of an ANSP decision support tool that adjusts 

required wake separations based on wind conditions, would allow air traffic control to operate these airports at 

arrival rates closer to their visual flight rule arrival capacity. Additionally, the research program is developing wake 

mitigation application solutions that safely enable reduced aircraft separations in congested air corridors and during 

arrival and departure operations at our nation’s busiest airports. The research program in FY 2011 will continue work 

begun in FY 2008 to address the feasibility and benefit of a wake avoidance decision support capability for the flight 

deck. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By FY 2012, determine the NAS infrastructure requirements (ground and aircraft) for implementing the 

NextGen “Trajectory Based Operation” and “High Density” concepts within the constraints of aircraft 

generated wake vortices and aircraft collision risk. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The program addresses the needs of the FAA Air Traffic Organization 

(ATO) and works with the agency’s Aviation Safety organization to ensure new capacity efficient procedures and 

technology solutions are safe and that the airports and air routes targeted for their implementation are those with 

critical needs to reduce airport capacity constraints and air route congestion. The program works with controllers, 

airlines, pilots and aircraft manufacturers to include their recommendations and ensure that training and 

implementation issues are addressed in the program’s research from the start. 

Customers: 

•	 Pilots; 

•	 Air navigation service provider personnel; 

•	 Air carrier operations; and 

• Airport operations. 

Stakeholders: 

•	 Joint Planning and Development Office; 

•	 Commercial pilot unions; 

•	 FAA air navigation service provider unions; 

•	 Other ICAO air navigation service providers; and 

A-96 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Aircraft manufacturers. 

R&D Partnerships: In addition to maintaining its partnership with the agency’s Aviation Safety organization, this 

research program accomplishes its work via working relationships with industry, academia, and other government 

agencies. The coordination and tasking are accomplished through joint planning/reviews, contracts and interagency 

agreements with the program’s partners: 

•	 Volpe National Transportation Systems Center; 

•	 Mitre/Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD) NG; 

•	 NASA Langley Research Center (NASA Sponsored Research); 

•	 EUROCONTROL and associated research organizations (coordination and shared research); 

•	 Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory NG; 

•	 National Center of Excellence for Aviation Operations Research NG; 

•	 National Institute of Aerospace NG 

•	 CSSI, Incorporated. NG 

Accomplishments: The following represent major accomplishments of the wake turbulence program: 

•	 FY 2009 - Developed airport specific procedure modifications to enable dependent ILS approaches to closely 

spaced parallel runways. 

•	 FY 2009 – Developed concept that for some airports, would allow B-757 and heavier aircraft to be the 

leader in dependent paired instrument approaches to the airport’s closely spaced parallel runways. 

•	 FY 2009 – Developed concepts for better merging of aircraft in an airports terminal airspace, in terms of 

wake mitigation constraints, for the NextGen midterm timeframe 

•	 FY 2009 – Submitted for coordination a modification to the wake turbulence separations applied to B757­

200 and B757-300 aircraft, resulting in an increased runway throughput for airports having B757 aircraft as 

a major component of their operations. 

•	 FY 2009 – Repositioned wake measuring pulsed LIDARS to airports having significant B-757 and heavier 

aircraft operations. Collected data will be used in defining more capacity efficient air traffic control 

procedures for aircraft wake turbulence mitigation. 

•	 FY 2008 – Developed a national air traffic control order for conducting dependent integrated landing system 

staggered approach operations on closely spaced parallel runways at five airports (Boston, Cleveland, 

Philadelphia, Seattle and St Louis). 

•	 FY 2006-2008 - Evaluated reports of wake turbulence encounter as part of the FAA Safety Management 

System assurance process for changes to air traffic control procedures. 

•	 FY 2005-2008 – Provided wake turbulence evaluation support in the integration of a new aircraft into the 

National Airspace System. 

•	 FY 2004-2008 – Cooperative data exchange with European wake turbulence data collection efforts. 

•	 FY 2002-2008 – Developed the most extensive wake turbulence transit and characterization data base in the 

world, used to determine feasibility of proposed changes to air traffic control’s wake turbulence mitigation 

procedures. 

•	 FY 2007 - Implement dependent staggered ILS approaches to St. Louis closely spaced parallel runways 

12R/L and 30R/L. 

•	 FY 2007 - Complete FAA assessment of NASA’s concept for wind dependent wake turbulence mitigation 

procedure for aircraft arriving on closely spaced parallel runways. 

•	 FY 2005-2007 – By analysis, simulation and evaluation prototype; demonstrated feasibility of a cross-wind 

based air traffic wake turbulence mitigation decision support tool concept for enabling more closely spaced 

departures from an airport’s closely spaced parallel runways. 

•	 FY 2006 – Provided wake turbulence information necessary for the ICAO determination of wake turbulence 

mitigation separations required for the A-380 aircraft. 

•	 FY 2006 – Completed a detailed proposal for modifying the current air traffic wake turbulence mitigation 

procedures used for dependent staggered instrument landing system (ILS) approaches to an airport’s CSPR. 

A-97 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 FY 2005-2006 – Enhanced the pulsed Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR), which can measure distance, 

speed and rotation, for wake data collection capability, enabling it to capture wakes from both arriving and 

departing aircraft. 

•	 FY 2005 – Utilizing analyses of the wake turbulence data collected at San Francisco International Airport 

(SFO) and Lambert – St. Louis International Airport (STL) upgraded FAA’s wake turbulence encounter model 

used for evaluating proposed changes to air traffic control procedures for routing aircraft into and out of 

airports. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Continued wake data collection and analyses at additional airports to support airport specific changes to air 

traffic control procedures for aircraft dependent instrument approaches to an airport’s closely spaced 

parallel runways. 

•	 Evaluated reports of wake turbulence encounter as part of the FAA Safety Management System assurance 

process for changes to air traffic control procedures. 

•	 Analyzed wake turbulence data base and provided the analysis information to continue upgrading 

computational models of wake vortex transport and decay.
 

•	 Accomplished air traffic procedure/air route proposal reviews utilizing the enhanced suite of wake 

turbulence encounter analysis tools.
 

•	 Initiate development of wake turbulence transport and decay modeling tools for use in evaluating proposed 

trajectory based operational concepts. 

•	 Developed airport specific procedure modifications to enable dependent instrument approaches to closely 

spaced parallel runways. 

•	 Development of an air navigation service provider concept feasibility prototype decision support system for 

use in reducing required wake mitigation separations in dependent instrument landing system arrivals of B757 and heavier aircraft on an airport’s closely spaced parallel runways. 

•	 Continue to conduct experiments/analyses and aviation community forums to define in terms of a wake 

turbulence hazard – what is an “unacceptable” level of wake turbulence for an encountering aircraft. 

•	 Continued development of ground based situational display concepts (and aircraft based as necessary, 

working jointly with EUROCONTROL) relative to separation constraints (wake, weather, and visibility) 

required for implementation of the NextGen concept for air routes and approach/departure paths. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

In FY 2011, FAA must continue its development of the capabilities needed to enable aircraft separation processes 

supportive of NextGen shared separation and dynamic spacing super density operations. These capabilities are 

highly dependent on technologies that accurately predict aircraft tracks, the track/decay of their generated wake 

vortices and the provision of this information to pilots and controllers. Some aspects of the NextGen Concept of 

Operations are dependent upon the aircraft being a participant in efficient, safe air traffic control processes that 

would minimize the effects of required wake turbulence mitigation on the flow of air traffic in all weather and visibility 

conditions. The Wake Turbulence Program’s research will result in enhanced technology assisted processes for safely 

mitigating aircraft wake encounter risks while optimizing capacity, for all flight regimes, including the effects of 

weather. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Continue to incorporate wake transport/decay and aircraft navigation performance analysis results into FAA 

wake encounter risk models. 

•	 Provide engineering and analysis support to develop airport specific procedure modifications to enable 

dependent instrument approaches to the airport’s closely spaced parallel runways. 

•	 Continued data collection to determine the characteristics of wake vortices generated by departing and 

arriving aircraft. Data will be used in development of air navigation service provider decision support tools 

in reducing the required wake mitigation separation applied to airport single runway arrivals and departures. 

•	 Continue development of wake turbulence transport and decay modeling tools for use in evaluating 

proposed trajectory based operational concepts.
 

A-98 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Continued development of ground and aircraft based situational display concepts (joint work with 

EUROCONTROL) relative to separation constraints (wake, weather, and visibility) required for 

implementation of the NextGen concept for air routes and approach/departure paths. 

•	 Continue development of modeling tools to evaluate system-wide safety risk associated with the NextGen 

pair-wise separation concepts. 

•	 Continue to conduct experiments/analyses and aviation community forums to define in terms of a wake 

turbulence hazard – what is an “unacceptable” level of wake turbulence for an encountering aircraft. 

•	 Initiate detail development of a decision support tool concept for use in determining when to apply reduced 

air traffic control wake mitigation separations during single runway instrument approach operations. 

A-99 
 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 45,168 

FY 2010 Enacted 10,631 

FY 2011 Request 10,685 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 43,142 

Total 109,626 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts 

Wake Turbulence 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

2,833 

222 

11 

3,066 

12,543 

251 

19 

12,813 

9,734 

374 

24 

10,132 

9,821 

700 

110 

10,631 

9,517 

910 

258 

10,685 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total

0 

3,066 

0 

 3,066 

0 

12,813 

0 

12,813 

0 

10,132 

0 

10,132 

0 

10,631 

0 

10,631

0 

10,685 

0 

 10,685 

A-100 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A12.b NextGen - Wake Turbulence 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

 111-130 NextGen - Wake Turbulence 

Evaluate reports of wake turbulence encounter 

Continued data collection and analysis to 

determine the characteristics of wake vortices 

generated by aircraft – for enhancing the fidelity 

of wake models 

Incorporate wake turbulence data analysis results 

into wake transport and decay models and utilize 

the models to review proposed air route and 

terminal airspace change proposals 

Develop airport specific procedure modifications to 

enable dependent instrument approaches to 

closely spaced parallel runways 

Continued data collection and analysis to 

determine the characteristics of wake vortices 

generated by aircraft – for use in determining 

potential achievable separation reduction in single 

runway operations 

Development of modeling and other analysis tools 

required for evaluation of wake encounter risks of 

trajectory based operations 

Accomplish wake turbulence encounter 

assessments of potential air traffic routing and 

separation changes associated with evolution to 

NextGen 

Development of ground based and flight deck 

based situational display concepts for showing 

separation constraints for aircraft operating in 

NextGen air corridors and high density airspace 

Conduct experiments/analyses and aviation 

community forums to define in terms of a wake 

turbulence hazard – what is an “unacceptable” 

level of wake turbulence for an encountering 

aircraft 

Complete development of ANSP feasibility 

prototype decision support system for use in 

reducing required wake mitigation separations in 

dependent instrument approaches for aircraft 

following B-757 and heavier aircraft landing on the 

adjacent closely spaced parallel runway 

Detail development of DST concept for use in 

determining air traffic control wake mitigation 

separations applied during single runway 

instrument approach operations 

Develop modeling tools to evaluate system-wide 

safety risk for NextGen era reduced separation 

standards 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs* 

9,517 

1,168 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 10,685 10,631 10,685 10,742 10,799 10,800 10,801 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-101 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A12.c NextGen – Air Ground Integration Human Factors $10,614,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: By 2017, demonstrate that NextGen operations, procedures and information can be standard 

and predictable for users (e.g., pilots, controllers, airlines, passengers) at all types of airports and for all aircraft 

across the full range of environmental conditions. 

Integration of air and ground capabilities poses challenges for pilots and air traffic service providers. A core human 

factors issue is ensuring the right information is provided to the right human operators at the right time to make the 

right decisions. Transitions of increasingly sophisticated automation and procedures must be accompanied by 

supporting interoperability with baseline systems and refinement of procedures to ensure efficient operations and to 

mitigate potential automation surprises. Additionally, NextGen systems, procedures and training must support safe 

and effective planned and unexpected transitions between NextGen and legacy airspace procedures. 

The safety factors that primarily have an impact on separation assurance must be jointly approached by both the 

flight deck and air traffic research communities. The increased levels of automation and new enabling technologies 

that will likely transform the National Airspace System (NAS) in the future will bring new human factors challenges.
 

As the NAS moves toward a more automated system and roles and responsibilities change in a series of planned 

steps, intent information as well as positive information on delegation of authority must be clear and unambiguous. 

This changing environment requires a close examination of new types of human error modes to manage safety risk in 

the human factors domain. Equipment design methods, training, and procedures must be developed to decrease 

error likelihood and/or increase timely error detection, for example in the case of blunders on closely spaced parallel 

approaches. 

Many of the emerging NextGen concepts imply that a flight plan will become an air-ground performance contract that 

meets the user’s needs, will be executed by the flight deck, and protected by the air traffic service provider. There 

are multiple parameters in aviation such as weather, unanticipated traffic, sudden denial of airspace or airport assets, 

emergencies, and a myriad of other factors that will require close monitoring to meet the expected flight 

performance goals. 

Changes in roles and responsibilities will occur not only between pilots and air traffic service providers, but also for 

both groups and the respective automation they use to achieve NextGen safety and efficiency gains. Issues such as 

mode confusion, transitions, and reversions must be understood and addressed to ensure appropriate levels of 

situation awareness and workload are maintained. 

The NextGen environment will include an increased reliance on collaborative and distributed decision making. 

Information must be provided to participants, e.g., pilots, air traffic service providers and airline operation centers in 

a fashion that facilitates a shared understanding of phenomena, such as weather, wake, etc. The format, content, 

timeliness and presentation of that information must be well integrated with other information provided to decision 

makers and their decision support tools. 

Operational Improvements (OIs) to be addressed from an integrated air-ground perspective include provision for 

spacing, merging and passing in en route airspace via Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) and Automatic 

Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B), with procedures for less than current levels of aircraft separation. 

Lateral and in-trail separation would be reduced to near Visual Flight Rules (VFR) levels for single runway and for 

converging and closely spaced parallel runway operations using CDTI, ADS-B and wake vortex ground detection.
 

Aircraft-to-aircraft separation would be delegated to the flight deck in oceanic airspace, with reduced longitudinal and 

lateral spacing via Required Navigation Performance (RNP), ADS-B/CDTI and data communication.
 

Agency Outputs: The NextGen Air Ground Integration research program addresses flight deck - air traffic service 

provider integration for each operational improvement or NextGen application considered, with a focus on those 

issues that primarily affect the pilot side of the air-ground integration challenge. The program collaborates with the 

NextGen Self Separation Human Factors Program to ensure robust examination of NextGen human factors issues.
 

Through use of modeling, simulation, and demonstration, the program assesses interoperability of tools, develops 

A-102 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

design guidance, determines training requirements, and verifies procedures for ensuring safe, efficient and effective 

human system integration in transitions of NextGen capabilities. 

Outputs include: 

•	 Defining, understanding, and developing guidance to successfully implement the changes in roles and 

responsibilities between pilots and controllers, and between humans and automation required for NextGen 

capabilities and applications. 

•	 Defining human and system performance requirements and guidance for the design and operation of 

aircraft and air traffic management systems to include examination of information needs, human 

capabilities, interface design and systems integration issues. 

•	 Developing and applying risk and error management strategies, mitigating risk factors, and reducing human 

errors. 

Research Goals: Research will support development of policy, standards and guidance required to design, certify 

and operate NextGen equipment and procedures from the perspective of air-ground integration. Additionally, this 

research will include integrated demonstrations of NextGen procedures and equipment in the context of ongoing airground integration human factors research. 

•	 By 2016 complete research to enable safe and effective changes to pilot and ATC roles and responsibilities 

for NextGen procedures. 

−	 By 2011 develop initial taxonomy describing the relationship between pilots/ATC and associated 

automated systems. 

−	 By 2013 complete initial research to evaluate and recommend pilot-ATC procedures for negotiations and 

shared decision making NextGen activities. 

−	 By 2015 complete research to identify and recommend mitigation strategies to address potential 

coordination issues between humans and automated systems. 

−	 By 2016 complete research to identify methods for effectively allocating functions between pilots/ATC 

and automated systems as well as mitigating any losses of skill associated with these new roles and 

responsibilities. 

•	 By 2016 complete research to identify and manage the risks posed by new and altered human error modes 

in the use of NextGen procedures and equipment. 

−	 By 2011 initiate development of guidance to support certification and flight standards personnel in 

assessing suitability of design and training methods to support human error detection and correction. 

−	 By 2013 complete initial research investigating methods to mitigate mode errors and unintended use of 

NextGen equipment. 

−	 By 2014 develop initial guidance on training methods to support detection and correction of human 

errors in near to mid-term NextGen procedures. 

−	 By 2016 complete research and modeling activities to identify, quantify and mitigate potential human 

errors in the use of NextGen equipment and procedures. 

•	 By 2016 complete research on human systems integration issues related to information needs, human 

capabilities and limitations, interface design and system integration required to support effective guidance 

for NextGen equipment design, procedure development and personnel training. 

−	 By 2012 initiate research to assess pilot performance in normal and non-normal NextGen procedures, 

including single pilot operations. 

−	 By 2013 complete initial research to identify cognitive tasks, associated information needs and 

recommended display methods for tasks that require shared flight deck-ATC information. 

−	 By 2013 complete research to identify human factors issues and potential mitigation strategies for the 

use of legacy avionics in NextGen procedures. 

−	 By 2013 complete initial research to address human-automation integration issues regarding the 

certification of pilots, procedures, training and equipment necessary to achieve NextGen capabilities. 

−	 By 2014 complete initial research to provide recommendations for displays, alerts, procedures and 

training associated with data communications. 

A-103 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

−	 By 2014 complete research to provide initial recommendations for equipment design, procedures and 

training to support use of 2 1⁄2 to 4 D trajectories. 

−	 By 2016 complete research to assess procedures, training, display and alerting requirements to support 

development and evaluation of planned and unplanned transitions between NextGen and legacy airspace 

procedures. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: Program researchers work directly with colleagues in FAA, other 

government agencies, academia, and industry to support the following R&D programs and initiatives: 

•	 Guidance from the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) Next Generation Air Transportation 

System (NextGen) initiative. 

•	 NASA’s Aviation Safety and Airspace Programs. 

•	 Close collaboration with FAA organizations, notably Flight Standards and Aircraft Certification in the AVS line 

of business. 

•	 Collaboration with specific FAA programs such as the Surveillance and Broadcast Services (SBS), DataComm 

and the NextGen-Wake programs. 

•	 FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – representatives from industry, 

academia, and other government agencies annually review the activities of the program and provide advice 

on priorities and budget. 

R&D Partnerships: The NextGen Air Ground Integration research program collaborates with industry and other 

government programs through: 

•	 Collaborative research with NASA on its safety, airspace and air portal projects including the identification of 

human factors research issues in the NextGen as technology brings changes to aircraft capabilities. 

•	 Complex full mission demonstrations using a distributed simulation architecture that leverages NASA cockpit 

and Air Traffic Management (ATM) simulation facilities and other resources. 

•	 Cooperative research agreements used with universities to address NextGen human factors issues. 

•	 Coordination on research issues and plans with aircraft and avionics manufacturers and operators as well as 

international civil aeronautics authorities. 

ACCOMPLISHMENTS 

FY 2009 

Roles and Responsibilities 

•	 Initiated development of a standard taxonomy for describing the relationship between flight deck and Air 

Traffic Control (ATC) automated systems and human operators in the context of NextGen equipment and 

applications. 

•	 Initiated investigation of shared decision making methods considering potential decisions shared between 

flight deck, Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) and Aircraft Operations Center (AOC) personnel. 

Human System Integration 

•	 Established preliminary equipment categories for legacy Flight Management Systems and associated cockpit 

displays to support future human factors evaluations of the acceptability of using legacy avionics equipment 

in NextGen procedures. 

•	 Began work to identify standard methods for conducting task analyses of flight deck-ATC activities for 

NextGen airspace procedures. 

Error Management 

•	 Initiated development of structured method to assist certification personnel in identifying risk areas related 

to human error and assessing system resilience to error for new and modified systems and procedures. 

•	 Began assessment of nature and impact of potential errors in oceanic in trail procedures. 

A-104 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Integrated Demonstrations 

•	 Developed an initial simulation and demonstration roadmap laying out incremental objectives, simulation 

requirements, assumptions, and risks. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS 

Roles and Responsibilities 

•	 Developed initial guidance addressing allocation of functions between the aircrew and automation. 

• Developed initial guidance on procedures for flight deck-ANSP negotiations. 

Human System Integration – Information Needs 

•	 Developed initial guidance for the design of NextGen flight deck and ATC displays and alerts, including those 

required for oceanic in trail procedures. 

•	 Continued research to identify human factors issues associated with instrument procedure design and to 

develop human factors guidelines for instrument procedures. 

Human System Integration – Human Capabilities and Limitations 

•	 Initiated development of a methodology to address the human capabilities and limitations of pilots 

(including single-pilot aircraft) to conduct a range of NextGen airspace procedures in normal and nonnormal situations. 

• Evaluated flight technical error in all four dimensions for TBO. 

Human System Integration – System Integration 

•	 Initiated research to identify human factors issues and potential mitigation strategies for the use of legacy 

avionics in NextGen procedures. 

• Conducted research to support guidance for data communications procedures, training, displays and alerts. 

Risk and Error Management 

•	 Delivered initial results of proactive analyses of human error hazards to understand and predict human error 

vulnerabilities. 

•	 Assessed human error impact and mitigation in oceanic in-trail procedures and RNP operations. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The program will continue to assess human system integration issues in use of airborne NextGen concepts, 

capabilities, and procedures, and ATM leading to a full mission demonstration. Each of these research areas, 

although general in nature, will continue to be conducted in the context of specific near-to mid-term NextGen 

applications such as closely spaced parallel operations, oceanic in-trail procedures, etc. 

Roles and Responsibilities 

•	 Define a taxonomy for describing the relationship between flight deck and ATC automated systems and 

human operators within NextGen applications. 

•	 Assess human-automation coordination methods for performance costs and benefits in the context of nearterm NextGen applications. 

•	 Initiate research to identify design and procedural methods to support collaboration and negotiation 

between flight deck, ANSP and AOC personnel. 

•	 Assess various strategies for Pilot Flying/Pilot Not Flying responsibilities and coordination procedures. 

Human System Integration – Information Needs 

•	 Assess pilot information needs associated with dynamic allocation to ensure awareness of need of reallocation, awareness that reallocation has occurred, and to ensure the pilot has the information required to 

effectively assume responsibility for a function. 

•	 Develop recommendations to support guidance on minimum flight deck wake turbulence display and 

alerting requirements to include priority, type of alert and synchronization between flight deck and ATC 

systems. 

A-105 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

• Determine which pilot and controller tasks are associated with NextGen flight procedures, using task and 

information needs analysis techniques, and develop guidelines for each type of procedure in NextGen. 

Human System Integration – Human Capabilities and Limitations 

•	 Continue development of a methodology to address the human capabilities and limitations of pilots 

(including single-pilot aircraft) to conduct a range of NextGen airspace procedures in normal and nonnormal situations. 

•	 Assess/evaluate flight deck human decision making capabilities and limitations in the context of near to midterm NextGen applications. 

Human System Integration – System Integration 

•	 Assess human factors issues associated with use of legacy avionics in NextGen procedures. 

•	 Initiate research to develop flight crew training recommendations for error detection and correction for 

NextGen operations for single pilot and two pilot crews. 

Risk and Error Management 

•	 Develop guidance to support certification personnel in evaluating risks and mitigation of human error and 

potential unintended uses of new technology in NextGen systems and procedures. 

•	 Determine the expected nature, frequency and potential impact of pilot errors that may lead to exceeding 

RNP containment criteria. 

•	 Develop a structured method (e.g., checklist, decision aid, analysis process) to assist certification personnel 

in evaluating system resilience to human error, and for identifying and estimating risk of human error 

(before and after application of risk mitigation) for new or modified technologies and procedures. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Roles and Responsibilities 

•	 Define a standard taxonomy for describing the relationship between flight deck and ATC automated systems 

and human operators in the context of NextGen equipment and applications. 

•	 Select the most likely human-automation coordination methods and assess the performance costs and 

benefits of these human-automation coordination strategies in the context of near-term NextGen 

applications. 

•	 Initiate research to identify design and procedural methods to support collaboration and negotiation 

between flight deck, ANSP and AOC personnel. 

• Assess various strategies for Pilot Flying/Pilot Not Flying responsibilities and coordination procedures. 

Human System Integration – Information Needs 

•	 Assess pilot information needs associated with dynamic allocation to ensure awareness of need of reallocation, awareness that reallocation has occurred, and to ensure the pilot has the information required to 

effectively assume responsibility for a function. 

•	 Continue research to support guidance for data communications procedures, training, displays and alerts. 

•	 Develop recommendations to support guidance on minimum flight deck wake turbulence display and 

alerting requirements to include priority, type of alert and synchronization between flight deck and ATC 

systems. 

•	 Determine which pilot and controller tasks are associated with NextGen flight procedures, using task and 

information needs analysis techniques, and develop guidelines for each type of procedure in NextGen. 

Human System Integration – Human Capabilities and Limitations 

•	 Continue development of a methodology to address the human capabilities and limitations of pilots 

(including single-pilot aircraft) to conduct a range of NextGen airspace procedures in normal and nonnormal situations. 

•	 Assess/evaluate flight deck human decision making capabilities and limitations in the context of near to midterm NextGen applications. 

Human System Integration – System Integration 

•	 Continue research to identify human factors issues and potential mitigation strategies for the use of legacy 

avionics in NextGen procedures. 

A-106 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

• Initiate research to develop flight crew training recommendations for error detection and correction for 

NextGen operations for single pilot and two pilot crews. 

Risk and Error Management 

•	 Develop guidance to support certification personnel in evaluating risks and mitigation of human error and 

potential unintended uses of new technology in NextGen systems and procedures. 

•	 Determine the expected nature, frequency and potential impact of pilot errors that may lead to exceeding 

RNP containment criteria. 

•	 Develop a structured method (e.g., checklist, decision aid, analysis process) to assist certification personnel 

in evaluating system resilience to human error, and for identifying and estimating risk of human error 

(before and after application of risk mitigation) for new or modified technologies and procedures. 

A-107 
 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 2,554 

FY 2010 Enacted 5,688 

FY 2011 Request 10,614 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012­ 42,666 

2015) Total 61,522 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Human Factors 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,485 

69 

0 

2,554 

5,448 

212 

28 

5,688 

10,035 

416 

163 

10,614 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,554 

0 

2,554

0 

5,688 

0 

 5,688 

0 

10,614 

0 

10,614 

A-108 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A12.c – NextGen - Air Ground 

Integration Human Factors 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

111-110 NextGen - Air Ground Integration 

Roles and Responsibilities 

Conduct research to enable safe and effective changes to pilot 

and ATC roles and responsibilities for NextGen procedures: 

Define a standard taxonomy for describing the relationship 

between flight deck and ATC automated systems and human 

operators in the context of NextGen equipment and 

applications. 

Select the most likely human-automation coordination 

methods and assess the performance costs and benefits of 

these human-automation coordination strategies in the 

context of near-term NextGen applications. 

Identify design and procedural methods to support 

collaboration and negotiation between flight deck, ANSP and 

AOC personnel 

Assess various strategies for Pilot Flying/Pilot Not Flying 

responsibilities and coordination procedures. 

Human System Integration 

Conduct research on human systems integration issues related 

to information needs, interface design and system integration 

required to support effective guidance for NextGen equipment 

design, procedure development and personnel training: 

Information Needs 

Assess pilot information needs associated with dynamic 

allocation to ensure awareness of need of re-allocation, 

awareness that reallocation has occurred, and to ensure the 

pilot has the information required to effectively assume 

responsibility for a function. 

Develop recommendations to support guidance on minimum 

flight deck wake turbulence display and alerting requirements 

to include priority, type of alert and synchronization between 

flight deck and ATC systems. 

Determine which pilot and controller tasks are associated with 

NextGen flight procedures, using task and information needs 

analysis techniques, and develop guidelines for each type of 

procedure in NextGen. 

Interface Design 

Based on pilot and controller information needs, develop and 

evaluate recommended display methods to facilitate 

predicting/detecting/resolving undesired aircraft performance 

for range of trajectory types (2 1⁄2 D – 4D) to include ensuring 

pilot and controller knowledge or proximity of current 2 1/2 

to 4D trajectory to aircraft limitations. 

For abnormal situations and degradation of a system function: 

Determine best method(s) to alert flight crew (both own-ship 

and other surrounding aircraft) and controllers of the nature 

and implications of system failure or degradation. 

System Integration 

Assess human factors issues associated with use of legacy 

avionics in NextGen procedures 

Develop flight crew training recommendations for error 

detection and correction for NextGen operations for single 

pilot and two pilot crews. 

Risk and Error Management 

Conduct research to identify and manage the risks posed by 

new and altered human error modes in the use of NextGen 

procedures and equipment: 

Develop guidance to support certification personnel in 

evaluating risks and mitigation of human error and potential 

unintended uses of new technology in NextGen systems and 

procedures 

Determine the expected nature, frequency and potential 

impact of pilot errors that may lead to exceeding RNP 

containment criteria. 

Develop a structured method to assist certification personnel 

in evaluating system resilience and risk of human error 

Integrated Demonstrations 

Update simulation roadmap 

Demonstrate pilot and controller functional 

capabilities via simulation (specific 

demonstrations executed under activities shown above) 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

1,989 

4,830 

2,717 

499 

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊ ◊

579 

Total Budget Authority 10,614 5.688 10,614 10,656 10,692 10,670 10,648 

Notes: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-109 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A12.d NextGen – Self-Separation Human Factors $9,971,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: By 2016, develop initial standards and procedures to enhance spacing of aircraft using Next 

Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) capabilities. In the near term, this includes reduced aircraft 

separation and delegated separation. 

New technologies such as Global Positioning System (GPS), Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), 

and Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) afford the possibility of transitioning from classic air traffic control 

separation assurance procedures to aircraft based spacing and separation. In the near to mid-term, these 

procedures will focus on reduced and delegated separation as well as supporting runway/surface awareness. Many 

NextGen enhanced capabilities are based on various aircraft oriented activities such as spacing, merging, passing, 

and closely spaced parallel operations, etc. Research will assess the human factors risks and requirements 

associated with these various spacing policies, procedures and maneuvers. The research results will provide 

technical information to support the development of standards, procedures, and training by Flight Standards to
 

implement NextGen. Human factors research required to provide the scientific and technical information to address 

human performance issues includes: 

•	 Providing human factors assessments on new information requirements to allow pilots to safely maintain 

aircraft separation, especially during low visibility ground operations. 

•	 Providing robust assessments of reduced separation procedures to ensure non-normal and emergency 

operations are evaluated including system failures and reversion impacts. The NextGen benefits associated 

with reduced aircraft spacing in high density terminal airspace also leave fewer buffers to accommodate 

non-normal events. The impact on safety and efficiency will be addressed. 

•	 Understanding changing roles and responsibilities associated with shifting separation responsibility between 

pilot and controller during delegated separation operations. 

•	 Developing advanced methods including efficient and standardized procedures to certify pilots and 

automation for different separation operations. 

•	 Assessing risk of pilot error during reduced and delegated aircraft spacing operations as NextGen 

technologies and procedures are implemented and integrated with legacy avionics. 

•	 Providing requirements and guidance for training pilots to assure adequate understanding of automation 

functions and limitations as they apply to enhanced spacing and separation operations. 

Agency Outputs: The NextGen – Self Separation Human Factors Research Program develops human factors 

scientific and technical information to address human performance and coordination among pilots and air navigation 

service providers (air traffic controllers), human system integration, and error management strategies to implement 

NextGen capabilities. Human factors technical information will also support the development of standards, 

procedures, training, policy, and other guidance material required to implement the operational improvements 

leading to enhanced aircraft spacing and separation. 

Outputs include: 

•	 Define the potential impact and human factors issues of new technologies such as enhanced vision, 

synthetic vision, and electronic flight bags on separation activities. 

•	 Define human factors technical information needed to support the development of standards, procedures, 

and training by Flight Standards to implement plans for reduced aircraft separation and recovery to classic 

air traffic operations as a result of abnormal events. 

•	 Develop procedures and training needed to implement new roles and responsibilities for pilots and 

controllers during delegated separation operations. 

•	 Define human and system performance requirements for separation activities, e.g., spacing, merging, and 

passing. 

•	 Develop and apply error management strategies, mitigate risk factors, and reduce automation-related errors 

associated with enhanced separation operations. 

A-110 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Develop human factors criteria for the successful use of flight deck performance monitoring and decision 

support tools as they relate to enhanced separation maneuvers such as spacing, merging, and passing, and 

how conformance alerts are communicated and resolved between flight deck and ground monitors, for 

example in Area Navigation (RNAV)/Required Navigation Performance (RNP) approach and departure 

operations. 

Research Goals: Conduct R&D to support the development of standards, procedures, training, policy, and other 

guidance material required to implement the NextGen operational improvements leading to enhanced aircraft spacing 

and separation including improved awareness of surface/runway operations, reduced separation, and delegated 

separation. 

•	 By 2016, complete research to enable enhanced aircraft spacing for surface movements in low visibility 

conditions guided by enhanced and synthetic vision systems, as well as cockpit displays of aircraft and 

ground vehicles and associated procedures. 

−	 By 2012 complete initial research to evaluate and recommend minimum display standards for use of 

enhanced and synthetic vision systems, as well as airport markings and signage, to conduct surface 

movements across a range of visibility conditions. 

−	 By 2014 evaluate and recommend minimum display standards and operational procedures for use of 

CDTI to support pilot awareness of potential ground conflicts and to support transition between taxi, 

takeoff and departure phases of flight. 

−	 By 2016 complete research to identify human capabilities and limitations with respect to ground collision 

avoidance and identify potential design solutions, training and procedures to mitigate risks associated 

with human performance. 

•	 By 2015, complete research and provide human factors guidance to reduce arrival and departure spacing 

including variable separation in a mixed equipage environment. 

−	 By 2011 complete initial research to evaluate the impact and potential risks associated with use of 

Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) in NextGen procedures. 

−	 By 2012 initiate research to evaluate alternative methods of allocating functions and coordinating 

between automated systems, pilots, Air Traffic Control (ATC) and Airline Operations Center (AOC) 

personnel in reduced and delegated separation procedures. 

−	 By 2014 complete research to identify likely human error modes and recommend mitigation strategies in 

closely spaced arrival/departure routings, including closely spaced parallel operations. 

−	 By 2015 complete initial research on human performance considerations for design, training and 

operational procedures in conformance monitoring and detection/correction of nonconformance with 

reduced separation routings and procedures. 

• By 2015, enable reduced and delegated separation in oceanic airspace and high density en route corridors. 

−	 By 2011, complete research to evaluate and recommend procedures, equipage and training to safely 

conduct oceanic and en route pair-wise delegated separation. 

−	 By 2013 complete initial research to provide recommended guidance for design of cockpit displays and 

alerts to support delegated separation. 

−	 By 2015 complete research to support recommended procedures and training required to safely and 

efficiently transition to/from NextGen reduced and delegated separation procedures in normal and nonnormal conditions. 

•	 By 2015, develop a repository of NextGen human factors data containing research roadmaps, results, and 

data from relevant ongoing and historical research, demonstrations and operational experience to provide a 

foundation for flight deck human factors research to support policy decisions, standards development, 

certification and approval to enable NextGen operational improvements, and to ensure that the future 

system adequately considers human systems integration issues. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: Program researchers work directly with colleagues in FAA, other 

government agencies, academia, and industry to support the following R&D programs and initiatives: 

•	 Guidance from the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) NextGen initiative. 

•	 NASA’s Aviation Safety and Airspace Programs. 

A-111 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Close collaboration with FAA organizations, notably Flight Standards and Aircraft Certification in the AVS line 

of business. 

•	 Collaboration with specific FAA programs such as the Surveillance and Broadcast Services (SBS), DataComm 

and the NextGen-Wake programs. 

•	 Collaboration with specific FAA programs such as the Surveillance and Broadcast Services (SBS), DataComm 

and the NextGen-Wake programs. 

•	 FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – representatives from industry, 

academia, and other government agencies annually review the activities of the program and provide advice 

on priorities and budget. 

R&D Partnerships: The research program collaborates with industry and other government programs through: 

•	 Collaborative research with NASA on its aviation safety and airspace projects including the identification of 

human factors research issues in the NextGen as technology brings changes to aircraft capabilities. 

Complex full mission simulations using an aviation simnet distributed simulation architecture will leverage 

NASA cockpit and Air Traffic Management (ATM) simulation facilities and other resources. 

•	 Cooperative research agreements with universities to address NextGen human factors issues. 

•	 Coordination on research issues and plans with aircraft and avionics manufacturers and operators. 

•	 Coordination with appropriate RTCA Committees, e.g., Airborne Separation Assurance System. 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2009 

Surface/Runway Operations Awareness 

•	 Began to define pilot information requirements for the display and use of enhanced cockpit technologies 

(Enhanced Flight Vision Systems (EFVS)/Synthetic Vision Systems (SVS), TCAS, and CDTI to support allweather operations. 

•	 Initiated development of survey instruments and analysis techniques to evaluate airport signage and lighting 

effects on pilot navigation at night and in reduced visibility. 

Reduced Separation 

•	 Began to evaluate pilot conformance, conflict detection and avoidance capabilities, and recommend pilot 

training and performance standards to ensure safe separation. 

•	 For closely spaced parallel operations, began research to determine CDTI and information requirements to 

support dual missed approaches, and to evaluate controller and flight crew workload and effects of blunder 

during the missed approach. 

Delegated Separation 

•	 For near to mid-term delegated separation procedures and applications for single-pilot operations, began to 

assess the impact of systems failures to prepare for development of procedures to safely and efficiently 

revert to backup separation methods. 

•	 Began assessment of human factors issues for the design and pilot use of display technologies including 

CDTI and TCAS in delegated separation operations. 

Cross-cutting 

•	 Began human factors assessments of new information requirements for NextGen alerts and displays in 

reduced and delegated separation operations. 

•	 Contributing to the development of a repository of NextGen human factors data, began a survey of human 

factors research relevant to near-to-mid-term NextGen applications, and a survey of the human factors 

issues that have arisen through operational experience with systems and procedures relevant to near to 

mid-term NextGen applications, as well as the projected needs based on NextGen planning documents. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS 

Surface/Runway Operations Awareness 

•	 Continued study to define pilot information display requirements for use of enhanced cockpit technologies, 

including EFVS/SVS, TCAS, and CDTI to support all-weather operations. 

•	 Evaluated airport signage and lighting effects on pilot navigation at night and reduced visibility. 

A-112 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Reduced Separation 

•	 Evaluated pilot conformance, conflict detection and avoidance capabilities, and recommend pilot training 

and performance standards to ensure safe separation. 

•	 Developed recommendations for use of autopilot coupled collision avoidance and pilot procedures for 

overriding the automation in each flight phase. 

•	 For closely spaced parallel operations, continued research to determine CDTI requirements to support dual 

missed approaches, and to evaluate controller and flight crew workload and effects of blunder during the 

missed approach. 

Delegated Separation 

•	 Developed initial methodology for conducting robust systematic assessments of separation procedures to 

ensure non-normal and emergency operations are evaluated. 

•	 Identified the major human factors considerations requiring research to support evaluation and 

recommendation of minimum display standards for use of enhanced and synthetic vision systems, as well as 

airport markings and signage, to conduct surface movements across a range of visibility conditions. 

•	 Continued analysis to evaluate pilot training requirements for use of limited delegation of separation 

authority in the oceanic environment. 

•	 Developed recommendations for the design and use of display technologies by pilots, including CDTI and 

TCAS in delegated separation operations. 

•	 For near to mid-term delegated separation procedures and applications for single-pilot operations, continued 

assessing the impact of systems failures and began development of procedures to safely and efficiently 

revert to backup separation methods. 

•	 For oceanic pair-wise separation procedures, continued to determine information needs, time requirements 

and pilot accuracy for detection and resolution of potential conflicts. 

•	 Continued to evaluate ADS-B/CDTI displays and procedures in a robust evaluation of merging and spacing 

operations for a range of controller-specified spacing and a variety of aircraft (not all same carrier or aircraft 

type). 

•	 Developed initial methodology for conducting robust systematic assessments of separation procedures to 

ensure non-normal and emergency operations are evaluated. 

Cross-cutting 

•	 Provided human factors assessments of new information requirements for NextGen alerts and displays in 

reduced and delegated separation operations. 

•	 Continued robust assessments of separation procedures to ensure non-normal and emergency operations 

are evaluated including system failures and reversion impacts. 

•	 Provided guidance for training pilots to use automation in NextGen separation operations. 

•	 Provided guidance for the integration and use of TCAS equipment and symbology in reduced and delegated 

separation operations. 

•	 Continued to determine the expected nature, frequency and potential impact of instrument procedure 

design on pilot errors. 

•	 Continued development of a repository of NextGen human factors data, incorporating results of efforts to 

survey human factors research relevant to near-to-mid-term NextGen applications, and surveys of the 

human factors issues that have arisen through operational experience with systems and procedures relevant 

to near to mid-term NextGen applications, as well as the projected needs based on NextGen planning 

documents. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The program will continue to assess human system integration issues in use of airborne NextGen concepts, 

capabilities, and procedures, and Air Traffic Management (ATM) leading to a full mission simulation in 2016. 

Surface/Runway Operations Awareness 

•	 Complete the study defining pilot information display requirements for use of enhanced cockpit technologies 

to support all-weather operations. 

A-113 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Complete initial research to evaluate and recommend minimum display standards for use of enhanced and 

synthetic vision systems, as well as airport markings and signage, to conduct surface movements across a 

range of visibility conditions. 

•	 Evaluate the effects of EFVS Head-Up Display (HUD) clutter and masking on detection of potential ground 

conflicts during taxi operations across a range of visibility and lighting conditions. 

•	 Conduct research on existing SVS and EFVS to evaluate time required, accuracy, and pilot workload 

associated with recognizing and reacting to potential ground collisions or conflicts with other aircraft, 

vehicles and obstructions across a range of visibility and lighting conditions, for single pilots and two pilot 

crews. 

Reduced Separation 

•	 For closely spaced parallel operations, complete research to determine CDTI requirements to support dual 

missed approaches, and to evaluate workload and effects of blunder during the missed approach. 

•	 Continue research to evaluate the impact and potential risks associated with use of Traffic Alert and 

Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) in NextGen procedures.

 Delegated Separation 

•	 Continue to evaluate ADS-B/CDTI displays and procedures in a robust evaluation of merging and spacing 

operations for a range of controller-specified spacing and a variety of aircraft (not all same carrier or aircraft 

type). 

•	 Complete research to evaluate and recommend procedures, equipage and training to safely conduct oceanic 

and en route pair-wise delegated separation. 

•	 Develop human performance models to predict errors, their impacts on performance, and human responses 

for airborne merging and spacing, and CDTI-assisted visual separation (CAVS). 

•	 For delegated separation applications, determine factors contributing to breakdowns in coordination and 

develop mitigating human factors recommendations for minimum equipment design, procedural and training 

methods. 

Cross-cutting 

•	 Continue development of a repository of NextGen human factors data, incorporating results of human 

factors research and human factors issues that surface during operational experience with systems and 

procedures relevant to near to mid-term NextGen applications 

•	 For proposed delegated separation procedures and equipment, conduct task analysis (including cognitive 

task analysis) and training needs analysis, to support development of training guidance for NextGen 

applications and technologies. 

•	 Continue research to develop risk and error management strategies to identify and mitigate human-system 

errors. 

•	 Evaluate the performance costs and benefits of various methods of decision support to include ability of 

human operators to understand automated system strengths and weaknesses. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Surface/Runway Operations Awareness 

•	 Complete the study defining pilot information display requirements for use of enhanced cockpit technologies 

to support all-weather operations. 

•	 Complete initial research to evaluate and recommend minimum display standards for use of enhanced and 

synthetic vision systems, as well as airport markings and signage, to conduct surface movements across a 

range of visibility conditions. 

•	 Evaluate the effects of EFVS HUD clutter and masking on detection of potential ground conflicts during taxi 

operations across a range of visibility and lighting conditions. 

•	 Conduct research on existing SVS and EFVS to evaluate time required, accuracy, and pilot workload 

associated with recognizing and reacting to potential ground collisions or conflicts with other aircraft, 

vehicles and obstructions across a range of visibility and lighting conditions, for single pilots and two pilot 

crews. 

A-114 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Reduced Separation 

•	 For closely spaced parallel operations, complete research to determine CDTI requirements to support dual 

missed approaches, and to evaluate workload and effects of blunder during the missed approach. 

•	 Continue research to evaluate the impact and potential risks associated with use of Traffic Alert and 

Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) in NextGen procedures. 

Delegated Separation 

•	 Continue to evaluate ADS-B/CDTI displays and procedures in a robust evaluation of merging and spacing 

operations for a range of controller-specified spacing and a variety of aircraft (not all same carrier or aircraft 

type). 

•	 Complete research to evaluate and recommend procedures, equipage and training to safely conduct oceanic 

and en route pair-wise delegated separation. 

•	 Develop human performance models to predict errors, their impacts on performance, and human responses 

for airborne merging and spacing, and CDTI-assisted visual separation (CAVS). 

•	 For delegated separation applications, determine factors contributing to breakdowns in coordination and 

develop mitigating human factors recommendations for minimum equipment design, procedural and training 

methods. 

Cross-cutting 

•	 Continue development of a repository of NextGen human factors data, incorporating results of human 

factors research and human factors issues that surface during operational experience with systems and 

procedures relevant to near to mid-term NextGen applications. 

•	 Continue research to develop risk and error management strategies to identify and mitigate human-system 

errors. 

•	 For proposed delegated separation procedures and equipment, conduct task analysis (including cognitive 

task analysis) and training needs analysis, to support development of training guidance for NextGen 

applications and technologies. 

•	 Evaluate the performance costs and benefits of various methods of decision support to include ability of 

human operators to understand automated system strengths and weaknesses. 

A-115 
 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 8,025 

FY 2010 Enacted 8,247 

FY 2011 Request 9,971 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012- 40,074 

2015)

Total 66,317 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted 

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

NextGen - Self-Separation Human 

Factors 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

7,956 

69 

0 

8,025 

7,796 

451 

0 

8,247 

9,440 

388 

143 

9,971 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8,025 

0 

8,025

0 

8,247 

0 

 8,247 

0 

9,971 

0 

9,971 

A-116 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A12.d – NextGen - Self-Separation Human FY 2011 Program Schedule Factors Request 

Product and Activities ($000) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

111-120 NextGen – Self-Separation Human 

Factors 

Surface/Runway Operations Awareness 3,162 

Conduct research to enable enhanced aircraft spacing for surface 

movements in low visibility conditions guided by enhanced and 

synthetic vision systems, as well as cockpit displays of aircraft and 

ground vehicles and associated procedures: 

Complete the study defining pilot information display 

requirements for use of enhanced cockpit technologies, 

including EFVS/SVS, TCAS, and CDTI to support all-weather ♦ ◊

operations. 

Complete initial research to evaluate and recommend minimum 

display standards for use of enhanced and synthetic vision ♦ ◊ systems, as well as airport markings and signage, to conduct 

surface movements across a range of visibility conditions. 

Evaluate the effects of EFVS HUD clutter and masking on 

detection of potential ground conflicts during taxi operations ◊ ◊ ◊

across a range of visibility and lighting conditions. 

For existing SVS and EFVS, evaluate time required, accuracy, and 

pilot workload associated with recognizing and reacting to 

potential ground collisions or conflicts with other aircraft, ◊ ◊ ◊

vehicles and obstructions across a range of visibility and 

lighting conditions, for single pilots and two pilot crews.
 

Reduced Separation 1,424 

Conduct research and provide human factors guidance to reduce 

arrival and departure spacing including variable separation in a 

mixed equipage environment: 

For closely spaced parallel operations, complete research to 

determine CDTI requirements to support dual missed 

approaches, and to evaluate controller and flight crew ♦ ◊

workload and effects of blunder during the missed approach. 

Continue research to evaluate the impact and potential risks 

associated with use of Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance ♦ ◊ ◊

System (TCAS) in NextGen procedures. 

Delegated Separation 2,674 

Conduct research to enable reduced and delegated separation in 

oceanic airspace and high density en route corridors: 

Continue to evaluate ADS-B/CDTI displays and procedures in a full 

evaluation of merging and spacing operations for a range of
 

controller-specified spacing and a variety of aircraft (not all ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊

same carrier or aircraft type). 

Complete research to evaluate and recommend procedures, 

equipage and training to safely conduct oceanic and en route ♦ ◊

pair-wise delegated separation 

Develop human performance models to predict errors, their 

impacts on performance, and human responses for airborne ◊ ◊ ◊ merging and spacing, and CDTI-assisted visual separation 

(CAVS). 

For delegated separation applications, determine factors 

contributing to breakdowns in coordination and develop ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ mitigating human factors recommendations for minimum 

equipment design, procedural and training methods
 

Cross-Cutting 2,180 

Continue development of a repository of NextGen human factors 

data, incorporating results of human factors research and 

human factors issues that surface during operational ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

experience with systems and procedures relevant to near to
 

mid-term NextGen applications
 

For proposed delegated separation procedures and equipment, 

conduct task analysis (including cognitive task analysis) and ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ training needs analysis, to support development of training 

guidance for NextGen applications and technologies. 

Continue research to develop risk and error management ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ strategies to identify and mitigate human-system errors 

Evaluate the performance costs and benefits of various method(s) 

of decision support to include ability of human operators to ◊ ◊ ◊

understand automated system strengths and weaknesses. 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 531 

Total Budget Authority 9,971 8,247 9,971 10,009 10,043 10,022 10,000 

Notes: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-117 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A12.e NextGen – Weather Technology in the Cockpit $9,312,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety and Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: By 2015, demonstrate that technology and automation, combined with policy, procedures, 

and regulatory oversight, meets the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) goal to reduce weather 

delays, leading to more efficient air traffic management (ATM) and improved aviation safety. Demonstrations will 

show that the technology and automation used in the cockpit provides pilots and aircrews with common weather 

situation awareness for safety and traffic flow management and assists airborne decision-making (e.g., adverse 

weather avoidance, etc.) by providing realistic, practical solutions to issues involving a myriad of variables. 

The NextGen Concept of Operations (ConOps) requires technology and automation in the cockpit to produce a 

“common weather picture” that will enhance collaborative decision-making and improve the safety, capacity, and 

efficiency of air transportation system by identifying the safest and most efficient route for aircraft traversing areas 

impacted by adverse weather conditions. The germane characteristics of the technology generally identified in the 

NextGen ConOps are that it assists collaborative decision-making (pilot, controller, air traffic management, etc.), 

leverages both human and automation capabilities, and integrates weather data and information with other 

necessary operational information to provide decision support and increase situational awareness. In the near term, 

this technology will be implemented as machine to human interface requiring human analysis and “processing” of 

visual presentations. However, in the long-term, the technology and automation envisioned in the NextGen ConOps 

is expected to migrate to automated “processing” via machine-to-machine interface between ground-based and 

aircraft systems (e.g., analyzes and processing of data and information are performed automatically and 

recommendations are provided to the human overseeing the aircraft operation). As a result, the NextGen ConOps 

differs dramatically from current operations regarding weather procedures; therefore, an examination of the NextGen 

goals and related procedures is warranted. 

Agency Outputs: One of the weather-related goals of NextGen is to reduce weather delays allowing more efficient 

and flexible air traffic management. The objective of the Weather Technology in the Cockpit program is to enable 

flight deck weather information technologies that will provide flight crews with timely, comprehensive weather 

information from on-board sensors, cross-link from nearby aircraft, and up-link from ground-based processors to 

support flight re-planning and weather hazard avoidance in flight, as well as in-situ observations to nearby aircraft for 

weather avoidance decisions and ground-based processors for direct and forecast use in ATM decision support 

processes. 

The program research will be accomplished in three phases. Phase I will be applied research to identify the gaps, 

Phase II will be the analysis and verification of the gaps to allocate the actions for the research, and will also validate 

the capability to provide current weather technologies that are not being currently made available to the cockpit such 

as icing and turbulence products. Phase III will be the validation of the research and the weather technologies 

developed. 

Phase I of the program research will be accomplished using the following framework: 

•	 Needs/Benefits – Identify the minimum weather data link capabilities and services are necessary to support 

Now and Next Generation National Airspace Operations. 

•	 Current Capabilities – From the minimum weather datalink capabilities and services, identify the commercial 

and government capabilities that in are in place. 

•	 Planned Capabilities – From the minimum weather datalink capabilities and services, identify the planned 

(within 3 years) commercial and government capabilities that is planned without WTIC support. 

The following is the research methods to accomplish Phase I: 

•	 Requirements Development – Develop a comprehensive user information needs statement and concept of 

operations for utilizing weather information in cockpit decision making based on the NextGen Concept of 

Operations. 

A-118 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Technology Assessment – Assess currently available onboard weather information processors, cockpit/ground 

interface capabilities, and communications infrastructure, identify gaps, and identify emerging technological 

capabilities to address the gaps. 

Phase II of the program research will be accomplished through the following framework: 

•	 Gaps Verification – Identify and verify the gaps between the needs and current plus planned capabilities. 

•	 Allocation of Actions – Identify the needs that require government actions and the commercial roles and 

expectations. 

The following is the research methods to accomplish Phase II: 

•	 Proof of Concept Demonstrations – Simulate, evaluate, and validate currently available but not fully 

developed systems for providing weather information to the cockpit. 

•	 Weather Technology in the Cockpit Prototyping – Develop semi-automatic prototypes of weather 

information integration decision support tool modules for flight deck technologies (e.g., flight management 

systems (FMS), electronic flight bags (EFB), etc.), to perform full, mission demonstrations, and to assess the 

integration of navigation, flight, and weather information into cockpit decision-making processes. 

Phase III of the program research is to develop Weather Technology in the Cockpit prototypes for validation. The 

methods to accomplish this capability are the following: 

•	 Prototyped Automated Weather Decision Support Tools (DST) – Develop and verify the technologies and 

capabilities to support automated weather support tools 

•	 Proof of Concept Demonstrations – Simulate, evaluate, and validate automated DST with a high fidelity 

system 

•	 Policy, Standards, and Requirements – Develop standards and guidance necessary to obtain design 

approvals for weather decision support systems for use in the cockpit, define minimum pilot training 

requirements, develop procedures for weather separation on the flight deck, and recommend changes to 

FAA and international policies pertaining to the provision and utilization of weather information in the 

cockpit. 

Research Goals: Research will enable the development of policy, standards, and guidance needed to safely 

implement weather technologies in the cockpit to provide shared situational awareness and shared responsibilities. 

The goals of the research are: 

•	 By FY 2012, demonstrate currently available, but not fully developed systems for providing weather to the 

cockpit. 

•	 By FY 2013, develop prototype weather information integration modules for flight deck technologies (e.g., 

FMS, EFB, etc.). 

•	 By FY 2014, simulate, test, and evaluate cockpit use of weather decision support tools, including 

probabilistic forecasts. 

•	 By FY 2014, simulate test, and evaluate fully integrated cockpit use of NextGen operational concepts, 

including weather technology in the cockpit. 

•	 By FY 2014, support full mission demonstrations assessing weather information integrated in NextGen air 

and ground capabilities for controllers and pilots. 

•	 By FY 2014, complete research necessary to develop guidance for airmen training and evaluation criteria 

and enhance the use of forecast products for pilot decision making. 

•	 By FY 2015, demonstrate the integration of navigation and flight information, including weather information, 

into cockpit decision-making and shared situational awareness among pilots, dispatchers, air traffic 

controllers supported by NextGen air and ground capabilities. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Weather Technology in the Cockpit Program works with FAA 

organizations, other government agencies, and industry groups to ensure its priorities and plans are consistent with 

user needs. This is accomplished through: 

A-119 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Guidance from the JPDO Next Generation Air Transportation System initiative through involvement in the 

Aircraft, Weather, and Integration Working Groups 

•	 Inputs from the aviation community, including weather information providers, technology providers (e.g., 

avionics manufacturers, etc.), simulator training centers (e.g., Flight Safety, etc.) 

•	 The annual National Business Aviation Association conference, the Friends/Partners in Aviation Weather 

Forum, scheduled public user group meetings, and domestic and international aviation industry partners 

•	 Subcommittees of the FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee – representatives 

from industry, academia, and other government agencies annually review program activity, progress, and 

plans. 

•	 RTCA SC-206 and Society of Automotive Engineers G-10 subcommittees 

R&D Partnerships: The Weather Technology in the Cockpit Program leverages research activities with members of 

other government agencies, academia, and the private sector through interagency agreements, university grants, 

and Memorandums of Agreement. 

Partnerships include: 

•	 National Center for Atmospheric Research. 

•	 NASA Langley and Glenn Research Centers. 

•	 Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. 

•	 Public and private universities. 

•	 Initiatives with airlines, pilots, and manufacturers. 

Accomplishments: The Weather Technology in the Cockpit program was a new start in FY 2009. The program 

developed the initial Now Generation Concept of Operations v.01 for weather technology in the cockpit based on 

foundational elements identified in the NextGen Concept of Operations, weather dissemination management, and GA 

operations. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Developed Mid-Term Concept of Operations and obtained partners, stakeholder, and user concurrence for 

weather technology in the cockpit based on foundational elements identified in the NextGen Concept of 

Operations, including integration of weather in flight deck decision support tools, weather dissemination 

management, and GA operations. 

•	 Based on capabilities described in the NextGen Concept of Operations, developed initial comprehensive 

weather information user needs statement for the cockpit environment in different types of operation (e.g., 

Part 121, Part 135, etc.) for each phase of flight (pre-flight, departure, en route, etc.) in the near-, mid-, 

and long-term NextGen operating environments. 

•	 Assessed currently available onboard weather information processing technology. 

•	 Identified the specific types of weather information being integrated into cockpit flight management systems 

(FMS) and the decisions supported by the information. 

•	 Assessed currently available and emerging ground and cockpit communications interface technologies. 

•	 Assessed currently available options for communications systems (air-ground, ground-air, and air-air). 

•	 Assessed the bandwidth demand of graphical icing products (Current Icing Product and Forecast Icing 

Product) and graphical turbulence products (Graphical Turbulence Guidance) for potential delivery via 

existing and planned FAA data link services. 

•	 Identified test bed(s) to develop prototype weather information integration modules for flight deck 

technologies (e.g., FMS, EFB, etc.).
 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

Work will continue in FY 2011 on the development of prototype weather information integration modules for flight 

deck technologies (e.g., FMS, EFB, etc.), and will continue research activities necessary to develop the concepts and 

A-120 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

the requirements for the provision, use, and integration of weather technology and information in NextGen cockpit 

operations. 

New Initiatives 

The new research initiatives that will commence in FY 2011 are related to the cockpit decision support systems. 

There will be an emphasis on simulations to identify weather-alerting capabilities, specific cognitive or skill 

deficiencies related to weather knowledge and weather encounters. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Determine what incremental weather information is needed in cockpit operations and when is it needed for 

tactical (less than 20 minutes) decision support and situational awareness planning (121, 135, 91). 

•	 Determine standards necessary for obtaining design approvals for cockpit weather decision support systems. 

•	 Quantify the regulatory impact of employing new types of weather information, weather technologies, and 

operational concepts. 

•	 Evaluate procedures for utilizing weather information in cockpit decision-making processes and define pilot 

training requirements. 

•	 Recommend changes to national and international policies pertaining to the provision of aviation weather 

information. 

•	 Research building prototypes of the integrated weather information with flight crew decision making 

processes through various flight deck technologies, such as Flight Management Systems, multi-function 

displays, etc. 

•	 Research general aviation community to identify best practices to incorporate VFR ceiling and visibility 

limitations in conjunction with minimum safe altitudes (terrain avoidance planning). 

•	 Research and evaluate currently available systems for providing weather information to the cockpit, in both 

machine-to-human and machine-to-machine modes, for the new types of operations anticipated in the fully 

implemented NextGen operating environment, including Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO), Equivalent 

Visual Operations (EVO), Super Density Operations. 

•	 Research and simulate real world weather hazards to flight and determine most appropriate way to alert 

pilots of weather hazards influencing their flight. 

A-121 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Amount 

($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 8,049 

FY 2010 Enacted 9,570 

FY 2011 Request 9,312 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 37,577 

Total 64,508 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted 

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts 

Weather Technology in the Cockpit 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

7,894 

155 

0 

8,049 

8,945 

539 

86 

9,570 

8,369 

764 

179

9,312 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Request 

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes)

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

8,049 

0 

8,049 

0 

9,570 

0 

9,570 

0 

9,312 

0 

9,312 

A-122 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A12.e – Weather Technology in the Cockpit 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 

2010 

FY 

2011 

FY 

2012 

FY 

2013 

FY 

2014 

FY 

2015 

111-140 Weather in the Cockpit 

Concept and Requirements Development 

Develop comprehensive program plan for Weather 

Technology in the Cockpit. 

Develop Concept of Operations for weather 

technology in the cockpit. 

Develop comprehensive weather information user 

needs statement. 

Determine how the “common weather picture” is to 

be maintained when the 4D Wx Cube is being 

constantly updated (e.g., appropriate update rate 

impacts, workload). 

Technology Assessment 

Identify weather information currently being 

integrated in cockpit FMS 

Assess currently available onboard weather 

information processing technology 

Assess currently available and emerging ground and 

cockpit communications interface technologies 

Assess currently available options for 

communications systems (air-ground, ground-air, 

and air-air) 

Proof of Concept Demonstrations 

Simulate and evaluate candidate systems for 

weather in the cockpit 

Identify, validate, and document communications 

systems attributes affecting weather in the cockpit 

Develop standards and guidance necessary to obtain 

design approvals of weather decision support tools 

Simulate, test, and evaluate cockpit use of weather 

decision support tools and probabilistic forecasts 

Simulate, test, and evaluate fully integrated cockpit 

use of NextGen operational concepts, including 

WTIC 

Weather Technology in the Cockpit Prototype 

Develop prototype weather information integration 

modules for flight deck technologies (e.g., FMS, etc.) 

Perform and support full mission demonstrations 

assessing weather information integrated in the 

cockpit 

Policy, Standards, and Requirements 

Conduct research to develop guidance for airmen 

training and evaluation criteria 

Conduct research to necessary to develop guidance 

to enhance use of forecasting products for pilot 

decision making 

Conduct research necessary to evaluate procedures 

for including weather information in the flight deck 

decision making processes 

Quantify the regulatory impact of integrating 

weather into flight deck decision-making processes 

Recommend changes and revisions to US and 

international policies pertaining to WTIC 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

8,369 

0 

943 

♦

♦

♦ ◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦ ◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦ ◊ ◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 9,312 9,570 9,312 9,360 9,407 9,406 9,404 

Notes: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-123 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A13.a Environment and Energy $15,374,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Greater Capacity and International Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: The Environment and Energy Program helps achieve FAA’s environmental compatibility goal 

and supports the FAA Flight Plan. The program also provides fundamental knowledge and tools to support the Next 

Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) research and development plan. The efforts complement activities 

in aircraft technology, alternative fuels, and operational solutions, environmental operational assessments and 

environmental management systems development under NextGen investments.
 

The Program specifically supports the following outcomes: 

The Flight Plan Noise Exposure Performance Target to reduce the number of people exposed to significant noise by 

four percent per year through FY 2013 as measured by a three-year moving average, from the three-year average 

for calendar year 2000 – 2002. FY 2011 Target is -20%. Specific activities include: 

•	 Conduct research and develop analytical tools to understand better the relationship between noise and 

emissions and different types of emissions, and to provide the cost-benefit analysis capability necessary for 

data-driven decision-making. 

•	 Leverage a broad cross section of stakeholders through the Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and 

Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) Center of Excellence (COE) to foster breakthrough scientific, operations, 

policy and work force advances to mitigate noise impacts. 

•	 Identify and assess the impact and enable implementation of operational procedures to reduce noise in the 

National Air Space (NAS). 

•	 Minimize the impact of aircraft noise – actions include: advancing the state of science/knowledge concerning 

effects of aircraft noise and assessing the need to refine noise impact criteria; improving aircraft certification 

standards and current operational procedures; and assessing the benefits of implementing improved noise 

control and mitigation measures. 

The Flight Plan Aviation Fuel Efficiency Performance Target to improve aviation fuel efficiency by another 1 percent 

over the FY 2008 level (for a total of 7 percent) through FY 2009, and 1 percent each subsequent year through FY 

2013 to 11 percent, as measured by a three-year moving average of the fuel burned per revenue mile flown, from 

the three-year average for calendar years 2000-2002. FY 2011 Target is - 8%. Specific activities include: 

•	 Conduct research and develop analytical tools to better understand the relationship between noise, fuel 

burn and emissions and different types of emissions, and to provide the cost-benefit analysis capability 

necessary for data-driven decision making. 

•	 Leverage a broad cross section of stakeholders through the PARTNER COE to foster breakthrough scientific, 

operations, policy and work force advances to mitigate emissions impacts. 

•	 Assess the impact and enable implementation of operational procedures to enhance fuel efficiency and 

reduce aviation emissions in the NAS. 

•	 Minimize the impact of aviation emissions – actions include: advancing the state of science/knowledge 

concerning atmospheric/health effects of aviation emissions; and improving aircraft certification standards 

and operational procedures; and assessing the benefits of implementing improved emissions control and 

mitigation measures. 

The Flight Plan International targets to foster international environmental standards, recommended practices, and 

guidance material that are technically feasible, economically reasonable, provide a measurable environmental benefit 

and take interdependencies among various emissions and between emissions and noise into account. Specific 

activities include: 

•	 Working with the international aviation community to reduce aircraft noise and emissions 

•	 Improving aircraft noise and engine exhaust emissions certification standards and operational procedures. 

A-124 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Promoting compatible land use. 

•	 Assessing the benefits of abatement measures to reduce population impacted by aircraft noise. 

•	 Assessing the benefits of measures to improve fuel efficiency and reduce aviation emissions, and the 

potential to reduce health and climate impacts. 

•	 Assessing the interrelationships and tradeoffs between measures to reduce aircraft noise and engine 

exhaust emissions. 

The Program also contributes to the following outcomes: 

•	 Providing the foundation for the NextGen investments that help achieve and manage the NextGen goal to 

promote environmental stewardship by reducing significant community noise and air quality emissions 

impacts in absolute terms, limiting or reducing the impact of aviation greenhouse gas emissions on global 

climate, and balancing aviation’s environmental impact with other societal objectives. Specific activities 

include: 

−	 Develop fundamental knowledge to aid in better science-based understanding of impacts of aircraft 

noise and aviation emissions on air quality and climate change to enable the NextGen goal of 

sustained aviation growth by 2025, while reducing significant community noise and air quality 

emissions in absolute terms. 

