Category Archives: Special Committees

NextGen Committee Objectives 2013-14

The NextGen committee will work with the Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) and the Industry Management Council of the NextGen Institute to help facilitate implementation of UAS systems and the next generation air traffic management system in America. We will keep states informed on progress, raise state concerns to federal organizations, and work to resolve issues that cross state lines.

Charlie Huettner, Chair

State Aerospace Organizations Committee Objectives 2013-14

The ASA State Aerospace Organization Committee’s goals are to help our state aerospace and aviation organization committee members collaborate and share information to grow aerospace and aviation in their states; and share best practices, lessons learned, business models, charters and organizational models.  Over the next two years, we will expand our committee membership (with the goal of having every state/region represented), develop a more comprehensive database of state aerospace and aviation organizations, and identify policy issues and initiatives to bring forward to the ASA general membership for consideration.

Mike Heil, Chair

State Aerospace Organizations Committee Minutes

ASA Meeting of the State Aerospace Organization Committee

March 22, 2011 – 9am

Recap

  • Committee Goals, Feedback on Goals, Thoughts on Committee and Activities
    • Need to recruit more states –dynamic situation
    • Top = Committee goals, want to learn what is working, what’s not working
  • Important for Aerospace and Aviation to collaborate and share information – goal for everyone in our own states
    • Aerospace is top export manufacturing industry – where U.S. is the clear world leader
    • Jobs are high-paying skilled jobs – industry is dependent upon strong engineering capabilities
      • Graduates recently have been having difficulty finding jobs
      • Important goal is to help everyone be successful
      • Some people going overseas to bring back business
  • Database of state aerospace organizations – need to keep updated and constantly evolving (i.e. AZ just started up and OK recently disbanded because of state budgetary reasons)
  • Best practices, what is working, lessons, not working, share information on the best business models
    • Feedback? Database available? Will look at it later in the meeting

Background

  • Seen as extremely important when Lt. Gov Dubie talking about enhancements, talking about chapters for grassroots impact
  • Easy for Lt. Gov’s to disappear and then every communication needs to be restarted but by having ASA, there would be continuity
    • In the country’s best interest to have entities in each state
    • Don’t have to own them, just have to connect
  • Last year – first meeting – grown in connectivity
  • Mansfield à need to recruit more participation and get more people involved (almost every state has an organization that could be in this organization) good for expanding network, need to make sure to reach out
  • Tendency to focus on manufacturers, don’t need to limit to that, have other affiliates

Vermont – Martha Hansen

  • Never used to consider VT an aerospace state
  • Now, VT Chamber of Commerce organizes quarterly conferences/meetings where people come and meet regarding the industry
    • Biggest value – collaboration and networking and companies go there because they want to do business
    • Can do business together, find out what everyone is doing
    • 200-300 people at each meeting talk about what they have to offer, all it takes is the desire of the Lt. Gov.
    • Mission – grow cooperation and jobs, build workforce à econ development and education should be advocated in legislature, separate from general manufacturing, trying to get synergy going with universities
  • Some groups are arms of the state government
  • Should mention ASA chapters at universities and find/attract students to engineering, difficult to make connection with students/deans sometimes
  • Martha – Magazines should help with PR – Membership isn’t just companies, it’s the National Guard, Universities etc, very diverse, no membership dues

