Who would I work for if given the choice?

There is an emerging industry out there right now, and it's in UAV's.  the UAV is becoming a very prominent reality in the world of aviation.  It's military applications are already applauded by most people, offering safety at little cost to manpower.  Soon we may see the advent of UAV's into the civilian world also.

A google search will actually bring up a few hits, but a more detailed look into a site like Indeed will actually bring up a good amount of jobs for UAV's.  A friend sent me a link to a company called General Atomics Aeronautical, and a look under jobs for pilots brings up several UAV jobs. 


The requirements for just the entry level UAV pilot are rather light really:  Must possess: (1) FAA Commercial Certificate with a current instrument rating and ability to maintain instrument currency; (2) three hundred (300) hours as PIC; (3) ability to obtain interim DOD secret clearance as well as customer specific clearance(s); (4) ability to travel on CONUS and ONCONUS six to eight months of the year on a rotating schedule; (5) good analytical, interpersonal, verbal and written communication skills to accurately interface with all levels of employees and military and civilian customers, contractors and aircrew; and (6) basic knowledge of computer operations and applications. The ability to work both independently and in a team environment is essential as is the ability to work extended hours and travel as required. 

Truthfully, these requirements are not that bad at all, and any graduate from a flight program would have close to those requirements.

Oh,and I hear the pay is really good, to boot.

Update: TSA, real classy.

A few weeks ago, I made it rather apparent my feelings on the TSA. As a recap, I find them to be a bloated agency whose original intentions may have been noble, but are now bogged down by bureaucracy and unionizing.  With the number of employees they have, they are likely to have some bad apples, but when it comes to the type of job they are doing, there should be no room for error or mistakes, especially with their own employees.

In late October, a news article ran in the New York Daily News about a TSA agent who opened checked baggage and found a 'sex toy'.  Well, this agent thought it would be amusing to leave the required tag with a note that said 'Get your freak on girl'.  Though amusing, it was entirely inappropriate.  These individuals are supposed to uphold the highest professionalism.  They are tasked with 'touching our bodies' in the event of a pat-down, and searching through items that are private in nature.  In my opinion, it is entirely uncalled for.  Luckily, the TSA is in the process of terminating the individual in question.  I've no issue with this.  This is a person that should have never been given a position within the TSA.

My overall issue with this is that, once again, this is not a situation that should have even been given a chance to happen.  Perhaps a more thorough evaluation of an individual should happen before they are given a final go ahead to accept employment into the TSA.  It seems like anyone can get a job with the TSA.  In the same article, it also gives a snippet about two former TSA agents that pled guilty to conspiring to steal $40,000 from a cash bag on an American Airlines flight at Kennedy Airport.  This makes me wonder how many of these incidents happen that we don't know about, and are gotten away with.  How many times in the last ten years have you lost your luggage on a flight?  Kind of makes you wonder now, doesn't it?  I think I'll just carry on my luggage for now on.

Personnel Profile: Richard Branson

Richard Branson is, by almost all accounts, a venture capitalist.  He has made his fortune buying, selling, and creating businesses.  It likely wouldn't come as a shock that his estimated worth is roughly $4.2 billion.  His brand name, Virgin Group Limited, is a conglomerate of over 400 different companies, utilizing the travel, entertainment, and lifestyle industries.  The various companies involve products from soda to airlines, and then some.  It's truly awe inspiring to see his brilliance at work, and the passion he has for doing it.

In 1984, Brandon launched Virgin Atlantic Airways, and now offers flight between England, North America, the Caribbean, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Australia.  Ironically, their services do not offer domestic flights, but instead are strictly international flights.  A quick lookup on a flight from New York to London also shows some pretty amazing airfares, as low as $450.00.  For a round-trip fare to London and back, that's certainly not bad.  He has been able to capitalize on a need to fly overseas at a reasonable rate.

In 2004, he formed Virgin Galactic, a new space tourism company.  He is wanting to capitalize on what is a fledgling industry at this point.  However, as luck would have it, there is apparently strong interest.  Even at $200,000 per ticket, over 430 individuals have purchased these tickets, wanting to be one of the first to go into space as a typical civilian.  Branson has also decided to make Spaceport America home to his vision, building the Virgin Galactic Gateway to Space facility and hanger on site.  Branson's dedication to this new venture is apparent, working tirelessly for years on the WhiteKnightTwo and SpaceShipTwo vehicles.  SpaceShipTwo is starting to see trial runs now, with a few mishaps, but each mishap being overcome.  As well, as of October 27th, 2011, Virgin Galactic has now chosen its first astronaut pilot, former USAF test pilot Keith Colmer.  Colmer joins a community dedicated to finding new ways to bring humans into space, and I'm sure he is thrilled.

Richard Branson is the definition of entrepreneur, and apparently has a fondness for the world of aviation.  He has a passion and dedication for trying to find better technologies for mankind.  It is obvious he has a true love for aviation, and respects what it can do for all of us.

Enter Chinese Aviation

China's aviation industry is one of curiosity.  In recent years, they have made strides to become more open, and it would appear they are gearing up to open their low altitude airspace completely to more private based aviation, according to this report.  This is a far cry from it's current status, which is pretty much restricted airspace over most of China.

China's airspace is currently controlled by the Central Military Commission, which manages Chinese airspace under a military doctrine.  The result is very few, if any, locations for general aviation, and general aviation flights are a rarity as it is.   With any luck, by opening their airspace to more private based aviation, general aviation will begin to become commonplace as it is here in the U.S.

