NASA Advisory Council Aeronautics Committee Meeting 

March 17, 2021 

Virtual Meeting Originated at NASA’s Mary W. Jackson HQ

Washington, D.C. 

Welcome 

Mr. John Borghese, committee chair, called the meeting to order. Introductions were 

made and guidelines regarding the meaning and intent of providing recommendations 

or findings were reviewed. Once again, due to the restricted travel rules necessitated by 

the COVID pandemic, this meeting was conducted virtually. 

Innovation in the NASA Aeronautics Portfolio 

Dr. John Cavolowsky, NASA’s director of the Transformative Aeronautics Concepts 

Program (TACP) introduced the topic of how the TACP program in particular, and more 

generally the entire Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD), is approaching 

the desire to focus on innovation and implement projects and activities that do indeed 

provide innovative solutions to challenges faced by the aviation community. 

Ms. Angela Surgenor from TACP summarized the activities and presentations made 

during the first-ever TACP showcase that integrated content from all three of the TACP 

projects. She solicited input from the Committee on the types of metrics that would be 

helpful to have to gauge the success of this and future showcases, and noted the entire 

showcase is available to watch online. 

While Dr. Cavolowsky described large participation and audience numbers during and 

after the showcase, Mr. Borghese expressed concerns about the pre-event outreach, 

noting that many within the industry, including himself, were not aware of the showcase. 

Ms. Surgenor acknowledged the concern in saying many lessons were learned and 

more aggressive strategic communication outreach is expected for the next showcase, 

possibly in early 2022. 

Mr. Mark Ballin from NASA provided an overview of what innovation in NASA 

Aeronautics means, how it is advanced within the research portfolio, and how that 

strategy may be fine-tuned in the future. 

A key area influencing how innovation will come about will be the convergence of a lot 

of industries and disciplines, many of which are non-traditional especially from an 

aviation standpoint. This will require future research that is more distributed, more 

connected, and increasingly democratized, Mr. Ballin said. 

How NASA responds to that, and the plans in place to encourage this innovation 

culture, in many ways will require NASA to take the lead in coordinating the research 

1 
 

 

 

 

 

efforts of others. In response to a question from the committee about how to decide 

which ideas to invest in or not, Mr. Ballin and Dr. Cavolowsky noted the process that 

results in ARMD’s Strategic Implementation Plan and that such a decision process

continues to evolve. 

Mr. Ballin described in detail the innovative, more transformative, and longer-term 

higher-risk research activities in work within the three major projects of the 

Transformative Aeronautics Concepts Program – namely the Convergent Aeronautics 

Solutions (CAS) project, the Transformative Tools and Technologies project, and the 

University Innovation project. 

Discussion 

Dr. Eric Allison recalled his experience with innovation in biomedical devices and 

wondered aloud if some of the same kind of efforts used to systemize innovation in that 

area, or more generally other areas outside of aviation, could be something for NASA to 

look into as it continues to find new ways to innovate within its own research portfolio. 

Dr. Allison continued by noting how venture capitalists invest in innovation fully 

expecting a large percentage to fail. The importance of being willing to try something 

new knowing it might not lead to success is a key feature of truly being innovative. This 

theme must be considered as NASA moves forward. Dr. Cavolowsky, and others, 

agreed with this sentiment and noted how this willingness to identify and accept failure 

has already happened. 

Part of the discussion in this area included noting the importance of being able to 

identify metrics and then track those as an indication of a project’s progress toward

innovation, making sure in the process that these metrics are used in a way that is 

perceived as positive by the research workforce. This discussion is what directly led to 

the finding noted here. 

Finding 

The Committee finds that NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD)

has a powerful vision for the future of air travel that will require increasingly bold 

attempts at innovation to realize. To that end, ARMD managers should consider 

establishing metrics that define a project’s progress both in terms of success and what 

traditionally is perceived as failure but instead should be embraced as learning. While 

the Convergent Aeronautics Solutions project has worked to incorporate a mindset that 

recognizes value when things do not go as planned, the Committee believes 

establishing a method for objectively measuring the value of negatively perceived 

outcomes – and tying it to some tangible incentive for its workforce – would motivate a 

more ostentatious spirit of innovation across ARMD, and perhaps the entire agency. 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wildfire Mitigation Team 

Dr. Parimal Kopardekar, principal investigator for the Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

Traffic Management (UTM) project, briefed the committee on how technologies 

developed from ARMD programs and projects are helping firefighters combat wildfires. 

The centerpiece of this discussion involved how the distributed, service-based UTM 

system developed by NASA and now being adapted for Advanced Air Mobility 

operations could be used in coordinating the use of drones for firefighting operations. 

