III. JOURNALS

III.A. Scopes and Scope Revisions

The scopes of all AIAA journals must be approved by the Publications Committee. Scopes may be updated from time to time, and this process usually is initiated by the Editors-in-Chief, although they do not have to be the source of suggested changes. The following sequence illustrates the normal scope revision process:

1. An Editor-in-Chief brings a suggested change to a meeting of Journal Editors.

2. The Editors discuss the change in relation to the scopes of all of the Institute journals. If necessary, they may recommend changes to one or more other journal scopes to complement the scope change of the first journal.

3. The Chair of the Journal Editors-in-Chief Subcommittee presents the suggested revision(s) to the full Publications Committee.

4. The Publications Committee discusses the merits of the revision(s) and formally approves or disapproves them. [Note: The Editors-in-Chief are ex officio members of the Publications Committee and do not participate in the actual balloting.]

5. The revised scope(s) are published in the next available journal issue(s). The Editor-in-Chief may, if desired, write an editorial calling attention to and giving the reason for the scope revision.

The current* official journal scopes are given in the Appendix. Short versions, approved by the Editors-in-Chief for use in promotional materials, are also given.

* As of May 1998.

Appendix: Journal Scopes

AIAA Journal (Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Peretz Friedmann, 3001 FXB Building 1320 Beal Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109; peretzf@umich.edu )

This Journal is devoted to the advancement of the science and technology of astronautics and aeronautics through the dissemination of original archival research papers disclosing new theoretical developments and/or experimental results. The topics include aeroacoustics, aerodynamics, combustion, fundamentals of propulsion, fluid mechanics and reacting flows, fundamental aspects of the aerospace environment, hydrodynamics, lasers and associated phenomena, plasmas, research instrumentation and facilities, structural mechanics and materials, optimization, and thermomechanics and thermochemistry. Papers also are sought which review in an intensive manner the results of recent research developments on any of the topics listed above.

Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication (Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Michael G. Hinchey, LERO, LRG-003, International Science Centre, Limerick, Ireland UK; mike.hinchey@lero.ie). This Journal is devoted to the applied science and engineering of aerospace computing, information, and communication. Original archival research papers are sought which include significant scientific and technical knowledge and concepts. The Journal publishes qualified papers in areas such as information technology, information assurance, data mining, real-time systems, computational techniques, embedded systems, communication systems, networking, software engineering, software reliability, systems engineering, systems of systems, signal processing, data fusion, computer architecture, high-performance computing systems and software, knowledge management, expert systems, sensor systems, robotics, intelligent and autonomous systems, and human–computer interfaces. Articles are sought which demonstrate the application of recent research in computing, information, and communications technology to a wide range of practical aerospace problems in the analysis and design of vehicles, onboard avionics, ground-based processing and control systems, flight simulation, and air transportation systems.

Journal of Aircraft (Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Thomas M. Weeks, 3157 Claydor Drive, Beavercreek, Ohio 45431-3307)

This Journal is devoted to the advancement of the applied science and technology of airborne flight through the dissemination of original archival papers describing significant advances in aircraft, the operation of aircraft, and applications of aircraft technology to other fields. The Journal publishes qualified papers on aircraft systems, air transportation, air traffic management, and multidisciplinary design optimization of aircraft, flight mechanics, flight and ground testing, applied computational fluid dynamics, flight safety, weather and noise hazards, human factors, airport design, airline operations, application of computers to aircraft including artificial intelligence/expert systems, production methods, engineering economic analyses, affordability, reliability, maintainability, and logistics support, integration of propulsion and control systems into aircraft design and operations, aircraft aerodynamics

(including unsteady aerodynamics), structural design/dynamics, and aeroacoustics. It includes international papers on general aviation, military and civilian aircraft, STOL and V/STOL, subsonic, supersonic, transonic, and hypersonic aircraft. Papers are sought which comprehensively survey results of recent technical work with emphasis on aircraft technology application.

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics (Editor-in-Chief: Dr. George T. Schmidt, Mail Stop 84, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc., 555 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA 02139-3563)

This Journal is devoted to the advancement of the science and technology of guidance, control, and dynamics through the dissemination of original archival papers disclosing significant technical knowledge, exploratory developments, design criteria, and applications in aeronautics, astronautics, celestial mechanics, and related fields. The Journal publishes qualified papers on dynamics, stability, guidance, control, navigation, optimization, electronics, avionics, and information processing related to aeronautical and astronautical and marine systems. Papers are sought which demonstrate the application of recent research to practical engineering problems. Papers that describe aspects of the dynamics and control of significant recent developments, such as a new or different aircraft or spacecraft, also are desired.

Journal of Propulsion and Power (Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Douglas Talley, U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory,10 E. Saturn Drive, Edwards Air Force Base, CA 93524; douglas.talley@edwards.af.mil)

This Journal is devoted to the advancement of the science and technology of aerospace propulsion and power through the dissemination of original archival papers contributing to advancements in airbreathing, electric, and advanced propulsion; solid and liquid rockets; fuels and propellants; power generation and conversion for aerospace vehicles; and the application of aerospace science and technology to terrestrial energy devices and systems. It is intended to provide readers of the Journal, with primary interests in propulsion and power, access to papers spanning the range from research through development to applications. Papers in these disciplines and the sciences of combustion, fluid mechanics, and solid mechanics as directly related to propulsion and power are solicited.

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets (Editor-in-Chief: Mr. E. Vincent Zoby, Mail Stop 408A, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681-0001)

This Journal is devoted to reporting advancements in the science and technology associated with spacecraft and tactical and strategic missile systems, including subsystems, applications, missions, environmental interactions, and space sciences. The Journal publishes original archival papers disclosing significant developments in spacecraft and missile configurations, re-entry devices, transatmospheric vehicles, systems and subsystem design and application, mission design and analysis, applied and computational fluid dynamics, applied aerothermodynamics, development of materials and structures

for spacecraft and missile applications, space instrumentation, developments in space sciences, space processing and manufacturing, space operations, interactions with spacecraft and sensors, design of sensors and experiments for space, and applications of space technologies to other fields. The context of the Journal also includes ground-support systems, manufacturing, integration and testing, launch control, recovery and repair, space communications, scientific data processing, and human and environmental factors in spacecraft and mission design. Papers also are sought which describe the effects of propulsion, guidance and control, thermal management, and structural systems on spacecraft and missile design and performance.

Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer (Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Alfred L. Crosbie, Thermal Radiative Transfer Group, 233 Mechanical Engineering Building, 1870 Miner Circle, University of Missouri–Rolla, Rolla, MO 65401)

This Journal is devoted to the advancement of the science and technology of thermophysics and heat transfer through the dissemination of original research papers disclosing new technical knowledge and exploratory developments and applications based on new knowledge. The Journal publishes qualified papers that deal with the properties and mechanisms involved in thermal energy transfer and storage in gases, liquids, and solids or combinations thereof. These studies include conductive, convective, and radiative modes alone or in combination and the effects of the environment.

Short Versions of Scopes

AIAA Journal

Discloses new theoretical developments and experimental results on topics such as aerodynamics, the aerospace environment, lasers and plasmas, fluid mechanics and reacting flows, and structural mechanics and materials.

Journal of Aerospace Computing, Information, and Communication

Publishes archival papers which demonstrate the application of recent research in computing, information, and communications technology to a wide range of practical aerospace problems in the analysis and design of vehicles, onboard avionics, ground-based processing and control systems, flight simulation, and air transportation systems.

Journal of Aircraft

Publishes archival papers on applied aircraft systems, design, operations, flight mechanics, flight and ground test, flight safety, computer applications, systems integration, aerodynamics, structures, and structural dynamics.

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics

Presents significant technical knowledge on topics such as dynamics, stability, guidance, control, navigation, optimization, electronics, and information processing, including applications of recent research to practical engineering problems.

Journal of Propulsion and Power

Contributes to advancements in airbreathing, electric, and advanced propulsion, solid and liquid rockets, combustion, fuels and propellants, power generation and conversion for aerospace vehicles, and terrestrial energy devices and systems.

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets

Covers advancements in spacecraft and tactical and strategic missile systems, including subsystem design and application, mission design and analysis, developments in space sciences, and applications of space technologies to other fields.

Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer

Contains research papers that deal with the properties and mechanisms involved in thermal energy transfer and storage in gases, liquids, and solids, including conductive, convective, and radiative modes alone or in combination.

III.B. New Editor-in-Chief Searches

The Publications Committee conducted two extensive, formal searches for new journal Editors-in-Chief. The procedures worked so well that they recommended documenting them for future use.

I. Search Committee

The first step is the formation of a Search Committee. A chair is appointed by the AIAA Vice President–Publications. The chair then forms a committee, preferably of six or seven individuals who are knowledgeable in the technical areas covered by the particular journal (and also knowledgeable in the general publications process). If possible, the group should include at least one current AIAA Editor-in-Chief, an editor of a competing journal, and the outgoing AIAA Editor-in-Chief (at least in an advisory capacity).

II. Evaluation Criteria

The chair circulates to the Search Committee an objective list of criteria to be used to evaluate the candidates. Suggested criteria are as follows:

1. Has the energy, initiative, management skills, judgment, and dedication to do the work required.

2. Has sufficient stature in the range of technical fields involved to be recognized and respected.

3. Has a clear view of the place held by the journal and a vision of what will be needed to maintain it.

4. Has the training and experience necessary to take advantage of the information revolution.

5. Has adequate organizational support for administration and travel.

6. Has demonstrated outstanding performance as an Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor.

If the journal has been reviewed by the Publications Review Subcommittee, a copy of that report may

also be sent to each member of the Search Committee. The chair may call attention to any portion of the review that is particularly significant or may ask the Committee to ignore any portion that is no longer relevant.

III. Call for Nominations

The chair sends letters to current and past Associate Editors of the journal, as well as to the Publications Committee, announcing the impending vacancy and requesting their suggestions of qualified candidates.

At the same time, announcements are published in Aerospace America and the technical journals inviting nominations for the open position. A sample follows:

Important Announcement: New Editor-in-Chief Sought for AIAA’s (Title) Journal

(Name), current Editor-in-Chief of the (Title) Journal, will relinquish his position on (Date). We are seeking a qualified candidate for this position and invite your nominations.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for receiving manuscripts, assigning them to Associate Editors for review and evaluation, and monitoring the performance of the Associate Editors to assure that the manuscripts are processed in a fair and timely manner. The Editor-in-Chief works closely with AIAA Headquarters staff on both general procedures and the scheduling of specific issues. Detailed record keeping and prompt actions are required. The Editor-in-Chief is expected to provide his or her own clerical support, although this may be partially offset by a small expense allowance. AIAA provides a computer, together with appropriate manuscript-tracking software.

Interested candidates are invited to send full résumés, including a complete list of published papers, to:

(HQ Staff Person)American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500Reston, VA 20191Fax (703) 264-7551

Two letters of recommendation also are required. The recommendations should be sent by the parties writing the letters directly to (Staff Person) at the above address or fax number. All materials must be received at AIAA Headquarters by (Date).

A selection committee will review the applications and will recommend qualified candidates to the AIAA Vice President–Publications, who in turn will present a recommendation to the AIAA Board of Directors for approval. All candidates will be notified of the final decision.

IV. Evaluation of Candidates

When the deadline for nominations/applications has past, the AIAA Publications Committee Staff Liaison prepares a package consisting of résumés and letters of recommendation for each candidate. These packages are sent to all members of the Search Committee for an initial evaluation. The chair then asks each Committee member to recommend the top few candidates (three is a reasonable number), including both outstanding strengths and weaknesses of each person selected. The chair ranks the responses and selects the top 4–6 nominees as finalists. The chair notifies all candidates of their status at this point. The finalists are then asked to provide detailed answers to a list of relevant questions, such as the following:

1. Why are you interested in being Editor-in-Chief of (Title) Journal?

2. What is your previous editorial experience?

3. How will you interact with the relevant AIAA Technical Committees?

4. What will you do to reverse trends of declining submittals and subscribers?

5. This position will require approximately two days per week to perform. Are you able to make this time commitment?

6. AIAA can provide up to approximately (dollar amount) per year in total office expense reimbursement, including clerical support. Can you accomplish the work within this budget?