−	 Developing tools to assess the ability of technologies for airframes, more efficient engines, 

advanced propulsion concepts, new fuels, new materials, market based options and policies to 

reduce source noise and emissions. 

Agency Outputs: The program is developing and validating methodologies, models, metrics, and tools to assess 

and mitigate the effect of aircraft noise and aviation emissions in a manner that balances the interrelationships 

between emissions and noise and considers economic consequences. It is also developing computer models and 

impact criteria for use by civil aviation authorities in assessing proposed actions. Researchers are also developing a 

better science-based understanding of the impacts of aircraft noise and aviation emissions. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By FY 2011, demonstrate enhanced capability to conduct comprehensive cost-benefit analyses of 

environmental policy options with quantified uncertainties. 

•	 By FY 2011, deliver Version 1.0 of AEDT local for airport applications to Design Review Group. 

•	 By FY 2011, develop architecture for AEDT noise and emissions modules communications 

•	 By FY 2011, harmonize AEDT and Aviation environmental Portfolio Management Tool (APMT) databases for 

tradeoffs and interdependency analyses 

•	 By FY 2011, continue to develop and implement as they become available methods and models to analyze 

aircraft, auxiliary power units, and ground support equipment emissions and their impact on air quality. 

•	 By FY 2011, advance modeling capability for dispersion of chemically reactive aircraft plume 

•	 By FY 2011, advance our understanding of the evolution of volatile PM emissions in order to specify 

measurement and sampling procedures. 

•	 By FY 2011, develop new technical guidance for noise and aircraft engine emissions certification. 

•	 By FY 2011, develop new standards and methodologies to quantify and assess the impact of aircraft noise 

and aviation emissions. 

•	 By FY 2011 provide computer models and impact criteria for use by civil aviation authorities in 

environmental assessments. 

•	 By FY 2011, develop noise propagation models to better capture air turbulence, meteorology, terrain, and 

wave nature of low-frequency noise. 

•	 By 2011, initiate effort to include renewable fuels analytical capability in aviation environmental models 

•	 By 2011, provide analyses of the effects of application of cap and trade schemes to aviation 

•	 By FY 2012, develop and disseminate a preliminary planning version of Aviation Environmental Design Tool 

that will allow integrated assessment of noise and emissions inventories at the local, regional and global 

levels. 

•	 By FY 2013, develop and field a fully validated suite of tools, including the Environmental Design Space 

(EDS) and APMT, which will allow cost benefit analyses. 

A-125 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 By FY 2013, use collected hazardous air pollutant and particulate matter emissions data, directly measured 

from aircraft engines to replace, to the extent possible, approximation methods and factors used in 

modeling tools. 

•	 By FY 2014, initiate development of simulation based environmental models 

•	 By FY 2015, advance capability for aviation noise ,emissions and fuel burn related integrated impact 

assessment 

•	 By 2015, initiate development of environmental models components to enable intermodal analyses 

•	 By 2015, demonstrate a first version of a simulation based environmental model 

In addition, the program is conducting government-industry sponsored research through the PARTNER COE to 

develop methodology and collect data to identify and more accurately characterize the sources and incremental 

impacts associated with aircraft noise and aviation emissions, and generate improved solutions to deal with these 

impacts. Specifics of these cooperative research efforts include: 

•	 By FY 2011 develop and disseminate new methodologies and procedures to quantify and assess the impact 

of aircraft noise and aviation emissions for use by industry, government, and the public – also suggest a 

new metric to assess the acceptability of sonic boom from supersonic aircraft. 

•	 By FY 2011, advance best practices in aviation emissions PM and HAPs measurements and characterize inservice aircraft 

•	 By FY 2011, assess current understanding of aviation impacts on sleep disturbance and/or annoyance. 

•	 By FY 2011, assess the impacts of aviation on regional air quality including the effects of PM emissions that 

result when aircraft climb and cruise 

•	 By FY 2011, test and deploy elements of an Internet capability to educate and inform the public about 

aviation and the environment. 

•	 By FY 2011, demonstrate capability to conduct comprehensive cost-benefit analyses of environmental policy 

options with quantified uncertainties. 

•	 By FY 2011, Initiate investigation of the combined health effects from aircraft noise and emissions exposure. 

•	 By FY 2011, begin investigating new methodologies to establish acceptability of noise from future 

unconventional aircraft such as open rotor-engine aircraft and low-boom supersonic jets. 

•	 By FY 2011, assess the level of certainty of aviation’s impact on climate change and advance the state of 

practical science research, with special emphasis on addressing the identified major uncertainties and gaps 

in our understanding of current and projected impacts of aviation on climate and to develop metrics that will 

enable us to characterize those impacts for purposes of advising options for mitigation. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: FAA works closely with other federal agencies, industry, academia, and 

international governments and organizations to design research and development (R&D) efforts that can mitigate the 

environmental impact of aviation. This unified regulatory approach to research identifies and influences technologies, 

models, regulations, certification criteria and policies that can improve our present and future global environment. 

•	 The FAA Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee -- a formal standing committee composed of 

representatives from aviation associations and industry. The committee conveys its recommendations, 

advice, and information to FAA for consideration in rule making activities, and its harmonization working 

groups ensure that domestic and international aircraft noise certification regulations impose uniform 

standards upon the aircraft of all countries. 

•	 International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) -- 

this committee establishes and continually assesses the adequacy of international aviation environmental 

standards for aircraft noise and engine exhaust emissions. 

•	 The Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAN) -- provides forums for debate over future 

research needs to better understand, predict and control the effects of aviation noise, and to encourage 

new technical development efforts in these areas. FICAN also evaluates such research and publishes its 

findings, which sometimes lead to recommendations on improving the state of the practice of aviation noise 

impact assessment and abatement. FICAN may conduct annual public forums in different geographic 

regions as a means to better align noise abatement research with local public concerns. 

•	 Aviation Emissions Characterization (AEC) Roadmap – developed by government and industry to coordinate 

research and regulatory activities. The objective of this long-range coordination mechanism is to advance 

the necessary understanding of particle formation, composition, and growth and transport mechanisms for 

A-126 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

assessing aviation’s particulate emissions, secondary particulate formation from gaseous emissions, and 

hazardous air pollutants, and understanding their impact on human health and the environment. Ultimately, 

if warranted, this activity will help guide the development of aviation related technology that results in 

reduced emissions. 

•	 NextGen -- FAA is leading an Environmental Working Group (EWG) responsible for leading environmental 

dimensions of the JPDO. The EWG comprises FAA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

(NASA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DoD, Department of Commerce, Council on 

Environmental Quality, and Office of the Secretary of Transportation, as well as industry, academia, local 

government, and community groups. The efforts of the EWG are centered on advancing the national vision 

and recommendations for aviation in the NextGen and in the congressionally mandated study on “Aviation 

and the Environment.” 

•	 Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) – The FAA is working with the CCSP program office and its 

individual member agencies to focus research efforts that address the uncertainties and gaps in our 

understanding of current and projected impacts of aviation on climate, and to develop metrics to 

characterize these impacts. 

•	 Commercial Alternative Aviation Fuel Initiative (CAAFI) -- Concerns about rising fuel costs, energy supply 

security and the environmental effects of aviation are providing a significant stimulus to take a fresh look at 

the use of alternative fuels for aviation. To forge a way ahead, FAA founded the Commercial Aviation 

Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) together with Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the 

Air Transport Association (ATA) and the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). CAAFI is teaming with the 

DoD to leverage their substantial efforts advancing alternative fuels for military aviation– driven by energy 

security considerations. CAAFI is also working with other Federal agencies such as NASA. 

•	 Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative (ACCRI) – The FAA worked with NASA and NOAA to establish 

the ACCRI. The primary objective is to coordinate and sponsor collaborative research efforts to reduce key 

scientific uncertainties in quantifying aviation-related climate impacts while providing timely scientific input 

to inform optimum mitigation actions and policies for NextGen and ICAO. 

R&D Partnerships: Through a series of Memorandums of Agreement (MOA), FAA works closely with NASA to 

identify long-term source abatement technologies for noise and emissions. Together, the agencies also work with 

industry and academia to assess the possible global impact of aircraft engine exhaust emissions. In FY 2005, FAA 

signed an MOA with DoD to pursue joint activities to understand and mitigate aviation noise and emissions. The FAA 

is also pursuing collaborative agreements with DoE, and EPA to leverage resources to address aviation’s 

environmental impact. The FAA plans to pursue collaborative agreements with the US Department of Health and 

Human Services, the US Department of Education, as well as international agencies and international researchers, to 

study the public health and welfare impacts of aircraft noise exposure. 

•	 Through the JPDO NextGen, the program supports the EWG comprising FAA, NASA, EPA, DoD, Department 

of Commerce, Council on Environmental Quality, and Office of the Secretary of Transportation, as well as 

industry, academia, local government, and community groups. The EWG is pursuing an intensive, balanced 

approach, emphasizing alignment across stakeholders in developing needed business and technology 

architectures and policy options and approaches, as well as other relevant tools, metrics, and products to 

address aviation’s environmental impact. 

•	 The Volpe National Transportation Systems Center continues, in collaboration with the Environment and 

Energy Program, to provide substantial technical assistance in the areas of aircraft noise and engine 

emissions measurement and assessment. 

•	 FICAN also offers a forum for partnership, as the Committee comprises all federal agencies concerned with 

aviation noise. The FAA works with this committee to foster greater, more cost-effective partnering in 

aviation noise research among all agencies. 

Accomplishments: The number of people exposed to significant noise levels was reduced by about 90 percent 

between 1975 and 2008. Today's aircraft are also 70 percent more fuel-efficient than jet aircraft of the 1960s. 

Reduced fuel consumption and technologies to reduce emissions have also led to a 90 percent reduction in carbon 

monoxide, smoke, and other aircraft emissions. Specific recent accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Developed methodologies to quantify and assess the impact of PM and HAPs. 

A-127 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2008: 

•	 Developed a comprehensive greenhouse gas life cycle assessment methodology for alternative fuels 

•	 Released updated version of EDMS (Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System) model that allows 

emissions inventory and dispersion of airport hazardous air pollutants 

•	 Released a simplified version of AEDT to support environmental assessment efforts of other Government 

agencies and research establishments 

•	 Enhanced capability of EDS model as technology evaluator with addition of more engine and airframe 

combinations 

•	 Conducted environmental assessments to support the NextGen program office and international 

negotiations 

•	 Developed preliminary cost-benefit estimates of using ultra low sulfur jet fuels 

•	 Developed estimates of health impacts for NextGen 2025 emission scenarios 

•	 Improved climate model and advanced simulations and analysis for estimation of aviation climate impacts 

•	 Developed a strategic noise research framework aimed at improving understanding and quantification of 

aviation’s noise impacts, and developing more effective mitigation solutions. 

•	 Develop and distributed APMT, the first generation of integrated noise and emission prediction and modeling 

tools, including an environmental cost module. 

•	 Enabled implementation of a new continuous-descent approach noise abatement and fuel burn (emissions) 

reduction procedure at low-traffic airports during nighttime operations and optimize aircraft routing to 

reduce fuel usage. 

FY 2007: 

•	 Developed and demonstrated the first versions of AEDT, EDS and APMT. These tools will revolutionize 

approaches to aviation environmental assessment and regulation by enabling a comprehensive approach 

that assesses interdependencies and optimizes solutions based on cost-benefit analyses of impacts and 

mitigation. The tools will provide significant cost savings and other benefits to users. 

•	 Released new versions of computer models to assess noise and emissions exposure incorporating the latest 

science and methodologies 

•	 Completed the analyses supporting a Report to Congress, jointly with EPA, on the impact of aircraft 

emissions on air quality in nonattainment areas; ways to promote measures that allow aviation to enhance 

fuel efficiency and to reduce emissions; and opportunities to reduce air traffic inefficiencies that both waste 

fuel and increase emissions. 

•	 Completed an assessment of the feasibility of using alternative fuels in commercial aviation. The 

assessment included a comprehensive assessment of well to tail emissions from coal and gas derived and 

renewable alternative fuels. 

FY 2006: 

•	 Released advanced version of highly influential advanced computer models for airport and heliport noise 

analysis –over 1000 users in over 40 countries. The models are used in over 160 U.S. airport studies 

involving more than $1.8 billion in airport noise compatibility grants, and recently provided the basis for an 

aircraft noise exposure prediction model for air tours in the Grand Canyon National Park. 

•	 Released advanced version of a computer model that is used extensively by over 300 domestic and 

international users in airport air quality analyses and has won the EPA’s highest endorsement. 

•	 JPDO Environmental Integrated Product Team (E-IPT, now EWG) instituted a framework for establishing 

national goals for aviation and the environment and completed a ”gap analysis” of environmental R&D 

programs necessary to meet NextGen goals. 

•	 Reported to Congress regarding a comprehensive national study of ways to reduce aircraft noise and 

emissions. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Noise and Emissions Analyses and interrelationships 

•	 Completed an annual assessment of noise exposure and fuel burn. 

A-128 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Completed a significant example analysis to demonstrate the benefit of cost-benefit analyses. 

•	 Delivered AEDT Version 3.0 for CAEP/8 related analysis. 

•	 Delivered APMT Version 3.0 for CAEP/8 related analysis. 

•	 Delivered EDS Version 3.0, including validated vehicle library and demonstrated capability within AEDT 

framework for CAEP/8 related analysis. 

•	 Completed upgrades to INM (Integrated Noise Model), EDMS, MAGENTA (Model for Assessing Global 

Exposure to the Noise of Transport Aircraft), and SAGE (System for Assessing Aviation's Global Emissions) 

modules for incorporation into AEDT and to support existing customers as necessary. 

•	 Continued comprehensive assessment, including quantified uncertainties, of EDS, AEDT, and APMT. 

•	 Continued developments of tools to aid in demonstrating Continuous Descent Arrival (CDA) procedures in 

high-density environment. 

•	 Continued development of tools to aid in demonstrating other environmentally beneficial procedures in the 

NAS. 

•	 Developed beta version of integrated framework for AEDT, APMT, and EDS tools. 

•	 Incorporated methodology to account for population growth in the environmental impact assessments. 

•	 Tested and deployed first elements of the website to educate and inform the public about aviation and the 

environment and to enable the community to participate actively in public processes. 

Aircraft noise 

•	 Updated and/or developed, as well as published: procedures and technical guidance for noise certification of 

aircraft (transport category and subsonic jet airplanes, small propeller airplanes, and rotorcraft, as well as 

unmanned aerial vehicles, supersonic airplanes, and very light jets, if data are available) that are both 

harmonized internationally and simplified. 

•	 Established comprehensive research plans to better understand which noise exposure metrics best correlate 

with health and welfare impacts such as community annoyance and sleep disturbance. 

•	 Continued updating current understanding of aviation noise impacts on annoyance and or sleep disturbance. 

•	 Continued work to establish acceptability of low-boom supersonic flight as perceived indoors. 

•	 Continued developing noise propagation models to better capture effects of air turbulence, meteorology, 

and terrain on outdoor community noise. 

•	 Assessed state of knowledge on potential health impacts of aircraft noise and investigate methodologies to 

incorporate these impacts in the APMT framework. 

•	 Supported efforts to update land use planning compatibility guidance. 

•	 Continued to assess potential global benefits of using newly-developed noise reduction technologies; 

identify technology goals for long term reduction of aircraft noise. 

•	 Continued to improve NoiseQuest website and assess its efficacy. 

•	 Assessed land use practice and investigated mitigation strategies beyond 65 dB DNL 

•	 Conducted two COE focused sessions at a national and an international conference. 

Aviation emissions 

•	 Continued to develop and publish procedures and technical guidance materials for affordable engine 

exhaust emissions testing and certification that are both simplified and harmonized. 

•	 Developed and disseminated methodologies and procedures to quantify and assess the impact of PM and 

HAPs emissions in the aviation environment. 

•	 Assessed potential global benefits of using newly developed emissions reduction technologies, and identify 

technology goals for long term reduction of aircraft engine emissions and fuel burn. 

•	 Advanced best practices in aviation emissions PM and HAPs measurements. 

•	 Continued collecting PM and HAPs measurement data and develop speciation profiles to improve and/or 

replace approximation methods and advance those data sources in models used to isolate sources, and 

identify aviation’s contribution to impacts. 

•	 Continued comparison of detailed chemistry computations to aviation environmental tools approximations. 

•	 Continued developing a model of near field plume evolution/expansion to feed air quality models. 

A-129 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Assessed whether there are unique health impacts or other environmental effects, particularly for NextGen 

scenarios, including particulate matter emissions and hazardous air pollutants from aviation sources, with 

specific focus on the aircraft engine. 

•	 Completed assessment of the impacts of aviation on air quality including the effects of particulate matter 

emissions attributable to aircraft climb and cruise operations. 

•	 Initiated development of guidance material related to dispersion, chemical and transport modeling (i.e., 

assessment of aviation-related air pollutant concentrations that effect air quality). 

•	 Continued evaluation of the necessity for establishing standards pertaining to particulate matter emissions 

from aircraft engines. 

•	 Incorporate climate impacts metrics in environmental assessment models and examine their suitability for 

environmental cost-benefit analyses 

•	 Conducted two COE focused sessions at a national and an international conference. 

•	 Exercised databases of PM emissions to assess trends as a function of engine combustor technology and 

other emissions, and impacts on health and welfare, in order to advise options for mitigation, as required. 

•	 Published guidance material related to dispersion, chemical and transport modeling 

•	 Continue to develop and publish: 

•	 Procedures and technical guidance materials for affordable engine exhaust emissions testing and 

certification that are both harmonized and simplified. 

•	 Develop and disseminate methodologies and procedures to quantify and assess the impact of Particulate 

Matter (PM) and Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) emissions in the aviation environment. 

•	 Assess potential global benefits of using newly developed emissions reduction technologies, and identify 

technology goals for long term reduction of aircraft engine emissions and fuel burn. 

•	 Advance best practices in aviation emissions PM and HAPs measurements. 

•	 Continue collecting PM and HAPs measurement data and develop speciation profiles to improve and/or 

replace approximation methods and advance those data sources in models used to isolate sources, and 

identify aviation’s contribution to impacts. 

•	 Continue assessment of the relative effect of various emissions on climate forcing functions. 

•	 Continue comparison of detailed chemistry computations to aviation environmental tools approximations. 

•	 Continue developing a model of near field plume evolution/expansion to feed air quality models. 

•	 Assess whether there are unique health impacts or other environmental effects, particularly for NextGen 

scenarios, including particulate matter emissions and hazardous air pollutants from aviation sources, with 

specific focus on the aircraft engine. 

•	 Continue assessment of uncertainty of impact of aviation on climate change. 

•	 Complete assessment of the impacts of aviation on air quality including the effects of particulate matter 

emissions attributable to aircraft climb and cruise operations. 

•	 Initiate development of guidance material related to dispersion, chemical and transport modeling (i.e., 

assessment of aviation-related air pollutant concentrations that effect air quality). 

•	 Continue evaluation of the necessity for establishing standards pertaining to particulate matter emissions 

from aircraft engines. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

In accordance with the agency’s mission and legislative mandates, FAA must assess and mitigate the environmental 

impacts of aviation. The FAA will continue to work with NASA, other Departments and Agencies, the manufacturing 

industry, and international authorities to support the development and implementation of aircraft environmental 

certification regulations through proactive response to changes in airplane and engine technology, 

measurement/analysis technology, regulatory policy, and international regulatory initiatives. 

FAA will continue to work with NASA and other Departments and Agencies as appropriate in research efforts 

identifying noise and emissions reduction technologies that may enter the marketplace within the next 10-15 years. 

The agency will use these research findings to consider new environmental certification standards and procedures for 

the next generation of transport aircraft. 

A-130 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Ongoing Activities 

Aerospace systems have historically been designed – and regulations for their certification and use have been written 

– as though aviation noise and various emissions had nothing to do with one another. 

However, aviation noise and emissions are highly interdependent phenomena. Future environmentally responsible 

aviation policy and rule making must be based on a new, interdisciplinary approach. Furthermore, this approach 

must be made as affordable as it is effective. 

Existing analytical tools are inadequate to assess interdependencies between noise and emissions or analyze the 

cost/benefit of proposed actions. Accordingly, FAA is developing a robust new comprehensive framework of aviation 

environmental analytical tools and methodologies to perform these functions. The long-term aim is to provide a 

seamless, comprehensive set of tools to address all aspects of noise and emissions. The elements of this framework 

include: 

•	 EDS’ capability to provide integrated analysis of noise and emissions at the aircraft level. 

•	 AEDT comprises of other integrated aviation noise and emissions modules and incorporates input from EDS– 

will provide integrated capability of generating interrelationships between noise and emissions and among 

emissions at the local, regional and global levels. 

•	 APMT incorporates input from AEDT, EDS and other modules – will provide the common, transparent 

cost/benefit methodology needed to optimize national aviation policy in harmony with environmental policy. 

•	 These suite of tools will allow: 

− Government agencies to understand how proposed actions and policy decisions affect aviation noise 

and emissions. 

− Industry to understand how operational decisions affect proposed projects affecting aviation noise and 

emissions. 

− The public to understand how actions by government and industry affect aviation noise and emissions. 

Anticipated benefits of this initiative include the ability to: 

•	 Optimize environmental benefits of proposed actions and investments. 

•	 Improve data and analysis on airport/airspace capacity projects. 

•	 Increase capability to address noise and emissions interdependencies in the resolution of community 

concerns. 

•	 Aid in more effective R&D portfolio management. 

•	 Remove environmental roadblocks to capacity growth. 

•	 Maximize efficiency of energy usage 

•	 Continue global leadership for the United States in environmentally responsible aviation. 

Other activities include: 

•	 Continue activities through the PARTNER COE to develop methodology and collect data to identify and more 

accurately characterize the sources and incremental impacts associated with aircraft noise and aviation 

emissions, and generate improved solutions to deal with these problems. 

•	 Provide analytical support to complete transition of existing analytical tool modules (e.g., INM, EDMS, SAGE, 

MAGENTA), to AEDT. 

•	 Support FAA role in the International Civil Aviation Organization Committee on Aviation Environmental 

protection (ICAO/CAEP) working groups for assessing the technological, scientific, operational, and 

economic aspects associated with setting international standards and recommended practices for aircraft 

noise and engine exhaust emissions. 

•	 Continue efforts to ensure the currency of the regulation and technical guidance materials concerning 

aircraft noise and engine exhaust emissions certification requirements. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Noise and Emissions Analyses and interrelationships 

•	 Complete an annual assessment of noise exposure and fuel burn. 

•	 Complete a significant example analysis to demonstrate the benefit of cost-benefit analyses. 

A-131 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Develop architecture for noise and emissions modules communications 

•	 Develop model for assessing global exposure to noise from transport aircraft 

•	 Enhance aircraft noise and emissions modeling for airspace management activities 

•	 Release screening model and its updates for airport air quality analyses 

•	 Publish handbook for airport air quality analysis 

•	 Develop guidance document for estimating and reducing emissions from airport ground support equipments 

•	 Continue upgrades to and assessment of AEDT, EDS and APMT models and use these models for analyses 

to support the work program of the 9th cycle of CAEP 

•	 Release AEDT model for local applications 

•	 Harmonize AEDT and APMT databases and code management protocols 

•	 Integrate cost and socio-economic data for APMT model 

•	 Develop tools to aid in demonstrating other environmentally beneficial procedures in the National Airspace 

System (NAS). 

Aircraft noise 

•	 Continue to update and/or develop, as well as publish: procedures and technical guidance for noise 

certification of aircraft (transport category and subsonic jet airplanes – including open-rotor engine 

airplanes, small propeller airplanes, and rotorcraft, as well as unmanned aerial vehicles, supersonic 

airplanes, and very light jets, if data are available) that are both harmonized internationally and simplified. 

•	 Begin investigating feasibility of more stringent international noise certification standards for transport 

category and subsonic jet airplanes. 

•	 Continue assessing land use practice and investigating mitigation strategies beyond 65 dB DNL. 

•	 Apply methodologies to incorporate potential health impacts of aircraft noise exposure within APMT 

•	 Continue studies to: 

− Better understand which noise exposure metrics best correlate with health and welfare impacts such as 

community annoyance and sleep disturbance, according to comprehensive research plans. 

− Advance understanding of long-term health impacts of noise exposure 

− Establish acceptability of low-boom supersonic flight as perceived indoors. 

− Validate methodologies in noise propagation models to better capture the effects of air turbulence, 

meteorology, and terrain on outdoor community noise. 

− Assess potential global benefits of using newly-developed noise reduction technologies; identify 

technology goals for long term reduction of aircraft noise. 

− Identify technology goals for long term reduction of aircraft noise. 

− Support efforts to update land use planning compatibility guidance. 

− Improve interaction with the public on potential aviation noise impacts on communities 

•	 With the “Aviation emissions activity,” conduct two COE focused sessions at a national and an international 

conference. 

•	 Publish COE PARTNER research findings 

Aviation emissions 

•	 Continue to develop and publish procedures and technical guidance materials for affordable engine exhaust 

emissions testing and certification that are both harmonized and simplified. 

•	 Develop and disseminate methodologies and procedures to quantify and assess the impact of aircraft 

emissions on the aviation environment. 

•	 Continue assessment of potential global benefits of using newly developed emissions reduction 

technologies, and identify technology goals for long term reduction of aircraft engine emissions and fuel 

burn. 

•	 Continue advance best practices in aviation PM, HAPs and speciated HC emissions measurements. 

•	 Continue comparison of detailed chemistry computations to aviation environmental tools approximations. 

A-132 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Continue development of a model of near field plume evolution/expansion to feed air quality models. 

•	 Examine need for further assessment of the impacts of aviation on air quality including the effects of 

particulate matter emissions attributable to aircraft climb and cruise operations. 

•	 Continue development of guidance material related to dispersion, chemical and transport modeling (i.e., 

assessment of aviation-related air pollutant concentrations that effect air quality) 

•	 Continue evaluation of the necessity for establishing standards pertaining to particulate matter emissions 

from aircraft engines. 

•	 With the “Aircraft noise” activity, conduct two COE focused sessions at a national and an international 

conference. 

A-133 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2008) 184,078 

FY 2010 Enacted 15,522 

FY 2011 Request 15,374 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 59,722 

Total 274,696 

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

Aircraft Noise 1,667 1,359 1,572 1,245 1,228 

Engine Emissions 1,846 1,600 1,700 1,451 1,430 

Noise & Emissions Analyses 10,320 10,213 9,900 10,100 9,957 

Personnel Costs 2,005 2,036 2,127 2,319 2,276 

Other In-house Costs 170 261 309 407 483

 Total 16,008 15,469 15,608 15,522 15,374 

OMB Circular A-11, FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

Conduct of Research and Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Development ($000)

Basic 0 0 0 0 0 

Applied 16,008 15,469 15,608 15,522 15,374 

Development (includes prototypes) 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 16,008 15,469 15,608 15,522 15,374 

A-134 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A13.a - Environment and Energy 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

091-016 Noise and Emissions Analysis 

Noise and Emissions Analysis 

Develop architecture for noise/emissions 

modules communication 

Develop model for assessing global exposure to 

noise from transport aircraft 

Validate the methodologies used to assess 

aircraft noise exposure and impact 

Release INM updates 

Enhance aircraft noise and emissions modeling 

for airspace management activities 

Release EDMS updates 

Forecast future global emissions and noise 

Release screening model for airport air quality, 

version 1, and updates 

Validate methodologies used to assess aviation 

emissions and their impact on air quality 

Advance approximation methods for aircraft 

engine PM emissions 

Publish handbook for airport air quality analysis 

and updates 

Guidance document for estimating and reducing 

emissions from ground support equipment 

Resource and guidance materials, and 

assessment protocol concerning hazardous air 

pollutants 

Develop AEDT 

Release AEDT for local applications 

Develop EDS/Develop APMT 

Harmonize AEDT and APMT databases and code 

management protocols 

Integrate cost and socioeconomic data 

Integrated noise and emissions impacts 

analysis 

Aircraft Noise 

Update/develop procedures and technical 

guidance for aircraft noise certification 

Assess land use practices and investigate 

mitigation strategies beyond 65 dB DNL 

Update and publish AC 36-4 

Investigate feasibility of more stringent 

international noise standard for transport 

category and subsonic jet airplanes 

Investigate which noise exposure metrics best 

correlate with health and welfare impacts 

Apply methodologies to incorporate potential 

health impacts of aircraft noise exposure within 

APMT 

Engine Emissions 

Assess technological and scientific bases to 

support future ICAO engine emission standards 

Develop alternative, simplified engine exhaust 

emissions certification test procedures 

Update AC 34-1 

Develop measurement/sampling protocol for PM 

emissions from aircraft engines 

Develop science/metrics and reduce 

uncertainties to assess impact of aviation 

emissions 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

9,957 

1,228 

1,430 

2,759 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 15,374 15,522 15,374 15,335 15,287 14,131 14,969 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-135 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

A13.b NextGen Environmental Research – Aircraft Technologies, 

Fuels and Metrics 

$20,600,000 

Goals:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Greater Capacity and International Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: The NextGen Technologies, Fuels and Metrics program helps achieve the NextGen goals to 

increase capacity by reducing significant community noise and air quality emissions impacts in absolute terms, and 

reducing aviation greenhouse gas emissions impacts on the global climate. The program is focused on reducing 

current levels of aircraft noise, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions and energy use and advancing sustainable 

alternative aviation jet fuels 

The Program specifically supports the following outcomes: 

Demonstrate aircraft and engine technologies that reduce noise and air quality and greenhouse gas emissions at the 

source to a developmental level that will allow quicker industry uptake of these new environmental technologies in 

order to produce a fleet that will operate more efficiently with less energy usage and permit expansion of airports 

and airspace capacity in a manner consistent with the environmental goals of the NextGen plan.
 

Specific activities include developing and demonstrating: 

•	 Certifiable aircraft technology that reduces aircraft fuel burn by 33% compared to current technology, 

reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas (CO2) emissions; 

•	 Certifiable engine technology that reduces landing and takeoff cycle (LTO) nitrogen oxide emissions by 60 

percent, without increasing other gaseous or particle emissions, over the International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) standard adopted at the sixth meeting of the ICAO Committee on Aviation 

Environmental Protection (CAEP/6); 

•	 Certifiable aircraft technology that reduces noise levels by 32 dB at each of the three certification points, 

relative to Stage 4 standards; and 

•	 Determination of the extent to which new engine and aircraft technologies may be used to retrofit or reengine aircraft so as to increase the level of penetration into the commercial fleet. 

Demonstrate alternative fuels for aviation to reduce emissions affecting air quality and greenhouse gas emissions and 

increase energy supply security for NextGen. 

Specific activities include developing and demonstrating: 

•	 The feasibility of use of alternative fuels in aircraft systems, including successful demonstration and 

quantification of benefits and internationally agreed criteria to quantify relative carbon content; and 

•	 Processing capability and technical data to support certification and assured safety of a “drop in” 

replacement for petroleum derived turbine engine fuels. 

Determining the appropriate enhancements of goals and metrics to manage NextGen aviation environmental impacts 

that are needed to support Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) and achieve environmental protection that 

enables sustained aviation growth. 

Specific activities include: 

•	 Evaluate, establish and implement advanced metrics to better assess and control noise, air quality impacts 

and greenhouse gas emissions that may influence climate impacts from anticipated NextGen commercial 

aircraft operations. 

•	 Evaluate and refine required technology and operational goals and targets to mitigate the environmental 

impact of NextGen and support NextGen EMS implementation. 

Agency Outputs: The program is protecting the environment by reducing significant aviation environmental 

impacts associated with noise, exhaust emissions and energy production. The program is also seeking to enhance 

energy efficiency and availability. The program will advance and mature, collaboratively with industry, engine and 

airframe technologies to reduce aviation noise, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions and energy use. It will also 

provide data and methodologies to assess the life cycle environmental impact and support certification of alternative 

aviation fuels that could serve as “drop in” replacements for today’s petroleum derived turbine engine fuels. This will 

lead to faster deployment of these fuels, and accompanying reductions in greenhouse gas and air quality emissions 

A-136 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

from aviation. Ultimately the program will demonstrate advanced technologies and alternative fuels in integrated 

ground and flight demonstrations. 

The program is also helping to achieve NextGen goals by improving metrics to define and measure significant 

aviation environmental impacts. The program will improve the fundamental understanding of aviation environmental 

health and welfare and climate impacts and translate impact into improved metrics that can be used to better assess 

and mitigate aviation’s contribution. This program will identify the gaps in scientific knowledge to support NextGen; 

focus research in areas that will reduce key uncertainties to levels that allow action; and develop enhanced metrics to 

enable sound analyses. Ultimately, the program will enable the refinement of goals and targets to support the 

NextGen EMS to better manage and reduce aviation’s environmental impacts. 

Research Goals: 

By FY 2015, complete system analyses and demonstrations of near-and mid-term CLEEN airframe and engine 

technologies to reduce noise, emissions and fuel burn in integrated flight demonstrations for civil subsonic jet aircraft 

Airframe and engine technologies supporting milestones: 

•	 Complete demonstration of first phase CLEEN technologies in ground rig tests. (by FY 2011) 

•	 Complete demonstration of CLEEN technologies in ground rig tests. (by FY 2012) 

•	 Demonstrate airframe and engine technologies to reduce noise, emissions and fuel burn in integrated 

ground demonstrations for civil subsonic jet aircraft. (by FY 2013) 

•	 Complete system analyses to identify the most promising CLEEN technologies for flight tests. (by FY 2013) 

•	 Initiate demonstrations of first round of CLEEN airframe and engine technologies to reduce noise, emissions 

and fuel burn in integrated flight demonstrations for civil subsonic jet aircraft (by FY 2013) 

•	 Complete system analyses and identify and pursue the development of second round engine and airframe 

technologies that will be the most effective at producing environmental benefits. (by FY 2015) 

•	 Complete demonstrations of first round of CLEEN airframe and engine technologies to reduce noise, 

emissions and fuel burn in integrated flight demonstrations for civil subsonic jet aircraft(by FY 2015) 

•	 Develop plans for analyses and demonstration of evolving technologies in a potential second Phase to 

CLEEN (by FY2015) 

By FY 2015, complete comprehensive assessment and research to support certification of “drop in” and renewable 

alternative turbine engine fuels and develop implementation plan to foster implementation in the commercial fleet. 

Alternative fuels supporting milestones: 

•	 Complete detailed feasibility study, including economic feasibility, environmental impacts, and assessment of 

potential for gas turbine renewable alternative fuels. (by FY 2011) 

•	 Initiate efforts to experimentally assess environmental impacts and benefits and costs of renewable 

alternative turbine engine fuels. (by FY 2011) 

•	 Develop internationally-agreed methodology to conduct environmental impact life cycle analyses for a range 

of renewable alternative turbine fuels (by FY 2012) 

•	 Conduct a significant demonstration of “drop-in” alternative turbine engine fuels (by FY 2012) 

•	 Conduct a study of strategies to incentivize implementation of renewable alternative fuels in commercial 

aviation (by FY 2012) 

•	 Conduct safety assessment of renewable fuels (by FY 2013) 

•	 Determine potential production capacity of alternative aviation fuels for aviation (by FY 2012) 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of additional “drop in” alternative turbine engine fuels. (by FY 2013) 

•	 Complete assessment of benefits of use of alternative fuels in operational aircraft fleet (by FY 2013) 

•	 Complete renewable alternative turbine engine fuels safety, environmental and business case assessments 

(by FY 2013) 

•	 Complete transition plans for “drop-in” alternative fuels (by FY 2014) 

•	 Complete renewable fuels safety assessment (by FY 2014) 

•	 Complete transition plans for renewable alternative fuels (by FY 2015) 

By FY 2016 identify and initiate assessment of non drop-in fuels. 

A-137 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

•	 Conduct initial feasibility study, including economic feasibility, environmental impacts, and assessment of 

potential for non drop in alternative aviation fuels (by FY 2015) 

•	 Conduct a demonstration of the performance characteristics of a non drop in alternative aviation fuel (FY 

2016) 

By FY 2015, investigate metrics, uncertainties on aviation emissions health and welfare and climate impact to 

facilitate NextGen EMS implementation. 

Metrics supporting milestones: 

•	 Complete preliminary assessment of aviation’s impact on climate. (by FY 2011) 

•	 Complete initial assessment of NextGen air quality and noise impacts. (by FY 2011) 

•	 Continue refinements of aviation environmental impacts and metrics (by FY 2013) 

•	 Reduce key uncertainties of aviation impacts to levels that better inform appropriate action. (by FY 2013) 

•	 Refine metrics that more accurately capture aviation emissions health and welfare and climate impact and 

goals to facilitate EMSs implementation. (by FY 2014) 

•	 Continue refined assessment of aviation environmental, health and climate impacts (by FY 2015) 

•	 Complete an updated assessment of aviation environmental, health and climate impacts (by FY 2015) 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: FAA works closely with other federal agencies, industry, academia, and 

international governments and organizations to design R&D efforts that can mitigate the environmental impact of 

aviation and explore alternative gas turbine fuels. 

•	 NextGen -- FAA leads an Environmental Working Group (EWG) responsible for leading environmental 

dimensions of the JPDO. The EWG comprises FAA, NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DoD, 

Department of Commerce, Council on Environmental Quality, and Office of the Secretary of Transportation, 

as well as industry, academia, local government, and community groups. The efforts of the WG are 

centered on advancing the national vision and recommendations for aviation in the NextGen and in the 

congressionally mandated study on “Aviation and the Environment”, including advanced technology and 

alternative fuels development. 

•	 Commercial Alternative Aviation Fuel Initiative (CAAFI) -- Concerns about rising fuel costs, energy supply 

security and the environmental effects of aviation are providing a significant stimulus to take a fresh look at 

the use of alternative fuels for aviation. To forge a way ahead, FAA founded the Commercial Aviation 

Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) together with Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the 

Air Transport Association (ATA) and the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). CAAFI is teaming with the 

DoD to leverage their substantial efforts advancing alternative fuels for military aviation– driven by energy 

security considerations. CAAFI is also working with other Federal agencies such as NASA. 

•	 Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) – The FAA is working with the CCSP program office and its 

individual member agencies to focus research efforts that address the uncertainties and gaps in our 

understanding of current and projected impacts of aviation on climate, and to develop metrics to 

characterize these impacts. 

•	 Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative (ACCRI) – The FAA worked with NASA and NOAA to establish 

the ACCRI. The primary objective is to coordinate and sponsor collaborative research efforts to reduce key 

scientific uncertainties in quantifying aviation-related climate impacts while providing timely scientific input 

to inform optimum mitigation actions and policies for NextGen and ICAO. 

•	 Environmental Protection Agency – The FAA is working with the EPA to leverage the Life Cycle Analysis 

(LCA) model being developed by the EPA under the Energy Security and Independence Act of 2007 to 

expand applicability to aviation. 

R&D Partnerships: As does the Environment and Energy Research Program and other NextGen activities, the 

NextGen Aircraft Technologies, Fuels and Metrics Program relies on a series of Memorandums of Agreement (MOA), 

to work closely with NASA and DoD. The FAA is also pursuing collaborative agreements with DoE, and EPA to 

leverage resources to address aviation’s environmental impact. 

•	 Through the JPDO NextGen, the program supports the EWG comprising FAA, NASA, EPA, DoD, Department 

of Commerce, Council on Environmental Quality, and Office of the Secretary of Transportation, as well as 

industry, academia, local government, and community groups. The EWG is pursuing an intensive, balanced 

approach, emphasizing alignment across stakeholders in developing needed business and technology 

A-138 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

architectures, as well as other relevant tools, metrics, and products to address aviation’s environmental 

impact. 

Accomplishments: This effort started in FY 2009 to address the challenges of NextGen. The program was stood 

up and contracts issued in 2009. However, relevant stakeholders have achieved significant accomplishments 

mitigating aviation’s environmental impact. The number of people exposed to significant noise levels was reduced by 

over 90 percent between 1975 and 2008. Today's aircraft are also 70 percent more fuel-efficient than jet aircraft of 

the 1960s. Reduced fuel consumption has also led to a 90 percent reduction in carbon monoxide, smoke, and other 

aircraft emissions. The outputs of this program will continue to enable future environmental performance 

improvements. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Noise, emissions and fuel burn reduction technologies maturation 

•	 Continued advancement of CLEEN system level assessments. 

•	 Initiated CLEEN component level assessment. 

•	 Conducted detailed integrated system level analyses to identify the most promising technologies. 

•	 Identified CLEEN airframe and engine technologies to be pursued. 

•	 Completed Round 1 demonstration of CLEEN technologies in ground rig tests. 

•	 Completed preliminary design of CLEEN demonstration experiment. 

Alternative turbine engine fuels 

•	 Measured experimentally environmental impacts of “drop in” alternative turbine engine fuels. 

•	 Initiated planning for comprehensive “drop in” alternative fuel demonstration 

•	 Initiated efforts to experimentally quantify renewable fuels environmental impacts 

NextGen Environmental Metrics, Goals and Targets 

•	 Continued efforts to determine how projected NextGen operations-generated emissions and noise impact 

human health and welfare, and global climate and identify key uncertainties. 

•	 Initiated implementation of research efforts necessary to reduce key uncertainties in our scientific 

understanding of environmental impacts and enhance models to assess those impacts for improved 

decision-making on mitigation and regulatory considerations. 

•	 Continued comprehensive modeling efforts to establish the relationship between aviation engine exhaust 

and the gaseous and particulate matter emissions that are deposited in the atmosphere. 

•	 Initiated a comprehensive particulate matter (PM), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and noise measurement 

campaign. 

•	 Continued assessing potential metrics to quantify the climate related impacts of commercial aircraft 

operations.
 

•	 Continued baseline analyses of potential climate response due to aviation emissions with quantified 

uncertainties, based on the best available science and modeling tools.
 

•	 Initiated comprehensive assessment of NextGen air quality and noise impacts. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Anticipated increases in air transportation demand will place significant environmental pressures on various segments 

of the NextGen. The primary environmental constraints on the capacity, efficiency and flexibility of the NextGen could 

be community noise, air quality, global climate impacts, and energy production and consumption. Environmental 

issues have constrained airport and airspace growth over the past decade. To ensure environmental impacts don’t 

become a constraint on growth in NextGen, we need to accelerate introduction of quieter and cleaner technology in 

our fleets. Ninety percent of the environmental improvements (noise and emissions reductions) in the aviation 

system in the last 30 years have come from improved technology. Without a pipeline of near term (5-10 years) 

technology improvements, we cannot achieve the absolute reduction of significant noise and air quality impacts that 

we believe are necessary to 

A-139 
 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

enable NextGen growth. We need robust research and development to enable technology solutions to manage and 

mitigate environmental constraints. The goal is to have a fleet of quieter, cleaner aircraft that operate more 

efficiently with less energy. 

We are currently facing larger research and development challenges at a time when we need to make larger 

technological leaps. Solutions that involve technology improvements in engines and airframes in a foreseeable 

timeframe require successful maturation and certification of new technologies within the next 5-10 years. This 

initiative establishes a world-class research consortium that can pursue technology goals to significantly reduce 

aviation noise, emissions, and fuel consumption. Establishing a world-class research consortium with industrytargeted on maturing technology- will help accelerate introduction of quieter and cleaner technology in our fleets so 

environmental issues do not become constraints. 

The NextGen environmental goal is to reduce significant health and welfare impacts of aviation community noise 

and air quality (namely NOX) emissions in absolute terms, notwithstanding growth. Although there is no quantitative 

goal for greenhouse gas emissions, the NextGen environmental goal does call for limiting or reducing the impact of 

aviation greenhouse gas emissions on global climate. There is a need to explore the appropriate metrics and system 

goals to establish significant impacts. There is also a need to develop a robust science-based understanding of 

impacts of NextGen aviation emissions on earth’s climate and translate these impacts into improved metrics that can 

be used to better assess and mitigate aviation’s contribution to climate change. These goals and metrics will enable 

NextGen Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) to mitigate impacts in a dynamic and cost-beneficial manner. 

Elements of this initiative include: 

•	 In collaboration with industry, mature noise, emissions and fuel burn reductions technologies (previously 

conceived by NASA and industry to Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) of 3-4) to levels (TRL 6) that enable 

industry to expedite introduction of these technologies into current and future products. 

•	 Advance the development of alternative “drop in” and renewable turbine fuels for aviation and assess their 

environmental impacts to expedite deployment. 

•	 Develop metrics to better assess and control noise, air quality and climate impacts from NextGen 

commercial aircraft operations and establish goals and targets to support NextGen EMS implementation to 

mitigate impacts. 

Ongoing Activities 

Anticipated increases in air transportation demand will place significant environmental pressures on the national 

airspace system. Current operational trends show that environmental impacts resulting from aircraft noise and 

aviation emissions will be the principal constraint on the capacity and flexibility of the NextGen unless managed and 

mitigated. Aviation impacts affect community noise footprints, surface air quality, water quality, and the global 

climate. Environmental issues have already resulted in the delay and/or down-scaling of certain airport capacity 

projects over the past decade. Therefore, the NextGen environmental challenge is to reduce, in absolute terms the 

number of people exposed to significant noise levels; and the significant health and welfare impacts on the 

population of aviation 

The challenge is also to reduce the impact of aviation greenhouse gas emissions on global climate – despite 

remaining scientific uncertainties regarding the nature of these impacts. And the overarching challenge is to better 

understand the impacts of aircraft noise and emissions on the population and climate, enabling appropriate 

mitigation actions. NextGen must achieve a balance between aviation’s environmental impacts and other societal 

objectives, both domestically and internationally. 

The FAA’s strategic plan to address these challenges has five elements: (1) enhance scientific understanding and 

develop integrated environmental models; (2) accelerate air traffic management efficiencies and improvements; (3) 

hasten the development of promising environmental improvements in aircraft technology; (4) hasten the 

development renewable aviation alternative fuels; and (5) explore market-based measures to offer assistance in 

managing aviation emissions growth. 

This program is focusing on efforts to accelerate the aircraft technology and aviation alternative fuels 

development/penetration cycle. It is also focusing on enhancing scientific understanding of metrics and targets that 

more accurately capture aviation noise and emissions health and welfare and climate impacts to enable cost 

beneficial actions to mitigate these impacts. 

A-140 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

The effort is pursuing the national goals and objectives delineated in the Energy and Environment component of the 

National Plan for Aeronautics R&D and Related Infrastructure (http://www.ostp.gov/cs/nstc/documents_reports) 

which provides quantitative integrated energy, fuel efficiency, emissions and noise research goals. 

The ongoing elements of the effort include: 

1.	 Continue the Continuous, Low Energy, Emissions, and Noise (CLEEN) effort focused on accelerating the 

maturation of lower energy, emissions and noise technology for aircraft and advancing environmentally 

beneficial alternative fuels. 

2.	 Continue efforts to develop the fundamental scientific understanding to enable Environmental Management 

Systems to dynamically manage aviation environmental impacts in a cost beneficial manner. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Noise, emissions and fuel burn reduction technologies maturation 

•	 Advance CLEEN systems analyses for most promising technologies 

•	 Continue CLEEN component level tests for most promising technologies 

•	 Initiate Round 2 ground rig tests 

•	 Continue design of CLEEN demonstration experiment 

Alternative turbine engine fuels 

•	 Complete detailed feasibility study, including economic feasibility, environmental impacts, and assessment of 

potential for gas turbine renewable alternative fuels. (by FY 2011) 

•	 Develop federally-agreed methodology to conduct environmental impact life cycle analyses for a range of 

renewable alternative turbine fuels (by FY 2011) 

•	 Initiate efforts to experimentally assess environmental impacts and benefits and costs of renewable 

alternative turbine engine fuels. (by FY 2011) 

NextGen Environmental Metrics, Goals and Targets 

•	 Continue analysis of targets to achieve NextGen environmental goals 

•	 Continue efforts to determine how projected NextGen operations-generated emissions and noise impact 

human health and welfare, and global climate and identify key uncertainties. 

•	 Continue research efforts necessary to reduce key uncertainties in our scientific understanding of 

environmental impacts and enhance models to assess those impacts for improved decision-making on 

mitigation and regulatory considerations. 

•	 Continue comprehensive modeling efforts to establish the relationship between aviation engine exhaust and 

the gaseous and particulate matter emissions that are deposited in the atmosphere. 

•	 Complete analysis of data collected during comprehensive particulate matter (PM), hazardous air pollutants 

(HAPs) and noise measurement campaign. 

•	 Develop plans for next round of emissions and noise measurement campaign and analysis 

•	 Continue assessing potential metrics to quantify the climate related impacts of commercial aircraft 

operations.
 

•	 Continue baseline analyses of potential climate response due to aviation emissions with quantified 

uncertainties, based on the best available science and modeling tools.
 

•	 Continue comprehensive integrated assessment of NextGen air quality and noise impacts. 

A-141 
 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Amount 

($000) Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 16,050 

FY 2010 Enacted 26,509 

FY 2011 Request 20,600 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012­ 82,947 

2015) Total 146,106 

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

NextGen Environmental Research— 

Aircraft Technologies, Fuels and 0 0 15,829 25,351 19,043 

Metrics 

Personnel Costs 0 0 221 954 1,150 

Other In-house Costs 0 0 0 204 407

 Total 0 0 16,050 26,509 20,600 

OMB Circular A-11, FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

Conduct of Research and Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Development ($000)

Basic 0 0 0 0 0 

Applied 0 0 16,050 26,509 20,600 

Development (includes prototypes) 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 0 0 16,050 26,509 20,600 

A-142 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A13.b- NextGen Environmental Research— 

Aircraft Technologies, Fuels and Metrics 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

111-150 NextGen Environmental Research 

Technology Maturation 

Establish CLEEN Consortium 

System Level Assessments 

Component Assessments 

Rig Tests – Round 1 

Rig Tests – Round 2 

Integrated Ground Demonstrators 

Flight Demonstrations 

Prepare Annual Report 

14,239 

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Alternative Turbine Fuels 

“Drop in” Fuels Feasibility Study 

Renewable Fuels Feasibility Study 

Lifecycle and sustainability analyses for 

renewable fuels 

Qualification testing 

Production Capacity Assessment 

Renewable Fuels Safety Assessment 

Renewable Alternative Fuels Demonstration 

Transition Plans for “drop-in” fuels 

Transition Plans for renewable alternative 

fuels 

Benefit assessment of use of alternative fuels 

in operational aircraft fleet 

Assess feasibility of non drop-in alternative 

fuels 

Prepare Annual Report 

2,467 

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ 

◊

◊ 

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ 

◊

◊

◊ 

◊

Metrics, Goals and Targets 

Define potential metrics 

Evaluate metrics and models 

Advance measurement approaches 

Climate impact assessments 

Air Quality assessments 

Noise assessments 

Refine metrics 

Assess efficacy of metrics 

Upgrade Assessment Models 

Integrated noise and emissions impacts 

analysis 

Assessment of Environmental goal targets 

Publish Research Reports 

2,337 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 1,557 

Total Budget Authority 20,600 26,509 20,600 20,691 20,778 20,752 20,726 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget 

process. 

A-143 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget Item Program Title Contract Dollars 

A14.a System Planning and Resource Management $1,733,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety. Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

Organizational Excellence
 

Intended Outcomes: Demonstrate the value of working with international partners to leverage research programs 

and studies to improve safety and promote seamless operations worldwide. The ongoing activity will manage the 

FAA’s R,E&D portfolio, meet the President’s criteria for R&D, increase program efficiency, and maintain management 

and operating costs. 

This activity produces the National Aviation Research Plan (NARP), an annual strategic plan for FAA R&D; administers 

the congressionally mandated R,E&D Advisory Committee (REDAC); conducts external program coordination; fosters 

future research opportunities; and provides program advocacy and outreach. 

Agency Outputs: In FY 2011, the FAA will: 

R,E&D Portfolio Development 

•	 Publish the annual National Aviation Research Plan (NARP). 

•	 Manage the R,E&D portfolio development. 

•	 Prepare the annual R,E&D budget submission. 

•	 Host two REDAC meetings and multiple subcommittee meetings. The Committee provides advice on and 

reviews plans for the annual FAA R&D budget, and produces periodic and special reports providing advice 

and recommendations to FAA on its R&D portfolio. 

Research Partnerships 

•	 Establish and cultivate research partnerships both domestically and internationally to leverage programs, 

laboratories, and facilities to support the implementation of NextGen operational improvements. 

•	 Manage the formulation and execution of interagency agreements and action plans with external research 

partners such as NASA, Air Force Research Lab (AFRL), EUROCONTROL, and SESAR Joint Undertaking. 

•	 Identify, validate, and catalog existing and needed research and technology activities internal and external 

to the FAA to support the operational needs of the FAA’s NAS Enterprise Architecture. 

• Conduct the 2011 USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar on NextGen and SESAR. 

Performance Measurement 

•	 Develop a strategic mapping for international collaboration. 

•	 Identify a process to measure quality, timeliness, and value of collaboration. 

Research Management Goals: 

•	 In FY 2011, the FAA will maintain an R,E&D management workforce of no more than 10 percent of the total 

R,E&D workforce and will sustain the System Planning and Resource Management budget at 2 percent or 

less of the total R,E&D budget. 

•	 In FY 2011, publish the NARP, which documents the annual R&D budget portfolio, describes activities of the 

RE&D Advisory Committee, and contains the FY 2011-2016 R&D plans. 

•	 By 2011, develop a strategic mapping for international research collaboration. 

•	 By 2011, identify a process to measure quality, timeliness, and value of international research collaboration. 

•	 By 2016, determine the value of international research collaborations. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The REDAC reviews FAA research commitments annually and provides 

guidance for future R,E&D investments. The members of this committee and its associated subcommittees are 

subject matter experts drawn from various associations, user groups, corporations, government agencies, 

universities, and research centers. Their combined presence in the REDAC fulfills a congressional requirement for 

FAA R&D to be mindful of aviation community and stakeholder input. 

R&D Partnerships: DOT, JPDO, NASA, other Federal Agencies, and EUROCONTROL. 

A-144 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Accomplishments: Program accomplishments for FY 2009 include: 

•	 Developed the FY 2011 R,E&D budget submission. 

•	 Met the research goal for R,E&D management workforce and funding for System Planning and Resource 

Management. 

•	 Managed two REDAC meetings and over twelve subcommittee meetings, where FAA’s proposed FY 2011 

R,E&D portfolio was reviewed. 

•	 Published the 2009 National Aviation Research Plan and submitted to Congress with the President’s FY 2010 

Budget. 

•	 Mapped FAA NextGen R&D programs to the JPDO Integrated Work Plan and the FAA’s NextGen 

Implementation Plan.
 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Developed the FY 2012 R,E&D budget submission. 

•	 Obtained REDAC guidance for the FY 2012 R,E&D portfolio. 

•	 Obtained REDAC review of and recommendations for FY 2012 R,E&D portfolio. 

•	 Provided strategic direction for the FAA R,E&D program. 

•	 Delivered the 2010 National Aviation Research Plan to Congress with the President's FY 2011 Budget. 

•	 Coordinated R&D activities with internal and external partners. 

•	 Determined criteria for assessing the benefits of the international research collaboration. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

FAA will continue supporting the work of the REDAC in its task to advise the Administrator on the R&D program. In 

particular, it will seek the counsel and guidance of the committee for the FY 2013 program, review the proposed FY 

2013 program prior to submission of the budget requirements to the DOT, and seek the committee’s guidance during 

the execution of the R&D program. The agency will publish, as required by Congress, the National Aviation Research 

Plan and submit it to Congress concurrent with the FY 2012 President’s Budget Request. 

The program will review the President’s R&D criteria, ensuring that the agency’s R&D program remains viable and 

meets national priorities. It will also publish program activities and accomplishments, as well as foster external 

review of and encourage customer input to the R&D program. 

The agency will maintain its field offices at the NASA Ames and Langley Research Centers as a vital part of efforts to 

coordinate and integrate the research and development programs of NASA and the FAA. 

The program will manage the FAA R&D portfolio, identify high value products being produced by the R&D program, 

and promote the use of these products globally to benefit the international market. In FY 2011, this initiative will 

develop strategic mapping for international collaboration and identify a process to measure quality, timeliness, and 

value of collaboration. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

R,E&D Portfolio Development 

•	 Prepare the FY 2013 R,E&D budget submission 

•	 Manage FAA’s R,E&D portfolio to meet efficiency goals 

•	 Obtain REDAC recommendations on planned R,E&D investments for FY 2013. 

•	 Support the REDAC in its preparation of other reports, as requested by the Administrator. 

• Deliver the 2011 National Aviation Research Plan to the Congress with the President’s FY 2012 Budget. 

Research Partnerships 

•	 Coordinate R&D activities with internal and external partners. 

A-145 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

• Conduct the 2011 USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar on NextGen and SESAR. 

• Update the Integrated Plan for Research Transition Teams with NASA. 

Performance Measurement 

• Develop strategic mapping for international research collaboration. 

• Identify a process to measure quality, timeliness, and value of International research collaboration. 

A-146 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) $42,320 

FY 2010 Enacted 1,766 

FY 2011 Request 1,733 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 6,719 

Total 52,538 

Budget Authority 

($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

R,E&D Plans and Programs 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

1,346 

39 

3 

1,388 

1,075 

37 

72 

1,184 

1,714 

103 

0 

1,817 

1,706 

44 

16 

1,766 

1,678 

32 

23

1,733 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

 FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes)

Total

 0 

1,388 

0 

 1,388 

0 

1,184 

0 

1,184 

0 

1,817 

0 

1,817 

0 

1,766 

0 

1,766 

0 

1,733 

0 

1,733 

A-147 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A14.a – System Planning and 

Resource Management 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

011-130 R,E&D Plans and Programs 

R,E&D Portfolio Development 

Prepare guidance for budget formulation 

Conduct R,E&D financial management 

Prepare annual budget submissions 

Congressionally Mandated 

Publish National Aviation Research Plan (NARP) 

Conduct REDAC Meetings 

Research Partnerships 

Sponsor NASA Field Offices 

Facilitate the development of Integrated Plan for RTT 

with NASA 

Performance Measurement 

Determine measures for exchange of research 

information 

Develop a strategic mapping for international 

collaboration 

Identify a process to measure quality, timeliness, and 

value of collaboration 

Calculate value of collaboration 

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

221 

438 

344 

675 

55 

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Total Budget Authority 1,733 1,766 1,733 1,717 1,700 1,668 1,634 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process. 

A-148 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

A14.b William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory Facility $3,717,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: The FAA sustains research facilities located at the William J. Hughes Technical Center 

(WJHTC) in support of its R&D program goals. These facilities consist of the Flight Program’s Airborne Laboratories, 

Simulation Facilities including the Target Generation Facility and the Cockpit Simulators, and the Concepts and 

Systems Integration Facilities, including the Human Factors Laboratory and the NextGen Integration and Evaluation 

Capability. 

Agency Outputs: R&D programs require specialized facilities to emulate and evaluate field conditions. Human 

factors projects require flexible, high fidelity laboratories to perform full mission, ground to air, human-in-the-loop 

simulations. Researchers measure baseline human performance using existing ATC configurations, and deltas in 

performance when new systems or procedures are introduced in order to evaluate human factors issues. These 

laboratories are comprised of integrated cockpit and air traffic control workstation simulators, and the performance 

issues they delve into reflect the perspectives of the pilot and flight crew. Airborne and navigation projects require 

flying laboratories, aircraft utilized for research and development, which are specially instrumented and 

reconfigurable to support a variety of projects. 

Research Goals: The FAA will work to provide an integrated laboratory platform for the purpose of demonstrating 

operational procedures, defining human and system performance requirements, full mission demonstrations 

integrating NextGen air and ground capabilities for pilot separation responsibility and controller efficiencies, and 

analysis, evaluation, and validation of R&D milestones. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The WJHTC facilities directly support agency projects and integrated 

product teams in the following areas: 

FAA’s Air Traffic Organization (ATO) – The WJHTC laboratories support the ATO in the areas of capacity and air 

traffic management; communications, navigation, and surveillance; NextGen concept validation; weather; 

airport technology; aircraft safety; human factors; information security; environment and energy. 

Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance – The Flight Program Team supports on-site flight tests of the 

Precision Runway Monitoring System in Detroit to aid in the development of a system for reduction of 

runway incursions. 

Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) – The WJHTC laboratories support concept validation and 

system integration. 

Automated Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast – Numerous flight test hours have been expended in support of 

field testing the new ITT system in southern Florida. Each test leads to improvements made to enhance the 

overall system. 

Terminal Instrumentation Procedures (TERPS) – Routine flight tests are ongoing in the development of GPS 

Helicopter precision approaches to a heliport. 

Wide Area Augmentation System – The Flight Program Team has been working with the WAAS program, 

Bombardier Aircraft, Canadian Marconi, and Honeywell to design, test and certify a WAAS installation into a 

Bombardier Global 5000 aircraft. 

R&D Partnerships: In addition to FAA’s research programs, WJHTC laboratories partnerships include: 

U.S. Air Force – The Flight Program Team has performed numerous test of the GPS signal security with the U.S. 

Air Force. 

National Transportation Safety Board – The Flight Program Team has participated in the recreation of aircraft 

accidents for the purpose of collecting data in an attempt to determine the underlying cause. 

Boeing - The Simulation team is working a under cooperative research and development to build capability to 

perform R&D of 4-D trajectory negotiation and execution, and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) 

A-149 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

EUROCONTROL - The simulation team exchanges aircraft modeling data for use in TGF
 

Industry – 

 Flight tests are on-going to help develop and deploy the ITT ADS-B system in southern Florida as well as 

the work being done with Bombardier, Canadian Marconi, and Honeywell in the design, installation and 

certification on GPS WAAS onboard a Bombardier Global 5000 aircraft. 

 The Simulation team has partnered with UFA Inc. to quantify voice recognition and response (VRR) system 

performance in Technical Center Human in the Loop (HITL) simulations. 

Facilities supporting R&D Goals at the FAA’s WJHTC: The following laboratory facilities provide the reliable 

test bed infrastructure to support these R&D customers, program goals, and outputs for the FAA: 

Simulation Facilities – Target Generator Facility (TGF) and Cockpit Simulators 

•	 Approach Procedures 

•	 Next Generation Air Transportation System 

•	 Airspace Design 

•	 Operational Evolution Plan Concept Validation 

•	 Dynamic Vertical Reduced Separation Minima 

•	 Unmanned Aerial Systems 

• ADS-B Concept Evaluation
 

Research & Development Flight Program – Airborne Laboratories
 

•	 Satellite Communications and Navigation Programs 

•	 Separation Standards 

•	 Wide Area Augmentation System 

•	 Terminal Instrumentation Procedures 

•	 Safety 

•	 Runway Incursion 

•	 Next Generation Air Transportation System 

•	 Local Area Augmentation System 

•	 ADS-B 

• Common Automated Radar Terminal System
 

Concepts and System Integration Facilities
 

•	 Air Traffic Control Human Factors 

•	 Airway Facilities Human Factors 

•	 NextGen Integration & Evaluation Capability (NIEC) 

•	 Airspace Design 

•	 Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) 

•	 ADS-B 

•	 SWIM 

•	 DataComm 

•	 TMA 

Accomplishments: The FAA’s WJHTC’s laboratory facilities provide the reliable test bed infrastructure to support 

R&D program goals and outputs. Outstanding program accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

Simulation Facilities 

•	 Simulation Team integrated TGF and Boeing Simulation Lab for UAS simulation capability. 

•	 Simulation Team added 4-D trajectory negotiation capability using AIDL to its B-737 flight management 

system trainer. 

•	 Simulation Team completed the evaluation of the UFA VRR system. 

A-150 
 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

Flight Program’s Airborne Laboratories 

•	 The Flight Program Team made improvements to its operational aircraft to enhance their ability to support 

project flight test. These included the installation of new antennas to support the ADS-B and NextGen 

programs and the modification of the aircraft to permit the display of Advanced Navigational signals unto 

the basic cockpit displays, into the Bombardier Global 5000 test aircraft (N47). 

Concepts and Systems Integration 

•	 The Research Development & Human Factors Laboratory (RDHFL) Future Terminal Workstation (FTWS) 

supported Human-in-the-Loop simulations that evaluated three user interfaces: STARS; STARS+ (STARS 

plus DataComm, ADS-B, use of RNAVs, tailored arrivals and functionality from DRS/ERAM; and FTWS: 2020 

NextGen Automation Platform common EnRoute/TRACON UI extrapolated from future EnRoute Workstation 

simulations. 

•	 The NIEC integrated UAS Pilot Stations to support demonstration for the FAA UAS Planning Team. 

•	 The NIEC laboratory environment has been improved to enhance capabilities to support NextGen, including 

upgrades to the laboratory infrastructure and installing component systems to support DataComm, ADS-B, 

SWIM, TFMM, and TMA. 

FY 2008: 

•	 The Flight Program Team has participated in the development and acceptance flight testing of the ITT ADSB system in southern Florida. These test consisted on numerous dual aircraft, highly scripted, flights to test 

system resolution, accuracy and performance. 

•	 Simulation Team successfully implemented Boeing’s Aircraft Intent Description Language (AIDL) 

•	 Simulation Team successfully completed manual flight capability in its Embraer-175 cockpit simulator using 

the manufacturer’s software. 

•	 Research Development & Human Factors Laboratory (RDHFL) developed Aircraft Geometric Height 

Measurement Element (AGHME): 2006 – 2009 In support of Domestic Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum 

(D-RVSM) – consists of changing the current 2,000-ft vertical separation standard applicable to pairs of 

aircraft operating between 29,000 and 41,000 (flight levels 290 and 410), inclusive, to 1,000 ft. AGHME 

estimates aircraft geometric height. An already existing analysis process will then make use of this 

geometric height, in conjunction with other information, to determine aircraft height-keeping performance. 

FY 2007: 

•	 The Flight Program Team has participated in the development and improvement flight testing of the FAA’s 

“Legacy” ADS-B system operational on the east coast of the US. These test consisted on numerous multiaircraft flights to test system resolution, accuracy and performance. 

•	 Simulation Team successfully completed baseline evaluations of the UFA VRR system. 

•	 Simulation Team successfully demonstrated a control tower visualization capability. 

•	 Research Development & Human Factors Laboratory (RDHFL) Future Terminal Workstation (FTWS): 2007- 

2010 The project is part of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) human factors research program to 

design and evaluate new air traffic control (ATC) capabilities for the 2015-2020 timeframe. The new 

capabilities include new automation tools; user interfaces (UIs) and interaction techniques, and ATC 

procedures. The FTWS project focuses on the environment known today as the Terminal Radar Approach 

Control (TRACON). 

