Good morning, and thank you, Dr. Greaves, for that kind introduction.  Let me start out by saying what an honor it is for me to share the stage with Dr. Greaves.  I started my career a long time ago with Boeing as a junior engineer, so I’ve been dealing with engines and commercial aircraft for quite some time.  Dr. Greaves, your resume speaks for itself.  You have made a difference in aviation … in aerospace.  So, thank you for that.

I’d also be remiss not to tip my hat to SAE itself.  More than half of the standards out there come from SAE.  When the need arises for a standard, we at the FAA know that we can count on SAE to develop the standard, and do so quickly.  You’re working on a dozen things for us at any given time.  That’s what we need.  I think SAE standards are mentioned in upwards of 200 TSO standards and policy guidance.  That tells you something right there.

So if you’re sitting here in the audience and you’re looking for a takeaway, here it is:  your SAE work matters.  We need your help in developing technical standards which we can use in our regulatory process to improve aviation safety.  It’s a team effort.  We want your help in developing technical standards in more and more evolving areas.  You are relevant.  You’re working on things we need.

No doubt about it, the FAA depends on you.  There’s a lot of brainpower in this room, and we rely on it.  The “A” in SAE may have started out as “automotive,” but ask around at 800 Independence Avenue.  We think that A in SAE now stands for aviation.  I think we’re right. 

Now that I’ve set the stage, let’s talk about for a moment about how much the scope of our work is changing.  I mentioned a moment ago about being a junior engineer at Boeing.  In college, you’re an expert, and you already know everything.  For example, commercial aircraft are gigantic, and back in the day, guys like Joe Sutter were pushing the envelope into something everyone now calls the jumbo jet. 

And that was my frame of reference for a lot of years. 

Now, the paradigm has shifted.  We’re dealing with a new entrant in the NAS … an aircraft that the kid who lives next door to you is probably going to open on Christmas Day.

It surprised me at how quickly unmanned aircraft came along. I have to admit when I was in college and working on aerodynamics I knew I’d be dealing with the Boeing, the McDonnell-Douglas, the Uniteds of the world. Little did I know that I’d be dealing with K-Mart and Amazon. The UAS is a very different animal. When you think of the relatively slow growth that commercial aviation experienced over 113 years, in relative terms, UAS is coming in lightning speed.  Part of the struggle has been the difficulty in maintaining our traditional FAA responsibilities for the NAS while keeping up with the demand of new commercial interests.

There was an “aha” moment when UAS really started to come into play two, three, or four years ago.  The business community had to recognize that anything that can leave the ground on its own power is considered aircraft.  Therefore, these aircraft then fall within FAA’s domain since we are the organization that approves anyone or anything flying in the NAS.

As the idea caught on, business quickly saw immediate applications—like real estate, surveying, news gathering.  Those type of activities fall within our jurisdiction, and we were shaping the parameters for operation as quickly as we could.  That said, companies wanted to petition for an exemption to commercially operate these drones, and some petitions started coming in. Legislation was then passed by Congress that outlined an exemption process, which opened the floodgates.

More applications were coming in than we could have handled using our normal exemption process.  We had to come up with creative ways to pump that up from a few each week to well over 100 a week. We’re well past 15,000 exemptions. The good news is we finalized a rule which obviates the need for an exemption in most cases.  This rule limits operations to UAS less than 55 pounds, flown in visual line of sight, and below 400 ft.  As a result, it frees up many of the commercial uses for UAS for real estate photography, precision agriculture, and other applications that were in high demand

So … where do we stand?  FAA clarified appropriate use of hobbyist UAS on where you can and can’t fly; including clarifications on how to fly safely and not endanger manned aviation.  There’s actually an app—B4UFLY.  When I was in school, “apps” were a slide rule.

We’ve set a baseline to understand the types of small UAS being used through our registration process.  To date, more than 500,000 small UAS users have registered.  Think about this for a moment:  There are more drones than there are traditional aircraft. 

We continue to evaluate and revise current regulations to allow the safe introduction and integration of UAS into the NAS by processing waivers and exemptions to accommodate future operations.  We’re working with colleges, universities, state and local governments, law enforcement, railroads—and CNN—to sharpen our understanding of what constitutes safe operation for unmanned systems; including learning the unique aspects of this new/novel technology.

So … where are we?  This is not your father’s NAS.  Not anymore. 

The definition of what’s flying is changing.  So is what powers what’s flying.  We’ve used gas and Jet A for a long time.  Before that, guys like Icarus used wax, and that didn’t end well.  

