R. John Hansman

T. Wilson Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Director, International Center of Air Transportation

Aeronautics and Astronautics

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

November 7, 2017

The Honorable Michael P. Huerta 

Administrator 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Dear Administrator Huerta:

Attached below please find the findings and recommendations from the Safety, Airports, Environment and 

Energy, Human Factors, NAS Operations subcommittees from their Fall meetings. During the meetings, the 

REDAC was briefed and commented on the planned FY20 research plans and budgets. We understand that 

these budgets are being reevaluated to align with administration objectives. If the research plans are significantly 

revised, the REDAC is available and interested in providing feedback and validation.

During subcommittee and the full REDAC meetings the draft FAA Cybersecurity Research plan was briefed and 

reviewed. The REDAC recommends that the FAA take a more systems view of cybersecurity including a 

comprehensive vulnerability (assisted by cybersecurity experts). This review should identify vulnerabilities which 

can be addressed with current best practices and those that are unique to the FAA and the NAS, which will help 

define and prioritize the next revision of the Cybersecurity Research Plan.

The REDAC was disappointed that the UAS Research plan had not been approved for release or internal review 

by the REDAC. While we had a good discussion with the representatives from the UAS program, the substance of 

the plan was not available. As a consequence, the REDAC was not able to understand or evaluate the UAS 

research program and has concerns that the lack of clear research objectives and requirements degrades the 

effectiveness of the UAS research program and will further delay UAS integration efforts.

We have enjoyed the opportunity to work with you and the FAA staff to support the safety, efficiency and 

effectiveness of our national aviation infrastructure and the agency.

Thanks for the opportunity to contribute.

Sincerely,

R. John Hansman

Chair, FAA Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee

Enclosure
1

Federal Aviation Administration

Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee (REDAC) 

Guidance on the FY 2020 Research and Development Portfolio

Subcommittee on Airports

Finding: Runway Braking Friction - The Subcommittee was pleased by FAA’s reassessment 

of the Runway Braking Friction project as well as convening a working group of subject matter 

experts from with a broad range of technical expertise—including aerodynamics, aircraft 

systems, braking systems, and human factors—to re-scope braking research plans across FAA 

research programs. While the Subcommittee understands that these reassessment and expert 

review efforts are not complete, we would like to have a general idea of how the FAA believes 

needed braking research should proceed.

Recommendation: The Subcommittee encourages the FAA to complete its reassessment of its 

runway braking friction research projects as soon as possible, with a focus on the objective of 

providing a reliable, objective method of aircraft runway friction assessment that accurately 

accounts for the effects of runway contaminants impacts on aircraft performance. Following this 

reassessment, the Subcommittee would like to receive a revised runway braking friction research 

plan that addresses issues identified by the aforementioned runway braking friction working 

group. We also recommend that the runway braking working group report back its 

recommendations at the next Subcommittee meeting, and possibly to the full REDAC 

membership, time and resource permitting.

Finding: Heated Pavement - The Subcommittee was pleased to learn that use of heated 

pavements to mitigate frozen contaminants in airfield pavements may be possible at lower costs 

than originally thought. Given the increased likelihood the economic feasibility of heated 

pavements, the Subcommittee believes that some consideration should be given to the potential 

safety and operational issues associated with such pavements, particularly those that use 

electrical means to heat the pavements.

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA consider safety risks 

associated with electrically heated pavements as well as the potential for electromagnetic 

interference associated with such systems and any effects the use of ferromagnetic materials in 

pavement surface layers may physically have on tires, personnel, or the potential for foreign 

object debris.

Finding: LED Lighting Research - Some Subcommittee members expressed concern during 

FAA presentations on light emitting diode (LED) lighting systems research that LED runway 

edge lights do not emit light omni-directionally in the same manner as their incandescent 

counterparts, potentially making airfields equipped with LED edge lights more difficult for pilots 

to see at night. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA expand evaluation of LED 

runway edge lights to include airfield conspicuity considerations.
2

Finding: Improving Awareness of Other REDAC Research Programs and Opportunities 

for Cross-Program Collaboration - Based in part on the discussion of research projects that 

involve other REDAC Subcommittees—including noise research that involves the 

Environmental & Energy Subcommittee, runway braking and runway incursion mitigation 

research that involves the Human Factors and Aircraft Safety Subcommittees, and air traffic 

automation research that involves the NAS Operations Subcommittee—members expressed an 

interest in increasing its awareness of the research within the purview of the other four 

Subcommittees.

