Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe ACARE Member States Group View and national examples 26th of June General Assembly 6-Oct-15 1

Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe Member States The Member States are committed to achieve Flightpath 2050 and have embarked on the SRIA –Several national initiatives are aligned with the SRIA The Member States are actively involved –a specific Member States group –ACARE is the only ETP having such direct involvement Efforts are undertaken to achieve a global level playing field for Aviation ?? Line on EASA, Eurocontrol?? 10/6/20152

Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe 10/6/20153 Examples of national inivatives: Sweden NRIA = National StrategyNational view on Innovation System for Aerospace

4 CORAC Council for Civil Aeronautics Research CORAC Council A national mirror platform to the ACARE technology platform Council created in 2008  Under the chairmanship of the Minister for Transports  Gathers all stakeholders in Civil Aeronautics and Air Transport Airlines, airports, air navigation service providers, Aircraft manufacturers, engine, systems and equipment suppliers, institutions & professional associations, research establishment ONERA, all Ministries concerned by Aviation research (Research, Defence, Industry and Finance, Ecology and Transport)  French strategy in terms of aviation research Very much aligned with the ACARE Strategic Research CORAC research roadmaps consistent and complementary  Pursue ACARE ambitious objective by 2020 (and 2050) To reduce the perceived noise by a factor 2 by 2020 To reduce aircraft carbon dioxide emissions by half To reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions by 80% France

Austria: Take Off funding – according to segments MitarbeiterInnen Ranked 15! Total Take Off funding: ~ 62 million € 142 projects in total

6 (06/10/2015) UNIÓN EUROPEA Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) Una manera de hacer Europa AERONAUTICS thematic areas Vs national funded projects ≈ EUR 500 million direct funding between Spain: CDTI support to aeronautics R&D

Finnish Transport Safety Agency FINLAND: Reduction of the environmental impact of aircraft de-icing fluids Icewing programme Generic Airbus type 3 element airfoil with wing tank cooling Wind tunnel testing of fluid effects Wind tunnel testing of real frost effects Budget € 7 Real frost

The Netherlands: Road Map for Thermoplastic Components A380 outboard fixed leading edge First large scale assembly: Welded fixed wing leading edges A340 CVO First Induction welded control surfaces G650 First series production: Fairchild Dornier ribs VTP First welded assembly: MUC door Fo50 VTP First primary structure: Gulfstr pressure floors CVO ‘TAPAS2’ TAPAS SRP’s TAPAS2 Budget 23 M€ 40% gov. loan Lower Weightup to -20% Labour Costup to -40% SRIA Relevance High Automation Possible

Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe Funding schemes in Member States 10/6/20159 AT Take Off€62 mioTotal funding DE LuFo up to €170 mioannually, HU USZTn/a PL PBSn/a UK NATEPca. €27.5 mio annually UK ATIca. €179 mio annually, for a 7-year period IT Incl. some regional fundsVarious€80 mio2014 & 2015 ES ca. €500 mio FR Corac National Strategic Platform NL TO2 fundingca. €16 mio2014 NL Public & Private Funds Innovation Contract Aeronauticsca. €57 mio

Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe Conclusion Several funding opportunities for aviation research exist in member states, however national research funds suffer from the financial crises In addition funding for aviation under Horizon 2020 is mainly focused on large closer to the market initiatives such as Clean Sky and SESAR National funds can not compensate for the gap that exists for lower TRL level research As a result of this gap, the European leadership is in jeopardy and may have the consequence of Europe not achieving the ACARE SRIA high level objectives Regional and structural funds are an area still underexplored

Advisory Council for Aviation Research and Innovation in Europe Recommendations National/regional/structural funding programmes follow a different technical and political agenda and have different governance structures This represents a challenge for both the European Commission, Clean Sky, SESAR and the Member States Alignment and synergies between different funds may be strengthened with the help of private (regional) stakeholders The Member States recommend to investigate potential synergies between Horizon 2020, EU Structural funds and/or national and regional funds.