Joseph E. (Gene) Justin:
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 17

Bio PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 124 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Joseph E. (Gene) Justin: Adjunct Faculty at University of Redlands Adjunct Assistant Professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Former Southern California High School Math Teacher Former Assistant Professor of Astronautics at the US Air Force Academy Education:

Download Presentation

Bio

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Bio

Joseph E. (Gene) Justin:

Adjunct Faculty at University of Redlands

Adjunct Assistant Professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

Former Southern California High School Math Teacher

Former Assistant Professor of Astronautics at the US Air Force Academy

Education:

B.S. in Engineering Science (Aeronautics) from the US Air Force Academy

M.S. in Astronautical and Aeronautical Engineering from Ohio State University

M.A. from University of Southern California

MBA from University of California, Los Angeles

Ph.D. in Management from Claremont Graduate University

Gene has 40 years in aerospace and is a retired US Air Force major

Bio


Bio

State of Aerospace -- 2010

Joseph E. (Gene) Justin, Ph.D.

University of Redlands and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

The Seventh Annual AIAA Southern California Aerospace Systems and Technology (ASAT) Conference

[email protected] – (714) 896-1945

Santa Ana, CA

1 May 2009

* The University of Redlands, The School of Business, 1200 East Colton Avenue, PO Box 3080, Redlands CA 92373-0099

Embry Riddle University Worldwide, Los Angles Metro Center, 5001 Airport Plaza Drive, Suite 150, Long Beach CA 90815


Summary

Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) in 2009 completed an assessment of the aerospace industrial base -- Little has changed

A fundamental goal of the US aerospace industry is to help provide the dominant edge in technology and turn that edge into systems for space and national defense

Concern that this relationship is weakening, and past capabilities and successes lead folks to take future capabilities as a given -- Creating a potential gap in future capabilities

This gap may grow if the industrial effects of new choices aren’t included in those new choices

Otherwise, decisions today can limit the strategy choices available in the future

This paper does not argue if AIA is right or wrong, but asks what if they are right -- What does it mean for us – which may mean stronger business cases needed for retaining and creating capabilities

Summary

Future aerospace capabilities may not be there when we need them, unless we foster them now


What are they talking about

Aerospace Industries Association (AIA):

Since World War II and in the Cold War, aerospace was believed to be able to provide whatever it took for whatever course was needed

This may not be true in the future

Gap widening since industry needs to make business case decisions on what capabilities to provide

This matters because decisions now determine future capabilities

And, making the gap wider -- Military and commercial programs may no longer benefit fromcommon capabilities, tools, processes, parts, material -- in spite of efforts– for example parts, material

What are they talking about

Few, shorter, military programs with fewer commercial common benefits make the business cases to maintain capabilities harder


What are they talking about continued

Aerospace Industries Association (AIA): Trends are not favorable

Was over 50 US companies, now 6 majors

1993 Pentagon said too many companies (The Last Supper meeting)

Small companies are emerging but still need to make case for their programs

Other example, 1970s -- Contractor (Rockwell) retained capability for B-1B for years waiting for a restart -- Wouldn’t happen today

Another example, B2 plant in Pico Rivera eventually became a Wal-Mart

Military programs are having to carry more of their own weight and technologies -- in parts for example, specialty material for another

Weaker economy, funding uncertainties don’t help the common base

More decline in industrial base and fewer skilled workers are possible

What are they talking about, Continued

Aerospace can create or recreate capability, but it will take time and money (Government money), as well as skilled workers (if available)


Bio

DC-3 – 16,079 built, > 400 still in limited use

http://www.friendsofthedc3.20m.com


Bio

F-4 – 5,195 built, 631 active in non-US service

Public Domain www.wikimedia.org


Bio

A380, Orders stand at 202, 43 built so far

widebodyaircraft.n/a380/htm


Bio

B1-B Photo

www.af.mil


Bio

B2 Photo

www.af.mil


Bio

F-35 Photo

www.lockheedmartin.com


Aia recommendations

Industry more as a partner in planning and understanding the forces that drive industry capability decisions

Greater formal industrial base considerations in decision processes

Greater assessment of the industrial base

AIA Recommendations

Industry capability needs to be a factor for space and military decisions, and industry decisions


Industrial college of the armed forces icaf

Industrial College of the Armed Forces (ICAF) had similar findings and recommendations in 2008:

This is important since US aviation/aerospace industry makes up 9% of the US Gross National Product (GNP)

But the industry faces challenges:

Aging and declining workforce

Restrictive regulations and export controls

Defense acquisition instability

Declining research funding

Also cite air-traffic system that needs to grow to meet new demands

Industrial College of the Armed Forces (ICAF)

Labor is a major driver in aerospace -- Employees are more than 635,000, with 380,000 in aircraft sector


Icaf continued

ICAF -- Challenges

In 2005, 55% of workers were over 45 (Percentage probably higher now)

In 2008, 27% eligible for retirement (Percentage probably higher now)

US lagging in math and science education, and foreign students less likely to stay in US and in aerospace

Other examples in restrictions, materials, exports controls

Example -- UK restrictions on the F-35 program

Other example -- Government funding for aviation research peaked in 1987 and has declined since then by 50%

Funding for NASA has also declined

ICAF, Continued

US aerospace faces major challenges


Icaf recommendations

Increased standards for math and science

Tax incentives for industry and worker education

Public service campaign to attract students into aerospace

More competitive pay packages

Streamline Export Controls

Reevaluate International Trade in Arms Regulations (ITAR)

Support NASA research in aviation

Follow through on the 2003 President Commission on Aerospace -- Increased funding for basic research

Tax credits for long term aerospace investments

ICAF Recommendations

US needs to foster positive industry relationships


What are does it mean to us

If ICAF and AIA are right, what does it mean to the Engineering Community:

Challenges moving forward

Decisions on capabilities may become more challenging

Need to recognize that decisions now determine future capabilities

Need to take the longer term view

Need to emphasis even more common capabilities, tools, processes, parts, material

If you are in aerospace, great -- Stay in aerospace but it will be challenging

What are does it mean to us

Need to educate and train the next generation and the next, next generation


References

Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). (2009) The Unseen Cost: Industrial Base Consequences of Defense Strategy Choices, Arlington, VA. Www-aia-aerospace.org

Gropman, A. (2008) Challenges ahead for U.S. aircraft manufacturers. National Defense Magazine, Wash. D.C. Feb. www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

References


  • Login