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends scheduling briefings from either designated 

members of other Subcommittees or their FAA counterparts on research areas and/or projects 

that have implications for the Airport Technologies research portfolio during the Airports 

Subcommittee’s meetings and notes that it has already been doing so successfully with the 

Environmental & Energy Subcommittee for the last 4 to 5 REDAC meeting cycles.

Subcommittee on Aircraft Safety 

General Observations: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) - The SAS greatly appreciated the 

initial presentation on the FAA UAS R&D Plan and commends the FAA’s efforts. The plan is a 

comprehensive identification of research required to meet the different UAS implementation 

phases and the research being performed by FAA, other government agencies, industry and 

academia. While we have not yet had the opportunity to review the plan itself, we understand 

that it identifies gaps in ongoing and planned research and required funding to cover the next 5 

years. The FAA is to be commended for undertaking such an ambitious planning activity. We 

look forward to the opportunity to review the entire plan once it is released. 

Finding: UAS COE- A significant portion of the FAA’s research budget is being directed to the 

UAS COE. From the FAA’s description, it appears that the majority of UAS research is in the 

form of university grants (i.e. the majority of the research is conducted by the UAS COE). 

Grants tend to be less driven by specific outputs and thus potentially less directed towards a 

specific practical aim or objectives of the applied research needs identified in the FAA UAS 

R&D plan. The subcommittee wonders whether the FAA is receiving full value from such 

research given the magnitude of the applied research identified in the plan.

Recommendation: The FAA should steer grants towards more goal directed research and should 

consider taking advantage of a contract vehicle to conduct more applied research at the UAS 

COE aimed at meeting the applied research objectives to identified in the FAA UAS R&D Plan. 

Finding: UAS Ground Collision Severity Evaluation Research - The Subcommittee noted 

that peer-reviewed UAS Ground Collision Severity Evaluation research is not being fully 

leveraged by AFS-800 in granting Part 107 waivers for UAS operations over people. A clear 

and closed loop connection between the research performers and the consumer of the research 

results appears to be lacking. The Subcommittee senses that research results are not taken into 

sufficient consideration in UAS safety oversight, rulemaking and other actions required for 

achieving UAS integration into the NAS.
3

Recommendation: Through all stages of research activities, there should be tighter engagement 

among research performers and the FAA organization(s) that would leverage research results in 

safety oversight activities and rulemaking. FAA should consider how to best utilize existing 

structure to assure the maximum transfer of research learning.

Finding: Research Plan Prioritizations - The plan identifies a significant amount of required 

research and FAA indicated that there will likely be insufficient funds to conduct all of the 

research identified in the necessary timeframe. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that FAA, together with its stakeholders, 

identify the minimum acceptable research results required to achieve each transition step and 

revise the plan accordingly. The FAA, together with its stakeholders should prioritize the 

research.

Finding: UAS Research - The advanced research that is ongoing to allow UAS to safely and 

efficiently integrate into the NAS can, in some cases, provide safety and efficiency benefits in 

the manned sector. While clearly there is direct applicability to highly automated manned 

aviation such as with the burgeoning “on-demand mobility” concept vehicles, this research can 

also inform more traditional forms of manned aviation including airline transportation segments. 

An example of this might be allowing the crew to take advantage of see and avoid concepts that 

might keep the aircraft a farther distance from large birds or other airborne conflicts.

Recommendation: The UAS research should place added emphasis on communicating research 

findings which can provide parallel benefits within the unmanned and manned aviation sectors.

Finding: Fatigue Mitigation - The Committee received a follow-on briefing on the FAA’s 

overall fatigue research program. The committee feels that this report described the existence of 

a wide-ranging fatigue research program within the FAA, and a strong interest in building 

follow-up research documenting the effectiveness of the Fatigue Risk Management 

System/Fatigue Risk Management Plan (FRMS/FRMP). The report identified an effective plan 

for moving forward which involved among other things, identifying research initiatives from 

around the industry, gaps in knowledge, and the establishment of fatigue working group with 

members from industry, research, and regulators to continue the necessary follow-up work 

needed to ensure required research is performed. The report stated that this working group will 

need a sponsor from the regulatory community to provide guidance and tasking for the working 

group. 

Recommendation: The FAA establish a Fatigue Working group, identify an FAA working 

group lead who will best represent fatigue across the agency, execute the FAA plan that was 

presented as the path forward for identifying and addressing fatigue research issues, and properly 

implementing the research results. Follow-up studies of the effectiveness, utility, and potentially

necessary enhancements of the FRMS/FRMP should be funded and implemented as soon as 

possible.
4

Subcommittee on Human Factors

General Observation: After reviewing the 2017 portfolio projects, tasks, and their status and 

outcomes the Subcommittee supports the ongoing flight deck research being conducted and 

scheduled. However, the Subcommittee identified several important gaps in the planned Human 

Factors (HF) research which the subcommittee deems high priority areas of research and 

recommends they be reprioritized for FY18 and funded in subsequent years. The two main areas 

of concern are information management and pilot training effectiveness which are presented in 

Findings 1 and 2. 