7. AIAA cannot pay travel expenses. You will need to meet with your editorial team, the Publications Committee, and others each year. Will your employer provide the necessary travel support?

8. The future success of the (Title) Journal and the effectiveness of your work are strongly

linked to your ability to capitalize on advances in information technology. What related capabilities and experiences do you have in this field?

9. Do you have Internet access? Do you have sufficient computer skills to manage, maintain, and evolve the Filemaker Pro–based record-keeping system that is used to track manuscripts?

10. Please comment on any particular issue(s) facing the journal that you would make a priority. How would you address them?

V. Final Selection and Approval

The chair of the Search Committee circulates the responses of the finalists to all Committee members and asks them to rank-order the remaining candidates, giving detailed reasons for their top two selections.

The chair, in consultation with the Vice President–Publications, makes a final selection based upon the Committee recommendations. The full Publications Committee is then asked to approve the nomination. (Depending upon the timing, this step may be taken by mail, fax, or e-mail ballot.)

The Vice President–Publications asks the AIAA Board of Directors for final approval of the new Editor-in-Chief (required by the Bylaws to the AIAA Constitution).

The chair of the Search Committee and the Vice President–Publications jointly notify all finalists of the outcome.

III.C. Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor

Appointments and Reappointments

I. Editors-in-Chief

Appointments of Editors-in-Chief are initiated by the Vice President–Publications. Ideally, if there is time, a formal editor search is conducted (see section III.B). In any case, the Vice President usually seeks the approval, by formal vote, of the full Publications Committee (although that step is not required). The nomination of a new Editor-in-Chief must be ratified by the AIAA Board of Directors.

Reappointments require only the approval of the Vice President–Publications.

All appointments are for three-year terms, as set forth in the Bylaws to the AIAA Constitution. These terms are renewable indefinitely. Editors-in-Chief must be members of the Institute.

When appointments/reappointments have been approved, the AIAA Headquarters staff sends out formal letters, signed by the AIAA President. This is a sample:

Dear (Name):

(Name), AIAA Vice President–Publications and Chairman of the AIAA Publications Committee, has recommended that you be appointed Editor-in-Chief of (Title) Journal. It is indeed a pleasure for me to formalize that appointment, by means of this letter, for a three-year term effective (date).

AIAA is fortunate in having a proud publication history, and in this history its many dedicated Editors have played a most important role. As an Editor-in-Chief, charged with seeing that only the very best material is published in (Title) Journal, you will have a unique opportunity to serve your fellow engineers and scientists in the field of aerospace.

I am sure that you will find the position of Editor-in-Chief to be a challenging and stimulating one. I am deeply appreciative of your interest in AIAA and its publications. My best wishes to you in this new role.

Sincerely yours,

(Name)

AIAA President

To simplify the record-keeping process, every effort is made to begin all editorial terms on January 1 and end them on December 31. If a term must begin on some interim date, the initial appointment will be somewhat less than three full years so that it can still end on December 31 and then will be in cycle with other volunteer appointments.

All new Editors-in-Chief are sent guidelines, forms, and procedural information by the AIAA Headquarters staff.

II. Associate Editors

Appointments of Associate Editors are usually initiated by the Editor-in-Chief. Honoraria for a specific number of Associate Editors per journal are budgeted each year, and Editors-in-Chief are expected to stay within the budgeted number unless they have urgent reasons to appoint additional people. Associate Editor appointments require only the approval of the Vice President–Publications. They are not brought to the full Publications Committee for discussion.

Reappointments also require the approval of the Vice President–Publications.

As with Editors-in-Chief, all appointments are for three-year terms, as set forth in the Bylaws to the AIAA Constitution. These terms are renewable indefinitely. Associate Editors must be members of the Institute.

The AIAA Headquarters staff sends out formal letters, signed by the AIAA President. This is a sample:

Dear (Name):

(Name), AIAA Vice President–Publications, has approved the recommendation of (Name), Editor-in-Chief of (Title) Journal, that you be appointed an Associate Editor of that journal. It is indeed a pleasure for me to formalize the appointment by means of this letter for a three-year term effective (date). It is AIAA publications policy that your term of service be at the pleasure of the Editor-in-Chief.

As I am sure you know, AIAA is fortunate in having a proud publication history, and in this history its many dedicated Editors have played a most important role. As an Associate Editor, charged with seeing that only the very best material is published in the (Title) Journal, you will have a unique opportunity to serve your fellow engineers and scientists in the field of aerospace.

Sincerely yours,

(Name)

AIAA President

As with Editors-in-Chief, every effort is made to begin all editorial terms on January 1 and end them on December 31. If a term must begin on some interim date, the initial appointment will be somewhat less than three full years so that it can still end on December 31 and then will be in cycle with other volunteer appointments.

All new Associate Editors are sent guidelines, forms, and procedural information by the AIAA Headquarters staff.

III.D. Editor Compensation and Recognition

I. Honoraria

As provided in the Bylaws to the AIAA Constitution, Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors may receive honoraria. The monthly amounts are as follows*:

Editor-in-Chief, AIAA Journal $550 ($650 beginning FY11)

Editors-in-Chief, all other journals $450 ($485 beginning FY11)

Associate Editors $165 ($185 beginning FY11)

The payment for AIAA Journal is higher than the others because it is a monthly journal and has a larger backlog of manuscripts.

To streamline the accounting process, honoraria checks are issued bimonthly in double the amounts given above. Recipients must provide their social security numbers, and they are issued IRS 1099 forms at the end of each calendar year.

II. Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor Expenses

A total of $25,000 is budgeted each year* to reimburse Editors-in-Chief for office supplies and necessary clerical assistance. The amount is allocated to each journal based on the total budgeted pages (e.g., if 35% of all journal pages are assigned to AIAA Journal, then that Editor-in-Chief is entitled to a maximum of 35% of the $25,000 reimbursement amount). In accordance with AIAA Board of Directors policy, there is no reimbursement of travel expenses.

* As of May 1998.

Both Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors may be reimbursed for postage expenses, with no dollar limit to the reimbursement.

Editors must submit receipts for all expenses for which reimbursement is requested. Expense requests should be submitted (preferably) monthly, or at least quarterly. Under no circumstances will a reimbursement request be considered if it is submitted more than six months after the date the expense was incurred.

III. Plaques

When an Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor retires, he/she is presented with a plaque commemorating his/her service to the Institute, provided that he/she has served at least one full three-year term and is retiring in good standing. (Similar plaques are presented to the authors of survey papers.)

III.E. AIAA Associate Editors’ Handbook

The main text of this information booklet, which is provided to all Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors, is reproduced here (without the numerous attachments and form letters):

AIAA Associate Editors’ Handbook: Information and Procedures

GeneralAIAA extends a warm welcome to you as a journal Associate Editor. You have been selected on the basis of your expertise in your particular field and will be relied upon heavily for your judgment in selecting worthwhile papers for the journal. Your responsibilities as an Associate Editor occasionally will make heavy demands on your time, but hopefully the information presented here will clarify those responsibilities, as well as those of the Editors-in-Chief, Reviewers, and AIAA Staff. Feel free to consult your Editor-in-Chief if you have policy questions on topics not covered here.

Much of your work will be accomplished using ScholarOne Manuscripts, AIAA’s new online manuscript tracking system (ScholarOne Manuscripts will replace AIAA’s old system, WriteTrack, in 2009-2010.) The Associate Editor ScholarOne Manuscripts User Guide, with detailed instructions, is available at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/aiaa. All of the instructions and forms cited in this document also are available at that location. AIAA Staff will be happy to answer any questions you may have on these policies and procedures.

Responsibilities of Associate EditorsWhen you undertake the responsibility of being an Associate Editor, you are agreeing to process papers both competently and promptly. This commitment, although voluntary, is of the highest priority and must be taken seriously.

You control the technical quality of the journals in your field; please make your decisions with this in mind. To be useful, and to be fair to authors, the papers must be published as soon as possible. Therefore, please act promptly on your papers, using the guidelines given in Table 1. Table 2 summarizes the responsibilities of the Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Reviewers, and AIAA Staff.

Table 1 Timetable for Processing Manuscriptsa,b

Task Time allowed

Full-Length Papers:

Associate Editor selects reviewers and forwards them manuscripts 3 days

Reviewers submit reports 3 weeks

Associate Editor informs author of evaluation following receipt of review reports 1 week

Author revises manuscript 4 weeks

Associate Editor checks revised manuscript (re-review allowed only in cases of extreme revision or controversy) and/or evaluates author rebuttal, if applicable

3 days

Notes and Design Forum (DF papers for Journal of Aircraft only):

Associate Editor processes Note (formal review not required) 1 week

aThis timetable is used to determine delinquency (with a short grace period). The reference date is the date your Editor-in-Chief first assigns you the manuscript.

bSee also the Acceptance Procedures for Archive Journals of AIAA.

18

Table 2 Division of Responsibilities

Editor-in-Chief (EIC) Associate Editor (AE) Reviewer AIAA Journals Staff

19

Table 2 Division of Responsibilities

) Acknowledges new submission via ScholarOne Manuscripts and glances through it, checking general quality, importance to technical community, and compliance with editorial specifications; checks manuscript word count (or may have AE check count); if appropriate to scope of the journal, forwards to AE for that field, using ScholarOne Manuscripts, informing him or her of any outstanding issues; if not appropriate to scope, informs author (and may propose transfer to another journal if the other EIC agrees) and withdraws from consideration; enters necessary data on each manuscript into ScholarOne Manuscripts

2) In cases of policy or other disagreement between AE and reviewers and/or authors, may be called upon to arbitrate dispute

3) Makes certain that all AEs perform their duties competently and promptly

4) Makes recommendations for new AEs or reappointment of those

1) Checks manuscript word count (if not done by EIC); using ScholarOne Manuscripts, forwards manuscript to 2 or 3 reviewers competent in field; prods reviewers when reports are overdue

2) Evaluates review report; sends reviewer automated “thank you” e-mail message via ScholarOne Manuscripts

3) Forwards review reports (if appropriate) and clear revision instructions to author via ScholarOne Manuscripts; prods author when revised manuscript is overdue

4) Checks revised manuscript and/or rebuttal and informs author if decision is to decline or (in very extreme cases) revise further; if decision is to accept, notifies both the author and the AIAA Staff of acceptance via ScholarOne Manuscripts

5) Makes decision on Readers’ Forum

1) Checks manuscript for accuracy, length (too brief or too long), and quality

2) Enters review report into ScholarOne Manuscripts

1) Confirms acceptance to author via ScholarOne Manuscripts e-mail, and directs author to required forms accessible via ScholarOne Manuscripts; forwards manuscript to composition vendor; schedules manuscript for an upcoming issue

2) Supervises all phases of actual production of journal

3) Tracks journal

20

Table 2 Division of Responsibilities

whose terms have expired

papers, Notes, Design Forum papers, and Comments; notifies author and AIAA Staff of decision via ScholarOne Manuscripts

backlogs

21

The Editors-in-Chief monitor the performance of all Associate Editors. It is essential that you effectively use ScholarOne Manuscripts to process and track the progress of each manuscript and that you avoid unreasonable delays. Associate Editors who are frequently slow may be replaced.

AIAA is aware of the burden of your responsibility and appreciates your willingness to undertake it. The quality of the journals could not be maintained without your hard work. You can take justifiable pride in the final result.

Manuscript EvaluationAs an Associate Editor, you have several choices for disposition of a manuscript:

1) Publish without revision.

2) Publish, but with minor revision.

3) Publish, but with major revision.

4) Propose to Editor-in-Chief (EIC) a transfer to one of AIAA’s other journals.

5) Recommend changing the manuscript from a Full-Length Paper to a Technical or Engineering Note.

6) Decline to publish. (Avoid using the word “rejected.”)

7) Withdraw the manuscript. (This option may be used when an inordinate amount of time has elapsed in the revision process and attempts to elicit a response from the author have failed.)

