1. Use of Systems Analysis to Assess Progress toward Goals and Technology Impacts Bill Gilbert NASA Langley Research Center November 15, 1999

2. Outline Aerospace Systems, Concepts, and Analysis Competency Programs/Technology Contribution to Goals Aviation System Analysis Capability

5. Aviation’s Impact on Environment Assessment Modeling Emission Measurements Radiative effects of Contrails Atmospheric Sciences Competency Helps Assess

6. The Three Pillars for Success (Aero-Space Technology Enterprise)

7. Three Pillars Aero-Space Goals SAFETY Reduce the aircraft accident rate by a factor of five within 10 years, and by a factor of 10 within 20 years. NOISE Reduce the perceived noise levels of future aircraft by a factor of two from today’s subsonic aircraft within 10 years, and by a factor of four within 20 years. EMISSIONS Reduce emissions of future aircraft by a factor of three within 10 years, and by a factor of five within 20 years. COST OF AIR TRAVEL Reduce the cost of air travel by 25% within 10 years, and by 50% within 20 years. GENERAL AVIATION Invigorate the general aviation industry, delivering 10,000 aircraft annually within 10 years, and 20,000 aircraft annually within 20 years. CAPACITY While maintaining safety, triple the aviation system throughput, in all weather conditions, within 10 years. SUPERSONIC TRAVEL Reduce the travel time to the Far East and Europe by 50 percent within 20 years, and do so at today’s subsonicticket prices. DESIGN & TEST Provide next generation design tools and experimental aircraft to increase design confidence,and cut the development cycle time for aircraft in half. IN-SPACE TRANS. Reduce the cost of interorbital transfer by an order of magnitude within 15 years, and reduce travel time for planetary missions by a factor of two within 15 years, and by an order of magnitude within 25 years. SPACE ACCESS Reduce the payload cost to low-Earth orbit by an order of magnitude, from $10,000 to $1,000 per pound, within 10 years, and by an additional order of magnitude within 25 years.

8. Mapping Programs and Technology Results into Goals Progress Towards the Aero-Space Enterprise Goals is Achieved by the Combined Contributions of -- Base Technology Research -- Focused Program Technology Development Contributions of Focused Programs and Base Technologies are Crosscutting Among the Goals Progress Towards the Goals May Be Achieved with Crosscutting Technologies and Not Solely by Dedicated Program Elements System Analysis -- Correlates Technologies with Goals -- Analyzes Contribution of Correlated Technologies Towards Goals

9. Enterprise Intercenter Systems Analysis Team Marshall Ames Langley Dryden Kennedy Glenn

10. Assessment of OAT Programs Vehicle/Fleet Team Reference Vehicles Subsonic transports CTR/commuter/rotorcraft HSCT GA Single Stage to Orbit Two Stage to Orbit Manufacturing & Market Economics Aircraft Emissions & Noise Airport/Airspace Team Reference Airports/ATM Concepts Enroute/Terminal Area Network Capacity/Throughput/Delays Noise Footprint/Community Impact Airport Operations/Airline Costs Airport/ATM Safety Model POC for Each Goal Impact Assure Generation of Output from Other Teams Technical Evaluation & Integration Team Data Solicitation Technology Oversight/Projections Technology Roll-up Program Objectives  L/D  All Weather Operations  Aero Design Time  Weight  SFC  MTBF  Labor Hours Reference Vehicles Reference Fleets Reference Operations/Airports Reference Air Traffic Mgmt System Safety Emissions Noise Capacity Cost Commercial Supersonic General Aviation Design Time Space Access In-Space Trans. Spaceports/Operations Team Reference Spaceport Concepts Servicing & Operations Models Launch/Flight Safety Model Oversee Subteam(s) Consistent Goal Accounting and Data Format Outcome Goals Teams

11. BASELINE AIRCRAFT Regional Turboprop Payload 40 pax Design Range 1000 nm Econ Range 200 nm Civil Tilt Rotor Payload 40 pax Design Range 600 nm Econ Range 200 nm General Aviation Jet Payload 4 pax Design Range 800 nm Regional Jet Payload 50 pax Design Range 800 nm Econ Range 400 nm Short-Range Twin Payload 100 pax Design Range 1500 nm Econ Range 500 nm Long-Range Twin Payload 300 pax Design Range 7500 nm Econ Range 3000 nm Long-Range Quad Payload 600 pax Design Range 7500 nm Econ Range 3500 nm High Speed Civil Payload 300 pax Design Range 5000 nm Econ Range 3500 nm General Aviation Prop Payload 4 pax Design Range 800 nm Intracontinental Payload 150 pax Design Range 3000 nm Econ Range 1000 nm Medium-Range Twin Payload 225 pax Design Range 6000 nm Econ Range 2000 nm

12. Notional Concept of a Safety Data Analysis Framework Accident Rates (Metrics) Additional Metrics: Fatal Accident Rates Number of Fatalities Number of Injuries Option #N Option #1 Technologies/Interventions Time Slice (2007, 2022) Fleet projection Accident projection