Finding: Information Management - One gap in the Human Factors NextGen portfolio 

concerns Information Management. An important example of this is the impact of information 

overload on pilot workload and its consequences for distraction. Standards are needed to define 

what information may be pushed to or pulled by the pilot and when. Increasing information 

management demands for pilots, controllers, dispatchers, and traffic managers in NextGen 

operations will create human factors risks and vulnerabilities such as high workload, distraction, 

longer task time, and increase errors. 

Recommendation: The FAA should review its HF portfolio for 2018 and 2019 to include 

information management as a research focus area and ask planned projects as appropriate to 

address information management issues as part of their current project tasking. Specific areas to 

address include: integration of different standards of information flow (volume of information 

and formats), acquisition of information from different sources, integrating it with other 

information in the flight deck, managing distractions, and managing the workload these tasks 

introduce. The 2020 research portfolio should include information management as a specific 

research focus area. 

Consequences if not funded:

Modern flight decks and the control stations for controllers, dispatchers, and traffic managers are 

rich information landscapes that demand user’s process and manage information by acquiring, 

filtering, interpreting, and integrating relevant information, into a coherent understanding. If the 

information sources are difficult to monitor and verify or if appropriate information is not shared 

among collaborators in the same format in a timely fashion, several human factors issues may 

result. Users may over rely and trust automated systems because they don’t have the capacity to 

interpret and verify outputs. Performing information management tasks such as organizing, 

filtering, and prioritizing information may distract from primary tasks (such as flight path 

management). Communication may break down and result in both errors and inefficiencies 

because collaborators don’t have the same information or don’t interpret the information 

similarly because it is in different forms or formats. Primary tasks may take longer because 

additional information management tasks add task time but not direct value. If this research 

priority is not addressed, the significant changes in the information environment related to 

NextGen and beyond will likely increase existing human performance issues and introduce new 

ones that could reduce safety and efficiency thereby negating the expected benefits of NextGen.

Finding: Pilot Training - A major gap in the Human Factors portfolio related to Pilot Training. 

There are a number of important areas related to training for NextGen that include human factors 
5

issues that are not being investigated nor are they currently planned. These areas include distance 

learning, training methods, training effectiveness assessment, instructor/evaluator training, and 

situations with no checklist. 

Recommendation: The FAA AVS should review and reprioritize the overall safety portfolio for 

2018 and 2019 to include research on pilot training effectiveness to improve safety and to 

evaluate the effectiveness of training for both current and new training methods that are 

introduced. The 2020 research portfolio should include training as a specific research focus area. 

For example, concerns about distance learning and training methodologies are already in the 

requirements but have not been funded and are high priority issues to the subcommittee. Training 

methods, such as competency based training and other methods need to be assessed and updated 

to meet current and future needs. What skills and knowledge do pilots need and how do we train 

instructors to ensure they are developed in pilots? We expect skills and knowledge to transfer, 

but how do we measure the effectiveness of training? Because we cannot train for everything 

how do we build resilience into the human component of the system, controllers and pilots, and 

into the system itself so that the humans are equipped to effectively manage the unexpected? 

Consequences if not funded:

Distance learning is already being used extensively by operators to replace other proven training 

methodologies without research being conducted to determine empirically if the distance 

learning method is effective. Safety and training data suggest that pilot knowledge and skills 

required for current and NextGen requirements is increasing and current training methodologies 

used to develop knowledge and skills may not be as effective to meet NextGen system needs. 

The FAA currently provides guidance that allows for 100% of some knowledge based training to 

be done via distance learning using methods which some studies found to be only 10-20% 

effective. Research is needed to define realistic guidance on what types of distance learning 

delivery methods are effective for different types of knowledge and skills, how to assess 

effectiveness of distance learning after training completion, and the proper mix of distance 

learning with classroom and other methodologies. ICAO is supporting competency-based 

training and the U.S. has not funded the research to understand competency-based training and 

other proposed training methodologies. The FAA is participating in the ICAO working group 

with little or no research to back up their position. The working group work is scheduled to be 

completed by 2020, so the research needs to be started now.

