Skip to main content

Decadal Survey of Civil Aeronautics Foundation for the Future (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

2 Process for Integration and Prioritization
Pages 9-12

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 9...
... . oritized list for each R&T Area, resolved conflicts in scoring At the second steering committee meeting, in November among panels that had considered similar technologies, iden2005, representatives from industry and academia were con tified common themes among R&T Challenges from more sulted in a roundtable discussion.
Read the entire page →
From page 10...
... The national Mission alignment priority scores are equivalent to the absolute importance rankings in a standard QFD table, and the NASA priority scores are equivalent to risk- Mission alignment refers to whether research related to weighted importance. the R&T Challenge falls under NASA's charter, as defined 3Each Challenge is designated by the letter of the Area to which is be- in the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (As longs and by its NASA priority ranking in that Area.
Read the entire page →
From page 11...
... the research, some other organization would do it, or does already. A score of 3 implies that if NASA did not do the research, it would be done but not be developed to an ad Lack of alternative sponsors equate level of maturity, or it would lack aeronautical focus.
Read the entire page →
From page 12...
... The technical discussions and milestones in integrated, prioritized list of R&T Challenges from all five cluded in this report are intended to be advisory, as it was not panels, the steering committee decided that the best use of feasible to complete a rigorous, comparative assessment of the limited time and resources available to complete the all of the research options that might be associated for each study would be to identify Common Themes and formulate of the 89 Challenges. The committee believes that the best overall findings and recommendations (see Chapters 4 and approach for selecting specific research projects to fund 5)
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • nasa priority
  • aeronautics research
  • air transportation
  • available online
  • civil aeronautics

  • national priority
  • priority scores
  • alternative sponsors
  • mission alignment
  • homeland security

  • supporting infrastructure
  • appropriate level
  • nasa research
  • priority score
  • standard qfd

  • space act
  • strategic objective
  • qfd matrix
  • six strategic
  • qfd table

  • importance rankings
  • modified qfd
  • established goals
  • possess similar
  • process characteristics

  • prioritized appear
  • similar infrastructure
  • qfd matrices
  • act appear
  • panels identified


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.