Ohio

  • Michael L. Heil – Ohio Aerospace Institute – michaelheil@oai.org
  • Non-profit 501(c)(3) – trying to bring aviation and aerospace together
    • Arguing aviation is a subset of aerospace – including flight attendants? Difficult to draw the line
    • Some also in automotive – latest count is 100,000 people in manufacturing, 2nd largest industry in the state
  • Mission – to build aerospace economy à through R&D, Ed and training, Collaborative and innovative solutions
  • OAI building voted one of the 50 best buildings in the world in 1994 – many people aligned to get this building built, analogous to aerospace, lots of funding taken to build it but successful in its purpose thus far
  • History and Background – started in 1989, first associated with NASA, chartered to foster relationships between universities, aerospace, industry, and government organizations
    • Strong support from NASA Glen Research Center, Wright Patterson AF Base, Ohio research universities, Ohio Gov etc
    • $241M in secured funding, 300 fed awards, FY ’10 $17.3M in revenue
    • State funding has gone up and down over the years, same with federal funding
    • Ohio currently tackling issue of “right to work” state, NASA Glenn Research Center has a union, viewed as small, not a major force
  • OAI Deans Committee – Engineering deans recommend OAI establish to focus and continue to improve state strengths + capabilities – bring visiting research and faculty
    • Also offers graduate courses, get younger people to stay engaged and involved
    • Could attract more research funding
  • Board of Trustees – 6 academic trustees, 6 industry trustees, 3 independent, 5 ex officio trustees – many industry sponsors
  • R&T – sponsored research – computational modeling, materials, structures, turbo machinery
    • AARC – Aero Acoustics Research Consortium with industry members is a good model
    • 3.10.11 = Ohio Aerospace Day – bringing together the community
  • Ohio Aerospace Working Group – collaboration of eight Ohio Regional Economic Development Organizations
    • Goals – to get feedback from Ohio Cong. Delegation on challenges, increase awareness, provide assistance, and achieve united bi-partisan support
    • Best way to face challenges and opportunities for aerospace industry in Ohio
    • Also want to work with Edu and Training – Ohio Space Grant Consortium – 23 institutes of higher learning, internship programs funded by the state

Iowa- Tom Hobson

  • New Lt. Gov – trying to increase economic awareness
  • Trying to increase impact and networking opportunity – recruiting for future workforce

Maine- Rich Grich

  • Working with Southern Maine Community College – to develop business and take to the next level within the state
  • Trying to make aerospace large composites group – trying to get state support to help it grow – has been done and can be done, no real business model
  • Working to increase aerospace presence

Pennsylvania- Bob Rockmaker

  • Just delivered notice of interest
  • Infrastructure poor, but facility is a bright opportunity on the aerospace side
  • No federal or state grants right now, trying to advance aerospace
  • Trying to work with people to get awareness that aerospace is 3-5% nation’s GDP
  • Don’t have what some of the other states have – but wants to continue to get leadership in the State House in support of initiatives
  • Doing some more awareness, advanced aerospace task force
  • Has developed counsel and lobbying efforts – were able to eliminate sales tax on rotary aircraft –  purchase and repair

Maryland

  • Many OEM chain suppliers
  • Trying to work and identify more people to work with

Delaware – Stephanie Wright

  • Nonprofit group – Governor just started
  • Dover AF Base – not specifically the focus
  • DOT – smaller group aviation, looking at coming together with W. VA

New Mexico- Bill McMillan

  • New Governor Susanna Martinez – meeting in middle of April and good job coming into state
  • Founded NM AA – working with DARPA and contractor and national labs etc.
  • Recruited some small aerospace companies
  • Hired new Director of Spaceport America, Christine Anderson – hope that it will be strong economy driver
  • Eclipse Lightweight Jet Company – 260 aircraft are flying, restructuring.
  • STEM Education – Randall Hayes – near Kirtland AFB, heads up the program, good recognition for afforts.

Alabama- Chuck Carver

  • Governor claims not taking salary until 5000 jobs created
  • Good for economic and community affairs – need to focus on Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) opportunities
  • Trying to bring BRAC and Aerospace together, no charter yet, some legislation pending now – workforce development
  • Interested in employee development
  • Not aware of an Aerospace Day in Alabama

Tom Maloney – Connecticut

  • Mostly federal dollars with some state cooperation
  • Long history in alternative fuels
  • Partnership with Air Force and Timken – starting off on things like that
  • Booth space at International Air Shows – over the years, good success
  • Other work goes up and down, trying to retrain F22 work force, most of the state money, good example of possible multistate collaboration – also opportunity because  there has been a recent change in seniority of Senators