The key question is whether or not the manuscript makes a significant contribution to the scientific and engineering literature. Is the manuscript worthy of preserving for five years? A decade? If the manuscript is a trivial extension, is not original work, has been published elsewhere, has conceptual or analytical flaws, or treats an inconsequential problem, do not accept it for publication. Some editorial manuscript deficiencies are listed in the “Manuscript Specifications” subsection, which follows.

If moderate or major revision is required, do not promise or imply that the revision will be accepted automatically for publication. Word your request for such revisions so that the author knows that only a revision that covers the points in your evaluation satisfactorily will be accepted. (See the sample evaluations in Section II.)

Your online evaluation of each paper is submitted to the author via ScholarOne Manuscripts. It should contain 1) your technical evaluation and instructions to the author, including all or portions of the reviewers’ comments, as appropriate, and 2) your editorial guidelines to the author, in the form of the Action Checklist. In your technical evaluation, specifically state everything you want done. Do not be overly brief. Erring on the side of writing too much is

22

preferable to skimpy instructions. If some reviewer remarks are more important than others, or if you need to clarify what you want done with some, number the comments and say exactly what the author should do with each. If remarks of two reviewers could be interpreted as conflicting (whether or not they are), include only the remarks you feel are relevant in your instructions to the author.

On the Action Checklist, you should mark the “Ethical Standards for Publication of Aeronautics and Astronautics Research,” “Numerical Accuracy and Experimental Uncertainty,” “Manuscript Style and Format,” and any editorial instructions that may benefit the author; he or she then will have access to the appropriate information through direct links.

Do not ask the Editor-in-Chief whether a manuscript should be accepted or declined. You are expected to make the decision yourself because you are likely to comprehend the technical issues better than the Editor-in-Chief. If there is a problem, e-mail the Editor-in-Chief with your decision, recommendation, and description of the problem. When a manuscript is declined, the evaluation must include specific and objective reasons. Be aware that occasionally an author might submit a paper containing classified material; question the author if there is any hint that a paper might be classified.

Any paper that has been published elsewhere cannot be published again in an AIAA journal. (This does not apply to AIAA conference papers, which may be reviewed and revised following our normal procedures.) Prior publication usually applies to any paper that has been critically reviewed, is copyrighted by some entity, appears in a copyrighted volume, or is widely distributed or widely available (such as individually for sale over the Internet). Papers that fall into these categories usually need to be revised substantially in order to be considered “original submissions.” Some authors hope that, by submitting such papers for peer review, the resulting final paper will qualify as original material because of the review and revision process. This is fallacious thinking. It is not the job of the editors or reviewers to help create an original paper; that is the author’s responsibility. There are many borderline cases, however, and in these you must use your own judgment. You may, if you suspect that the work is not original, ask the author for a copy of the previous paper and request him or her to identify changes. If you have any doubts, consult your Editor-in-Chief.

Because the changes that you or the reviewers have requested may be difficult to find in the revision, you can check the last box on the Action Checklist, which asks the author to explain in the re-submittal, point by point, where he or she has accounted for each of your requests, or the reasons for not doing so. This potentially can save you much effort when you are evaluating the revised manuscript. Check the revision carefully. Only in very exceptional cases should the manuscript be sent for re-review or re-revision.

Before you accept a manuscript, PLEASE make sure that all requested revisions have been completed by the author. The accepted PDF in ScholarOne Manuscripts is used by Beacon (our composition vendor) as the authoritative version of the manuscript during the copyediting and production process. If the source file uploaded by the author contains revisions made after acceptance, it creates confusion and extra work for the vendor.

Your Editor-in-Chief usually will expect you to handle Technical Comments and Replies without formal review. Remember to process any paper commenting on another paper as a Comment, not a Note. All Comments must be sent to the original author so that he or she can

23

prepare a Reply if desired. Notify the AIAA Staff if you are unable to obtain complete contact information for the original author from ScholarOne Manuscripts.

When you determine the final disposition of a manuscript (accept or decline), notify both the author and the AIAA Staff of your decision, using ScholarOne Manuscripts.

The AIAA Staff will handle publication upon receipt of your notification. The staff will communicate with the author regarding materials required for publication (source files, copyright and subject index forms) publication charges, reprint orders, will send the paper for copyediting and composition, and will inform the author when the article is scheduled for an upcoming journal issue.

Manuscript SpecificationsIn order to evaluate each manuscript thoroughly, Associate Editors should be familiar with

the requirements outlined in the Manuscript Style and Format instructions. Common deficiencies or problems with manuscripts are found in the following areas:

1) Title: Titles of papers should be no more than 12 words and should contain no acronyms or abbreviations. They are often too long; sometimes they do not reflect the contents of the paper. If a title is too long, try to suggest a shortened version.

2) Authors: To protect the integrity of authorship, only persons who have significantly contributed to the research and paper presentation should be listed as authors. Others may be thanked in the Acknowledgments section. The listing of more than six authors must be approved by the Associate Editor or Editor-in-Chief. Before you accept a paper, please ensure that you have approved the listing of more than six authors, if applicable.

3) Abstract: Each Full-Length Paper must have a one-paragraph abstract (summary) of not less than 100 or more than 200 words. History of Key Technologies papers and special lectures also include abstracts. (Survey Papers, however, include biographies of the authors instead of abstracts.) The abstract must state clearly the subject of the paper and the objectives of the investigation. The most important newly observed facts and conclusions should be stated. It should be a summary (not an introduction!), complete in itself (no mention of references, figures, etc.), and it should contain no acronyms or abbreviations. The abstract should be written using third person instead of first person (i.e., “The experiments were performed” versus “We performed the experiments…”).A good abstract should convey to the reader the essential information even if he or she does not have access to the full paper or does not have time to read it. A so-called abstract that has numerous sentences such as “The results are discussed in the paper,” or “Various test data are given,” or “Conclusions are presented” is nothing but a promissory note. It is not a “stand-alone” abstract. Do not accept an abstract that fails this test. When requesting revisions from an author whose abstract is deficient, you may use the Action Checklist to link him or her to the Preparation of an Abstract instructions.

4) Nomenclature: A Nomenclature section is required for papers containing more than a few symbols; nomenclature definitions then should not be repeated in the text. More complete guidelines are given in the Manuscript Style and Format instructions.

5) Introduction: The introduction must indicate the motive for the topic and put it into perspective with previously published, publicly available work. The archival contribution of the paper must be made clear in the context of this previous work. If a paper is analytically oriented,

24

the introduction also should contain an explanation of how, where, and why the method would be used in an actual engineering situation.

6) Length Specifications: Papers frequently are too long. Although there is no rigid length limitation for Full-Length Papers, they must be as brief and concise as proper presentation of the ideas will allow. Authors usually enter the initial word count of papers as they are submitted via ScholarOne Manuscripts (generally by means of the automatic word-count function of the software program used to prepare the manuscript). Approximate normal length limits (including equations) are as follows:

a) Full-Length Paper: 10,000–12,000 words

b) Technical/Engineering Note: 2500 words

c) Technical Comment: 1200 words

d) Survey Paper: 18,000–20,000 words

e) History of Key Technologies or Special Lecture: to be determined by the EIC

f) Design Forum Papers: 10,000-12,000 words

A normal-sized drawing, photograph, or table counts as 200 words. Complicated flow charts or diagrams may be estimated at 300–400 words, as should multipart figures and oversized tables. These numbers should be added to the author’s original word count to estimate the total paper length.

If the manuscript is overly long but otherwise has technical merit, ask for a revised manuscript of proper length. Be sure that an approximate reduction percentage is noted in the ScholarOne Manuscripts e-mail message that is forwarded to the reviewers. An extremely long paper may be returned to the author for shortening prior to review.

A paper with an acceptable word count may be too long! If the paper is poorly organized, uses too much space in roundabout explanations, or focuses on extraneous material, it is too long. When asking for reductions, give guidelines to authors in the ScholarOne Manuscripts e-mail message as to what material you believe can be deleted. Figures take up a great deal of space. Be sure all figures are necessary. (Can a figure be replaced by a paragraph of text?)

Keep in mind that the revised manuscript may vary in length from the original, and particular attention should be paid to the length of the accepted version. Accepted manuscripts should not significantly exceed the stated guidelines without approval from your Editor-in-Chief.

On rare occasions, an unusually long manuscript may be justified. If you recommend acceptance of such a manuscript, contact your Editor-in-Chief for his or her approval. When the paper is accepted, be sure to indicate to AIAA Staff, in the Comments field of ScholarOne Manuscripts, that the over-length paper has been approved.

7) General Content Specifications: The Editor-in-Chief frequently suggests changes in his or her initial comments to the Associate Editor. Be sure to incorporate his or her suggestions in your evaluation to the author.

25

The English in some papers is unacceptable. The author should be instructed to improve it in the revision. If there is an identifiable problem, such as incorrect use of articles or tenses, specifically inform the author. If English is not the author’s primary language, ask him or her to have the paper edited by a colleague who is a native English speaker. Be as polite and gentle as possible, while still making your point, so that you do not offend the author. You may also wish to request that a member of the International Advisory Board for your journal (if applicable) review the paper for proper use of English; consult your Editor-in-Chief regarding this option.

Organizational names do not belong in the text of an archival paper. They should be deleted (with a few exceptions, such as when established, major research facilities are included). Commercial overtones also must be deleted, as well as any programmatic material such as who sponsored whom for what work. This information may be placed in the Acknowledgments.

In the same spirit, be cautious about papers describing computer programs that are proprietary and for which the key references are carefully controlled by the author’s employer. If the computer program must be purchased to be used, such papers can amount to thinly disguised sales brochures.

8) Acknowledgments: Financial support (through a grant or contract) and/or sponsor information may be acknowledged in this section. Those who contributed to the paper or to the research documented, but who were not actually authors, also may be thanked. Papers presented at non-AIAA meetings may be mentioned here (not in the paper’s first footnote).

Full names should be used, if possible, and titles such as “Dr.” or “Professor” should not be used. It is not appropriate to thank clerical help for assistance. Personal (as opposed to professional) acknowledgments are never allowed.

9) References: References are frequently incomplete. They should be prepared in accordance with the Reference Format instructions; please familiarize yourself with this instruction sheet. Although the journals accept references to company reports, references to widely available publications in archival journals are preferred. Classified or export-restricted references, personal/private communications, personal Web sites, and Web sites where there is no commitment to archiving are not to be used as references. They may be cited in the text or in footnotes and the date of citation must be included.

Some authors cite only their own work; this frequently indicates lack of interest and lack of knowledge about other work. Other authors fail to cite papers extending back even five years. Occasionally authors reinvent a theory that can be found in early classics such as Durand’s Aerodynamic Theory. If only last year’s papers are cited, be suspicious. References reflect the thoroughness of manuscript preparation.

10) Units of Measure: Metric (or dual) units are preferred for all journals and are mandatory for AIAA Journal and Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer. Units should be consistent; many manuscripts switch from English to metric and back. Authors should use one system (or dual dimensions) consistently.

11) Mathematics: Consult the Mathematics section of the Manuscript Style and Format instructions. Pay particular attention to guidelines for the use of boldface, italic, and Roman type in mathematics. Also note that layers of subscripts and superscripts are time-consuming to compose and should be simplified if possible.

26

12) Illustrations: Authors can submit artwork in any format. Lettering on illustrations must be at least 1/16 in. high (0.16 cm) when reduced to column width (3.25 in. or 8.25 cm). Be inflexible; insist on adequate lettering, including the subscripts and superscripts. Discourage the use of very small and very large type in the same illustration, as it is impossible to reduce these figures uniformly and still maintain readability. Figures also should be designed to minimize wasted space. (See sample figures with good and poor lettering at the end of this document.)

Flow charts of computer programs are rarely archival material, since it is the method, not the particular computer program mechanization, that usually makes publishable material. Accordingly, consider each flow chart a prime candidate for deletion.

Photographs of equipment and test setups are usually of limited use and are seldom archival. Consider them as prime candidates for deletion. Diagrams usually are more readable in the journal. If a diagram can convey the information equally well or better than a photograph, ask the author to provide one.