•	 The NextGen Laboratory Team gave several demonstrations of PAS throughout the week ending September 

28, 2007, to the FAA UAS Planning Team, showing some basic scenarios in support of the SC203 Document 

concerning Unmanned Aerial Systems integration into the NAS. 

•	 Research Development & Human Factors Laboratory (RDHFL) Tower Operations Digital Data System 

(TODDS): 2007 – 2010 Integrated tool to display aircraft location, electronic flight data, and other digital 

data for the ground and local controller positions in ATC Towers. Address the current limitations of paper 

and electronic flight strip systems by: 

− Consolidating information into a single source 

− Connecting flight data to aircraft position 

− Providing a means to organize flight data information spatially; touch screen displays 

− Presenting only the information that controllers need when they need it 

− Providing timing capability, reminders, and notices of expired information 

A-151 
Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

The test beds at the WJHTC provide the necessary infrastructure for R&D programs to achieve agency goals. 

Specific milestones and products are contained within individual programs. 

Simulation Facilities 

•	 Simulation Team conducted human in the loop (HITL) simulations of UAS in the NAS. 

•	 Simulation Team conducted an end-to-end evaluation of 4-D trajectory prediction and negotiation using TGF 

and B-737-800 cockpit simulator. 

Flight Program’s Airborne Laboratories 

•	 The Flight Program enhanced our assets of flying laboratories to meet the anticipated future needs of our 

flight test customers. These include adding the capability to the Global 5000 to capture and record aircraft 

engine parameters such as: fuel flow, temperatures, pressures, etc. 

Concepts and Systems Integration 

•	 The NIEC team improved the laboratory environment to enhance our capability to support NextGen. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

Ongoing Activities 

The FAA will continue to modify, configure, and sustain the research facilities located at the William J. Hughes 

Technical Center (WJHTC) to support its R&D program goals. 

New Initiatives 

No new initiatives are planned in FY 2011. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Simulation Facilities 

•	 Target Generation Facility (TGF) will fully realize its capability to support air traffic control tower visualization 

and surface movement studies. This capability will support research in the areas of runway incursions, and 

taxi clearances. 

•	 The Cockpit Simulation Facility (CSF) will achieve a fully integrated simulation environment with its B-737­

800/900, EMB-175, and A-320 simulators. 

Flight Program’s Airborne Laboratories 

•	 The Flight Program will work to enhance the flying laboratories to meet the anticipated future needs of our 

flight test customers. These include the capability to capture all “Flight Data Recorder” information and 

make it available to project personnel in a variety of formats. The first aircraft to be equipped with this 

capability will be the Global 5000. 

Concepts and Systems Integration 

•	 Research Development & Human Factors Laboratory (RDHFL) will continue to merge results from three 

ongoing projects: Future En Route Workstation (FEWS), Future Terminal Workstation (FTWS) and Tower 

Operations Digital Data System (TODDS). Lessons learned will be applied to continued development work 

on the common automation platform to create one UI for all ATC environments. 

•	 The NIEC team intends on continuously improving the laboratory environment to enhance our capability to 

support NextGen. 

A-152 
 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Amount 

($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 110,426 

FY 2010 Enacted 4,588 

FY 2011 Request 3,717 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 15,548 

Total 134,279 

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

WJHTC Laboratory Facility 779 667 684 1,833 1,251 

Personnel Costs 2,584 2,642 2,672 2,675 2,377 

Other In-house Costs 67 106 180 80 89

 Total 3,430 3,415 3,536 4,588 3,717 

OMB Circular A-11, FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

Conduct of Research and Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request 

Development ($000)

Basic 0 0 0 0 0 

Applied 3,430 3,415 3,536 4,588 3,717 

Development (includes prototypes) 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 3,430 3,415 3,536 4,588 3,717 

A-153 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Aviation Administration
 

FY 2011 President’s Budget Submission 

A14.b – WJHTC Laboratory Facility 

Products and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

011-140 WJHTC Laboratory Facility 

Simulation Facilities (Target Generator 

Facility, Cockpit Simulators) 

Approach Procedures 

Next Generation Air Transportation System 

(NextGen) 

Airspace Design 

Operational Evolution Plan Concept Validation 

Dynamic Vertical Reduced Separation Minima 

(DRVSM) 

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) 

ADS-B Concept Evaluations 

250 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Research & Development Flight Program 

(Airborne Laboratories) 

Satellite Communications and Navigation Programs 

Separation Standards 

Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS). 

TERPS 

Safety 

Runway Incursion 

Next Generation Air Transportation System 

(NextGen) 

Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) 

ADS-B 

Common Automated Radar Terminal System 

751 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Concepts & Systems Integration 

Air Traffic Control Human Factors 

Airway Facilities Human Factors 

Operational Evolution Plan Concept Validation 

NextGen Integration & Evaluation Capability 

Airspace Design 

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) 

ADS-B 

SWIM 

DataComm 

TMA 

250 

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 2,466 

Total Budget Authority 3,717 4,588 3,717 3,785 3,857 3,920 3,986 

Note: Out year numbers are for planning purposes only. Actual funding needs will be determined through the annual budget process 

A-154 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A01A Runway Incursion Reduction $5,000,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety and Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: The FAA has undertaken the Runway Incursion Reduction Program (RIRP) to minimize the 

chance of injury, death and damage, or loss of property caused by runway accidents or incidents within the civil 

aviation system. The program selects and evaluates runway incursion reduction technologies to validate their 

technical performance and operational suitability. Based on these evaluations, a business case for program 

implementation has been developed to support Agency investment decisions. Current program initiatives are aimed 

at evaluating pilot situational awareness tools. 

The Program directly contributes to achieving Objective 3, “reduce the risk of runway incursions,” of the FAA’s Flight 

Plan 2009 –2013 strategic goal of Increased Safety. 

Airports referred to in this program description include: 

DFW Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport 

SAN San Diego International Airport 

LGB Long Beach – Daugherty Field 

GEG Spokane International, Washington 

LAX Los Angeles International 

BOS Boston Logan International 

RNO Reno, NV 

SJC San Jose, CA 

MHT Manchester, NH 

Agency Outputs: 

•	 Operational concepts, system prototypes, field test data, technical specifications and life cycle cost 

estimates for selected technology solutions. 

•	 Safety Risk Management Plan (SRMP) and National Airspace System Change Proposals (NCPs) for 

implementing equipment into the National Airspace System (NAS). 

•	 Non-technology solutions, such as improved airport markings/signage, education, training, and advisory 

circulars. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: Operational concepts, technical specifications and system evaluations for 

runway incursion reduction initiatives are fully coordinated with stakeholders within the air traffic service provider, 

pilot and airport operator communities. Reducing runway incursion incidents remains a top FAA priority – as 

reflected in Safety Objective 3 of the current FAA Flight Plan. 

Accomplishments: 

•	 Completed installation of RWSL test system at LAX. 

•	 Initiated RWSL Field Operational Evaluation at LAX. 

•	 Awarded 4 contracts for pilot LCGS procurement. 

•	 Initiated installation of LCGS product at MHT, SJC, LGB, RNO airports. 

•	 Completed RIL engineering tests at BOS. 

•	 Established MOAS to support implementation of RWSL Test Systems at two additional airports, BOS, LAX. 

•	 Conducted operational user evaluation of Low Cost Ground Surveillance System (LCGS) at GEG. 

•	 Completed Final Approach Runway Occupancy Signal (eFAROS) field evaluation at DFW. 

•	 Installed Runway Status Light (RWSL) Airfield Lighting Equipment (ALE) at LAX. 

A-155 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

• Conducted initial investment analysis activity for LCGS program. 

• Initiated procurement action to support pilot LCGS program. 

• Completed engineering evaluation of Runway Intersection Lights (RILs) application at BOS. 

R&D Partnerships: Partnerships for RIRP technology initiatives exist with several members of industry, with 

Federally Funded Research and Development Consortia (e.g., MIT Lincoln Laboratory, MITRE), with selected airport 

operators (e.g., DFW, SAN, LGB, GEG, RNO, SJC, MHT, BOS, LAX), and with other government agencies (e.g., the 

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center). 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

• Develop system enhancements for RWSL 

• Conduct installation of LCGS at three additional airports. 

• Complete investment analysis activity for LCGS. 

• Conduct Runway Intersection Lights (RILs) operational trials. 

• Develop a low cost Runway Status Lights (RWSL) system design for applications at non-ASDE-X airports. 

• Initiate evaluation of LED technology for application in runway safety systems. 

• Initiate evaluation of airport wireless data communication system design alternatives. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The requested funding will allow the program to: 

• Complete installation of LCGS at three additional airports. 

• Complete investment analysis activity for LCGS. 

• Conduct Runway Intersection Lights (RILs) operational trials. 

• Develop a low cost Runway Status Lights (RWSL) system design for applications at non-ASDE-X airports. 

• Evaluation of LED technology for application in runway safety systems. 

• Evaluation of airport wireless data communication system design alternatives. 

FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

• Develop system enhancements for RWSL. 

• Continue testing of LCGS at four pilot site airports. 

• Complete investment analysis activity for LCGS. 

• Initiate LCGS investment analysis report. 

• Complete RIL operational trials and refine logic. 

• Develop low cost RWSL system design alternatives for application at4r4 non ASDE-X airports. 

• Complete evaluation of LED technology for runway safety applications. 

• Continue evaluation of airport wireless data com system design alternatives. 

A-156 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

80,735 

11,000 

5,000 

12,000 

108,735 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Runway Incursion Reduction 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

8,000 

0 

0 

8,000 

8,000 

0 

0 

8,000 

12,000 

0 

0 

12,000 

11,000 

0 

0 

11000 

5,000 

0 

0

5,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

8,000 

8,000 

0 

0 

8,000 

8,000 

0 

0 

12,000 

12,000 

0 

0 

11,000 

11,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

A-157 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A01A - Runway Incursion 

Reduction 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Runway Incursion Reduction 

Runway Status Lights (RWSL) 

Develop RWSL system enhancements 

Initiate RWSL test system 

Initiate RWSL Field Operation 

Complete Install of RWSL test system 

Complete RIL Shadow Ops Tests at BOS 

Conduct RIL operational trials 

Develop Low Cost RWSL system at non ASDE-X 

airports. 

Initiate Evaluation of LED technology for 

runway safety systems 

Initiate Evaluation of airport wireless data 

comm. Design alternatives 

Complete RIL operational trials 

Develop Low Cost RWSL System at non-ASDE-X 

airports 

Complete evaluation of LED technology 

Continue evaluation of airport wireless data 

com system design alternatives 

Low-Cost Ground Surveillance (LCGS) 

Award contract for Pilot Program 

Complete install at two airports by FY10 

Complete install at two add’l airports by FY11 

Complete Investment analysis activity 

Continue testing of LCGS at 4 pilot sites 

Complete LCGS investment analysis activity 

5,000 

◇

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦

♦

♦

♦

◇







◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇ ◇

Total Budget Authority 5,000 11,000 5,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-158 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A01B System Capacity, Planning, and Improvement $4,100,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: The System Capacity, Planning, and Improvements program identifies, evaluates, and 

formulates system capacity improvements for the NAS. This program sponsors NAS capacity and airport capacity 

studies where experts from the FAA, academia and industry collaborate to analyze and develop recommendations for 

improving capacity and system efficiency, and reducing delays at specific airports in alignment with FAA Flight Plan 

targets. In conjunction with providing recommendations for airport improvements, procedural updates, and 

simulation studies, this program delivers performance measurement systems and operations research to quantify 

the efficiency of the NAS and form the basis of proposals for system improvements. The Performance Data Analysis 

and Reporting System (PDARS) is a fully integrated performance measurement tool designed to help the FAA 

improve the NAS by tracking the daily operations of the air traffic control (ATC) system. The tracking and monitoring 

capabilities of PDARS support studies and analysis of air traffic operations at the service or national level. Also, the 

capacity and efficiency of the NAS is further expanded through capacity modeling which analyze the impact of 

NextGen operational improvements. 

Agency Outputs: The System Capacity, Planning and Improvement (SCPI) program strives to deliver high-quality, 

cost-effective services to meet the needs of its customers and the users of the air transportation system. A 

component of this program, the Performance Data Analysis and Reporting System (PDARS), captures real-time 

performance data at major operational facilities. Airport design studies will continue to provide problem identification 

and solution sets at specific targeted airports. Strategic Goals and related performance metrics required by the Air 

Traffic Organization (ATO), and captured through the organization’s Strategy 2014 Plan and the Agency’s Flight Plan, 

will continue to provide a framework for assessing operational performance against Agency goals and targets. SCPI 

sponsors a wide range of tasks designed to measure, assess, and improve aviation capacity. The following programs 

are critical to the improvement of the aviation system: 

Performance Data Analysis and Reporting System 

•	 Supports the development of facility-level metrics that tie Agency goals to actions at the service delivery 

point and quantify specific outcomes. PDARS extracts radar data from the HOST, Automated Radar Terminal 

System (ARTS), and STARS computer systems. The system records and integrates flight plan and track 

data in an interactive database. The data is aggregated to establish outcome metrics such as time, 

distance, altitude, and reroutes, with the fidelity necessary to make meaningful distinctions between the 

performance of facilities (both en-route and terminal). 

Performance Metrics Development 

•	 Includes the planning, coordination, data collection, and implementation of performance measures used to 

assess NAS operations. These metrics are also included in the Agency’s strategic planning documents and 

databases to determine whether or not the Agency is meeting its targets. Currently metrics have been 

developed to measure operational errors, runway incursions, on-time arrivals, delays, ground stop minutes, 

airport arrival efficiency rate, and airport arrival capacity. Forecasted metrics include the development of an 

indicator that effectively quantifies the impact of weather on NAS activity and the design of en route, 

system predictability, terminal departure, and efficiency rate metrics. 

ATO Strategy 2014 

•	 Provides focus and alignment to successfully implement FAA Flight Plan and ATO initiatives and all activities 

necessary to achieve our objectives. Strategy 2014 is a structured system used to identify Strategic Goals 

and Objectives with related measures or metrics which are used to determine the ATO’s progress in 

achieving these objectives. Performance metrics are important both to senior management leading the 

ATO, and employees in operational roles driving functional excellence in order to achieve Agency and ATO 

Goals and Objectives. Strategy 2014 links effective measures across organizational tiers as those measures 

are cascaded to the field. 

Airport Capacity Enhancement/Design Studies 

•	 Investigates capacity and delay at major airports, both domestically and internationally. The FAA works 

with airports and other aviation industry stakeholders to conduct computer simulation and modeling studies 

A-159 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

aimed at improving the operating efficiency of airports. The outputs are in the form of recommendations 

that can include any of the following: new runways, taxiways, intersections, operating procedures, or 

terminals. 

NextGen Implementation Plan (NGIP) Performance Modeling 

•	 Models the impact of NGIP capabilities on the performance of the NAS. The NGIP includes seven “solution 

sets” in the air traffic operations “domain,” two in the airport development domain, and one in the aircraft 

and operator requirements domain. These solution sets are designed to maximize the capacity of the NAS 

over the next ten years, while ensuring the highest standards of safety. This activity will use fast-time 

models to analyze NGIP improvements in NAS performance retrospectively, and project anticipated 

improvements in performance prospectively. 

International Air Navigation Service Provider (ANSP) Benchmarking 

•	 Working with the Civil Air Navigation Services Organization (CANSO), compares the operational and financial 

performance of the ATO to that of other ANSPs. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The success of the FAA depends on effective capacity programs involving 

all elements of the Agency, its customers, and its stakeholders. Field experts from the affected disciplines – 

concerned airports, air carriers, aviation interest groups, and FAA regional and local facilities – collaborate on 

diversified airspace and airport capacity task forces and projects. 

The Office of Performance Analysis and Strategy is an active participant in formal advisory committees, informal 

seminars, and individual meetings with relevant industry elements regarding the NAS infrastructure. 

R&D Partnerships: 

Work with the National Center of Excellence for Aviation Operations Research (Nextor) and the Partnership for Air 

Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction to study 

•	 the causes and impacts of delay; 

•	 the economic cost of delay; 

•	 how to forecast future traffic, capacity, and environmental impacts of ATM inefficiencies; and 

•	 strategies to increase capacity. 

Accomplishments 

•	 Developed software and hardware to allow integration of surface movement data (e.g., ASDE-X) with 

PDARS, and develop initial surface movement metrics. Establish PDARS connection to at least one facility 

providing such data. 

•	 Played a key role in the development of automated delay reporting initiatives at the ATCSCC involving 

airborne holding information 

•	 Added 4 FAA organizations/facilities to the PDARS network 

•	 Enhanced the PDARS Enterprise Website to support broader use of PDARS. 

•	 Integrated oceanic data into PDARS. 

•	 As part of the ATO Strategy 2014 development process: 

−	 Developed the process and content for the goal area development meetings in all five goal areas and for 

the review of these results monthly with the Strategy Steering Group. 

−	 Maintained the web-based software application infrastructure to provide all ATO Service/ Business Units 

with centralized access to ATO and Service Unit cost and performance analysis, forecasting, reporting 

and initiative tracking capabilities; and 

−	 Prepared and coordinated the ATO updates for the FAA Flight Plan 

−	 Performed system and process modifications based on the general needs of stakeholders, maintenance 

of Strategic Management Process software application for Service Units, communication of strategy 

management best practices. 

−	 Reviewed and if deemed necessary, developed new measures to monitor and assess strategic objectives, 

strengthen existing metrics, validate continuing relevance of metrics on Strategy 2014. 

A-160 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Future Airport Capacity Team (FACT) will continue to work with aviation stakeholders to develop a strategy 

for implementing solutions from the toolbox developed for each airport projected to have an anticipated 

capacity shortfall in 2025. 

•	 Developed Biweekly Operations review, coordinating data intake from operational service units, analyzing 

data and presenting informational graphs, charts and talking points for discussion at Operational Executive 

Council meetings. 

o	 Operations Review currently is in the process of being automated, which will provide greater 

access to information, enhanced capacity for analysis and increased data consistency. 

•	 Developed seasonally adjusted trajectory-based forecasts for use in DataComm Initial Investment Analysis. 

•	 Developed Service Delivery Point (SDP) demand projections for terminal and en route. 

•	 Completed deployment of PDARS to all TRACONs serving the 34 OEP airports in the continental United 

States. 

•	 Used the NAS Strategy Simulator (NSS) to analyze the impact of the proposed FAA reauthorization
 

language, and Congressional alternatives, on Airport and Airway Trust Fund receipts. 

•	 Adapted a computable equilibrium model (GTAP) of to study EU-US Open Skies Agreement on North Atlantic 

operations in support of the ICAO North Atlantic (NAT) Economic and Financial Group (EFG). 

•	 Completed a study of the economic impact of civil aviation on the U.S. economy. 

•	 Developed an econometric model of NAT traffic. 

•	 Completed and released the Future Airport Capacity Task (FACT) II report. 

•	 Analyzed changes in excess fuel burn over the past seven years. 

•	 Prepared the ATO FY 2008 Economic Outlook. 

•	 Developed airport delay forecasts for major airports in response to Flight Plan initiative. 

•	 Developed an NGIP “avoided delay” metric and prepared estimates of the expected value of this metric for 

the next 10 years. 

•	 Completed a study of the economic impact of civil aviation on the U.S. economy. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop high level metrics, supporting metrics, targets and key initiatives for the five strategic goals in the 

new Five Year ATO Strategic Plan. 

•	 Develop a new governance process for implementing and measuring the success of the ATO via the 

outcomes developed for the FAA Strategic Plan. 

•	 Develop, analyze and report performance benchmarks with international partners 

•	 Expand network to include existing airport ASDE-X surface surveillance data. 

•	 Update current airport capacity estimates, and estimate future airport capacities considering fleet, 

infrastructure, and procedural changes to support Airport Design Teams, Future Airport Capacity Task 

(FACT) III report and NextGen modeling and analysis. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The requested funding will support the Agency goals documented in the FAA Flight Plan by continuing to focus on 

maximizing airport capacity through improvements in runways, taxiways, navigational/guidance aids, and operational 

procedures that can result in increased capacity and reduced delays. The SCPI Program will effectively design data 

systems to measure and analyze operational performance for the assessment of system improvements. The program 

will also produce capacity studies and analyses to improve operational activity at the nation’s most congested 

airports. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Coordinate the goals and objectives of the updated Strategic Flight Plan and Strategy 2014 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Amount ($000) 

A-161 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

47,658 

4,100 

4,100 

26,000 

81,858 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

System Capacity, Planning, and 

Improvement 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

5,500 

0 

0 

5,500 

6,500 

0 

0 

6,500 

6,500 

0 

0 

6,500 

4,100 

0 

0

4,100 

4,100 

4,100 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

5,500 

5,500 

0 

0 

6,500 

6,500 

0 

0 

6,500 

6,500 

0 

0 

4,100 

4,100 

4,100 

4,100 

A-162 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A01B - System Capacity, Planning, 

and Improvement 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

Product and Activities FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

System Capacity, Planning and Improvement 4,100 

NAS Performance Measurement 

Prepare FAA Flight Plan ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Update Strategy 2014 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Integrate surface surveillance data into PDARS ♦ 

Integrate oceanic data into PDARS ♦ 

Integrate Micro EARTS data into PDARS ♦ 

Airport Development 

Complete FACT II Next Steps report 

NGIP Performance Modeling 

Estimate NGIP impacts on NAS ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Total Budget Authority 4,100 4,100 4,100 6,500 6,500 6,500 6,500 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-163 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A01C Operations Concept Validation $4,000,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership 

Intended Outcomes: Validated Operational Concepts and system designs will enable more efficient operations and 

changes in roles and responsibilities of the pilots and controllers for increased productivity and more efficient 

operations. This project assesses the interaction of changing roles and responsibilities of NAS service providers and 

pilots, airspace changes, procedural changes and new mechanized systems for distributing weather, traffic and other 

flight related information. It tests the assumptions behind common situational awareness and distributed 

information processing. It provides the high-quality performance requirements needed to ensure that the next 

generation of National Airspace System (NAS) ground and airborne support systems succeed. This process assesses 

and redirects the tactical and strategic assumptions behind controller and pilot roles and responsibilities, and decision 

support tools in general – as well as requirements affecting information type, display and update rate – for the 

mutual benefit of the public and the aviation community. Associated with the changes in roles and responsibilities 

are opportunities for restructuring the services provided by air traffic control facilities to best support the re-aligned 

roles of humans in the NAS as enabled by new automation and communication capabilities. 

Agency Outputs: The project objective is to provide a well-defined and well-understood “validated” operational 

concept based on system modeling and simulation. This work evaluates and incorporates lessons learned from the 

recent delivery of decision support tools to provide guidance on how advanced decision support and operational 

enhancements will be integrated into the NAS. The program develops and exercises advanced analysis capabilities to 

consider the benefit and operational feasibility of technological and procedural changes. In particular, the program is 

analyzing the methods for more flexibly managing airspace and taking advantage of the differences between high 

and low altitude work, new opportunities for flow based trajectory management, and the expanded role of Traffic 

Flow Managers in managing airspace capacity versus limiting demand. It is looking at new ways of cost effectively 

expanding tower services and remotely providing tower services, and looking at effective ways to manage optimized 

descent profiles into terminal airspace. It looks at leveraging automation to change roles and responsibilities of NAS 

airspace users and service providers. Simulation and human-in-the-loop experimentation are used to integrate this 

new guidance revealing the type, update rate, and display requirements that need to be established to ensure 

optimum controller performance. The work program has three thrusts: ·Operational Concept Development, Concept 

Validation, and Concept System Design. 

Research Goals: 

2011 Demonstrate an increase in capacity and efficiency at 166% current traffic levels 

2013 Demonstrate an increase in capacity and efficiency at 230% current traffic levels 

2016 Demonstrate an increase in capacity and efficiency at 300% current traffic levels 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The RTCA Select Committee for Free Flight Implementation has been a 

strong external influence on the FAA in many aspects of operational concept development and validation. 

Additionally, the Agency works in conjunction with the JPDO to survey major stakeholders on their ranking of future 

concept sub-elements designed to support modernization. This level of stakeholder participation ensures that the 

evolving concepts are fully mindful of aviation user community requirements – an essential prerequisite to validating 

the concept of a modern NAS based on a shared, integrated infrastructure. 

Operational concept development and validation will utilize an iterative approach with members from the FAA ATO 

Operational Service Units and representatives from the airspace user community, including pilots and flight 

operations centers. The iterative approach will present an initial concept or scenario and elicit feedback from 

impacted stakeholders. This feedback will be incorporated into future versions of the concept that will be reviewed 

by stakeholders. Concept validation activities employing human-in-the-loop simulation will utilize participants with 

experience in the task being validated. The Program will identify the precise mechanism for obtaining stakeholder 

participation. It is currently envisioned that this participation will be through the Next Generation Air Transportation 

System Institute. 

A-164 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Partnerships: This work directly relates to the FAA/NASA Memorandum of Understanding on ATM research 

and development and to the objectives of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) objectives 

advanced by the JPDO. Specifically, much of the research funded under this program is part of the Joint FAA/NASA 

Research Transition Team effort to ensure that planned research results will be fully utilized, and will be sufficient to 

enable implementation of NextGen Operational Improvements. 

Accomplishments: Significant program accomplishments include: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Made recommendation on Big Airspace automation alternatives, conducted safety analysis and determined 

surveillance requirements for implementation of Big Airspace at operational test sites. 

•	 Conducted validation activities for high altitude, generic airspace and procedures 

•	 Conducted validation activities for Multi-sector planner concept 

•	 Conducted fast-time analyses to support 2nd level concept validation 

•	 Provided RTCA support for concept development and validation 

•	 Conducted simulations to develop preliminary program requirements for Staffed NextGen Towers 

•	 Continued FAA/EUROCONTROL effort on Operational Concept and Simulation and Modeling related Action 

Plans (i.e., AP 2, AP 5, AP9, AP16) 

FY 2008: 

•	 Provided RTCA Annual Funding 

•	 Conducted FAA/EUROCONTROL Action Plan meetings such as Action Plan 2 - Operational Concept 

Development, comparing the JPDO operational concept for Trajectory Based Operations with the European 

SESAR concept, Action Plan 5 to develop an Operational Concept Validation and Verification Strategy, and 

Action Plan 16 to identify requirements for common four dimensional trajectories 

•	 Conducted analysis of the automation alternatives for Big Airspace 

•	 Modified human-in-the-loop laboratories, developed evaluation plan and conducted Cognitive Walkthrough 

Analyses on the Multi-Sector Planner concept down-selected in FY07. 

•	 Developed NextGen Towers Operational Concept 

• Developed preliminary NextGen Facilities Operational Concept 

FY 2007: 

•	 Provided RTCA Annual Funding 

•	 Developed Traffic Flow Management 2nd level concept 

•	 Conducted information flow analysis for a high altitude generic airspace operational concept 

•	 Evaluated various concepts for a Multi-Sector Planner and down selected to the most viable concept 

•	 Conducted analyses to support NextGen Facilities Executive Council Decision 

•	 Developed common trajectory definition and analysis white paper 

•	 Aligned the NextGen and NAS operational improvements 

• Validated the Big Airspace Operational Concept 

Previous Years: 

•	 Provided RTCA Annual Funding 

•	 Developed Big Airspace Operational Concept 

•	 Developed two alternative concepts for a Multi-Sector Planner Strategic Controller 

•	 Developed the international flight object 

KEY FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop and validate second level operational concepts (multiple) 

•	 Conduct joint FAA/NASA/user concept validation activities, including human-in-the-loop simulations. 

•	 Conduct fast-time analyses to support concept validation 

•	 Conduct human-in-the-loop simulations to support concept validation 

•	 Expand cognitive and analytic models to support assessments. 

A-165 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

• RTCA support for concept development and validation. 

• Development of operational, information and performance requirements 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FY 2011 funding request will be used for concept development, concept validation including benefits and safety 

analysis, and requirements development for lower level NAS concepts, such as requirements development and 

transition planning for flow based trajectory management, concept validation of airspace concepts, concept validation 

activities for automated tower services and remotely staffed tower services, and analysis and validation of 

requirements for optimized profile descent decision support capabilities. These activities will include validation of 

concepts for ground–ground and air-ground communications to support transfer of information and change the air 

traffic control paradigm, as well as to validate assumptions about flight deck evolution. 

FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

• Continue to develop and validate second level operational concepts (multiple). 

• Conduct joint FAA/NASA/user concept validation activities, including human-in-the-loop simulations. 

• Conduct fast-time analyses to support concept validation 

• Conduct human-in-the-loop simulations to support concept validation 

• Expand cognitive and analytic models to support assessments. 

• RTCA support for concept development and validation. 

• Development of operational, information and performance requirements 

A-166 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

35,238 

8,000 

4,000 

26,000 

73,238 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

Contracts: 

Operational Concept Validation

Personnel Costs

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

3,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

3,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

7,400 

0 

0 

7,400 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

8,000

0

0 

8,000

FY 2011 

Request 

4,000 

0 

0 

4,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

0 

0 

3,000 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

0 

0 

3,000 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

0 

0 

7,400 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

0 

0 

8000 

FY 2011 

Request 

0 

0 

4,000 

Total 3,000 3,000 7,400 8,000 4,000 

A-167 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A01C - Operations Concept 

Validation 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Operations Concept Validation 

Operational Concept Development 

High altitude, generic airspace 

Multi-sector Planner 

Flexible & dynamic airspace resectorization 

Concepts of operations for the evolution 

of Traffic Flow Management 

Phase 2/3 Concepts for NextGen Towers 

4-D trajectory management, including 4­

D Advanced Arrivals 

Concept Validation 

Validation Data Repository and metrics 

Traffic Flow Management evolution 

Multi-sector Planner 

Airspace Concepts 

Provision of NextGen Tower Services 

4-D trajectory management, including 4­

D Advanced Arrivals 

SESAR Activities 

Concept System Design 

Requirements Development to support 

concept implementation 

RTCA 

Develop Aviation Community inputs to 

MASPS, MOPS and Integrated Plans to 

Support Future Concepts and 

Modernization 

4,000 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦

♦ 

♦

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦

♦ 

♦ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊

◊ 

◊

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊

◊

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊ 

◊

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

Total Budget Authority 4,000 8,000 4,000 8,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 

NOTE: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-168 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A01D NAS Weather Requirements $1,000,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: 

This program develops mission analysis and investment analysis for initial investment decision for aviation weather 

support to the NAS. The focus is upon NextGen including collaboration with SESAR and realignment of ICAO aviation 

weather standards. The purpose is to reduce the number of weather related accidents, reduce the number of 

aviation flight delays, diversions and cancellations, improve operational efficiency of the NAS, and harmonize ICAO 

standards with US practices in weather. 

The funding supports contract services to identify future demand for services, identify technological opportunities to 

address that demand, identify projected supply of services, perform gap analysis, perform mission needs analysis, 

and conduct initial requirements definition. It also supports planning, analysis and documentation studies in support 

of initial investment decisions for new or modified aviation weather capabilities. Included are (1) policy studies 

related to the boundary between FAA, NWS, and DOD roles and responsibilities in providing weather support, (2) 

analysis of and plans for integration of weather information into decision support systems, and (3) standards 

development for surface and airborne observations forecasts, and ICAO SARPS. 

This program also funds contract support to develop functional and performance requirements for weather 

information and for transitioning weather research into operations including evaluation of human factors,
 

compatibility of new technology with procedures, and analysis of the impact of new information on controller and 

pilot workloads.
 

This work builds upon the similar work done under the RWI and NNEW programs. It provides additional detail to the 

requirements work from those efforts and updates the mission analysis and requirements development at the 

portfolio level.
 

Agency Outputs: This line item enables the Agency to develop greater capacity by developing policies, 

requirements and metrics to move weather capabilities in the National Airspace System from current state to meet 

NextGen objectives. The program funds analyses and studies that will assist in developing and validating 

requirements, defining the boundaries, contents, policies, participants and governance for the 4-Dimensional 

Weather Data Cube, develop and implement metrics for avoiding weather-induced delays and to better predict those 

delays and to identify research needed to increase capacity. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By 2010, complete safety studies for new aviation weather information products including de-icing/anti-icing 

(liquid water equivalent), WAFS icing, turbulence, and convection, NCV, and FIP-Severity 

•	 By 2010, develop the WAFS Global 4-D Weather data set to support flight planning 

•	 By 2011, develop functional and performance requirements for space weather information and space 

weather impacts 

•	 By 2013, align ICAO SARPS with US current and NextGen weather standards 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: 

•	 External FAA users include pilots, dispatchers, airline operations centers, airport operators, and aviation 

meteorologists, all of whom are represented by entities that include ATA, NBAA, AOPA, ALPA, APA, RAA, 

SAMA, GAMA, IATA as well as individual airlines and others (see attached acronym list for clarification of 

unfamiliar acronyms); 

•	 Internal FAA Service units representing controllers service providers in Terminal, En route/Oceanic, Flight 

Service, Systems Operations, Operations Planning, and Technical Operations Services; 

•	 FAA Regulatory arm (aircraft certification and flight standards personnel); 

•	 The Joint Program Development Office (JPDO); 

A-169 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 The weather and satellite services in the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration; 

•	 ICAO and the World Meteorological Organization; 

•	 The Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorology; and 

•	 The National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

R&D Partnerships: 

FAA’s Air Traffic Organization, NextGen and Operations Planning, Aviation Weather Group, Weather Planning and 

Requirements Team partners with the Agency’s Aviation Weather Research program, other Air Traffic Organization 

offices, Flight Standards, Aircraft Certification, and NWS offices as a part of the safety management system process. 

The office partners with Flight Standards and NWS personnel on a full range of aviation weather development 

activities. In the international arena, the office closely partners with ICAO and its contracting members. 

Accomplishments: 

The following summarizes major accomplishments to date: 

•	 Developed various Concept and Requirements Definition (CRD) for weather. 

•	 Developed JPDO Integration Plan which identifies the interface of weather information and decision support 

systems 

•	 Continued to transition the research to operations process; develop G-AIRMET training requirements and 

changes to documents/orders. 

•	 Conducted preliminary hazards assessment (PHA) for G-AIRMET and for LWE(de/anti-icing) 

•	 Continued work to harmonize international and US standards and requirements to include plans for aligning 

ICAO SARPS/Guidance with NextGen/SESAR requirements; agree upon a WXXM standard; and develop 

requirements for World Area Forecast Services (WAFS). 

•	 Continued to support a variety of research requirements to include service standards; turbulence EDR 

demonstration; QICP program; anti-icing improvements. 

•	 Developed a reliable technique to measure avoidable weather delays as subset of overall weather delays. 

•	 Developed and obtained agreement that defines a common weather exchange model for use by JPDO 

agencies, EUROCONTROL and ultimately becomes an ICAO standard. 

•	 Updated aviation weather roadmap to integrate NextGen weather concepts 

•	 Defined Single Authoritative Source of weather information for NextGen Air Traffic Management. 

•	 Completed Operational Suitability and Environmental Description (OSED) for Weather and Aeronautical 

Information Data Link via joint RTCA/EUROCAE special committee. 

•	 Prepared Reduce Weather Impact (RWI) NGIP Solution Set. 

•	 Revised FAA NextGen Aviation Weather Strategic Plan (FY2008-2025) 

•	 Initiated NextGen Weather Evaluation Capability Plan. 

•	 Completed technology transfer into NAS operations of several new R&D products. 

•	 Transferred other products into the final R&D phase. 

•	 Conducted a safety risk assessment process for R&D products before being implemented on Government 

platforms. 

•	 Represented U.S. aviation interests at ICAO to minimize operating costs for U.S. carriers. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop and coordinate functional and performance requirements for space weather information 

•	 Complete safety analysis and develop SRM documents for G-AIRMET 

•	 Complete safety analysis and develop SRM documents for LWE (ground de-icing/anti-icing) 

•	 Complete safety analysis and develop SRM documents for WAFS icing, turbulence, and convection 

information 

•	 Complete NCV safety analysis and develop SRM documents 

•	 Complete FIP-Severity safety analysis and develop SRM documents 

•	 Review, coordinate, and prepare updates to the ATO International Strategy and Work Plan 

A-170 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Review, coordinate, and prepare updates to the US Work Plan for ICAO SARP implementation related to the 

NextGen 4-D Weather Data Cube 

•	 Indentify and coordinate procedural changes for FAA Service Units and NWS necessary to comply with ICAO 

Annex 3 Amendment 75 

•	 Develop safety risk management documentation for US/ICAO Annex 3 differences that affirm current US 

practices or lead to adoption of ICAO standards 

•	 Complete gap analysis between 4-D Weather Functional Analysis and ICAO SARPS and map to each element 

of the 4-D Wx Data Cube at IOC to the appropriate chapter of ICAO Annex 3 

•	 Develop a long-range plan for the inclusion of each evolutionary change of the 4-D Wx Data Cube in 

amendments to ICAO Annex 3 or an ICAO Manual 

•	 Develop and coordinate the implementation of QMS for US-produced aviation weather information 

•	 Develop and implement safety risk assessment process for new WAFS forecast products 

•	 Develop a plan to implement finer resolution WAFS data sets fore region-specific areas (e.g., US and 

Europe) 

•	 Coordinate the implementation of WAFS File Service (WIFS) 

•	 Lead the development of the WAFS Global 4-D gridded data set to support flight planning 

•	 Align NextGen with SESAR weather requirements and propose a joint package to ICAO to upgrade Annex 3 

weather SARPS. 

•	 Gather, verify, and process service standards data 

•	 Review and publish service standards report 

•	 Manage QICP process and complete QICP authorization for NWS 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The funding will continue to support contract services that allow the Aviation Weather Group to prepare for the 

future increased demand for aviation weather services. Specifically, the funding will enable the completion of space 

weather information requirements and safety studies for aviation weather information as part of the FAA Safety 

Management System process, as well as harmonization of US current and NextGen aviation weather standards with 

SESAR and ICAO SARPS/guidance. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Complete space weather information functional and performance requirements 

•	 Promote terminal weather information modernization and incorporate NextGen terminal weather information 

standards into ICAO Annex 3 

•	 Align NextGen with SESAR weather requirements and propose a joint package to ICAO to upgrade Annex 3 

weather SARPS. 

A-171 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

13,978 

1,000 

1,000 

11,100 

27,078 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

NAS Weather Requirements 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

800 

0 

0 

800 

1,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

0 

0

1,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

800 

800 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

A-172 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A01D - NAS Weather Requirements 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

NAS Requirements (Office of Weather Policy 

and Standards, NAS Weather Office, ATO-P) 

Aviation Weather Requirements 

Development 

Develop space weather functional and performance 

requirements 

Weather Policy Studies 

Develop service standards report. 

Manage QICP approval process. 

Complete NowGen weather support projects 

Safety Studies 

Complete G-AIRMET Safety Assessment 

Complete Anti/De-Icing Safety Study 

Complete WAFS Icing, Turbulence, Convection Safety 

Study 

Complete NCV Safety Study 

Complete FIP-Severity Safety Study 

International Standards 

Lead global alignment of ICAO SARPs with US current 

and NextGen weather standards. 

Develop of the WAFS (Global 4-D Weather) in support 

of flight planning.. 

Promote terminal weather modernization strategy and 

incorporate NextGen in ICAO Annex 3 for terminal 

weather (including observations and forecasts). 

Provide support for space weather, radioactive (RA) 

SIGMET, and Volcanic Ash through the IAVWOPSG 

Support the METWSG and Regionalized SIGMET 

Advisory Centers concept and development 

1,000 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦

♦

♦

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

Total Budget Authority 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,300 3,400 3,400 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-173 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A01E Airspace Management Program $1,000,000 

GOALS:
 

The program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership.
 

FAA Air Traffic Control Facilities Cited in this program description: 

DFW Dallas Ft. Worth International Airport ZHU Houston Air Route Traffic Control Center 

HAATS Houston Area Air Traffic System ZJX Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control Center 

IAH George Bush Intercontinental Airport; Houston, Texas ZKC Kansas City Air Route Traffic Control Center 

LAS McCarran International Airport; Las Vegas, Nevada ZLA Los Angeles Air Route Traffic Control Center 

NCT Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control ZMA Miami Air Route Traffic Control Center 

PHX Sky Harbor International Airport; Phoenix, Arizona ZME Memphis Air Route Traffic Control Center 

ZAB Albuquerque Air Route Traffic Control Center ZOA Oakland Air Route Traffic Control Center 

Intended Outcomes: The Airspace Management Program (formerly National Airspace Redesign) directly supports 

all four objects of the “Greater Capacity” goal of the FAA’s Flight Plan 2006-2010. Airspace redesign accomplished 

through the Airspace Management Program will create a modern and effectively managed national airspace redesign 

that: 

•	 Increases system capacity and efficiency by removing as many airspace constraints as possible; 

•	 Manages complexity and congestion without continuously increasing sector splitting and growth in the 

number of sectors; 

•	 Increases flexibility and predictability for the benefit of air traffic controllers and aviation system users; 

•	 Balances the access needs of the diverse set of aviation system users; 

•	 Maintains the highest levels of system safety and security; and 

•	 Reduces expected delays and inefficient routing over the next ten years in major metropolitan areas. 

Agency Outputs: The Airspace Management Program serves as the FAA’s primary effort to modernize the nation’s 

airspace. The purpose of this national initiative is to review, redesign and restructure airspace. The program 

includes: 

•	 Regional Optimization and Redesign projects involve airspace changes that are targeted at local problem, 

but can have larger system-wide impacts. These projects can be smaller in scale, utilizing available 

resources, or can be larger in scale, encompassing multiple facilities that cross several Service Areas or FAA 

Regions. 

•	 National High Altitude and Oceanic Redesign are national level efforts that apply state-of-art design 

techniques in systematic way. These projects specifically leverage national automation and procedural 

enhancements. High Altitude Airspace Management has been a mechanism for influencing future 

infrastructure system requirements and the introduction of advanced concepts into airspace design. 

Oceanic Redesign capitalizes on the oceanic infrastructure and automation improvements across all oceanic 

and offshore facilities. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Airspace Management Program utilizes both formal and informal 

methods to solicit and include customer/stakeholder perspectives. Since the inception of FAA’s national focus on 

airspace redesign, the program has worked with RTCA to communicate plans and receive appropriate feedback from 

the aviation customer community. Since 2001, the Airspace Working Group has been the main body to aid in 

understanding the operational views and perspectives of the diverse airspace customers and stakeholders. Airspace 

Working Group members represent major carriers, regional carriers, general and business aviation, and the military. 

Regarding environmental concerns, the Airspace Management Program communicates with communities through 

various forums and processes as prescribed by the National Environmental Policy Act. 

A-174 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Accomplishments: Through the Airspace Management Program (and its predecessor, National Airspace Redesign), 

the FAA has implemented many airspace changes that have resulted in significant operational improvements. These 

accomplishments include: 

•	 NY/NJ/PHL Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign (initial phases). 

•	 Chicago Airspace Project (additional airspace changes for new runway). 

•	 HAATS Airspace. 

•	 Southern California Redesign (environmental analysis initiated) 

•	 Western Corridor Airspace (including Southern Nevada Airspace) 

•	 Airspace for new runways in Seattle and Washington DC metro areas 

•	 NY/NJ/PHL Metropolitan Airspace Redesign – initial implementation of elements of Stage 1, including 

dispersal headings for departures at Newark, Kennedy, and Philadelphia 

•	 Houston Area Air Traffic System (HAATS) Airspace – completion of Environmental Assessment, including 

public meetings, implementation of HAATS Phase 3A 

•	 Chicago Airspace Project – implementation of departure portion of CAP Stage 2, including new southbound 

departure routes 

•	 Northern California Redesign (ZOA) – completion of sectorization for Three Tier Redesign 

•	 Las Vegas Redesign & Phoenix/Northwest 2000 – redesigned terminal/en route airspace and random 

navigation/area navigation (RNAV) procedures. 

•	 Honolulu Redesign – improved departure coordination procedures for flights; reduced departure times. 

•	 Great Lakes Integrated Design Plan – implemented new routes and improved procedures; reduced delays 

and restrictions. 

•	 Choke Points – implemented new sectors and route changes; reduced delays, miles in trail, and other 

restrictions. 

•	 High Altitude Redesign Phase 1 Initial – improved information about Special Use Airspace (SUA) availability 

and usage, implemented waypoints to circumnavigate SUA supporting improved flight planning information; 

reduced flying distance around SUA. 

•	 Oakland Oceanic Gateway – created new oceanic route access points; allowed Pacific bound aircraft to 

achieve desired altitudes quicker, saving fuel and time. 

•	 Denver South – created new routings for Denver satellite airports; reduced complexity. 

•	 Anchorage Center Redesign – created an oceanic specialty, added a new sector, and revised other sector 

boundaries; improved controller workload balance. 

•	 ZHU/ZMA/ZJX Boundary Realignment – revised the boundaries that divide control of Gulf airspace; improved 

safety for Gulf flights. 

•	 High Altitude Redesign Phase 1 – instituted non-restrictive routing, Navigational Reference System, and QRoutes. 

•	 Denver Redesign – developed Ski Country procedures; better-managed delays and demand at key airports. 

•	 NY/NJ/PHL Redesign – instituted “Dual Modena” departure routes; increased departure throughput, reduced 

departure restrictions, and reduced taxi-out delays. 

•	 Atlantic Oceanic Redesign – instituted Coded Caribbean Routes; reduced coordination and communication 

errors, increased use of shorter distance access routes, and saved 11-35 miles for flights from Philadelphia 

and Boston to the Caribbean. 

•	 ZME 5th Area Redesign and ZKC East End – realigned sectors; balanced workload and reduce complexity. 

•	 HAATS Airspace and DFW RNAV – instituted new RNAV departures for DFW; tripled arrivals for IAH and 

expected to increase throughput. 

•	 LAS Redesign – re-instituted RNAV procedures; reduced flight distances. 

•	 Bay to Basin Redesign and ZAB Redesign – instituted new sectors in ZLA and ZAB; reduced restrictions upon 

LAS and PHX. 

•	 Southern CA Redesign (LAX Departure Optimization) – instituted new departure routes; allowed for more 

fuel efficient departures and reduced the number of leveled-off departures by over 70 percent. 

•	 Northern California Terminal Airspace Redesign – realigned airspace between NCT and ZOA; reduced FAA 

operational costs and reduced flight distances for customers. 

A-175 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Florida Airspace Optimization – added new sectors and routes; reduced delays and restrictions in the busy 

east coast corridor. 

•	 Central California Terminal Airspace – realigned en route airspace from Los Angeles center to Santa Barbara 

TRACON, providing enhanced service to general aviation customers in central California. 

•	 Southern CA Redesign (LAX Arrival Optimization) – instituted new arrival routes; allowed for more fuel 

efficient arrival altitudes into LAX. 

•	 High Altitude redesign Expansion Q-Routes – implemented remaining RNAV Q-routes for the southwest and 

southeast, expanding number of routes available to customers. 

•	 Airspace for New Runways – implement airspace changes to support new runways, specifically Minneapolis, 

Cincinnati, St. Louis, Atlanta, adding new capacity and efficiency to the system. 

•	 Midwest Airspace Enhancement – large scale redesign of terminal and en route airspace to reduce 

complexity in the busy Great Lakes Corridor and to leverage previous runways built in Cleveland and Detroit. 

•	 Northern California Airspace Redesign (Dual Arrival Routes and Sector 33 Split) – en route airspace was 

realigned to add a new sector and to support improvements in arrival throughput at the Bay area airports. 

•	 NY/NJ/PHL Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign – published Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 

in August 2007 and signed Record of Decision (ROD) in September 2007 

•	 Chicago Airspace Project – completed Stage 1, with new eastbound departure routes and supporting 

sectorization and airspace realignment changes 

R&D Partnerships: The Airspace Management Program works closely with the FAA’s Federally Funded Research 

and Development Center, MITRE’s Center for Advanced Aviation Development (CAASD). MITRE-CAASD’s work 

includes investigating, innovating, and developing modeling, simulation, and analysis capabilities facilitating airspace 

design. MITRE-CAASD will also research and explore issues that influence strategic policy in airspace management 

and design, such as sectorization concepts. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Infrastructure changes resulting from the airspace redesign supporting the Chicago and New 

York/Philadelphia metropolitan
 

•	 Infrastructure changes resulting from the airspace redesign supporting the Western Corridor project 

•	 Infrastructure changes resulting from the airspace redesign supporting the High Altitude Airspace 

Management project 

•	 Engineering analyses of operational feasibility of airspace concepts supporting transition to NextGen 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The airspace redesign projects supported by these requested funds are projected to deliver as much as $121 million 

of direct operating cost benefits by 2015. These benefits are realized through the reduction of restrictions, shorter 

flight distances, more fuel efficient routes, and reduced delays. The most significant benefits will be in the key 

metropolitan areas. Airspace redesign in New York and Philadelphia metropolitan areas will reduce delays by 20 

percent in the next 10 years; based on today’s flight statistics. In Chicago, airspace redesign will ensure return on the 

runway investments. With airspace changes and the new runway, delays can be reduced by as much as 60 percent. 

Airspace redesign will also provide internal FAA benefits. Without airspace redesign, sector splitting and growth in the 

number of sectors will be the only methods to manage complexity and congestion, increasing operations costs by 

millions every year. Reducing the number of sectors in the HAAM program through standardization and reallocation 

of airspace boundaries could provide a minimum of $20 million of annual FAA cost savings 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

 Infrastructure changes resulting from the airspace redesign supporting the New York/Philadelphia metropolitan 

phase II 

 Conduct initial design and modeling for the Western Corridor project 

 Develop plans for Denver Airspace 

 Infrastructure changes resulting from the airspace redesign supporting the Chicago phase III 

 Engineering analyses of operational feasibility of airspace concepts supporting transition to NextGen 

A-176 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

10,800 

3,000 

1,000 

20,000 

34,800 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Airspace Management Program 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

2,800 

0 

0 

2,800 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

3,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

3,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

1,000 

0 

0

1,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

2,800 

2,800 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

3,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

3,000 

0 

0 

1,000 

1,000 

A-177 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A01E - Airspace Management 

Program 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

Product and Activities FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Airspace Design 

Equipment and other F&E expenditures to 

support Airspace Management Program 

projects 

Develop/Initiate regional optimization and redesign 

Develop/Initiate high altitude and oceanic redesign 

1,000 

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 1,000 3,000 1,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-178 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A08A NextGen – Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations 

Human Factors (Controller Efficiency and Air 

Ground Integration) 

$10,000,000 

GOALS:
 

The programs support the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and Organizational 

Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: By 2015, demonstrate improvements in air traffic controller efficiency (e.g., greater number 

of aircraft, fewer delays) and effectiveness (e.g., fewer operational errors) through the automation and 

standardization of operations, procedures, and information. 

This program for NextGen Human System Integration (HSI) in system development will examine the roles of the 

various actors in the NAS including controllers, pilots, dispatchers, and maintainers to ensure safe operations at 

increased capacity levels and how those roles are best supported by allocation of functions between human operators 

and automation. The technologies being introduced by the NextGen Enterprise Architecture indicate the roles and 

responsibilities of controllers may change significantly if there is increased reliance on automation for conflict 

monitoring and if separation functions migrate to the aircraft flight deck. This program will support further 

development of systems in the Enterprise Architecture and the NextGen Implementation Plan (NGIP) solution sets by 

addressing human-system integration and human performance issues. The approach in this program is to use 

Human System Integration as a mechanism to bring cohesiveness to all the human-centered domains that bear on 

the people in the NAS. Some examples of the domains and major HSI issues are:
 

Human Factors Engineering:
 

•	 Deciding the appropriate role of the controller and aircraft operator relative to the automation when 

trajectory based operations are routinely used in the en route cruise regime. 

•	 Develop integrated workstations that enable the delivery of services throughout the NAS using the 

technology being introduced in the Enterprise Architecture and NGIP. 

•	 Ensuring that there is unambiguous transfer of separation responsibility between ground and flight deck 

elements of the system as aircraft make the transition between different types of airspace. 

•	 Effectively using automation to aid the controller in conformance monitoring during trajectory based 

operations 

•	 Providing the characteristics of usable merging and spacing tools in high density airspace to increase 

capacity and reduce environmental impact. 

•	 Making appropriate use of automation to aid the controller in airspace segments where there are variable 

separation criteria. 

•	 Avoiding the design of automated systems that are “brittle” and leave the controller and other actors in the 

NAS with inadequate clues regarding automation failures. 

Human Error/Human Performance in NAS Safety: 

•	 Preparing for degraded system modes so that safety can be maintained under emergency and off-normal 

conditions. 

•	 Enhancing the response of the NAS to weather disruptions using collaborative air traffic management 

techniques to accommodate operator preferences. 

•	 Managing safety risk associated with human errors as human operators interact in new or novel ways with 

automation that alters traditional relationship between actors in the air traffic system and between those 

actors and various automated system elements. 

Personnel Selection: 

•	 Predicting how the job of the controller will change in the NextGen environment and modifying the 

controller selection criteria and process to match the needs of the new job 

Training: 

•	 Ensuring that training needs for the NextGen controllers and maintainers are identified to prevent skill 

degradation in an automated NextGen environment 

•	 Identifying new skills, knowledge, and abilities that will be needed by controllers and maintainers in the 

NextGen time frame 

A-179 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

A systems approach to air-ground integration needs to address how to transition from current operations to new 

concepts taking into account changes in responsibilities and liabilities. This program is closely linked to the NextGen 

Self Separation and NextGen Air Ground Integration human factors research programs. Interoperability of air and 

ground decision support tools necessitates synchronization of conflict probe look-ahead times, 4-D intent information, 

and alerting functions for Cockpit Display of Traffic Information (CDTI) to enable the efficient and effective use of 

NextGen capabilities that rely on coordinated activities. Pilots and controllers need a shared understanding of how 

procedures change during transitions across different types of airspace (e.g., from a delegated separation regime to 

shared separation to traditional ground-based separation environments). 

Agency Outputs: The Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human Factors Research Program provides 

leadership and products to motivate the evolution of the NAS to assure that the human component of the system will 

reliably perform to meet the needs of the flying public. Outputs include: 

•	 Design concepts for en route, terminal and tower workstations for increasing the efficiency and 

effectiveness of the workforce. 

•	 Develop human factors requirements for decision support tools, conformance monitors, advanced 

automation technologies and associated procedures. 

•	 Investigate human-in-the-loop performance level or safety benefit associated with specific technologies and 

concepts to determine the contribution to efficiency, safety risks, and workload costs. 

•	 Demonstrate a framework for using part task simulations, high fidelity simulations, and integrated full 

mission demonstrations to assess interoperability of air and ground systems 

•	 Accelerate the development of training and selection procedures to transform the workforce into a new 

generation of service providers who can manage traffic flows in a highly automated system. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By 2010, Determine preliminary efficiency improvements when controllers use selected NextGen decision 

support tools and automation. 

•	 By 2010, Explore the use of NextGen tools such as data communications, ADS-B, RNAV/RNP and improved 

conflict resolution tools to reduce controller workload in the terminal area including data entry requirements 

and workload benefits. 

•	 By 2010, Define initial requirements and anticipated efficiency benefits for merging and spacing decision 

support tools to support continuous descent approach in the terminal area 

•	 By 2013, define the new role for the controller that is more strategic in nature in the en route and terminal 

domains. 

•	 By 2013, demonstrate common situation awareness between flight operators and controllers to enable 

collaborative air traffic management. 

•	 By 2013, define procedural requirements for controllers to manage and introduce change into the four 

dimensional (position plus time) dynamic environment. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The ATC/TO Human Factors research program coordinates research 

priorities with its internal FAA sponsoring organizations and the JPDO. 

•	 Advanced Air Traffic Systems Requirements Group – operational personnel and systems developers from the 

En Route and Terminal Service units as well as System Engineering in Operations Planning coordinates 

NextGen research requirements for measuring human factors benefits and impacts of proposed technologies 

to controllers, traffic management specialists, and maintainers. 

•	 Individual and Team Performance Requirements Group – The Safety, En Route, Terminal, System 

Operations, Technical Operations and System Engineering functions participate to identify human 

performance research needs involving safety culture, human error hazard identification, age, operational 

errors, runway incursion prevention, and employee attitudes. The Safety Integrated Product Team of the 

JPDO participated in this requirements group. 

•	 Technical Operations Research Group – The Technical Operations, En Route, and Terminal service areas 

recommend research for operation and maintenance of the NAS infrastructure including specification of 

displays, controls, and maintainability features of ATC systems. 

A-180 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Personnel Selection Research Group – Human Resources, Workforce Services, Workforce Development, and 

the financial services groups address personnel selection and retention including the ability to successfully 

screen applicants for controller positions, and the need to reduce training cost and time. 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 Collaborative research with NASA on its aerospace systems and air portal projects includes the identification 

of human factors research issues in the NextGen as technology brings changes to air traffic management. 

•	 Collaboration with EUROCONTROL includes participation in semi-annual Air Traffic Management (ATM) 

Seminars and participation in ATM Safety Research symposiums. 

•	 Program personnel represent the agency in the Normal Operations Safety Survey Study Group of the 

International Civil Aviation Organization. 

•	 Grants will be used with universities to address NextGen human factors issues. 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2009: 

Initiate Trajectory Based Operations 

•	 Defined a preliminary set of roles and responsibilities for the actors in the NextGen NAS when interacting 

with anticipated automated functions to achieve the expected performance levels. 

•	 Conducted a high fidelity TRACON simulation to assess efficiency from integrating NextGen concepts, 

capabilities, and procedures. 

Increase Arrivals/Departures at High Density Airports 

•	 Defined controller information requirements for merging and spacing operations in the terminal area. 

• Assessed types and modes of human error in operations for merging and spacing. 

Increase Flexibility in the Terminal Environment 

•	 Assessed controller workload benefits from data communications for mixed equipage aircraft in the terminal 

area. 

Improve Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

•	 Developed initial collaborative ATM requirements, ensuring information and communication flows support 

common situation awareness for controllers, pilots, and dispatchers in the future NAS. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Initiate Trajectory Based Operations 

•	 Define a preliminary set of roles and responsibilities for the actors in the NextGen NAS when interacting with 

anticipated automated functions to achieve the expected performance levels. 

•	 Conduct analyses to assess efficiency from integrating NextGen concepts, capabilities, and procedures. 

Increase Arrivals/Departures at High Density Airports 

•	 Define controller information requirements for merging and spacing operations and continuous descent 

approach in the terminal area. 

•	 Assess system performance requirements to recover from controller data entry errors. 

•	 Assess types and modes of human error in operations for data communications. 

Increase Flexibility in the Terminal Environment 

•	 Assess controller workload benefits from data communications for mixed equipage aircraft in the terminal 

area. 

•	 Deliver results of initial simulations to assess the benefits of automation in TRACON workstations 

Improve Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

• Develop initial collaborative ATM human factors requirements, ensuring information and communication 

flows support common situation awareness for controllers, pilots, and dispatchers in the future NAS. 

Cross-concept Human Factors Issues 

•	 Define initial stability and reliability requirements for decision support tools and automation to assure that 

they help the service provider achieve the expected benefits. 

A-181 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Deliver results of simulations of conformance monitors in terms of feedback, false alerts, and other human 

factors characteristics to achieve the goal of the operation. 

•	 Define threshold values of false alarms and other human factors characteristics that affect trust and usability 

of the tool. 

•	 Build an initial “human performance budget” to determine the contribution of various NextGen concepts to 

capacity and safety. 

•	 Perform analyses of the potential for human error using proactive human error analyses and modeling as 

changes to automation are considered. 

•	 Perform analyses of selected off-normal and emergency conditions for NextGen concepts to assure that 

system design and personnel skills can maintain safety in the NAS under degraded modes. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The program will accelerate and expand research addressing human performance issues in NextGen concepts.
 

Initiate Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) 

•	 Defining concepts, decision support tools, and procedures for integrating TBO capabilities into controller 

workstations to ensure improvements in controller efficiency. 

•	 Evaluating midterm workstation enhancements to ensure benefits intended from integration of data 

communications and NextGen operational concepts (e.g., variable separation criteria, merging and spacing, 

and continuous descent approach) are realized. 

Increase Arrivals/Departures at High Density Airports 

•	 Determine information requirements necessary to manage advanced operations such as merging, spacing, 

and passing in en route airspace. 

•	 Assessing the potential for human error in human-automation interaction and developing guidance 

supporting error tolerance and recovery. 

•	 Identifying the potential human error modes when various actors in the NextGen system communicate and 

carry out new roles and responsibilities. 

Increase Flexibility in the Terminal Environment 

•	 Determine how to integrate traffic flow management information into the terminal service provider 

workstation.
 

•	 Develop methods to display aircraft equipage differences to service providers in the terminal environment to 

enable the appropriate level of service. 

•	 Develop integrated tower workstations that enable the provision of airport traffic services using the NextGen 

suite of technology. 

Improve Collaborative Air Traffic Management (CATM) 

• Perform human factors analyses of the CATM concept to determine the optimum communications and 

decision paths for negotiating access to NAS resources and stating preferences. 

Reduce Weather Impact 

•	 Specify the human factors characteristics of decision support tools that will be used in strategic and tactical 

decision making by members of the air traffic community when adverse weather has an impact on NAS 

capacity or safety of flight. 

Cross-concept Human Factors Issues 

•	 Define human factors characteristics of decision support tools in terms of stability and reliability to assure 

that they help the service provider achieve the expected benefits. 

•	 Find the set of proposed changes in NextGen that provide the greatest human performance return on 

investment. 

•	 Prepare for operations in off-normal and emergency conditions to assure that system concepts and 

personnel skills can maintain safety in the NAS. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Completion of the Air Traffic Controller Strategic Job Analysis to determine how the job of the controller will 

change in the NextGen environment and how it will impact personnel selection 

A-182 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Completion of the first stage of a Common Air Traffic Control Workstation to address the convergence of en 

route and terminal services that can be provided from a tailored workstation 

•	 Demonstration of an initial integrated en route workstation applicable to mid-term ERAM implementation 

•	 Demonstration of an initial integrated tower workstation applicable to a variety of airport sizes and traffic 

levels. 

•	 Demonstration of an initial TRACON workstation integrating automation to allow the terminal controller to 

operate on a more strategic level. 

•	 Delivery of a Human Factors/Safety analysis to identify hazards and mitigations for human performance and 

human error in the NextGen environment 

A-183 
 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

6,700 

10,000 

10,000 

40,000 

66,700 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

NextGen - Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors (Controller 

Efficiency and Air Ground Integrstion) 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

6,700

0

0 

6,700

 10,000

 0 

0 

10,000

 10,000 

0 

0 

10,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0

0

6,700 

6,700

 0

 0 

10,000 

10,000

 0 

0 

10,000 

10,000 

A-184 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08A – Air Traffic 

Control/Technical Operations 

Human Factors (Controller 

Efficiency and Air Ground 

Integration) 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

Product and Activities FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations 

Human Factors (Controller Efficiency and Air 10,000 

Ground Integration) 

Trajectory Based Operations 1,500 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

High Density Airports 2,000 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Flexibility in the Terminal Environment 2,000 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Collaborative Air Traffic Management 1,000 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Reduce Weather Impact 500 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Cross-concept Human Factors 3,000 ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

Total Budget Authority 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-185 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A08B NextGen - New Air Traffic Management 

Requirement 

$23,000,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the Flight Plan goal for Greater Capacity 

Intended Outcomes: The NextGen – New Air Traffic Management (ATM) Requirement program addresses the 

FAA’s goal for capacity and the DOT Reduced Congestion Strategic Objective to “Advance accessible, efficient, intermodal transportation for the movement of people and goods.” It also supports the FAA’s National Aviation Research 

Plan goal for “Fast, Flexible and Efficient” which supports development of a system that safely and quickly moves 

anyone and anything, anywhere, anytime on schedules that meet customer needs. It fits within the Air Traffic 

Organization’s pathway 4, “Ensure Viable Future” which has the goal to assure a sustainable and affordable Air 

Transportation System for the future. Furthermore, this program fits the NextGen goal of expanding capacity by 

satisfying future growth in demand (up to three times capacity) as well as reducing transit time. 

The program will include research and development for new procedures and technologies both on the ground and in 

the air to increase efficiency of the NAS. Program outcomes include procedures, technologies, and tools to support 

trajectory-based operations in transitional airspace, such as between oceanic and domestic en route, as well as all 

airspace to outer markers (approach and departure). 

Agency Outputs: The program will address several of the NextGen solution sets while aligning with the FAA 

Enterprise Architecture and will concentrate on final research and development activities to prepare capabilities to be 

transitioned into the NAS. These solution sets include the following: Trajectory Based Operations; High Density 

Arrivals/Departures and Airports; Flexible Terminal and Airports; Collaborative Air Traffic Management; and 

Networked Facilities. Research activities may contribute to more than one of these solution sets. Where appropriate, 

activities will be coordinated with MITRE and/or NASA to complete any required final research and development to 

transition their products into the NAS. Also as appropriate, these activities move into final development and 

implementation upon successful completion of Joint Resource Council 2-B level decisions. 

Research Goals: 

Trajectory Based Operations 

Enable strategic planning and execution of flight trajectories throughout the airspace for equipped aircraft. This will 

require performance-based separation management, performance-based trajectory management operations and 

decision support tools, flight object information exchange, and airspace support. 

•	 By 2013, develop requirements for development, negotiations and exchange standards trajectories 

•	 By 2014, determine conflict resolution approaches using aircraft intent data 

•	 By 2014, develop approaches for implementing flexible airspace management 

High Density Arrivals/Departures and Airports 

Using trajectory-based terminal operations and flow management, reduce spacing between aircraft. This will require 

implementation of high density corridors with reduced separation matching aircraft in transition to airport arrival 

capacity, enhanced surface technologies, parallel runway operations with reduced lateral separation, digital taxi 

clearance and conformance, expansion of terminal separation procedures throughout arrival and departure airspace. 

Higher performance navigation and communication capabilities will be necessary. 

•	 By 2011, determine requirements for TCAS “8.0” to continue to provide effective collision risk safety net in 

an environment of closely space parallel RNP route form top-of-descent to the runway approaches for 

parallel runway operations with spacing down to 750 feet 

•	 By 2013, develop concepts for surface traffic management with conformance monitoring 

Flexible Terminal and Airports 

Dynamically manage airspace and surface operations with appropriately equipped aircraft, as opposed to the static 

way of managing airspace today, to provide greater capacity, efficiency, and safety. Will be applicable to lower 

density terminal areas and either trajectory-based or classic operations can be conducted. This dynamic 

A-186 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

management will require changes to procedures for low or zero visibility conditions, as well as, related decision 

support tools for both air and ground applications. 