California- Marsha Kalwasser

  • CA Aerospace Tech Association
  • Created California legislature select committee on aerospace, there are 300K aerospace employees in CA, industry is not recognized for its importance to the state, select committee will help grow support
  • Will start with STEM and then incentives – would make CA more competitive

Hawaii

  • Jim Crisafulli, Office of Aerospace Development
  • Strategic Geographic Advantage, Location, Long standing Partnership with Asian Pacific Countries and communities, potential to build as growth industry
  • Builds on existing infrastructure and advancement in science research
  • Key Sectors for development: Aerospace Related RDT&E, Training/Edu, Commercial Space
  • Goals: Diversify activity, Public/Private Multinational partnerships, Promote education, Monitor Trends, Recommend policies
    • Hawaii Aerospace Advisory Committee – may reps inside and out of state
  • NASA Hawaii Space Act Agreement
    • Space Exploration, Next Generation Aviation, Scientific Research
    • Stem education – through Public/private partnerships and multinational alliances
  • PISCES – University of Hawaii – for scientific research and community development, tech development test and eval, education and training, multinational dialogue and exchange
  • Other organizations working with include – Pacific International Space Alliance, and commercial space transportation (talking with Boeing), Pacific Hub for Aviation Training and Maintenance
  • Vision – to expand center of RD, STEM, Center aviation training and Next GEN, National development and work to be global leader
  • Want to collaborate and not compete

Conclusion

  • Want to collaborate with AIA and AIAA

Wants to multiply the effect of every aerospace organization

Small Manufacturers Committee

2013-14 Objectives

We will continue to strengthen the relationships between regional manufacturing extension partnership entities and manufacturers.  Many regional MEP organizations have unique and valuable services to assist manufacturers in the aerospace supply chain.  Regional best practices need to be identified by manufacturers and recommended to serve all states.  Stronger regional connections to aerospace companies and related supply chains need to be developed to collect that input. Two specific areas of analysis will be:

· Supply chain identification/expansion

· ISO Certification assistance to potential supply chain companies

Additionally, there will be focus on capturing an even greater percentage of the global aerospace market. With projections of growth for the next 20 years it is important for US manufacturers to not only keep pace with that growth but demonstrate a competitive advantage. A specific area of discussion will include STEM/workforce development partnerships.

Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, Chair

Interactive area for Small Manufacturers Committee

Aerospace States Association (ASA) Aerospace Manufacturing Special Committee Charter

I. Background: ASA is a bi-partisan organization representing the grass roots of the American aerospace industry. It is an organization of Lieutenant Governors and state appointed delegates. The ASA was formed to promote a state-based perspective in federal aerospace policy and support state initiatives that enhance education, economic development, and the competitiveness of the U.S. aerospace industry.

ASA will accomplish this by:

  1. Advancing America’s vision for space science and exploration.
  2. Implementing the NextGen aviation system as soon as possible.
  3. Promoting an educational system that will result in an aviation and an aerospace workforce that is second to none.
  4. Stimulating investments in science, research and technology at levels that will ensure American leadership.
  5. Revising legal and procedural export controls to increase the U.S.’s ability to compete in global markets.
  6. Emphasizing the importance of small to medium-size aerospace manufacturers to the economic health and competitiveness of the industry.

We will work to achieve these objectives by mobilizing industry within our states and local communities, creating partnerships between industry and our education and training institutions, working with federal agencies, informing the media, and bringing together state congressional delegations. The U.S. aviation and aerospace industry are a national strategic asset. It is vital to our national security and the well being of our economy. We must join together now to create a safer, stronger, better and more globally competitive America.

II. Goal of the Manufacturing Special Committee: Improve the global competitiveness of U.S. small to medium-size aerospace manufacturers in such a way that will benefit local, state, regional and national economic interests.