Color artwork should be evaluated to determine whether the color is essential to the interpretation of the data. Authors are informed when they submit their manuscripts that they will be responsible for covering all expenses associated with printing in color. When a paper with color figures is accepted, then an estimate of the color printing costs will be sent to the author when acceptance is confirmed by AIAA Staff.

ReviewersYou may select either two or three reviewers for Full-Length Papers. Consult your Editor-in-

Chief to determine the number he or she prefers you to use. Generally, if you are familiar with the subject of a Full-Length Paper, send it to two reviewers; if you are less familiar, select three. Each of the reviewers you choose will have access to the manuscript and the reviewer score sheet within ScholarOne Manuscripts. Technical and Engineering Notes often are reviewed only by the Associate Editor, as they are intended for prompt publication.

Ask potential reviewers to confirm their availability before you assign manuscripts to them; telephone calls are strongly recommended. Although this may seem troublesome, in the long run it will save you countless hours spent in tracking down reviewers from whom you did not receive prior agreement. All reviewers should be instructed to download both “Ethical Standards for Publication of Aeronautics and Astronautics Research” and “Numerical Accuracy and Experimental Uncertainty.” Allow the reviewers three weeks to review the manuscript. Tardy reviewers should be prodded promptly. If four weeks have elapsed and you have only one review, proceed on the basis of the one review. This assumes that the one is competently done. (If it is not, you will have to select new reviewers.) Occasionally reviewers simply check off the boxes on the reviewer score sheet; merely checking boxes yields a worthless review.

Keep in mind, however, that you are the final judge of each paper. You may overrule the reviewers, if you wish, or choose not to send the author a particular review report. If you are in doubt about a manuscript even after thorough review, you probably should decide in favor of the author. Remember that the author bears responsibility for what he or she publishes long after the reviewers have forgotten about it.

There are several techniques for finding reviewers:

27

1) To search for reviewers in S1, AEs can use the Quick Search to find a reviewer by name or the Advanced Search to look up anyone who has reviewer privileges, has few papers assigned, and/or has relevant subject interests. He or she can also do a Related Papers Lookup to find reviewers and authors of papers with a similar subject matter. All of these options will appear on the select/invite/assign reviewers tab in a manuscript’s details.

2) Consult the list of preferred/non-preferred reviewers submitted to ScholarOne Manuscripts by most authors when their papers are submitted. Associate Editors can view preferred reviewers for a manuscript under “Author-Supplied Data” in the Manuscript Information section of each manuscript’s record in ScholarOne. Be cautious in the use of these reviewers, since the preferred reviewers are likely to be friends of the author. Use these names for not more than one out of three reviews. The names can be more useful for other papers in that particular field rather than for the paper by the author who submitted the names.

3) Look at the reference list; people who are cited in the paper are likely reviewers.

4) Thumb through past issues of journals or the year-end journal index to find individuals who have published on the same topic.

5) Ask your colleagues to recommend reviewers.

6) Consult your current list of AIAA Technical Committee members in the Technical Activities Information Manual, which is sent to all Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors by the AIAA Staff. E-mail or telephone appropriate Technical Committee members, and ask them to nominate reviewers and to identify specific interests.

Do not select reviewers from the author’s local organization. Reviewers need not be members of AIAA. In selecting reviewers, avoid using the world’s foremost expert; he or she is frequently too busy. You may wish to use a disciple.

Input any new reviewers you have identified into ScholarOne Manuscripts database.Record Keeping

ScholarOne Manuscripts will keep track of the status of manuscripts as actions are taken. In this way, both you and your Editor-in-Chief are aware of the disposition of manuscripts in your care at all times. You must keep your records current by taking appropriate actions punctually. Because you are taking on an obligation to authors to handle their manuscripts promptly, your Editor-in-Chief will contact you to take corrective action if your assigned manuscripts are not progressing through the system.

Your Editor-in-Chief will enter key comments or information about the paper into the paper’s Manuscript Information, under “Notes,” and ScholarOne Manuscripts will record the date the paper is assigned to you. This date will be the key date for monitoring the progress of the paper. Table 1 gives the times allotted to each step of the process. A small margin is added to each stage to allow for unforeseen circumstances. If this time elapses without data entries showing that the appropriate action has been taken, you are considered overdue on that action. For instance, if you have not forwarded a paper for review within three days (plus margin) of when your Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to you, that action will be declared overdue by ScholarOne Manuscripts.

Three important types of data will be captured by ScholarOne Manuscripts:

28

1) Dates on which you took actions, such as assigning manuscripts to reviewers, and on which you made decisions.

2) Decisions such as Accept, Revise, etc.

3) Reviewer names, to include first name (or initials) and last name, and reviewer performance ratings. As you build your database of reviewers, be sure to use the correct spelling for reviewer names and to include usernames, passwords, and professional interest codes for all reviewers. The system will keep track of reviewers and their ratings so that they can be used again (by you and other Associate Editors) and so that an accurate, annual reviewer list can be prepared for publication.

29

II. Correspondence and Instruction Documents

ScholarOne Manuscripts features automated e-mails (which you can edit) and downloadable instructions to facilitate your work. The e-mails should be self-explanatory as you navigate through the various processes involved in 1) tracking manuscripts, and 2) moving them, step by step, from submittal through your final decision to accept or decline.

All instruction documents are accessible on ScholarOne Manuscripts (http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/aiaa).

Those documents contain detailed (and in some cases mandatory) information—primarily for authors but also, in particular instances, for reviewers. They are described here:

1) Ethical Standards for Publication of Aeronautics and Astronautics Research

This is, arguably, AIAA’s most important publications-related document. It is a definitive publication ethics guideline for editors, authors, and reviewers. You should refer all of your authors and reviewers to it as “required reading.”

2) Editorial Policy Statement on Numerical and Experimental Accuracy

This policy statement clarifies AIAA’s definition of acceptable standards for presentation of numerical and experimental results. It should be required reading for all of your authors and reviewers.

3) Journal Scopes

This gives the complete scopes of all AIAA journals. It is useful to authors who need some guidance as to which journal would be most appropriate for their papers.

4) Acceptance Procedure for Archive Journals of AIAA

This explains in detail the steps of manuscript processing, including peer review, revision, due consideration of author rebuttals, and the final editorial decision to accept or decline. It is informally referred to as the Author’s Bill of Rights. It also is very useful for Associate Editors.

5) Paper Type Definitions

These are descriptions and length requirements for each type of paper published in AIAA technical journals. It is for the information of authors.

6) Information for Contributors to Journals of the AIAAThis guides authors through the basic requirements for their original submissions, including

primary paper types, titles, mathematics, references, illustrations, tables, and symbols and units. It also is published on the inside back covers of all print journals.

7) Manuscript Style and Format

The emphasis of this document is on the detailed formatting of papers. All of the information is not necessary for original submissions. You definitely should refer authors to this document when you request their revised manuscripts.

8) Submission of AIAA Conference Papers to Journals

This document is directed specifically to authors of AIAA conference papers. It includes basic submission instructions and a description of archival criteria.

9) Preparation of an AbstractThis outlines abstract content and length specifications. Refer authors to these instructions if

their abstracts are deficient.

10) Preparation of a Biography

Biographies are required (in lieu of abstracts) for all Survey Papers and are optional for Full-Length Papers in the Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics (if there are three or fewer authors). Refer authors to these instructions if needed.

11) Reference Format

This document gives detailed instructions for the formatting of all types of references, including citations of electronic media. Refer all authors to these instructions when you request their revised manuscripts.

12) Page Proof Instructions

This explains to authors how to make any corrections or necessary changes to the final page proofs of their papers, which they will receive directly from AIAA’s composition vendor.

13) Reprint Orders

This form may be used by authors to order reprints of their papers if they do not pay the optional publication charges.

III. Sample Evaluations

The examples that follow show the scope of comments and the types of details that might be included in an Associate Editor’s evaluation and instructions to an author.

Example 1—Specific Guidelines for RevisionSubject to satisfactory major revision, your paper will be accepted for publication in JSR. The

paper seems overly long and unnecessarily wordy and should be reduced to 10,000–12,000 words. As an example, Figures 1, 3, and 4 can be combined into one basic figure with dashed lines indicating major configuration differences. If the oil flow photographs represent the best available, they should be deleted because the reproduction is not sufficiently clear to permit observation of the points made. A concise description of the patterns observed in the photographs will suffice. A major concern is created by the figures illustrating the M = 4, R = 1 106 data. From DMS-DR-2069 the accuracies for these data are quoted as pitching moment – 0.0605; rolling moment – 0.0151; and yawing moment – 0.0151. The scales used on the figures illustrating these data are far smaller than justified by the quoted accuracies. Comments on trends observed are completely misleading since these trends occur within the data accuracy. Also, if the data shown in Figure 26 are from CFHT, the scale is much too small. Please make certain that the symbol size is at least as large as the appropriate data accuracy (i.e., change scales).

Comments of two technical reviewers aimed at reducing the length of the paper and improving the quality are provided for your consideration. Please follow the recommendations of the reviewers wherever possible, and indicate your changes in the comments accompanying your revised paper; where it is not possible to follow the recommendations, please explain why not.

Example 2—Gentle RejectionAlthough the paper deals with an area of interest to a narrow segment of JSR readers, the

reviewers do not feel it is sufficiently novel to warrant archive publication in JSR. Our readers are more concerned with application of a technique to a specific problem than an extension of the method used in Reference 7. We recommend that the authors submit the paper to a more appropriate journal.

Example 3—Rejection with Specific ReasonsIt will not be possible to publish your paper in the JSR. The technical editors feel that little

novel material is presented to the spacecraft specialist and that the subject matter is too narrow to warrant a survey paper for the nonspecialist. While the editors found the material interesting, we felt that it was too tutorial in nature for an archive journal.

Example 4—Interpretation of Reviewers’ Comments

Subject to satisfactory major revisions, your paper will be published in the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets. Two technical review reports are provided for your consideration. Please follow the recommendations wherever possible, and indicate your changes in the comments accompanying your revised paper; where it is not possible to follow the recommendations, please explain why not. It is not unusual to receive conflicting recommendations from reviewers relative to whether or not a paper should be published. In this case, however, there is agreement that major revisions are required. Reviewer 1 essentially feels that the paper fails to delineate and quantitatively assess basic flow concepts. This criticism can be overcome by revision. Reviewer 2 feels that the paper is too detailed and suggests a clear statement of the problem and a presentation of the major results and conclusions. This criticism is justified; while the introduction establishes the complexity of the problem, it fails to establish for the uninitiated reader the importance of the problem—i.e., launcher performance, etc.

One approach that might significantly improve the paper would be to exclude the many details of the flight 12 data, which only lead to conjecture about what might have happened during the test. The emphasis should be placed on the significance or consequences of the valid data that were obtained.

The use of certain specialized terminology (Rip-Zap, etc.) in the Abstract should be avoided. A nomenclature section must be provided.

Example 5—Rejection Encouraging Resubmittal at a Later TimeAs suggested by the reviewer, this paper has been declined for publication due to a lack of

sufficiently new material to warrant publication at this time. There is of course a continuing interest among the community in the development of the colloid thruster system, especially as it gets closer to its projected flight date. The next milestone where publication may be appropriate (barring substantial and previously unreported performance improvements) might be an extended test of the complete thruster module.

Example 6—Conditional Acceptance with Detailed RequirementsPending a revision that satisfactorily accommodates the several points made by the

reviewers, this paper will be accepted for publication in JSR. Regarding the material presented and the format, option 1 of review #2 should be followed; i.e., provide a complete report on the ATS-6 experiment. This will entail deletion of any lengthy description of possible remedies and will thus satisfy comment 6 in review #1.

Other instructions for revision are as follows:

1) Either delete Fig. 2 or replace it with a suitable schematic of the thruster.

2) Delete Fig. 5 and the associated text.

3) The editorial suggestions of reviewer #2 are good. They should be adopted everywhere except at the bottom of p. 6 and top of p. 7. In addition, I would suggest that you carefully check your entire paper for correct spelling and grammar.

4) Use mks or dual units if possible.

