Page images

In keeping with the pattern of follow-on sales experienced in the market for aircraft, aircraft engines and spare parts, it was assumed that the initial increase of $1 billion would lead to increases in export sales for spare parts and follow-on fleet sales. In addition to the initial sales, incremental exports of 1 percent per year for spare parts were assumed for each year-1983 through 1990.

Further, it was assumed that increased follow-on fleet sales would amount to three times the value of the initial sale over a 20-year period with 75 percent of those sales falling during the 1983 to 1990 time period. This amounts to increased follow-on fleet sales of $2.24 billion.

Table 10 shows the annual value of the additional aircraft exports assumed. Figure 6 depicts the cumulative effect.

[blocks in formation]

Source: "The Economic Impacts of Increased Aircraft Exports" prepared by Chase Econometrics/Interactive Data Corp., for the AIA, June 1982.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Source: "The Economic Impacts of Increased Aircraft Exports" prepared by Chase Econometrics/Interactive Data Corp., for the AIA, June 1982.

[blocks in formation]

Source: "The Economic Impacts of Increased Aircraft Exports" prepared by Chase Econometrics/Interactive Data Corp., for the AIA, June 1982.

Using these follow-on fleet assumptions is tantamount to assuming an increase of $1 billion in export sales of a new generation of aircraft or sales of an older model to a new customer. An example of this might be the sale of 12 767's and 16 757's to new customers, or the additional sale of 10 to 16 747's, or 15 DC10-30's.


Using the assumptions and methodology described above, Chase found that an initial increase of $1 billion in aircraft-related exports would add 44,000 full time equivalent (FTE) man-years in the aerospace industry. As a result of supplier sales and the multiplier effects describer earlier, the total impact of the $1 billion increase would be 148,000 FTE man-years during the period 1982-90. Table 11 shows the division of these man-years into various industries. Both the total impact and the average annual impact are presented.

Total gross industry output, which includes both intermediate and final sales, follows a pattern of impacts similar to that seen in employment. Table 12 depicts the distribution of the $10 billion total impact by industry.

The initial $1 billion generates a $6.5 billion increase in GNP over the period 1982-90. Almost half ($3 billion) of this reflects increased consumption resulting from the incremental direct and indirect wage earnings. Investment increases $1 billion over the baseline case. The remainder of the $6.5 billion GNP increase is due to a $2.4 billion increase in net exports. The initial increase leads to a total gain in exports of $3.3 billion and the nearly $0.9 billion increase in imports reflects the use of foreign-made aircraft components and other unrelated goods, such as those for individual consumption.

Table 13 shows the 1982 and total 1982-90 impact of aircraft exports on the U.S. GNP. As described above, such an increase in exports also has an impact on government receipts and expenditures through personal and corporate income taxes, social security receipts, state and local receipts, unemployment compensation payments and government interest expense. The 1982 impact on government budgets, excluding interest expense, is $400 million.

As shown in Table 14, the cumulative effect on government funds and spending for the nine-year period amounts to 2.7 billion current dollars or 2.05 billion in 1982 dollars. These figures include the impact on tax receipts and unemployment compensation. When the additional impact on government interest expenses are added to this, the total impact on the Federal Deficit is $3.7 billion (current $) or $2.4 billion (constant 1982 $).

[blocks in formation]

Source: "The Economic Impacts of Increased Aircraft Exports" prepared by Chase Econometrics/Interactive Data Corp., for the AIA, June 1982.


Senator Gorton and Members of the Subcommittee, I submit this statement to the subcommittee on behalf of the Space Science Working Group, a consortium of research universities which participate in NASA-sponsored space science programs. Let me begin by stating how we at the universities view the objectives of the U.S. Space Science and Exploration activity. The Space Science program

(a) Addresses scientific questions of the highest intellectual significance.

(b) Provides practical information about our own planet Earth.

(c) Stimulates the development of new technology.

(d) Brings worldwide recognition to the U.S. for its unchallenged leadership.

(e) Attracts young people to careers in science and engineering.

(f) Manifests a policy of cooperation with other nations.

(g) Is viewed with pride and satisfaction by the U.S. public.

Despite these positive attributes, federal support of space science and exploration has declined to dangerously low levels in the past half dozen years. This decline has damaged space science in the universities, because there are no alternative ways to support the undergraduate students, graduate students, postdoctoral research associates, engineers and technicians who carry out space science projects under the direction of faculty members.

NASA and industry look to the universities for fundamental conceptual advances in space instrumentation and research required to make spectactular discoveries. Further, the universities serve as the training ground for future generations of scientists and engineers who contribute the discoveries, innovation and new ideas so

essential to our technological leadership and economic well being. These scientists and engineers are employed not only in space-related activities, but mostly in industry and government where they contribute new concepts to solution of pressing technological problems. As an example, I recall the case of a recent graduate trained in space instrumentation who is currently working with a small company developing equipment for rapid measurement of sulfur content in coal, an essential tool in our efforts to clean our environment. Such innovations are essential to generating new jobs which are so important to our national economy today.

Last year, the U.S. Congress took positive action to stem the downward trend in space science and exploration. We are very grateful and encouraged by that action which augmented the proposed space science budget and, by doing so, prevented what would have been disastrous consequences for the space science research base in this country. In addition, we wish to commend this committee's actions in support of the Universities' participation in NASA's space science program.

