11.12.2012 Views

NASA Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports

NASA Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports

NASA Scientific and Technical Aerospace Reports

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

the Northeast Asian region. The results suggest that reducing aircraft turnaround time at the airport be an effective strategy,<br />

rather than subsidizing to reduce airport charges.<br />

Author<br />

Air Cargo; Air Transportation; Routes; Optimization<br />

20040111227 <strong>NASA</strong> Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, USA<br />

Flight Demonstration of Integrated Airport Surface Automation Concepts<br />

Jones, Denise R.; Young, Steven D.; [1995]; 6 pp.; In English; No Copyright; Avail: CASI; A02, Hardcopy<br />

A flight demonstration was conducted to address airport surface movement area capacity issues by providing pilots with<br />

enhanced situational awareness information. The demonstration showed an integration of several technologies to government<br />

<strong>and</strong> industry representatives. These technologies consisted of an electronic moving map display in the cockpit, a Differential<br />

Global Positioning System (DGPS) receiver, a high speed VHF data link, an ASDE-3 radar, <strong>and</strong> the Airport Movement Area<br />

Safety System (AMASS). Aircraft identification was presented to an air traffic controller on AMASS. The onboard electronic<br />

map included the display of taxi routes, hold instructions, <strong>and</strong> clearances, which were sent to the aircraft via data link by the<br />

controller. The map also displayed the positions of other traffic <strong>and</strong> warning information, which were sent to the aircraft<br />

automatically from the ASDE-3/AMASS system. This paper describes the flight demonstration in detail, along with<br />

preliminary results.<br />

Author<br />

Flight Tests; Automatic Control; Airport Surface Detection Equipment; Air Transportation; Systems Integration<br />

20040111486 McDonnell-Douglas Corp., Saint Louis, MO<br />

Mixed Initiative Control of Automa-Teams, Open Experimentation Platform<br />

Corman, David; Herm, Thomas; Paunicka, James; Sheperd, Thomas; Emrich, Tim; Jul. 2004; 60 pp.; In English; Original<br />

contains color illustrations<br />

Contract(s)/Grant(s): F30602-01-C-0196; DARPA ORDER-M413; Proj-M413<br />

Report No.(s): AD-A425443; AFRL-IF-RS-TR-2004-198; No Copyright; Avail: CASI; A04, Hardcopy<br />

The MICA Open Experimentation Platform (OEP) successfully provided an integration framework for MICA controllers<br />

<strong>and</strong> experimentation platform for simulation, demonstration, assessment <strong>and</strong> transition of MICA research to operational<br />

systems. Accompanying Challenge Problems (CP) provided a challenging environment <strong>and</strong> C2 products representative of real<br />

world Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB), Comm<strong>and</strong>er’s Guidance <strong>and</strong> Rules of Engagement (ROE). The CPs<br />

also incorporated a red force controller that enabled intelligent adversarial reactions including an Integrated Air Defense<br />

System (IADS). The combined OEP/CP capabilities represented a challenging but manageable 3 to 5 day air campaign<br />

encompassing all elements of the Target Kill Chain. This report describes the OEP/CP capabilities <strong>and</strong> summarizes<br />

experimentation performed on MICA research artifacts using the OEP <strong>and</strong> CP.<br />

DTIC<br />

Comm<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Control<br />

20040111549 Air Univ., Maxwell AFB, AL<br />

Big Eagle, Little Dragon: Propag<strong>and</strong>a <strong>and</strong> The Coercive Use of Airpower Against North Vietnam<br />

Morgan, Forrest E.; Jun. 1994; 93 pp.; In English<br />

Report No.(s): AD-A425585; No Copyright; Avail: CASI; A05, Hardcopy<br />

In 1959, Alex<strong>and</strong>er George reconstructed a methodology the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) used to<br />

analyze Nazi propag<strong>and</strong>a during World War II. This same methodology, with adjustments for differences in culture <strong>and</strong><br />

ideology, might have been used to analyze North Vietnamese propag<strong>and</strong>a to help evaluate the effectiveness of America’s<br />

coercive air campaign against North Vietnamese. Throughout the war, North Vietnamese leaders used political propag<strong>and</strong>a to<br />

manipulate the opinions of the people it controlled <strong>and</strong> others they wished to influence. The analysis of this propag<strong>and</strong>a during<br />

Operation Rolling Thunder suggests the North’s decision calculus remained insensitive to the effects of bombing, which helps<br />

explain why Rolling Thunder was unsuccessful in compelling Hanoi to stop supporting the insurgency against South Vietnam.<br />

However, the analysis of propag<strong>and</strong>a in 1972 indicates that President Richard Nixon’s Linebacker operations played a key role<br />

in coercing North Vietnamese leaders to negotiate <strong>and</strong> sign an agreement to end the war. The implications of such a<br />

propag<strong>and</strong>a analysis are significant. In the emerging political l<strong>and</strong>scape of the twenty-first century, airpower may be applied<br />

more often to compel changes of behavior among international actors than to defeat them. The successful application of<br />

airpower may well depend on whether its coercive effectiveness can be measured rapidly <strong>and</strong> accurately. Propag<strong>and</strong>a analysis<br />

6

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!