•	 By 2011, conduct tradeoff studies to determine approaches to future air-ground and ground-ground data 

communications requirements implementing flexible terminal management 

•	 By 2014, determine mixed equipage trajectory-based routes for RNAV/RNP and continuous descent (CDA) 

operations 

Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

Optimize capacity to balance demand by strategic and tactical interactions with air traffic managers and flight 

operators. Requires shared data communication among pilots, dispatchers, and controllers and decision support 

tools for both air and ground applications. This includes developing a software assurance standard for integrating the 

air ground applications safely. 

•	 By 2012, develop software assurance standard for integration of air and ground decision support systems 

•	 By 2013, test initial concepts in partial collaborative decision making application 

•	 By 2014, determine weather and performance requirements for decision support tools integration. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The program addresses the needs of the FAA Air Traffic Organization 

(ATO) and works with the FAA Aviation Safety organization to ensure new procedures and solutions are safe and that 

the airports and air routes targeted for their implementation are those with critical needs to reduce air traffic delays 

and air route congestion thus providing more capacity. The program works with controllers, airlines, and pilots to 

include user recommendations and ensure that training and implementation issues are addressed in the program’s 

research from the start. 

Customers: 

•	 Pilots 

•	 Air navigation service provider personnel 

•	 Air carrier operations 

• Airport operations 

Stakeholders: 

•	 Joint Planning and Development Office 

•	 Commercial pilot unions 

•	 FAA air navigation service provider unions 

•	 Other ICAO air navigation service providers 

•	 Avionics and Aircraft manufacturers 

R&D Partnerships: In addition to maintaining its partnership with FAA’s Aviation Safety organization, this research 

program will accomplish its work via working relationships with industry, academia, and other government agencies. 

The coordination and tasking are accomplished through joint planning/reviews, contracts and interagency 

agreements with the program’s potential partners: 

•	 Volpe National Transportation Center 

•	 MITRE/Center for Advanced Aviation and Systems Development (CAASD) 

•	 NASA Ames, Glenn, and Langley Research Centers 

•	 EUROCONTROL and associated research organizations 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2010: 

Trajectory Based Operations 

•	 Investigated compatibility of prototyped L-Band components with existing systems in the L-band particularly with 

regard to the onboard co-site interference and agree on the overall design characteristics; and 

•	 Considered the design trade-offs and proposed the appropriate L-Band solution for input to a global aeronautical 

standardization activity. 

•	 Analyzed common trajectory requirements and implementation strategy – identified trajectory differences, 

evaluated need and fidelity and proposed exchange standards 

A-187 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

High Density Arrivals/Departures and Airports 

•	 Determined TCAS effectiveness in the NextGen environment and define requirements for improved performance 

Flexible Terminal and Airports 

•	 Identified the portions of the IEEE 802.16e C-band standard best suited for airport surface wireless mobile 

communications and propose an aviation specific standard to appropriate standardization bodies; 

•	 Evaluated and validated the performance of the aviation specific standard to support wireless mobile 

communications networks operating in the relevant airport surface environments through trials and testbed 

development; and 

•	 Developed a channelization methodology for allocation of safety and regularity of flight services in the band to 

accommodate a range of airport classes, configurations and operational requirements. 

Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

•	 Conducted analysis of approaches/methodologies for software assurance of complex air-ground systems. 

•	 Initiated development of a coordinated airborne and ground software assurance standard to support Air-Ground 

operational integrity. 

•	 Analyzed of airborne SWIM – identified information distribution requirements for non-command and control 

information, evaluate alternative design and architecture, propose standard. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

In FY 2011, the FAA must begin developing the capabilities needed to make required capabilities supportive of 

NextGen solution sets. These capabilities are highly dependent on technologies that accurately predict the location 

and intent of aircraft and provide this information to other pilots and controllers. Some of the aspects of the 

NextGen Concept of Operations depend upon the aircraft as a participant in efficient, safe air traffic management. 

These capabilities also rely on procedures that keep traffic flowing smoothly in all weather and visibility conditions. 

The NextGen research initiative will result in enhanced methods of determining safe separation while optimizing 

capacity, for all flight regimes and all aircraft. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

TCAS 8.0 

•	 Analysis, requirements, pseudo-code- supports provide effective collision risk safety net in an environment of 

closely spaced parallel RNP route from top-of-descent to the runway 

L-Band Communications Standard 

•	 Complete evaluation in relevant environments through trials and testbed development; and 

•	 Propose the appropriate L-Band solution for input to a global aeronautical standardization activity 

C-Band Standard 

•	 Goal IEEE 802.16e C-Band standard best suited for airport surface wireless mobile communications 

•	 Conduct evaluation of an aviation specific standard to support wireless "mobile" communications in relevant 

airport surface environments 

•	 Develop a channelisation methodology for allocation of safety and regularity of flight services in the band to 

accommodate a range of airport classes, configurations and operational requirements. 

Common Trajectory Requirements and Implementation Strategy 

•	 Identify Trajectory Differences 

•	 Evaluate Need and Fidelity 

•	 Propose Standard for Exchange 

•	 Analyze System changes and Allocations 

Mid-term Advances in Tactical Flow 

•	 Integration of EDA advances into ATM (allocation to ERAM & TMA) 

RNAV/RNP via Data Communications 

•	 Delivery across data communications-requirements 

•	 "On the fly" development, evaluation and delivery 

Airborne SWIM 

• Identify information distribution requirements for non-command and control information 

A-188 
2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

• Evaluate alternatives 

• Propose standard (if required) 

Appendix A 

A-189 
 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

5,400 

13,200 

23,000 

165,200 

206,800 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts

New Air Traffic Management 

Requirement 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

5,400 

0 

0 

5,400 

0 

13,200 

0 

0 

13,200 

23,000 

0 

0

23,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

5,400 

5,400 

0 

0 

13,200 

13,200 

0 

0 

23,000 

23,000 

A-190 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08B – New Air Traffic Management 

Requirement 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

New ATM Requirement 

Trajectory Based Operations 

Continue to develop approaches for implementing 

flexible airspace management 

Continue to develop requirements for interactive flight 

planning 

Analysis of conflict resolution approaches using aircraft 

intent data 

Common Trajectory Requirements simulation and 

modeling 

High Density Arrivals/Departures and 

Airports 

TCAS 8.0 analysis and requirements 

Surface management CNS technologies identification 

Flexible Terminal and Airports 

RNAV/RNP via Data Communications 

Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

Efficient and safe certification methods of complex 

software systems (Software Standards) 

Real time integrated decision making information 

(Weather Integration) 

Shared data concepts (Airborne SWIM) 

Reduce Weather Impacts 

Weather Radar Replacement (WRR) Engineering Trade 

Studies 

23,000 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

♦ 

♦ 

◊ 

◊ ◊ ◊ 

♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊

◊ ◊ 

Total Budget Authority 23,000 13,200 23,000 31,200 32,000 50,100 51,900 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-191 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

1A08C NextGen - Operations Concept Validation – 

Validation Modeling 

$10,000,000 

GOALS: 

This Program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership 

Intended Outcomes: The Operations Concept Validation Program addresses developing and validating future endto-end (flight planning through arrival) operational concepts with special emphasis on researching changes in roles 

and responsibilities between the FAA and airspace users (e.g., pilots and airlines), as well as the role of the human 

versus systems, that will increase capacity and improve efficiency and throughput. It will identify procedures that 

can decrease workload and increase reliance on automation for routine tasking to increase efficiency of the NAS. 

Furthermore, this program works toward developing operational methods that will meet the NextGen goal of 

expanding capacity by satisfying future growth in demand as well as reducing transit time (reduce gate-to-gate 

transit times by 30 percent and increasing on-time arrival rate to 95 percent.). 

Agency Outputs: The research will provide an end-to-end NAS Operational Concept and a complete set of 

scenarios that describe operational changes for NextGen solution sets including: Trajectory Based Operations (TBO); 

High Density Arrivals/Departures and Airports; Flexible Terminal and Airports; Collaborative Air Traffic Management; 

and Networked Facilities. These products will be developed for the Midterm (2018) initially, and subsequently for the 

NAS in 2025. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) Free Flight 

Steering Committee, the FAA’s R,E&D Advisory Committee, the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and 

Security, and numerous other members of the aviation community have called for the development and validation of 

a Concept of Operations for modernizing the NAS. This concept must be consistent with the JPDO’s concept for 

NextGen, and its impact on the FAA’s ATO, including transition steps, must be identified and validated. 

Operational concept development and validation will utilize an iterative work group approach with members 

representing each of the FAA ATO Operational Service Units and representatives from the airspace user community, 

including pilots and flight operations centers. The work group approach will present an initial concept or scenario 

and elicit feedback from impacted stakeholders. This feedback will be incorporated into future versions of the 

concept that will be reviewed by stakeholders. Concept validation activities employing human-in-the-loop simulation 

will utilize participants with experience in the task being validated. The Program will identify the precise mechanism 

for obtaining stakeholder participation. It is currently envisioned that this participation will be through the Next 

Generation Air Transportation System Institute. 

R&D Partnerships: This program is encouraged by the JPDO to ensure the FAA’s research and development 

activities support the evolution to NextGen. Participation of the JPDO assures that the Operational Concept activities 

reflect user community needs, and assures that identified improvements are evaluated for operational impacts on 

NAS users and FAA service providers. 

The concept development and concept validation effort described here is also coordinated with the European 

community via agreements with the European Commission on SESAR. This cooperation ensures that unique 

solutions and transitions are not developed in different quadrants of the globe, a situation which would impose an 

undue burden on all carriers and manufacturers participating in the global airspace system. 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Developed the Initial NAS End-to-End Mid-term (2018) Concept of Operation Narrative 

•	 Developed f the Initial NAS End-to-End Mid-term (2018) Concept of Operation Detailed Operational 

Scenarios and Traffic Scenarios 

•	 Validated the Data Communications Segment 2 Operational Concept and requirements development 

A-192 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Developed Research Plan for the integration of four dimensional trajectories (4DT) across operational 

environments (e.g., terminal, traffic flow management, and en route operations) to determine the level of 

accuracy needed in each phase of flight 

•	 Initiated planning activities to perform human-in-the-loop and fast-time simulations to validate the mid-term 

concepts with particular emphasis on roles and responsibilities 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Validation of Midterm Concepts 

•	 Data Communications Segment 2 Requirements 

•	 Develop Detailed scenarios for midterm 

•	 Refine Midterm NextGen CONOPS 

•	 Begin developing detailed scenarios for 2025 

•	 Time Based flow management Integrated Research Plan and fast time simulations 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FY 2011 research will provide an Initial End-to-End Midterm (2018) NAS Operational Concept and a complete set 

of scenarios that describe operational changes for NextGen solution sets including: Trajectory Based Operations 

(TBO); High Density Arrivals/Departures and Airports; Flexible Terminal and Airports; Collaborative Air Traffic 

Management; and Networked Facilities. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop Data Communications Segment 2/3 Requirements. 

•	 Continue development of a detailed set of scenarios to be used in concept validation. 

•	 Conduct human in the loop simulations of Trajectory Based Operations (TBO), particularly for integrated time 

based flow management. 

•	 Refine the Midterm NextGen End-to-End CONOPS based on concept validation. 

•	 Demonstrate an increase in capacity and efficiency at 166% current traffic levels 

A-193 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

4,000 

10,000 

10,000 

40,000 

64,000 

Budget Authority FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

($000) Enacted Enacted Request Enacted Request 

Contracts: 

NextGen Operations Concept Validation – 

Validation Modeling 0 0 4,000 10,000 10,000 

Personnel Costs 0 0 0 0 0 

Other In-house Costs 0 0 0 0 0 

Total 0 0 4,000 10,000 10,000 

OMB Circular A-11, FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 

Conduct of Research and Development ($000) Enacted Enacted Request Enacted Request 

Basic 0 0 0 0 0 

Applied 0 0 0 0 0 

Development (includes prototypes) 0 0 4,000 10,000 10,000 

Total 0 0 4,000 10,000 10,000 

A-194 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08C – Next Gen - Operations 

Concept Validation – Validation 

Modeling 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Operations Concept Validation 

End-to-end mid-term (2018) concept of 

operation narrative 

End-to-end mid-term (2018) concept detailed 

task list descriptions 

End-to-end far-term (2025) concept of 

operations narrative 

End-to-end far-term (2025) concept detailed task 

descriptions 

Integration of 4DT across operational 

environments 

Detailed operational scenarios to support midterm concept validation 

Simulations to validate the mid-term concept 

Detailed operational scenarios to support farterm concept validation 

Simulations to validate the far-term concept 

10,000 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-195 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A08D NextGen - Environment and Energy – 

Environmental Management System and Advanced 

Noise and Emissions Reduction 

$15,000,000 

GOALS:
 

The programs support the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety and Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: The Advanced Noise and Emissions Reduction and Validation Modeling program helps 

achieve the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) goal to increase capacity threefold while reducing 

significant environmental impacts in absolute terms. 

The program will explore advanced operational procedures to enable absolute reduction of significant aviation 

environmental impacts and establishing the benefits and costs for adopting these new procedures. The program will 

also develop and advance analytical tools and metrics to implement Environmental Management Systems (EMSs) to 

manage and mitigate NextGen environmental impacts. The analytical efforts are providing sufficient knowledge of 

climate change effects of aviation to enable assessing the impacts of various means to mitigate these effects. 

The program is also focused on assessing National Airspace System (NAS) infrastructure impacts of Continuous Low 

Energy, Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) technologies and alternative fuels developed under the Research, Engineering 

and Development program (RE&D) and establishing and advancing any NAS adaptation required to implement and 

benefit from these technologies and fuels. 

The Program specifically supports the following outcomes: 

Identify and explore how advances in Communication, Navigation and Surveillance technology can be leveraged in 

the short- to medium-term to further optimize advanced aircraft arrival and departure, surface and en route 

procedures to reduce noise, fuel burn and emissions. Develop airspace analytical tools for aviation noise and 

emissions impacts, and analysis of costs/benefits of mitigation techniques. Design, develop and demonstrate 

implementation of EMS approaches to dynamically manage environmental impacts on the NAS in the most efficient 

and effective manner possible. Specific activities include: 

•	 Explore advanced aircraft arrival, departure and surface operations to reduce emissions, fuel burn and noise 

•	 Advance noise, local air quality and climate impacts metrics to quantify and manage the impacts of 

operations associated with NextGen 

•	 Develop decision support tools to dynamically manage environmental impacts via EMSs 

•	 Conduct validation modeling of mitigation approaches 

•	 Develop decision support tools to assess the benefits and costs and aid in the implementation of clean and 

quiet procedures in the NAS 

•	 Determine and develop NAS infrastructure adaptation necessary to adopt new environmental technologies 

and advanced fuels. 

Assess impacts of adopting new aircraft environmental technologies and advanced fuels for the NAS infrastructure 

and advance any NAS adaptation necessary to benefit from these technologies. Specific activities include: 

•	 Assess the impacts of new aircraft technologies and alternative fuels on the NAS 

•	 Identify and develop any new elements of NAS infrastructure required to support the operation of new 

aircraft and alternative fuel technologies 

•	 Demonstrate flight and ground integration of new CLEEN technologies and alternative fuels in the NAS 

Agency Outputs: The program is protecting the environment by reducing significant aviation environmental 

impacts associated with noise, emissions, and global climate impact. The program will explore, collaboratively with 

industry and academia, advanced operational procedures that mitigate NextGen environmental impact while 

satisfying safety requirements. The program will support the design, development and implementation of EMSs that 

will allow adapting environmental protection to the dynamic needs of the NAS. In addition, the program will 

establish the benefits and costs for adopting new procedures and practices and develop decision support tools that 

A-196 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

can be introduced into the NAS in the short and medium term to enable better planning and decisions. Finally, the 

program will also establish and advance any NAS infrastructure adaptation required to support the operation of new 

aircraft technologies and alternative fuels. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By FY 2010, evaluate impacts of CLEEN technologies on NAS infrastructure integration. 

•	 By FY 2010, evaluate benefits of alternative fuels on NAS infrastructure integration. 

•	 By FY 2010, conduct demonstration of algorithms to enable clean and quiet operational procedures. 

•	 By FY 2010, develop architecture for Environmental Management Systems (EMSs). 

•	 By FY 2011, apply metrics for health and climate impacts to develop a sample NAS EMSs and define impact 

of mitigation actions. 

•	 By FY 2011, conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for en route (Oceanic) 

operational procedure for reduced aircraft emissions that may influence climate. 

•	 By FY 2011, define standards, policy and procedures for environmental control logic for use in automated 

systems for surface and arrival operations. 

•	 By FY 2011, integrate modifications to static environmental analyses models to enable dynamic assessment 

and control of environmental impacts. 

•	 By FY 2011, deliver specific recommendations for environmental procedures to be integrated and 

demonstrated within appropriate NGIP solution sets. 

•	 By FY 2011, conduct demonstration of environmental control algorithms for advanced ground, terminal 

area, and en route operational procedures to reduce emissions and noise. 

•	 By FY 2012, apply the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) to evaluate environmental impact for 

regional airspace needs and support EMSs. 

•	 By FY 2012, design significant demonstration of CLEEN mitigation technologies and NAS infrastructure 

integration. 

•	 By FY 2012, design significant demonstration alternative fuels and NAS infrastructure integration. 

•	 By FY 2012, conduct significant demonstration of alternative fuels integration into the NAS. 

•	 By FY 2013, conduct significant demonstration of CLEEN mitigation technologies and NAS infrastructure 

integration. 

•	 By FY 2013, conduct significant demonstration alternative fuels and NAS infrastructure integration. 

•	 By FY 2013, define standards, policy and procedures for environmental control logic for use in automated 

systems for en route (Oceanic) operations. 

•	 By FY 2014, define standards, policy and procedures for CLEEN technologies integration into NAS. 

•	 By FY 2014, define standards, policy and procedures for alternative fuel integration into the NAS. 

•	 By FY 2014, assess the potential environmental benefits of improved efficiency coupling of separate 

automated system for surface, en route and arrivals/departures. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The FAA works closely with other federal agencies, industry, academia, 

and international governments and organizations to design R&D efforts that can advance understanding of aviation 

environmental health and welfare impacts. 

•	 NextGen -- FAA is leading an Environmental Working Group (EWG) responsible for all environmental 

dimensions of the JPDO. The EWG comprises FAA, NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DoD, 

Department of Commerce, Council on Environmental Quality, Department of the Interior, and Office of the 

Secretary of Transportation, as well as industry, academia, local government, and community groups. The 

efforts of the EWG are centered on advancing the national vision and recommendations for aviation in the 

NextGen and in the congressionally mandated study on “Aviation and the Environment”, including advanced 

operational procedures, aircraft technologies and alternative fuels development. 

R&D Partnerships: As does the Environment and Energy Research Program and other NextGen activities, the 

Advanced Noise and Emissions Reduction and Validation Modeling program relies on a series of Memorandums of 

Agreement (MOA), to work closely with NASA. In FY 2005, FAA signed an MOA with DoD to pursue joint activities to 

understand and mitigate aviation noise and emissions. The FAA is also pursuing collaborative agreements with DOE, 

and EPA to leverage resources to address aviation’s environmental impact. 

A-197 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Through the JPDO NextGen, the program established a Working Group comprising FAA, NASA, EPA, DoD, 

Department of Commerce, Council on Environmental Quality, and Office of the Secretary of Transportation, 

as well as industry, academia, local government, and community groups. The Working Group is pursuing an 

intensive, balanced approach, emphasizing alignment across stakeholders in developing needed business 

and technology architectures, as well as other relevant tools, metrics, and products to address aviation’s 

environmental impact. 

Accomplishments: This is a new effort to address the challenges of NextGen. However, relevant stakeholders 

have achieved significant accomplishments mitigating aviation’s environmental impact. The number of people 

exposed to significant noise levels was reduced by about 90% between 1975 and 2006. Today's aircraft are also 70 

percent more fuel-efficient-per-passenger-mile than jet aircraft of the 1960s. Reduced fuel consumption has also led 

to a 90 percent reduction in carbon monoxide, smoke, and other aircraft emissions. 

FY 2009: 

Advanced Operational Procedures 

•	 Explored advanced algorithms and approaches for en route operations that reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions that may contribute to climate impacts 

•	 Explored advanced algorithms and approaches for surface operations that reduce criteria pollutants that 

contribute to ambient air quality 

•	 Explored advanced algorithms and approaches for terminal procedures that optimize noise and air quality 

emissions reductions 

Environmental Management System 

•	 Defined existing and planned environmental mitigation methods to counter NAS constraints (today and for 

NextGen) 

•	 Modified the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) to enable evaluating environmental impact for 

regional airspace needs and support EMSs 

•	 Applied metrics for health and climate impacts to develop a sample NAS EMSs and define benefits of 

mitigation actions 

CLEEN and Alternative Fuels and NAS Infrastructure Integration 

•	 Evaluated potential benefits of CLEEN aircraft technologies on the NAS 

•	 Evaluated potential benefits of aviation alternative fuels on the NAS 

•	 Analyzed new aircraft types (e.g., aircraft featuring CLEEN technologies, VLJ, UAV, SBJ) to ascertain their 

influence on environmental impacts and assess approaches to optimize environmental performance 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Advanced Operational Procedures 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for surface (taxi/ramp) area 

operational procedure to reduce emissions. 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for terminal area operational 

procedure to reduce emissions and noise. 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for surface (taxi/ramp) area 

operational procedure to reduce emissions. 

Environmental Management System 

•	 Initiate EMS outreach program to communicate EMS approach 

•	 Identify refinements to improve NextGen EMS framework 

•	 Initiate development of first phase of decision support tools for EMS 

•	 Develop future concept and core requirements for IT systems to support reporting and integration of 

information for NextGen EMS 

•	 Initiate first phase of pilots to test refined approaches and to support development of standardized 

approaches and tools for organizational level NextGen EMS 

•	 Develop an approach to prioritize how early adopters should be targeted so as to achieve the greatest 

positive impacts for NextGen and the environment 

A-198 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Research potential incentives to encourage action toward NextGen environmental goals, assess benefits and 

potential costs - Propose a framework (and schedule) for applying selected incentives 

• Applied Research on the Methodologies and Metrics to Assess Health and Climate Change Impacts 

CLEEN, Alternative Fuels, Market Measures, Standards and NAS Infrastructure Integration 

•	 Define existing and planned environmental mitigation methods to counter NAS constraints (today and for 

NextGen) 

•	 Continue analysis of environmental impacts of new aircraft types (e.g., aircraft featuring CLEEN 

technologies, VLJ, UAV) on the NAS and assess approaches to optimize system environmental performance 

•	 Continue analysis of the environmental impacts of aviation alternative fuels on NAS and assess approaches 

to optimize system environmental performance 

•	 Investigate potential metrics and define standards for aircraft CO2 emissions 

•	 Investigate market based options, including Cap & Trade, to limit aircraft greenhouse gas emissions 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

NextGen has adopted environmental goals to reduce significant noise and air quality impacts in absolute terms, to 

enhance fuel efficiency, to limit or reduce greenhouse gases. The growth enabled by NextGen will lead to significant 

increase in environmental impacts even in the near term which could restrict capacity growth and prevent full 

realization of NextGen. The solution is to reduce the increased environmental impacts of aviation through new 

operational procedures, technologies, alternative fuels, policies, standards and market based options to allow the 

desired increase in capacity. The ATO Capital environmental investments enable delivering the NextGen noise goal 

of reducing the number of people exposed to noise each year by 4% and improving fuel efficiency by at least 2% per 

year. Future environmentally responsible aviation environmental mitigation must be based on a new, 

interdisciplinary approach that addresses the relationship between noise and emissions and different types of 

emissions, and provides the cost-benefit analysis capability necessary for data-driven decision making. 

This effort will lead to assessment of new and advanced aircraft and engine technologies, alternative fuels, improved 

operational procedures and analysis of policy, environmental standards and market based options to reduce 

emissions, fuel burn, and noise towards achieving NextGen environmental goals. The effort specifically focuses on 

explorations, simple demonstrations as well as methods to integrate these environmental impact mitigation and 

energy efficiency options with the NextGen infrastructure in a costs-beneficial manner. It will also provide ways to 

adapt the NAS infrastructure to fully exploit the benefits of these environmental mitigation and energy efficiency 

options. 

Environment and Energy – Environmental Management System (EMS) 

The NextGen Environmental Management System (EMS) will dynamically manage NextGen environmental impacts 

and help to define and identify optimum mitigation actions and their benefits in order to achieve NextGen 

environmental goals. The FY 2011 research will continue developing, refining and evaluating the EMS framework, 

decision support tools and outreach program to initiate, implement, coordinate and link EMS activities across 

NextGen participants and stakeholders. This program will also develop strategy and framework for incentives options 

that may be implemented to encourage EMS implementation. Additionally, this program will assess National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance of NextGen EMS and continue to evaluate environmental impacts 

metrics and analysis approaches to support EMS implementation. 

Environment and Energy –Advanced Noise and Emission Reduction 

The FY 2011 research will evaluate the potential NAS environmental benefits of new aircraft technologies and 

alternative fuels; initiate a comprehensive analysis of the impacts on the NAS of new aircraft types [e.g., aircraft 

featuring Continuous Lower Emissions, Energy, and Noise (CLEEN) technologies, Very Light Jet (VLJ) and Unmanned 

Aerial Vehicle (UAV)], and alternative aviation fuels; and explore and assess new operational procedures optimized 

for environmental and energy efficiency and environmental performance. This program will analyze impacts of 

potential policy, environmental standards and market based measures on the aviation system and NextGen 

environmental and energy efficiency goals. This program element will also identify ways to integrate mitigation 

options with the NAS infrastructure and demonstrate any NAS adaptation required to implement new CLEEN aircraft 

technologies, alternative fuels, environmental and energy efficient operational procedures, and policy, environmental 

standards and market based options. 

A-199 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Advanced Operational Procedures 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for surface (taxi/ramp) area 

operational procedure to reduce emissions. 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for terminal area operational 

procedure to reduce emissions and noise. 

•	 Conduct significant demonstration of environmental control algorithms for surface (taxi/ramp) area 

operational procedure to reduce emissions 

•	 Initiate investigation of potential operational changes required to optimize aircraft operations for greenhouse 

gas reductions 

Environmental Management System 

•	 Perform EMS Environmental Impacts Analysis and Metrics 

•	 Implement and asses EMS Outreach Communications program 

•	 Refine EMS Framework 

•	 Develop EMS Decision Support Tools 

•	 Design architecture for NextGen EMS IT system 

•	 Perform EMS Pilot demonstration/Testing 

•	 Initiate standardization of EMS approaches for organizational EMS 

•	 Finalize strategy and framework for incentives and begin development of selected incentive programs 

•	 Implement first phase of EMS and develop prioritization for EMS strategy 

•	 Develop design and scoping of EMS performance tracking framework 

• Analyyze NextGen EMS and NEPA compliance 

CLEEN, Alternative Fuels, Market Measures, Standards and NAS Infrastructure Integration 

•	 Define existing and planned environmental mitigation methods to counter NAS constraints (today and for 

NextGen) 

•	 Continue analysis of environmental impacts of new aircraft types (e.g., aircraft featuring CLEEN 

technologies, VLJ, UAV) on the NAS and assess approaches to optimize system environmental performance 

•	 Continue analysis of the environmental impacts of aviation alternative fuels on NAS and assess approaches 

to optimize system environmental performance 

•	 Investigate potential metrics and define standards for aircraft CO2 emissions 

•	 Investigate market based options, including Cap & Trade, to limit aircraft greenhouse gas emissions 

A-200 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 7,000 

FY 2010 Enacted 7,000 

FY 2011 Request 15,000 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 72,000 

Total 101,000 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

Contracts: 

Environmental Management System 

Advanced Noise and Emissions 

Reduction 

Personnel 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

4,500 

2,500 

0 

0 

7,000 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

3,000 

4,000 

0 

0 

7,000 

FY 2011 

Request 

6,000 

9,000 

0 

0

15,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total

FY 2007 

Enacted 

0 

0 

0 

0 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

0 

0 

0 

0 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

0 

0 

7,000 

7,000 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

0 

0 

7,000 

7,000 

FY 2011 

Request 

0 

0 

15,000 

15,000 

A-201 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08D - Environment and Energy – 

Environmental Management System 

and Advanced Noise and Emissions 

Reduction 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Environmental Management System 

EMS Environmental Impacts Analysis and 

Metrics 

EMS Outreach & Communications 

Development of EMS Decision Support 

Tools 

EMS Pilots demonstrations and Testing 

Standardization of EMS approaches for 

organizational EMS 

Incentive Framework for Adoption of EMS 

Implementation of EMS 

EMS performance tracking framework 

NextGen EMS and NEPA compliance 

Publish results 

Advanced Noise and Emissions Reduction 

6,000 

9,000 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

Evaluation of NAS benefits of CLEEN 

aircraft technologies 

Evaluation of NAS benefits of aviation 

alternative fuels 

Evaluation of NAS-wide market based 

options 

Environmental standards and NAS-wide 

benefits 

Analysis of policy options and NAS-wide 

benefits 

Significant exploration and demonstration 

of environmental control algorithms for 

surface (taxi/ramp) area operational 

procedures 

Significant exploration and demonstration 

of environmental control algorithms for 

terminal area operational procedure 

Significant exploration and demonstration 

of environmental control algorithms for en 

route 

Publish Results 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

♦ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

◊ 

Total Budget Authority 15,000 7,000 15,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-202 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A08E NextGen - Wake Turbulence – Re-categorization $3,000,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: The Wake Turbulence – Re-Categorization project (Wake Re-Cat) addresses FAA’s goal for 

capacity and the DOT Reduced Congestion Strategic Goal, Capacity Management Strategy: “Modify aircraft 

separation standards to increase airspace capacity and allow more efficient use of airspace.” Redefining (based on 

enhanced understanding of aircraft generated wake turbulence and its transport/demise) the basis for the air 

navigation service provider’s (ANSP) required minimum spacing between aircraft to mitigate the effects of wake 

turbulence is a major first step towards the NextGen efficient use of our nation’s airspace. Wake Re-Cat provides 

the analysis, experimentation, and validation activities necessary to replace today’s safe but capacity inefficient air 

traffic control wake mitigation procedures for separating aircraft. The work is conducted cooperatively with 

EUROCONTROL and will result in global changes to the ANSP wake turbulence mitigation procedures. Project 

outcomes include: 

•	 Current 6 weight categories and safe separation distances adjusted to account for fleet mix changes since 

the last re-categorization effort in the early 1990s (adjustments will include additional factors beyond 

aircraft weight) 

•	 Increased capability to safely place more aircraft in the same volume of airspace – resulting in ability to 

meet increased demand for air travel. 

Increased opportunity and flexibility for safe aircraft pair-wise maneuvering within airspace and other system 

constraints 

Agency Outputs: Wake Re-Cat uses applied research to develop the enhanced methods of defining wake safe 

separations between aircraft. Previously used methods are being reviewed and refined. Current wake 

characterization models are being enhanced to allow experimentation with the use of various aircraft design 

parameters as mechanisms for defining the strength and longevity of aircraft produced wake vortices. Results of the 

modeling efforts will be validated through field measurements. Wake encounter models will be developed, validated 

and integrated into aircraft simulators. Separation standards will be refined based on field data, analysis and pilot-inthe-loop simulations. Wake mitigation separation procedures developed for use by the ANSP will be evaluated using 

scenario based simulations to include human-in-the-loop simulations to insure usability and safe operations. Work 

will also include the development of the safety risk management documentation necessary for the implementation of 

the revised ANSP wake mitigation separation procedures. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By 2011 refine the boundaries of the current 6 weight categories and associated wake separation minima 

into a static wake-based set of categories and separation minima for National Airspace System (NAS) wide 

fleet mix and define automation requirements to support those modifications 

•	 By 2011, in support of variable wake separations, determine optimal set of aircraft flight characteristics and 

weather parameters for use in setting wake separation minimums. 

•	 By 2013, determine how best to incorporate the leader/follower based wake separation standards into the 

en-route and terminal automation platforms. 

•	 By 2016, develop the algorithms that will be used in the ANSP (and potentially on flight deck automation 

systems) for setting dynamic wake separation minimum for each pair of aircraft. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The Wake Re-categorization project addresses the needs of the FAA Air 

Traffic Organization (ATO) and works with the FAA Aviation Safety organization to ensure new procedures and 

solutions are safe for implementation both by the ANSP and for the flight deck. The project consults with aircraft 

manufacturers, controllers, airlines, airport operators and pilots to include their recommendations; ensure an open 

safety assessment process and a shared understanding of the results of the safety assessments. The project’s 

emphasis is insuring user’s training and implementation issues are addressed in the project’s research from the start. 

A-203 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Customers: 

•	 Pilots 

•	 Air navigation service provider personnel 

•	 Air carrier operations 

•	 Airport operations 

• Aircraft manufacturers 

Stakeholders: 

•	 Joint Planning and Development Office 

•	 Commercial pilot unions 

•	 FAA air navigation service provider unions 

•	 Other ICAO air navigation service providers 

•	 Aircraft manufacturer associations 

•	 General aviation associations 

R&D Partnerships: In addition to maintaining its partnership with FAA’s Aviation Safety organization, this project 

will accomplish its research agenda via working relationships with industry, academia, and other government 

agencies. The coordination and tasking are accomplished through joint planning/reviews, contracts and interagency 

agreements with the program’s partners: 

•	 Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 

•	 MITRE/Center for Advanced Aviation and Systems Development (CAASD) 

•	 NASA Ames and Langley Research Centers 

•	 EUROCONTROL and associated research organizations 

•	 National Institute of Aerospace 

Accomplishments: The following represent major accomplishments of the Wake Re-categorization project: 

•	 FY2009 - Enhanced analysis tools (to include effects of wake encounter) for evaluating alternative methods 

of defining safe wake separations between various types of aircraft. 

•	 FY2009 - Conducted analyses and aviation community forums to vet potential methods for specifying safe 

wake separations between various types of aircraft 

•	 FY2009 - Developed an approach for evaluating the safety risks associated with the potential methods for 

setting wake separations between various groups of aircraft (i.e. Jumbo, Heavy, Large, Small, Very Small) 

•	 FY2009 - Developed planning for human-in-the-loop ANSP simulations to evaluate usability of a proposed 

set of wake separation standards 

•	 FY2009 - Developed potential methods for defining the minimum safe wake separations between aircraft, 

beginning with the more general groupings of aircraft types. 

•	 FY2009 - Conducted analyses to link wake transport and decay characteristics to aircraft flight and 

surrounding weather parameters. 

•	 FY2008 - Series of work sessions with several candidate sets of standards developed for evaluation 

•	 FY2008 - Existing data sets and models examined for utility to this project 

•	 FY2007 – Second international meeting - Developed strategy for accomplishing the re-categorization work 

•	 FY2006 – First international meeting – reviewed history of wake separation standards setting and various 

potential approaches to accomplishing re-categorization. 

•	 FY 2006 – Completion of a two year effort to determine required wake separation minimums for the A-380 

and similar sized aircraft. 

•	 FY 2004-2006 – Utilized wake turbulence data collected from ground based and aircraft based prototype 

pulsed LIDAR systems, along with wake turbulence transit and demise models for characterizing the wake 

generated by the A-380 aircraft in relation to the wake generated by the 747-400 aircraft. 

A-204 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Apply enhanced analysis tools (to include effects of wake encounter) for evaluating alternative methods of 

defining safe wake separations between various types of aircraft. 

•	 Continue to conduct analyses and aviation community forums to vet potential methods for determining safe 

wake separations between various types of aircraft. 

•	 Evaluate the safety risks associated with the potential methods for determining safe wake separations 

between various groups of aircraft (i.e. Jumbo, Heavy, Large, Small, Very Small) 

•	 Conduct human-in-the-loop ANSP and Flight Deck simulations to evaluate usability of a proposed set of 

wake separation standards 

•	 From the examined alternatives for defining safe wake separations between aircraft, develop a 

recommendation for a change to wake separation standards. This proposed change (proposed by both FAA 

and EUROCONTROL) will be sent to ICAO for international review. 

•	 Using results from collected data, continue to upgrade analytical models - linking wake transport and decay 

to aircraft flight and surrounding weather parameters. 

•	 Initiate development of wake separation standards that account for which aircraft is leading and which 

aircraft is following in terms of wake separation 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

In FY11, FAA must continue developing the capabilities needed to enable separation requirements supportive of 

NextGen shared separation and dynamic spacing super density operations. Wake Re-cat addresses the existing wake 

separation standards and seeks to evolve from these static standards to ones that better address the variety of 

aircraft being separated and the weather conditions that impact the needed wake separations. Wake Recategorization project is one component in the overall effort to apply technology toward achieving the envisioned 

NextGen number of aircraft operations in the NAS. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop and apply enhanced analysis tools (to include the effects of wake encounter) for evaluating 

alternative methods of defining safe wake separations between various types of aircraft 

•	 Conduct analyses and aviation community forums to vet potential methods for determining safe wake 

separations between various types of aircraft 

•	 Develop required changes and then support FAA’s CARTS/STARS and ERAM automation programs in their 

development of software and adaptation to implement the wake separation standards recommended to 

ICAO. 

•	 Complete follow-on analyses requested by ICAO to support the wake separation standards recommendation 

submitted to ICAO in FY10 

•	 Continue the analyses and modeling to develop wake separation standards, processes, and procedures 

along with the associated benefit and safety analyses for wake separation standards that consider individual 

aircraft types both as wake generators (leader) and as aircraft following a wake generating aircraft 

(follower). 

•	 Determine optimal set of flight characteristics and weather parameters for use in setting wake separation 

minimums 

•	 Plan for conduct of simulations to evaluate the feasibility - in terms of air traffic control - of aircraft type 

specific leader/follower separation standards, processes and procedures. 

A-205 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

2,000 

2,000 

3,000 

12,000 

19,000 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Wake Turbulence 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,000 

0 

0 

2,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

0 

0

 Total 0 0 2,000 2,000 3,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied

Development (includes prototypes) 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2,000 

0 

0 

2,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

Total 0 0 2,000 2,000 3,000 

A-206 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08E - NextGen - Wake Turbulence 

– Re-categorization 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Wake Turbulence – Re-categorization 

Develop and apply enhanced analysis tools 

(to include the effects of wake encounter) for 

evaluating alternative methods of defining 

safe wake separations between various types 

of aircraft 

Conduct analyses and aviation community 

forums to vet potential methods for 

determining safe wake separations between 

various types of aircraft 

Develop required changes and then support 

FAA’s CARTS/STARS and ERAM automation 

programs in their development of software 

and adaptation to implement the wake 

separation standards recommended to ICAO. 

Complete follow-on analyses requested by 

ICAO to support the wake separation 

standards recommendation submitted to 

ICAO in FY10 

Continue the analyses and modeling to 

develop wake separation standards, 

processes, and procedures along with the 

associated benefit and safety analyses for 

wake separation standards that consider 

individual aircraft types both as wake 

generators (leader) and as aircraft following a 

wake generating aircraft (follower) 

Determine optimal set of flight characteristics 

and weather parameters for use in setting 

wake separation minimums 

Plan for conduct of simulations to evaluate 

the feasibility - in terms of air traffic control - 

of aircraft type specific leader/follower 

separation standards, processes and 

procedures 

3,000 

500 

200 

600 

400 

700 

400 

200 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

Total Budget Authority 3,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

In the F&E appropriations, personnel and other costs are budgeted in Activity 5, not the program budget line item.
 

A-207 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A08F NextGen – Operational Assessments $10,000,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Greater Capacity 

Intended Outcomes: The NextGen Operational Assessments Program addresses the FAA’s goal for greater 

capacity in the system. The program includes research and development of system wide assessment of NAS 

performance, safety and environmental impacts. The transition to NextGen requires the conduct of operational 

assessments to ensure that safety, environmental, and system performance considerations are addressed throughout 

the integration and implementation of NextGen. Such assessments are particularly important as the NextGen 

program begins to evaluate current airspace design and as new procedures are developed and implemented within 

the NAS. In FY 2011, funding is requested to continue conducting system wide operation performance, system wide 

safety assessments, environmental-specific assessment, and system risk management activities. 

Agency Outputs: The program will support several of the NextGen solution sets through operational assessment of 

new capabilities and its impact on NAS-wide performance, safety and environment. These solution sets include the 

following: Trajectory Based Operations; High Density Arrivals/Departures and Airports; Flexible Terminal and Airports 

and Collaborative Air Traffic Management. Where appropriate, research and development and assessment activities 

will be coordinated with JPDO to complement JPDO NextGen working groups’ activities on far term capabilities. 

Research Goals: 

•	 By 2012, enhance NAS wide model(s) to support operational assessments of the en route domains 

•	 By 2012, continue to conduct safety assessment of NextGen capabilities 

•	 By 2012, continue to conduct environmental assessment of NextGen capabilities 

•	 By 2013, enhance NAS wide model(s) to support operational assessments of strategic flow management 

operations 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The program addresses the needs of the FAA Air Traffic Organization 

(ATO) and works with the FAA Aviation Safety and Aviation Environment organizations to perform comprehensive 

NAS wide operational assessments of NextGen capabilities. The program works with controllers, airlines and pilots to 

include user recommendations and ensure that implementation issues are addressed early on. 

Customers: 

•	 Air Navigation Service Provide personnel 

•	 Air carrier operations 

•	 Airport operations 

•	 Pilots 

Stakeholders: 

•	 Joint Planning and Development Office 

•	 FAA Air Traffic Operation service units, Aviation Safety and Aviation Environmental offices 

R&D Partnerships: This program will partner with the FAA Aviation Safety and Aviation Environmental 

organizations, industry, academia and other government agencies. The coordination and tasking are accomplished 

through joint planning/reviews, contracts and interagency agreements with the program’s potential partners: 

•	 MITRE/Center for Advanced Aviation and Systems Development (CAASD) 

•	 NASA Ames, Glenn and Langley Research Centers 

•	 EUROCONTROL and associated research organizations 

•	 Volpe National Transportation Center 

Accomplishments: This was a new program in FY 2010. 

A-208 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Complete inventor and catalog of NAS wide operational models, safety models and environmental models 

•	 Complete gap analysis of models 

•	 Developed requirements for models enhancements 

•	 Conduct limited NAS wide operational assessment of NextGen capabilities 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

In FY2011, FAA must continue developing/enhancing the modeling capabilities to support the NextGen solution sets. 

These modeling capabilities will support the agency in assessment capabilities feasibilities, safety and environmental 

impacts. The output from NAS wide operational assessments will support service units and programs in developing 

system and interface requirements, procedural and training requirements, cost and benefits assessments and 

documentations. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Refine requirements for models enhancements. 

•	 Continue to conduct a limited NAS wide operational assessment of NextGen capabilities. 

•	 Develop an initial NAS wide model(s) to support operational assessments of the Airport and Terminal 

Domains. 

•	 Conduct a limited safety assessment of NextGen capabilities. 

•	 Conduct a limited environmental assessment of NextGen capabilities. 

A-209 
 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

0 

7.500 

10.000 

40,000 

57,500 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts

Operation Assessments 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

7,500 

0 

0 

7,500 

0 

10,000 

0 

0

10,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

7,500 

7,500 

0 

0 

10,000 

10,000 

A-210 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08F – NextGen – Operational 

Assessments 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

NextGen Operational Assessments 

Gap Analyses 

Assess and inventory of existing NAS wide 

operational models. Safety and environmental 

models 

Develop requirements for model enhancements 

Model Developments 

Develop enhancements to NAS wide operational 

models, safety and environmental models 

Modeling and Simulations 

Model NextGen capabilities for the Airports and 

Terminal domains 

Model NextGen capabilities for the en route domain 

Conduct limited NAS wide safety assessment of 

NextGen capabilities 

Conduct limited NAS wide environmental assessment 

of NextGen capabilities 

Conduct limited NAS wide operational assessment of 

NextGen capabilities 

10,000 

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Total Budget Authority 10,000 7,500 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

In the F&E appropriations, personnel and other costs are budgeted in Activity 5, not the program budget line item.
 

A-211 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 1A08G NextGen - System Safety Management Transformation $18,000,000 

GOALS: 

The program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety and International Leadership. 

Intended Outcomes: This program enables NextGen by reducing the fatalities rate commensurate with the 

increases in capacity. By 2015, this program element will provide system knowledge to enable early identification of 

event precursors allowing intervention strategies to avoid accidents and incidents and to understand economic 

(including implementation) and operational impact (with respect to safety) of NextGen system alternatives. This will 

be done by encouraging and participating in global safety practices to ensure the safety of the traveling public and 

cargo. A cutting-edge operational data analysis capability will be developed that identifies safety issues. This 

research will promote expansion of the U.S. capability to meet national and international safety goals and objectives 

with less oversight of individual carriers. Understand which alternatives are most likely to decrease accidents rates 

as air traffic increases 3 times the current levels. 

Agency Outputs: The program will develop an infrastructure that enables the free sharing of de-identified, safety 

information that is derived from various government and industry sources in a protected, aggregated manner. This 

will be accomplished through the following transformation directions: 

•	 Develop a comprehensive, cooperative approach to safety across the system-of-systems at the national 

level. 

•	 Develop a comprehensive set of safety management principles and practices to establish a common 

framework for the aviation community: 

•	 Ensure an evolution of present certification, testing, and inspection of individual system elements to 

comprehensive approvals of operators’ and manufacturers’ safety management programs: 

•	 Promote safety through training, sharing of safety data, and dissemination of lessons learned 

•	 Establish a non-punitive reporting system, relieving concerns about corrective action processes. 

Research Goals: The approach includes developing the information analysis and sharing capabilities to support the 

FAA and NextGen safety initiatives; generating guidelines and shared capabilities to help stakeholders successfully 

implement their own safety management systems; and modeling activities to help measure progress toward 

achieving FAA goals. 

•	 2011: Develop proof of concept for NextGen including a prototype to implement on a trial basis with 

selected participants that involve a cross-section of air service providers. 

•	 2012: Validate the Net Enabled Operations (NEO) Architecture proof-of-concept for the sharing of aviation 

safety information among JPDO member agencies, participants, and stakeholders. 

•	 2013: Complete the Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) pre-implementation activities, 

including concept definition, with other JPDO member agencies, participants, and stakeholders. 

•	 2014: Demonstrate a National Level System Safety Assessment capability that will proactively identify 

emerging risk across the NextGen. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: Stakeholders are integral participants in the research effort by providing 

subject matter experts in the areas of safety, operations, design, production, and maintenance. In addition, 

stakeholders will share their data, processes, resources and tools with other participating stakeholders. 

Stakeholders include, but are not limited to the following: 

•	 Other government organizations, within and outside the JPDO 

•	 Aerospace manufacturers 

•	 Aerospace repair stations and maintenance organizations 

•	 Air traffic service providers (civilian and military) 

•	 Local and state governments (port authorities, funding offices) 

•	 Aerospace industry associations 

A-212 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Private, commercial, government, and military operators 

•	 International airworthiness authorities 

•	 Providers of other aviation products (e.g., ARINC, contract towers, weather service providers, Jeppesen) 

R&D Partnerships: R&D Partnerships have not been established yet but may include academia, government and 

foreign research and government organizations. 

Accomplishments: 

The following are planning activities, completed by the JPDO, that have provided support to this effort: 

•	 2004 Next Generation Air Transportation System Integrated Plan 

•	 2006 Progress Report to the Next Generation Air Traffic System Integrated Plan 

•	 2007 Safety Management System National Standard 

•	 2007 Initial Safety Culture Improvement Plan 

•	 2007 Safety IPT Program Plan that integrates planning and research activities 

•	 2007 Proposed ASIAS (Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing) Environment Concept of 

Operations 

• 2007 ASIAS Related Implementation Guidance Material 

FY 2009: 

Safety Management Systems (SMS) 

•	 Began developing selected prototype solutions based on National SMS requirements for management of 

safety risk of hazards that cross multiple agencies and users of the air transportation system. 

• Assess integration of industry SMS with FAA’s internal SMS and oversight responsibilities. 

Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) 

•	 Completed evaluation of current protection and assurance models and potential conflicts with privacy and 

consumer advocacy groups. 

•	 Completed enhanced ASIAS Concept of Operations (ConOps) document to include NextGen member agency 

aviation safety information needs, expanding upon the existing ASIAS ConOps. 

•	 Completed the baseline for the enhanced ASIAS, include information on infrastructure, data/information 

protection policies, information access policies, procedures, equipment, tools, processes, data architectures, 

resources and budgets, building upon existing ASIAS baseline. 

•	 Completed an analysis to identify any gaps between the existing ASIAS baseline and the enhanced ASIAS 

ConOps. 

•	 Completed interim implementation plan using expanded ASIAS ConOps and the results of the gap analysis. 

The interim plan will be used by JPDO member agencies to communicate required ASIAS implementation 

activities. 

•	 Developed an ASIAS data management plan that addresses data set integration, data standardization, 

taxonomy issues, data quality issues; including data quality assessments and mitigation analyses. 

•	 Used existing ASIAS ConOps and baseline and gap analysis products expand existing ASIAS architecture 

(AA) to meet Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) requirements. Develop and expand AA Framework and 

Standards documentation. 

•	 Conducted ASIAS policy research to support the development of ConOps for all future enhancements of 

ASIAS. 

Safety Risk Management (SRM) 

•	 Began evaluating NextGen processes, components, and their relationships and rules to identify 

characteristics of the air transportation system which should be assessed for risk (complexity, dynamic, etc) 

System Safety Assessment (SSA) 

•	 Developed prognostic safety assessment methods for systems and operations 

•	 Began baseline risk assessment for system-wide risks associated with current operations in (1) terminal area 

airspace, (2) transition airspace, or (3) en route airspace 

•	 Conducted initial safety assessments of proposed concepts, algorithms, and technologies to indicate the 

relative safety impacts with respect to the baseline system 

•	 Began developing a proof of concept of an assessment process, including data collection, risk baseline 

calculation, system impact assessment, development of a risk analysis function and application to a limited 

set of new NextGen technologies and procedures 

A-213 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Safety Management Systems (SMS) 

• Develop a detailed process that can be used to assess the Design Approval Holder compliance with SMS 

requirements. 

Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) 

•	 Begin making analytical text mining tools available for stakeholder use at the local level. 

•	 Execute recommendations from the FY09 data quality assessment and mitigation analysis across all primary 

data sources of ASIAS. 

•	 Further expand scope of ASAIS to include additional NextGen stakeholders and begin development of 

ConOps, baseline, gap analysis, and implementation plan for expanded version. 

•	 Begin integration of initial limited set of data from JPDO participating agencies into ASIAS, using suitable 

data protection policies and procedures. 

Safety Risk Management (SRM) 

• Complete identification of all of the AVS organizations that conduct analyses, their analytical approaches, 

data, methods, taxonomies and standards. 

System Safety Assessment (SSA) 

•	 Develop a baseline risk assessments for surface operations component of system-wide risks associated with 

current operations in all system components. 

•	 Conduct a proof of concept demonstration of an assessment process, including data collection, risk baseline 

calculation, system impact assessment, development of a risk analysis function and application to NextGen 

concept in surface operations. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FY 2011 research will continue development of methodologies that enable safety assessments of proposed 

NextGen concepts, algorithms, and technologies and provide system knowledge to understand economic (including 

implementation) and operational impact (with respect to safety) of NextGen system alternatives. Work will continue 

on a demonstration of a National Level System Safety Assessment working prototype that will proactively identify 

emerging risk across the proposed NextGen, with the intent of using what is learned in earlier years to define system 

performance requirements and provide the basis for a user and system performance requirements analysis. In 2011, 

refinement of a system-wide risk analysis of the NAS will lead to definition of system and user requirements to 

transition the baseline risk and forecasting capability into the ASIAS base platform. The research will continue to 

develop ASIAS capabilities to include enhancements that build upon and extend existing capabilities for managing 

and processing aviation performance data, advancing tools that convert both textural and numeric data into 

information, and creating visualization capabilities that aid casual/contributing factor analyses and risk assessment. 

NextGen member agency aviation safety information needs will be included. Research supports operational 

implementation by 2025. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Safety Management Systems (SMS) 

• Develop a method that can be used for continual surveillance of the Design Approval Holder compliance 

with SMS requirements. 

Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing (ASIAS) 

•	 Achieve capability across all commercial aviation nodes to fuse data from public and non-public sources 

while maintaining data protection. 

•	 Conduct a demonstration project with a limited set of JPDO participants for analysis of safety metrics and 

directed studies. 

• Integrate data from at least one international user of the US domestic airspace into ASIAS. 

Safety Risk Management (SRM) 

•	 Develop guidance on taxonomy, analytical methods and integrated evaluation applications that ensure that 

consistent risk assessment processes are employed throughout AVS. 

System Safety Assessment (SSA) 

•	 Develop a user and system requirements document for system baseline risk estimation. 

•	 Develop a user and system requirements document for system forecast capability, including standard user 

requirements for development and installation of this capability into the operational ASIAS platform. 

•	 Develop a user and system requirements definition of system safety metrics. 

A-214 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

16,300 

16,300 

18,000 

72,000 

122,600 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts 

System Safety Management 

Transformation 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

16,300 

0 

0 

16,300 

16,300 

0 

0 

16,300 

18,000 

0 

0

18,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

16,300 

16,300 

0 

0 

16,300 

16,300 

0 

0 

18,000 

18,000 

A-215 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08G - NextGen - System Safety 

Management Transformation 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

Product and Activities FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

System Safety Management Transformation 

Safety Management Systems 2,000 

Establish Design Approval Holder (DAH) SMS 

requirements, a process to assess DAH 

compliance with SMS requirements, and a ♦ ◊ ◊

method for continual surveillance of DAH SMS. 

Develop a detailed process that can be used to 

assess the DAH compliance with SMS ♦

requirements. 

Develop a method that can be used for 

continual surveillance of the DAH compliance ◊

with SMS requirements 

ASIAS 7,000 

ASIAS stakeholders able to conduct custom 

analyses using selected ASIAS provided fused ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

data and tools. 

Begin making analytical text mining tools 

available for stakeholder use at the local level. ♦

Achieve capability across all commercial 

aviation nodes to fuse data from public and ◊

non-public sources 

Expand ASIAS to achieve statistically significant 

coverage of NAS operations ♦ ◊ ◊

Begin integration of initial limited set of data 

from JPDO participating agencies into ASIAS ♦

Further expand scope of ASAIS to include 

additional NextGen stakeholders ♦

Conduct a demonstration project with a limited 

set of JPDO participants for analysis of safety ◊

metrics and directed studies 

Integrate data from at least one international 

user of the US domestic airspace into ASIAS ◊

Safety Risk Management 2,000 

Provide guidance on a unified framework in risk 

assessment and risk management (RARM) 

process and on a unified standard to improve ♦ ◊ ◊

RARM quality. 

Complete identification of all of the AVS 

organizations that conduct analyses, their 

analytical approaches, data, methods, ♦

taxonomies and standards 

Develop guidance on taxonomy, analytical 

methods and integrated evaluation applications ◊

System Safety Assessments 7,000 

Baseline risk assessments for system-wide risks 

associated with current operations in all system ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊

components 

Develop a baseline risk assessments for surface 

operations component ♦

Conduct a proof of concept demonstration of a 

NextGen concept in surface operations ♦

Develop a user and system requirements 

document for system baseline risk estimation ◊

Develop a user and system requirements 

document for system forecast capability ◊

Develop a user and system requirements 

definition of system safety metrics ◊

Total Budget Authority: 18,000 16,300 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-216 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Budget Item Program Title Budget Request 

1A08H NextGen - Staffed NextGen Towers (SNT) $6,000,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goal: Greater Capacity, Safety, and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: The air traffic in the United States (U.S.) is expected to increase significantly over the next 

several decades. Some high-end estimates indicate that by the year 2025 the total passenger enplanements may 

more than double and total aircraft operations may triple in comparison to the traffic today. In the next 10-15 years, 

most US tower facilities will reach the end of their useful life. The cost of new tower construction is escalating and is 

rapidly reaching a point where requirements are exceeding budgets. The FAA has to develop new operational 

concepts to increase capacity and address the predicted growth in airport tower operations while still addressing the 

cost prohibitive nature of replacing air traffic control towers with new towers. Runway safety (reduced runway 

incursions) also needs to be enhanced to keep pace with traffic growth. 

To achieve the end-state configuration for the proposed SNT capability, implementation will be done in three phases: 

Supplemental Configuration, Flexible Configuration, and Full SNT Configuration. The Supplemental SNT, Phase 1,
 

provides surface and tower services through the use of an integrated display certified for separation assurance based
 

on surveillance data as an enhancement to the current control paradigm. Under the Supplemental Configuration of
 

SNTs, ANSP personnel will remain in the existing tower cab and will use the integrated display to increase airport 

capacity under IMC. By operating in this initial phase of SNT, ANSP personnel will gain valuable experience in the 

use of the new display. The Flexible SNT, Phase 2, provides surface and tower services either from a ground-level 

SNT facility or from the tower cab. The SNT facility provides advanced surface management and decision support 

tools to the ANSP. Such an operation will give ANSP personnel confidence in SNT operation because the existing 

tower will be available as a backup to SNT. The Full SNT, Phase 3, provides surface and tower services exclusively 

from a ground-level SNT facility. The SNT facility provides advanced surface management and decision support 

tools.
 

Agency Outputs: The research will provide preliminary program requirements and documentation to support 

investment analysis activities including a business case analysis report, implementation strategy and planning, and 

updated enterprise architecture products and amendments.
 

Research Goals: The research goals include standards and alternatives development in support of an initial 

investment decision to ensure the timely implementation of SNT into the NAS. It will also fund the sustainment 

of the SNT equipment installed at DFW and allow for refinement and analysis to be conducted at the field site in 

support of the investment analysis activities. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: This is a collaborative project with ATO Terminal Systems Engineering 

Planning. Additional stakeholders identified and coordinated with include the ATO Terminal NextGen Procedures 

Integration Office and the NextGen Facilities Solution Set Coordinator. SNT will also utilize feedback from the Tower 

Flight Data Manager user working group. This feedback will be incorporated into future concept revisions and SNT 

prototypes. SNT activities such as human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulations and field demonstrations will utilize 

participants with appropriate experience and expertise. It is currently envisioned that this participation will be with 

current supervisors and certified professional controllers.
 

R&D Partnerships: The SNT program includes R&D partnerships with MIT Lincoln Labs and MITRE CAASD. NASA 

and universities may also be used to research specific human factors or operational/technical issues.
 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FY2011 activities will provide preliminary program requirements, operational procedures, cost benefit 

information, standards and alternatives in support of an investment analysis. In addition, SNT equipment installed at 

DFW will be maintained allowing for additional field demonstrations. 

A-217 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

• Develop a Business Case Analysis Report 

• Develop an Implementation Strategy and Planning 

• Identify Risk Metrics for initial investment analysis 

• Update Enterprise Architecture products and amendments 

• Maintain critical issues matrix 

• Maintain SNT equipment at DFW 

A-218 
 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

 Amount ($000) 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 0 

FY 2010 Enacted 0 

FY 2011 Request 6,000 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 0 

Total 6,000 

Budget Authority 

($000)

Contracts: 

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

NextGen - Staffed NextGen Towers 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

6,000 

6,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and 

Development ($000)

Basic 

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total

0 

0 

0 

0 

0

0 

6 ,000 

6,000 

A-219 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

1A08H – Staffed NextGen Towers 

(SNT) FY 2011 Program Schedule 

Products and Activities Request FY 

2010 

FY 

2011 

FY 

2012 

FY 

2013 

FY 

2014 

FY 

2015 

Staffed NextGen Towers 6,000 

Preliminary Program Requirements ◊ ◊ ◊

Business Case Analysis Report ◊ ◊

Implementation Strategy and Planning ◊ ◊ ◊

Risk Metrics ◊ ◊

Enterprise Architecture products and 

amendments ◊ ◊ ◊

Critical issues matrix ◊ ◊

Maintain SNT equipment at DFW 

◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ 

System Design ◊ ◊ ◊

Decision support tools ◊ ◊ ◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 

Total Budget Authority 6,000 0 6,000 0 0 0 0 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-220 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

F&E 4A09A Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development 

(CAASD) 

$23,564,000 

GOALS: 

The program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: The FAA applies knowledge and expertise developed at its Center for Advanced Aviation 

System Development (CAASD) to produce a safer, more efficient global air transportation system. Studies performed 

at CAASD comprise an essential component of FAA research, systems engineering, and technical analyses. CAASD, a 

Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC), is operated for the FAA by The MITRE Corporation 

under a Sponsoring Agreement. 

Agency Outputs: CAASD research and development identifies and tests new concepts and technologies for the 

National Airspace System (NAS) in the areas of aviation safety, performance-based navigation, airspace design, and 

traffic flow management that impact worldwide standards and applications. CAASD produces detailed reports and 

briefings on subjects across the entire spectrum of their work program. CAASD also develops sophisticated models 

and prototypes to test concepts and/or systems proposed for use in the management and control of air traffic. 

Presently, some of these new products are helping to shape a Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) 

that will be safer, more efficient, and more readily available. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: The FAA responds to a constant challenge to increase safety in the 

nation’s civil aviation system while increasing capacity and efficiency. CAASD is playing an instrumental role in the 

achievement of the NextGen goals and objectives, providing key operational and technological inputs based on its 

many years of research and analysis in areas such as Air Traffic Management (ATM), communications, navigation, 

and surveillance operations/capabilities. CAASD contributes directly to the goals and activities of the RTCA Air Traffic 

Advisory Committee, which is the principal forum to bring industry, aircraft operators, and FAA representatives 

together to define the operational needs and to identify an affordable NAS Architecture capable of satisfying those 

needs. Additionally, CAASD efforts contribute to the FAA’s global aviation goals and the goals of the International 

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) through international aviation standards development activities. 

Accomplishments: CAASD supported the following accomplishments: 

•	 Enhanced the en route Trainer prototype with additional student performance measures and Intelligent 

Training Systems (ITS) capabilities that include additional real-time performance feedback and skill 

development aids. These prototype enhancements will be assessed at ZID during developmental training. 

The enhancements’ evaluation data supports en route Trainer prototype capability technology transfer and 

the en route Trainer investment decision. 

•	 Developed additional capabilities (technology, tools, and strategies) that help air traffic controllers perform 

tasks for the mid-term and post mid-term concept of operations. Conducted HITL evaluations with 

operational personnel. Evaluations and analyses of future concepts and capabilities provide operational 

understanding for deciding the evolution of capabilities toward NextGen. 

•	 Developed a concept of operations for en route wake turbulence avoidance and assessed the potential 

impact of integrating wake turbulence separation standards in the automation for conflict probe, conflict 

alert, or as a distinct capability. 

•	 Conducted experiments in collaboration with other research and stakeholder organizations to improve the 

FAA’s understanding of key benefits enablers for the future Traffic Flow Management (TFM) and NextGen 

operations. These experiments provided insight into the full benefits potential for future concepts and help 

identify concepts and capabilities holding the greatest promise for NAS stakeholders. 

•	 Identified technical, operational, and safety risks and mitigations associated with implementing winddependent wake departure procedures nationally. This work helps with the implementation of new 

procedures that will safely increase departure capacity at relevant high density airports. 

•	 Provided enhanced en route data for the identification of major issues and to facilitate investment and 

resource decisions. 

•	 Provided technical and systems engineering analysis of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) operations 

concerning detect, sense and avoid concepts, air-ground communications requirements, and national and 

A-221 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

international standards for development and operation, resulting in integrated guidance to commercial and 

government operators of UASs. 

•	 Modeled and assessed the impact of procedures for new FY 2009 traffic management capabilities, airspace 

changes, and emerging operational issues that require procedure enhancements to provide better efficiency. 

•	 Refined and validated other advanced, high-benefit NextGen cockpit-based ADS-B applications that will 

provide the greatest benefits to the FAA and user community. Applications included call sign, oceanic – intrail, and extensions of CDTI Assisted Visual Separation in other conditions. 

•	 Researched and explored sector and airspace management concepts (e.g. dynamic sectorization) in the 

mid-term for operational efficiency, productivity, and workload balancing to enable national decisions on 

airspace policy and facility structure 

•	 Performed analyses that characterize the performance of critical capabilities in various operational conditions 

for the enroute mid-term concept. These detailed algorithmic analyses determined the sensitivity of key 

performance metrics to algorithm parameters (e.g., problem resolution). Such analyses and evaluations of 

future concepts and capabilities provide operational understanding for deciding the evolution path of 

NextGen capabilities. 

•	 Developed detailed cross-domain operational and technical evolution plans for transitioning to proposed 

Performance-Based Air Traffic Management concepts for the mid-term. Assessed user benefits (e.g. 

capacity) that may be realized from the proposed concepts. Initiated development of terminal concept 

extensions to the current scope of the overall Performance-Based Air Traffic Management concept that 

could further enable the transition to NextGen. 

•	 Developed and evaluated an evolving set of simulation capabilities and curriculum changes to be integrated 

into the overall controller training process to; improve the process; improve the quality and consistency of 

training; reduce the training time and costs to certify a controller; and facilitate a more effective 

implementation of the NextGen solutions. 

•	 Conducted experiments in collaboration with other research and stakeholder organizations to improve the 

FAA’s understanding of key benefits enablers for the future TFM and NextGen operations. 

•	 Identified gaps in the TFM future vision, particularly how it leads to the NextGen. Started to address the 

identified gaps through concept development, refinement, and evaluation. 

•	 Completed a benefits and safety assessment for mid-term wake vortex procedures for departures under predefined wind conditions. 

•	 Conducted several HITLS and analyses further refining the next stage of Merging and Spacing 

(M&S)/Continuous Descent Arrival (CDA) concepts, algorithms, and simulations. These analyses allowed the 

applications’ benefits to be expanded, providing additional benefits to airlines as well as the FAA. 

•	 Performed HITLS and analyses in support of the Enhanced Airport Surface Alerting application. This 

application is being researched as a future cockpit-based application that will reduce runway incursions and 

thus enhance safety on the airport surface. 