13. Aviation Safety Goal Analysis 34 Technology Datasheets considered in Safety Goal Analysis -- 20 from Aviation Safety Program Office -- 2 from Airframe Systems -- 6 from Propulsion Systems -- 1 from Advanced Subsonic Technologies -- 5 from Aviation Operations Systems Approximately 47 Different Causal Factor Impacts Technology impacts to different aircraft classes analyzed separately (Transports, Commuters, GA, Rotorcraft)

14. Aviation Safety Goal Analysis - Transport Aircraft (Part 121) •Accident Rate (Fatal & Non-Fatal Combined) •Fatal Accident Rate •Number of Fatalities •Number of Injuries Metrics F Reduce the aircraft accident rate by a factor of 5 within 10 years, and by a factor of 10 within 25 years. Goal • U.S. only, 1990 to 1996, fatal & non-fatal accident NTSB data used to determine percentage of accidents/fatalities/injuries avoided due to technology implementation • U.S. fleet projections based on FAA and DOT forecasts • 100% overlap in accident coverage allowed due to multiple technologies impacting individual accidents; consistent with AvSP philosophy of increased reliability through redundant technology impacts Approach

15. Aviation Safety Goal Analysis - Commuter Aircraft (Part 135, sch. and non-sch.) •Accident Rate (Fatal & Non-Fatal Combined) •Fatal Accident Rate •Number of Fatalities •Number of Injuries Metrics F Reduce the aircraft accident rate by a factor of 5 within 10 years, and by a factor of 10 within 25 years. Goal Approach • U.S. only, 1990 to 1996, fatal & non-fatal accident NTSB data used to determine percentage of accidents/fatalities/injuries avoided due to technology implementation • U.S. fleet projections based on FAA and DOT forecasts • 100% overlap in accident coverage allowed due to multiple technologies impacting individual accidents; consistent with AvSP philosophy of increased reliability through redundant technology impacts

16. Summary of NASA Programs Projected Progress Toward the Goals (end of FY98) 20 Year Projections 10 Year Projections 0 25 50 75 100 Safety (w/out AvSP) EmissionsNoiseCapacityAffordabilityTravel TimeGeneral Aviation Development Cycle 0 25 50 75 100 Safety (w/out AvSP) EmissionsNoiseCapacityAffordability Travel Time General Aviation Development Cycle % Toward the Goal NO x CO 2 NO x CO 2 GA non-GA Time Surcharge

17. Assess advanced aviation technology impacts on the integrated aviation system Technical Progress and Value Technology Cost Effectiveness Technology Investment Portfolio http://www.asac.lmi.org

19. ASAC Ties The Integrated Aviation System Together System Airline Integrated Aviation System Airspace Aircraft EnvironmentSafety Operators Air Carrier Investment Air Carrier Network Cost Flight Segment Cost Airline Cost/Benefit & Ops Air Cargo Cost/Demand DOT Databases Functional Analysis Airport Capacity Airport Delay Approximate Network Delay AATT Decision Support Tools Airport Databases Aircraft Synthesis (ACSYNT) Flight Optimization System (FLOPS) Reference Aircraft Configurations Integrated Noise Impact System Safety Tolerance Analysis 3

20. ASAC Data Flow Airport Capacity & Demand Air Carrier Cost Functions Route Structure Efficient Routes, Fleet Air Traffic Management & Regulation ATC Safety Environment Aviation Industry Aircraft & System Technologies FAA Air Traffic Management Constraints CharacteristicsCosts ATM Demand

21. User Organizations 6 U.S. Government (e.g., NATO, Defense, U.S. Int’l Trade Commission, FAA) 4 Operations (AA, NWA, UAL, USAirways) 29 Manufacturing/Engineering (e.g., BAC, TRW, P&W, LM,ARINC, Cessna Textron, Draper) 13 Academia (e.g., Johns Hopkins APL, Princeton, GaTech, Berkeley, MIT, Geo Mason) 6 International (e.g., AirServices Australia, Eurocontrol) Users of ASAC are Increasing Each Year 11

22. ASAC Customers & Applications American Airlines Free Flight: Preserving Airline Opportunity, ‘97 United Airlines B-727 Navigation Upgrade, ‘97 Pratt & Whitney PW8000 Product Launch Decision Support, ‘97 - ‘98 Boeing CNS Study Group, ‘98 - ‘99 Transportation Research Board Economic Impacts of Air Traffic Congestion, ‘98 CNS/ATM Focused Team (CAFT) TAP/AATT Study Results, ‘98 NASA Dallas-Ft. Worth CTAS Operations Safety Assessment, ‘98 Noise Impact Assessment for Environmental Program Planning, ‘99 TAP/AATT Technology Assessments, ‘98 - ‘99

23. Summary The OAT ten technology goals were chosen to address aero-space industry technology needs Validity of our technology assessments depends on fidelity of our aviation system models –We need your continued support in keeping the models relevant As our customers and partners, we encourage you to interact with us and provide feedback on technology focus and analysis methods –Tour –Breakout sessions