Finding: Research to Reality - Next Gen applications such as, Trajectory-Based Operations and 

Dynamic RNP aim to enable both greater flexibility and efficiency. For such programs to realize 

the expected benefits, human factors principles and findings need to be included into the design 

of flight crew and air traffic displays, procedures, and other details of the complex operations. 

While significant human factors work has been conducted that relate to these applications and 

supporting technologies, such as Data Comm, a continual emphasis on the correct application of 

past research and human factors principles is needed as decisions are made on national and 

international procedures and guidance. While some of the relevant work had a specific program 

emphasis in the past (e.g., Data Comm), the total of the work that needs to be applied to ensure 

realization of expected benefits is broad and cross-cutting. This includes several ‘lessons

learned’ that need to be considered to prevent situations that have resulted in rejection of new 

technologies by pilots and air traffic controllers. The application of this body of knowledge is the 

final step in the research process and required for the realization of the benefits of the research.
6

Recommendation: Standardized processes are needed to identify within the FAA lessons 

learned and how to enable the continual transfer of the results of both Core and Next Gen human 

factors research and the correct application of these results and human factors principles into the 

decision-making bodies of the standards and procedures of Next Gen operations. These include 

RTCA working groups, ICAO panels and ICAO working groups which develop and refine 

international standards and guidance materials and work toward global harmonization of such 

procedures. Such a vehicle would promote and ensure effective continual involvement of 

human factors in all aspects of Next Gen operations from concept development through postimplementation. Post-implementation testing would assess effectiveness and identify whether 

refinements are needed to realize projected benefits.

Subcommittee on Environment and Energy

Finding: Public/Private Partnerships - Members of the E&E Subcommittee are very aware of 

the budgetary constraints that exist within the Department of Transportation and the FAA. The 

Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions, and Noise (CLEEN) program, the Commercial Aviation 

Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) and the Aviation Sustainability Control (ASCENT) 

program are successful industry/FAA cost-share programs that leverage scarce FAA R&D funds 

that have accomplished significant advances and improvements for the industry. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the FAA continues to prioritize robust 

funding for the Public Private Partnership programs like CLEEN, CAAFI and ASCENT. 

Finding: Human Resource Allocations - As has been highlighted in the past, there is serious 

concern over the number of vacancies that exist in the Office of Environment and Energy (AEE)

and the increasing requests for answers. There are currently twelve (12) vacancies in AEE. In 

order for the dedicated employees within AEE to be able to properly manage the current 

portfolio, which we believe is well balanced, maintain the FAA’s global leadership position in 

the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), address the growth of other areas of 

commercial transportation and the development of smart policy, there is a need for answers. The 

answers to the many questions require the ongoing need for research. 

Recommendation: In order to provide the research that is needed to properly address the 

increased tasking of the Office of Environment and Energy (AEE), the subcommittee 

recommends that the FAA commit the resources needed to hire additionally qualified individuals 

to be able to properly address portfolio needs. We would ask the FAA to not take away limited 

resources from current work in an effort to handle new work. 

Finding: Supersonic, Unmanned and Commercial Space Vehicle Impacts - During the 

Subcommittee meeting, the FAA presented information that indicates that there has been a 

dramatic increase in the level of interest in supersonic aircraft under the current Administration. 

There is also potential growth in unmanned aerial systems and commercial space vehicles. There 

is a significant amount of research that needs to be done in order to understand the environmental 

impacts of these new entrants. Research is the key to establishing sound policy. The FAA/AEE 

should ensure that its research plans will address the noise, emissions and possible health 

impacts of these new entrants such that the FAA can make informed decisions in carrying out 

their responsibilities under various statutes. 
7

Recommendation: Based on increased interest in supersonic aircraft, the growth of unmanned 

aerial systems and the growth of commercial space vehicles, the Subcommittee encourages the 

FAA to advance our understanding on the environmental impacts of these entrants. 

Finding: Non-Volatile Particulate Matter - The Subcommittee is very pleased with the work 

done by AEE on developing a non-volatile particulate matter (PM) emissions standard and in the 

development of the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction System for International Aviation 

(CORSIA). In regards to the CORSIA, it is important that proper credit be given for the use of 

alternative fuels. The Subcommittee is also pleased with the efforts of the FAA along with 

NASA to conduct and align research activities to inform the development of noise and emission 

standards for supersonic aircraft. The Subcommittee believes that United States leadership in the 

ICAO CAEP process continues to be an important priority. 

Recommendation: The Subcommittee highly recommends that the FAA continue their 

commitment for all of the necessary programs to support continued U.S. leadership in ICAO 

CAEP. This includes the non-volatile PM emissions standard, CORSIA, alternative fuels and 

supersonic aircraft. 