R&D Partnerships: Extensive partnerships have been forged with industry suppliers, aircraft operators, other 

government entities and other non-profit research institutions through the CAASD work program. These 

relationships include: 

•	 Air Force Research Laboratory (UAS collision avoidance technology); 

•	 Cargo Airlines Association, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (research on ADS-B and its use for 

situational awareness [traffic and weather information in the cockpit] and self-spacing); 

•	 Commercial avionics industry (technology transfer of UAT Beacon Radio technology); 

•	 New Mexico State University Physical Sciences Laboratory (research on UAS operations in the NAS); 

•	 University of Alaska at Anchorage (ADS-B integration on UAS and operational applications); 

•	 Aurora Flight Sciences (ADS-B integration on UAS and operational applications); 

•	 University of North Dakota (research on ground radar surveillance of UAS); 

•	 University of Virginia (software assurance); 

•	 North Carolina Department of Transportation Aviation Division (ADS-B technology demonstrations and operational applications); 

•	 EUROCONTROL (future ATM research information exchange and flight object interoperability proposed standard); 

•	 Joint University Program (research on National Airspace System capacity and NextGen concepts); 

•	 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, International Center for Air Transportation (UAS and National Airspace System capacity research); 

A-222 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 MIT Lincoln Laboratory (wake turbulence mitigation, safety analyses, UAS, and Traffic Flow Management under weather uncertainty); 

•	 NASA Langley (wake vortex and surface issues - capacity improvement); 

•	 The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) (aviation weather impact and mitigation, and weather integration); 

•	 United Parcel Service (research on techniques for merging and spacing); 

•	 NASA Ames (continuous descent arrivals and merging & spacing concepts, safety data analysis); 

•	 Monash University, Purdue University (system-wide economic modeling for aviation); 

•	 The National Center of Excellence for Aviation Operations Research (NEXTOR) (National Airspace System 

capacity analyses and operations research); 

•	 George Mason University, Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science (economic analyses); 

•	 The Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (operational evaluation of Air Traffic Management research topics and environmental research); 

•	 Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction (PARTNER) (environmental research); 

•	 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (system capacity analysis & modeling); 

•	 Santa Fe Institute (research on complexity and complex systems engineering); 

•	 Embry Riddle Aeronautical University, Lockheed-Martin, NASA Ames & Langley, FAA Technical Center, Boeing, Federal Express, Crown Consulting, and Raytheon (development of the AviationSimNet standard for distributed Air Traffic Management simulation); and 

•	 Airliner Cabin Environment Research (ACER) (cabin sensor prototyping and research). 

In addition, CAASD has collaborative relationships with a number of the other R&D Programs described in this Plan. 

These relationships include Airspace Redesign, Aviation Safety Risk Analysis, Joint Planning and Development Office, 

NextGen-New ATM Requirement, Runway Incursion Reduction, Wake Turbulence, Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

Research, and the William J. Hughes FAA Technical Center. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Expand the scope of terminal training ITS evaluation activity to include field evaluation activities at a second 

site in order to validate adaptability and demonstrate shorter training cycle times as a cost savings to the 

FAA. Conduct a high level needs assessment for the FAA’s TRACON facilities to help prioritize where to 

deploy terminal training ITS systems. 

•	 Develop and refine the terminal automation roadmap that aligns with the emerging NextGen 

Implementation Plans and concepts. The roadmap will need to accommodate advancements in RNAV/RNP 

concepts, Big Airspace, Virtual Tower, TFM advanced concepts, high density airport operations, and 

increasingly complex wake vortex separation algorithms. 

•	 Demonstrate the benefits of advanced intelligent training systems (ITS) and curriculum changes at different 

phases of en route training. Continue transfer of validated ITS capabilities as available. Technology 

transfer products will reduce acquisition risk and support more efficient en route controller training. 

•	 Model and assess the impact of procedures for new FY 2010 traffic management capabilities, airspace 

changes, and emerging operational issues that require procedure enhancements for improved efficiency. 

•	 Provide technical and system engineering analysis of UAS operations concerning detect, sense and avoid 

concepts, air-ground communications, requirements, and national and international standards for 

development and operation, resulting in integrated guidance to commercial and U.S. government operators 

of UAS. 

•	 Provide technical and system engineering analyses and an infrastructure and capabilities that enable the 

sharing of de-identified, aggregate safety information, supporting expanded and more effective safety 

analysis of U.S. aviation called for by the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST). Establish an 

architecture that supports scores of simultaneous data queries from approved industry studies as well as 

automated risk detection applications. The initiative, called Aviation Safety Information Analysis and 

Sharing (ASIAS), will result in early detection of emerging safety trends and permit early intervention by 

FAA and industry. 

•	 Provide detailed concept and capability assessments as input to the FAA’s selection process for the third 

iteration (i.e. WP3) of TFM system enhancements. Quantify FAA efficiency and productivity benefits 

resulting from the down-selected list of TFM operational enhancements. This will allow the FAA to better 

justified planned TFM F&E expenditures and provide additional context for the investment decision expected 

in FY 2010. 

•	 Provide initial data from the terminal analysis core capability assessment to identify major issues and to 

facilitate investment and resource decisions. 

A-223 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

CAASD provides independent advanced research and development required by the FAA to obtain technical analyses, 

prototypes and operational concepts needed to fulfill the vision for the FAA’s Flight Plan, the NextGen Integrated 

Plan, and the NAS enterprise architecture. CAASD has unique knowledge, skills, and capabilities in aviation research, 

systems engineering and analysis. Its expertise is critical to the FAA in transforming the nation’s air transportation 

system in an effective and timely manner. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Conduct technology transfers for validated ITS capabilities and other advanced simulation capabilities to 

enable the FAA to acquire a permanent capability for all of its busy Terminal Radar Approach Controls 

(TRACONS). These technology transfers will reduce acquisition risk and support improved, more efficient 

en-route controller training. 

•	 Further develop and evaluate the student model of advanced Intelligent Training Systems (ITS) for ongoing 

demonstrations and technology transfer to enable streamlined, effective training of new ATC automation 

capabilities and procedure changes that are necessary to transform training and support introduction of 

NextGen capabilities. 

•	 Model and assess the impact of procedures for new FY 2011 traffic management capabilities, airspace 

changes, and emerging operational issues that require procedure enhancements for improved efficiency. 

•	 Conduct multi-year research into capabilities that enable decision makers to understand and visualize the 

relative risk of individual UAS flight profiles. In FY2011, focus is on updating a baseline prototype UAS flight 

profile model. This work will result in greater UAS access to the NAS. 

•	 Extend technical and system engineering analysis of UAS operations concerning detect, sense and avoid 

requirements, air-ground communications, and national and international standards for development and 

operation. 

•	 Provide technical and system engineering analysis to evolve the infrastructure and capabilities that enable 

the sharing of de-identified, aggregate safety information, supporting expanded and more effective safety 

analysis of U.S. aviation called for by the CAST. Expand the architecture that supports scores of 

simultaneous data queries from approved industry studies as well as automated risk detection applications. 

Integrate data from foreign carriers, original equipment manufacturers, and JPDO member agencies into the 

ASIAS system. 

•	 Refine the modernized TFM system’s future concepts and capabilities for use by FAA as inputs planning and 

for future technology transfers. Increased technology transfer from research into development will reduce 

the risk of FAA’s development activities. 

•	 Provide data from the terminal analysis core capability to identify major issues for selected terminal facilities 

and to facilitate investment and resource decisions. 

A-224 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

259,664 

23,944 

23,564 

106,317 

413,489 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Center for Advanced Aviation Systems 

Development (CAASD) 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

30,100 

0 

0 

30,100 

24,640 

0 

0 

24,640 

22,932 

0 

0 

22,932 

23,266 

0 

0 

23,266 

23,564 

0 

0

23.564 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

30,100 

30,100 

0 

0 

24,640 

24,640 

0 

0 

22,932 

22,932 

0 

0 

23,266 

23,266 

23,564 

23,564 

A-225 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

4A09A - Center for Advanced 

Aviation System Development 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Research, Engineering and Development 

Evolve/perform next phases of merging and 

spacing, cockpit display of traffic information 

assisted visual separation, and continuous descent 

arrivals simulations 

Conduct analyses of key requirements issues (e.g. 

system safety) and plan for NAS evolution to 

inform NextGen decisions related to productivity 

improvements, including defining functional and 

system requirements and NAS architecture changes 

Develop and validate student controller 

performance measures, real time performance 

feedback and skill development aids related to the 

evaluation of controller training technologies 

Conduct HITLS and analyses examining the 

potential benefits to and operational changes for 

ATC as the result of the eventual deployment of 

ADS-B on the ground and in the cockpit in the 

near-, mid-, and far-term 

Advance the maturity of TFM concepts to account 

for uncertainty in predictions and decision making 

by developing algorithms and prototype capabilities 

and conducting (HITL) evaluations 

Provide assessments of TFM concept maturity, 

operational feasibility and implementation risks, 

including identification of cross-domain 

dependencies. 

Develop an aviation environmental portfolio tool 

that allows the FAA to evaluate the impact of 

environmental policies on aviation demand and on 

the national economy. 

Develop information derived from enhanced data 

to address key FAA issues and inform decisions. 

Enhance and extend terminal performance data 

used in FAA operational and investment decision 

making. 

Air Traffic Operational Research and 

Special Situation Support 

Provide technical and operational expertise to 

enhance the quality and efficiency TRACON 

controller training through the use of advanced 

training technologies 

Provide technical and operational insight into 

systems that can be used to safely permit increase 

productivity and capacity in the terminal area. 

Determine the potential safety risks, operational 

concepts, and standards associated with increased 

unmanned aircraft system access to the NAS 

Provide technical and system engineering analysis, 

evolution planning, data and analytical model 

integration, requirement analysis, and validation 

experimentation for ASIAS. 

Total Budget Authority 

23,564 

23,564 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

23,944 

◊

◊

◊

◊

23,564 

◊

◊

◊

◊

23,594 

◊

◊

◊

◊

24,148 

◊

◊

◊

24,703 

◊

◊

◊

33,872 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

IN THE F&E APPROPRIATIONS, PERSONNEL AND OTHER COSTS ARE BUDGETED IN ACTIVITY 5, NOT THE PROGRAM BUDGET LINE ITEM. 

A-226 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

AIP N/A Airport Cooperative Research – Capacity $5,000,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership. 

Intended Outcomes: The objective of the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) is to carry out applied 

research on problems that are shared by airport operators and are too difficult for individual airports to solve on their 

own. Additionally, ACRP studies issues that are not being adequately addressed by existing Federal research 

programs. ACRP undertakes research in a variety of airport subject areas, including design, construction, 

environment, maintenance, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, administration, and operations. 

Congress established ACRP through the Vision 100–Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 (Vision 100). As 

called for in Vision 100, a Memorandum of Agreement was developed to provide organizational guidance for the 

three main entities that fund, administer, and oversee ACRP. The FAA funds the program. The National Academies, 

acting through its Transportation Research Board (TRB), administers the program. The ACRP Oversight Committee 

(AOC), an independent governing board comprised of airport managers and other aviation officials appointed by the 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation, selects all of the program’s research projects. 

Agency Outputs: The ACRP-Capacity program conducts research to provide better airport planning and design. 

Future aviation demand will rely on the ability of airports to accommodate increased aircraft operations, larger 

aircraft, and more efficient passenger throughput. This program will prepare for those future needs while 

simultaneously solving near-term and current airport capacity issues. 

Research Goals: TRB annually solicits the aviation community for input on future research topics and industry 

concerns. New research priorities are therefore generated on a yearly basis under the direction of the AOC. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport 

professionals, air carriers, shippers, State and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, airport 

users, educational institutions, other research organizations, and the general flying public. These stakeholders 

generate project ideas, guide projects while they are under way, and serve as the ultimate end-users of the final 

research products. 

Representatives from these organizations also serve on the AOC where they help select ACRP research projects. 

Federal representation on the AOC is comprised of the FAA, along with NASA and the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). The aviation industry is further represented on the AOC through the participation of the following 

groups: the Airports Council International (ACI), the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National 

Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), and the Air Transport Association (ATA). 

R&D Partnerships: ACRP is a cooperative partnership with airports and federal agencies to conduct airport 

research. The research will be conducted by universities, airports, and companies within the aviation industry. 

Accomplishments 

FY 2009: 

Fast, Flexible, and Efficient
 

•	 Developing a guidebook for airport capital project delivery systems. This research reviews and assesses 

delivery acceleration strategies, techniques, and practices at program and project levels, from conception to 

completion. The research product serves as a comprehensive source of information on strategies, 

techniques, and practices that may be used to accelerate delivery and avoid delay throughout the entire 

process. (ACRP Report 21, formerly 1-05) 

•	 Generating a unified database on passenger-related processing rates in an electronic spreadsheet or 

database format that is useful to planners, designers, and other interested parties. These results provide 

guidance on how best to collect passenger-related processing point data. (ACRP Report 23, formerly 3-02) 

•	 Developing guidelines for the collection and use of geospatially referenced data for use in the management 

of airfield pavements. Such guidelines promote compatibility of data collected at different facilities; improve 

A-227 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

integration, sharing, and analysis of data; provide an effective means for economically addressing issues of 

common concern; and help better manage investments in airfield pavements. (ACRP 09-01) 

•	 Producing a guidebook that airport operators can use to compare and contrast various parking strategies 

and supporting technologies and then evaluate each for application to individual airport situations and 

demographics. The guidebook describes airport-parking strategies, categorizes each strategy, offers 

methods to evaluate each strategy, matches existing and emerging technologies that support each strategy, 

and provides guidance on how to implement each strategy and its supporting technology. (ACRP 10-03) 

Human-Centered Design 

•	 Developing an intuitive, easy-to-use guidebook of best practices for developing, soliciting, and managing 

airport agreements for use by airports of all sizes. The guidebook includes an interactive CD-ROM that 

contains templates with options and alternatives for each type of agreement. These include: agreements for 

airport use (airline and non-airline); design and construction; commercial development; commercial 

operations; management; intergovernmental relations; real estate; maintenance and operations of buildings 

and grounds; utilities; administrative services; military use; airport “through-the-fence” operations; 

common-use facilities; ground transportation; concessions for a variety of passenger services (rental car, 

parking, retail/food/beverage); and others as appropriate. (ACRP 01-02) 

•	 Producing a handbook of airport operational and financial data that provides useful information and 

resources for airports as they implement systems necessary to effectively meet operational needs, make 

informed business decisions, and forecast operational and financial trends. This research: (1) assesses the 

current state of the industry related to managing appropriate data from business-related financial and 

operational activity, (2) develops guidelines and current best practices to fully integrate these data and the 

business-critical information that they indicate, (3) develops functional specifications for procuring openarchitecture systems for integrating these data, and (4) describes a vision of an airport with fully integrated 

business, operational, and financial information systems. (ACRP Report 13, formerly 01-03) 

•	 Developing a guidebook for airport-user survey methodology. This research examines issues such as: the 

selection of sample size and appropriate sample design; how to handle responses from large parties, such 

as tour groups or sports teams that have been encountered in the survey; and how to appropriately weight 

individual survey responses in presenting the survey results. (ACRP 03-04) 

•	 Developing a user–friendly spreadsheet model (or models), with an accompanying manual, to analyze issues 

common to airport passenger terminal planning and design. This research produces a compendium that 

identifies the types, scopes, and availability of spreadsheet and discrete event models that can be used by 

airport operators for airport passenger terminal planning and design. The prime users of this project’s 

products are intended to be employees of airport operators who are involved in terminal planning and 

design. (ACRP 07-04) 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Fast, Flexible, and Efficient 

•	 Developing passenger space allocation guidelines for terminal functional areas. The guidelines are based on 

level-of-service (LOS) scales developed from data collected at a sample of 10 airports. The guidelines will 

be used by airport operators, planners, and consultants in making decisions on development of new 

terminals and renovation of existing facilities. (ACRP 03-05) 

•	 Preparing a comprehensive guidebook for planning and implementing automated people mover (APM) 

systems at airports. The guidebook includes a CD-ROM with interactive tools designed to assist airports to 

plan and implement an APM system. The scope of this research includes APM systems that provide 

transportation on airport grounds as well as access to remote facilities (e.g., airport parking, car rental 

facilities, hotels, off-airport public transportation, and other related activity centers). (ACRP 03-06) 

•	 Developing a user-friendly guidebook for measuring performance of automated people mover (APM) 

systems at airports. The guidebook identifies a set of performance measures and associated data 

requirements for APM operators at airports to assess and improve performance, compare APM systems, and 

plan and design future APM systems. The performance measures address the efficiency, effectiveness, and 

quality of APM systems at airports, particularly focusing on impacts on APM passengers and on airport 

performance. (ACRP 03-07) 

•	 Developing integrated strategic actions to enhance decision making to address the constrained aviation 

system capacity and growing travel demand in the high-density, multijurisdictional, multimodal, coastal 

mega-regions along the east and west coasts. The research results will be used by transportation agencies 

and operators, as well as for informing public officials at the federal, state, and local levels. (ACRP 03-10) 

A-228 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Preparing a guidebook enabling airport operators to define more effectively airport peak-period and 

operational profiles necessary for facility and environmental planning. This guidebook includes an analytical 

toolbox and associated application and implementation procedures. The guidebook will help airport facility 

managers and operators evaluate (a) capacity requirements and operational improvements (e.g., examine 

how common-use or preferential gate use can accommodate increased passenger demand); (b) implications 

of designing facilities to accommodate alternative peak periods (e.g., those occurring more or less 

frequently); and (c) specific facility requirements as a function of larger-scale control totals (e.g., annual 

passengers or aircraft operations). (ACRP 03-12) 

•	 Preparing a comprehensive guidebook that serves as a decision-support tool for planning, designing, and 

evaluating passenger conveyance systems at airports. This research examines how passenger conveyance 

systems operate and provide service to different areas within the airport environment. For the purpose of 

this research project, passenger conveyance components include, but are not limited to, escalators, 

elevators, moving walkways, wheelchairs, and passenger assist vehicles/carts. (ACRP 03-14) 

•	 Developing a handbook that airport operators can use to assess the access impacts of constrained public 

and/or employee parking at airports. For airports where constrained parking exists or is expected, the 

handbook provides guidance on how to quantify the impacts of potential changes in airport customer and 

employee access resulting from strategies such as changes in parking rates, the provision of new or 

improved public or private transportation services, and the introduction of remote parking facilities. The 

handbook allows airport operators to better understand, anticipate, and evaluate changes in airport parking 

strategies at airports where constrained parking exists or is expected. (ACRP 10-06) 

•	 Reporting on the state of airport system planning practices through a review of literature and survey of 

state aviation agencies, regional planning organizations, and the FAA. The primary audience for this 

synthesis report includes airport operators, regional planning agencies, state aviation agencies, and the 

national and regional FAA staff. (ACRP Synthesis 14, formerly 11-03 / S03-04) 

Human-Centered Design 

•	 Developing a practical, easy-to-use guidebook for managing small airports. The guidebook is designed to be 

useful to owners, operators, managers, and policy makers of small airports. To achieve this objective, the 

research: (1) identifies fundamental management principles, (2) identifies best practices for effective use 

and management of resources and facilities, and (3) presents the information in an attractive, convenient 

format. A major element of this research is the identification of best practices that achieve safe and 

efficient operations while maintaining compliance with regulatory requirements and federal obligations. 

(ACRP Report 16, formerly 01-01) 

•	 Developing a guidebook for small airport marketing, external communications, and public information. The 

guidebook describes effective airport marketing practices, provides guidance in their use, and assists 

airports in developing an airport marketing strategy. (ACRP 01-04) 

•	 Producing a practical, user-friendly guidebook that: (1) assists airport management in understanding the 

practical benefits of a performance-measurement system; (2) identifies methods to help airports discern 

how well they are meeting their customer and stakeholder expectations; (3) guides the development and 

implementation of the most appropriate performance-measurement system; and (4) provides examples of 

key performance indicators, and how to incorporate them into a system. Performance-measurement 

systems resulting from this guidebook enhances the decision-making process to improve service and 

efficiency. (ACRP 01-06) 

•	 Developing a resource manual for airport and airline professionals that: (1) describes the current range of 

practices and characteristics of airport and airline relationships and their relative, underlying airport and 

airline business models; (2) identifies and briefly summarize rates and charges policies and guidance; (3) 

identifies, compares, and contrasts airport and airline critical issues, objectives, and considerations inherent 

in airport/airline agreements or other business arrangements; and (4) identifies and synthesizes the tradeoffs and linkages among the critical issues as they relate to common objectives for airport/airline 

negotiations. (ACRP 01-07) 

•	 Developing a guidebook for airport management and other relevant stakeholders to implement leasing, 

property management, and development agreements in the context of airport improvement and expansion 

plans. The research identifies and defines best management practices used in formulating airport leasing 

and development policies to support public and private investments for aeronautical and non-aeronautical 

uses at airports. This research assists airport proprietors in making planning, policy, and financial decisions 

that will protect both the federal and local investment in the national airport system. (ACRP 01-08) 

A-229 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Preparing a guidebook that describes techniques that airports and communities can employ in their efforts 

to develop passenger air service. The guide includes fundamental information to assist airports and the 

communities they serve to understand the nature of ASD within the general context of the airport, 

community, and airline business perspectives. (ACRP 03-08) 

•	 Preparing a practical guidebook for airport professionals, airport policy-making organizations, and industry 

associations that contains procedures, tools, and benefits for the strategic planning process. The guidebook 

addresses the use of continuous strategic planning and considers relevant policy, management, and 

technical issues at airports, recognizing local, national, and global uncertainties. (ACRP 03-09) 

System Knowledge 

•	 Developing a guidebook that defines and explains the various criteria used to identify objects that affect the 

airspace needed by an airport for its current and future operations, as well as the interrelationships between 

these criteria. The guidebook is intended to be used by airport operators, consultants, and surrounding 

communities in understanding the airport’s current and future airspace needs and how objects individually 

and collectively can affect the safety, utility, and efficiency of their airport. (ACRP 03-13) 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FAA has requested $15 million for ACRP in FY 2011 as part of the Airport Improvement Program. Of the total 

amount, $5 million will be provided for each of the 3 ACRP program areas of Safety, Capacity, and Environment. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Fast, Flexible, and Efficient 

•	 Producing a computer model that can be used by airport operators and planners to examine the impact of 

jet fuel price on supply and demand for air service at commercial service airports, and the resulting impact 

on airport development and finance. This model will be constructed using a software platform generally 

available at nominal cost, using specified airport parameters drawn from a broad list of relevant categories 

(ACRP 3-15) 

•	 Developing a guidebook to assist airport planners with airfield and airspace capacity evaluation. The 

guidebook addresses airport airfield and airspace capacity planning at all types of airports. The research 

results will present capacity modeling guidelines that will improve the decision-making process for 

determining the appropriate level of modeling sophistication for a given planning study or capital 

improvement project and make the process more consistent from airport to airport. (ACRP 3-17) 

•	 Documenting lessons learned during recent airport facilities openings so that effective airport terminal 

facility activation practices can be identified and shared across the industry. The target audience for this 

synthesis is terminal operators and those involved in the facility activation process. The research effort will 

include a literature review of facility activation techniques and interview of ten or more airport terminal 

operators that have recently opened a facility in order to identify steps undertaken for successful 

activations. (ACRP 11-03/S08-01) 

Human-Centered Design 

•	 Developing a handbook that identifies best management practices in all phases of development, 

management, financing, and oversight of airport capital plans and includes those elements, steps, and key 

milestones that are necessary to create a collaborative business process that ensures the consistent flow of 

information and maintains the capital plan. This includes reporting, updating, and tracking financial and 

individual project information and identifying the processes that facilitate communication between internal 

and external stakeholders (e.g., airlines, FAA, local and state officials). The handbook should also identify 

and translate the elements of the collaborative business process so that it can be incorporated into an 

information technology solution. (ACRP 1-10) 

•	 Develop a resource manual to help airports and managers understand market potential and implementation 

requirements for an effective in-terminal concession program while recognizing evolving challenges. This 

Resource Manual will be a tool for use by airport staff involved in and responsible for the business decisions 

affecting the development of concession programs and plans. It will also serve as an informational tool for 

other stakeholders, including but not limited to, airport board members, airlines involved in creating 

concession programs and concessionaires. (ACRP 1-11) 

•	 Develop an easy-to-read primer that speaks to two distinct audiences, the airport’s executive manager and 

the information technology (IT) professional, in order to facilitate mutual understanding of each other’s 

perspective of the fundamental considerations for IT at the airport. Fundamental considerations include 

functional architectural concepts, functional and strategic objectives, mutual and disparate expectations, 

A-230 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

total costs (i.e., life-cycle, acquisition, implementation, activation, operation, and maintenance), benefits, 

consequences, priorities, risks, and other relevant considerations. (ACRP 1-12) 

•	 Providing airport operators and users with a comprehensive tool for identifying potential sources of funding 

for airport environmental projects. The synthesis report will provide airport operators with a series of 

funding alternatives to facilitate important environmental projects being carried out that would otherwise be 

postponed. The research will highlight programs that airport operators can access for funding, but other 

programs found of interest to airlines, concessionaires, and lessees will be included to the extent identified. 

(ACRP 11-03/S02-05) 

•	 Collecting and reporting on existing, common and successful methods and resources currently available to 

develop and train personnel for aviation and airport professions. The report will also identify additional 

research efforts needed to increase the number of experienced job seekers in the aviation industry and 

provide the entire industry a continuous resource of interns available to mentor and aid in meeting growing 

workload demands. The report will include a literature review, survey, and evaluation of survey results and 

a summary of common practices to develop and train personnel. (ACRP 11-03/S06-01) 

•	 Describing the current state of ramp operational and safety techniques available to airports and their 

tenants, including airlines, ground handling agents, fuelers, caterers and others having significant levels of 

ramp activity. The synthesis report will provide a compilation of common practices currently in effect, rather 

than undertake any original research on potential future techniques. (ACRP 11-03/S10-05) 

•	 Documenting how airports implement a pavement maintenance management program, including inspection 

and tracking pavement condition, scheduling maintenance, identifying necessary funds, and treating 

distresses in asphalt and concrete pavements. This research effort will document effective practices and 

differences in maintenance practices by pavement type, airport category and geographical location (e.g., 

weather and availability of materials). (ACRP 11-03/S09-02) 

System Knowledge 

•	 Developing, for a wide variety of types and sizes of airports, a resource manual with a searchable (by 

airport type and size) CD-ROM that contains an extensive list of airport performance indicators, categorized 

by functional type, and identifies a subset of fundamental “core” performance indicators within each 

category. The resource manual will present and define each indicator, suggest methods for collecting 

relevant data for each indicator, and generally, support the implementation of an airport’s performance 

measurement system as intended in ACRP Project 01-06, "Guidebook for Developing an Airport Performance 

Measurement System." (ACRP 1-09) 

•	 Prepare a compilation and analysis of economic and operational data for airport benchmarking purposes. 

These data could be used as part of cross sectional and time series analyses. This would permit measures of 

relative efficiency and performance to be developed. The output of this would be both a descriptive financial 

summary of the U.S. airport industry as well as specific analyses related to cost and performance for this 

important sector of the economy. (ACRP 1-13) 

•	 Preparing a handbook for airport operators and planners to (1) identify issues and requirements relating to 

water resources (including quality and quantity, wetlands, and groundwater) that may affect the 

environmental review process linked to airport capacity improvements; (2) describe potential effects of not 

adequately addressing these issues and requirements; and (3) develop strategies airports can employ to 

implement improvements in a timely and cost-effective manner while protecting water resources. (ACRP 2­

11) 

•	 Developing a guidebook for use by airport operators and other air cargo industry stakeholders that provides 

tools and techniques for measuring existing and future economic impacts of air cargo activities at a national, 

regional, and local airport level in the context of changing market, financial, security, and other conditions. 

Critical issues in measuring economic impacts of air cargo activity at a given airport include, but are not 

limited to: (1) size of the air cargo market, (2) source and purpose of air cargo activity, (3) effect of 

changing fuel prices, (4) understanding complex linkages to changing economic conditions, (5) effect of 

increasing security requirements, and (6) availability and comparative cost of alternate cargo shipment 

modes. (ACRP 3-16) 

A-231 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

19,950 

5,000 

5,000 

20,000 

49,950 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Airport Cooperative Research - Capacity 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0

5,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

A-232 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Airport Cooperative Research - 

Capacity 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Airport Cooperative Research Program 

Capacity-Related Research 

Conduct research on selected AOC proposals 

Airport Parking Strategies and Technologies 

Aviation Capacity in Coastal Mega-Regions 

Automated People Mover Planning and 

Performance 

Airport Peak-Period Operational Profiles 

Airport Management – Contracts /Software/ 

Revenue 

Small Airport Management BMPs 

Airport System Planning Practices 

Developing Airport Strategic Plans 

Small Airport Marketing Techniques 

Airport Performance Measurement Systems 

Airport Development and Oil Price 

Uncertainty 

Airport Airfield Capacity Analysis 

Capital Projects – Best Practices 

Airport Concession Planning 

Airport IT Primer 

Airport Performance Indicators 

Compilation of Airport Benchmarking Data 

Airport Privatization 

Airport Alternative Revenue Strategies 

Asset Management 

GA Business Planning 

Business and Operational Continuity 

Aircraft and Airfield Delay 

5,000 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊ ◊ ◊

Total Budget Authority 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL 

BUDGET PROCESS. 

A-233 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

AIP N/A Airport Cooperative Research – Environment $5,000,000 

GOALS: 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership. 

Intended Outcomes: The objective of the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) is to carry out applied 

research on problems that are shared by airport operators and are too difficult for individual airports to solve on their 

own. Additionally, ACRP studies issues that are not being adequately addressed by existing Federal research 

programs. ACRP undertakes research in a variety of airport subject areas, including design, construction, 

environment, maintenance, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, administration, and operations. 

Congress established ACRP through the Vision 100–Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 (Vision 100). As 

called for in Vision 100, a Memorandum of Agreement was developed to provide organizational guidance for the 

three main entities that fund, administer, and oversee ACRP. The FAA funds the program. The National Academies, 

acting through its Transportation Research Board (TRB), administers the program. The ACRP Oversight Committee 

(AOC), an independent governing board comprised of airport managers and other aviation officials appointed by the 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation, selects all of the program’s research projects. 

Agency Outputs: The ACRP-Environment program examines the impact an airport has on the surrounding 

environment and advances the science and technology for creating an environmentally friendly airport system. 

Projects include the study of airport specific aviation noise and emissions and their environmental impacts, 

developing strategies and guidance for green airports via reduction in noise and emissions, infrastructure and 

benefits of alternative aviation fuels at airport facilities, deicing management, and advanced noise and emissions 

databases. 

Research Goals: TRB annually solicits the aviation community for input on future research topics and industry 

concerns. New research priorities are therefore generated on a yearly basis under the direction of the AOC. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport 

professionals, air carriers, shippers, State and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, airport 

users, educational institutions, other research organizations, and the general flying public. These stakeholders 

generate project ideas, guide projects while they are under way, and serve as the ultimate end-users of the final 

research products. 

Representatives from these organizations also serve on the AOC where they help select ACRP research projects. 

Federal representation on the AOC is comprised of the FAA, along with NASA and the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). The aviation industry is further represented on the AOC through the participation of the following 

groups: the Airports Council International (ACI), the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National 

Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), and the Air Transport Association (ATA). 

R&D Partnerships: ACRP is a cooperative partnership with airports and federal agencies to conduct airport 

research. The research will be conducted by universities, airports, and companies within the aviation industry. 

Accomplishments: Program outputs during the first two years have been focused on low-cost, rapid-response 

projects on urgent airport problems: 

FY09 

Clean and Quiet – Baseline Measurement 

•	 Producing a prioritized agenda of research needs associated with aircraft and other airport-related sources 

of Hazardous Air Pollutants. These needs include, but not be limited to, identifying the types of HAPs being 

emitted; their sources, detection and measurement; and possible health and other environmental impacts. 

(ACRP Report 7, formerly 2-03) 

•	 Developing a prioritized agenda of research needs relating to airport sources of PM emissions. The agenda 

has been developed by (1) conducting a survey of airports regarding PM emissions issues and concerns and 

A-234 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

(2) identifying, reviewing, and evaluating past and current research relating to airport sources of PM 

emissions. (ACRP Report 6, formerly 2-04) 

Clean and Quiet – Threshold Levels 

•	 Summarizing, analyzing, and interpreting the scientific data available from the Aircraft Particle Emissions 

Experiment (APEX) 1-3 and the Unnamed Airport-Unnamed Airline (UNA-UNA) experiment. The results, 

presented in a comprehensive report, help the airport community and general public understand the data's 

ability to understand industry data generated on gaseous and particulate emissions and contribute to 

developing better air quality assessments in the airport environment. (ACRP Report 9, formerly 2-04A) 

•	 Developing a guidebook that can be used to prepare airport source-specific inventories of greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions. The guidebook provides methods to calculate airport GHG emissions inventories in a 

consistent manner and provides information on considerations that should be taken into account when 

scoping and preparing such inventories. This guidebook focuses on the following six GHG emissions since 

they are widely recognized as relevant and quantifiable: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous 

oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluoro compounds (HFC), and perfluorocarbons (PFC). (ACRP 

Report 11, formerly 2-06) 

Clean and Quiet – Reduction Techniques 

•	 Define the present state of the art of aircraft deicing and anti-icing fluids (ADAF) with respect to minimizing 

their aquatic toxicity and biological oxygen demand (BOD5). The results also identify ADAF components 

causing aquatic toxicity and BOD5, identify promising alternative ADAF formulations with reduced aquatic 

toxicity and BOD5, evaluate the performance, efficiency, material compatibility, and environmental, 

operational, and safety impacts of these alternative ADAF formulations compared with current commercial 

products, and describe the fate and transport of ADAF and their degradation products. These results inform 

stakeholders of the operational and environmental benefits of alternative ADAF formulations with reduced 

aquatic toxicity and BOD5. (ACRP 02-01) 

•	 Developing planning guidelines incorporating an array of best management practices (BMPs) for the 

practical, cost-effective control of runoff from aircraft and airfield deicing and anti-icing operations. These 

planning guidelines and BMPs are (1) consistent with the laws and regulations for protecting water quality 

and ensuring flight safety; (2) provide practical technical guidance to airports and local, state, and federal 

regulators; and (3) support the U.S. EPA's ongoing efforts to gain better information on how airports 

manage ADAF-affected stormwater runoff. (ACRP Report 14, formerly 2-02) 

•	 Preparing a handbook that airport operators can use to evaluate the costs and benefits of providing a “dropin” alternative turbine engine fuel at airports, taking into account that such fuel may also be used for other 

purposes (e.g., ground vehicles, generators). The cost and benefit analysis includes, at a minimum: 

infrastructure changes, operational/maintenance impacts, and environmental factors. The handbook also 

includes templates and illustrative examples of cost and benefit analyses for different sizes of airports and 

types of fueling facilities. (ACRP 02-07) 

•	 Identifying procedures and technologies that optimize the use of aircraft deicing and anti-icing fluids, thus 

reducing their environmental impact while assuring safe aircraft operations in deicing and anti-icing 

conditions. The project produces (1) a description of the application of currently available procedures and 

technologies to optimize ADAF use, (2) the results of an experiment to validate the effectiveness of 

promising procedures and technologies, (3) a plan for implementation of these promising procedures and 

technologies, and (4) recommendations for further study. (ACRP 10-01) 

Human-Centered Design 

•	 Developing an informative guidebook about local aircraft noise to inform readers with a direct interest, 

involvement, or Investment in airports. In addition, this research effort will: develop a toolkit that airport 

decision makers can use to manage expectations related to aircraft noise within the community; investigate 

alternative metrics to communicate noise issues to the community; and suggest other improvements that go 

beyond current practice to ease aircraft-noise issues. For this project, the term "noise issues" involves the 

socioeconomic, political, operational, safety, environmental, and legal impacts of aircraft noise on an airport; 

the complaints about aircraft noise from neighbors; the effects that noise has on neighbors; and the 

communication between the airport and its neighbors. This research also identifies the actual jurisdictional 

authority over various aspects of the aircraft-noise issue, and the obstacles to airport operations and 

development because of community perceptions of local aircraft noise. (ACRP 02-05) 

A-235 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY08 

Clean and Quiet – Reduction Techniques 

•	 Conducting an energy-use study of Terminals B and D at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport. This effort provides a 

model energy report and informational brochure for airport managers that focuses on pro-typical operations, 

building commissioning, and energy conservation retrofits opportunities. (ACRP Research Results Digest 2, 

formerly 11-02/T1) 

•	 Producing a report that explores airport sustainability practices across environmental, economic, and social 

issues. The issue of sustainability is explored, which involves airport facilities and operations, management, 

and development protocols to ensure economic viability, operational efficiency, natural resource 

conservation, and social responsibility. Initial aviation industry research and sources validate that 

sustainability initiatives are implemented and become part of airport management practice in response to 

the aviation/airport industry’s financial pressures, as well as to the expectations or mandates of communities 

or regulatory agencies. (ACRP Synthesis 10, formerly 11-03 / S02-02) 

Clean and Quiet – Baseline Measurement 

•	 Investigating how airports chemically treat their airport pavements to mitigate snow and ice, and the 

chemicals used, which may impact associated aircraft equipment and airport infrastructure. The areas of 

pavement deicing product interaction with aircraft brakes and deicing fluids, concrete and asphalt 

pavements, and airport ground service equipment are explored. (ACRP Synthesis 6, formerly 11-03 / S10­

03) 

Clean and Quiet – Threshold Levels 

•	 Revising the 1985 FAA publication on Aviation Noise Effects. This document will serve as the new 

compendium of research concerning the effects of aircraft noise, and function as a centralized location for 

information that summarizes the findings of new research and conclusions. (ACRP Synthesis 9, formerly 11­

03 / S02-01) 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Clean and Quiet – Baseline Measurement 

•	 Designing and implementing a test program to measure gaseous hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions 

from in-production jet engines operating at a range of idle settings and ambient temperatures. The primary 

research objective of this program encompasses measurements of total hydrocarbons and speciated 

hydrocarbons, including HAPs, within the exhaust plume at a reasonable proximity of the engine nozzle to 

capture emissions prior to condensation of volatile gasses. The secondary objective of this project captures 

measurements at a downstream location where the plume has cooled to near-ambient temperatures. 

(ACRP 02-03A) 

•	 Gathering data and developing a robust estimate of what potential deicing chemical use may be today and 

how it may vary by geographic location and or seasonal weather characteristics. In addition, this research 

effort gathers and summarizes information on the existing Clean Water Act regulatory requirements that 

directly address the potential discharge of deicing runoff because full implementation of these existing 

programs sheds important light on the potential effect of related controls and/or potential environmental 

threats these activities represent. This information is designed to help to direct potential future Estimate of 

National Use of Aircraft and Airfield Deicing Materials. (ACRP 11-02 / T10) 

Clean and Quiet – Threshold Levels 

•	 Providing guidance for airport operators on effective tools and techniques for measuring airport 

contributions to ambient air quality. This research evaluates existing and potential monitoring strategies and 

forecasting techniques that airport operators can use to measure airport-related air quality impacts on local 

jurisdictions that may exceed what is traditionally measured and modeled for National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) purposes. This research project identifies gaps in existing models and the inputs to those 

models, future research needed to fill those gaps to improve the predictive capabilities of available models, 

a set of detailed recommendations for implementing an optimal emissions monitoring and forecasting 

strategy, and guidance to airport operators on how to select and carry out that strategy. (ACRP 02-08) 

Clean and Quiet – Prediction 

•	 Producing a comprehensive Model Development Plan (MDP) that will guide future development of a model 

to facilitate integrated quantification of multimodal noise and emissions, as well as economic analysis of 

alternative scenarios. The model that will result from implementing the MDP will consist of an analytical tool 

or set of tools in the form of a “super” model (i.e., a single, inclusive model designed to address all desired 

A-236 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

components) and/or a tool that combines inputs and/or outputs of existing or new models. This research 

defines the process required to create this model, but does not result in the actual development of the 

model. The research determines the feasibility of an integrated approach to quantification of multimodal 

noise and emissions, the form that this model might take, and the process required to create the model. 

(ACRP 02-09) 

•	 Improving the ability to evaluate noise generated by aircraft ground operations, allowing airport staff, 

airport planners, and consultants to incorporate taxiway noise modeling in their evaluations systematically 

when needed. This capability will increase the accuracy of airport noise modeling, thus improving chances 

that significant noise impacts and incompatible land-uses are properly identified, and that appropriate 

mitigation strategies are addressed. This research will enable a joint assessment of both noise and air 

quality, resulting in more balanced and comprehensive decisions in airport planning. (ACRP 11-02 / T8) 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FAA has requested $15 million for ACRP in FY 2011 as part of the Airport Improvement Program. Of the total 

amount, $5 million will be provided for each of the 3 ACRP program areas of Safety, Capacity, and Environment. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Clean and Quiet – Baseline Measurement 

•	 Developing a departure optimization methodology to (1) quantify potential reductions in fuel burn and 

source emissions, (2) estimate possible increases in air traffic capacity that can be achieved by optimizing 

departure procedures while continuing to address noise exposure for communities around airports, and (3) 

account for existing and future fleet mixes and improvements envisioned under NextGen. In the context of 

current noise abatement departure procedures, this methodology should estimate environmental and 

capacity-related benefits associated with the following localized contributors: (a) source noise reduction in 

future engine/airframe technologies, and (b) realistic alterations to present noise abatement departure 

procedures to help regulators and airport management make environmentally optimal decisions. (ACRP 2­

12) 

Clean and Quiet – Threshold Levels 

•	 Defining the current range of factors considered in the development of storage and conveyance systems for 

the management of winter storm design conditions. Based on these factors, a process will be developed for 

analyzing key design factors and evaluating design storm or design conditions. This research will focus on 

evaluation of design storm events as well as design conditions which may consist of multiple small events 

(ACRP 2-19) 

Clean and Quiet – Reduction Techniques 

•	 Developing a guidebook of practices for improving environmental performance at small airports. The 

objective of this research is to provide managers of small airports with a guidebook (1) promoting 

environmental awareness, (2) identifying federal environmental compliance requirements, (3) outlining 

those best management practices that proactively enhance environmental stewardship, and (4) identifying 

resources/tools that airports can use to be proactive. (ACRP 2-13) 

•	 Evaluating the requirements associated with locating alternative fuel production facilities on or adjacent to 

airports. This research will address legal requirements, funding opportunities, environmental considerations, 

public concerns, and logistical considerations associated with locating an alternative fuel production facility 

adjacent to or at an airport. The research will also identify in detail the potential benefits associated with 

constructing and operating a facility adjacent to or at an airport. To the extent that projects already have 

been or are being developed, the project should identify lessons learned during implementation. The 

research will help evaluate the benefits and identify the hurdles associated with locating an alternative fuel 

production facility near an airport. The objective of this project is to further the progress toward the 

widespread use of environmentally friendly alternative fuels in the aviation industry. (ACRP 2-18) 

•	 Evaluation of aviation growth capacity within state implementation plans (SIPs). Given that most SIP 

emission forecasts for aviation sources differ with the FAA’s aviation activity TAF, the objective of this 

research is to develop recommendations and/or guidance for local and state agencies to better represent 

future airport emission sources in their SIP forecasts. This research will answer the following questions. 

What portion(s) of the individual SIP emissions budgets do airport sources represent? What are the 

forecasted out years of SIP attainment compliance? How were airport emission sources forecasted for these 

out years? How do the SIP emissions forecasts compare with the FAA’s TAF activity forecast? If there is 

considerable difference between the two, what recommendations can be brought forth to improve the 

A-237 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

forecasted growth of airport emissions within the applicable SIP budgets to better align with the FAA TAF? 

(ACRP 2-21) 

•	 The objective of this project is to develop guidance for evaluating the cost-benefit of incorporating “green” 

design and engineering practices. This project will also focus on the benefits and challenges of permeable 

pavements and how it affects Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funding eligibility. (ACRP 2-22) 

•	 Identifying practices, technologies, and procedures to reduce the airport’s environmental impacts during 

construction and long-term operations. This research will develop a collection of sustainable practices that 

can be implemented during airport construction. The collection will include best practices, methods, 

procedures, and technologies for all stakeholders involved in the planning, design, and construction of 

airport development or re-development projects and will be in a format that is easily usable by airports. 

(ACRP 8-01) 

•	 Identifying implementable actions that result in reducing energy consuming system costs in airport 

terminals. This research effort will focus on selected opportunities such as those identified in ACRP RRD 2, 

Model for Improving Energy Use in U.S. Airport Facilities, by describing successful practices that airports 

have implemented to increase airport energy efficiency and reduce airport operating costs. Because there 

are many more small airports with fewer discretionary funds, there will be an additional focus on no-cost, 

low-cost and moderate-cost improvements. The audience for this synthesis of practice is airport managers 

and their staff that are responsible for these systems and their effect on airport operating budgets (energy, 

equipment, staff). (ACRP 11-03/S10-04) 

A-238 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

8,000 

5,000 

5,000 

20,000 

38,000 

Budget Authority ($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Airport Cooperative Research - Environment 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3,000 

0 

0 

3,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0

5,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted

 FY 2008 

Enacted

 FY 2009 

Enacted

 FY 2010 

Enacted 

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3,000 

3,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

A-239 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Airport Cooperative Research - 

Environment 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Airport Cooperative Research Program 

Environment-Related Research 

Conduct research on selected AOC proposals 

Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from 

Idling Aircraft 

National Inventory of Deicing Use 

Airport Emissions Impact on Local Air 

Quality 

Multimodal Noise and Emissions Model 

Enhanced Aircraft Taxiway Noise Model 

Evironmental Optimization of Aircraft 

Departures 

Evaluation of Stormwater System Design 

Conditions 

Improving Environmental Performance of 

Small Airports 

Locating Alternative Fuel Facilities Near 

Airports 

Aviation Growth Capacity in State 

Implementation Plans 

Evaluation of Green Engineering Practices 

Reducing Airport Environmental Impact 

During Construction 

Airport Energy Efficiency and Cost Reduction 

Practices to Reducing an Airport’s Carbon 

Footprint 

Monitoring contaminated Stormwater 

Improving Aircraft Recycling 

Strategies to Reduce Airport Surface 

Emissions 

Measuring PM Emissions from Ground 

Support Equipment 

5,000 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊ ◊ ◊

Total Budget Authority 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

A-240 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

AIP N/A Airport Cooperative Research – Safety $5,000,000 

GOALS:
 

The program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: The objective of the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) is to carry out applied 

research on problems that are shared by airport operators and are too difficult for individual airports to solve on their 

own. Additionally, ACRP studies issues that are not being adequately addressed by existing Federal research 

programs. ACRP undertakes research in a variety of airport subject areas, including design, construction, 

environment, maintenance, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, administration, and operations. 

Congress established ACRP through the Vision 100–Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 (Vision 100). As 

called for in Vision 100, a Memorandum of Agreement was developed to provide organizational guidance for the 

three main entities that fund, administer, and oversee ACRP. The FAA funds the program. The National Academies, 

acting through its Transportation Research Board (TRB), administers the program. The ACRP Oversight Committee 

(AOC), an independent governing board comprised of airport managers and other aviation officials appointed by the 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation, selects all of the program’s research projects. 

Agency Outputs: The ACRP-Safety program conducts research to prevent and mitigate potential injuries and 

accidents within the airport operational environment. A fundamental element of this program is to produce results 

that provide protection of aircraft passengers and airport personnel through improved safety training, airport design,
 

and advanced technology implementation. 

Research Goals: TRB annually solicits the aviation community for input on future research topics and industry 

concerns. New research priorities are therefore generated on a yearly basis under the direction of the AOC. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport 

professionals, air carriers, shippers, State and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, airport 

users, educational institutions, other research organizations, and the general flying public. These stakeholders 

generate project ideas, guide projects while they are under way, and serve as the ultimate end-users of the final 

research products. 

Representatives from these organizations also serve on the AOC where they help select ACRP research projects. 

Federal representation on the AOC is comprised of the FAA, along with NASA and the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). The aviation industry is further represented on the AOC through the participation of the following 

groups: the Airports Council International (ACI), the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National 

Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), and the Air Transport Association (ATA). 

R&D Partnerships: ACRP is a cooperative partnership with airports and federal agencies to conduct airport 

research. The research will be conducted by universities, airports, and companies within the aviation industry. 

Accomplishments: Program outputs during the first two years have been focused on low-cost, rapid-response 

projects on urgent airport problems: 

FY 2009: 

Human Protection
 

•	 Compilation and analysis of data from aircraft overrun and undershoots on airport runway safety areas 

(RSAs). This research effort provides a comprehensive database that includes additional variables related to 

runway overruns and undershoots to allow for more informed RSA design and planning decisions. (ACRP 

Report 3, formerly 4-01) 

•	 Recommendation of potential improvements to lightning-warning systems for use by airports. This research 

effort (1) characterizes lightning detection and prediction technologies currently in use by airports and air 

carriers; (2) evaluates the feasibility of improving operational lightning-warning capabilities; and (3) 

estimates the reduction in direct and indirect operating costs for airlines and airport operators that would 

result if the improved lightning-warning capability were implemented. (ACRP Report 8, formerly 4-02) 

A-241 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Develop a guidebook for airport operators on (1) performing a risk assessment of hazards associated with 

approach light systems and (2) determining measures that can be taken to mitigate the identified hazards. 

(ACRP RRD 6, formerly 04-03) 

•	 Creation of a tool for exercising command-level decision making for critical incidents at 14 CFR Part 139 

airports. The tool includes methods to measure and evaluate actions and outcomes including compliance 

with nationally recognized standards and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) requirements. (ACRP 04-04) 

•	 Developing a resource manual of human-impact considerations and practices for airport and air carrier 

managers related to human-made accidents or attacks, or natural disaster events. The manual rationalizes 

the need for airport and air carrier preparedness, and describes critical considerations and steps that can be 

taken to mitigate employee psychological trauma before, during, and after such distressing events. (ACRP 

Report 22, formerly 06-01) 

•	 Advancing the development of alternative civil aircraft arresting systems that safely decelerate an aircraft 

overrunning a runway. This research: (1) identifies and evaluates the most promising alternatives to the 

existing FAA-approved system; (2) identifies the steps that must be taken to have such promising 

alternatives approved for use at a civil airport in the United States, and identify barriers that may preclude 

manufacturers from making the alternative solutions commercially available; and (3) conducts a sensitivity 

analysis of the FAA’s design and performance parameters for civil aircraft arresting systems. (ACRP 07-03) 

System Knowledge 

•	 Developing a guidebook for airport Safety Management Systems (SMS). The SMS guidebook describes the 

associated concepts, methodologies, processes, tools, and safety performance measurements that can be 

applied by airports based on their level of operations and complexity. The results are applicable to all 

airports that have certificates issued under 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139, Certification of 

Airports. (ACRP Report 1, Vols 1&2, formerly 04-05) 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Human-Centered Design 

•	 Exploration of information on the requirements and training required to obtain driving privileges on airport 

airfields, and the differences and similarities among the various airports throughout the country. The report 

also examines information on the types of training programs available to airport employees based on where 

the employees were authorized to drive. (ACRP Synthesis 15, formerly S04-03) 

System Knowledge 

•	 Comparing and evaluating the safety benefits of airport apron management and control programs in 

countries that regulate airport apron operations under ICAO Annex 14, Paragraph 9.5.1, with those 

programs and services at similar types of airports in the United States. (ACRP 04-07) 

Situational Awareness 

•	 Developing a guidebook that managers of general aviation (GA) airports can use to identify, understand, 

and mitigate wildlife hazards to aircraft in the airport environs. This guidebook is intended to provide a 

primer for addressing wildlife hazards but is not intended to fulfill Part 139 certification requirements 

regarding wildlife. The guidebook is accompanied by a brief reference guide and outreach materials for 

aircraft/wildlife hazards at GA airports. (ACRP 04-06) 

•	 Developing a handbook for airport operators containing up-to-date wayfinding and signing guidelines for the 

airport terminal and landside. These research results facilitate the safe and efficient movement of 

passengers within each airport and from one airport to another through the uniform application of the 

guidelines. The guidelines address the following areas: (a) terminal including concourses/gates, 

ticketing/check-in, security checkpoints, federal inspection services, baggage claim; (b) curbside/ground 

transportation; (c) parking; and (d) on-airport roadways/off-airport access roads. (ACRP 07-06) 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The FAA has requested $15 million for ACRP in FY 2011 as part of the Airport Improvement Program. Of the total 

amount, $5 million will be provided for each of the 3 ACRP program areas of Safety, Capacity, and Environment. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

Human Protection
 

•	 Assessing the role of airports and airlines in the spread of vector-borne diseases. This research will result in 

a better understanding of whether/how vector-borne diseases like malaria are facilitated by air travel. The 

A-242 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

resulting report should provide a basis for public health officials to assess the appropriateness and efficacy 

of current practices such as aircraft disinfection and alternative approaches to preventing introduction of 

vector-borne diseases in the U.S. (ACRP 2-20) 

•	 Developing guidance for airport management in developing and implementing airport rules and regulations 

for the use of towbarless tow vehicles (TLTVs) in towing aircraft in airport movement and non-movement 

areas. The results include a collection of the best practices and/or airport rules and regulations enacted by 

airports in managing TLTV operations. (ACRP 4-07A) 

•	 Developing a method for assessing the risks associated with non-standard separations at existing 

constrained airports where standards can not be practicably met and applied nationally. The risk assessment 

method supports, explains, and justifies requests to modify standards for non-standard separations. Topics 

studied include: separations standards between taxiways and runways; taxiways/taxilanes and 

taxiways/taxilanes; and taxiways/taxilanes and fixed or movable objects. (ACRP 4-09) 

System Knowledge 

•	 Developing and validating a user-friendly software analysis tool that can be used by airport and industry 

stakeholders to quantify risk and support planning and engineering decisions when determining RSA 

requirements to meet an acceptable level of safety for a various types and sizes of airports. This research 

expands on the research presented in ACRP Report 3, using many variables, not just those referenced in 

Table 7, page 28, of the report. (ACRP 4-08) 

•	 Determining how proposed firefighting standards would impact airports. These research results: compare 

the current FAA requirements for ARFF to the proposed NFPA and ICAO standards; provide a financial 

analysis of the operational costs for airports to comply with the NFPA and ICAO standards to the extent that 

they differ from the costs associated with the current FAA requirements; and provide a financial analysis of 

the infrastructure and equipment costs for airports to comply with the NFPA and ICAO standards (ACRP 

RRD 7, formerly 11-02/T11) 

•	 Analyzing the extent to which NFPA and ICAO ARFF standards beyond FAR Part 139 requirements may be 

expected to reduce fatalities and/or mitigate serious injuries associated with aircraft accidents on or directly 

adjacent to airport property. (ACRP 11-02/T17) 

•	 Surveying a statistically meaningful volume of large and medium hub airports to collect data on ramp 

incidents from both the airport and airlines. This effort is intended to result in a database (Access or Excel) 

that will be made available to the airport industry. (11-02/T12) 

•	 Conducting a public symposium that features invited presentations on the status of research on or related to 

the transmission of disease on aircraft and/or in airports. The purpose is to provide an opportunity for the 

research community to share data, models and methods; discuss findings and preliminary conclusions of 

ongoing research; and identify gaps to inform future research projects. (11-02/T13) 

A-243 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

20,000 

5,000 

5,000 

20,000 

50,000 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Airport Cooperative Research - Safety 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0

5,000 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

0 

0 

5,000 

5,000 

A-244 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Airport Cooperative Research - 

Safety 

FY 2011 

Request Program Schedule 

Product and Activities ($000) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Airport Cooperative Research Program 

Safety-Related Research 5,000 

Conduct research on selected AOC proposals ♦ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊

Airfield Driving Privilege Requirements ♦

Airport Signage and Way-finding ♦

Wildlife Hazard Prevention at Small Airports ♦

Role of Airports and Airlines in Spread of Diseases ♦ ◊

Improve Ramp Management and Safety ♦ ◊

Improved RSA models ♦ ◊

Assessing Airfield Separation Risk ♦ ◊

ARFF Standard Impacts to Airports ♦ ◊

Total Budget Authority 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

A-245 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

AIP N/A Airport Technology Research – Capacity $12,930,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following FAA Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, and International 

Leadership.
 

Intended Outcomes: The FAA is enhancing airport system capacity through improved pavement design, 

construction and maintenance practices, new pavement management systems and better airport design and 

planning.
 

Agency Outputs: Federal law requires the FAA to develop standards and guidance material for airport design, 

management, construction, and maintenance. The Airport Technology program provides the technical information 

needed to support and update these FAA outputs in a timely manner.
 

The airport Advisory Circulars (AC) related to capacity improvements are the Agency’s principal means of
 

communicating with U.S. airport planners, designers, operators, and equipment manufacturers. These ACs apply to 

airport geometric design, pavement thickness design, pavement management systems and airport planning.
 

The FAA and its regional offices enforce standards and guiding material when administering the Airport Improvement 

Program (GIAA). 

Research Goals: 

Conduct R&D to support the development of standards in the airport system areas to improve pavement thickness 

design, pavement management, construction methods, and maintenance issues. 

•	 By 2015, improve prediction of pavement service life and provide accurate assessment of aircraft-pavement 

compatibility. 

•	 By 2015, provide more durable, long-lived airport pavements and reduce downtime due to construction & 

maintenance activities. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: GIAA grants contribute about half of the approximately $2 billion spent 

each year to provide operationally safe and reliable airport pavements. Projects funded under the GIAA grants must 

conform to the FAA ACs or designated standards. The remaining costs are borne by state and local governments. 

To ensure new pavement standards will be ready to support the safe international operation of next-generation 

heavy aircraft, the FAA and the Boeing Company have entered into a Cooperative Research and Development 

Agreement. Together, these partners have built the National Airport Pavement Test Facility (NAPTF), a unique fullscale research vehicle, at the William J. Hughes Technical Center. Along with the International Civil Aviation 

Organization, the FAA is using data collected at the facility in developing the pavement design standards that airports 

throughout the world need to accommodate the new large aircraft weighing in excess of 1,000,000 pounds and 

having high tire pressures. 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 FAA-U.S. Army ERDC* 

•	 FAA-U.S. Air Force, Tyndall Air Force Base1 

•	 FAA-Center of Excellence for Airport Technology, University of Illinois 2 

•	 FAA-Boeing Company, Cooperative Research and Development Agreement ($7 million Boeing/$21 million 

total for the NAPTF)3 

•	 FAA-IPRF

•	 FAA-Auburn University4 

•	 FAA-Rowan University4 

4 

1 Interagency agreement or Memorandum of Agreement 

2 Partnership through matching funds 

3 Cost Sharing 

4 Cooperative Agreement 

A-246 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 FAA-University of Massachucetts-Dartmouth4 

Through these partnerships, research results are published in scientific journals, presented at technical conferences, 

and discussed at workshops. 

Accomplishments: The Airport Technology research program has provided products to enhance airport capacity in 

the United States and around the world. Recent research results are published as FAA reports and ACs and made 

available to users worldwide. Some major accomplishments are: 

FY 2009: 

•	 Completed draft of AC 150/5320-6E, “Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation.” 

•	 Finalized the airport pavement thickness design computer program FAARFIELD for release with AC 

150/5320-6E. 

•	 Expanded and revised the computer program COMFAA for automatic computation of PCN and assisted in the 

preparation of Draft AC 150/5335-5B, “Standardized Method of Reporting Airport Pavement Strength – 

PCN.” 

•	 Finalized the airport pavement roughness evaluation computer program ProFAA for release with AC 

150/5380-9, “Guidelines and Procedures for Measuring Airfield Pavement Roughness.” 

•	 Completed a major upgrade to the NAPTF Test Vehicle, consisting of the addition of four more loading 

modules, removal and replacement of the load and speed control systems and software, procurement of 

twelve new rims complete with 52x21.0 R22 radial tires, complete refitting of the control cab, plus 

numerous other small improvements and repairs. 

•	 Assisted in the evaluation of a runway incursion incident at DFW involving a TLTV towing a Boeing 777. 

Published a report AR-TN09/44, “Towbarless Towing Vehicle Operations – Evaluation of Braking Action and 

Vehicle Conspicuity.” 

•	 Assisted in an evaluation of new runway grooving at ORD for possible deficiency of construction. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Continue analyzing full-scale data from the NAPTF. 

•	 Improve upon and update the pavement design procedures based on data from the FAARFIELD computer 

program. 

•	 Continue conducting technical workshops in pavement design using FAARFIELD and COMFAA. 

•	 Revise the ACN-PCN methodology with software program entitled COMFAA 3.0 

•	 Conduct technical workshops in pavement roughness criteria using PROFAA. 

•	 Develop web-based pavement management system called FAA PAVEAIR. 

•	 Conduct full-scale tests on reflective cracking of flexible pavement at the NAPTF. 

•	 Conduct testing of Alkali-Silica Reactive (ASR) concrete pavement under full-scale loading 

•	 Continue development of a web-based application for airport pavement database management system as a 

suite of FAA analysis tools (PROFAA, FAARFIELD, BAKFAA, LEDFAA) 

•	 Install pavement instrumentation at assorted Airports throughout the Unites States and analyze the 

recorded data. 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The Airport Technology research program is a collaborative effort among many government organizations, 

universities, and industry associations. The requested funding will allow this group to continue developing standards 

and guidelines for maintaining and enhancing our national airport infrastructure. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Purchase a Heavy Vehicle Simulator (HVS) to test different paving materials 

•	 Continue analyzing full-scale data from the NAPTF. 

•	 Continue conducting technical workshops in pavement design using FAARFIELD and COMFAA. 

•	 Conduct technical workshops in pavement roughness criteria using PROFAA. 

•	 Upgrade FAA PAVEAIR with Geographic Information System 

A-247 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 Continue full-scale tests on reflective cracking of flexible pavement at the NAPTF. 

•	 Continue testing of Alkali-Silica Reactive (ASR) concrete pavement under full-scale loading 

•	 Install pavement instrumentation at assorted Airports throughout the Unites States and analyze the
 

recorded data. 

A-248 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

64,103 

10,596 

12,930 

51,720 

139,349 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Airports Technology Research – Capacity 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

7,337 

1,318 

0 

8,655 

7,220 

1,535 

0 

8,755 

7,536 

1,573 

0 

9,109 

8,856 

1,740 

0 

10,596 

10,900 

2,030 

0

12,930 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

8,655 

8,655 

0 

0 

8,755 

8,755 

0 

0 

9,109 

9,109 

0 

0 

10,596 

10,596 

0 

0 

12,930 

12,930 

A-249 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Airport Technology Research -

Capacity 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Airport Technology Research – Capacity Goal 

Airport Technology Research - Capacity 

Continue full-scale testing at NAPTF 

Continue analysis of full-scale data from NAPTF; 

maintain equipment, instrumentation, conduct material 

testing, develop pavement specifications, demolition 

and reconstruction activities 

Develop advanced airport pavement design procedures; 

conduct related workshops in development, 

programming and documentation 

Next phase of rigid pavement design, analysis of slab 

curling, materials characterization, field 

instrumentation, and continue support of airport 

technology center of excellence 

Conduct non-destructive pavement testing 

Support development of a web-based airport pavement 

management software 

Conduct pavement roughness research 

Operate material testing lab 

Improve paving materials 

In-situ instrumentation and data collection at selected 

Airports 

11,190 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

◊

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 1,740 

Total Budget Authority 12,930 10,596 12,930 12,930 12,930 12,930 12,930 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

A-250 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

AIP N/A Airport Technology Research – Safety $14,287,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following FAA Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, and Greater Capacity. 

Intended Outcomes: The FAA conducts safety-related research to improve airport lighting and marking, reduce 

wildlife hazards, improve airport fire and rescue capability, and reduce surface accidents. The FAA will also develop 

and maintain standards in airport system areas to: 

•	 Reduce aircraft accidents due to incursions, particularly in low-visibility conditions; 

•	 Reduce aircraft accidents due to slipperiness caused by ice and snow on runways; 

•	 Improve post-crash rescue and firefighting capabilities; and 

•	 Reduce the negative impact of wildlife on airport safety. 

Agency Outputs: Federal law requires the FAA to develop and publish standards and guidance material for airport 

design, construction, and maintenance. The Agency uses the airport AC system as its principal means to 

communicate this guidance with a user community consisting of U.S. airport planners, designers, operators, and 

equipment manufacturers. 

Achieving the overall FAA goal of reducing accidents requires improvement in airport safety as well as aircraft safety. 

Outputs of the program include guidance regarding: new technology and techniques that can improve airport lighting 

and marking to help reduce surface accidents and runway incursions; improve aircraft rescue and fire fighting to 

address double decked aircraft carrying up to 800 passengers; and modify the habitats of increasing numbers of 

wildlife on or near airports. 

The Airport Improvement Program (GIAA) provides current technical information to support and update ACs covering 

design of airport safety areas, visual aids, rescue and firefighting, ice and snow control, and wildlife control. The FAA 

and its regional offices then enforce these standards and guidance materials as part of administering the GIAA. 

Research Goals: 

Conduct R&D to support the development of standards in the airport system areas to improve safety, improve 

situational awareness, and reduce accidents. 

•	 By FY 2014, increase post crash passenger survivability and improve current levels of fire fighting 

effectiveness. 

•	 By FY 2014, improve airport design standards to provide increased levels of safety for airport operations. 

•	 By FY 2015, reduce rate of accidents involving slipperiness and save lives in the event of overruns. 

•	 By FY 2015, reduce wildlife strike risks to aircraft and provide more accurate and timely wildlife strike 

advisories. 

•	 By FY 2015, reduce pilot disorientation and provide better visual cues to reduce the risk of incursion. 

Customer/Stakeholder: Projects funded under the GIAA grants must conform to the FAA ACs or designated 

standards. GIAA grants contribute about half of the approximately $2 billion spent each year to provide operationally 

safe and reliable airport pavements. The remaining costs are borne by state and local governments. 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 FAA-U.S. Air Force, Tyndall Air Force Base. 

•	 FAA-U.S. Air Force, Wright Patterson Air Force Base. (aircraft braking performance studies) 

•	 FAA-USDA, National Wildlife Research Center, Sandusky, Ohio. 

•	 FAA-Port Authorities of New York and New Jersey 

•	 FAA-ACRP (for study of alternative arresting systems for civil airports). 

Accomplishments: The Airport Technology Research Program has provided products to enhance the safety of 

airport operations in the United States and around the world. Research results are published as FAA ACs and made 

available to users worldwide. Recent program accomplishments include the completion of: 

A-251 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY 2009: 

•	 Studied Next Generation High Reach Extendible Turret. 

•	 Assessed commercial avian radars at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. 

•	 Deployed commercial avian radars at Chicago O’Hare for multi-year assessment. 

•	 Evaluated alternative runway groove shape on asphalt and concrete runway surfaces. 

•	 Evaluated camera based FOD detection systems at Boston Logan and Chicago O'Hare. 

•	 Evaluated a mobile FOD detection system at Chicago’s Midway Airport. 

