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
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
genejustin01@aol.com – (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
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 from common capabilities, tools, processes, parts,
material -- in spite of efforts – for example parts, material
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
Aerospace can create or recreate capability, but it will take time and
money (Government money), as well as skilled workers (if available)
DC-3 – 16,079 built, > 400 still in limited use
http://www.friendsofthedc3.20m.com
F-4 – 5,195 built, 631 active in non-US service
Public Domain www.wikimedia.org
A380, Orders stand at 202, 43 built so far
widebodyaircraft.n/a380/htm
B1-B Photo
www.af.mil
B2 Photo
www.af.mil
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
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
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
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
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
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