5) Update the results wherever appropriate or necessary.

6) A summary paragraph must be added.

Finally, the concern of reviewer #2, as stated in his last paragraph, could be alleviated by some statements, perhaps in the summary, that put the results of this flight in the proper context of the overall E. P. Program.

Example 7—Revision Guidelines, Including Writing Style RequirementsThis paper requires substantial revision before it can be accepted for publication in JSR. Not

only have several technical questions been raised by the reviewers (one of whom wants to see the revision), but also the writing style itself is very loose, and in many places it is not clear what point the authors are trying to make.

Regarding the technical comments, the authors will have to appraise the reviewers’ remarks and incorporate appropriate changes in the revision. Those suggestions that cannot be accommodated should be addressed in your comments accompanying the revised paper.

In addition, for an archival publication, data should be completely reduced and the message made clear. The footnote on p. 7 is cause for concern. The authors should not revise this paper until data analysis is complete and the results are unambiguous.

Concerning the writing style, the purpose of each section and paragraph and their places in the overall structure of the paper should be firmly established, and the text should reach this goal clearly and concisely. Standard symbols and notation should be used, and mks or dual units—mks (English)—are preferred.

Example 8—Specific and Thorough Revision InstructionsConsiderable revision and deletion are required prior to consideration of the paper as an

Engineering Note in JSR. This Note should be based on the data obtained. The Introduction and Experimental Set-Up sections must be shortened, together with deletion of Figs. 1 and 2; and reference must be made to the authors’ Ref. 12 for details. Some justification for a portion of the procedure is required: for instance, is regression rate constant? Are throat diameter and chamber pressure constant? If so, what about variation in rate with G0? Is the thermal transition time of the polymer short compared with 10 seconds? A serious question concerns the assumption of constant oxygen flow rate, since the injector is apparently operating unchoked for some pressures.

The data should be plotted against G, as is standard hybrid-rocket procedure, and compared with previous studies. The discussion of the axial variation of regression rate (p. 7) is unclear and unsubstantiated, and should be deleted.

Several of the figures should be combined because of the interrelation of several of the operating parameters and test results (comments no. 9 and 12).

Reference 6 appeared in the August issue of JSR. Reference 3 is incorrect. Remaining references should be checked closely. Finally, it is suggested that the authors have a colleague

whose native language is English review the revised manuscript prior to submission for use of articles and correctness of verb number.

III.F. Acceptance Procedures for Archive Journals of AIAA*

The Institute publishes six archival journals. If an Editor-in-Chief of a journal believes that a paper should be submitted to a different AIAA journal of more suitable scope, the paper will be returned to the author with that recommendation. In the journals, material may be published in one of the following forms: Survey Paper (broad review of literature in specific field), Full Paper (including abstract), Note (short paper disclosing new, significant data or developments of limited scope), Comment (discussion relating to paper previously published by AIAA), or Readers’ Forum (brief discussion of previous investigations). The following paragraphs explain the Acceptance Procedure for submitted material.

I. Evaluation of Manuscripts and Preprints

1. The first step is an examination of submitted papers by the Editor-in-Chief. He or she first tests the manuscript according to the several criteria of subject scope, archival editorial style, apparent technical validity, topical importance, timeliness, relationship to prior publication, conciseness, appropriate references, and length. Papers that vary widely from the prescribed archival style (those written as speeches, ill-defined manuscripts, progress reports, or news releases, or those strongly flavored with advertising or sales nuances) are returned to the authors immediately. Papers in which the English is difficult to understand also may be returned for rewriting prior to technical evaluation. If the subject scope makes the paper more suitable to one of the other AIAA journals, the Editor-in-Chief may return it to the author immediately with that recommendation. (If the paper was submitted from another country, the Editor-in-Chief may refer it directly to the other journal to avoid long mail delays; in that case, the author will be informed of the transfer.) If, in his or her judgment, the paper obviously fails in the areas of technical validity and/or advance over prior publication, the Editor-in-Chief can reject it, giving the author the reasons for rejection, or return it to the author for preparation as a Note.

2. If it survives the tests at this point, the paper will be assigned to the Associate Editor for that journal who has most direct knowledge of the subject matter and of expert reviewers in the field. The Associate Editor then evaluates the paper according to the same criteria and, in most cases, has the paper sent to one or more reviewers in the field (usually two) for confidential review. The Associate Editor may, however, at his or her discretion, accept the paper without review, reject it giving explicit reason, or return it to the author for preparation in a different format.

3. Considerable significance is attached to the review reports. Each reviewer is asked to judge the technical validity of the manuscript and the extent of its advance over work previously published. The reviewer is asked also for advice as to whether the paper merits publication in an archive journal. However, the decision to publish, to require major revision before publication, or to

* This policy was approved on October 16, 1964, by the Editors-in-Chief of the archive journals and by the Vice

President–Publications, and revised in January 1994.

reject for reasons cited lies first with the Associate Editor and ultimately with the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers often disagree with each other in their advice, and some reviewers tend to be too lenient (or too severe) in the light of the technical faults they have found in a paper. Hence the publication decision is made by the technical editors.

II. The Editorial Decision to Accept or Reject

4. It may take six months or more after receipt of the manuscript or preprint to accomplish the evaluation and review steps discussed above. (When several AIAA meetings are closely spaced, it may take longer.) The Editors will inform the author of their decision (acceptance, conditional acceptance, or rejection) as soon as possible. In the case of rejection, the author will be given specific reasons related to the criteria enumerated above. In the case of conditional acceptance, the required revisions will be clearly indicated. On some occasions, the Editors may anticipate a need for further reviews after revision; if so, the author will be notified.

5. The next step is up to the author. If the paper has been rejected or if extensive revisions have been requested which the author believes are incorrect or unwarranted, then he or she is entitled to submit a point-by-point rebuttal to the Editor’s statement of reasons and the reviewers’ comments. The rebuttal then is analyzed by the Editors, and a decision is made. In rare cases of a complex point of dispute, the Editors, at their discretion, may mandate additional reviews. In no case shall a paper go through more than two reviewing cycles before a decision is given. If the dispute still remains unresolved, then the decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final and overrides all other considerations.

6. It is the policy of the Editors to make sure that no unconventional hypothesis or original idea is throttled if there is a chance that such a paper might stimulate either progress or constructive controversy on a technical point. It also is a basic principle of the publications program of the Institute that all authors shall have an equal opportunity to have their papers published, provided they can meet certain objectively defined standards. However, the primary responsibility of the Editors is to maintain these high technical standards for the archive journals of the Institute. This commitment takes precedence over all other factors. Within the bounds of that objective, the following working policy has been adopted by the Editors.

III. Fair Procedure for Rebuttal by Author

7. In the confrontation between the rejection statement and the rebuttal statement, the decision goes in favor of the author if the dissenting reviewer’s case is not clearly convincing.

8. Since promptness is the essence of fairness, an author who has received no decision on his or her rebuttal within three months is welcome to request an immediate explanation and status report on the paper. If the forthcoming report is unsatisfactory to the author, then he or she may request a prompt decision regarding either rejection or conditional acceptance. The Editor should make every effort to respond to this request in a maximum of four weeks.

9. By the same token, authors who are requested by Editors to revise their papers must make an effort to accomplish the requested revisions in the stated period, which normally is four weeks for major revisions, three weeks for minor revisions. If the author does not respond to our subsequent inquiries, the paper will be regarded as withdrawn. Normally, an author who has good reason to request a time extension will be granted such an extension.

10. A reviewer who feels strongly that a particular paper should not be published may be given the opportunity, if the Editor decides nevertheless to accept it, to write the criticism as a Technical Comment. The author then is allowed to write a closing response for publication in the same issue as the Comment.

IV. Formal Acceptance and Publication

11. Formal acceptance will not occur until the author has complied with all of the revision requests (if any) made by the Associate Editor or the Associate Editor has accepted the author’s rebuttal, and the author has prepared the paper in the AIAA archival style as described in “Manuscript Style and Format.”

12. When a paper is formally accepted, it will be scheduled for publication in a forthcoming issue, and the author will be so informed. Survey Papers and Full Papers normally will be assigned to issues in the order in which they initially were received. Depending upon the number of papers awaiting publication and the projected size of issues, this may require that papers be scheduled several issues ahead. Items for the Notes, Comments, or Readers’ Forum sections will be scheduled for the earliest available issue. The Editor-in-Chief also may designate certain special-category papers for immediate publication.

13. Galley proofs will be sent to authors for correction and release approximately two months prior to scheduled publication. Authors should inform the AIAA Journals Department of any anticipated change of address between acceptance and galley proof time. Authors are expected to read and return their galleys within seven days (maximum).

14. To allow for late or non-return of galleys by authors and to provide the flexibility to meet issue-length and topic-mix constraints, issues will be overscheduled by about 25%. Thus, there will always be a certain number of papers held over for the next issue. Papers not published in the issue for which they were originally scheduled will have first priority for publication in the following issue.

15. All authors and co-authors will receive a complimentary copy of the issue in which their papers appear.

III.G. Ethical Standards for Publication of Aeronautics and Astronautics Research

I. Preface

The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) serves the engineering and scientific aerospace communities and society at large in several ways, including the publication of journals that present the results of scientific and engineering research. The Editor-in-Chief of a journal of the AIAA has the responsibility to maintain the AIAA ethical standards for reviewing and accepting papers submitted to that journal. In the main, these ethical standards derive from the AIAA definition of the scope of the journal and from the community perception of standards of quality for scientific and engineering work and its presentation. The following ethical standards reflect the conviction that the observance of high ethical standards is so vital to the whole engineering and scientific enterprise that a definition of those standards should be brought to the attention of all concerned.

II. Ethical Standards

A. Obligations of Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors*

1. The Editor-in-Chief has complete responsibility and authority to accept a submitted paper for publication or to reject it. The Editor-in-Chief may delegate this responsibility to Associate Editors, who may confer with reviewers for an evaluation to use in making this decision.

2. The Editor will give unbiased and impartial consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its scientific and engineering merits without regard to race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).

3. The Editor should process manuscripts promptly.

4. The Editor and the editorial staff will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration or its disposition to anyone other than those from whom professional advice is sought. The names of reviewers will not be released without the reviewers’ permission.

5. The Editor will respect the intellectual independence of authors.

* Throughout this document, the term “Editor,” when used alone, applies to both Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor. When one or the other bears the specific responsibility, the full title is used.

6. Editorial responsibility and authority for any manuscript authored by an Editor-in-Chief and submitted to the journal must be delegated to some other qualified person, such as an Associate Editor of that journal. When it is an Associate Editor participating in the debate, the Editor-in-Chief should either assume the responsibility or delegate it to another Associate Editor. Editors should avoid situations of real or perceived conflicts of interest. If an Editor chooses to participate in an ongoing scientific debate within the journal, the Editor should arrange for some other qualified person to take editorial responsibility.

7. Unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the research of an Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or reviewer except with the consent of the author.

8. If an Editor is presented with convincing evidence that the main substance or conclusions of a paper published in the journal are erroneous, the Editor must facilitate publication of an appropriate paper or technical comment pointing out the error and, if possible, correcting it.

B. Obligations of Authors

1. An author’s central obligation is to present a concise, accurate account of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

2. A paper should contain sufficient detail and reference to public sources of information such that the author’s peers could repeat the work.

3. An author should cite those publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work and that will guide the reader quickly to the earlier work that is essential for understanding the present investigation. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported in the author’s work without explicit permission from the investigator with whom the information originated. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, should be treated similarly.

4. Fragmentation of research papers should be avoided. A scientist who has done extensive work on a system or group of related systems should organize publication so that each paper gives a complete account of a particular aspect of the general study.

5. It is inappropriate for an author to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research to more than one journal of primary publication.

6. An accurate, nontrivial criticism of the content of a published paper is justified; however, in no case is personal criticism considered to be appropriate.

7. To protect the integrity of authorship, only persons who have significantly contributed to the research and paper presentation should be listed as authors. The corresponding author attests to

the fact that any others named as authors have seen the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Deceased persons who meet the criterion for co-authorship should be included, with a footnote reporting date of death. No fictitious name should be listed as an author or co-author. The author who submits a manuscript for publication accepts the responsibility of having included as co-authors all persons appropriate and none inappropriate.