•	 Evaluated Taxiway Deviation data collection at Manchester, NH and West Palm Beach and Orlando, FL, and 

Chicago O’Hare. 

•	 Completed phase 1 study of fire fighting agent quantities for NLA. 

•	 Initiated full scale testing of composite fires at NLA Facility, Tyndall AFB, Panama City, FL. 

•	 Completed Report on New Photoluminescent Technology for Visible Surface Markings 

•	 Completed Study of Engineered Material Arresting System cold region freeze-thaw durability 

•	 Completed Testing of Effects of Runway De/Anti-Icing Chemicals on Traction 

•	 Final report on a polyurea alternative marking material; 

•	 Evaluation of a prototype foreign object debris (FOD) detection radar at a large airport; 

•	 Developed AC for Automated FOD Detection Systems. 

•	 Report on installation criteria for taxiway centerline lights; 

•	 Demonstrated use of aircraft lighting to make aircraft on the ground more conspicuous. 

Through these partnerships, research results are published in scientific journals, presented at technical conferences, 

and discussed at workshops. 

FY 2010 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

•	 Develop specifications for a new Visual Guidance Technology Testbed. 

•	 Complete recommendations to improve Heliport Design AC. 

•	 Publish recommendations for airfield LED electrical Infrastructure. 

•	 Update General Aviation “Community Service Airports Lighting Handbook”. 

•	 Complete validation testing (phase 2 of study) of firefighting agent quantities for NLA. 

•	 Initiate full scale testing of composite fires at NLA facility, Tyndal AFB, Panama City, FL. 

•	 Complete taxiway deviation data collection for design group III airports, and develop statistical analysis for 

deviation behavior of aircraft in this group. 

•	 Complete evaluation of second level access vehicle at New Large Aircraft Test Facility. 

•	 Complete report on automated FOD detection system technology. 

•	 Complete report on alternative runway grooving research. 

•	 Initiate Feasibility Study for Dynamic Internal Drum Tire Pavement Test Machine Augmentation 

•	 Complete Report on Deployment of Avian Radars at Civil Airports 

•	 Release new Wildlife Hazards Mitigation Website and Database. 

•	 Complete Draft Advisory Circular for Use of Avian Radar Systems at US Civil Airports. 

•	 Initiate multi-year study on the effects of Fully Enclosed Trash Transfer Facilities on attracting hazardous 

wildlife. 

•	 Initiate evaluation of other commercial avian radar systems 

•	 Complete Advanced Composite Material Penetration Study (Phase I) 

•	 Complete Phase II of study on The Effects of Fuselage Geometry on Post Crash Fires 

•	 Complete Phase I for Crash Simulation of Transport Aircraft for Predicting Fuel Release 

•	 Complete Phase I of Development of Advanced Fire Fighting Agent Application Model 

•	 Develop Specifications for Low Cost Ground Surveillance System. 

A-252 
 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FY 2011 PROGRAM REQUEST: 

The Airport Technology FY 2011 research program is a collaborative effort among many government organizations, 

universities, and industry associations. The requested program funding provides the contract support necessary for 

an integrated, effective research program that delivers the standards and guidelines for maintaining and enhancing 

airport infrastructure. 

KEY FY 2011 MAJOR ACTIVITIES AND ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS: 

• Complete Advanced Composite Material Penetration Study (Phase II - Computer Model Development) 

• Complete Phase II for Crash Simulation of Transport Aircraft for Predicting Fuel Release 

• Complete Phase II of Development of Advanced Fire Fighting Agent Application Model 

• Complete multi-year study of Fully Enclosed Trash Transfer Facilities 

• Evaluate non-commercially available, emerging technologies in bird detection and tracking 

• Complete Evaluation of Ground Vehicle Navigation Systems 

• Complete development of FOD database. 

• Initiate collection of taxiway deviation data at design group II airports. 

• Initiate visual guidance research utilizing completed Visual Guidance Technology Testbed. 

A-253 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

•

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1982-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

62,549 

11,876 

14,287 

57,148 

145,860 

Budget Authority 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Airports Technology Research – Safety 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

7,897 

1,318 

0 

9,215 

8,312 

1,493 

0 

9,805 

8,465 

1,774 

0 

10,239 

10,135 

1,741 

0 

11,876 

12,546 

1,741 

0

14,287 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted 

FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

0 

9,215 

9,215 

0 

0 

9,805 

9,805 

0 

0 

10,239 

10,239 

0 

0 

11,876 

11,876 

0 

0 

12,329 

14,287 

A-254 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Airport Technology Research -

Safety 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Airport Technology Research – Safety Goal 

Airport Technology Research - Safety 

Complete validation testing (phase 2 of study) of 

firefighting agent quantities for NLA. 

Complete Report on Deployment of Avian Radars at 

Civil Airports 

Complete evaluation of second level access vehicle at 

New Large Aircraft Test Facility. 

Complete Report on alternative runway groove shape 

on asphalt and concrete runway surfaces. 

Complete Report on automated FOD detection system 

technology. 

Complete taxiway deviation data collection for design 

group III airports 

Initiate full scale testing of composite fires at NLA 

facility, Tyndal AFB, Panama City, FL. 

Release new Wildlife Hazards Mitigation Website and 

Database. 

Complete Draft Advisory Circular for Use of Avian Radar 

Systems at US Civil Airports. 

Initiate multi-year study on the effects of Fully Enclosed 

Trash Transfer Facilities on attracting hazardous 

wildlife. 

Initiate evaluation of other commercial avian radar 

systems 

Complete recommendations to improve Heliport Design 

AC. 

Publish recommendations for airfield LED electrical 

Infrastructure. 

Update General Aviation “Community Service Airports 

Lighting Handbook”. 

Develop specifications for a new Visual Guidance 

Technology Test bed. 

Complete Advanced Composite Material Penetration 

Study (Phase I) 

Initiate Feasibility Study for Dynamic Internal Drum Tire 

Pavement Test Machine Augmentation 

Complete Phase II of study on The Effects of Fuselage 

Geometry on Post Crash Fires 

Complete Phase I for Crash Simulation of Transport 

Aircraft for Predicting Fuel Release 

Develop Specifications for Low Cost Ground Surveillance 

System. 

12,546 

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

♦

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

◇

Personnel and Other In-House Costs 1,741 

Total Budget Authority 14,287 11,876 14,287 14,287 14,287 14,287 14,287 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

A-255 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Budget 

Appropriation 

Budget 

Item 

Program Title Budget Request 

Ops N/A Commercial Space Transportation Safety $165,000 

GOALS:
 

This program supports the following Flight Plan goals: Increased Safety, Greater Capacity, International Leadership, 

and Organizational Excellence. 

Intended Outcomes: 

The mission of the Commercial Space Transportation Safety Program is to ensure protection of the public, property, 

and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch or re-entry 

activities, and to encourage, facilitate, and promote U.S. commercial space transportation. 

To achieve its mission, the program undertakes research projects intended to: 

•	 Prevent safety incidents (such as fires and explosions) involving nontraditional monopropellants and 

oxidizers (specifically Hydrogen Peroxide, H2O2, and Nitrous Oxide, N2O) in commercial space transportation 

applications. 

•	 Provide information on the capability, limitations, and considerations for GPS implementation in a dynamic 

environment, such as Space and Air Traffic Control. The results shall include information on topics such as 

requirements for signal reception, system accuracy, signal processing delay times, and GPS vs. 

future/alternate technologies. 

•	 Identify operational and technical issues that must be addressed for launching and operating either 

supersonic or hypersonic point-to-point (PTP) systems in or through the NAS and between transcontinental 

city pairs. 

•	 Ensure that the safety of the public, crew, and spaceflight participants is well understood by studying the 

effects of operating in an environment in which composites are used for reusable launch vehicles (RLVs). 

•	 Identify a set of requirements for a black box system and propose a notional design for such a system to be 

used in expendable launch vehicles (ELVs) and reusable launch vehicles (RLVs). 

•	 Evaluate the adequacy of current rules and polices related to commercial space transportation, implement 

new rules/policy/advisory materials, and identify barriers to industry caused by unnecessary or conflicting 

regulations. 

•	 Directly compare present and emerging system safety methods to discern best practices and derive 

regulatory requirements. 

Agency Outputs: 

The research program completes or provides inputs for the development of regulations, advisory circulars, and/or 

guidelines that identify the requirements for the safe operation of expendable, as well as reusable launch vehicles 

(ELV/RLV). These outputs include: 

•	 Develop clear, written, user-friendly guidelines for transport, processing/loading, usage, and disposal of 

H2O2 and N2O in commercial space transportation applications. Transmit these guidelines to the 

commercial space transportation community via an outbrief to COMSTAC, a summary report, and potentially 

a FAA Advisory Circular containing them. 

•	 Recommendations for standards to consider for GPS implementation in conjunction with licensed activities, 

for both AST and industry. 

•	 Identify areas related to the PTP study that may require legal, regulatory, or policy changes. Also, provide a 

prioritized ranking of operational and technical issues, from the most challenging to the least challenging, 

provide a rationale for each ranking, and provide recommendations for a path forward to resolve each 

identified issue. 

•	 Guidance for AST and industry use on operational limitations and inspection requirements for suborbital 

reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) comprised of composite materials. This guidance will be based on and 

subject to a typical flight profile. 

•	 A requirements document for a black box system for commercial space transportation vehicles, as well as a 

notional design for use in developing a prototype black box for testing in a future launch. 

A-256 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 A report identifying existing laws beyond those listed in 14 CFR Part 400 which may apply to commercial 

space transportation, and how they relate may help or hinder industry. 

•	 An assessment conducted by AST on the outputs from two specialized, independent system safety analysis 

conducted by separate parties to determine the optimal system safety method. The assessment will include 

the strengths and weaknesses, the hazard analysis depth, the hazard identification thoroughness, and the 

projected resource utilization. 

Research Goals: 

•	 A set of clear written guidelines, in terms of the established conditions and/or technical parameters 

(concentration, impurities, temperature, pressure, liquid vs. vapor state, shock sensitivity, and incompatible 

materials), in which H2O2 and N2O may safely be handled and used. These guidelines would also include 

conditions to avoid. Note: In the (unlikely) event that some of the conditions and/or technical parameters 

associated with H2O2 and N2O cannot be defined to sufficient granularity to develop clear guidelines, then 

further research to define specific conditions and/or technical parameters will be recommended. 

•	 To conduct a study on current and near-term capabilities and limitations of GPS user equipment suitable for 

use in suborbital, ballistic trajectories with emphasis on low cost. The study will capture lessons learned 

wherever possible. 

•	 To explore possible scenarios to help AST better strategically plan for the future with respect to Air Traffic 

Interfaces, international relations, and potential vehicle technologies (if applicable). 

•	 To develop effective rules for operations and maintenance (O&M) for use of composite materials, as they 

apply to commercial space transportation. These rules may also provide potential benefits for rules 

addressing other systems such as structures and environmental control and life support systems (ECLSSs). 

•	 To provide the ability to access relevant data captured at the time of an anomaly, for determining the root 

cause(s), potentially enabling faster “return to flight” status. 

•	 Look at various rocket operations and current laws, and apply them to limited areas likely to conduct such 

operations, to evaluate the current regulatory process. This will assist in providing recommendations for 

rules and policy and attempt to mitigate barriers to industry. 

•	 To demonstrate the relative performance of different systems safety methods and develop data supporting 

system safety regulation revisions. 

Customer/Stakeholder Involvement: 

•	 A survey of the companies in the aerospace industry (as well as other industries) that use H2O2 and N2O 

regarding safety incidents they have experienced and lessons learned will be part of the study. 

•	 The study will request inputs from COMSTAC on current plans and challenges for GPS user equipment for 

commercial vehicles. 

•	 Identify areas related to the PTP study that may require legal, regulatory, or policy changes. 

•	 The study will provide guidance to AST and industry on the use of operational limitations and inspection 

requirements for suborbital reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) comprised of composite materials. 

•	 To examine the operational environment, determine the number of sensors needed, defining the data 

recovery process, and provide black box survivability criteria for use in developing requirements for a black 

box system to be used in commercial space transportation systems (ELVs and RLVs). 

•	 To examine existing laws not included in 14 CFR Part 400 that apply to rocket operations, and asses the 

adequacy of these rules and policy to identify barriers to industry. 

•	 The results of the assessment will enable AST to have a more accurate system safety method to be used 

when evaluating applications for launch licenses and permits, to ensure the safety of the public. 

R&D Partnerships: 

•	 AST will partner with the Air Force Research Lab, Air Force Space and Missile Center and NASA safety 

organizations for the research and to establish the guidelines and recommendations related to the use H2O2 

and N2O. 

•	 AST will coordinate the goals of the study (and if appropriate) partner with the GPS Joint Program Office 

(JPO), the Naval Research and Air Force Research Labs, Kennedy and Johnson Spaceflight Centers, and 

Ames Research Center to determine plans for development or modification of GPS user equipment suitable 

for use in suborbital, ballistic trajectories, while focusing on low-cost opportunities. 

A-257 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

•	 The Volpe National Transportation System Center has been contracted to conduct the work associated with 

this research project. 

•	 Partnerships are still being determined. 

•	 Looking into partnership with Volpe National Transportation System Center. 

•	 Looking into partnerships with the academic community or contract with Volpe National Transportation 

System Center. 

•	 Partnerships are still being determined. 

Accomplishments: 

FY 2008 was the funding year for the activities known as: 

•	 “Temporal Winds Database Study”* 

•	 “Low Cost ,Field Portable, High Altitude Wind Profiler”* 

*These projects were extended into and completed in FY 2009. Will be included as accomplishments. 

FY2009 was the funding year for the activities known as: 

•	 “Lessons Learned in Handling Nontraditional Monopropellants/Oxidizers” 

•	 “Application of GPS to Space Transportation Technologies” 

• “Point-To-Point Suborbital Missions” 

*These projects were extended into FY 2010, and thus included in this NARP submission. 

FY2010 is the funding year for the activities known as: 

•	 ”Effects of Suborbital Flights on Composite Constructed Vehicles and Their Maintainability” 

•	 ”Voice/Data Recorder (“Black Box”) Requirements and Technology Roadmap for Commercial RLVs and 

Reentry Vehicles” 

•	 ”Research and Identification of Existing Laws and Regulations, Beyond 14 CFR Part 400, Affecting the 

Commercial Space Transportation Industry” 

•	 ”Applicability and Benefits of Alternative System Safety Hazard Analyses Methods” 

FY 2010 Major Activities and Anticipated Accomplishments: 

•	 Provided for the following: 

1) Examining existing standards on H2O2 and N2O, from agencies such as DOT, IATA, NFPA, and DoD; 

2) Surveying the aerospace industry and other industries that use H2O2 and N2O; 

3) Develop and deliver briefing to COMSTAC; and 

4) Develop summary report with guidelines and (if needed) recommendations for future research. 

•	 Provided for the following: 

1) Conduct brief survey of RLV users state of the art and plans on GPS user equipment for use in 

suborbital, ballistic trajectories; 

2) Discuss results of survey of RLV users coordinate the goals of the study (and if appropriate) partner 

with the GPS Joint Program Office (JPO), the Naval Research and Air Force Research Labs, Kennedy and 

Johnson Spaceflight Centers, and Ames Research Center to determine their plans for development or 

modification of GPS user equipment suitable for use in suborbital, ballistic trajectories, while focusing on 

low-cost opportunities; 

3) Review ongoing state of the art and plans on GPS user equipment in development in national labs and 

avionics industry suitable for use in suborbital, ballistic trajectories; and 

4) Develop summary report with guidelines and (if needed) recommendations for future research. 

•	 Published a research study with current information on commercial PTP systems identifying legal, 

regulatory, or policy changes that might be required. Additionally, the publication will identify issues and 

recommendations to resolve the identified issues. 

•	 Established guidance for AST and industry use on operational limitations and inspection requirements for 

suborbital RLVs with composite structures to ensure safety of the public, crew, and space flight participants. 

A-258 
2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

This will take into account extreme temperatures, extreme pressure changes, and atomic oxygen 

environments. 

•	 Developed a set of requirements and a notional design for a black box system for use in space 

transportation vehicles to assist in early identification and resolution of anomalies.
 

•	 Identified existing laws, other than 14 CFR Part 400, that apply to rocket operations in an effort to evaluate 

the adequacy of existing rules and policy, provide input into new rules and policy, and identify barriers to 

industry by current rules and policy. 

•	 Compared present and emergent system safety methods to determine best practices for hazard analysis 

determination used in evaluation for applications for licenses and permits in compliance with the regulatory 

process. 

FY 2011 Program Request: 

For all projects, authorized Commercial Space Transportation research is currently included in the Safety and 

Operations budget. 

Key FY 2011 Major Activities and Anticipated Accomplishments: 

None identified as yet, although call for topics both internally and externally have been extended. However, as 

research is conducted during the year, there may be indications of additional research efforts required during FY 

2010, with appropriate products and milestones determined at that time. 

A-259 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix A 

APPROPRIATION SUMMARY 

Appropriated (FY 1983-2009) 

FY 2010 Enacted 

FY 2011 Request 

Out-Year Planning Levels (FY 2012-2015) 

Total 

Amount ($000) 

473,000 

145,000 

165,000 

660,000 

1,443,000 

Budget Authority ($000) FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Contracts: 

Commercial Space Transporation Safety 

Personnel Costs 

Other In-house Costs 

 Total 

125 

0 

0 

125 

125 

0 

0 

128 

145 

0 

0 

145 

145 

0 

0 

145 

165 

0 

0

165 

OMB Circular A-11, 

Conduct of Research and Development 

($000) 

FY 2007 

Enacted 

FY 2008 

Enacted 

FY 2009 

Enacted 

FY 2010 

Enacted

 FY 2011 

Request 

Basic 

Applied 

Development (includes prototypes) 

Total 

0 

38 

38 

125 

0 

63 

63 

128 

0 

63 

63 

145 

0 

73 

73 

145 

0 

83 

83 

165 

A-260 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix A 

February 1, 2010 

Commercial Space 

Transportation Safety 

Product and Activities 

FY 2011 

Request 

($000) 

Program Schedule 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 

Commercial Space Transportation Safety 

Lessons Learned in Handling Nontraditional 

Monopropellants/Oxidizers* 

Guidelines for transport, processing/loading, usage, and 

disposal of H2O2 and N2O in commercial space 

transportation applications. These guidelines will be 

transmitted to the commercial space transportation 

community via an outbrief to COMSTAC, a summary 

report, and potentially a FAA Advisory Circular 

containing them. 

Application of GPS to Space Transportation 

Technologies* 

Recommendations for standards to consider for GPS 

implementation in conjunction with licensed activities, 

for both AST and industry. 

Point-To-Point Suborbital Missions* 

Publish a research study with current information on 

the state of the commercial suborbital transportation 

industry with a focus on market demand, safety, 

operability, and international coordination. 

Effects of Suborbital Flights on Composite 

Constructed Vehicles and Their Maintainability 

Guidance for AST and industry use on operational 

limitations and inspection requirements for suborbital 

reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) comprised of composite 

materials. This guidance will be based on and subject to 

a typical flight profile. 

Voice/Data Recorder (“Black Box”) Requirements 

and Technology Roadmap for Commercial RLV and 

Reentry Vehicles 

A requirements document for a black box system for 

commercial space transportation vehicles, as well as a 

notional design for use in developing a prototype black 

box for testing in a future launch. 

Research and Identification of Existing Laws and 

Regulations, Beyond 14 CFR Part 400, Affecting the 

Commercial Space Transportation Industry 

A report identifying existing laws beyond those listed in 

14 CFR Part 400 which may apply to commercial space 

transportation, and how they relate may help or hinder 

industry. 

Applicability and Benefits of Alternative System 

Safety Hazard Analyses Methods 

An assessment conducted by AST on the outputs from 

two specialized, independent system safety analysis 

conducted by separate parties to determine the optimal 

system safety method. The assessment will include the 

strengths and weaknesses, the hazard analysis depth, 

the hazard identification thoroughness, and the projected 

resource utilization. 

165 

♦† 

♦† 

♦† 

♦

♦

♦

♦

Total Budget Authority 165 145 165 165 165 165 165 

◆ - Activities Accomplished ◇ - Activities Planned 

NOTES: OUT YEAR NUMBERS ARE FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY. ACTUAL FUNDING NEEDS WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGET PROCESS. 

* ACTIVITIES FUNDED IN FY09 WERE NOT STARTED UNTIL 3Q, FY09, DUE TO CONTINUING RESOLUTION. WORK ON THESE PROJECTS CONTINUED INTO FY10, IN ADDITION TO 

NEW PROJECTS ADDED AND FUNDED IN FY10. THESE FY09 FUNDED PROJECTS ARE EXPECTED TO COMPLETE IN FY10. 

† INDICATES THESE ACTIBVITES ARE FUNDED WITH FY09 FUNDING. 

A-261 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Appendix B: Partnership Activities 

Table of Contents
 

Introduction................................................................................................................................. B-1 

1. Working with Government ............................................................................................. B-1 

1.1 Memoranda of Understanding and Agreement ........................................................... B-1 

1.2 Interagency Committees ............................................................................................. B-4 

2. Working with Government, Industry and Academia ...................................................... B-4 

2.1 Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRDAs) ............................... B-4 

3. Working with Industry........................................................................................................ B-6 

3.1 Small Business Innovation Research .......................................................................... B-6 

3.2 Patents issued through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ................................... B-6 

4. Working with Academia ..................................................................................................... B-7 

4.1 Joint University Program (JUP) for Air Transportation Research ............................. B-7 

4.2 Aviation Grants ........................................................................................................... B-8 

4.3 Air Transportation Centers of Excellence ................................................................ B-11 

4.3.1 COE for Research in the Intermodal Transport Environment (RITE) .............. B-11 

4.3.2 Joint COE for Advanced Materials (JAMS)..................................................... B-12 

4.3.3 COE Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction 

(PARTNER)...................................................................................................... B-14 

4.3.4 COE for General Aviation Research (CGAR).................................................. B-17 

4.3.5 COE for Airport Technology (CEAT).............................................................. B-18 

List of Tables
 

Table B.1 – Active MOU, MOAs, and IAs FY2009 .................................................................. B-1 

Table B.5 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to COE for Research in the Intermodal Transport 

Table B.7 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to the Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and 

Table B.2 – Active Cooperative Research and Development Agreements, FY 2009 ................ B-4 

Table B.3 – Patents Issued for DOT/FAA .................................................................................. B-7 

Table B.4 - FAA Research Grants Originating in FY 2009 ....................................................... B-8 

Environment (RITE) .............................................................................................. B-12 

Table B.6 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to the Joint COE in Advanced Materials (JAMS) .. B-13 

Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) ....................................................................... B-15 

Table B.8– Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to COE for General Aviation Research (CGAR) .... B-17 

Table B.9 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to COE for Airport Technology (CEAT) ............... B-18 

B-i 
 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

B-ii 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Introduction 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) enhances and expands its research and development 

(R&D) capabilities by partnering with other government, industry, and academic organizations. 

Such partnerships help the FAA leverage critical resources and capabilities to ensure that the 

Agency can achieve its goals and objectives. By reaching out to other government agencies, 

industry, and the academic community, the FAA gains access to both internal and external 

innovators, promoting the transfer of technology, personnel, information, intellectual property, 

facilities, methods, and expertise. These partnerships also foster the transfer of FAA 

technologies to the private sector for other civil and commercial applications. The Agency uses 

the following partnership mechanisms to achieve its goals. 

1. Working with Government 

1.1 Memoranda of Understanding and Agreement 

FAA researchers collaborate with their colleagues in government through memoranda of 

understanding/agreement (MOU/MOA) and other mechanisms, such as interagency agreements 

(IAs). The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is the FAA’s closest R&D 

partner in the federal government. The two agencies cooperate on research through a series of 

intra-governmental agreements. The FAA also works closely with the Department of Defense 

(DOD), especially in the environmental area. Table B.1 provides details of the agreements in 

place in fiscal year (FY) 2009. 

Table B.1 – Active MOUs, MOAs, and IAs FY 2009 

Active MOUs, MOAs, and IAs in FY 2009 

Agreement 

Type Subject Objective 

FAA/NASA 

MOU 

A Partnership to Achieve 

Goals in Aviation and Space 

Transportation 

Partnering in the pursuit of complementary goals in 

aviation and space transportation, including safety, 

airspace system efficiency, environmental 

compatibility, international leadership, and others. 

FAA/NASA 

MOA 

Support of FAA R&D Field 

Offices at NASA Research 

Centers 

Continuing operation and support of the FAA Field 

Offices established at NASA Centers. 

FAA/NASA 

MOA 

Air Traffic Management 

Research and Technology 

Development 

Supporting the NASA Aviation Systems Capacity 

Program and FAA Air Traffic Management with 

respect to conducting research, development, and 

technology transfer to FAA. 

FAA/NASA 

MOA 

Impact of Aviation Air 

Emissions on Climate and 

Global Atmospheric 

Composition 

Establishing programs and plans to determine aviation 

emissions that have the potential to impact global 

atmospheric composition, stratospheric ozone and 

climate. 

FAA/NASA 

MOA 

Aeronautical Safety and 

Human Factors 

Establishing a strategic partnership with respect to the 

conduct of human factors research in commercial air 

transportation, general aviation, vertical flight, aviation 

maintenance, flight technologies and procedures, air 

traffic control and airway facilities, and bioaeronautics. 

B-1 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Active MOUs, MOAs, and IAs in FY 2009 

Agreement 

Type Subject Objective 

FAA/NASA Aviation Safety Reporting Describing the basic relationship between the FAA’s 

MOA System (ASRS) Aviation Safety Reporting Program and the NASA 

ASRS, and outlining the roles and responsibilities of 

each agency. 

FAA/DOD Collaboration on Research and Conducting and coordinating research and development 

MOA Development to Measure and projects and exchanging research and development 

Mitigate the Environmental data, analyses and related information and material 

Impacts of Aircraft Noise and concerning the environmental impacts of aircraft noise 

Aviation Air Emissions and aviation emissions. 

FAA/DOD Flight Deck Illumination by Evaluate laser eye protection during human-in-the-loop 

Interagency Unauthorized Lasers simulation studies; develop database models to enhance 

Agreement DTFACT-05-X-00011 airmen training; develop and evaluate procedures for 

flight crew awareness and recovery action. 

FAA/DOD Damage Tolerance Enhance collaboration between FAA and U.S. Army 

Interagency Methodologies in Rotorcraft Research, Development, and Engineering Command to 

Agreement Structures and Dynamic 

components. 

DTFACT-06-X-00001 

support FAA rulemaking and the implementation of 

damage tolerance (DT) methodology in the design and 

certification of rotorcraft and dynamic components. 

FAA/DOD Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Provide technical support in these areas: 

Interagency Prevention Program 1. Uncontained Engine Failure Research; 2. Dry Bay 

Agreement DTFACT-06-X-00005 Fire Protection; 3. Fuel System Explosion – Protection; 

4. Engine Malfunction plus Inappropriate Crew 

Response; and 5. Engine and Other Aircraft System 

Impending Failure Diagnostics Research 

FAA/DOD 

Interagency 

Agreement 

Rotorcraft Health Usage 

Monitoring System (HUMS) 

DTFACT-06-X-00008 

Engineering support for the FAA rotorcraft structural 

integrity research program. 

FAA/NSF 

Interagency 

Agreement 

Ground Deicing/Anti-icing 

Program. 

DTFACT-07-X-00002 

Technical participation with and financial support for 

National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) on 

ground icing research. 

FAA/DOE Continued Airworthiness Provide access to DOE/Sandia National Laboratory’s 

Interagency Assurance independent test and evaluation capabilities for 

Agreement DTFACT-07-X-00005 nondestructive inspection systems; structural integrity 

maintenance & information systems; and aging nonstructural systems. 

FAA/DOD Rotorcraft Health Usage Support FAA research efforts in HUMS operational 

Interagency Monitoring System (HUMS) development, commercial HUMS validation, and 

Agreement DTFACT-07-X-00008 HUMS Advisory Circular compliance validation and 

demonstration. 

FAA/NASA Wake Turbulence and Building upon and expanding the long-standing 

Interagency Associated Reduced research relationship between the FAA and NASA in 

Agreement Separation Research. 

DTFAWA-07-X-80026 

the areas of wake turbulence and required separation 

between aircraft to insure flight safety. 

FAA/NASA Performance Data Analysis To enable continued collaboration in research and 

Interagency and Reporting System development efforts by NASA and the FAA on the 

Agreement (PDARS) 

DTFAWA-07-X-00033 

utilization and enhancement of the Performance Data 

Analysis and Reporting System. 

FAA/DOD Support substantiation of FAA Obtain technical information related to HUMS AC 

Interagency Advisory Circular AC 29-2C compliance and validation – flight testing, operational 

Agreement Section MG-15 Airworthiness 

Approval of HUMS 

DTFACT-08-X-00002 

HUMS development, and commercial HUMS 

validation. 

B-2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Active MOUs, MOAs, and IAs in FY 2009 

Agreement 

Type Subject Objective 

FAA/NASA Software Enhancement, Establish a cooperative procedure to enhance the 

Interagency Standardization and Material NASA Crack Growth Program (NASGRO) software 

Agreement Database Generation for 

Damage Tolerance Analysis 

DTFACT-08-X-00004 

and generate material database for damage tolerance 

analysis. 

FAA/NASA P-STAR Radar Systems Establish collaborative research activities on manned 

Interagency DTFACT-08-X-00005 and unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), and in 

Agreement particular, on utilization of ground based radar systems 

to support the FAA UAS safety studies. 

FAA/NASA Characterization of High Ice- Collaborative icing research with NASA Glenn 

Interagency Water Content Environments. Research Center with main, but not exclusive, focus on 

Agreement DTFACT-08-X-00007 propulsion icing in high ice water content environments 

potentially hazardous to engines. 

FAA/NASA 

Interagency 

Agreements 

Support of the FAA R&TD 

NASA Langley Field Team 

DTFAWA-08-X-00009 

Continuing operation and support of the FAA Field 

Offices established at NASA Centers and 

accomplishment of cooperative projects. 

FAA/NASA 

Interagency 

Agreements 

Support of the FAA R&TD 

NASA Ames Field Team 

DTFAWA-08-X-80011 

Continuing operation and support of the FAA Field 

Offices established at NASA Centers and 

accomplishment of cooperative projects. 

FAA/NASA Research for Aviation Coordination and cooperation between FAA and 

Interagency Communications/ NASA to leverage both agencies’ strengths to enable 

Agreement Navigation/Surveillance/ 

Information Systems 

DTFAWA-08-X-80021 

the most efficient CNSI research and technology 

development and implementation of the NextGen 

vision. 

FAA/NASA 

Interagency 

Agreement 

Human Factors Research 

DTFAWA-08-X-80023 

FAA HFRE and NASA Ames will collaborate on 

human factors research that support the FAA’s goals of 

greater capacity and increased safety. 

FAA/NASA Research and Technology This agreement between the FAA’s Air Traffic 

Interagency Development Concept Development Group and NASA establishes 

Agreement DTFAWA-08-X-80031 roles and responsibilities for each organization in a 

collaborative effort to develop the Next Generation Air 

Traffic Control System (NextGen). 

FAA/NASA Aviation Safety Reporting ASRS is designed to provide information to the FAA 

Interagency System (ASRS) and the aviation community to identify and eliminate 

Agreement DTFAWA-09-X-80016 unsafe conditions to prevent accidents. NASA receives, 

processes, and analyzes the raw information ensuring 

confidentiality of the reporter. 

FAA/NASA Enhancement of Aeronautical A framework under which NASA and the FAA can 

Interagency Research and Technology collaborate in aeronautics research and technology 

Agreements Development 

DTFAWA-09-A-80018 

FAA/NASA 

Interagency 

Agreement 

NextGen Human Factors Air 

Traffic Control Research 

DTFAWA-09-X-80020 

The FAA and NASA will research, study, analyze, 

model, test and implement the advanced services and 

capabilities required for NextGen to be successful. 

FAA/NASA Develop methods to define Support validation and demonstration of HUMS 

Interagency helicopter vibration thresholds operation requirement, technologies, and processes to 

Agreement IA # SAA3-872 collect and substantiate structural usage data for 

maintenance credits. 

B-3 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

1.2 Interagency Committees 

In addition to MOUs, the FAA partners with other agencies through a variety of inter-agency 

committees and groups. For example, the FAA and other interested federal agencies established 

the Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise to encourage debate and agreement over 

needs for future aviation noise abatement and new research efforts. The committee conducts 

annual public forums in different geographic regions with the intent to align noise abatement 

research with local public concerns. 

2. Working with Government, Industry, and Academia 

The FAA complies with all applicable federal guidelines and legislation concerning the transfer 

of technology. The FAA’s goal is to transfer knowledge, facilities, equipment, and capabilities 

developed by its laboratories and R&D programs to the private sector. This helps expand the 

United States technology base and maximize the return on federal R&D investments. 

2.1 Cooperative Research and Development Agreements 

The Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRDAs) allow the FAA and its 

partners to share facilities, equipment, services, intellectual property, and personnel resources 

with industry, academia, and state and local governments in collaborative R&D activities. 

CRDAs are a highly effective way to meet congressionally mandated technology transfer 

requirements. In fiscal year (FY) 2009, the FAA established 7 new CRDAs, bringing the present 

total of active agreements to 22. Table B.2 provides details of these CRDAs. 

Table B.2 – Active Cooperative Research and Development Agreements, FY 2009 

Active CRDAs in FY 2009 

CRDA 

Number FAA Program Subject Recipient Organization 

Award 

Date 

Completi 

on Date 

1994-A-0065 Airport 

Technology 

Research -

Safety 

Testing of a soft ground 

arresting system developed to 

safely stop aircraft that 

overrun the available length of 

runway 

Engineered 

Arresting 

Systems Corp., 

Logan Township, 

NJ 

09/07/94 09/07/10 

1996-A-0097 Airport 

Technology 

Research -

Capacity 

Development of the National 

Airport Pavement Test 

Machine 

The Boeing 

Company, 

Seattle, WA 

07/29/96 07/29/11 

2001-A-0164 Airport 

Technology 

Research -

Safety 

Use statistical analysis for 

determining airplane contact 

risks of varying-span 

airplanes on taxiways of 

varying separation 

The Boeing 

Company, 

Seattle, WA 

04/05/02 04/05/11 

B-4 
 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Active CRDAs in FY 2009 

CRDA 

Number FAA Program Subject Recipient Organization 

Award 

Date 

Completi 

on Date 

2002-A-0171 Capacity and Air 

Traffic 

Management 

Technology 

Develop modeling and 

simulation tools to assist in 

tech implementation of 

capacity enhancing 

capabilities for the National 

Airspace System 

The Boeing 

Company, 

McLean, VA 

07/17/02 07/17/12 

2005-A-0213 Air Traffic 

Models and 

Evaluation Tools 

Machine-graded aviation 

English test for pilots for 

measuring levels of English 

language proficiency 

Ordinate 

Corporation, 

Menlo Park, CA 

01/17/06 01/17/11 

2006-A-0216 Air Traffic 

Models and 

Evaluation Tools 

Development and 

improvement of a graphical 

user interface for the display 

of recorded air traffic data 

Rowan 

University, 

Glassboro, NJ 

07/25/06 07/25/10 

2006-A-0219 Human Factors 

& Aviation 

Medicine 

Air Traffic Controller 

Cognitive Modeling 

Drexel 

University, 

Philadelphia, PA 

02/20/07 02/20/10 

2006-A-0223 Surface 

Surveillance 

Airport Surface Surveillance RVision LLC, 

San Diego, CA 

12/13/06 04/13/10 

2007-A-0233 Surveillance Flight testing for ADS-B 

separation standards 

CNS Aviation, 

Vienna, VA 

07/18/07 07/18/11 

2007-A-0235 SERC/NextGen Provide guidance for 

NetCentric standards and 

protocols that may be 

incorporated by the NextGen 

Program. 

Network Centric 

Operations 

Industry 

Consortium Inc., 

Newport Beach, 

CA 

09/21/07 09/21/10 

2007-A-0236 Continued 

Airworthiness 

Composite repair of aircraft 

structures 

The Boeing 

Company, 

Huntington 

Beach, CA 

10/30/07 10/30/10 

2008-A-0245 Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems 

Research 

Unmanned aircraft system 

research 

New Mexico 

State University, 

Las Cruces, NM 

02/19/08 02/19/10 

2008-A-0247 Propulsion and 

Fuel Systems 

Full scale engine evaluation 

and analyses of aviation fuel 

Swift Enterprises, 

West Lafayette, 

IN 

06/30/08 06/30/10 

2008-A-0249 Technical 

Strategies and 

Integration 

Aviation-related research in 

support of DoD rapid 

response-third generation 

activities 

HiTec Systems 

Inc., Egg Harbor 

Township, NJ 

08/5/08 04/5/14 

2008-A-0250 Fire Safety Wind tunnel research in 

aerodynamics 

Absegami High 

School, Galloway 

Township, NJ 

09/17/08 03/17/10 

2008-A-0251 Laboratory 

Future 

Development 

For the advancement and 

commercialization of Sun 

Keyboard System Translator 

Diakon Solutions 

LLC, Cape May 

Court House, NJ 

12/10/08 12/10/13 

B-5 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Active CRDAs in FY 2009 

CRDA 

Number FAA Program Subject Recipient Organization 

Award 

Date 

Completi 

on Date 

2008-A-0252 Human Factors Index of cognitive activity and 

characteristics of the air traffic 

control task 

The Richard 

Stockton College 

of New Jersey, 

Pomona, NJ 

01/6/09 01/6/11 

2008-A-0255 Weather Network centric airborne 

microserver 

Center for 

Network Centric 

Product Support 

Research LLC, 

East Hartford, CT 

10/23/08 10/23/11 

2009-A-0257 Laboratory 

Future 

Development 

Aircraft Geometric Height 

Measurement Element 

Diakon Solutions, 

LLC Cape May 

Court House, NJ 

01/27/09 01/27/14 

2009-A-0258 Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems 

Research 

Modeling and simulation to 

assess the impact of 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

General Atomics 

Aeronautical 

Systems, Inc. San 

Diego, CA 

07/15/09 07/15/11 

2009-A-0259 Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems 

Research 

Modeling and simulation to 

assess the impact of 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

AAI Corporation, 

Hunt Valley, MD 

06/26/09 06/26/11 

2009-A-0260 Unmanned 

Aircraft Systems 

Research 

Modeling and simulation to 

assess the impact of 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

GE Aviation 

Systems LLC, 

Grand Rapids, MI 

06/19/09 06/19/11 

3. Working with Industry 

3.1 Small Business Innovation Research 

Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contracts encourage the private sector to invest in 

long-term research that helps the federal government meet its R&D objectives. Eligible small 

business contractors compete for Phase I contracts to conduct feasibility-related experimental or 

theoretical research. A Phase II contract is awarded based on the results of Phase I; Phase II is 

the actual research phase. Contractors are encouraged to pursue other than SBIR funding 

sources for Phase III and to attract venture capitalists to commercialize the innovation. 

3.2 Patents Issued Through the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 

Inventors are encouraged to patent new technologies through the U.S. Patent and Trademark 

Office. A patent is a grant of a property right and gives the owner the right to exclude anyone 

else from making, using, or selling the invention. Inventions patented by FAA inventors are 

available for commercial licensing with royalty payments shared with the inventor and the 

agency. Legislation allows for inventors to receive up to $150,000 a year over their salary from 

royalty payments. The agency’s Technology Transfer Program Office promotes the agency’s 

patents for commercialization. Table B.3 lists the current U.S. patents issued to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, FAA. 

B-6 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Two licensing agreements are in effect for Patent No. 5,981,290 “Microscale Combustion 

Calorimeter” and Patent No. 6,464,391 “Heat Release Rate Calorimeter for Milligram Samples.” 

Under the patent provisions of Government funding agreements, recipients must disclose each 

subject invention that they make to the Federal agency and may elect to retain title to any 

patentable subject matter. If the recipient retains title, the Government is granted a broad license 

to use the invention for Government purposes throughout the world. 

The FAA has identified approximately 60 active patents resulting from FAA funded agreements. 

These patented technologies are available for use by the Government, and its contractors, on a 

cost-free basis when used for Government purposes. For more information, see 

http://www.tc.faa.gov/technologytransfer/ttpatentsthru_grant.html. 

Table B.3 – Patents Issued for DOT/FAA 

Patents Issued for DOT/FAA 

Patent No. Date 

of Patent Title Description 

7,592,816 09/22/09 Localizer cable fault analyzer An analyzer that memorizes which antenna in a 

Localizer antenna array caused a fault. 

6,812,834 11/02/04 Reference sample for generating 

smoky atmosphere 

A reference sample for testing fire detectors and 

a method for testing using the reference samples. 

6,470,730 10/29/02 Dry transfer method for the 

preparation of explosives test 

samples 

A method of preparing samples for testing 

explosives and drug detectors of the type that 

search for particles in air. 

6,467,950 10/22/02 Device and Method to Measure 

Mass Loss Rate of an 

Electrically Heated Sample 

A device and a method for measuring the mass 

loss rate of a sample of combustible material 

placed on a mass-sensitive platform. 

6,464,391 10/15/02 Heat Release Rate Calorimeter 

for Milligram Samples 

A calorimeter that measures heat release rates of 

very small samples (on the order of 1 to 10 

milligrams) without the need to separately and 

simultaneously measure the mass loss rate of the 

sample and the heat of combustion of the fuel 

gases produced during the fuel generation 

process. 

6,116,049 09/12/00 Adiabatic Expansion Nozzle A nozzle for producing a continuous gas/solid or 

gas/aerosol stream from a liquid having a high 

room temperature vapor pressure. 

5,981,290 11/09/99 Microscale Combustion 

Calorimeter 

A calorimeter for measuring flammability 

parameters of materials using only milligram 

sample quantities. 

4. Working with Academia 

4.1 Joint University Program for Air Transportation Research 

The Joint University Program (JUP) is a research partnership of three universities (Ohio 

University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Princeton) that conducts scientific and 

engineering research on technical disciplines that contribute to civil aviation, including air traffic 

control theory, human factors, satellite navigation and communications, aircraft flight dynamics, 

B-7 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

avionics, and meteorological hazards. The FAA and NASA benefit directly from the results of 

the research and, less formally, from valuable feedback from university researchers regarding the 

goals and effectiveness of government programs. An additional benefit is the creation of a 

talented cadre of engineers and scientists who will form a core of advanced aeronautical 

expertise in industry, academia, and government. For more information, see 

http://u2.princeton.edu/~jup/. 

4.2 Aviation Grants 

The FAA awards research grants to qualifying colleges, universities, and legally incorporated 

nonprofit research institutions. The evaluation criteria for grant proposals include the potential 

application of research results to the FAA's long-term goals for civil aviation technology. Table 

B.4 lists the FAA research grants started in FY 2009. The FAA awarded $9,456,680 in new 

grants in FY 2009. It also awarded an additional $8,299,661 to grants started in prior fiscal years 

for a total of $17,756,341 in grant awards in FY 2009. 

Table B.4 - FAA Research Grants Starting in FY 2009 

FAA Research Grants, FY 2009 

FAA R&D Program Grant Number 

and Title 

Recipient 

Institution 

Award and 

Completion 

Dates 

Award 

Amount 

Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors 

2009-G-001 

The Identification of 

Critical Human 

Factors Issues for 

Improving 

Collaborative Air 

Traffic Management 

in the Future Aviation 

System 

The Ohio State 

University 

10/14/2008 

8/31/2010 $173,071 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

Research 

009-G-002 

Visual Aircraft 

Detection and 

Tracking via Foveal 

and Peripheral Vision 

Board of 

Trustees of the 

Leland Stanford 

Junior University 

11/18/2008 

11/17/2010 $203,200 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/Syst 

em Integration Human 

Factors 

2009-G-003 

Improving Aviation 

Safety Through 

Training & Design 

George Mason 

University 2/18/2009 

2/17/2010 $450,000 

Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors 

2009-G-004 

Data Communication 

Part-task Simulation: 

Pilot Performance 

Board of 

Trustees of the 

University of 

Illinois 

3/3/2009 

9/2/2010 $299,523 

Runway Incursion Reduction 2009-G-005 

Airport Runway 

Incursion Safety 

Analysis and 

Prioritization 

The Rector and 

Visitors of the 

University of 

Virginia 

7/22/2009 

7/21/2011 $160,000 

B-8 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Research Grants, FY 2009 

FAA R&D Program Grant Number 

and Title 

Recipient 

Institution 

Award and 

Completion 

Dates 

Award 

Amount 

Airport Technology Research 

– Safety 

2009-G-006 

Non Wildlifeattracting Native and 

Naturalized Turf 

Species Suitable for 

Use on Airfields 

Managed for Wildlife 

Hazards in the 

Northeast 

The Research 

Foundation of 

SUNY for 

SUNY College at 

Oneonta 5/21/2009 

8/20/2010 $25,487 

Weather Program 2009-G-007 

Weather Processors 

Support Task: RightSizing NextGen 

Weather Observation 

Network 

The Board of 

Regents of the 

University of 

Oklahoma 

5/27/2009 

3/26/2010 $247,500 

Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Human Factors 

2009-G-008 

Situation Management 

Georgia Tech 

Research 

Corporation 

6/9/2009 

6/8/2010 $294,992 

Airport Technology Research 

– Capacity 

2009-G-009 

Pavement 

Rehabilitation 

Strategies for Ramps 

at Airports with 

Commercial and 

Primary Services 

University of 

Massachusetts 

Dartmouth 6/18/2009 

6/17/2010 $43,000 

Satellite-based Navigation Satellite-Based 

Aircraft Precision 

Approach and 

Landing Research 

Ohio University 

8/3/2009 

11/2/2010 $397,533 

Airport Technology Research 

– Safety 

2009-G-0011 

NSSA Security Work 

for FY 2000 

National Safe 

Skies Alliance 8/7/2009 

8/6/2010 $5,000,000 

Flightdeck/Maintenance/ 

System Integration Human 

Factors 

2009-G-0012 

Forecasting the Future 

of Aviation 

Maintenance and the 

Impact on the US 

Aviation Maintenance 

Technician 

Board of 

Trustees of the 

University of 

Illinois 8/25/2009 

8/24/2010 $250,426 

Fire Research and Safety 2009-G-0013 

Ultra-low 

Flammability Polymer 

Materials for Aircraft 

University of 

Massachusetts 

Amherst 

8/7/2009 

8/6/2010 $236,747 

Continued Airworthiness 2009-G-0014 

Flight Loads Analysis 

of Light Agricultural 

Aircraft 

Wichita State 

University 8/5/2009 

1/4/2011 $245,292 

B-9 
 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Research Grants, FY 2009 

FAA R&D Program Grant Number 

and Title 

Recipient 

Institution 

Award and 

Completion 

Dates 

Award 

Amount 

Continued Airworthiness 2009-G-0015 

Damage Tolerance 

Based Maintenance 

Planning of Aircraft 

Structures Subjected 

to Stochastic Process 

Random Effects 

Wichita State 

University 

8/14/2009 

2/17/2011 $180,000 

Continued Airworthiness 2009-G-0016 

Probabilistic Damage 

Tolerance-Based 

Maintenance Planning 

for Small Airplanes 

University of 

Texas at San 

Antonio 9/1/2009 

8/31/2012 $717,517 

Aviation Safety Risk 

Analysis 

2009-G-0017 

Statistical Analysis of 

Contributing Factors 

in Landing 

Performance during 

Commercial 

Operations 

Rutgers, The 

State University 

of New Jersey 8/25/2009 

8/28/2010 $154,677 

Fire Research and Safety 2009-G-0018 

Material 

Flammability: Twodimensional Burning 

Model for Aircraft 

Materials 

University of 

Maryland 

9/1/2009 

8/31/2010 $139,968 

Atmospheric Hazards – 

Aircraft Icing 

2009-G-0019 

Plans for Future Pilot 

Icing Training 

Materials: Developing 

New Techniques and 

Educational Design 

Methods for Pilot 

Icing Training 

Materials 

Decision Science 

Research 

Institute 

8/27/2009 

8/26/2010 $50,000 

Fire Research and Safety 2009-G-0020 

Collaborative 

Research Supporting 

FAA Fire Safety 

Mission through FAARutgers Graduate 

Assistant Support 

Rutgers, the State 

University of 

New Jersey 9/2/2009 

9/1/2010 $102,116 

B-10 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Research Grants, FY 2009 

FAA R&D Program Grant Number 

and Title 

Recipient 

Institution 

Award and 

Completion 

Dates 

Award 

Amount 

Atmospheric Hazards – 

Aircraft Icing 

2009-G-0021 

An Investigation of 

Anti-icing Endurance 

Times of Aircraft 

Ground De/Anti-icing 

Fluids: Snow Pellets, 

Thermodynamic and 

Aerodynamic Fluid 

Failure and Nonglycol Fluids 

University of 

Quebec at 

Chicoutimi 

9/3/2009 

9/2/2010 $85,631$ 

Total of awards originating in FY 2009: $9,456,680 

4.3 Air Transportation Centers of Excellence 

The FAA sponsors five air transportation centers of excellence (COEs) with academic 

institutions throughout the United States. COEs are established through long-term cooperative 

agreements that encourage collaboration between government, academia, and industry to 

advance aviation technologies. COE universities match FAA grants by partnering with industry 

affiliates and state and local governments. The five COEs include: 

• COE for Research in the Intermodal Transport Environment (RITE) 

• Joint COE for Advanced Materials (JAMS) 

• Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction (PARTNER) 

• COE for General Aviation Research (CGAR) 

• COE for Airport Technology (CEAT) 

A new COE for Commercial Space Transportation is under consideration for FY 2010. 

The pages that follow provide a brief description of each of the five centers with a table that 

identifies the grants awarded in FY 2009 for each COE. 

4.3.1 COE for Research in the Intermodal Transport Environment (RITE) 

Established as the Center of Excellence for Airliner Cabin Environment in 2004, Harvard 

University and Purdue University are the technical leads for the renamed COE for Research in 

the Intermodal Transport Environment (RITE). Auburn University serves as the administrative 

lead. RITE conducts R&D on cabin air quality and chemical and biological threats. Because of 

the Phase I evaluation, RITE expanded research activities to include the intermodal transport 

environment. Other member universities include: Boise State University, Kansas State 

University, the University of California at Berkeley, and the University of Medicine and 

Dentistry of New Jersey. For additional information see: http://www.acer-coe.org/. 

B-11 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Table B.5 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to COE for Research in the Intermodal Transport 

Environment (RITE) 

RITE Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Pesticide Exposure and Ozone 

By-Products 

University of Medicine 

and Dentistry of New 

Jersey 

$150,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

C. Weisel 

Chemical Sensors for Cabin Air 

Quality 

Boise State University 

$150,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

S. Loo 

Ozone and its Volatile Reaction 

By-Products on Domestic and 

International Flights 

University of California at 

Berkeley $150,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

W. Nazaroff 

Health Effects of Mild Hypoxia 

During Air Travel - a Study of 

Physiological Effects and 

Impact; Evaluation of 

Triethylene Glycol for 

Inactivation of Influenza Virus 

Aerosols 

Harvard University 

$250,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

J. Spengler 

Improvements on the Advanced 

Models for Predicting 

Contaminant and Infectious 

Disease Virus Transport in 

Airliner Cabin Environment 

Purdue University 

$250,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

Q. Chen 

Chemical Sensors for Cabin Air 

Quality 

Auburn University 

$250,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

R. Overfelt 

Aircraft Recirculation Filter for 

Air Quality and Incident 

Assessment 

Kansas State University 

$120,000 

C. Ruehle 

and 

J. Watson 

S. Eckels 

Total awarded in FY 2009: $1,4000,000 

4.3.2 Joint COE for Advanced Materials (JAMS) 

Established in 2003, under the leadership of the University of Washington and Wichita State 

University, the Joint COE for Advanced Materials conducts R&D on material standardization 

and shared databases; bonded joints; structural substantiation; damage tolerance and durability; 

maintenance practices; advanced material forms and processes; cabin safety; life management of 

materials; and nanotechnology for composite structures. Other member universities include: 

Edmonds Community College, Northwestern University, Oregon State University, Purdue 

University, the University of California at Los Angeles, the University of Delaware, Florida 

International University, the University of Utah, Tuskegee University, and Washington State 

University. For additional information, see http://www.jams-coe.org/. 

B-12 
 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Table B.6 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to the Joint COE in Advanced Materials (JAMS) 

JAMS Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Fluid Ingression Damage 

Mechanisms in Composite 

Sandwich Structures 

Wichita State University 

$50,000 D. Westlund J. Tomblin 

Development and Safety 

Management of Composite 

Certification Guidance 

Wichita State University 

$51,500 C. Davies J. Tomblin 

Improving Adhesive Bonding of 

Composites through Surface 

Characterization 

University of Washington 

$70,000 C. Davies B. Flinn 

Certification of Discontinuous 

Composite Material Forms for 

Aircraft Structures 

University of Washington 

$65,000 C. Davies M. Tuttle 

Standardization of Analytical 

and Experimental Methods for 

Crashworthiness Energy 

Absorption of Composite 

Materials 

University of Washington 

$34,044 A. 

Abramowitz P. Feraboli 

Combined Global/Local 

Variability and Uncertainty in 

Integrated Aeroservoelasticity of 

Composite Aircraft 

University of Washington 

$34,000 L. Pham E. Livne 

Development of ReliabilityBased Damage Tolerant 

Structural Design Methodology 

University of Washington 

$34,000 L. Pham E. Livne 

Administration of the FAA 

Center on Advanced Materials in 

Transport Aircraft Structures 

(AMTAS) 

University of Washington 

$74,531 C. Davies M. Tuttle 

Identification and Validation of 

Analytical Chemistry Methods 

for Detecting Composite Surface 

Contamination and Moisture 

Florida International 

University $34,000 D. Westlund D. McDaniel 

Development and Evaluation of 

Fracture Mechanics Test 

Methods for Sandwich 

Composites 

University of Utah 

$34,000 C. Davies D. Adams 

Certification by Analysis Wichita State University $150,000 A. 

Abramowitz G. Olivares 

Environmental Factor Influence 

on Composite Design and 

Certification 

Wichita State University 

$225,000 D. Westlund J. Tomblin 

Inverse/Optimal Thermal Repair 

of Composites 

University of Washington $58,761 C. Davies A. Emery 

Improving Adhesive Bonding of 

Composites Through Surface 

Characterization 

University of Washington 

$34,000 C. Davies B. Flinn 

Impact Damage Formation on 

Composite Aircraft Structures 

University of California at 

Los Angeles $162,500 C. Davies T. Hahn/H. Kim 

B-13 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

JAMS Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Training Strategy Development -

Composite Materials Education 

for Aircraft Practitioners 

Edmonds Community 

College $38,640 C. Davies C. Seaton 

Training Strategy Development 

– Composite Materials 

Education for Aircraft 

Practitioners 

Edmonds Community 

College $25,000 D. Westlund C. Shaeffer 

Failure of Notched Laminates 

Under Out-of-plane Bending 

Oregon State University $30,000 L. Pham J. Parmigiani 

Development and Safety 

Management of Composite 

Certification Guidance 

Wichita State University 

$75,000 C. Davies J. Tomblin 

Evaluation of Friction Stir Weld 

Process and Properties for 

Aircraft Application 

Wichita State University 

$200,000 L. Pham D. Burford 

Failure of Notched Laminates 

Under Out of Plane Bending 

Oregon State University $64,650 L. Pham T. Kennedy 

Damage Tolerance Testing and 

Analysis Protocols for Full-Scale 

Composite Airframe Structures 

under Repeated Loading 

Wichita State University 

$275,000 C. Davies J. Tomblin 

Administration of the Center of 

Excellence for Composites and 

Advanced Materials (CECAM) 

at Wichita State University 

Wichita State University 

$75,000 C. Davies J. Tomblin 

Production Control Effect on 

Composite Material Quality and 

Stability 

Wichita State University 

$125,000 C. Davies J. Tomblin 

Total awarded in FY 2009: $2,019,626 

4.3.3 COE Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction 

(PARTNER) 

Selected by the Administrator in 2003, the COE Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and 

Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) is co-sponsored by NASA and Transport Canada with FAA 

and led by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. PARTNER conducts R&D to identify, 

understand, measure, and mitigate the impacts of aircraft noise and aviation emissions. 

PARTNER seeks to reduce uncertainty in issues dealing with climate impact and the health and 

welfare effects of emissions to actionable levels. Other member universities include: 

Pennsylvania State University, Purdue University, Stanford University, the University of 

Missouri-Rolla, the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill, and Georgia Institute of 

Technology. For additional information, see http://www.partner.aero. 

B-14 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

Table B.7 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to the Partnership for Air Transportation Noise 

and Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) 

PARTNER Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Noise Exposure-Response: 

Annoyance 

Pennsylvania State 

University $25,000 M. Marsan V. Sparrow 

Environmental Design Space 

Tool Development 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology $100,000 J. DiPardo D. Mavris 

Program Management for 

Aircraft Noise and Aviation 

Emissions Mitigation Center of 

Excellence 

Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology $100,000 L. Maurice I. Waitz 

Noise Exposure Response - 

Sleep Disturbance 

Purdue University $25,000 L. Fisher P. Davies 

Emissions Characteristics of 

Alternative Aviation 

Missouri University of 

Science and Technology $150,000 C. Ma P. Whitefield 

Environmental Cost-Benefit 

Analysis of Ultra Low Sulfur Jet 

Fuels 

Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology $174,000 M. Gupta I. Waitz 

EDS Capability Demonstration 

for Assessing the CLEEN 

Program 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology $100,000 J. DiPardo D. Mavris 

Implementation of Enhanced 

Network Restructuring 

Algorithms and Scenarios for 

Improved ATO Forecasts 

Purdue University 

$75,000 J. Post D. 

DeLaurentis 

Economic and Environmental 

Effects of the Introduction of a 

Cap and Trade Policy in 

Aviation 

Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology $400,000 T. Cuddy I. Waitz 

SAE E31 Methodology 

Development and Associated 

PM and HAP Emissions 

Characteristics for a HighBypass Turbofan Engine 

Missouri University of 

Science and Technology 

$450,000 C. Ma P. Whitefield 

Use of Near-Term Operational 

Changes to Mitigate 

Environmental Impacts of 

Aviation 

Purdue University 

$104,515 L. Wedande K. Marais 

Development of a Research 

Roadmap for Sound Structural 

Transmission 

Purdue University 

$25,000 B. Hua K. Ming 

CDA Implementation in Lowthrough High Density Traffic Georgia Institute of 

Technology $250,000 S. Liu J-P Clarke 

NextGen En Route Traffic 

Optimization to Reduce Fuel 

Burn and Emissions 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology $989,197 L. 

Windhoffer J-P Clarke 

Noise Characterization and 

Improved Metrics to Assess 

Open Rotor Engine 

Architectures and Noise Impact 

to Airport Communities 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology 

$75,000 B. He D. Mavris 

B-15 
 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

PARTNER Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Monitoring of Enroute and Open 

Rotor Noise 

Pennsylvania State 

University $75,000 Hua V. Sparrow 

Program C. Management for 

Aircraft Noise and Aviation 

Emissions Center of Excellence 

C. Massachusetts Institute 

of Technology $295,000 L. Maurice I. Waitz 

Assessment of CO2 Emission 

Metrics for Commercial Aircraft 

Certification and Fleet 

Performance Monitoring 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology $225,000 L. 

Windhoffer D. Mavris 

Outreach Pennsylvania State 

University $60,000 L. Fisher V. Sparrow 

Sonic Boom Mitigation Pennsylvania State 

University $167,658 L. Fisher V. Sparrow 

Source Emission and 

Propagation 

Pennsylvania State 

University $58,000 B. Hua V. Sparrow 

Studying the Effects of Aircraft 

Exhaust on Global and Regional 

Climate 

Stanford University 

$420,000 M. Gupta M. Jacobson 

Multi-Scale Modeling 

Assessment of the Impacts of 

Aviation Emissions on Air 

Quality 

University of North 

Carolina $274,999 M. Gupta S. 

Arunachalam 

Health Impacts of AviationRelated Air Pollutants Harvard University $200,000 M. Gupta J. Levy 

SAE E31 Methodology 

Development and Associated 

PM Emissions Characteristics of 

Aircraft APUs and Alternative 

Aviation Fuels 

Missouri University of 

Science and Technology 

$60,000 C. Ma P. Whitefield 

Use of Isotopic Measurement 

and Analysis Approach to 

Uniquely Relate Aircraft 

Emissions to Changes in 

Ambient Air Quality 

Missouri University of 

Science and Technology 

$96,063 M. Gupta P. Whitefield 

Sonic Boom Mitigation Purdue University $10,000 L. Fisher P. Davies 

Environmental Design Space 

Tool Development 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology $799,999 J. DePardo D. Mavris 

Use of Near-Term Operational 

Changes to Mitigate 

Environmental Impacts of 

Aviation 

Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology $153,000 L. Wedande J. Hansman 

Emissions Characteristics of 

Alternative Aviation Fuels 

Missouri University of 

Science and Technology $384,000 C. Ma P. Whitefield 

Environmental Cost-Benefit 

Analysis of Alternative Jet Fuels 

Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology $300,000 W. Gillette I. Waitz 

Noise Exposure Response – 

Sleep Disturbance 

Purdue University $45,000 L. Fisher P. Davies 

Total awarded in FY 2009: $6,666,431 

B-16 
 

 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

4.3.4 COE for General Aviation Research (CGAR) 

Established in 2001, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University serves as the lead member for the 

Center of Excellence for General Aviation Research. This COE conducts safety-related R&D 

with application to non-commercial aviation. Core university members include: Wichita State 

University, the University of North Dakota, and the University of Alaska - Fairbanks and 

Anchorage. For additional information, see http://www.cgar.org. 

Table B.8– Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to COE for General Aviation Research (CGAR) 

CGAR Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient 

University Amount FAA POC University POC 

Pilot Awareness of Current 

and LED Elevated Runway 

Guard Lighting 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $52,804 D. Gallagher J. French 

General Aviation Systems 

Safety Management Research 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $49,369 T. Tessitore A. Stolzer 

General Aviation Systems 

Safety Management Research 

University of Alaska - 

Anchorage $25,000 T. Tessitore L. Kirk 

General Aviation Systems 

Safety Management Research 

University of North 

Dakota $45,000 T. Tessitore G. Ullrich 

Flight Data Monitoring: 

General Aviation Safety 

Information Analysis & 

Sharing 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $23,492 T. Tessitore D. Esser 

General Aviation Systems 

Safety Management Research 

University of North 

Dakota $10,000 T. Tessitore G. Ullrich 

General Aviation Systems 

Safety Management Research 

University of Alaska – 

Anchorage $10,000 T. Tessitore L. Kirk 

Data Communications Human 

Factor Air Traffic Control 

Implications on Preferential 

Treatment Service-forEquipage Scenarios Across 

the NAS 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University 

$35,157 L. Ileri E. Blickensderfer 

Weather in the Cockpit 

(WITC) - Concept of 

Operations 

University of Alaska - 

Anchorage $150,126 I. Johnson L. Kirk 

A Database Management 

System for General Aviation 

Safety 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $58,972 V. Kolli M Bazargan 

Year Nine, Management & 

Administrative Support - 

General Aviation Center of 

Excellence 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $221,446 P. Sparacino S. Hampton 

Weather Technology in the 

Cockpit - User Needs 

Segment 

University of North 

Dakota $176,679 I. Johnson J. Vacek 

Load Spectrum Development 

for Unmanned Aerial Systems 

Airworthiness 

Wichita State 

University $100,000 T. Vu J. Tomblin 

B-17 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

CGAR Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient 

University Amount FAA POC University POC 

Development of a 3-

Dimensional Radar Based 

Airspace Monitoring 

Surveillance Instrument 

University of Alaska - 

Fairbanks $22,139 J. Zvanya G. Walker 

Development of a ThreeDimensional Radar Based 

Airspace Monitoring and 

Surveillance Instrument 

University of Alaska - 

Fairbanks $88,883 J. Zvanya G. Walker 

Subject Matter Expert Support 

for FAA UAS Simulator 

Workstation 

University of North 

Dakota $100,000 Lee/ 

Buondonno D. Marshall 

Remote Airfield Lighting 

Systems 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $109,848 D. Gallagher C. Grant 

Weather Technology in the 

Cockpit - Pilot Training 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $77,364 I. Johnson J. Lanicci 

General Aviation Systems 

Safety Management Research 

Embry-Riddle 

Aeronautical University $10,000 T. Tessitore S. Hampton 

Helicopter Lighting System University of North 

Dakota $192,941 D. Gallagher T. Zeidlik 

Total awarded in FY 2009: $1,559,220 

4.3.5 COE for Airport Technology (CEAT) 

Established in 1995, the Center of Excellence for Airport Pavement Research focused primarily 

on pavement issues. The Center expanded its scope to include R&D on wildlife hazard 

mitigation, lighting, and related topics and changed its name to the Center of Excellence for 

Airport Technology. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign remains the lead 

university. Other member universities include: Northwestern University, Georgia Institute of 

Technology, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. For further information, see 

http://www.ceat.uiuc.edu/. 