This idea, as Dr. Kopardekar explained, is being tested and demonstrated by a CAS 

activity known as STEReO, or Scalable Traffic Management for Emergency Response 

Operations. 

In response to a question from Mr. Borghese, Dr. Kopardekar noted that building a 

unified concept of operations, with associated setting of standards and requirements, 

that could be used in any wildfire fighting situation – no matter who is doing the work –

is a key goal of STEReO and potential follow-on work. 

(Editor’s note: For a more thorough explanation of STEReO and examples of where it 

has been tested, see https://www.nasa.gov/ames/stereo.) 

Discussion 

The committee very briefly discussed this topic, the summary of which is incorporated 

into the wording of this finding. 

Finding 

The Committee applauds NASA’s engagement in assisting with wildfire detection and

mitigation. Efforts to fully take advantage of capabilities enabled by Advanced Air 

Mobility, with integration from other NASA sensors from space, should continue. The 

Committee also suggests NASA embrace a leadership role in building a common 

concept of operations that would standardize procedures and sharing of data across 

involved organizations in order to more quickly and efficiently combat wildfires wherever 

they may rise up. 

Hypersonics Market Studies 

Mr. Charles Leonard, project manager of NASA’s Hypersonic Technology project,

briefed the committee on a pair of market studies regarding the interest in commercial 

hypersonic flight. He first began with an overview of the different applications for 

hypersonic flight and when they might be expected to be put in use. These include 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

military, civilian, and commercial use cases. NASA’s primary interest in working with 

industry will include commercial point to point travel and civil space access. 

Mr. Borghese asked for a clarification of what defines hypersonic speed, and while Mr. 

Leonard said the standard definition mostly agreed to by everyone was anything at 

Mach 5 and above, there are some technical phenomenon that happen at Mach 4 which 

would make a case for that speed being the beginning of the hypersonic region. 

Mr. Leonard described the Hypersonics project as conducting the fundamental research 

that enables the broad spectrum of hypersonic systems and leads to U.S. supremacy in 

the field of hypersonics. An important focus of that is seeding the future by engaging 

and training the next generation of engineers. 

Mr. Leonard reviewed the findings of the market study, which was inspired by and the 

result of a one-day, invitation-only hypersonics workshop held in January 2020 and 

which focused on the point-to-point segment of commercial hypersonic air travel. In 

addition to economic viability, the two awarded studies each were to address technical, 

environmental, and even passenger satisfaction considerations – and to do so at 

different speed levels. 

The two studies wound up producing many similar and many different conclusions 

regarding a host of variables that included length of trip, speeds flown, fares charged, 

number of available routes depending on what criteria was used, aircraft costs, type of 

markets (passenger or cargo), and geopolitical and economic considerations. 

Mr. Leonard said additional meetings about the studies and their influence on NASA’s 

research portfolio were planned, after which decisions could be made and the full 

details of the studies released to the public. 

Discussion 

The Committee’s deliberations on this topic – which considered many variables in 

markets, speeds, distances, price points, and more – are directly summarized in this 

finding. 

Finding 

The Committee recognizes the potential of commercial hypersonic air travel as detailed 

in the studies NASA presented yet proposes additional analysis and clarification of 

criteria is needed. The suggestion that there is a difference between saving time and 

going fast summarizes some of the concerns the Committee has about this market’s 

viability to the extent that it yet warrants any significant research investment by NASA 

Aeronautics. A clear understanding of the benefits of commercial hypersonic flight 

4 
 

 

 

 

 

considering the nation’s drive toward sustainability and carbon neutrality needs to be 

articulated. 

Sustainability of Aviation 

Mr. Robert Pearce, NASA’s associate administrator for Aeronautics, opened the 

multipart presentation by reflecting on the increasing importance of this topic to the 

overall research strategy of NASA Aeronautics. Although the major focus in this area is 

on a more sustainable single-aisle subsonic airliner, the need for the entire aviation 

community to become more sustainable going forward will result in new approaches 

across the entire ARMD portfolio. 

Mr. Pearce said NASA’s goal for sustainable aviation is to reach a 50 percent net 

reduction in carbon emissions from aviation by 2050 – compared to a 2005 baseline –

with a net zero emissions goal by 2060. 

Mr. David Hyde, director of environmental policy for the Aerospace Industries 

Association, echoed Mr. Pearce’s comments, and emissions goals, saying sustainability 

is at the top of the priority list for the aviation community. He said that partnerships 

between industry and government will be more important than ever in achieving these 

environmental goals. 