III. Committee Chairs: The initial Chairperson of the Manufacturing Committee is Robert Mansfield, Jr., Brigadier General, USAF (Retired), will provide professional guidance to the committee, direct day-to-day activities, and be responsible for recommending funding decisions for consideration by the committee to the ASA. After the initial term, Chairs will be selected by the ASA Chairman as part of the regular biennial election process.

IV. Committee Membership: All state Lt. Governors, their representatives, and Associate Members are eligible and encouraged to participate on the committee. Membership is focused on those interested in achieving the goals of the Manufacturing Committee in particular states, regions and across the country.

V. Responsibilities of the Manufacturing Special Committee: The responsibilities of this committee include but are not limited to:

  1. Developing a biannual agenda that addresses the needs of the aerospace manufacturing industry; with emphasis on the small to medium-size firms that comprise the majority of our nation’s aerospace manufacturing supply chain.
  2. Engaging the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) community to create a strong “SBIR for Manufacturing” emphasis that can be a resource to fund innovations which directly improve the efficiency, profitability and competitiveness of firms to grow their businesses.
  3. Encouraging federal Manufacturing Extension Program (MEP) organizations in the states and territories to become associate members of the ASA and join the Manufacturing Special Committee.
  4. Identifying resources that can help American aerospace manufacturers improve their performance. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to technology, processes, and most importantly the aerospace workforce.
  5. Developing position papers; identifying policy issues and recommendations for the ASA membership to consider for presentation to state and federal officials.
  6. Increasing the ASA presence in its for coordination and collaboration with national, local and regional organizations working to enhance manufacturing in the United States; for example: the National Institute of Standards and Technology, National Association of Manufacturers, General Aviation Manufacturing Association, National Association for Advanced Manufacturing, Aerospace Industries Association, the National Defense Industries Association, including state MEPs, not-for-profit aerospace organizations and workforce and economic development organizations, whether ASA members or not.
  7. Increasing the ASA coordination and collaboration with technical schools, colleges and universities that offer courses and programs that are relevant to manufacturing in the aviation and aerospace industry.
  8. Identifying opportunities to finance the operations of the committee.
  9. Encourage aerospace manufacturing organizations to become ASA members.

 

Vermont Chamber Aerospace & Aviation Trade Show
Showcasing Manufacturing & Propelling Vermont’s Economy Forward
August 8th, 2013
10am – 4pm
Burlington International Airport
Meet key contacts and exhibitors. Discover new resources, business, supply chain, networking and career opportunities.
Register for airport parking voucher and enter raffle to win Porter Airline vouchers.

Real World Design Challenge

Interactive area for Real World Design Challenge Committee

The Aerospace States Association is working with educators across the country to promote the Real World Design Challenge (RWDC) – a program that gives high school students practical experience leading to science and engineering-based jobs. An annual competition aimed at engaging youth in aeronautics and engineering, RWDC invites students to develop solutions to practical aviation design challenges posed by industry experts. Last year, 28 states and 600 high schools participated in the challenge, and I hope to see even more involvement during the 2011-2012 school year.

RWDC is run by a public-private partnership focused on long-term economic competitiveness, and thanks to corporate support, the program is offered free to students and schools and incurs no cost to taxpayers. I encourage you to bring your state on board today, as a way of supporting education and workforce development with no financial burden to your state.

The program will create tremendous opportunities for the students of your state. Every state champion team receives an all-expense-paid trip to Washington, D.C., and students involved in previous competitions have earned paid internships through their participation. Last year’s national champions presented their work before the president at the White House.

The program not only offers a creative educational opportunity for students, but it also provides some excellent resources for the classroom. Each teacher that registers a team will receive professional engineering software for use in the classroom that costs industry buyers $1 million. Students will also receive access to mentors from industry, government and academia.

If your state is already participating, please urge as many of your teachers as possible to take advantage of this exciting opportunity for their students.

For more information on the Real World Design Challenge, visit http://www.realworlddesignchallenge.org, and to participate, contact RWDC Director Dr. Ralph Coppola at (703) 298-6630 or rcoppola@ptc.com