Table B.9 – Grants Awarded in FY 2009 to COE for Airport Technology (CEAT) 

CEAT Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Field Evaluation of Runway 

Guard Lights 

Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Institute $125,000 D. Gallagher N. Narendran 

GIS, Hazard Assessment, Hazard 

Visualization, and CONOPS as 

Components of Wildlife 

Management Programs at 

Airports 

University of Illinois - 

Urbana-Champaign 

$451,476 

R. King E. Herricks 

Metrics Research Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Institute $150,000 D. Gallagher N. Narendran 

B-18 
 

2010 NARP Appendix B 

February 1, 2010 

CEAT Awards in FY 2009 

Title Recipient University Amount FAA POC University 

POC 

Deployment and Operation of 

FOD Detection Systems at 

Airports with Runway Grove 

Testing 

University of Illinois - 

Urbana-Champaign $405,626 

J. Patterson E. Herricks 

Phosphor LEDs Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Institute $75,000 D. Gallagher N. Narendran 

Center of Excellence for Airport 

Technology (CEAT) Work 

Program FY 2010 

University of Illinois - 

Urbana-Champaign $408,000 

D. Brill D. Lange 

Deployment and Evaluation of 

Avian Radars 

University of Illinois - 

Urbana-Champaign $996,296 R. King E. Herricks 

Color Boundaries for Color 

Deficient Observers 

Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Institute $125,000 D. Gallagher N. Narendran 

Total awarded in FY 2009: $2,736,398 

B-19 

 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

APPENDIX C: Research, Engineering and Development 

Advisory Committee 

Introduction..................................................................................................................................C-1 

1. FAA Response to REDAC Guidance on Fiscal Year 2011 R&D Portfolio. .......................C-2 

General Observations...........................................................................................................C-2 

Subcommittee on Environment and Energy.........................................................................C-2 

NAS Operations Subcommittee ...........................................................................................C-5 

Subcommittee on Airports....................................................................................................C-9 

Subcommittee on Human Factors ......................................................................................C-11 

Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety.......................................................................................C-14 

2. FAA Response to REDAC Recommendations on Fiscal Year 2011 

R&D Budget.......................................................................................................................C-19 

General Observations.........................................................................................................C-19 

Subcommittee on Airports..................................................................................................C-21 

Subcommittee on Environment and Energy.......................................................................C-22 

Subcommittee on Human Factors ......................................................................................C-23 

NAS Operations Subcommittee .........................................................................................C-27 

Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety.......................................................................................C-32 

C-i 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

C-ii 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Introduction 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) values the ongoing involvement of the Research, 

Engineering and Development Advisory Committee in reviewing its current and planned 

research and development programs. FAA has established a formal process for the agency to 

reply to Committee recommendations. This document summarizes the Committee 

recommendations made during fiscal year (FY) 2009, and includes FAA responses as follows: 

1. FAA Response to REDAC Guidance on Fiscal Year 2011 R&D Portfolio 

2. FAA Response to REDAC Recommendations on Fiscal Year 2011 R&D Budget. 

In FY 2010, FAA expects to receive the Committee’s recommendations on FAA’s planned 

research and development investments for FY 2012, including detailed recommendations from 

the standing subcommittees. 

C-1 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

1. FAA Response to REDAC Guidance on Fiscal Year 2011 R&D Portfolio. 

Dr. John Hansman (Committee Chair) submitted REDAC’s R&D guidance for FY 2011 to the 

Administrator on Oct. 17, 2008. The agency provided the following response to the 

recommendations. 

General Observations 

FAA Response: In response to your general observation about the multiple shared objectives of 

the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), the FAA recognizes the need to fully 

integrate the shared objectives of NextGen (e.g., Capacity, Efficiency, Emissions, Noise, Safety, 

Security) in both the near-term and long-term plans. The integrated benefits story related to the 

shared objectives is discussed in the NextGen Implementation Plan that the Agency released in 

January. Specific metrics that can be tracked to reflect progress towards the shared objectives 

are also in development. 

Subcommittee on Environment and Energy 

As a general observation, the REDAC has been encouraged by the efforts to develop a structured 

approach to integrate near term and longer term (NextGen) objectives as well as the beginning of 

a research requirements flow down process driven by NextGen. The REDAC is concerned, 

however, that the multiple shared objectives of NextGen (e.g. Capacity, Efficiency, Emissions, 

Noise, Safety, Security) are somewhat piecemeal and need to be more fully integrated in both 

near term and long term plans. It is also important that the NextGen planning processes remain 

dynamic and able to adapt to emergent factors such as fuel, emissions and financial concerns 

which may shift the relative importance of competing NextGen objectives. 

Recommendation (1): The Agency must continue to focus its environmental research on both 

activities to support NextGen and the traditional research necessary to ensure that United States 

leadership in the international process (ICAO) remains constant. It is therefore recommended 

that additional resources be made available, at least at the levels envisioned by the National 

Aviation Research Plan (NARP). 

FAA Response (1): We fully agree that environmental research to support the activities of both 

the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) and the International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) is important and should continue. We will strive to support these activities 

in 2011 at least at the levels envisioned in the 2008 NARP. 

Recommendation (2): With respect to NextGen, it is recommended that: 

Recommendation (2a): Concentration on applied solutions should continue, especially with 

respect to the ongoing research on potential alternative fuels. Indeed, to highlight the importance 

of alternative fuels, the Subcommittee recommends that funding for Alternative Fuels research 

be broken out as a separate line item in future FAA budgets. 

C-2 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Response (2a): We agree that focusing on applied solutions to mitigate environmental 

impacts is critical. We will separately highlight Alternative Fuels research investments in the 

future. However, please note that we cannot initiate robust efforts on applied solutions unless 

Congress appropriates the Fiscal Year 2009 President’s Budget request and ultimately 

reauthorizes the Agency’s activities. 

Recommendation (2b): Airspace redesigns have generated an entirely new class of aircraft 

noise complaints, with citizens miles from airports now voicing concerns. It is recommended 

that sufficient funds be made available for a thorough reassessment of the noise issue to ensure 

that the goals of NextGen are not derailed by environmental concerns based on noise. 

FAA Response (2b): We agree it is important to assess aircraft noise impacts within the context 

of airspace redesign. We are in the process of developing a new comprehensive noise research 

strategy and identifying partners and resources to carry it out. 

Recommendation (2c): Similarly, with NextGen considering a shift to underutilized or new 

airports to relieve future congestion, the environmental challenges inherent in such a paradigm 

shift, both in terms of noise and emissions, must be considered. Sufficient funding to conduct 

such research should be provided. 

FAA Response (2c): We agree that we must carefully assess and effectively address the 

environmental challenges inherent to shifting activities to underutilized airports. We will work 

this important effort, but it is dependent on Congress appropriating our Fiscal Year 2009 

President’s Budget request for Environment and Energy research and development. 

Recommendation (2d): In order to foster continued communication and cooperation between 

the Office of Environment and Energy and the Air Traffic Organization (ATO), the 

subcommittee recommends that ATO establish one point of contact for work with the 

environmental community. Such communication is necessary to ensure that environmental 

metrics are included in the ATO NextGen decision-making process so that the environmental 

impacts on air traffic decisions are adequately considered. 

FAA Response (2d): The Office of Environment and Energy (AEE) serves as FAA’s single 

point of contact with respect to the external environmental community. Environmental issues 

that impact NextGen span broad constituencies, such as airports, aircraft, and air traffic control 

infrastructure and procedures. As a result of the broad impact, the FAA has not assigned a single 

individual point of contact with ATO. However, the NextGen Integration and Implementation 

Office is serving as the coordinating office on NextGen environmental issues within ATO. 

Furthermore, AEE is an active member of the NextGen Review Board and is represented on 

cross-FAA integration teams, including the NextGen benefits integration team. 

Recommendation (2e): With respect to longer term considerations, the subcommittee 

recommends that FAA environmental research also concentrate on the environmental benefits of 

new aircraft development and specifically that work in conjunction with NASA on such issues 

continue. 

C-3 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Response (2e): We agree that concentrating on the environmental benefits of new aircraft 

is critical to achieving NextGen environmental goals. We are working with the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to implement the Continuous Low Energy, 

Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) program, which will concentrate on developing new clean and 

quiet aircraft technology. We will consider CLEEN a top priority as we build our Fiscal Year 

2011 Budget Request. However, as noted previously, our ability to initiate this critical research 

is dependent on Congress appropriating the Fiscal Year 2009 President’s Budget request and 

ultimately reauthorizing the Agency’s activities. 

Recommendation (2f): Finally, with global climate change an increasing environmental 

concern, the subcommittee recommends that the FAA work to bring together all relevant 

agencies to support the Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative (ACCRI). 

FAA Response (2f): We agree that the climate impact of aviation is a topic of increasing 

environmental concern. Understanding climate impacts of aviation is an issue of high priority 

for the FAA, and we are addressing it through the Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative 

(ACCRI). We are engaging various federal agencies including NASA, the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, and 

National Science Foundation that are participants in the U.S. Climate Change Science Program. 

We are working on developing approaches to implement the next phases of ACCRI. 

Recommendation (3): With respect to the ICAO standard setting process: 

Recommendation (3a): The development of tools and metrics to support international standard 

setting should continue. In order to support these objectives, funding for the PARTNER 

program and the tool to assess the costs and benefits of various environmental initiatives 

(APMT) must continue. 

FAA Response (3a): We agree that development of tools and metrics to support international 

standard setting is an important and high priority activity for the agency. We will strive to 

continue funding the Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction 

(PARTNER) Center of Excellence and all efforts for the development of tools such as the 

Aviation environmental Portfolio Management Tool (APMT) in coming years. 

Recommendation (3b): With ICAO having established a new process to assess the issue of 

global climate change (GIACC), the subcommittee recommends that sufficient funding and 

personnel resources be made available to support this activity. 

FAA Response (3b): The activities of the ICAO Group on International Aviation and Climate 

Change (GIACC) are critical. We have already allocated new funds in Fiscal Year 2008 to 

support GIACC activities. We will continue monitoring the requirement and support GIACC as 

necessary. 

C-4 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

NAS Operations Subcommittee 

Finding: Neither the July workshop nor the September briefings presented adequate information 

to determine if, or how, critically important (if very difficult) R&D with system-wide NextGen 

design implications is being conducted. Specific areas of concern are an apparent lack of R&D 

devoted to (1) separation responsibility--including the air-ground split, the human-automation 

split, and the impact of failures or aircraft nonconformance; (2) the impact of new classes of 

vehicles (UAS, VLJ, CESTOL, etc) on the NextGen design and operation; (3) the development 

of risk assessment methods and safety analyses for the NextGen ConOps; and (4) the design of 

NextGen and operations in it to optimally minimize adverse environmental effects. 

Recommendation (1): Use a taxonomy based upon research devoted to these areas to assess the 

FY 09 and FY10 R&D projects to ascertain whether a re-binning and an increase in funding for 

FY11 for R&D in these difficult areas is required. If so (and NASOPS believes it is so), consider 

re-allocating additional resources from other target areas to NASOPS. 

FAA Response (1): NextGen R&D addresses these and other important areas through programs 

that coordinate with the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office (AJP-A) to ensure 

alignment of activities and priorities across FAA lines of business. In addition, the Agency’s 

NextGen and core R&D programs are mapped into the National Airspace System Enterprise 

Architecture (NASEA) infrastructure roadmaps, which provide additional checks for timephasing of program priorities. R&D program priorities are approved by the NextGen Review 

Board. 

Fiscal Year 2011 involves a proposed current services budget that is based on the Fiscal Year 

2010 proposed current services budget and is subject to change from policy decisions stemming 

from the new Presidential Administration. 

In Fiscal Year 2011 NextGen R&D addresses separation responsibility including allocation of 

function between the human and automation as well as delegation of separation responsibility 

between air and ground through several NextGen budget line items. Based on the Fiscal Year 

2011 proposed current services budget, this includes NextGen Self-Separation funded at $8.661 

million as well as NextGen ATC/Technical Operations Human Factors – Controller Efficiency 

funded at $6.7 million. Also, the FAA partners with NASA to leverage its R&D investments in 

safety and airspace management. 

Research is addressing new classes of vehicles with a multi-year Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

(UAS) project in the NextGen Demonstration budget line item funded in the Fiscal Year 2009 

proposed budget at $5.7 million and the Fiscal Year 2010 proposed current services budget at 

$3.8 million. In addition, there is an ongoing UAS safety research program in the RE&D 

appropriation funded in the Fiscal year 2011 proposed current services budget at $1.97 million. 

The FAA models the introduction of UAS, Very Light Jets (VLJ), NASA’s Cruise Efficient 

Short Takeoff and Landing (CESTOL) subsonic transport system, and other new classes of 

vehicles into the National Airspace System (NAS) to assess impacts from their operational 

characteristics. 

C-5 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Research is addressing NextGen and safety including through the System Safety Management 

Transformation budget line item funded in the Fiscal Year 2011 proposed current services 

budget at $16.3 million. This includes R&D components on Safety Management Systems, 

Safety Risk Management, System Safety Assessments, and Operational Safety Assessments. As 

each NextGen concept of operation matures, the Acquisition Management System requires 

completion of safety analysis reported in a Safety Risk Management Document, which is funded 

through the NextGen Operations Concept Validation – Validation Modeling budget line item. 

Safety analysis methods are reviewed with EUROCONTROL through Action Plan 15, Safety. 

Research is addressing environmental modeling through the NextGen Environment and 

Energy – Advanced Noise and Emission Reduction and Validation Modeling budget line item 

funded in the Fiscal Year 2011 proposed current services budget at $7 million. 

Finding: Although there was mention that a plan to establish an avionics roadmap has been 

drafted. The FAA appears to have no avionics roadmap yet for aircraft equipage, nor incentive 

to the industry to equip in an integrated fashion. Briefings on the airborne requirements for ATM 

are not linked to specific performance requirements. Since equipage is a major cost and 

complexity driver for airlines, this lack needs to be remediated immediately. 

Recommendation (2): NASOPS subcommittee offers to work with the Aircraft Working Group 

of the JPDO to establish an airborne avionics road-map and FY11 funding requirements for 

airborne ATM R&D and lead-in re-prioritization of FY10 funding. 

FAA Response (2): The FAA welcomes the interest and the offer of assistance by the NASOPS 

subcommittee regarding the NextGen Avionics Roadmap, and how this can be used to improve 

the NextGen-related R&D plans and the associated funding priorities for long-term avionics 

needs. 

Recommendation (3): Continue to fund the EA at an appropriate level, but ensure that it 

develops into a straightforward tool to map and assess requirements and R&D. 

FAA Response (3): The FAA appreciates the support of the REDAC in our efforts to develop, 

maintain, and evolve the Enterprise Architecture (EA) to facilitate sound enterprise level 

planning and decisionmaking and to support the evolution of the NAS towards NextGen. The 

FAA agrees with the suggestion to continue to fund and support the Agency’s EA development 

and maintenance efforts at current funding levels. We also agree with the suggestion to align, 

map, and integrate R&D activities and requirements into the EA. We anticipated the second 

recommendation and have already made this a part of the annual EA update process for this year. 

The next version of the NAS roadmaps was published in January. These roadmaps will depict 

linkages and a mapping of existing and planned research and development activities to the main 

program/project activities planned for NextGen. This work, in conjunction with the development 

of new EA roadmaps for this year (i.e., Human System Integration, Security, etc.), will provide a 

more complete picture of the key relationships that must exist between critical R&D efforts and 

the NextGen portfolio of systems and programs. We anticipate that this EA enhancement will 

not only allow enhanced visibility into linkages between existing research and the NextGen 

portfolio, but will also identify potential areas where additional R&D efforts may address gaps or 

C-6 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

reduce risk for NextGen. We are currently working within the ATO to coordinate acquisition 

planning with the R&D planning efforts using these new alignment artifacts as a basis for the 

coordination. 

Recommendation (4): Re-establish funding at $15M/year for 2025 ConOps development, and 

develop a less risk averse NextGen Board ranking criterion. 

FAA Response (4): The 2025 ConOps development is a Joint Planning Development Office 

(JPDO) function and they remain funded to complete the work. The NextGen Review Board is 

focused on near- and mid-term implementation and uses portfolio ranking criteria to prioritize 

funding on an annual basis. 

Recommendation (5): Re-examine lower priority work currently funded with the goal of 

ending it. A specific recommendation is to stop Common Data and Structure Data (CSSD) 

work. Another is to re-examine the funding requirement for Common Automation Platform. 

FAA Response (5): The FAA applies prioritization criteria to each activity to assess its 

continuation and the appropriate funding levels. The FAA is continuously reviewing activities 

and their results and any activity that does not warrant receiving continued funding will have the 

funding removed. 

In response to the CSSD and Common Automation Platform recommendations specifically, the 

CSSD is not part of the RE&D portfolio as it is in the pre-implementation stage. It was 

identified as a critical shortfall as far back as the Target System Description and the introduction 

of Architecture Version 6. The CSSD activity is critical to moving towards a SWIM 

environment. This capability will be subject to a full investment analysis before it moves into 

development. 

As envisioned, the common automation platform, or automation convergence, will enable 

significant cost savings. As the elements of the common automation platform are in our preimplementation process, the FAA continues to examine aspects including common 

infrastructure, common software, common human and machine interactions and identical 

systems. 

Partnerships 

Finding: The NextGen design appears to be based on intuition and consensus, rather than 

modeling, analysis, simulation, and demonstration or testing. The implication from the July 

workshop is that the FAA intends to start a whole new activity in modeling and simulation, 

heavily infrastructure based, which was not ready to be briefed to NASOPS in September. This 

is not the correct approach. Additionally, the demonstration activities (e.g. Florida) need to be 

explicitly a part of the analysis, simulation, and learning process, and there is no evidence that 

they are. 

Recommendation (6): Leverage the work of NASA and other government partners, and 

particularly the considerable investment of the JPDO and its industry partners in the work 

C-7 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

accomplished by its System Modeling and Design Division, to form the basis from which to start 

this activity. Re-examine funding plans to develop entirely new simulation capabilities. 

FAA Response (6): The ATO-P NextGen Modeling and Simulation Directorate is responsible 

for the development and coordination of FAA’s NextGen Simulation capabilities. They 

presently have modeling and simulation capability in-house and make extensive use of the 

capabilities resident in the following organizations: 

- Performance Strategy and Analysis Directorate; 

- NextGen Integration and Implementation; 

- Research and Technology Development; 

- Aviation Weather; 

- Technical Center’s Test and Evaluation organization; 

- FAA Airports; 

- NASA; 

- MITRE; 

- University Partners; and
 

- National Center of Excellence for Aviation Operations Research (NEXTOR). 

FAA uses this modeling and simulation expertise to integrate NextGen planning and benefits 

across the Agency. In 2009, FAA is launching a task force with industry through RTCA to focus 

on maximizing NextGen benefits, deployments, and business case understanding for industry. 

We are continually looking to advance our capabilities. We have recently completed a lab gap 

analysis to identify the expertise and laboratory needs for the near-term and future NextGen 

R&D and test and evaluation (T&E) activities and to describe the gaps between those needs and 

what is available at the William J. Hughes Technical Center and the Civil Aeromedical Institute 

(CAMI). This analysis can be used to identify future simulation capabilities that will be needed 

and provide input on funding priorities. 

Recommendation (7): Establish criteria for demonstration projects that link them to specific 

research questions and on-going analysis and simulation to provide validated answers. Provide 

exit criteria for, and lessons-learned from, each demonstration project. Establish clear funding 

stream for proof-of-concept tests or demonstrations. 

FAA Response (7): We agree with the characterization in the recommendation, which is 

consistent with the processes being established for managing demonstration projects. This 

includes defining the research issues being addressed by the project, and outputs expected at the 

end. 

Demonstrations are selected based on opportunities identified from the National Airspace 

System Enterprise Architecture and in conjunction with key public interest. 

Exit criteria correspond to the purpose of the demonstration. Near-term demonstrations conclude 

following validation of requirements, which are then allocated to systems for investment 

C-8 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

decisions. Longer-term demonstrations accommodate additional validation exercises in order to 

further assess NextGen concepts such as involving new scenarios and technologies. 

Funding for demonstration projects and tests are included in all NextGen budget lines including 

the NextGen Technology Demonstration and Infrastructure Development budget line, preinvestment activities contained in the NextGen solution sets, and in the R&D portfolio. 

Subcommittee on Airports 

Recommendation (1): The Subcommittee is pleased with the Airport Technology Research 

budget allocation for FY 10/FY 11, and with the task statements and recommends the personnel 

increase of two persons that the budget supports. 

FAA Response (1): We concur. The FAA recognizes the need for additional staff in the Airport 

R&D Branch to keep pace with the significant funding increase in the Airport Technology 

Program. We have been successful in obtaining additional staff in Fiscal Year 2008 and Fiscal 

Year 2009. We will carefully consider the staffing levels required as we develop the Fiscal Year 

2010 and Fiscal Year 2011 Administration budget requests. 

Recommendation (2): The Subcommittee recommends closer coordination between the Airport 

Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) and the FAA's own Airports Technology Research 

Program based at the FAA Technical Center. This is especially important given the maturation 

of the ACRP after a several year start-up period. These two research programs should be, and 

largely are, complimentary and are both vital to supporting the airport progress needed in the 

years ahead. While they target different types of airport issues, only a continuous awareness by 

each program of the other's activities can assure that the goal of complementary programs will be 

achieved. 

FAA Response (2): We concur. The FAA will continue close coordination between ACRP and 

the Airports Technology Research Program to ensure they remain complementary and are not 

duplicative. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Airports is on the ACRP Board of 

Governors. The Airport Subcommittee designated Federal official, James White, also supports 

the ACRP and is on the ACRP workgroup that screens all ACRP topics before they are 

considered by the ACRP Board. The active participation in both airport research programs by 

senior FAA personnel in the Office of Airports ensures that the programs will operate efficiently 

and without duplicative research. 

Recommendation (3): There has been talk of moving the Airport Technology Research Branch 

(AJP) from ATO to AAS, which is the primary sponsor for the Airport Technology research. 

The subcommittee supports this realignment. 

FAA Response (3): The Office of Airports has a Memorandum of Agreement with the Air 

Traffic Organization that specifies the roles of each organization in the oversight of the Airport 

R&D Branch. We believe it is working well and do not plan to make significant changes. 

C-9 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Recommendation (4): The subcommittee recognizes the good work that has come out of the 

large aircraft fire mock-up at Tyndall AFB in Panama City, Florida, and recommends the 

transition of this work to a draft training document as soon as possible to support fire crews 

across the nation at airports wherever the A380 might operate. An emphasis on composite fire 

fighting is also strongly supported. 

FAA Response (4): We concur. We will include composites in our fire fighting research. 

Recommendation (5): The subcommittee supports the pavement area research and the 

construction of a laboratory to support this research area. There is one topic that the Airport 

Subcommittee recommends adding to the pavement area research and that would be an effort to 

investigate the use of warm-mix asphalt for air carrier airport pavements, which reportedly 

deliver environmental benefits to paving operations. 

FAA Response (5): We concur. We will add warm-mix asphalt research to the pavement 

research program. 

Recommendation (6): The subcommittee recommends an increase for FY 2011 of $1,375,000 

for visual aids, which increases this item to a total of $3,200,000. The increase is required to 

start work on the development of a visual aids test. For visual guidance, FAA will start a 

multiyear initiative to develop a state-of-the-art visual guidance technology test bed. This will 

enable visual guidance engineers an opportunity to design, install, test, monitor, and report on 

what it will take to create a visual guidance infrastructure that will take full advantage of state of 

the art technologies in Signs, Lighting and Markings. This will provide a more efficient 

infrastructure and the best visual cues to the airport user. Major advances in visual guidance 

technology have brought forth new, brighter, more efficient and more conspicuous lighting 

devices, enhanced paint material that lasts longer than traditional paint, and airport signage that 

is easier to read from greater distances. This new technology, when compared with the current 

state of visual guidance systems, warrants that the FAA undertake a major research effort to 

enhance these essential systems, making improvements that will best serve the future of our 

nation’s aviation system. The FAA's conceptual "NextGen" program talks about levels of air 

traffic increasing to three times what it is today, bringing thousands and thousands of aircraft to 

smaller airports that have historically seen very little traffic. The demand for the visual guidance 

infrastructure at these airports will increase significantly, bringing with it higher levels of usage, 

higher performance requirements, and higher costs to maintain. Energy use and energy costs are 

becoming an important consideration for all airports in their efforts to become more sustainable 

and ”green“. Today’s General Aviation community is already indicating that there is a need to 

enhance their visual aids, citing examples of aging power cables, antiquated fixtures, and high 

energy costs as major problems that they are experiencing now. 

FAA Response (6): We concur. Funding for the Visual Aids Laboratory was in the President’s 

Fiscal Year 2009 budget request. That funding is uncertain because we are operating under a 

continuing resolution. If it is not included in the final Fiscal Year 2009 appropriations, we will 

consider it in future budgets. 

C-10 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Recommendation (7): The Subcommittee recommends that at some point in the future to carry 

out a study that would validate (or refute) the findings on taxiway deviation at JFK, now that 

NLA operations have begun. While not necessarily the only study that could be considered for 

validation, it would be timely to do this, once the numbers of daily operations increase to a 

suitable level. 

FAA Response (7): We concur. We will continue to work with the Subcommittee and start this 

research at the appropriate time. 

Recommendation (8): The Airport Subcommittee sees an overarching need for the NextGen 

program to more thoroughly consider airport issues in its plans. The NextGen Program should 

decide what a future airport might possess in order to make it fully NextGen ready, and then 

articulate the attributes that airports will need to build to, in order to achieve consistency with 

that vision. 

FAA Response (8): Development of future airports capabilities is an integral part of NextGen 

and the FAA’s Airports organization is integrally tied into NextGen planning and 

implementation. This is illustrated by both the July 2008 and January 2009 releases of the 

NextGen Implementation Plan which highlight a number of recent and planned improvements to 

a number of airports. Improvements included the installation of surface movement technology, 

improved routes and procedures in and out of airports, and the reduction of landing visibility 

minimums. The FAA is also actively pursuing research and other activities that will lead to 

improvements in the utilization of closely spaced parallel runways. The FAA will continue to 

work closely with the airport community to improve understanding of NextGen plans and 

benefits as they relate to airports and to receive improved feedback on those plans. 

Subcommittee on Human Factors 

Observations 

Recommendation (1): The committee noted the strong cooperation/collaboration between ATOP and AVS human factors (HF) personnel. The committee believes that a continued level of 

close cooperation will be critical to achieving success in development and fielding of NextGen 

concepts. 

FAA Response (1): The Human Factors Research and Engineering Group intends to continue 

and strengthen the link to human factors personnel in the Aviation Safety organization. We feel 

that a high level of coordination is necessary to address common human factors issues as we 

move forward to implement NextGen. 

Recommendation (2): The Personnel Roadmap is an extremely valuable tool to ensure 

recognition and visibility for human-related issues in NextGen. The committee strongly supports 

this effort and feels it will be a valuable component of the NextGen development process. 

FAA Response (2): We agree about the importance of fully incorporating human considerations 

in the development of NextGen and the NAS Enterprise Architecture. The Personnel Roadmap, 

C-11 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

now revised to the “Human System Integration (HSI) Roadmap” as suggested during discussions 

with the Subcommittee on Human Factors, provides a means to link system developments with 

the impacts on human role changes and safety as well as changes in staffing, training, and 

personnel selection requirements. We intend to use the HSI Roadmap as a focal point for our 

research and development activities and for coordination with other elements of the FAA 

associated with new automation, safety, staffing, training, and personnel selection. 

Recommendation (3): It is important that NextGen planning and implementation continue to 

leverage common resources across industry, government and academia. 

FAA Response (3): Our NextGen planning will make full use of laboratories, personnel, and 

other resources on a national level. We have engaged NASA and Volpe in discussions to 

leverage their resources through tasking agreements and will continue to cooperate with 

academia as we have in our core human factors research program. We anticipate making 

extensive use of contracting to industry to perform analyses, modeling, and other activities. 

Findings and Recommendations 

Finding (1) - Focus on Equipment at Expense of Human Issues: Current FAA NextGen 

planning in the solution set framework focuses primarily on equipment acquisition and 

insufficiently addresses human-related issues and needs. Greater emphasis on human systems 

integration in NextGen is required. 

Recommendation (1a): Edit and revise NextGen planning documents, enterprise architecture, 

etc. to address human systems integration issues related to NextGen implementation. Continued 

development and integration of the Personnel Roadmap should facilitate this process. 

FAA Response (1a): The FAA agrees. The next version of the NAS enterprise architecture 

includes a HSI roadmap. The FAA is continuing to assess related threads through the other 

enterprise architecture roadmaps. Examples include Optimized Profile Descent (OPD) and Low 

Visibility Operations. Furthermore, the FAA added a Chief System Engineer for Human Factors 

to its Chief System Engineers Group in the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office. 

Recommendation (1b): Change term “Human Factors” in FAA job titles and organizational 

names to “Human Systems Integration.” This may facilitate a broader role and understanding of 

the human component in the systems engineering approach. 

FAA Response (1b): We will consider changing “Human Factors” in FAA job titles and 

organizational names to “Human Systems Integration” as suggested, but we have several 

concerns. While HSI may facilitate a broader role and understanding of the human component in 

systems engineering and acquisition, it is not typically used in civil aviation operations, either in 

air traffic or aviation safety. As such, it may be less useful in effectively communicating within 

and between FAA lines of business as well as with ICAO where “human factors” is currently 

used. We also need to better understand the potential impact on changing job titles while 

operating within the framework and job listings developed and managed by the Office of 

Personnel Management 

C-12 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Finding (2) - Human Factors Resource Limitations. Human factors resources in ATO-P and 

AVS are insufficient to carry out the range of activities required to adequately support NextGen 

development and implementation. 

Recommendation (2): Increase AVS and ATO-P HF staffing and ATO-P HF research funding 

to support NextGen. In case of an extended Continuing Resolution for FY09 that will maintain 

Human Factors funding at the FY08 level, the FAA should augment human factors research 

funding so that critical NextGen human factors activities can be initiated. The Human Factors 

subcommittee notes that for FY08, the NextGen human factors budget line items were among the 

few that did not receive funding to perform substantive work. An additional delay in funding 

will jeopardize human system integration for NextGen. 

FAA Response (2): We agree that human factors staffing is insufficient. Both Aviation Safety 

and the Air Traffic Organization have posted Human Factors professional vacancy 

announcements. We have selected two individuals from the list of candidates to fill positions in 

the Human Factors Research and Engineering Group. This Group has two additional vacancies 

to fill and will continue to review applications as they are received. We will continue to monitor 

the status of human factors specialist staffing in order to ensure that this critical component is 

adequately resourced. Our vacancy announcements will continue to cycle until we have 

recruited and hired sufficient staff. We are using various means to ensure that the human factors 

community of practice is aware of the vacancies to cast our recruiting net as wide as possible. 

We are exploring avenues with other Air Traffic Organization service units to ensure that human 

factors work in NextGen reflects the needs of the people in the NAS as we introduce new 

technology and change roles and responsibilities. We will fund high priority cross-cutting 

NextGen human factors work to a limited degree from our traditional RE&D funding lines. 

Finding (3) - Lessons Learned Not Well Integrated. The Post Implementation Review (PIR) 

process for the Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures program resulted in a number of 

significant human factors findings, but there is not a clear process to ensure these findings are 

fed forward to benefit other NextGen programs. 

Recommendation (3): Develop a process to formalize a human factors component to Post 

Implementation Reviews and establish processes to ensure lessons learned are available to other 

NextGen programs. 

FAA Response (3): As we continue to assess and improve all aspects of the Post 

Implementation Review (PIR) process, we will look for further opportunities to enhance the 

incorporation of human factors as an essential component of this evaluation tool. The PIR policy 

requires that lessons learned be identified when PIRs are conducted. In early Fiscal Year 2009, 

an analysis of all lessons learned from PIRs conducted in Fiscal Year 2008 will be performed. 

The lessons learned are to be categorized by subject area (e.g., contracting, human factors, 

performance goals, cost and schedule baseline management, etc.) and used to identify any 

necessary changes in AMS policy or guidance including those related to human factors. The 

lessons learned will be available to all Acquisition process stakeholders in the agency. 

C-13 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Finding (4) - Crosscutting NextGen HF Issues Are Not Adequately Addressed. Due to the 

management structure of NextGen (individual program managers, solution set managers, etc.), it 

is not clear how crosscutting human factors issues will be recognized and addressed. 

Recommendation (4): Develop management structure to address cross cutting human systems 

integration issues. Consider sharing REDAC subcommittee members or joint REDAC 

subcommittee meetings. 

FAA Response (4): The FAA has applied a significant amount of research to human factors. 

We believe we have an operational and management structure that appropriately applies this 

research in addressing human factors issues in NextGen development. It is the responsibility of 

the solution set coordinators and the Chief System Engineer (CSE) for Human Factors to ensure 

human factors issues are being addressed in a consistent manner. The FAA is taking an 

integrated approach and recognizes it is a priority. The REDAC Subcommittee Chairs have 

received all meetings dates and will attend as schedule permits. 

Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety 

Key program observations and recommendations are listed below: 

Observation (1): The Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety is encouraged by the FY2011 AVS 

Strategic Guidance provided by the Associate Administrator to the research planning 

community. The guidance created two new TCRGs, one focused on Weather in the Cockpit and 

the other on Self Separation & Air-Ground Integration. Additionally, emphasis was placed on 

the importance of program metrics, milestones & project phases in planning research projects, all 

positive additions intended to guide the right project management planning & execution. 

Recommendation (1): Item tracking database put in place. Assures subcommittee input is 

addressed. 

FAA Response (1): The FAA thanks the subcommittee for its positive observation. The FAA 

will continue to update the item tracking database and effectively follow-up on subcommittee 

recommendations. 

Observation (2): The Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety reiterates its past recommendation that 

R, E & D requirements definition for NextGen must be expedited. Failure to define the research 

needs supportive of the envisioned cutting edge technologies that NextGen is counting on will 

result in less capable, in hand, solutions having to be implemented with NextGen performance 

suffering as a result. Given that the NextGen mid-term implementation target dates are 2012-

2018 or just 3 to 9 years from now, R&D should already be well underway on any new 

capabilities envisioned for these time frames. Without roadmaps in place, some capabilities 

currently being envisioned for NextGen may already be overtaken by time. 

C-14 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Currently only about 10% of the R,E&D efforts are aligned explicitly with NextGen needs based 

on a SAS requested Solution Set, Domain & Roadmap alignment assessment. While waiting for 

top down requirements; 

Recommendation (2): The Subcommittee recommends AVS R,E&D management extend the 

assessment approach, on a proactive basis, to uncover potential research requirements by 

reviewing Roadmaps, Integrated Work Plans, ConOps and Operational Improvements (as well as 

any other lower level plans that might exist) and discuss the findings with the Solution Set 

coordinators for validation. 

FAA Response (2): During the September 2008 meeting, the subcommittee was briefed on an 

initial assessment of the alignment of FAA aircraft safety R&D projects with NextGen needs. 

As noted, this assessment indicates that about 10 percent of the base aircraft safety research 

program is aligned with NextGen. The subcommittee recommended, and the FAA concurs, that 

the assessment be continued. In the next step, NextGen solution set managers will review their 

respective solution sets with AVS to identify all NextGen Air Traffic Operations needs that 

potentially require supporting aircraft safety research. The FAA will complete this next step and 

present the results of this assessment at the next SAS meeting in the spring of 2009. 

Observation (3): As was discussed at the July 2008 REDAC workshop on NextGen, there is 

currently no overarching System Safety Analysis model for NextGen. This model could be used 

to assess the impact of the large number of proposed NextGen system & subsystem elements and 

enable proper trades & capability requirements to be defined. 

Recommendation (3): The Subcommittee recommends a System Safety Model be developed to 

permit an integrated, quantitative assessment of NextGen. 

FAA Response (3): The FAA uses a Safety Management System (SMS) approach to all 

changes to the NAS. Due to the number and scope of the changes that are envisioned in 

NextGen implementation, the FAA is taking an integrated approach to assessing NextGen 

capabilities and that these are addressed in a consistent manner under the SMS framework. 

Observation (4): Aviation Weather research is a very complex topic with the dual goals of 

improving both safety and capacity. The Subcommittee appreciated the review provided by Ken 

Leonard and the team. A strategic plan is needed to show how the products developed under the 

research program will be transitioned to meet the needs of the flying community. 

Recommendation (4): Recommend the FAA engage the user community for both safety and 

capacity improvements validation. 

FAA Response (4): FAA concurs with the recommendation and is pursuing it on multiple 

fronts. First, the ATO NextGen and Operations Planning Integration and Implementation Office 

is developing an overall NextGen strategy composed of seven solution sets. The Aviation 

Weather Office is responsible for the development and execution of a solution set called the 

Reduced Weather Impact (RWI), a NextGen transformational program called NNEW, and 

supporting research for both. 

C-15 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Second, the Aviation Weather Office is developing plans to transition each weather research 

area, such as convection, icing, ceiling and visibility, to operational use. Each plan will 

incorporate requirements from the NextGen ConOps, the NextGen Weather Functional 

Requirements, the FAA Weather Performance Requirements, the FAA NextGen Reduced 

Weather Impact solution set and other users input. 

Third, the Aviation Weather Office will launch a program in Fiscal Year 2009 to validate the 

Weather Functional Requirements and the Weather Performance Requirements with users in the 

pilot, dispatch, and controller communities. The validation effort will utilize user workshops, 

user surveys, and, extending beyond Fiscal Year 2009, simulations and demonstrations. 

Observation (5): ASIAS has indeed come a long way. However, there is still much work to do 

in R,E&D to accomplish ASIAS objectives as envisioned. Tools are still needed to effectively 

process, integrate, and mine the large amounts of disparate data that will be entered into ASIAS 

as more data sources come on line. Thus need to have clear roadmaps with roles and 

responsibilities of what new capabilities are needed and how they will be inserted into ASIAS. 

Also, it was noted that a Continuing Resolution (CR) in FY09 will impact new starts planned for 

ASIAS. SAS did not hear a mitigation strategy if CR should go past March, which is indeed 

possible in an election year. 

Recommendation (5): Subcommittee strongly recommends FAA create mitigation plans, in the 

event the CR goes for an extended period. (note: this concern is not unique to ASIAS) 

FAA Response (5): The FAA agrees and has developed and begun to implement a mitigation 

plan. Tasks for the initial six months of the fiscal year have been prioritized and funding has 

been secured which will allow ASIAS R,E&D work to continue to operate at the current staffing 

level until the end of March 2009. 

Observation (6): FAA should continue to contribute to instrumentation development for NASA 

High Ice Water Content Atmospheric Characterizations effort. There is a need for fundamental 

physics research on accretion of ice crystals inside an engine – partial funding of this work is be 

contemplated by the FAA. This basic research is needed for future engine development and 

certification as well as resolving in-service issues of engine power loss. This research has 

applications beyond the engine, to any inlet with a heated surface, as well as probes which can be 

corrupted by ice crystals. 

Recommendation (6): Subcommittee recommends finding a way to enable the Weather 

program to provide “pop-up” support of the upcoming flight test effort to maximize the 

efficiency of the test program. 

FAA Response (6): The FAA concurs with the recommendation and is rebalancing its Fiscal 

Year 2009 activities to support the upcoming flight test effort via the Aviation Weather Office's 

Aviation Weather Research Program (AWRP). The AWRP’s In-Flight Icing Research Team 

will support the NASA High Ice Water Content effort by working closely with the FAA Aircraft 

Icing Group and NASA to provide scientific analyses of cloud environments with high ice 

C-16 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

crystal concentrations. Forecasts will then be provided for those regions during instrumented 

flight tests. 

Observation (7): The influx of new Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) requirements from the 

user community is not waiting for or being driven by NextGen. The FAA needs to address 

current requirements that are ready for operational implementation, and also have a strategic plan 

to ensure NextGen can accommodate emerging and future UAS requirements. 

Recommendation (7): Subcommittee recommends the FAA take a proactive education 

approach aimed at the “newcomers” to this rapidly expanding aviation sector as well as 

accelerating rulemaking-supporting research. 

FAA Response (7): The FAA agrees with the recommendations. Education was identified early 

on as one of the most important issues regarding unmanned aircraft. Since 2004, the FAA has 

had a coordinated effort working closely with hobby groups, professional organizations, 

manufacturers, state and local law enforcement, and Federal agencies to develop a shared 

understanding of the issues. Throughout this time, the FAA has participated or hosted numerous 

conferences and meetings to better understand the users’ needs and educate them on relevant 

aviation policy, regulations, and procedures. Since it is not unusual for ‘newcomers’ to have 

little or no aviation experience or knowledge, our education efforts often include a wide range of 

topics from basic aviation theory to advanced R&D initiatives. Building upon this interaction, 

the FAA has created a UAS Modeling and Simulation Lab where current and emerging needs 

can be evaluated against the NAS, as it is today and as it will be under NextGen. Numerous 

manufacturers and users groups are already participating in the development of this R&D effort. 

Based on what we learned in these gatherings, the FAA initiated in mid 2007 a Special Federal 

Aviation Rulemaking effort to enable small unmanned aircraft to operate routinely in the NAS 

by late 2011. This regulatory effort, largely based on a “non-traditional” approach toward 

airworthiness and personnel certification, will rely heavily on validation through our Safety 

Management System and supporting research conducted along the way to ensure safety of the 

NAS is maintained. After this rule is enacted, resulting operations will provide valuable data 

that will be used in the many ongoing and new R&D efforts, including the UAS Lab, to promote 

the development of further regulation and the expanded integration of UAS into the NAS. 

Observation (8): Research is planned to: “Develop minimum standards for augmented manual 

control Fly By Wire (FBW) designs”. The Subcommittee is surprised that the current 

certification approach apparently relies heavily on program specific Special Conditions instead 

of up to date, comprehensive regulations. The Subcommittee is equally surprised the current 

regulations apparently do not adequately cover the >15 year old Fly by Wire technology. 

Recommendation (8a): The Subcommittee recommends the FAA closely examine all areas of 

aircraft & engine certification for repeated use of Special Conditions as an indicator of areas 

where the regulations have not actually kept pace with the “advancing” technology. 

FAA Response (8a): The SAS recommendation is related to policies regarding the methods of 

managing type certification and the updating of regulations and standards. FAA requests 

C-17 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

additional time to evaluate the recommendation concerning the use of special conditions and will 

respond to the SAS prior to the spring 2009 meeting date. 

Observation (8b): Airframe Icing - NASA and the FAA Technical Center have been involved 

with other organizations in a multi-year SLD technology roadmap to define the SLD 

environment and to develop engineering tools (codes, icing tunnels) with which airplane 

manufacturers can predict SLD ice shapes. This capability is critical to the airplane design, 

flight test, and certification processes. The FAA advisory group is currently conducting a status 

review of the available SLD engineering tools prior to the rulemaking proposal being issued for 

public comment. Although there is an "interim" capability for developing SLD ice shapes for 

freezing drizzle conditions the available tools are inadequate for freezing rain conditions. It is 

essential that FAA & NASA provide adequate priority and funding to enable completion of the 

key remaining SLD technology roadmap tasks prior to the regulation being implemented. 

FAA Response (8b): The FAA Aircraft Icing research plans that were developed for Fiscal 

Years 2009 and 2010 did include projects for supercooled large droplet (SLD) engineering tools 

development. However, due to the priority of engine ice crystal ingestion research, available 

aircraft icing research resources have been concentrated on this issue. There are insufficient 

resources for the concurrent support of SLD and engine ice crystal ingestion research. The 

Aircraft Safety Research Program is currently prioritizing requirements for 2011 and will 

carefully evaluate aircraft icing research requirements. 

Observation (9): Halon Replacement - Industry is still committed to working with the FAA to 

define an acceptable Halon-1301 replacement for engine/APU applications. This requires 

continued work with the nacelle fire simulator located at the William J. Hughes Technical 

Center. In addition to further testing using the FAA/industry-reviewed protocol Minimum 

Performance Standard - Engines (MPSe) Rev03, it will be necessary to define Rev04 of the 

MPSe to account for next generation fire extinguishing agents (e.g., higher boiling points, nongaseous). Lack of support for these initiatives will make it difficult or even impossible to 

eliminate Halon-1301 from the propulsion fire extinguishing system on future airplanes. 

FAA Response (9): The FAA supports industry development of extinguishing technologies for 

aircraft engine and auxiliary power unit applications, including alternatives for replacement of 

Halon 1301. FAA aircraft safety research resources are not currently budgeted specifically to 

extinguishing agent projects; however, the FAA will monitor continuing activities in this area 

and evaluate future priorities as appropriate. 

C-18 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

2. FAA Response to REDAC Recommendations on Fiscal Year 2011 R&D Budget. 

Dr. John Hansman (Committee Chair) submitted REDAC’s recommendations to the fiscal year 

2011 R&D budget to the Administrator on May 18, 2009. The agency provided the following 

response to the recommendations. 

General Observations 

Observation 1: As a general observation, the REDAC has been encouraged by the efforts to 

develop a structured approach for NextGen implementation. The REDAC does have concerns 

that the NextGen scope is so broad it is difficult to identify the most critical research 

requirements and determine if the appropriate research is in place to support NextGen. The 2018 

focus of current implementation efforts seems appropriate for initial FAA implementation but it 

will be important to retain a longer national focus for the full NextGen effort. 

FAA Response: As mentioned, the FAA’s focus is NextGen’s near- and mid-term 

implementation. However, the FAA does coordinate extensively with the Joint Planning and 

Development Office (JPDO) to ensure consistency between mid-term implementation and the 

long-term vision. The Enterprise Architecture (EA) lays the framework for NextGen beyond 

2018 and into the 2025 timeframe from a high level, and the FAA has worked to ensure there are 

links within the EA from the mid-term through the long-term. The NextGen Implementation 

Plan provides additional detail on the activities (including research activities) to achieve the 

desired near- and mid-term operational improvements. While most of the research activities 

currently in the FAA’s R&D portfolio are focused on mid-term implementation, the FAA is 

continuously evaluating research needs. In addition, the FAA along with the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), is working with the JPDO on four Research 

Transition Teams (RTT) to better coordinate between agencies the evolution of research into 

operational improvements and new capabilities. These efforts expand the full NextGen timeline 

through the long-term vision. The FAA values the insights we receive from REDAC and 

welcomes further recommendations on specific longer-term research requirements. 

Observation 2: The REDAC also notes that the existing environmental and safety approval 

processes are not well structured to deal with the magnitude of system changes expected from 

NextGen. The challenges of the New York airspace redesign illustrate the difficulty of making 

even modest changes which clearly improve the environmental performance of the system. 

Innovative technical and policy approaches to these processes will be necessary for successful 

modernization. 

FAA Response: The FAA remains committed to environmental stewardship and recognizes 

there are significant technical and political challenges to addressing environmental issues. The 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) places stringent mandates on the FAA for how we 

assess changes in the environmental performance of the system and timely NEPA reviews are a 

critical element of NextGen implementation. NEPA requires Federal agencies to consider the 

environmental impacts of proposed Federal projects which could significantly affect the 

environment. While this requirement can be time consuming, the FAA continually looks for 

opportunities to improve the process. The FAA has taken steps to ensure the NextGen changes 

C-19 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

and the resulting assessments are integrated appropriately. The FAA has recently formed a cross 

organizational team to ensure we map environmental reviews into NextGen project timelines. 

We are also conducting research to ensure we understand the longer term NEPA implications of 

NextGen. The FAA operates under a Safety Management System (SMS) that requires the 

assessment of all changes before they become operational. In addition, environmental impacts 

and safety integration are among the topics that are actively discussed by FAA leadership at the 

NextGen Management Board (NMB) meetings. 

Observation 3: Finally, the REDAC has a continuing concern regarding the FAA’s technical 

workforce in several emerging technology areas. In particular, the REDAC has repeatedly 

identified critical software and digital systems as an area where the agency has unique 

responsibility and exposure to technical risk in both air traffic and flight safety. The progress has 

been disappointing and will require a significant effort in the hiring and training of core technical 

staff as well as a research investment to stimulate national competency in these areas. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees with the REDAC’s observation regarding the FAA’s technical 

workforce in the critical software and digital systems area. The Software and Digital Systems 

(SDS) Technical Community Representative Group is developing a comprehensive and 

integrated research plan that identifies SDS-related research requirements for automation, 

communications, navigation, surveillance, and security as they relate to NextGen evolution. This 

plan, due December 30, 2009, should help focus new hiring requirements for SDS. To date, the 

Aircraft Certification Service (AIR) has hired two digital systems engineers in 2008 and a third 

vacancy is being filled presently. Also, we are actively recruiting to fill the Chief Scientific and 

Technical Advisory positions for both Aircraft Computer Software and Advanced Avionics. 

Also, our Airports and Aircraft Safety Group has budgeted for an additional senior system 

engineer and computer scientist to supplement the staff. We are seeking individuals who have 

knowledge of integrated and complex aircraft digital systems and have conducted safety 

assessments of civil airborne systems and equipment. 

C-20 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Subcommittee on Airports 

Recommendation 1: The Subcommittee recommends the FAA expedite completion of the 

research to identify if more firefighting agent is required at airports. This research is for the new 

large aircraft (group 6 aircraft) such as the A-380. These aircraft carry much more fuel than the 

group 5 aircraft such as the B-747. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees with this recommendation. Air carriers are purchasing and 

operating the Design Group 6 aircraft and several airports are making preparations to accept 

these aircraft. We will continue to focus on the completion of the fire testing underway to 

determine if changes to the appropriate advisory circulars are necessary. 

Recommendation 2: The Subcommittee recommends the FAA continue to focus on wildlife 

research. This should be maintained at the highest levels to assure further progress in reducing 

wildlife hazards to aviation around airports. 

FAA Response: The Office of Airports has a longstanding research program aimed at 

mitigating wildlife hazards, and we intend to continue these efforts. This includes research on 

habitat modification, harassment techniques, and the assessment of portable radars capable of 

detecting and tracking birds on or near airports. 

Recommendation 3: The Subcommittee recommends that staffing be increased by one engineer 

within the Airport R&D Branch at the William J. Hughes Technical Center. The position will 

support the increased funding and research projects underway. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees with this recommendation. The President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 

2010 Airports Improvement Program (AIP) budget includes one engineer for the Airport R&D 

Branch. We anticipate requesting another engineer in the FY 2011 AIP request. 

Recommendation 4: The Subcommittee recommends the FAA include $2,300,000 for Phase II 

of the visual aid test bed, and $2,400,000 for the high tire pressure testing initiative in the FY 

2011 program request. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees with this recommendation. We support the initiatives to 

continue with Phase 2 of the visual test bed in FY 2011 and to start the high tire pressure testing 

in FY 2011. We anticipate including both these items in our FY 2011 AIP request. 

C-21 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Subcommittee on Environment and Energy 

Recommendation 1: The Subcommittee finds that the FAA Office of Environment and Energy 

is significantly underfunded and understaffed, especially in view of the additional responsibilities 

(global climate change issues and a refocusing on noise research) that continue to be imposed on 

it. While the Subcommittee recognizes that the FAA is captive to the congressional 

appropriations process, action is necessary to ensure that appropriate research activities are 

initiated and sustained. In particular: 

a. The Subcommittee recommends that the Agency fully fund an additional position in the 

Operations and Policy Division as soon as possible. 

FAA Response 1(a): The FAA agrees with the Subcommittee that we need to augment staff in 

the Office of Environment and Energy to address the environment and energy issues associated 

with NextGen. In FY 2009, we have filled or are in the process of filling three vacancies and 

have added eight new positions to the Office of Environment and Energy. This includes filling 

two vacancies and adding three new positions to the Operations and Policy Division. 

b. The Subcommittee recommends the Agency should, as quickly as possible, restore the 

contract support that was recently removed. 

FAA Response 1(b): The FAA agrees that maintaining contract support to ensure the Agency’s 

environment and energy research priorities are coordinated with the JPDO is important. We 

have asked JPDO to reevaluate this support and, in the mean time, have added an on-site 

contractor to provide support to the Environmental Working Group led by the Office of 

Environment and Energy. 

c. The Subcommittee recommends that appropriate funding should be provided to continue the 

research review of aviation noise metrics and policy. 

FAA Response 1(c): The FAA agrees with this recommendation. The Office of Environment 

and Energy is creating a research plan to review aviation noise metrics and policy with the 

assistance of a panel and the engagement of experts. We have begun work on what we consider 

the low-hanging-fruit tasks related to the effort. Constructive work is being done prior to the 

draft and final research roadmaps; however, the bulk of the effort will take place after the final 

research roadmap as this roadmap is needed to ensure a systematic approach to conducting the 

research. We will weigh allocation of resources for this effort against other research priorities 

when we finalize the research roadmap. At the conclusion of the research, there will be a 

recommendation on an aircraft noise metric (or metrics) and noise impact criteria. 

d. The Subcommittee recommends that support of, and leadership in, the international processes 

of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) be continued. Specifically, funds 

should be available to support the activities of ICAO’s Group on International Aviation and 

Climate Change (GIACC). GIACC is working to establish international standards on global 

climate change. 

C-22 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

FAA Response 1(d): The FAA agrees that the work of the GIACC is critical. Funding was 

made available to support this activity in the past. At present there is no need for additional 

research to support the GIACC process. However, the environment and energy research 

program will support the action plan the GIACC has recommended to mitigate the impacts of 

international aviation emissions. 

Recommendation 2: The Subcommittee continues to be concerned that environmental issues 

have not been given appropriate attention in the NextGen effort. In order to ensure proper 

environmental consideration, it is recommended that an Environmental Management System 

(EMS) be established for the NextGen initiative. This EMS would be used to provide 

information on the environmental impacts of modernization actions and would facilitate the 

implementation of environmental research efforts. 

FAA Response: The FAA views addressing environmental issues as critical to the success of 

NextGen. Furthermore, the FAA agrees with the Subcommittee’s observations about the 

importance of EMS and its recommendation to establish the NextGen EMS. We are presently 

scoping out the EMS framework for NextGen and will convene the first workshop on this 

important issue later this year to seek input from all stakeholders. The Office of Environment 

and Energy and the Air Traffic Organization are working together to address the operational 

aspects to be included in the NextGen EMS. 

Recommendation 3: In order to support environmental research efforts, the Subcommittee 

recommends funding for the Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction 

(PARTNER) program is continued. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees with this recommendation. PARTNER plays a vital role in 

FAA’s environment and energy RE&D program. We are in the process of completing the Phase3 renewal of PARTNER and will continue to fund its valuable research activities at current or 

higher levels, depending on congressional appropriation levels. 

Subcommittee on Human Factors 

Finding 1: As a whole, the NextGen research work plans proposed by both Air Traffic Control 

and Technical Operations (NextGen Controller Efficiency) and Flight Deck (NextGen Self 

Separation and NextGen Air Ground Integration) domains were well crafted and reflect a good 

allocation of budget. The Subcommittee was pleased to see the efforts within NextGen Self 

Separation and NextGen Air Ground Integration focused on flight deck automation and humanautomation function allocations. However, after reviewing the material provided (NARP, 

NextGen Implementation Plan), we were unable to judge the extent to which human factors was 

adequately addressed beyond the efforts of The FAA Human Factors Office (AJP-61) across 

NextGen elements. Numerous reviews by GAO, National Research Council and so forth have 

highlighted the lack of a NextGen strategy for ensuring that concerns with human performance, 

human system integration and effective use of automation are being systematically and 

thoroughly addressed at all stages of design and implementation. 

C-23 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Recommendation: The FAA, perhaps through the NextGen Integration and Implementation 

Office, should ensure that all organizations responsible for design and implementation of 

NextGen contribute to and act upon the following: 

(a): A thorough review should be made and reported in a single document (e.g., Human Factors 

Requirements of NextGen) of the key issues with human performance, human systems 

integration and effective use of automation inherent to NextGen Operational Improvements (OIs) 

and enablers. Particular attention should be devoted to highlighting potential solutions and 

mitigations to likely issues. 

(b): This document should be finalized in a multi-disciplinary workshop. The workshop 

organized outside of AJP-61 should include key decision makers in NextGen design and 

implementation. It should include the Chief Scientist for Architecture, the NextGen 

Development and the Director of the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office. This 

workshop should also address a strategy for pervasively, comprehensively, and systematically 

accounting for issues with human performance, human systems integration, and effective use of 

automation, and building in solutions and mitigations to identified concerns early in design. The 

document should have concurrence with the Chief Scientist for Architecture and NextGen 

Development and by the Director of the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office at the 

conclusion of the workshop and made available for public dissemination. 

(c): The Subcommittee recommends that the agency should require all organizations in the FAA 

to periodically report how they are addressing the human factors requirements as documented in 

the areas of NextGen design and implementation for which they are responsible. 

FAA Response: We appreciate the positive comments in the Finding regarding three NextGen 

human factors research work plans addressing Controller Efficiency, Self Separation, and AirGround Integration. The FAA agrees that the human element is a critical factor in successfully 

implementing NextGen and it remains a large focus for the Agency. However, the FAA does not 

believe that a stand-alone plan for human factors requirements is in the best interest of NextGen 

because it introduces opportunities for confusion and lack of integration. The FAA believes it is 

in our best interest to fully integrate human factor issues into our existing planning and 

execution. Integrated planning efforts are ongoing across the FAA to avoid the inconsistencies 

that might be raised as a result of developing independent, stand-alone plans. The FAA uses 

results from human factors research and studies in setting requirements as well as for validation 

of processes and systems. This is designed to provide the required level of integration and 

traceability. 

These efforts have resulted in the development of an architecture roadmap for human system 

integration. In addition, there is extensive engagement occurring across the solution sets to 

address human performance and human system integration issues, solutions, and mitigations in 

NextGen. The Human Factors Research and Engineering office (AJP-61) works closely with the 

NextGen Integration and Implementation office (AJP-A) and other performing organizations to 

address critical human factors issues within the solution sets and transformational programs. 

C-24 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Finding 2: Many programs within and outside NextGen call out issues that have direct human 

factors implications but may not fall within the purview of AJP-61. Examples are weather 

products, safety, System-Wide Information Management (SWIM), and the repeated articulation 

of supporting situational awareness across many NextGen elements. We are concerned that 

critical human factors issues within these elements may not be addressed. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA develop a consistent process 

that addresses critical human factors issues within the seven NextGen Solution Sets. One 

approach would be to hire a human factors professional within the solution sets comprising the 

developmental areas of NextGen. AJP-61 could help coordinate and facilitate these 

developmental human factors activities. 

FAA Response: A strong framework is in place to address human factors within the seven 

solutions sets as a result of substantial coordinated efforts. There has been and will continue to 

be significant discussion regarding human performance and human system integration 

challenges. The Human Factors Research and Engineering office (AJP-61) works closely with 

the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office (AJP-A) to address critical human factors 

issues in the solution sets. In addition, considerable effort was expended to develop an 

architecture roadmap for human system integration. 

From a resource perspective, the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office added a Chief 

System Engineer for Human Factors within the last year to help provide the required 

consistency. AJP-61 supports NextGen efforts conducted by the ATO service units. AJP-61 is 

also coordinating with Flight Standards and Aircraft Certification office in Aviation Safety 

(AVS) regarding human factors research requirements supporting AVS NextGen regulatory 

matters. 

Finding 3: The Subcommittee views the new NextGen positions allotted to AJP-61 and one 

more position as important steps to addressing the resource shortfall. However, filling the 

remaining positions is an immediate need for managing programs and contracts. Challenges 

external to the FAA include a shortage of both qualified applied researchers who understand the 

flight-deck, ATO domains, human factors engineering, and qualified human-in-the-loop 

simulation facilities. Compounding this problem is the lack of rapid and effective mechanisms 

for letting contracts to bring external researchers into the program. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA begin now to prepare human 

factors researchers for the NextGen tasks. This should include bringing in top talent in human 

factors and providing rapid but comprehensive exposure to the flight-deck and ATO domains. 

The FAA should explore ways to engage researchers in countries with similar ATO traditions 

(e.g., Canada, Europe, and Australia). Qualifying simulation facilities needs to be explored and 

the specialized programming skills required for this work obtained. The NextGen program is of 

long enough duration that a concerted effort to train the necessary researchers is still feasible, if 

it starts immediately. Other funding mechanisms need to be explored to allow qualified 

researchers to participate effectively, e.g., contracts, inter-agency agreements, broad agreements 

with umbrella groups (e.g., National Institute of Aerospace) and temporary assignments of 

researchers to FAA for specific time periods. 

C-25 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

We also recommend that efforts be made to increase the pool of qualified applicants for future 

positions. This may be addressed by supporting the education of aviation human factors 

specialists at universities through contracts and grants. Within the FAA, short courses may be 

offered in aviation human factors for acquisition and regulatory personnel. 

FAA Response 3: The FAA, led by the Human Factors Research and Engineering group 

(AJP-61), is pursuing several approaches for building a stronger base of specialized aviation 

human factors expertise enabling continued research for NextGen in the years ahead. 

We are investigating new mechanisms to access aviation human factors expertise in academia 

and non-profit aviation organizations broadly. FAA continues to improve and expand air traffic 

control and flight deck simulation capabilities at the William J. Hughes Technical Center and the 

Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, including specialized programming expertise in relation to 

NextGen capabilities. 

We are building and expanding research relationships with NASA, including use of its 

simulation facilities. By leveraging the expertise of the highly experienced human factors 

professionals at NASA and by ensuring that NASA’s basic research is aligned with FAA 

NextGen goals, we are developing a cohesive human factors program. FAA collaborates with 

EUROCONTROL and its international research partners in air traffic management safety and 

human reliability assessment. 

Education of aviation human factors students promotes a steady supply of professionals for 

positions in the public and private sectors. To this end, FAA has developed a Web-based short 

course on human factors. 

Finding 4: The Human Factors office (AJP-61) has had rapid turnover in leadership with a 

series of temporary appointments. This may provide human factors with less influence on 

NextGen policies and decisions than would be the case if there was long-term continuity in the 

office. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that permanent leadership be appointed as 

rapidly as possible. This person should have sufficient authority to ensure effective, coordinated 

human factors activities across the organizational lines spanned by human factors. 

FAA Response: AJP-61 is under the management of an experienced supervisor, with human 

factors expertise, who is actively taking steps to build the group’s business practices, practices 

that are crucial in implementing the NextGen human factors portfolio. It is recognized that 

Human Factors Group management has changed in recent years, mostly due to individual career 

choice but also due to corporate needs. The Acting Director has the full support of the Director 

of Research and Technology Development (R&TD) and is empowered to make leadership 

decisions for AJP-61. The current Senior Executive leading AJP-61 is on a temporary detail to 

the Department of Transportation. 

C-26 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Finding 5: The Subcommittee is encouraged by the identification of human factors lessons 

learned in acquisition such as those expressed in the AJA Report Cross Post-Implementation 

Review Analysis Lessons Learned, dated December 30, 2008. However, in order for the FAA to 

take full advantage of the opportunities identified, a follow-on activity is needed to address each 

of these lessons as an appropriate change to acquisition policy, standards, guidance, or processes. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends a process be developed that establishes 

how to transition human factors lessons learned into substantive follow-on activities. This will 

improve system implementation and acquisition policy, standards, guidance, and processes. 

FAA Response: We agree with this recommendation. As our base of experience grows we need 

to capture what was learned, what changes resulted from these experiences, and how to transition 

improvements to acquisition policy, standards, guidance, and processes into the Acquisition 

Management System. The Human Factors Research and Engineering Office will monitor and 

coordinate with Air Traffic Organization service units to identify opportunities and mechanisms 

for gathering lessons learned throughout the system life cycle. 

NAS Operations Subcommittee 

Finding 1: The majority of the research presented was oriented at developing a mid-term 

capability in 2018 for the NAS or by implementing incremental changes to the existing system to 

increase controller productivity. The general construct for the research is therefore one of 

evolution from the current system, rather than a transformation of the system. The 

Subcommittee understands that it is important for the FAA to provide as many benefits to the 

NAS users in the near term as possible; the evolutionary focus is consistent with that 

requirement. However, the Subcommittee is very concerned that this emphasis will not provide 

the technologies, policies, and procedures required for the transformation to the long-term vision 

of the NAS, because it is a push from current operations rather than a pull from the future. To 

have research oriented to both 2018 and the long term may require more resources than those 

needed for either vision alone. 

Recommendation (a): The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA conduct an assessment of 

the extent to which the planned mid-term improvements to the NAS for 2018 are consistent with 

the requirements for the transformed long term NAS. Research conducted for the 2018 goal 

should be scalable to the transformations most needed for the long-term vision. 

FAA Response: There are ongoing efforts to ensure alignment between the mid-term 

improvements and the long-term vision. The FAA and JPDO expend considerable effort to 

ensure consistency between FAA’s mid-term implementation and the long term vision. This is 

clearly illustrated by the significant efforts to ensure consistency between the FAA’s National 

Airspace System Enterprise Architecture (NAS EA) and the JPDO’s longer term, cross-agency 

EA. 

The FAA’s focus is on near-and mid-term NextGen implementation. However, part of the 

FAA’s process for managing NextGen is to execute current mid-term activities while continually 

assessing future requirements. The FAA does not view the mid-term (i.e., 2018) as a stopping 

C-27 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

point. However, the long-term is extremely visionary and exploratory and, therefore, by its very 

nature does not have well defined requirements. The ongoing mid-term activities set the 

foundation for building future requirements. In building the requirements for individual 

operational improvements for the mid-term, the FAA develops plans for evolving the operational 

improvement beyond the mid-term. As pointed out, there must be a focus on research activities 

that support both the mid-term and long-term need. The ongoing RTTs will help provide the 

foundation for moving forward. The RTTs are designed to coordinate the development of key 

research requirements and to better coordinate the evolution of research into operational 

improvements and new capabilities. Efforts like this help ensure that research being conducted 

in the midterm will meet the long-term vision. It also allows for the identification of any 

additional research resources that might be required. 

Recommendation (b): If the research supporting the 2018 capability does not scale to the 

longer-term vision, the FAA should undertake to identify additional research resources that may 

be required for the longer-term vision and clarify the approach for obtaining them. 

FAA Response: The FAA’s implementation focus on the near- and mid-term is not exclusive 

and must have a research focus that extends beyond the mid-term to the long-term. The FAA 

works in partnership with the JPDO, who maintains the long-term vision, and collaborates 

closely with them on identifying long-term needs. The FAA believes that there is a strong role 

for the FAA, NASA, and JPDO to define coordinated research to explore and mature long-term 

concepts. The FAA, along with NASA, is working with JPDO on four RTT that provide the 

foundation for the way forward. 

Finding 2: The Subcommittee heard a briefing on the Avionics roadmap, which provides a good 

start to providing an understanding of the requirements for the air-side contribution to the 

NextGen infrastructure, but much work remains to be done. Performance metrics must be 

established and systems requirements must be defined. This is particularly true for the aircraft 

contribution to the 2018 architecture, because no research was described which addresses what 

the airspace users have to do to enable NextGen. Additionally, none of the research we have 

seen has addressed the aircraft avionics reliability impact on the 2018 or the long-term ConOps. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA accelerate developing 

airborne avionics and ground-based automation requirements that permit achievement of the 

stated 2018 goals so that users will know what they need to do. Consideration of reliability 

requirements should be part of this development. The roadmaps should include necessary 

stakeholder decisions, actions, and implied costs. 

FAA Response: The NextGen mid-term is focused on building on proven capabilities. All 

involved with the NextGen avionics roadmap believe it was a good start, and that it points to 

how much remains to be done to ensure fleet avionics equipage. The January 2009 NextGen 

Implementation Plan provides a view on mid-term avionics planning in terms of user equipage. 