8. It is inappropriate to submit manuscripts with an obvious marketing orientation.

C. Obligations of Reviewers of Manuscripts

1. Inasmuch as the reviewing of manuscripts is an essential step in the publication process, every publishing engineer and scientist has an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing. On the average, an author should expect to review twice as many papers as an author writes.

2. A chosen reviewer who feels inadequately qualified or lacks the time to judge the research reported in a manuscript should return it promptly to the Editor.

3. A reviewer of a manuscript should judge the quality of the manuscript objectively and respect the intellectual independence of the authors. In no case is personal criticism appropriate.

4. A reviewer should be sensitive even to the appearance of a conflict of interest. If in doubt, the reviewer should return the manuscript promptly without review, advising the Editor of the conflict of interest or bias.

5. A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript authored or co-authored by a person with whom the reviewer has a personal or professional connection if the relationship would bias judgment of the manuscript.

6. A reviewer should treat a manuscript sent for review as a confidential document. Its contents, as well as the reviewers’ recommendations, should neither be shown to nor discussed with others except, in special cases, to persons from whom specific advice may be sought; in that event, the identities of those consulted should be disclosed to the Editor.

7. A reviewer should explain and support judgments adequately so that Editors and authors may understand the basis of the comments. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

8. A reviewer should be alert to failure of authors to cite relevant work by other scientists. A reviewer should call to the Editor’s attention any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any published paper or any manuscript submitted concurrently to another journal.

9. A reviewer should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in a manuscript under consideration, except with the consent of the author.

D. Obligations of Engineers and Scientists Making Statements to Society at Large

1. A scientist or engineer publishing in the popular literature has the same basic obligation to be accurate in reporting observations and to be unbiased in interpreting them as when publishing in a technical journal.

2. A scientist or engineer should strive to keep public writing, remarks, and interviews as accurate as possible.

3. A scientist or engineer should not proclaim a discovery to the public unless the support for it is of strength sufficient to warrant publication in the technical literature. An account of the work and results that support a public pronouncement should be submitted as quickly as possible for publication in a technical journal.

III. Acknowledgments

The ethical standards embodied in this document were adopted by the Publications Committee of AIAA on August 16, 1989, and are endorsed by the Editors-in-Chief. With minor changes, these standards are adopted from those published by the American Geophysical Union and are used with their permission.

III.H. Editorial Policy Statement on Numerical Accuracy and Experimental Uncertainty

The purpose of this statement is to reiterate the desire to have high-quality investigations with properly documented results published in the AIAA journals, and to clarify acceptable standards for presentation of numerical and experimental results. Recently there has been considerable concern with the quality of published numerical solutions. Also the practice of including error bars on experimental results is often lacking. In response to these problems, a succinct policy statement on these items is as follows:

The AIAA journals will not accept for publication any paper reporting (1) numerical solutions of an engineering problem that fails adequately to address accuracy of the computed results or (2) experimental results unless the accuracy of the data is adequately presented.

The implementation of this policy will be at the discretion of the Editors and Associate Editors of the journals.

The accuracy of the computed results is concerned with how well the specified governing equations in the paper have been solved numerically. The appropriateness of the governing equations for modeling the physical phenomena and comparison with experimental data is not part of this evaluation. Accuracy of the numerical results can be judged from grid refinement studies, variation of numerical parameters that influence the results, comparison with exact solutions, and any other technique the author selects. The validity of the accuracy estimation will be judged by the reviewers of the paper. An estimate of accuracy of the numerical results must be presented when comparisons with other numerical and experimental results are given, and when new results of the author will likely become data for future comparisons. Since accuracy of various computed results obtained from a numerical solution can vary significantly, the accuracy of the result being used must be stated. Accuracy of results from a validated code must still be established to show that proper input parameters have been used with the code.

Estimates of experimental uncertainty are required for all plotted or tabulated data obtained by authors. If data from other workers are used, they require no uncertainty. Unless otherwise stated and properly referenced, it is assumed that the uncertainty of authors’ output data is estimated by the small-sample

method1 with assumed odds 20:1. All reported data must show uncertainty estimates if used in text or tables; for example, T = 642 + 8 K. All figures reporting new data should contain uncertainty estimates either on the figure with error bars in both coordinate directions or in the caption; for example, uncertainty in T = + 8 K at 20:1 odds. Investigations with limited data should present

1 Kline, S. J., and McClintock, F. A., “Describing Uncertainties in Simple-Sample Experiments,” Mechanical Engineering, Jan. 1953, pp. 3–8.

tabulated results in the paper while extensive data should be available elsewhere in tabulated form for use by other workers.

Finally, the accepted documentation procedures for a technical investigation must be used. For computational papers, the author must provide an adequate description of the numerical solution procedure, if not documented elsewhere. In addition, the complete governing equations must be specified with sufficient detail along with the input parameters to the code so that a reader could reproduce the results of the paper. For papers concerned with experimental test, thorough documentation of the experimental conditions, instrumentation, and data reduction techniques is required.

III.I. Guidelines and Procedures for New Journals*

I. Introduction

The technical interests and responsibilities of members of AIAA range from fundamental scientific advances to major systems such as aircraft and spacecraft. The technical activities of the Institute can be classified in four categories, as follows:

1. Fundamental scientific contributions

2. Technical discipline advances

3. Specific subsystem developments and applications

4. Major systems developments and applications

With the publication of the Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer in 1987, AIAA committed itself to journals in all four of the above categories. These are as follows:

Category 1: AIAA Journal (AIAAJ)

Category 2: Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer (JTHT)

Category 3: Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics (JGCD)

Journal of Propulsion and Power (JPP)

Category 4: Journal of Aircraft (JA)

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets (JSR)

The scope of AIAAJ, in principle, covers fundamental scientific contributions from all AIAA scientific and technical disciplines. The scopes of JA and JSR are limited to applications papers. However, the other three journals, JGCD, JPP, and JTHT, include in their scopes fundamental contributions to the particular subsystem, as well as applications.

When the AIAA was founded in 1963 by merger of the ARS and IAS, a clear publication policy was agreed upon whereby all papers that dealt with advances in basic, scientific disciplines were to be published in AIAAJ, and all applications papers in JA and JSR. There was a de facto abrogation of this policy by the appearance of JGCD, JPP, and later JTHT.

This document, therefore, will not address policy issues in publishing AIAA journals, but rather will provide guidelines and procedures for starting a new AIAA journal in any one of the four categories mentioned previously.

II. Starting a New Journal: Who and When?

Based on a broad interpretation of the AIAA charter and the four publication categories identified above, new AIAA journals will most probably fall in categories 2 and 3, i.e., discipline-oriented or specialist journals (e.g., JTHT) and subsystem applications (e.g., JGCD, JPP).

A new journal could be initiated either by the membership at large or by the AIAA management. In the former case, a large primary interest group, consisting of one or more Technical Committees (TCs) with a substantial pool of contributors, could find their papers spread over several AIAA journals, published in proceedings, and/or published in specialty journals of societies other than the AIAA (e.g., ASME, IEEE). New journals based on corporate decisions arise when AIAA management identifies new opportunities in a wider interpretation of the scope of the Institute. Such was the case with the now-defunct Journal of Energy.

III. Criteria for Justifying a New Journal

A number of related criteria should be recognized as a prerequisite to publishing a new journal. These are as follows:

A. Membership in the primary interest group must exceed 2000, and the pool of contributors (or authors) must be able to produce 400 papers a year.

B. Over a period of five to seven years, the interest group that is requesting a new journal must have established a substantial record of publications in its area of specialty. The publications could be in the form of proceedings (following specialist meetings) or special issues in existing journals (AIAA or other society journals).

C. The proposed journal should represent disciplines, subsystem developments or systems developments, and applications that have a wide support base in AIAA, as well as in other professional societies.

D. The requesting group should demonstrate one or both of the following:

1. There are no adequate journals in existence for the particular discipline.

2. The backlog of existing journals (non-AIAA) is excessive.

* Prepared by the Publications Journals Subcommittee in July 1986 (Kenell Touryan, Dana Moran, Edward Price); adopted by the Publications Committee in August 1987; updated in July 1997 to reflect Publications Committee and AIAA staff structural changes.

E. Surveys conducted by the interest group and the AIAA staff demonstrate a reasonable prospect for financial success of the proposed journal (e.g., a total paid circulation of 2000, including 400–500 library subscriptions).

F. A strong endorsement must be available from the AIAA membership and the Technical Activities Committee (TAC). Support from the Editors-in-Chief of the other AIAA journals will be most helpful.

G. The proposed journal is able to attract an Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors with strong reputations in the scientific/technical community. They should be capable of operating a journal and willing to perform their tasks promptly.

H. Proponents of the new journal should be able to demonstrate to the Publications Committee and the AIAA Board of Directors that the new journal will have minimum adverse effect on existing AIAA journals (e.g., less than 10% decrease in submissions).

IV. Important Issues and Concerns

Publishing a new journal is both costly and time-consuming. New journals seldom break even financially in less than three years; in fact, five years is not considered unusual. Therefore, it is essential that the initiators of new AIAA journals consider the following, in addition to the eight criteria listed in the previous section:

A. What alternate methods can fulfill the needs that would be filled by the proposed journal? Consideration should be given to:

1. enlarging the scope of an existing AIAA journal before proceeding with a new one; or

2. publishing special issues, once or twice a year, as part of an existing AIAA journal.

B. U.S. government pressures for controlling technology transfer to foreign countries have reduced the pool of available papers in certain disciplines. A strict interpretation of no-foreign-dissemination rules could reduce the pool of archival papers published in the open literature.

C. A new AIAA journal will always take away from existing journals. It may be better to make an existing journal more “healthy” than to create two (or more) marginal ones.

V. Procedures: From Request to Final Approval

The following steps must be taken by an interest group proposing a new journal:

A. A primary interest group (e.g., one or more TCs) reviews its need for a new journal in light of the preceding criteria and presents it to TAC.

B. A draft proposal is prepared and submitted to the Journals Subcommittee. [Note: Under the current subcommittee structure, it probably would be the Publications Review Subcommittee, or possibly a special task force appointed by the Vice President–Publications. The balance of this document assumes that the Publications Review Subcommittee takes the responsibility.] The draft addresses all of the criteria and issues listed above in a preliminary manner.

C. The Subcommittee meets with the key individuals proposing the new journal and reviews and critiques the proposal.

D. If the proposal has sufficient merit for further consideration, copies are prepared and distributed to the Vice President–Publications, any other appropriate Publications Subcommittees, Editors-in-Chief of existing AIAA journals, and the AIAA staff market analyst and market strategist.

E. A preliminary market survey is prepared by the market analyst. This survey, along with inputs from all parties listed above, is presented to the members of the Publications Review Subcommittee and discussed in detail with the initiators of the proposal.

F. If the draft proposal still has merit, it is revised by the initiators to reflect the discussion mentioned above and resubmitted to the Chair of the Publications Review Subcommittee.

G. A formal presentation is made by the Chair of the Subcommittee to the full Publications Committee. This presentation is attended by members of the primary interest group, Editors-in-Chief of current AIAA journals, and the staff market analyst and market strategist (or a designated staff representative).

H. If the proposal continues to show merit, the Publications Committee requests the AIAA staff, together with key representatives of the interest group, to conduct a more thorough market analysis and prepare a five-year financial plan.

I. Results of this survey and the financial plan are presented at the next meeting of the Publications Committee, at which time the members vote to approve or disapprove publication of the new journal.

J. If approved (by a simple majority vote), the proposal is taken by the Vice President–Publications to the Board of Directors for final approval.

K. The new Editor-in-Chief (approved by the Board of Directors) meets with the AIAA staff to plan the start-up details of the new journal. For a healthy start, a quarterly journal should have a backlog of 75 papers ready before the first issue goes to print. For a bimonthly, this number is 100, and for a monthly, the number is 200.