Subcommittee on NAS Operations 

Findings: Commercial Space -

1) The projected dates for NAS improvements to integrate Commercial Space in the NAS 

are based on the current commercial space research plan. The Subcommittee believes that 

these implementation dates need to be moved to the left (i.e. come earlier) to deal with 

the significant growth in commercial space operations that the subcommittee anticipates.

2) There are a large number of R&D projects across the four pillars. The subcommittee 

believes that, with the available budget, many of these will not have enough funding to 

achieve meaningful results.

3) Some of the projects in the commercial space R&D portfolio don’t appear to support 

commercial space operations integration into the NAS.

Recommendation: The Subcommittee recommends that the Commercial Space R&D be 

prioritized and limited to those activities that directly support early integration of Commercial 

Space into the NAS. Research is currently focused on four areas (pillars):

Research Area 1. Management of Space and Spaceport Operations

Research Area 2. Space Transportation Vehicles and Analysis

Research Area 3. Human Spaceflight

Research Area 4. Space Transportation Industry Viability

The most critical items (those necessary to ensure that as the number of space launches increases 

there will be as little impact on ATC as possible) must have sufficient investment. Lowerpriority activities, such as those in pillar 4, should be stopped completely. The R&D plan should 
8

be revised to reflect this recommended prioritization, as these activities appear to be most 

appropriately the responsibility and obligations of the private sector.

General Observation: Pathfinder Programs - The Subcommittee received briefings on the 

FAA’s three Pathfinder Programs, namely CNN’s Visual Line of Sight operations over people, 

PrecisionHawk’s Extended Visual Line of Sight operations, and BNSF’s Beyond Visual Line of 

Sight operations.

Findings: The Pathfinder Programs represent an excellent opportunity to both provide near-term 

access for specific UAS operations in the NAS while also identifying and providing data for key 

research issues that warrant further exploration. Although the subcommittee appreciates the 

complexity of integrating these UAS activities into the NAS, the pace of progress is significantly 

slower than required to satisfy the accelerating demand for airspace access. The processes used 

to approve airspace access in the current Pathfinder Programs will not scale up to meet the 

expected significant expansion in the scope of UAS operations that is needed. At the same time, 

there does not appear to be an established process for extracting research issues and linking them 

to other R&D efforts within the FAA so that they can be resolved. As a result, the Pathfinder 

Program risks falling behind the demand for access and failing to inform the FAA’s UAS 

research roadmap.

Recommendation: The FAA should define a formal process for identifying and prioritizing 

research and development issues arising out of the Pathfinder Program and then conveying that 

information in a way that can be integrated into the UAS R&D plan. Each Pathfinder focus area 

should produce an ordered list of associated research questions that, if resolved, would validate 

the assumptions and constraints placed on operations and inform future UAS operational 

concepts. In turn, the FAA’s UAS research roadmap should facilitate ingesting inputs from the 

Pathfinder Program and ensuring they are resolved through its ongoing research programs. The 

REDAC looks forward to reviewing these research issues and priorities at its Spring 2018 

meeting.

General Observation: NextGen ATC/TechOps Human Factors - The Subcommittee received 

briefings on the FAA’s NextGen ATC/TechOps Human Factors research, BLI number 

1A07A0/1A08A0, that focuses on documenting and transitioning Human Factors lessons learned 

from concept exploration and early implementation activities.

Findings: The NextGen ATC/TechOps Human Factors research is performing valuable work 

related to best practices, performance metrics, and standards in the early phases of the 

Acquisition Management System (AMS) process. While the Subcommittee understands the 

difficulty of integrating new technology and processes with an existing ATC, ATM, and 

TechOps workforce, the segmented nature of research is obscuring aggregate and collateral 

human factors issues. The process of small, segmented studies and outcomes does not capture 

recent human factors changes and insights as context for near term plans. There does not appear 

to be an adequate process linking collective impacts and outcomes to the Human-Systems 

Integration Roadmap. As a result, the Human Factors research risks overlooking aggregate 

impacts or not fully capturing opportunities to align workforce development with technology for 

NextGen.
9

Recommendation: The FAA should define a broad scope assessment process for aligning 

segmented Human Factors research activities with an aggregate roadmap that is aligned with 

anticipated changes in workforce structure and function in NextGen. The Subcommittee is 

interested in understanding how the workforce will change and, as determined through HF 

research, how the current structure may need to transform in order to sustain significant 

technological and process change. The REDAC looks forward to reviewing these research issues 

and priorities at its Spring 2018 meeting.