This work has continued as the avionics roadmap has been completely integrated in FAA 

planning in the NASEA Aircraft roadmap. This roadmap indicates the aircraft contribution to 

every one of the planned NAS Operational Improvements and outlines the infrastructure that will 

continue to be built on in the long-term. The standards that will be in place for the mid-term are 

C-28 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

outlined in the 2009 NextGen Implementation Plan. In addition, there are a number of initiatives 

within the NextGen portfolio, both F&E and RE&D, that are geared towards solidifying 

requirements and the FAA is continuing with other concept and development work that directly 

impacts requirements. All research and development funded by the FAA whether in the 

Navigation Services, Data Communications, or Surveillance and Broadcast Services, explicitly 

considers avionics reliability in terms of failure effects and resultant certification level expected 

in the equipment approval. Examples of ongoing work include closely spaced parallel runways, 

weather in the cockpit, human-in-the-loop simulations for Datacomm, and the “Texas T” 4-D 

Trajectory demo. Furthermore, we have integration activities underway that look at overarching 

reliability and maintenance strategies for NextGen. 

The RTCA NextGen Implementation Task Force is working in part to identify strategies to 

enable and encourage avionics equipage as well as defining the means for maximizing benefits, 

both for operators and the FAA. 

Finding 3: The Subcommittee was given a briefing of the Air Traffic Control/Technical 

Operations Core and the NextGen Controller Efficiency human factors research programs. The 

Subcommittee has mixed opinions concerning this work and the level of funding it is receiving. 

On the one hand, these two programs each are requesting plus-ups near $6 million for FY 2011, 

which are substantial increases when overall ConOps, and technical issues such as humanautomation or air-ground roles-responsibilities, have not yet been determined. On the other 

hand, it is clear that controller roles will in some sense be switching from tactical control to 

management of traffic, even for the mid-term implementation, and it should be relatively 

straightforward to develop hypotheses regarding the change in required skill sets and start 

developing selection and training programs for new hires. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA task REDAC to put together a 

joint NASOPS-Human Factors Working Group to provide an external assessment of the best 

way to accelerate appropriate ATM human factors research in support of the 2018 mid-term 

capability. A key aspect should be the definition of accelerated activities required to develop 

new controller selection and training criteria. 

FAA Response: The planned budgets for the two programs you mentioned are only increasing 

slightly from FY 2010 to FY 2011. The FAA has made, and continues to make, process changes 

to ensure NextGen related research is clearly aligned to NextGen needs and decisions. We agree 

new controller selection and training criteria will be needed for NextGen and research to address 

this need is underway. Specifically, research on the NextGen Strategic Job Analysis is assessing 

changes to criteria for screening applicants for controller positions. The NextGen Strategic 

Training Analysis, starting in FY 2009, will assess changes to training needs associated with 

NextGen capabilities. Thus, we do not believe there is a need to establish a REDAC Working 

Group at this time as suggested. 

Finding 4: In the presentations given to the Subcommittee, there is frequently a lack of 

connection of the research to desired increments in NextGen capability, a lack of any sense of 

the magnitude of the problem being addressed, a lack of any real technical detail of the work 

being performed, a lack of any measure of the extent to which performing the research and 

C-29 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

implementing the results will provide an efficiency or capacity increase for NextGen, and a lack 

of an overall sense of relative priority among research elements. The resulting lack of clarity 

makes the research (1) very difficult to place in context, and (2) very difficult to ascertain in 

value. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA should conduct (or complete, 

if it is underway) a gap analysis which clearly identifies projected benefits, in quantitative terms, 

to capacity, efficiency, and/or safety of proposed implementations in the solution sets, the 

priorities among them, and the research required to provide them, and develop research 

portfolios which have clear milestone completion requirements, exit criteria, defined funding 

lines, and clear lines of authority. 

FAA Response: The FAA recognizes it has not done an effective job of communicating and 

providing clarity on our NextGen R&D efforts during briefings and will improve on that aspect. 

However, all items the subcommittee recommends are active elements of the existing NextGen 

planning and execution processes and many efforts are already underway to better define the 

processes. 

Quantitative benefits based on preliminary modeling of a series of NextGen capabilities were 

published in the 2009 NextGen Implementation Plan. The FAA will continue to refine these 

projections as additional information is made available. In addition, clear entrance and exit 

criteria for decisions are included in the enterprise architecture. Also, this is being augmented by 

the development of a stage gate process both to advance mature technologies and to identify and 

eliminate research activities that should not receive continued funding. The FAA has initiated a 

cross-agency team that will establish the Research and Systems Analysis (RSA) guidelines to 

support portfolio management of pre-concept requirements definition (CRD) investment 

activities (pre-CRD phase of AMS), optimize research and development investments, and 

standardize decisionmaking. The FAA is pursuing RSA to ensure there is a consistent and 

disciplined approach to advancing promising research concepts and technologies while 

eliminating less promising work. 

To ensure continuity and consistency, all RE&D FY 2012 targets for the NextGen mid-term 

capabilities will be formulated and managed using the solution set process that is in place for the 

NextGen F&E budget. 

Finding 5: Public-private partnerships hold substantial, and largely untapped, potential for many 

of the activities underway for engaging the private and state sectors in NextGen technology 

maturation and the related required innovations. Such partnerships are particularly effective 

when they emphasize pre-competitive, industry-wide design guidelines, industry standards for 

systems and architectures, and means of compliance for certification of new technologies. 

Additionally, industry methods for managing R&D may provide various accelerations to the 

FAA approach. Even with the slowly rebuilding NASA/FAA partnership, current FAA NextGen 

implementation strategies make scarce, insufficient use of partnerships. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA should consider developing a 

public-private partnership for the execution of NextGen. The FAA should use past models for 

C-30 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

lessons learned, and build the partnership around pre-competitive focus, shared governance, cost 

sharing, and appropriate IP protections. An approach would be to engage the National Council 

for Public Private Partnerships (NCPPP) as a forum to facilitate the design exercise, and engage 

the roles of small and large businesses (OEMs and suppliers), the states and municipalities, the 

operators, academia, and the Federal sector. 

FAA Response: The subcommittee may be unaware that the FAA already has extensive publicprivate partnerships through a number of cooperative agreements currently in place and will 

continue to develop partnerships as NextGen matures. All told, the FAA has over two dozen 

cooperative agreements in place with aviation partners. For example, we are partnering with 

several of the nation’s air carriers for trials and demonstrations and we are working with a wide 

range of government, university, and industry partners to evaluate NextGen technologies. The 

most visible example is the NextGen Test Bed where concepts, procedures, technologies, and 

capabilities are demonstrated through a laboratory operated by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical 

University and an industry consortium at Daytona Beach International Airport. 

In addition, in December 2008 the FAA announced that we have entered into a lease agreement 

and signed a memorandum of understanding with the South Jersey Economic Development 

District to build an aviation research and technology park adjacent to the William J. Hughes 

Technical Center near Atlantic City, N. J. The FAA transferred 55 acres of property to the 

district to build the research park, which will be a high-technology, integrated, and dynamic 

aviation facility that will provide the infrastructure for National and international leadership in 

aviation technologies. The park will offer a central location for the FAA’s partners to perform 

research, development, testing, integration, and verification of the technologies, concepts, and 

procedures required by NextGen. 

Finding 6: The described FAA approach to assessing the environmental impacts of operational 

changes focuses on deleterious effects but does not allow credit for offsetting reductions in 

environmental impact. This imbalance was particularly evident in the discussion of the Required 

Navigation Performance (RNP) approaches that remove noise impacts over much of a possible 

approach or departure area by concentrating all flight tracks in narrow corridors. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA should task REDAC to 

develop a NAS Operation/Environment & Energy Working Group to propose new assessment 

approaches for environmental impact. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees that assessing environmental impacts of our operations is 

critical and recognize, the need to continue looking for further opportunities to enhance the 

process. The FAA has significant work underway to advance techniques to assess environmental 

impacts. Our demonstrations and studies clearly illustrate that NextGen capabilities provide 

positive environmental benefits. We will brief the NAS Operations and Environmental and 

Energy REDAC subcommittees on these efforts as appropriate. However, we do not believe 

there is a need to charter a REDAC Working Group to do this. 

C-31 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety 

Finding 1: The Subcommittee has considered the roles played by several activities and 

laboratories – especially the Tech Center Fire laboratory, the Fuels laboratory and, importantly, 

CAMI. FAA has made major contributions to knowledge in these areas. The laboratories and 

their work are world renowned and add important luster to FAA. There is a need to document the 

various capabilities and the justification for the care and feeding of these facilities, so as to 

permit an FAA-wide examination of the need for, modernization of, and the funding of existing 

facilities. This examination should ensure that adequate ATC/Cockpit/pilot/controller simulation 

and modeling capabilities are available to support studies related to NextGen, self-separation, 

human factors, reduction of spacing between parallel runways, RNP, etc. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that, even in difficult budget periods, the 

work and funding of these laboratories be addressed from not only a program perspective, but 

from an Agency and national perspective as well. The full motion flight simulators at CAMI 

supporting research in Terminal Area Safety is a case in point. 

FAA Response: FAA shares the Subcommittee’s views on the value of the FAA’s unique 

research laboratories to the entire FAA and the aviation community. A case in point is the fire 

test facilities complex, which is unprecedented in the world, enabling FAA to be the clear 

international leader in aircraft fire safety R&D and the recognized source of knowledge relative 

to aircraft fire safety. Although the greatest majority of fire safety R&D is sponsored by AVS, 

important work has also been performed for the FAA’s Office of Hazardous Materials and 

agencies outside FAA such as the National Transportation Safety Board and the Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. We have completed an independent review of the 

FAA Aviation Engine and Fuels Test facility. The Independent Review Team recommended that 

the FAA conclude the search for a replacement fuel for 100 LC and develop a program plan to 

address alternative fuel research for General Aviation aircraft. In addition, we are completing a 

gap analysis of the modeling and simulation capabilities of the Agency. We will continue to 

evaluate the requirements and capabilities from both an Agency and national perspective. These 

FAA laboratories, simulators, and modeling capabilities are critical to accomplishing our mission 

and achieving the NextGen vision and they will be modified, closed, or supplemented as 

necessary. Thus, we believe these actions are addressing the current recommendation. 

Finding 2: Several research topics presented plans that were stated to be in support of the Next 

Gen initiative. Detailed NextGen research needs appear to be elusive and still need to be clearly 

defined in most areas. It was mentioned that the I&I office is working diligently on this 

requirements definition process. 

Recommendation: As stated in the last several Subcommittee meeting reports, the 

Subcommittee recommends that this must be accelerated to assure research is done in a manner 

consistent with NextGen deployment timing. In the interim the FAA research sponsors must use 

their best judgment to anticipate the NextGen research needs until such requirements become 

better defined. In addition as requirements evolve, the sponsors must be aware of research that 

has already been done. For example, much work has been done to evaluate closely spaced 

parallel runway limitations for today’s infrastructure. Much of this work may be applicable to 

C-32 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

support Next Gen objectives for assessing self-separation capabilities on closely spaced parallel 

runways. 

FAA Response: The FAA recognizes the need to continually improve the clarity of its R&D 

program requirements for NextGen. Last year for the first time, the FAA included clear linkages 

between architectural decision points to the research activities that support those decisions. 

Moving to 2012, NextGen research will be driven using the same process currently being used 

for the enabling activities in the Capital Investment Programs. Once in place, research activities 

will unambiguously drive future requirements definition. As the Subcommittee notes, we have 

made significant progress over the recent years. The highlighted closely spaced parallel runway 

operations project is an important NextGen activity designed to produce a safe reduction in 

separation standards targeted for the midterm. Significant work is underway at the Aeronautical 

Center in Oklahoma City targeting safe standards reduction for closely spaced parallel runway 

operations relying on today’s systems and equipment. 

Finding 3: Consistent with the Strategic Guidance provided, the Subcommittee expects to see 

detailed plans with measurable milestones & deliverables for the FY 2011 research activity. It is 

noted that excellent results need several key ingredients – complete planning, diligent execution 

& skilled people. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FY11 plans be defined, be clear & 

explicit to the point of being trackable on a monthly basis – not just the budget expenditure but 

the actual results vs. the plan. This timely understanding of execution issues enables midcourse 

corrections to be considered & implemented early for maximum benefit. Additional focus on 

execution excellence will yield more & better research per dollar spent. Earned Value 

Measurement techniques are available to help here and can be very simple to implement in their 

most basic form. 

FAA Response: The FAA does not believe Earned Value Measurement (EVM) techniques are 

appropriate for research activities and have no plans to pursue EVM in this area. However, the 

FAA agrees with the Subcommittee that having detailed plans with measurable milestones and 

deliverables for the planned research activities is critical to the success of the research. The 

Office of Research and Technology Development (AJP-6) has begun an effort in July 2009 to do 

exactly that in a uniform manner across the R&D portfolio. As noted in Recommendation 2009-

3-4, Project Level Agreements (PLAs) are being used in some research programs, those that are 

NextGen funded. Other programs use similar mechanisms, but there has not been a consistent 

approach across the FAA’s R&D programs. We plan to develop a consistent status reporting and 

feedback process that will use the information currently gathered by the existing tools, such as 

PLAs, to minimize workload on the program offices. This process will also include information 

on the implementation of the research results. As suggested by the Subcommittee on Aircraft 

Safety (SAS) in Recommendation 2009-3-3, we are beginning with several of the research 

activities reviewed by the SAS. We will be able to brief the Subcommittee on the progress at 

their March 2010 meeting. 

Finding 4: The Subcommittee understands that FAA now uses Project Level Agreements as a 

management tool to make judgments about appropriate NextGen research levels – as opposed to 

C-33 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

the former use of Program Plans. Program Plans have been valuable as a mechanism to gather 

user and stakeholder support and input. Weather Plan and Human Factor Plan are good 

examples. (The Weather research program, for example. continues to deliver high quality 

capability improvements. This consistent delivery may be due, in part to a consistently high 

level of research funding for which multi-year detailed plans are created & executed). This 

approach could be duplicated for strategically critical programs in other areas. These efforts have 

helped FAA to achieve support, consistency, and effective monitoring on the research initiatives. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the Project Level Agreement 

mechanism be used actively to document the core research efforts and to capture industry and 

stakeholder input. 

FAA Response: Finding and Recommendation 4 has been addressed in combination with the 

response to Finding and Recommendation 3. 

Finding 5: The Subcommittee also recognizes that Weather requirements cut across both safety 

and capacity mission objectives of the FAA. Consequently there are inherent institutional 

complexities for managing and sponsoring the Weather research. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that FAA ensure it has enough qualified 

people to manage the broad and complex Weather related programs that support multiple 

mission needs. 

FAA Response: FAA agrees; the Aviation Weather Group has recently added two new 

positions for the Weather Technology in the Cockpit (WTIC) program, and one new position in 

Aviation Weather Research Program (AWRP). 

Finding 6: There is more funding proposed for Unmanned Air System (UAS) activities than for 

software /digital systems work. We have been informed that all the internal requests for research 

have been fully funded, but this situation may be evidence of the previously identified difficulty 

of FAA acquiring talented software/digital system experts. Next Gen based research 

requirements for Software Digital Systems are largely missing & must be defined. The 

continued lack of requirements is actually quite surprising since all of Next Gen is dependent on 

advanced avionics. 

Recommendation: In light of the growing and crucial importance of software/digital systems, 

the Subcommittee recommends that this work be given additional emphasis and funding, as well 

as renewed efforts to hire software and digital systems experts. 

FAA Response: There is a considerable amount of ongoing work being done with automation 

to solidify NextGen based research requirements. These efforts and FAA’s plans going forward 

are outlined in the 2009 NextGen Implementation Plan and the NAS Enterprise Architecture. In 

addition, the Stevens Institute of Technology is currently conducting a study to provide 

recommendations on revising and refining competency models for the FAA systems engineering, 

systems integration and software engineering workforce, with a specific consideration of the 

impact of NextGen. The FAA anticipates receiving the recommendations in late August 2009. 

C-34 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

In reference to renewing the hiring efforts, the NextGen I&I Office already has in place a Chief 

System Engineer (CSE) for this domain. AIR continues to increase its staffing levels for 

software and digital systems policy development. AIR-100 hired two digital systems engineers 

in 2008. Applicants are currently being interviewed to fill another similar position in 2009. AIR 

is also actively recruiting to fill the Chief Scientist and Technical Advisor positions for both 

Aircraft Computer Software and Advanced Avionics. 

In addition, at the direction of the AVS Management Team, the Software and Digital Systems 

(SDS) Technical Community Representative Group (TCRG) is developing a comprehensive and 

integrated research plan that identifies SDS-related research requirements for automation, 

communications, navigation, surveillance, and security. This SDS Plan is due to the Associate 

Administrator for Aviation Safety by December 30, 2009. The SDS TCRG made significant 

progress in 2008 by identifying sources of reference for research requirements. This resulted in 

identification of both people and documents for future collaboration and research. 

Finding 7: Unmanned Air System (UAS) research requirements are fuzzy at best and lack a 

coherent plan that provides a clear path to certification and operation of UAS in the NAS. It 

appears the possible solution set is overly constrained by multiple conflicting operational 

requirements to the point where it may well be a null set making research either irrelevant or 

misdirected. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that significant system level thinking be 

applied to the development of the optimal operational construct and to the definition of the 

research (if any) needed to permit guidance material & regulations to be developed. The 

Subcommittee recommends that a Program Plan be developed with milestones, metrics and 

funding requirements. 

FAA Response: The FAA has applied system level thinking towards developing a framework 

for defining research requirements and using research results to develop policies, standards, and 

guidelines for safe integration of UASs into the NAS. We presented a detailed UAS program 

review to the Subcommittee at the 2008 Fall meeting. That program review, including an 

overview of the 2011 research, engineering and development requirements, was favorably 

received by the Subcommittee. 

The FAA will continue to engage the UAS community in the development of standards through 

the RTCA and the research program is integral to this process. The UAS Program Office will 

review its program and ensure the research requirements are clearly defined and linked to 

standards and policy development plans. Additional emphasis will be placed upon development 

of critical research and implantation milestones and performance metrics for the 2012 

requirements and this information will be presented to the Subcommittee at the Spring 2010 

meeting. We feel that we are addressing this recommendation. 

Finding 8: The Subcommittee notes that based on what was presented, the FAA planned 

activities for icing research are relevant, appear to be on track, and are well integrated with other 

organizations doing icing research such as NASA. 

C-35 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Finding 9: The Small Airplane Directorate has a very tough task ahead to assure Continued 

Operational Safety (COS) for the >150,000 general aviation aircraft in the US. The issue of 

aging aircraft (one that has been worked tirelessly for many years on large commercial aircraft 

with great success) has barely had an impact in the General Aviation (GA) fleet. There remains 

significant work to do here. The approach proposed to develop guidance material for GA 

airplane structural fatigue assessment is good but insufficient. The efforts of the Directorate to 

educate pilots, mechanics & owners are commendable & are very slowly increasing awareness of 

the issue, but this too is insufficient. There needs to be a large scale, mandatory reporting system 

implemented to permit the FAA to gather the aging aircraft structural cracking data it needs to 

support an adequate, data based, reliable approach to COS for this fleet. This is unpopular & 

difficult. Absent a program such as this, the GA fleet will expose the structural fatigue issues, 

event by event, death by death. It will happen, what will be the human cost before the FAA is 

called to react to the systemic issue of aging GA aircraft? 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that FAA develop a more efficient and 

timely reporting system for the general aviation fleet as a means of gathering factual data on the 

aging GA fleet to proactively prevent in-flight catastrophic structural failures by enabling timely, 

appropriately focused, data based, high priority GA R&D activities leading to improved 

structural assessment guidance material and potentially Airworthiness Directives. This is 

directly aligned with the FAA mandate to assure Continued Operational Safety as well as 

complimentary to the ongoing Small Airplane Directorate Part 23 Certification Process Study. 

FAA Response: This finding and the associated recommendation address a Small Airplane 

Directorate research project. The FAA appreciates the REDAC’s support for the Small Airplane 

Directorate’s research project to develop guidance material for general aviation (GA) airplane 

structural fatigue assessments and risk assessment tools. The FAA agrees with the 

Subcommittee’s finding 9, that a mandatory service difficulty reporting (SDR) system for GA 

would provide the FAA with better data to assess and manage risk of continued operational 

safety concerns proactively. 

As the recommendation states, the need for a mandatory SDR system has also been identified by 

the Part 23 Small Airplane Certification Process Study (CPS) currently in progress. The FAA 

and industry representatives with vested interest in GA safety have undertaken the CPS to 

develop recommendations for future actions, including rule changes. One of those 

recommendations will be to require SDRs for GA airplanes, which would require a Part 91 rule 

change. The CPS report was released to the public at AIR Venture in Oshkosh on July 30, 2009. 

The CPS recommendation on SDRs is part of a larger effort by AVS to implement a safety 

management system (SMS) philosophy to improve processes related to safety. The FAA will 

consider all CPS recommendations and determine how best to move forward. The FAA will 

process the CPS recommendation regarding SDRs through appropriate channels and that action 

will provide the response to this recommendation. The FAA will brief the Subcommittee on the 

result at a future meeting once the CPS recommendations have been processed. 

C-36 
 

2010 NARP Appendix C 

February 1, 2010 

Finding 10: The Subcommittee was asked to review a Volcanic Ash Risk Assessment paper that 

was provided at the meeting. Although the risk assessment was very limited and there have been 

no accidents to date due to Volcanic Ash encounters, the Subcommittee recognizes there is 

legitimate concern within the transport pilot community about the potential hazards of volcanic 

ash. The subcommittee concludes that these concerns probably warrant further research. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that research be limited to a very focused 

approach on how to detect and avoid a volcanic ash encounter. The Subcommittee does not 

believe the research related to the development of onboard technologies to detect or harden an 

aircraft against volcanic ash is warranted. The Subcommittee recommends that the research be 

limited to the development of procedures for getting tactical information to flight crews so they 

can effectively avoid the hazardous areas. Finally the Subcommittee believes that even this 

limited scope for research is relatively low in the broad research portfolio. 

FAA Response: The FAA agrees that research on onboard technologies to detect or harden an 

aircraft against volcanic ash is not needed. The FAA will, however, continue to focus our 

volcanic ash research efforts on predicting the movement and location of the ash plume and 

communicating that information to flight planners and to flight crews so the aircraft can 

effectively avoid the hazardous areas. 

C-37 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

APPENDIX D: Changes in NARP Chapter 2 Milestones 

The 2010 NARP presents an established research plan that describes how the FAA R&D 

programs are progressing toward achieving the R&D targets through 2016. The plan maintains 

continuity with the previous R&D goals and the milestones supporting those goals. To enhance 

the visibility of this continuity, we have added “Appendix D - Changes in 2010 Chapter 2 

Milestones.” 

Appendix D summarizes all the changes to the milestones in Chapter 2 (as compared with the 

Chapter 2 milestones from the 2009 NARP) and provides an explanation for each change. Only 

milestones that change or were added are listed. This is intended to help the reader see the how 

the program milestones are changing from year to year and to understand the rationale for all 

changes. After all, these are research efforts and it is expected that there will be changes given 

the nature of research and the reality of government budget processes. 

D-1
 
2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 1 - Fast, Flexible, and Efficient 

1. NextGen demonstrations 

Develop and demonstrate NextGen technologies and concepts. 

1.1 Demonstrate super-density operations. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

NextGen 

Demonstrations 

and 

Infrastructure 

Development 

2010: Demonstrate greater throughput 

in congested, domestic, en route 

airspace using point-in-space 

metering linked to required 

navigation (RNAV)/required 

navigation performance (RNP) 

routes. 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Program no longer 

considered R&D after 

FY 2009, will be 

included in FAA 

Capital Investment 

Plan (CIP) 

1.2 Demonstrate trajectory-based operations. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

NextGen 

Demonstrations 

and 

Infrastructure 

Development 

2011: Demonstrate trajectory-based 

operations in transitional 

airspace, between oceanic and 

domestic en route, using oceanic 

data link and Advanced 

Technologies and Oceanic 

Procedures (ATOP) automation. 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Program no longer 

considered R&D after 

FY 2009, will be 

included in CIP 

NextGen 

Demonstrations 

and 

Infrastructure 

Development 

2013: Demonstrate trajectory-based 

operations in mixed-equipage, 

high-altitude airspace with actual 

aircraft and procedures. 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Program no longer 

considered R&D after 

FY 2009, will be 

included in CIP 

NextGen 

Demonstrations 

and 

Infrastructure 

Development 

2015: Demonstrate auto-negotiations 

between flight automation and 

ground automation without 

human initiation. 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Program no longer 

considered R&D after 

FY 2009, will be 

included in CIP 

2. Airport capacity 

Increase airport capacity while reducing costs. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Airport 2011: Develop guidebook to assist Cooperative airport planners with airfield and NEW Milestone Research - airspace capacity evaluation. Capacity 

D-2
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

3. Separation standards 

3.1 - Reduce separation with procedures only. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2013: Modify procedures as requested 

NextGen - to allow use of closely spaced 

Wake parallel runways for arrival NEW Milestone 

Turbulence operations during non-visual 

conditions. 

3.2 - Develop new performance-based separation standards. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

NextGen - 2013: Determine how best to Under subheading of “Demonstrate Wake incorporate the leader/follower Same research activity, wake turbulence avoidance Turbulence - based wake separation standards revised wording for technologies” and procedures in 2009 Re- into the en-route and terminal clarity NARP, see section 4. below. categorization	 automation platforms. 

4. Wake turbulence 

Demonstrate wake turbulence avoidance technologies and procedures. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2012: Finish evaluation of the Wake Program ends in FY Wake Turbulence Mitigation for 2010; combined with Turbulence Arrivals air traffic control Not in 2010 NARP another F&E program Research decision support tool feasibility after FY 2010 prototype. 

2013: Develop additional, static, wakeNextGen - based set of categories and Fit the category of Moved to different subsection of Goal 1 Wake separation minima to optimize	 “Develop new (Develop new performance-based Turbulence - capacity for a set of airport- performance-based separation standards) and wording Re- specific fleet mixes and define	 separation standards” revised, see section 3.2 above. categorization	 the automation requirement to better
 

support those modifications. 

5. Aviation weather 

Reduce weather-related delays to increase on-time arrival rate and reduce transit time. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

2010: Develop Continental United 

Weather 

Program 

States (CONUS) ceiling, 

visibility, and flight category 

Moved to Situational Awareness in FY 

2010 NARP Activity fit better there 

forecast capability. 

2010: Develop 0-6 hour advanced 

Weather 

Program 

2012: Develop consolidated convective 

weather forecast capability. 

storm prediction algorithm. 

2011: Demonstrate 0-6 hour advanced 

storm prediction algorithm. 

Wording changes to 

make milestone more 

specific, same activity 

D-3
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

D-4
 

Program 

Name 

Weather 

Program 

2009 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

2010 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

2010: Transition Rapid Refresh 

Weather Forecast Model for 

implementation at NOAA 

NCEP. 

Explanation for 

Change 

NEW milestone 

Weather 

Program 

2010: Transition Mountain-Wave 

Turbulence Forecasts for 

implementation. 

Moved to Human Protection Goal in 

FY 2010 NARP Activity fit better there 

Weather 

Program 

2012: Develop consolidated convective 

weather forecast capability. 

2013: Transition 0-6 hour advanced 

storm prediction algorithm for 

implementation. 

Wording changed 

Weather 

Program 

2013: Transition turbulence forecast 

capability for all flight levels for 

implementation. 

Moved to Human Protection Goal in 

FY 2010 NARP Activity fit better there 

Weather 

Program 

2016: Transition Global Turbulence 

Forecasts for implementation. Moved to Human Protection Goal in 

FY 2010 NARP Activity fit better there 

Weather 

Program 

2013: Transition in-flight icing Alaska 

forecast and analysis capability 

for implementation. 

NEW milestone 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 2 - Clean and Quiet 

1. Baseline measurements 

Measure current levels of aviation related noise and emissions. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Threshold levels 

Determine acceptable levels of noise and emissions. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

2011: Investigate feasibility of new Environment standards for aircraft noise and NEW milestone and Energy emissions certification. 

3. Prediction 

Develop models to predict the impact and benefits of changes. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

NextGen - 2011: Enhance regional analysis 

Operational capability in aviation NEW milestone 

Assessments environmental analysis tools. 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Environmental 

Management 

System and 

Advanced Noise 

and Emissions 

Reduction 

2014: Assess NAS-wide benefits of 

environmental mitigation 

solutions comprised of new 

technologies, alternative fuels, 

advanced operational 

procedures, market measures, 

and options for policy and 

noise/emissions standards. 

NEW milestone 

D-5
 
2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

4. Reduction techniques 

Develop noise and emission reduction methods. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

NextGen 2011: Complete detailed feasibility Environmental study, including economic and, Research - environmental impacts and an Aircraft NEW milestone assessment of potential of Technologies, renewable alternative fuels for Fuels, and gas turbine engines. Metrics 

NextGen 

Environmental 

Research - 2013: Complete significant 

Aircraft demonstration of “drop-in” NEW milestone 

Technologies, alternative turbine engine fuels. 

Fuels, and 

Metrics 

NextGen 

Environmental 2014: Complete assessment of Research - renewable alternative turbine Aircraft NEW milestone engine fuels. Technologies, 

Fuels, and
 

Metrics
 

5. Environmental Management (NEW subcategory in this goal) 

Develop environmental management systems for the NAS. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

NextGen -

Environment 2011: Complete detailed feasibility and Energy - study, including economic and, Environmental environmental impacts and an Management NEW milestone assessment of potential of System and renewable alternative fuels for Advanced Noise gas turbine engines. and Emissions 

Reduction
 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Environmental 2013: Complete significant 

Management demonstration of “drop-in” NEW milestone 

System and alternative turbine engine fuels. 

Advanced Noise 

and Emissions 

Reduction 

D-6
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 3 - High Quality Teams and Individuals 

1. Increase to 130 percent 

Demonstrate 130 percent controller efficiency. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Demonstrate improvements in ANSP efficiency 

Demonstrate improvements in ANSP efficiency achieved by implementation of NextGen 

ground automation capabilities and aircraft equipage, use of data communications, and 

implementation of new decision support tools and automation. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

NextGen - Air 

Traffic Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

NextGen - Air 

Traffic Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

2010: Define anticipated ANSP 

workload reductions due to 

implementation of data 

communications. 

2010: Define initial requirements and 

anticipated efficiency benefits 

for merging and spacing decision 

support tools to support 

continuous descent approach in 

the terminal area. 

2010: Define anticipated controller 

workload reductions due to 

implementation of data 

communications. 

2010: Define initial requirements and 

anticipated efficiency benefits 

for merging and spacing decision 

support tools to support 

continuous descent approach in 

the terminal area. 

Returning to controller 

terminology back from 

ANSP (service 

provider) terminology 

Returning to controller 

terminology back from 

ANSP (service 

provider) terminology; 

extra wording added 

for clarity 

NextGen - Air 

Traffic Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

NextGen - Air 

Traffic Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

2013: Redefine ANSP roles in a 

strategic air traffic environment 

for en route and terminal 

domains. 

2016: Increase efficiency given the 

need to manage multiple airport 

streams for the terminal phases 

of flight in large metropolitan 

areas given a mixed-equipage 

environment. 

2013: Analyze controller roles in a 

strategic air traffic environment 

for en route and terminal 

domains for the impact on 

personnel selection and training. 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Returning to controller 

terminology back from 

ANSP (service 

provider) terminology 

Milestone linked to 

preliminary JPDO 

planning. As NextGen 

research requirements 

matured, Human 

Factors office 

determined the 

milestone was no 

longer valid. Should 

have been deleted 

previously from 2009 

NARP 

D-7
 
2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

3. Selection criteria 

Ensure ANSPs have the aptitude and capability required to manage air traffic in the 

future system. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

D-8
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 4 - Human-Centered Design 

1. Roles and responsibilities 

Define the changes in roles and responsibilities, between pilots and controllers and 

between humans and automation, required to implement NextGen. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

Airport 

Cooperative 

Research - 

Capacity 

2011: Document ramp operational and 

safety techniques and how 

airport operators implement 

pavement maintenance 

programs. 

New milestone 

NextGen - Air 

Ground 

Integration 

Human Factors 

and NextGen -

Air Traffic 

Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

2011: Develop initial taxonomy 

describing the relationship 

between human pilots/ATC and 

associated automated systems. 

2011: Develop initial mid-term 

analysis describing the 

relationship between human 

pilots and controllers with 

associated automated systems. 

Changed to emphasize 

the mid-term focus of 

the research and 

reworded pilots and 

controllers versus 

pilots/ATC. 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

NextGen - Air 

Ground 

Integration 

Human Factors 

and NextGen -

Air Traffic 

Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

NextGen - Air 

Ground 

Integration 

Human Factors 

and NextGen -

Air Traffic 

Control/ 

Technical 

Operations 

Human Factors 

(Controller 

Efficiency and 

Air Ground 

Integration) 

2012: Complete initial research to 

evaluate and recommend pilotATC procedures for negotiations 

and shared decision-making 

NextGen activities. 

2016: Complete research to enable safe 

and effective changes to pilot 

and ATC roles and 

responsibilities for NextGen 

procedures. 

2012: Complete initial research to 

evaluate and recommend 

procedures for negotiations and 

shared decision-making between 

pilots and controllers. 

2016: Complete research to enable safe 

and effective changes to pilot 

and controller roles and 

responsibilities for NextGen 

procedures. 

Reworded to improve 

clarity 

Reworded to improve 

clarity 

D-9
 
2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

2. Human system integration 

Define human and system performance requirements for design and operation of aircraft 

and air traffic management systems. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

3. Error management 

Develop and apply error management strategies, mitigate risk factors, and reduce 

automation-related errors. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

4. Integrated demonstrations 

Conduct incremental and full-mission demonstrations to increase the likelihood of 

successful implementation of research results. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

D-10
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 5 - Human Protection 

1. Safe evacuation 

Prevent injuries or fatalities during evacuations. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Turbulence 

Prevent injuries and fatalities due to turbulence. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Weather 

Program 

2011: Transition convectively induced 

turbulence forecast capability for 

implementation. 

2013: Transition convectively-induced 

turbulence forecast capability for 

implementation. 

Due to changes in 

research priorities, 

milestone due date was 

slipped 

Weather 

Program 

2012: Transition mountain-wave 

turbulence forecast capability for 

implementation. 

NEW milestone 

Weather 

Program 

2013: Transition convectively-induced 

turbulence forecast capability for 

implementation. 

NEW milestone 

Weather 

Program 

2016: Transition global turbulence 

forecast capability for 

implementation. 

NEW milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

3. Hazardous weather 

Prevent injuries and fatalities due to hazardous weather. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

4. Occupant restraint 

Improve occupant restraint systems to reduce injuries and fatalities. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

5. Airports 

Prevent injuries and fatalities due to aircraft overrun. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Airport 

Technology 

Research - 

Safety, Airport 

Cooperative 

2011: Evaluate new formulations for 

soft ground arrestor systems. Not in 2010 NARP 

Research - 

Safety 

Explanation for 

Change 

This milestone was 

deleted based on 

results of the initial 

evaluation of 

alternative material 

documented in ACRP 

Report 29. Research 

task will be reevaluated. 

D-11
 
2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

6. Cabin air quality 

Reduce health risk to aircrew and passengers due to cabin environmental threats. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

7. Commercial space. 

Identify the requirements for safe commercial space transportation operations. 

Program 

Name 

2009 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

2010 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

2009: Conduct a study to determine the 

need to develop a temporal wind 

database to support the launch of 

wind-weighted, unguided, 

suborbital rockets launched from 

nonfederal launch sites. 

Moved to Situational Awareness Goal 

in FY 2010 NARP 

Activity fit better 

under that Goal 

8. Human aeromedical safety and health risk management 

Identify and manage human aeromedical safety and health risks. 

Program 

Name 

2009 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

2010 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Airport 2011: Assess role of airports and Cooperative airlines in the spread of vector- NEW milestone Research - borne diseases. Safety 

D-12
 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 6 - Safe Aerospace Vehicles 

1. Engines 

Prevent engine failures. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Structures
 

Prevent accidents due to structural failures or fire. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

3. Systems 

Prevent accidents due to system failures. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

4. Unmanned aircraft 

Integrate unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) into the civil airspace. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

2012: Analyze data on the safety 

Unmanned 

Aircraft 

Systems 

Research 

implications of system 

performance impediments to 

UAS command, control, and 

communication (C3) in different 

classes of airspaces and 

NEW milestone 

operational environments. 

Unmanned 

Aircraft 

Systems 

Research 

2013: Develop and conduct systemlevel proof-of-concept 

regulatory-based causal factor 

framework (RCFF) by applying 

Safety Management System 

(SMS) principles to support 

integration of UAS 

civil/commercial operations in 

the NAS. 

NEW milestone 

2012: Determine performance Unmanned characteristics and operational Aircraft requirements for UAS detect, NEW milestone Systems sense and avoid technologies Research (DSA). 

D-13
 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

5. General aviation (GA) 

Reduce GA accidents. 

Program 

Name 

Continued 

Airworthiness 

2009 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

2012: Complete developing methods 

and data for damage tolerance 

analysis of rotorcraft. 

2010 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

2012: Complete development of 

methods and data for damage 

tolerance analysis of rotorcraft 

structure. 

Explanation for 

Change 

Revised wording for 

clarity 

NextGen -

Alternative 2015: Evaluate and characterize all 

Fuels for 

General 

candidate replacement 

formulations for 100LL. 

NEW milestone 

Aviation 

6. Commercial space 

Identify the requirements for safe commercial space transportation vehicles. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2009: Conduct a study to survey the 

existing technologies available 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

for determining wind conditions 

from the upper troposphere to 

the stratosphere. The study will 

address possible modifications of 

radar wind profiler to obtain 

Moved to Situational Awareness goal in 

FY 2010 NARP 

Activity fit better 

under that goal 

winds to greater altitudes than 

currently available. 

2010: Conduct a study to provide 

information on the capability, 

limitations, and considerations 

Commercial for GPS implementation in space 

Space 

Transportation 

launch and reentry environments, 

such as Space and Air Traffic NEW milestone 

Safety Control, which will be used to 

help determine requirements for 

GPS usage and future 

technologies. 

2010: Conduct a study to identify 

means of preventing hazards 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

(such as fires and explosions) 

involving nontraditional 

monopropellants and oxidizers 

(specifically hydrogen peroxide, 

H2O2, and nitrous oxide, N2O) 

NEW milestone 

used in propulsion systems in 

commercial space applications. 

D-14
 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

2010: Conduct a study to provide 

guidance to AST and industry on 

the use of operational limitations 

and inspection requirements for 

suborbital reusable launch 

vehicles (RLVs) comprised of 

composite materials. The results 

of this study will help to develop 

effective rules for operations and 

maintenance (O&M) for use of 

composite materials, as they 

apply to commercial space 

transportation. 

2010: Conduct a study to examine the 

operational environment, 

determine the number of sensors 

needed, defining the data 

recovery process, and provide 

black box survivability criteria 

for use in developing 

requirements for a black box 

system to be used in commercial 

space transportation systems 

(ELVs and RLVs). 

2010: Conduct an assessment on the 

outputs from two specialized, 

independent system safety 

analysis conducted by separate 

parties to determine the optimal 

system safety method. The 

assessment will include the 

strengths and weaknesses, the 

hazard analysis depth, the hazard 

identification thoroughness, and 

the projected resource utilization. 

NEW milestone 

NEW milestone 

NEW milestone 

D-15
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 7 - Separation Assurance 

1. Surface/runway operations awareness 

Support procedures, equipage, training and design to enable enhanced aircraft spacing for 

surface movements. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Reduced separation 

Support procedures, equipage, training and design to enable reduced separation. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

3. Delegated separation 

Support procedures, equipage, training and cockpit design to enable delegated separation. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

2011: Complete research to evaluate 

NextGen - Self- and recommend procedures, 

Separation equipage, and training to safely 

Human Factors conduct oceanic and en route 

pair-wise delegated separation. 

2013: Complete initial research to 

evaluate and recommend 

procedures, equipage, and 

training to safely conduct 

oceanic and en route pair-wise 

delegated separation. 

Start of task was 

delayed due late 

receipt of the FY 2009 

budget and the en route 

component is not as 

mature as expected so 

will need more time to 

properly assess and 

address procedures, 

equipage, and training 

D-16
 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 8 - Situational Awareness 

1. Weather situational awareness 

Develop common situational awareness for weather. 

1.1 Weather Information Improvements 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Weather 

Program 

2009: Transition for operational 

readiness the National Ceiling 

and Visibility forecast for 

CONUS. 

2010: Develop CONUS ceiling, 

visibility and flight category 

forecast capability. 

Wording revised for 

clarity; year slipped 

due to change in 

priority 

Weather 

Program 

2012: Demonstrate 1-3 hour CONUS 

ceiling, visibility, and flight 

category forecast capability. 

NEW milestone 

Weather 

Program 

2014: Demonstrate 1-12 hour CONUS 

ceiling, visibility, and flight 

category forecast capability. 

NEW milestone 

2016: Transition 1-12 hour CONUS 

Weather 

Program 

ceiling, visibility, and flight 

category forecast capability for NEW milestone 

implementation. 

Aviation Weather is 

Weather 

Program 

2012: Transition in-flight icing Alaska 

forecast for implementation. 

2013: Transition in-flight icing Alaska 

forecast for implementation. 

still supporting this 

activity due FY 2013. 

Year slipped due to 

change in priority 

2013: Transition the volcanic ash Weather forecast for operational Not in 2010 NARP Program readiness. 

In light of REDAC 

recommendation to 

limit research to a very 

focused approach on 

how to detect and 

avoid a volcanic ash 

encounter, research is 

temporarily halted 

pending the results of 

gap analysis. 

1.2	 Weather Technology in the Cockpit (WTIC) 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2010: Assess bandwidth demand of 

graphical icing products (Current 

Icing Product and Forecast Icing NextGen – Product) and graphical Weather turbulence products (Graphical Technology in Turbulence Guidance) for the Cockpit potential delivery via existing 

and planned FAA data link 

services. 

NEW milestone 

NextGen – 

Weather 2010: Simulate and evaluate available 2012: Simulate and evaluate available Date change, 

Technology in cockpit weather technologies. cockpit weather technologies. explanation pending 

the Cockpit 

D-17
 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

NextGen – 2011: Identify, validate, and document 

Weather datalink system attributes that
 NEW milestone Technology in may affect use of weather in the 

the Cockpit cockpit. 

2. Airports 

Ensure safe airport operations. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

3. Commercial space (NEW subcategory in this goal) 

Develop situational awareness for commercial space transportation. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

Located under Human Protection Goal 

in FY2009 NARP 

2009: Conduct a study to determine the 

need to develop a temporal wind 

database to support the launch of 

wind-weighted, unguided, 

suborbital rockets launched from 

nonfederal launch sites. 

Moved to this goal in 

FY 2010, activity fit 

better within this goal 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

Located under Safe Aerospace Vehicles 

Goal in FY2009 NARP 

2009: Conduct a study to survey the 

existing technologies available 

for determining wind conditions 

from the upper troposphere to 

the stratosphere. The study will 

address possible modifications of 

radar wind profiler to obtain 

winds to greater altitudes than 

currently available. 

Moved to this goal in 

FY 2010, activity fit 

better within this goal 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

2009: Review integrated operations of 

reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) 

from spaceports, joint use airport 

and spaceports, as well as the 

airspace surrounding those NEW milestone 

facilities and provide 

recommendations on how to 

safely integrate and conduct 

routine RLV operations. 

D-18
 
 

 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 9 - System Knowledge 

1. Information analysis and sharing 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Capacity and efficiency evaluation 

Develop methods, metrics, and models to demonstrate that the modernized system can 

handle anticipated increases in capacity. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Operations 

Concept 

Validation 

2008: Demonstrate capacity increase to 

130% current levels 

2008: Demonstrate capacity increase to 

130% of baseline levels. 

Wording changes made 

to clarify the definition 

of the baseline as set in 

2004 

Operations 

Concept 

Validation 

2011: Demonstrate capacity increase to 

166% current levels 

2011: Demonstrate capacity and 

efficiency increase to 166% of 

baseline levels. 

Wording changes made 

to clarify the definition 

of the baseline as set in 

2004 

2011: Develop a guidebook for airport 

Airport 

Cooperative 

Research - 

Capacity 

operators and air cargo industry 

stakeholders that provides tools 

and techniques for measuring 

economic impact of air cargo 

activities at the national, 

NEW milestone 

regional, and local level. 

Operations 

Concept 

Validation 

2013: Demonstrate capacity increase to 

230% current levels 

2013: Demonstrate capacity and 

efficiency increase to 230% of 

baseline levels. 

Wording changes made 

to clarify the definition 

of the baseline as set in 

2004 

Operations 

Concept 

Validation 

2016: Demonstrate capacity increase to 

300% current levels 

2016: Demonstrate capacity and 

efficiency increase to 300% of 

baseline levels. 

Wording changes made 

to clarify the definition 

of the baseline as set in 

2004 

3. Safety management system 

Produce guidelines for developing processes and technologies to implement a safety 

management system. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

Airport 2011: Develop and validate a software 

Cooperative 

Research - 

tool to quantify risk and support 

engineering decision-making NEW milestone 

Safety safety area requirement. 

D-19
 
2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

4. Commercial space 

Develop understanding of commercial space transportation system operations. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2010: Conduct a study with current 

Commercial 

Space 

Transportation 

Safety 

information related to the state of 

the commercial suborbital 

transportation industry with a 

focus on market demand, safety, 

operability, and international 

NEW milestone 

coordination. 

2010: Conduct a study to evaluate the 

adequacy of current rules and 

Commercial polices related to commercial
 

Space space transportation, implement NEW milestone Transportation new rules, policy, and advisory 

Safety materials, and identify barriers to
 

industry caused by unnecessary
 

or conflicting regulations. 

5. Safety evaluation 

Develop methods and metrics to measure progress in reducing the rate of fatalities and 

significant injuries by two-thirds. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP. 

6. Environmental evaluation 

Develop methods, metrics, and models to demonstrate that significant aviation noise and 

emissions impacts can be reduced in absolute terms to enable the air traffic system to 

handle growth in demand up to three times current levels. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP
 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone 

Explanation for 

Change 

New milestones listed 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Validation 

Modeling 

2009: Demonstrate no environmental 

constraints at 130% capacity. Not in 2010 NARP 

below for this section 

are the current research 

activities that will lead 

to defining the 

appropriate metrics for 

FAA environmental 

research 

New milestones listed 

below for this section 

are the current research 

activities that will lead 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Validation 

Modeling 

2011: Demonstrate no environmental 

constraints at 166% capacity. Not in 2010 NARP 

to defining the 

appropriate metrics for 

FAA environmental 

research. FY 2009 was 

the final year for this 

program, new 

milestones below will 

be funded by NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment Program 

D-20
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix D 

February 1, 2010 

D-21
 

Program 

Name 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Validation 

Modeling 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Validation 

Modeling 

2013: 

2016: 

2009 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

Demonstrate no environmental 

constraints at 230% capacity. 

Demonstrate no environmental 

constraints at 300% capacity. 

2010 NARP 

Ch. 2 Milestone 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Not in 2010 NARP 

Explanation for 

Change 

New milestones listed 

below for this section 

are the current research 

activities that will lead 

to defining the 

appropriate metrics for 

FAA environmental 

research. FY 2009 was 

the final year for this 

program, new 

milestones below will 

be funded by NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment Program 

New milestones listed 

below for this section 

are the current research 

activities that will lead 

to defining the 

appropriate metrics for 

FAA environmental 

research. FY 2009 was 

the final year for this 

program, new 

milestones below will 

be funded by NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment Program 

NextGen -

Environment 

and Energy -

Validation 

Modeling 

2009: Develop and implement NASwide regional environmental 

analysis capability within 

Aviation Environmental Design 

Tool (AEDT). 

NEW milestone 

NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment 

2010: Implement weather effects in 

AEDT environmental analyses. NEW milestone 

NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment 

NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment 

2012: Develop and implement NASwide cost-benefit environmental 

analysis capability with Aviation 

Portfolio Management Tool 

(APMT). 

2013: Explore options to integrate 

environmental assessment 

capability with NextGen NAS 

models. 

NEW milestone 

NEW milestone 

NextGen 

Operational 

Assessment 

2016: Employ AEDT and APMT for 

NAS-wide environmental 

analyses. 

NEW milestone 
2010 NARP 

February 1, 2010 

R&D Goal 10 - World Leadership 

1. Management 

Manage ongoing research. 

Program 2009 NARP 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone 

2008: Publish the NARP, which 

documents the annual R&D 

budget portfolio, describes the 

activities of the R,E&D 

Advisory Committee, and 

contains the FY 2008-2013 FAA 

R&D plan. 

System 2008: Manage R&D portfolio, conduct Planning and advisory committee reviews of Resource R&D, and publish the NARP Management 

Appendix D 

2010 NARP Explanation for 

Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2009: Publish the NARP, which 

documents the annual R&D 

budget portfolio, describes the 

activities of the R,E&D 

Advisory Committee, and 

contains the FY 2009-2014 FAA 

R&D plan. 

2010: Publish the NARP, which 

documents the annual R&D 

budget portfolio, describes the 

activities of the R,E&D 

Advisory Committee, and 

contains the FY 2010-2015 FAA 

R&D plan. 

Reworded to better 

describe activities of 

program, and split into 

multi-year steps to 

better show schedule. 

Reworded to better 

describe activities of 

program, and split into 

multi-year steps to 

better show schedule. 

Reworded to better 

describe activities of 

program, and split into 

multi-year steps to 

better show schedule. 

System 2010: Determine measures for the 2010: Determine criteria for assessing Planning and exchange of research the benefits of the international Reworded for clarity. Resource information	 research collaboration. Management 

Leverage international research collaboration. 

No Changes from 2009 NARP to 2010 NARP 

2. Products 

Leverage research results. 

Program 2009 NARP 2010 NARP Explanation for 

Name Ch. 2 Milestone Ch. 2 Milestone Change 

2013: Complete development of 

NextGen – ANSP wake separation This milestone was Wake standards that better use deleted based on a Turbulence – aircraft flight characteristics Not in 2010 NARP change in the Re- and information concerning program’s direction. categorization	 surrounding weather 

conditions. 

D-22
 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

0-9 

100LL 100 Low Lead 

4D Four-Dimensional 

4DT Four-Dimensional Trajectories 

A 

AA ASIAS Architecture 

AAAE American Association of Airport Executives 

AAFEX Alternative Aviation Fuel Experiment 

AAIADS Aerospace Accident Injury and Autopsy Data System 

AAM FAA Office of Aviation Medicine 

AAWU Alaska Aviation Weather Unit 

AC Advisory Circular 

ACCRI Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative 

ACER Airliner Cabin Environment Research 

ACES Airspace Conflict Evaluation Simulator 

ACI Airports Council International 

ACI-NA Airports Council International-North America 

ACO Aircraft Certification Office 

ACOSM Air Carrier Operations Systems Model 

ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program 

ADAF Airfield Deicing and Anti-Icing Fluids 

ADS-B Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast 

AEC Aviation Emissions Characterization 

AEDT Aviation Environmental Design Tool 

AEE FAA Office of Environment and Energy 

AEP FAA Office of Aviation Policy, Planning, and Environment 

AFETF Aviation Fuel and Engine Test Facility 

AFRL Air Force Research Lab 

AGHME Aircraft Geometric Height Measurement Element 

AIA Aerospace Industries Association 

AIP Airport Improvement Program Appropriation 

AIR Aircraft Certification Service 

AJP-6 FAA Office of Research and Technology Development Directorate 

AJP-61 FAA Human Factors Research and Engineering Group 

AJP-A FAA NextGen Integration and Implementation Directorate 

ALE Airfield Lighting Equipment 

AMS Aerospace Materials Specifications 

AMTAS Advanced Materials in Transport Aircraft Structures 

E-1 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

ANSI American National Standards Institute 

ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider 

AOC ACRP Oversight Committee 

AOC Airline/Aviation/Aircraft Operations Center 

APEX Aircraft Particle Emissions Experiment 

APM Automated People Mover 

APMT Aviation Environmental Portfolio Management Tool 

APU Auxiliary Power Unit 

AQP Advanced Qualification Program 

ARAC Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee 

ARFF Aqueous Film-Forming Foam 

ARP Aerospace Recommended Practice 

ARTS Automated Radar Terminal System 

AS Aerospace Standard 

ASAP Aviation Safety Action Program 

ASIAS Aviation Safety Information Analysis and Sharing 

ASPIRE Asia and South Pacific Initiative to Reduce Emissions 

ASR Alkali-Silica Reactive 

ASRS Aviation Safety Reporting System 

ASTM ASTM International (formerly the American Society for Testing and 

Materials) 

ATA Air Transport Association 

ATC Air Traffic Control/Controllers 

ATC/TO Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations 

ATCOV Air Traffic Control Color Vision Test 

ATCS Air Traffic Controller Station/Specialist 

ATD Anthropomorphic Test Device/Dummy 

ATM Air Traffic Management 

ATO FAA Air Traffic Organization 

ATOP Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures 

AUVSI Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International 

Avgas Aviation Gasoline 

AVS FAA Office of Aviation Safety 

AVSI Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute 

AWRP Aviation Weather Research Program 

E-2 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

B 

BMP Best Management Practice 

BOD5 Biological Oxygen Demand 

BOM Australian Bureau of Meteorology 

C 

C3 Command, Control, and Communication 

CA Constant Amplitude 

CAAFI Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuel Initiative 

CAASD Center for Advanced Aviation System Development 

CAD Color Assessment and Diagnostics 

CAEP Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection 

CAMI Civil Aerospace Medical Institute 

CAMS Critical Area Management System 

CANSO Civil Air Navigation Services Organization 

CAST Certification Authorities Software Team 

CAST Commercial Aircraft Safety Team 

CATM Collaborative Air Traffic Management 

CAVS CDTI-assisted visual separation 

CCSP Climate Change Science Program 

CDA Continuous Descent Arrival 

CDTI Cockpit Display of Traffic Information 

CEAT COE for Airport Technology 

CECAM Center of Excellence for Composites and Advanced Materials 

CESTOL Cruise Efficient Short Takeoff and Landing 

CFIT Controlled Flight Into Terrain 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CGAR COE for General Aviation Research 

CH4 Methane 

CIP Capital Investment Plan 

CLEEN Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions, and Noise 

CNS Communication/Navigation/Surveillance 

CO Carbon Monoxide 

CO2 Carbon Dioxide 

COA Continental Airlines 

COE Center of Excellence 

COMSTAC Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee 

ConOps Concept of Operations 

E-3 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

CONUS Continental United States 

COS Continued Operational Safety 

COTS Commercial-Off-The-Shelf 

CP Compression Precracking 

CPCA Compression Precracking Constant-Amplitude 

CPS Certification Process Study 

CR Continuing Resolution 

CRC Coordinating Research Council 

CRD Concept Requirements Definition 

CRDA Cooperative Research and Development Agreement 

CSAHWG CDTI Symbology Ad Hoc Working Group 

CSE Chief System Engineer 

CSF Cockpit Simulation Facility 

CSPR Closely Space Parallel Runways 

CSSD Common Data and Structure Data 

CVN Color Vision Normal 

D 

DAH Design Approval Holder 

DARWIN Design Assessment Of Reliability With INspection 

Data Comm Data Communications 

DFW Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport 

DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

DIWS Data Imaging and Workflow System 

DOC U.S. Department of Commerce 

DoD U.S. Department of Defense 

DoDAF DoD Architecture Framework 

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation 

D-RVSM Domestic Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum 

DRWP Doppler Radar Wind Profilers 

DSA Detect, Sense, and Avoid 

DST Decision Support Tools 

DT Damage Tolerance 

E 

E&E Environment and Energy 

EA Enterprise Architecture 

EA Environmental Assessment 

ECLSS Environmental Control and Life Support System 

EDMS Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System 

E-4 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

EDS Environmental Design Space 

eFAROS Final Approach Runway Occupancy Signal 

EFB Electronic Flight Bag 

EFG Economic and Financial Group 

EFVS Enhanced Flight Vision Systems 

E-IPT Environmental Integrated Product Team (now Environmental Working 

Group, or EWG) 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

ELV Expendable Launch Vehicle 

EMS Environmental Management System 

EOP Executive Office of the President 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

ERDC En Route Data Communications 

ETA Estimated Time of Arrival 

ETBE Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether 

EUOCONTROL European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation 

EVM Earned Value Measurement 

EVO Equivalent Visual Operations 

EWG Environmental Working Group (formerly the Environmental Integrated 

Product Team, or E-IPT) 

EWIS Electrical Wiring Interconnect Systems 

F 

F&E Facilities and Equipment Appropriation 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FACT Future Airport Capacity Team/Task 

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation 

FASTER Full-Scale Aircraft Structural Test Evaluation and Research 

FBW Fly-By-Wire 

FEA Federal Enterprise Architecture 

FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement 

FEWS Future En Route Workstation 

FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center 

FICAN Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise 

FIP-AK Forecast Icing Product - Alaska 

FLM Front Line Manager 

FMS Flight Management Systems 

FOD Foreign Object Debris 

FOQA Flight Operations Quality Assurance 

FPI Fluorescent Penetrant Inspection 

E-5 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

FT Fischer-Tropsch 

FTWS Future Terminal Workstation 

FY Fiscal Year 

G 

GA General Aviation 

GAMA FAST General Aviation Manufacturers Association Future Avgas Strategy and 

Transition Plan 

GC/MS Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry 

GEOSS Global Earth Observation System of Systems 

GGUAS Global Gridded Upper Air Station 

GHG Greenhouse Gas 

GIAA Grant-In-Aid-to-Airports 

GIACC Group on International Aviation and Climate Change 

GOES Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites 

GPS Global Positioning Satellites/System 

GRC NASA Glenn Research Center 

GUI Graphical User Interface 

H 

HAATS Houston Area Air Traffic System 

HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant 

HCAS Hazard Categorization and Analysis System 

HEPA High Efficiency Particulate Air 

HESRA Human Error Safety Risk Assessment 

HF Human Factors 

HFD Hydrofluoro Compounds 

HIS Human System Integration 

HITL Human-In-The-Loop 

HIWC High Ice-Water Content 

HRET High-Reach Extendable Turrets 

HUD Head-Up Display 

HUMS Health and Usage Monitoring Systems 

HVS Heavy Vehicle Simulator 

I 

I&I FAA NextGen Integration and Implementation Office 

IA Interagency Agreement 

IAP Instrument Approach Procedure 

IC4D Interactive Correction in Four Dimensions 

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization 

E-6 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

ICAO/CAEP International Civil Aviation Organization Committee on Aviation 

Environmental protection 

IFR Instrument Flight Rule 

ILS Instrument Landing System 

IMA Integrated Modular Avionics 

INM Integrated Noise Model 

IOSA International Aviation Transportation Association Operational Safety Audit 

IRT Icing Research Tunnel 

ISU Iowa State University 

IT Information Technology 

ITS Intelligent Training Systems 

ITWS Integrated Terminal Weather System 

IWP Integrated Work Plan 

J 

JAIdB Job Analysis Information Database 

JAMS Joint COE for Advanced Materials and Structures 

JPDO Joint Planning and Development Office 

JPE Joint Planning Environment 

JPO Joint Program Office 

JRC Joint Resources Council 

JTA Job Task Analysis 

JUP Joint University Program 

L 

LAAS Local Area Augmentation System 

LCA Life Cycle Analysis 

LCGS Low Cost Ground Surveillance System 

LIDAR Light Detection And Ranging 

LOS Level-Of-Service 

LOSA Line Operations Safety Audit 

LR Load-Reduction 

LTO Landing and Take-Off 

M 

M&S Merging and Spacing 

MAGENTA Model for Assessing Global Exposure to the Noise of Transport Aircraft 

MDP Model Development Plan 

MMIR Maintenance Malfunction Information Reporting 

MMPDS Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization 

MOA Memorandum of Agreement 

MOA/U Memorandums of Understanding/Agreement 

E-7 
 

 

 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

MOC Memorandum of Cooperation 

MOPS Minimum Operational Performance Standards 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 

MPSe Minimum Performance Standard - Engines 

MSP Multi-Sector Planner 

N 

N2O Nitrous Oxide 

N47 FAA's Bombardier Global 5000 Test Aircraft 

NAPTF National Airport Pavement Test Facility 

NARP National Aviation Research Plan 

NAS National Airspace System 

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials 

NASEA National Airspace System Enterprise Architecture 

NASGRO NASA Crack Growth Program 

NAT North Atlantic 

NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization 

NATPRO National Air Traffic Professionalism Program 

NAWC Naval Air Warfare Center 

NCAR National Center for Atmospheric Research 

NCP National Airspace System Change Proposal 

NCPPP National Council for Public Private Partnerships 

NDI Nondestructive Inspection 

NDT Nondestructive Test 

NEIS Net Enabled Information Sharing 

NEO Net Enabled Operations 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NEVS Network-Enabled Verification System 

NextGen Next Generation Air Transportation System 

Nextor National Center of Excellence for Aviation Operations Research 

NGIP FAA's NextGen Implementation Plan 

NIEC NextGen Integration & Evaluation Capability 

NMB NextGen Management Board 

NNEW NextGen Network Enabled Weather 

NOAA U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NOSS Normal Operations Safety System 

NOx Nitrogen Oxide 

E-8 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

NPARDRI National Plan for Aeronautics Research and Development and Related 

Infrastructure 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

NRC National Research Council 

NSS NAS Strategy Simulator 

NT NextGen Towers 

NTSB National Transportation Safety Board 

NUC National University of Colombia 

NWEC NextGen Weather Evaluation Capability 

NWS National Weather Service 

O 

O&M Operations and Maintenance 

OE Operational Error 

OI Operational Improvement 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

ONERA Office of National d'Etudes et de Recherches Aerospatiales 

OOT Object-Oriented Technology 

OPD Optimized Profile Descent 

Ops Operations Appropriation 

OSED Operational Suitability and Environmental Description 

OST Office of Science & Technology Policy 

OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy 

P 

PAPI Precision Approach Path Indicator 

PARC Performance-Based Operations Aviation Rule-Making Committee 

PARTNER Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction 

PDARS Performance Data Analysis and Reporting System 

PFC Perfluorocarbon 

PHA Preliminary Hazards Assessment 

PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 

PIR Post Implementation Review 

PLA Project Level Agreement 

PM Particulate Matter 

ppm Parts-Per-Million 

PRA Probabilistic Risk Assessment 

PTP Point-To-Point 

Q 

q-PCR Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction 

E-9 
 

 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

R 

R&D Research and Development 

R&TD Research and Technology Development 

R,E&D Research, Engineering and Development Appropriation 

RA Radioactive 

RAMs Repairs, Alterations, and Modifications 

RAPT Route Availability Planning Tool 

RARM risk assessment and risk management 

RCFF Regulatory-Based Causal Factors Framework 

RDHFL Research Development & Human Factors Laboratory 

REB Research and Development Executive Board 

REDAC Research, Engineering, and Development Advisory Committee 

RF Radius-to-Fix 

RILs Runway Intersection Lights 

RIRP Runway Incursion Reduction Program 

RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration 

RITE FAA National Air Transportation COE for Research in the Intermodal 

Transportation Environment 

RLV Reusable Launch Vehicle 

RNA Ribonucleic Acid 

RNAV Area Navigation 

RNP Required Navigation Performance 

ROD Record of Decision 

ROGIDS Remote Onboard Ground Ice Detection System 

RSA Research and Systems Analysis 

RSA Runway Safety Area 

RTCA Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics 

RVSM Reduced Vertical Separation Minima 

RWI Reduce Weather Impact 

RWSL Runway Status Light 

S 

SAE Society of Automotive Engineers 

SAFO Safety Alert for Operators 

SAGE System for Assessing Aviation's Global Emissions 

SAS Single Authoritative Source 

SAS Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety 

SBIR Small Business Innovation Research 

SBS Surveillance and Broadcast Services 

E-10 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

SC Special Committee 

SCPI System Capacity, Planning and Improvement 

SDP Service Delivery Point 

SDR Service Difficulty Reporting 

SDS Software and Digital Systems 

SEMP Systems Engineering Management Plan 

SF6 Sulfur Hexafluoride 

SFO San Francisco International Airport 

SHM Structural Health Monitoring 

SIF Stress Intensity Factor 

SIMMOD FAA's Airspace and Airport Simulation Model 

SIP State Implementation Plan 

SIS Scientific Information System 

SJA Strategic Job Analysis 

SLD Supercooled Large Droplet 

SMS Safety Management System 

SNT Staffed NextGen Towers 

SRA Solar Radiation Alert 

SRM Safety Risk Management 

SRMP Safety Risk Management Plan 

SS II SpaceShipTwo 

SSA System Safety Assessment 

SSE Safety, Security, and Environment Solution Set 

SSM Safety Systems Management 

SSRI Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor 

STARS Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System 

STARS+ STARS plus DataComm 

STL St. Louis International Airport 

SUA Special Use Airspace 

SVS Synthetic Vision Systems 

SWIM System-Wide Information Management 

SwRI Southwest Research Institute 

T&E Test and Evaluation 

T 

TA Tailored Arrivals 

TBO Trajectory-Based Operation 

TCAS Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System 

TCP Tricresyl Phosphate 

E-11 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

TCRG Technical Community Representative Group 

TERPS Terminal Instrumentation Procedures 

TFM Traffic Flow Management 

TGF Target Generator Facility 

THC Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannbinol 

ThermaKin FAA Thermal-Kinetic Burning Model 

TLTV Towbarless Tow Vehicle 

TMA Traffic Management Advisor 

TO Technical Operations 

TODDS Tower Operations Digital Data System 

TRACON Terminal Radar Approach Control 

TRB Transportation Research Board 

TRL Technology Readiness Levels 

U 

U.S. United States 

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System 

UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 

UEDDAM Uncontained Engine Debris Damage Assessment Model 

UI User Interface 

UIUC University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 

USAF U.S. Air Force 

V 

VFR Visual Flight Rules 

Vision 100 Vision 100–Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 

VLJ Very Light Jet 

VOC Volatile Organic Compound 

VRR Voice Recognition and Response 

W 

WAAS Wide Area Augmentation System 

WAFS World Area Forecast Services 

Wake Re-Cat Wake Turbulence – Re-Categorization Program 

WFD Widespread Fatigue Damage 

WIFS WAFS File Service 

WJHTC William J. Hughes Technical Center 

WK II WhiteKnightTwo 

WRF Weather Research and Forecast 

WRR Weather Radar Replacement 

WTIC Weather Technology in the Cockpit 

E-12 
 

2010 NARP Appendix E 

February 1, 2010 

Acronym Definition 

WTMA Wake Turbulence Mitigation for Arrivals 

Z 

ZOA Northern California Redesign 

E-13