We are also encouraged by the Administration's fiscal year 1984 federal research budget in general, and the NASA budget in particular, which promises the beginning of important progress toward revitalizing space science in the United States. This year, the President's Science Advisor has stressed the importance of federal support of basic research as a way to strengthen long-term industrial growth and national security. Dr. Keyworth has emphasized both knowledge and training as the important reasons for university-based research and has said that "America's universities are the core of our world leadership in science." We are pleased Mr. Chairman, to see political leaders of both parties espouse the view that research and development is the keystone to our economic viability, and indeed to our national survival as a modern industrial state.

I would like to comment on some very positive aspects of the NASA and space science budget for fiscal year 1984.

1. Funding for the Venus Radar Mapper, the first planetary new start in 5 years signifies NASA's commitment to a planetary program. This mission can be expected to have an important salutary effect on planetary space science in the universities. 2. There is a significant augmentation of the Explorer program which will provide an ongoing level of support of opportunities for small spaceflight experiments of the Principal Investigator class to be developed in universities and national laboratories.

3. Funding for the development of the Tethered Satellite system will provide a new Shuttle capability for conducting experiments in space in future years.

The funding of each of these projects as well as support for other ongoing missions and activities add up to a renewed commitment to a stronger national space program.


The Space Science Working Group has examined the proposed fiscal year 1984 NASA budget to determine its effect on space science, in particular the research carried out at universities. The budget lines which support university-based activities are Research and Analysis (R&A) and Mission Operations and Data Analysis (MO&DA). The adequate funding of these budget line items are critical to the conduct of basic research and scientific training and are relatively inexpensive to sustain in the context of the overall NASA budget.

To fulfill our commitment in strengthening research at the universities, i.e. fostering innovation, high technology, training of new talent, etc. we have identified some areas in the budget where a small augmentation is likely to result in significant scientific and technological advancements. We consider these augmentations to be critical to the vitality of space science at universities.

Planetary exploration research and analysis.

Physics and astronomy research and analysis.

Physics and astronomy mission operations and data analysis......
Environmental observations-Space Physics ATD research and analysis.








This $18 million augmentation is for the various budget lines which directly support experimental and theoretical research at universities as well as conceptual and experimental developments that form the basis of new missions.


This augmentation is for the basic planetary research programs. This basic research is an important component of the NASA space science program and, in part, represents the means by which results of spacecraft investigations are turned into real knowledge and understanding. The administration's request is $4.8 million below the Congressional appropriation for fiscal year 1983. The recommended augmentation will forestall large additional reductions in the nation's basic planetary research programs in universities and national laboratories, and will allow very modest steps toward restoring these programs to a minimally acceptable level of vigor. It will also permit a very modest start of an Outer Planets Data Analysis program. The regular mission operations funds allow for the basic reduction of raw data to a usable form and for preliminary interpretation by the spacecraft teams. This Data Analysis program will permit general access to and use of the data by the wider scientific community. Data analysis programs of this type provide the means of exploiting and developing information gained through spacecraft investigations, and an important way to bring new young scientists into the scientific program.



This augmentation is recommended for basic research programs. A major portion of R&A funding directly supports experimental and theoretical research at universities which interpret and disseminate the scientific results from flight programs. Another major portion supports the conceptual and experimental developments that form the basis for new missions. The congressional action of adding $2 million to the President's fiscal year 1983 budget for this line item has provided much needed support for rejuvenation of this vital area of NASA's basic research base. The recommended augmentation would restore support to approximately the fiscal year 1981 level, which was already seriously constrained.


This augmentation is recommended to fund the analysis of data from NASA's HEAO-2/Einstein satellite at current levels. The fiscal year 1984 budget proposes a 17 percent cut in this productive scientific program. HEAO-2 ceased operations in mid-1981; however, the 22 years of X-ray data it acquired will be the best available for most of the 1980's. The next major U.S. X-ray telescope-AXAF-will not be launched before 1990. Until then, the HEAO-2 funding represents a major source of support for scientists and students involved in X-ray astronomy at U.S. universities and research institutions.


This augmentation is recommended for the Advanced Technology Development (ATD) for the program Origin of Plasmas in the Earth's Neighborhood (OPEN). Although this line item has shown some nominal (3 percent) growth from fiscal year 1983 to fiscal year 1984, funding for the only effort in Advanced Technology Development, the OPEN program, has decreased from $3.5 million in fiscal year 1983 to a proposed $1.8 million in fiscal year 1984. The OPEN program represents the only major U.S. initiative in space plasma physics in this decade, with extensive involvement by University investigators in over 30 experiments. The proposed funding level of $1.8 million is insufficient to support these University teams in pursuit of further experiment definition activities. We deem it essential that these university teams continue to be supported.


In our opinion the $18 million augmentation to the fiscal year 1984 budget is crucial for space science at universities; however, there are additional problems confronting these areas of research to which we also call attention. The ultimate viability of university research programs in the space sciences requires that these problems also be addressed:

Planetary research and analysis-additional $8 million.-Restoring the planetary program to its already constricted fiscal year 1981 level of effort would require an augmentation to the proposed fiscal year 1984 budget of $19 million. The $11 million labeled as crucial above goes part way, but the remaining $8 million must ultimate

« PreviousContinue »