VI. Sample Schedule

A representative schedule (from the start-up of JTHT) is given to provide the members of the new journal team with an estimate of the time it takes to bring the new journal from its inception to initial publication. Based on the histories of JPP and JTHT, this estimated time is about 18 months (see schedule).

JTHT Schedule (from inception to publication):

January 1983 Feasibility study initiated by Thermophysics TC.

January 1985 Thermophysics TC votes to discontinue publishing in AIAA Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics book series.

June 1985 Preliminary proposal presented to Journals Subcommittee and Publications Committee for evaluation.

Preliminary market survey initiated.

August 1985 Detailed proposal completed.

September 1985 Proposal submitted to Journals Subcommittee.

October 1985 TAC endorsement obtained.

Publications Committee approves proposal and solicits funding from the Institute Development Committee (IDC).

AIAA Board of Directors gives go-ahead.

November 1985 Plans made to solicit support from heat transfer community. New editorial board begins soliciting new thermophysics and heat transfer papers for proposed journal and transferring appropriate papers from existing journal backlogs (with consent of authors).

Publications Committee and Journals Subcommittee representatives meet with AIAA Finance Committee.

January 1986 Finance Committee approves proposal.

February 1986 Detailed market survey completed.

IDC approves funding.

Board of Directors gives final approval.

June 1986 Marketing brochure prepared.

October 1986 Early publication of first issue; mailed as free sample as part of promotion plan.

January 1987 Official publication date of first issue of JTHT.

Note: The first JTHT paper was submitted on November 20, 1985; the 100th paper was submitted on August 11, 1986.

VII. Discontinuing a Journal

Each new journal must be justified on the basis of continuous operation. No new journal appears on a trial basis. Journals are not planned with a demise in mind. However, decisions are often made on the basis of limited information, and unpredictable events in the future could cause a journal to become financially or technically nonviable. Two such cases occurred with AIAA journals. The first was the Journal of Hydronautics, which starved to death because of a dearth of contributors (see Appendix for details), and the second was the Journal of Energy. The latter was terminated because the best predictions for a growing emphasis on energy technologies did not materialize after the 1973 oil embargo.

To avoid journal terminations (or minimize the impact of a termination should a demise become unavoidable), the Publications Review Subcommittee shall be responsible for the following actions:

A. The Subcommittee reviews, on a regular basis and in depth, the status of at least one AIAA journal per year.

B. The Subcommittee members track the backlog and circulation of each journal (with assistance from the AIAA staff).

C. If backlogs and/or circulation levels for any journal show a steady decline over a two-year period, active steps are taken by the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors to remedy the situation.

D. In case of such a decline, the Vice President–Publications instructs the Subcommittee to review the action steps taken by the Editor-in-Chief on a quarterly basis. (A healthy backlog of accepted papers for a monthly journal is, for example, 60–65 papers per issue.)

E. If the backlog continues to decline in spite of the best efforts of the Editors, the Subcommittee recommends to the Vice President–Publications and the AIAA staff a reduction in the frequency of publication (i.e., for a monthly journal, changing to bimonthly or quarterly issues).

F. If journal circulation drops to a level where the economic viability of the journal is in serious question, and/or the backlog situation does not improve, the Publications Committee recommends to the Board of Directors that publication of the journal be terminated.

Appendix: Brief Histories of Current and Past AIAA Journals

AIAA Journal , by George W. Sutton

At the time of the merger of the American Rocket Society and the Institute of the Aerospace Sciences, they each had their own archive journals, ARS Journal and the Journal of the Aerospace Sciences, respectively. As part of the merger, it was decided that there would be only one “research” journal, the AIAA Journal, and two applications journals, the Journal of Aircraft and the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets. All research types of papers were to be in the first one, including atmospheric sciences, space sciences, propulsion, combustion, power, fluids, structures, materials, thermophysics, etc. This overall arrangement proceeded in an orderly process for many years.

All of the AIAA Journal papers were published in numerical order of their log numbers, as soon as they were accepted. Hence there was considerable random inhomogeneity in the listing on the cover. The main problem was the enormous backlog of papers that built up because of the Apollo effort. After 1975, this backlog gradually subsided.

In this time period, considerable thought was given to better means of delivery of hard copy, including “selective dissemination.” Complaints had begun to arise that individual subscribers were running out of shelf space. In addition, it was not particularly easy to retrieve technical information from the AIAA Journal—electronic retrieval was not yet available. Nevertheless, there continued to be a sense of uneasiness that some measures needed to be taken to make the AIAA Journal more manageable.

The first major divergence from the previous policy was a request by a group to break out and form a separate journal for guidance and control. While not originally incorporated in the title, the spacecraft dynamics constituency also seemed to be in favor of it. The motivation seemed to be a fear that other journals which are devoted strictly to this subject would make inroads on both manuscript submission and AIAA membership. While it was clear that most of the papers for it would come from the AIAA Journal, it was hoped that it would also contain papers devoted to both applications and relevant hardware developments. There was also considerable opposition to the concept of creating a journal that did not quite fit into the previous formula. Nevertheless, the proponents were able to demonstrate a large enough constituency of authors and subscribers to make it appear to be a viable concept. And it was fairly successful. But, partly as a result of this, I decided to compartmentalize the index on the cover of the AIAA Journal by discipline, so that readers could immediately locate articles of interest to them. This was a successful change, one that I hope all other journals will adopt.

Flush with success, as the Arab energy crisis continued and as trouble started brewing on the nuclear front, it seemed desirable to start another journal—Energy. It would draw some theoretical papers from AIAA Journal, and some (mainly from JA and JSR) on propulsion and power, respectively. Unlike JGC, this subject did not have a sufficiently broad constituency, and the impact on the AIAA Journal was minimal.

The formation of the Journal of Propulsion and Power did have a major impact on the AIAA Journal. All papers on combustion of fuels, compressors, advanced space propulsion, etc., disappeared from the AIAA Journal. Again, this was the formation of a journal based on a technical field, not a discipline, but it

seemed to be a way of countering other societies that were initiating separate journals devoted to turbomachinery. General papers on reacting flows and cascade fluid flow are still more suitable to the AIAA Journal because of their generality.

The formation of the Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer further removed about 10% of the papers from the AIAA Journal. The formation of this journal was spearheaded by members of the discipline who saw their previous publication outlet, the Progress Series, disappearing because of lack of sales, e.g., too small a constituency. In addition, the papers that were submitted to AIAA’s journals tended to be spread out among them. For the more research-oriented papers, there is still a close relation between fluid mechanics and heat transfer, which raises problems in deciding which is the more suitable journal for a paper that contains both subjects.

On the mechanical side, the shift to in-house electronic composition was an excellent method of fighting inflation. However, the shift of tracking papers from AIAA HQ to the Editor-in-Chief has not permitted satisfactory tracking of papers; the AIAA Journal still needs to perform this more expeditiously than the manual searching presently used. It is hoped that electronic paper tracking can be instituted in the near future in conjunction with the move to Washington.

In the meantime, because of the reduction in submissions and maintenance of a high publication rate, the backlog problem has subsided. It may build up slightly due to the move to Washington, but the chief concern will be the staffing and training of a large number of new publication professionals.

Journal of Aircraft , by Allen E. Fuhs and Kenell J. Touryan

At the merging of the American Rocket Society and the Institute of the Aerospace Sciences in 1963, the Officers and Directors of the newly formed Institute, the AIAA, established the Journal of Aircraft, alongside the AIAA Journal and the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets. Volume 1, Number 1 of the Journal of Aircraft appeared in January–February 1963 with Carl F. Schmidt as its Editor-in-Chief.

The mission of JA was to provide a medium for the exchange of new ideas and knowledge which would contribute to the advancement of the science and technology of airborne flight. As with the JSR, the emphasis of this new journal was on significant applications and effects of new knowledge on the technology of airborne flight.

When one compares the scope of JA published in the first issue in 1963 with the scope described in 1987, one notices very minor changes in the ensuing 24 years. The new subdisciplines for airborne flight that have been added in the past decade are 1) application of computers to aircraft (instead of flight navigation); 2) aircraft-oriented information systems; and 3) integration of control systems into aircraft design.

JA is being published monthly [at the time of the creation of this document]. In 1983 it suffered its first major drop in the backlog of submitted papers, primarily as a result of the change instituted in the paper acceptance policy for AIAA preprints. Restrictions placed on technology transfer to unfriendly nations

and the lack of new nonmilitary aircraft programs seem to have contributed to this decline.

Effective in January 1987, the present Editor-in-Chief (Thomas M. Weeks) and his Associate Editors embarked on more aggressive solicitation of archival papers in order to increase submittal rates to JA. The July 1987 figures already show an upturn in the JA backlog. In addition, a new emphasis in the areas of atmospheric environment, aircraft acoustics, and aircraft design will ensure the continued health of JA.

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics , by Donald C. Fraser

The journal publishes qualified papers on dynamics, stability, guidance, control, navigation, celestial mechanics, astrodynamics, optimization, electronics, avionics, and information processing related to astronautical, aeronautical, and marine systems.

This journal grew out of a frustration on the part of the large guidance, control, and dynamics and astrodynamics community of the AIAA that papers of interest to them were spread among all journals. Packaged in that way, they had to subscribe to each journal and then were confronted with a situation where most papers in each journal they bought were not of interest to them. A consensus grew to launch a new journal which would publish these papers together. Support was secured from the Guidance and Control, Astrodynamics, and Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Technical Committees, and then from TAC and the Publications Committee. To establish the viability of the new journal, an experimental issue of the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets was published in February 1977 which was restricted to content that would be included in the new journal. Member feedback from this experiment indicated that there was sufficient support for a viable journal, both from a paper-submittal and circulation-rate point of view. At a joint meeting of TAC and the Publications Committee, a journal entitled the Journal of Guidance and Control was agreed upon. This title was a compromise. Based on these steps, approval for a new journal was obtained from the AIAA Board of Directors. The previous Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Donald C. Fraser, was appointed as the Editor-in-Chief of the new journal, and he recruited Associate Editors from the existing journals, together with a few new ones, to make up the editorial board. Papers in process from existing journals plus newly recruited ones filled the first issues in a way that fulfilled the full scope. The first issue appeared in January 1978.

The debate over the title and scope of the new journal did not end with its inception. The dynamics community, in particular, was disappointed that their specialty was not included in the journal title. Lobbying within TAC and the Publications Committee continued. This culminated in a decision made in 1981 to change the title of the journal to emphasize the dynamics part of the scope. Beginning in January 1982, the title was changed to the Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics. At the same time, a re-emphasis was placed on inclusion of papers on aircraft stability and control, handling qualities, spacecraft dynamics, aircraft dynamics, basic mechanics, and similar subjects.

Future plans for the journal include a continuing emphasis on applications papers. A number of new

history of key technology papers have been identified, and special issues on digital avionics and artificial intelligence are in the planning stages. Emphasis will continue on the recruitment of more avionics papers, which are the practical embodiment of much guidance and control work.

Journal of Propulsion and Power , by R. H. Woodward Waesche

The original genesis of the Journal of Propulsion and Power was the concept advanced by the Airbreathing Propulsion TC of a Journal of Gas Turbines. This journal was to provide a “home” in the AIAA archival journal structure for those many researchers in the field of turbomachinery, since neither JSR nor JA was a suitable focal point. In addition, it was known that an Israeli journal in the same general area was being considered, and that consideration was being given to an ASME journal in the same field. Following discussions by TAC and the Publications Committee, R. H. Woodward Waesche was given the task of evaluating the potential success of such a journal. Discussions were held with the five propulsion-related TCs; the relevant paper submittal and circulation statistics were also reviewed to determine the potential sources of papers and subscribers.

Two primary questions were raised during these discussions—would propulsion other than gas turbines be included, and would the scope include basic research? There was considerable concern in the rocket community about being part of a Journal of Gas Turbines, and there was also a strong concern that many organizations would not wish to purchase yet another journal. During a discussion of these issues at a TAC meeting in November 1982, the place of the new journal in the overall journal structure was also debated; i.e., if basic research were included, it would completely destroy the original concept of applications-oriented journals (JA, JSR) and basic-research journals (AIAAJ).