Dr. Ed Waggoner, NASA’s deputy associate administrator for Aeronautics programs, 

centered on describing the four major technology areas in support of sustainability: 

transonic truss-braced, high-aspect ratio wing; electrified aircraft propulsion; small core 

jet engines; and high-rate composite manufacturing. 

(Editor’s note: For more on each of these technologies, see

https://www.nasa.gov/aero/nextgen-aircraft-design-is-key-to-aviation-sustainability) 

Dr. Waggoner also emphasized the importance of involving the academic community in 

sustainable aviation research through the University Leadership Initiative in order to 

benefit from the creative ideas these younger researchers will bring to bear. 

Discussion 

Mr. Mike Hirschberg noted that technologies derived from research efforts to benefit a 

new single-aisle transport also will benefit vertical flight. 

Mr. Borghese asked about the place sustainable aviation fuels has within NASA’s 

research. Dr. James Kenyon, NASA’s Advanced Air Vehicles Program director, said this 

is a “vexing challenge” as to the exact role NASA does or should have in this area. 

Currently NASA is not involved with production research and development but has 

5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

tested the effects of using sustainable aviation fuels in jet engines and found positive 

results. 

Mr. Peter Bunce raised the question of how NASA is characterizing its sustainable 

research compared to the terms used by industry and even the FAA. He described 

these “pillars” as being sustainable aviation fuels, technology, infrastructure and 

operations – with an additional one called market-based measures, which is a catch-all 

for a number of possible measures. His concern was that the way NASA has organized 

its sustainable research doesn’t match up with what seems to be becoming an industry 

standard of sorts, based on the Air Transport Action Group’s recent report “Blueprint for 

a Green Recovery.” Mr. Pearce and others responded that NASA is aware of this point 

and that this discussion is helpful as ARMD continues to build its messaging and longterm research plans. 

Recommendation (Requires NASA response) 

Based on the presentation about NASA’s current research into sustainable aviation –

which centered on technologies associated with single-aisle transports – the Committee 

recommends NASA include areas such as air traffic management and Advanced Air 

Mobility as being part of making aviation more sustainable, both in its research portfolio 

and its external messaging. The Committee suggests NASA consider framing the 

discussion of sustainability in the same way industry is doing so as shown in the Air 

Transport Action Group’s recent report “Blueprint for a Green Recovery.”

Public Comments 

A public comments period was offered as required. No public comments were received. 

6 
 

List of Webex Attendees 

Committee Members 36.Laura Kennedy 

1. Mr. John Borghese, Chair 

2. Mr. Darin DiTommaso, Vice Chair 

3. Mr. Andy Cebula 

4. Mr. Anil Nanduri 

5. Dr. Eric Allison 

6. Mr. Eric Fanning 

7. Ms. Lisa Ellman 

8. Dr. Tom Shih 

9. Dr. Karen Thole 

10.Mr. Mike Hirschberg 

11.Dr. Naveed Hussain 

12.Mr. Peter Bunce 

NASA 

13.Akbar Sultan 

14.Alicia Wesley 

15.Angela Butcher 

16.Ann Harkey 

17.Anthony Springer 

18.Brian Pitman (USAF Detailee) 

19.Charles Leonard 

20.Cheryl Quinn 

21.Curtis Armstrong 

22.Dave Hinton 

23.Dan Lockney 

24.Edgar Waggoner 

25.Eric Cooper 

26.Huy Tran 

27.Irma Rodriguez 

28.James Kenyon 

29.Jay Fletcher 

30.Jennifer Kibler 

31.Jessica Culler 

32.Jon Montgomery 

33.John Cavolowsky 

34.Justin Tilman 

35.Kenny McCombs 

37.Lee Noble 

38.Mary Dijoseph 

39.Maureen Kudlac 

40.Melissa Rivers 

41.Michael Patterson 

42.Michael Rogers 

43.Nateri Madavan 

44.Paul Krasa 

45.Peter Coen 

46.Richard Wahls 

47.Robert Pearce 

48.Roger Kantz 

49.S Melissa Rivers 

50.Sasha Ellis 

51.Sharon Jones 

52.Shawn Engelland 

53.Sherilyn Brown 

54.Steven Clarke 

55.Steven Hirshorn 

56.Tiffany Blake 

57.Vanessa Aubuchon 

58.William Johnson 

External (affiliation identified if 

provided) 

59.John Tylko (Aurora) 

60.Steve Cook (Northrup Grumman) 

61.Steve Moran (Spire Global) 

62.Natalie Alms (Federal Computer 

Week) 

FedWriters (NAC meeting support) 

63.Jim Banke 

64.John Gould 

7