But there is a bright spot, and SAE has been instrumental in bringing this from a good idea to what I think will be a terrific innovation.  I’m talking about the development of standards for the ground based electric vehicle market.  As you know, this isn’t just airplanes, but cars, trains and boats as well. 

We initiated the efforts in working on electric propulsion for manned and unmanned aircraft.  We’ve had experimental aircraft flying with electric propulsion systems for many years.  The bottom line here is that we’re waiting for Industry to develop a mature type of battery and motor technology so the usable flight time could be achieved to meet its intended application.

We don’t have any specific tasking at this time with SAE.  Looking into the future, we may be able to utilize SAE’s experience from other electric transportation standards to identify requirements for airborne systems.

So far, we’ve talked about the changing scope of what defines an aircraft and what powers an aircraft. What’s inside the cabin is changing as well.

For those of you who haven’t had the chance, you should familiarize yourselves with the FAA’s Technical Center in Atlantic City.  There are labs where full scale aircraft are set on fire, where smoke evacuation tests are run, where runway braking is tested.  There’s also a facility specifically used for crashworthiness. 

The traditional aircraft seat is designed to transfer the dynamic energy of a crash away from the occupant and into the seat itself.  The legs of the seat are meant to crumple, they’re meant to take the shock.

We’re well into the age of composite materials, and composites don’t crumple—certainly not the way traditional metal would.  So the big question becomes:  where does that energy go? 

The use of composite materials in seats is expected to increase significantly in the future due to significant weight savings over traditional metallic materials. 

The current standards for aircraft seats do not specifically address the unique technical challenges in the certification of composite seats.  To address these challenges, the FAA is developing a specific Issue Paper for a given certification project.  As a point of reference, EASA is undertaking a similar review on the European side.

To standardize and streamline composite seat certification, the FAA and EASA are actively engaged with SAE to develop an Aerospace Recommended Practice for Composite Seats. This recommended practice will address several key areas where composites differ from traditional metallic structure certification … things like material qualification, fabrication, environmental conditions, and non-visual damage from in service use.  

The recommended practice for composite seats may serve as the basis for design, test, and related requirements that support an update to the FAA TSO for seats qualification.  We hope to achieve a harmonized position between the authorities to support the FAA/EASA TCCA streamlining certification process.

With respect to composite seats:  stay tuned.  

Before I close, I’d be remiss not to mention additive manufacturing.  I’m not going to get into a discussion of powder bed fusion or directed energy deposition, but I will tell you what I do know.

I find the concept of 3D printing to be mind-blowing.  There was a time when Chuck Yeager and Scott Crossfield didn’t know if they would break apart when aircraft first broke the sound barrier.  But we did it.

I think 3D printing is going to be the same kind of leap.  We’re thinking, “How the hell do they do that?”  But there will be a day where we look back and think, “Of course, they could do that.”

In aviation, this refers to a range of manufacturing methods where the purchased feedstock material like powder or wire is consolidated by an energy source into a near-finished part.

We’ve already certified metal AM parts in aircraft engines and approved AM parts in a TSO, which were fabricated using the additive manufacturing technology.  The FAA is currently working the first certification project using this technology.  The FAA also certified additive manufacturing parts that made from powder and polymers as installed on aircraft cabin interior, galley carts, air-condition ducts, and related areas.

I’m glad to see that SAE has created a Data Management subcommittee for additive manufacturing.  This committee will develop guidance for data collection and analysis unique to AM.  For our part, we actively support the development of four additive manufacturing specifications and the Additive Manufacturing Data Management subcommittee.

In closing, as you are all well aware, standardization is one of the most critical aspects of aviation. We depend on organizations like SAE to provide the technical specifications that promote this standardization throughout the entire system. As our national airspace system becomes more and more interconnected with the international aviation system, this standardization becomes even more critical. 

In all of these examples, we’re focusing our efforts on achieving standardization.  We must ensure that our direction incorporates the international perspective.

All of us rely on ICAO to promote harmonization worldwide.  As the scope of this worldwide standardization becomes increasingly complex, it is important to consider where it may be appropriate to include ICAO direction into our standards-making efforts.

I say this because we’re actually at a very delicate spot in the history of aviation.  We haven’t had a commercial passenger fatality on a U.S. air carrier. since February 12, 2009.  That’s quite a streak, but the danger in a streak like that is complacency.  Now is the very specific and direct moment in time where we must redouble our efforts for safety.

Everything is clicking.  We’re making advances like we never have before.  The accident rate is so low that we track accidents that didn’t happen.  SAE needs to be a part of that focus.  Our system has never been safer. And there’s never been a time where we’ve needed to make sure that we raise the safety bar even higher.  We can’t do that without you.