It was eventually decided, in January 1983, that the new journal would be a viable one only if rockets were included and that the title should be the Journal of Propulsion, to reflect this scope. The title was later changed to the current one, even though the Journal of Energy (JE) was, at this time, struggling and it was feared that inclusion of power-generation papers in JPP would spell the end of JE. A survey was conducted at the 1983 Propulsion Conference with a generally positive response. The survey also revealed that rockets should definitely be included in the scope of the journal. Acceptance of JPP by the Publications Committee was achieved in August 1983, but only with the understanding that it would be like the former ARS journal, Jet Propulsion; i.e., it would include all propulsion-related papers, even those dealing with basic combustion phenomena when they were related to propulsion. No analysis of the financial viability of the new journal was made at that time, largely because of the above-mentioned survey.

The working group headed by Dr. Waesche was then replaced by a task force headed by Allen E. Fuhs, which met in November 1983 to discuss the scope of the new journal and to screen recommendations for editors for both JPP and the new JSR, which would no longer include propulsion-related papers. (A separate group headed by Paul F. Holloway evaluated the future of JSR.)

In January 1984, William H. Heiser (then AIAA Vice President–Publications) appointed Gordon C. Oates

as Editor-in-Chief of JPP; an editorial board was presented to the Publications Committee in May 1984, and the first Associate Editors were appointed later that month to allow for processing of papers from the 1984 Propulsion Conference. In addition, papers then in the manuscript evaluation process for AIAAJ, JA, and JSR were reviewed for possible transfer to JPP. A marketing plan was set up, including a sample issue later in 1984 and announcements at both the AIAA and JANNAF Propulsion Conferences in the summer of 1984. The first issue was published in January 1985.

Although there was some residual opposition to the new journal from some TCs in the propulsion community, expansion of the editorial board to represent additional interests alleviated many of these concerns. Further discussions have been held which have ensured better working relations with all of the relevant Technical Committees, including involving the TCs in suggestions for potential AEs.

The future of JPP appears bright. Active participation in the relevant technical meetings, e.g., the Propulsion Conference, has produced a continuing growth in submittals from these meetings. At the same time, over-the-transom papers are appearing at an increasing rate, so that the backlog is growing at a healthy rate. The staff of Associate Editors has been expanded from the original seven to ten, both for seeking potential papers (especially in power generation) and for efficiency in processing the resultant manuscripts. The membership in this group has been diversified, including representatives of the three services, NASA, universities, the propulsion industry, and research centers. A wider range of technical expertise is also represented. The Editorial Advisory Board will be tasked to provide applications-oriented papers in new fields of propulsion and power. The original concept of a Journal of Gas Turbines has indeed expanded to one with a broad base which is rapidly being accepted as a journal which is the proper outlet for propulsion-related studies and is the journal of choice for much of the entire propulsion community.

Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, by Paul F. Holloway

As noted in other summaries, the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets was one of the “triad” established at the time of the merger of the Institute of the Aerospace Sciences and the American Rocket Society. Intended as an “applications journal,” it was substantially the successor to the old ARS journal Jet Propulsion.

The first issue, volume 1, number 1, was issued in January–February 1964. Gordon L. Dugger was Editor-in-Chief; Associate Editors were Robert Fischell, Herbert Goda, and Ralph Ragan. Ruth F. Bryans was Managing Editor.

The origins of JSR and its mission were clearly established in the first paragraph of Dr. Dugger’s introductory editorial:

The decision of the AIAA Board that additional journals should be published in 1964 resulted from many deliberations over many proposals and committee reports, but at least three points were

recognized by all of the proposals: 1) a greater total publishing outlet was needed, so that no original, significant paper would be turned away for the reason of inadequate publishing space; 2) although the contributions of the “engineer” and the “scientist” are inescapably interwoven in the great ventures of aeronautics and astronautics today, there had been a lingering tendency to look down on “engineering” papers which described applications of new knowledge to such ventures, and in fact, the 1963 outlet of AIAA for such papers had been inadequate; and 3) a large fraction of the membership feared that the aeronautics of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics was being overlooked. To fulfill these needs, this Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets and its counterpart for aeronautics, the Journal of Aircraft, have been created. They are intended to be full technical partners to the continuing, respected AIAA Journal—equal in quality, in value to the portion of the AIAA membership each will serve, and in professional recognition among authors and readers, Members and Corporate Members, and institutions and their libraries. Although these new journals are not, at present, equal in size (or price) to the AIAA Journal, the initial subscription response on the part of the members has already validated the wisdom of the decision of the AIAA Board to establish them.

Dr. Dugger’s subsequent remarks also were relevant:

Each journal carries its scope statement on its inside front cover. It is unavoidable, and indeed it is desirable, that there be some overlap among the three. Whereas AIAAJ will continue to emphasize new research and exploratory developments of rather fundamental character, JSR and JA will be primarily interested in significant applications and effects of such new knowledge in the fields of astronautics and aeronautics, respectively. A gray area is bound to exist between JSR and JA, and it is also certain to shift with time. An illustrative example is that (for the year 1964, at least) papers dealing with aerospace planes should go into JSR, and papers on the X-15 should go into JA.

It is significant that, although only minor changes have been made in the scope of JSR in these past twenty years, it has, in fact, spun off at least two current journals—Journal of Propulsion and Power and Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics. As each journal was proposed, careful analyses were made of the impact of the new journal on the resource of papers for JSR and, in each instance, dire predictions forecast severe impact on availability of papers and on subscriptions. Yet, in fact, neither occurred. The backlog of papers remains stable, with little change since the elimination of the automatic submittal procedure. Subscriptions, in fact, have improved a bit in the past year.

Thus it would appear that JSR fills a specific and continuing need in the community of aerospace-related archival journals, and that it is assured of solid and loyal readership.

Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer , by Alfred L. Crosbie and Kenell J. Touryan

The JTHT is the most recent AIAA journal, and that brings the total number of journals to six. It is devoted to the advancement of the science and technology of thermophysics and heat transfer through the dissemination of original research papers disclosing new technical knowledge and exploratory developments and applications based on new knowledge. The journal publishes qualified papers that deal with the properties and mechanisms involved in thermal energy transfer and storage in gases, liquids, and solids or combinations thereof. These studies include conductive, convective, and radiative modes alone or in combination and the effects of the environment.

The journal had its inception with the AIAA Thermophysics Technical Committee. In January 1983, the TC members initiated a journal feasibility study. About the same time, the TC began a program to increase the number of thermophysics papers in AIAA journals. It should be noted that, every year since 1965, the Thermophysics TC has organized one of the two major heat transfer conferences held in North America, the AIAA Thermophysics Conference. From these meetings, papers have been published in the AIAA Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics book series, the AIAA Journal, and the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets. For example, from 1965 to 1985, 28 thermophysics volumes have been published in the AIAA Progress Series. After detailed discussions with members of the Publications Committee and the Editor-in-Chief of the Progress Series, in January 1985 the Thermophysics TC voted to discontinue the thermophysics volumes and to pursue the establishment of a thermophysics journal.

During the summer of 1985, the TC voted overwhelmingly for a proposal to establish the new journal. After due process, the Publications Committee approved the journal in October 1985, and final approval was given by the Board of Directors in early 1986. The first issue of the journal appeared in January 1987. (For details, see the JTHT Schedule in the “Guidelines and Procedures for New Journals.”)

The new journal will encourage the drawing together of work from industry, government, and academia and will be a full-spectrum publication in the field of thermophysics and heat transfer. Topics will include aerothermodynamics, thermophysics properties, nonintrusive diagnostics, radiation, conductive and convective heat transfer, and numerical heat transfer.

Journal of Energy , by William H. Heiser

The origin of the Journal of Energy (JE) was the oil embargo of 1973, which aroused the nation’s concern for energy availability. The AIAA response to the “energy crisis” was the Energy Activities Task Force (EATF), which sought aerospace initiatives to reduce energy dependency.

One of the few concrete results of the EATF was the JE, although the actual planning of the journal took place in a Finance Committee meeting. The journal first appeared in January 1977, and was devoted to energy research and development in accordance with its scope, as follows:

This Journal is an archival publication devoted to advancing our knowledge of the usage of energy in space and on Earth, including its production, transformation, and conservation. The Journal is

expected to emphasize advanced technologies contained within the domains of aeronautics and astronautics and their logical extensions. It shall include but not be limited to such terrestrial and space applications as: chemical systems (combustion efficiency, alternate fuels, exploration and recovery, hydrogen and other unique fuels); solar systems (photovoltaic power, solar thermal power, wind power, ocean thermal energy conversion, biomass energy); nuclear fission systems; nuclear fusion systems; power conversion (MHD, rotating machinery, reciprocating machinery, thermoelectric, thermionic, power conditioning); storage and transmission systems (lasers, batteries, fuel cells, flywheels, cryogenics, microwaves, fiber optics); energy conservation systems (human factors); and geothermal, ocean wave, tidal, and hydroelectric power. Papers dealing with applied science, systems performance and operations analysis, economic analysis, and process development of the subjects listed above will be published.

Although the JE reached its expected potential as a bimonthly, a number of problems were encountered during development which can be avoided in the future via good planning.

First, a decision to proceed was made in July 1976, at which point no papers were in the editorial pipeline, and no sample issue could be generated for marketing and advertising during the critical fall season. In fact, papers were taken from every available source in order to barely meet the January Aerospace Sciences Meeting first-issue deadline. The process had the additional unfortunate effect of depleting the supply of appropriate papers for subsequent issues of the JE.

Second, establishment of the JE preceded the existence of relevant, energy-related AIAA conferences. This deprived the JE of the traditional, dependable, and usually predominant flow of technical papers, and placed the burden instead on such erratic sources as over-the-transom, non-AIAA meetings, and material sought or even prepared by JE editors.

Third, the JE had no strong connection to the mainstream of AIAA activities, but was really an opportunistic if legitimate response to a national need. In particular, it was neither system nor discipline oriented, but rather connected to a topical theme. This led to the demise of the JE in 1983 when oil became plentiful again, prices declined, and federal funding of energy R&D dropped sharply. The supply of papers diminished proportionately, and it was decided to terminate JE before a lingering death began.

Despite this, the life cycle experienced by the JE did not harm the reputation of the family of AIAA journals. In retrospect, it seems better to have tried to serve this need than to have let it pass. The greater danger is holding on to a journal too long.

Journal of Hydronautics , by Donald M. Layton

The Journal of Hydronautics began publication in 1967 at the initiation of the Marine Systems TC. Prior to the creation of the journal, the Marine Systems TC published supplements in the Journal of Aircraft. The authorization to proceed with the new journal was based more on the optimistic anticipation of a new, expanded discipline for the AIAA than on solid market information.

The scope of the journal was as follows:

This Journal is dedicated to the publication of significant, original papers which contribute to the advancement of the science and engineering of all types of marine craft, installations, and instrumentation devised to explore and make use of the oceans of the world. This Journal presents qualified papers dealing with the hydromechanics of propulsion, the stability and control of surface vessels and submersibles, and methods for providing mobility and habitation in water. Ocean environmental characteristics, such as currents, acoustical properties, wave spectra, density, and chemical and biological aspects, are also topics within the purview of this publication insofar as they bear upon the design of bodies, structures, and instruments to be employed in the seas. Papers are sought which describe the results of current research as well as those which show how new experimental findings and rational mechanical analyses can be applied to the solution of practical engineering problems in this field.

The journal was published until 1981 on a quarterly basis. In 1981, because of a lack of sufficient papers, all remaining papers were put into one issue and published for the last time, although the journal was in the black, the total member circulation was 650, and library subscriptions were 450 (down from a high of 600). The reasons for discontinuing the journal were twofold: 1) less than 200 AIAA members identified their primary interest as marine systems; 2) the journal lacked a strong technical paper source. For example, the AIAA cosponsored a biannual Advanced Marine Vehicle Conference. The total number of archival papers from these meetings was barely sufficient to fill four or five quarterly issues. The AIAA Board, therefore, voted in 1981 to discontinue publication of the Journal of Hydronautics.