Aviation takes back seat to space flight at NASA

By reaching for the moon and Mars, NASA is letting go of aviation research that was the foundation for the nation's journey into space.
Some contend that cuts to aeronautics research — long one of the agency's cornerstones — will endanger the country's lead in aviation.

NASA's role in the industry goes largely unseen by the public, but is experienced by nearly anyone who boards an airplane. Its contributions include deicing technology and engine research that has led to safer, quieter and more fuel efficient airplanes.

The agency's aeronautics program is being restructured to meet President Bush's focus on the human exploration of space. The president's 2007 budget proposal for NASA would cut 18% from aeronautics research, leaving it $724 million, down from more than $1 billion in 2004.

NASA Administrator Michael Griffin compared aeronautics' fate to that of slide rule makers in the United States.

"The last slide rule maker went out of business I think in 1975," he said June 5 when announcing work for several centers on a space vehicle. "We simply are not doing all of the things that all of our centers once did."

While programs in aviation security — which NASA says duplicated efforts by the Homeland Security Department — and unmanned aerial vehicles have been phased out, the major decisions regarding the future of aeronautics research will be made in the coming months.

Although to many NASA likely is nearly synonymous with space, the origin of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is in airplane engineering.

Griffin said the aeronautics heritage at Cleveland-based NASA Glenn Research Center, Langley Research Center in Virginia and Ames and Dryden Flight research centers in California "just doesn't fit" with NASA's new goals.

However, a NASA-sponsored study by the National Academies' National Research Council recommended that the agency prioritize its aeronautics research, partnering with public and private institutions to help expand the capacity of the nation's air transportation system and decrease accidents as the number of flights increase.

The council was not asked to provide budget recommendations but warned that the nation's status as aviation leader could erode if funding is cut further.

Alex Roland, a professor of technology history at Duke University in Durham, N.C., agreed that aeronautics is vulnerable because NASA doesn't have enough money to fulfill its commitments of flying the space shuttle through 2010, completing the international space station and having a new space vehicle ready for flight in 2014.

"Its budget is just going to suffer horrendously. I don't know if it will disappear," said Roland, who worked for NASA as a historian from 1973 to 1981. "I wouldn't want to depend on NASA anytime soon for aeronautics research."

The aviation industry and universities are feeling the cutbacks.

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Fla., counts NASA among its top three funders. The school partnered with NASA on a project that examined the feasibility of a Jetsons-like future in which people use small aircraft the same way they use cars.

"It's certainly a concern because who's going to pick up the gap," said Christina Frederick-Recascino, the university's associate provost.

NASA research helped General Electric design a new engine being used on the Boeing 787, said Rick Kennedy, spokesman for the company's Cincinnati-based aircraft engine division. GE tested composite material at NASA Glenn's wind tunnels that was used to make the engine's fan blades and casing lighter.

GE spends its own money on research but NASA helped explore some far-out possibilities while lending its facilities and expertise, thereby minimizing the company's risk, Kennedy said.

"The funding is not what it used to be," he said.

Lisa Porter, NASA's associate administrator for aeronautics, said the agency is returning to long-term, cutting-edge research that will benefit the nation. It will focus on areas such as air traffic control systems and safety and mastering the science of subsonic, supersonic and hypersonic flight.

The restructuring appeals to professor John Hansman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Hansman thinks NASA employees were spending too much time managing contracts with outside agencies rather than doing research themselves.

But Hansman, a former member of NASA's aeronautics research advisory committee, added that there's not enough funding and that the cuts to aeronautics research have created uncertainty for universities.

"I'm not picking up any new students because of the uncertainty in funding," said Hansman, who has projects funded by NASA. "I have many colleagues that are in the same situation."

Some NASA centers are facing job losses, and employees say morale has been damaged. Many young workers are looking for employment elsewhere, said Lee Stone, a life scientist at Ames Research Center.

"Most of the programs that have supported us in the past are disappearing," Stone said. "There's total chaos going on as far as funding."

NASA Glenn has received a lead role in the development of the crew exploration vehicle that is expected to take astronauts to the moon. While it was an economic boost for the center, it doesn't provide job security for all 1,648 civil service employees.

Griffin promised Ames and other aeronautics-heavy centers a significant role in the space mission.

"I know it's very difficult for you when you're out at field centers wondering, 'what are those idiots at headquarters doing?'" he joked. "Hang in there with us."

NASA's largest union, though, fears pursuit of the moon and Mars will eventually render NASA unable to do aeronautics research, said Matthew Biggs, legislative director of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers.

"What's going to be left?" Biggs said. "Are we going to be a taxi service to and from space?"

The Associated Press