Currently, domestic operations are primarily conducted by state operated air carrier Commercial Aircraft Corporate of China, or Comac, with the some other operations intermixed by companies like Parc Aviation, Contractair, and Sigma Aviation Services.  Internationally, flights are conducted by familiar companies such as Delta, British Airways, American Airways and such.  Eventually, China may open up their domestic commercial industry to the private sector, and that's certainly a promising idea with the opening of their airspace in 2015.

On the upside, the need for pilots in China continues to rise.  A quick Google search brings up this website and lists a number of jobs based in China.  If China is a place that a pilot would want to work, the industry is getting ready to expand drastically over there, and the prospects look very good.

Job Info: Corporate Pilot

Company: NetJets

What are they: NetJets is a part 135 operator that runs on a rather unique business model: Fractional Ownership. Their Who Is page gives most of the detail about what they are, but for the most part, they essentially 'sell' the customer partial ownership of a corporate jet of their choosing. The customer essentially buys a specific number of hours that it would be needed for the year, and NetJets takes care of all the operating costs of the aircraft. It's like owning the aircraft, but not having to worry about the logistics. They fly everyone from sports teams to CEO's of major corporations.

Job Description and details: Their requirements for pilots are not too far fetched, at least when compared to the big airlines. Their requirements can be found here.

• Airline Transport Pilot Certificate (Multi-Engine Land)
• Current FAA First Class Medical certificate
• 2500 hours total pilot time
• 500 hours fixed wing multi-engine time
• 250 hours instrument time (actual or simulated in flight - excludes simulator time)

As well, the type of pilot they are looking for can be found here.

• Demonstrate an unwavering dedication to safety
• Focus on exceeding the expectations of each passenger as the norm
• Act as an ambassador for the Company
• Are open and flexible to ever-changing flight schedules
• Empower and respect fellow team members
• Strive for continuous improvement and increased profitability for the Company

They also have a rather detailed section on their website telling the prospective pilot what they can expect after being hired, and the working environment. All of that can be found on their What to Expect page.


New Hire Training:

• Basic Indoctrination at NetJets Operations Center in Columbus, OH (approximately 11 days)
  - Minimum of 5 days off to follow
• Initial Aircraft (Simulator) Training – Location varies and duration can exceed a month for certain types of aircraft; however, the average is usually 11 to 25 days
  - Minimum of 5 days off to follow
• After successfully completing training, pilot will be released to begin initial operating experience
  

Working Environment

• Cockpit/Pilot station size – Pilots must fit and be able to fully function in NetJets aircraft
• Aircraft assignments or changes to assignments are not based upon pilot size
• Owners will bring baggage and cargo of various sizes and weights that will be loaded by crewmembers
• Owners and passengers can and will smoke during flight
• Animals (including, but not limited to dogs, cats and birds) can and will be carried aboard the aircraft in the main cabin. Animals are not usually in cages. This means NetJets pilots have direct contact with animal hair, feathers, etc.
• With few exceptions, the maximum required duty day is 14 hours
• The minimum rest period is 10 hours

Sadly, at this time, NetJets is not hiring, however fear not. The need for pilots is beginning to grow, and they are always accepting applications. The best the to do is to submit your profile at their website. I plan on doing it. How about you?

Not your fathers Star Trek!

The shuttle has flown its last mission.  President Obama has cancelled plans to return to the moon.  NASA is getting restructured to perform a different type of mission.  The days of space exploration, as we know it, are gone.  It is now the dawn of a new age of Space Exploration.  The Final Frontier is now a new Final Frontier.  The real question is, what is happening now?  What is NASA planning out over the next 25 years?  Who is going to take on the role of the Astronaut now?  Well, those answers aren't too hard to imagine.

First up, we have Virgin Atlantic.  Sir Richard Branson has taken it upon himself to create the first commercial space fleet.   If anyone can pull off commercializing space flight, it would be Mr. Branson.  He has been a pioneer in the field of aviation, and it's clear that he is determined to bring this frontier to the common folk.  On that note, he is also essentially creating a new need for pilots.  Pilots will now become astronauts, of sorts.  Low earth orbit is not like what NASA has done, but it's still considered space.  Combine all of this with the fact that he has decided to create his 'spaceport' in New Mexico, and it's a win win for the United States aviation industry as a whole.  Oh, and if you ever get a chance to read this Richard, contact me.  I'm available.  I will fly for food.

NASA, on the other hands, appears to not have abandoned its mission of Space Exploration (thankfully).  NASA has released its Global Exploration Roadmap which details it's mission over the next 25 years, and it includes robotics, human working environments in space, a possible moonbase, Mars base, and the possibility of traveling to an asteroid in the future.  It's good to see that NASA is trying to move forward with its original intentions, even if programs have been scrapped.

Eventually, and likely not in my lifetime, we will have the technology to venture to new worlds, new solar systems, and to colonize extrasolar planets.  We have already identified a number of planets that could sustain life as we know it.  The immediate affects of the space industry are rather apparent.  There is massive potential growth for aviation jobs in the space industry.  Virgin Galactic has already shown that there is a desire for commercial based space travel, with customers lined up for flights and having already paid deposits.  The benefits are also limitless.  The time required for commercial flights across the globe can be cut down dramatically.   Technologies needed for sustained space flight can go to benefit mankind in ways we haven't even imagined yet.  Essentially, the sky is the limit. 

Hopefully, we will continue to innovate in ways not yet though of, and continue to offer the aviation industry new avenues of exploration, both terrestrial and extra-terrestrial.

Cap and Trade: EU vs the US.

Recently (within the last 6 years), the European Union has passed legislation that puts a 'Cap and Trade' system in place to help reduce carbon emissions and makes for a better atmosphere.  Essentially, companies have to purchase 'tokens' based on the amount of greenhouse gasses they produce, and the funds are used to develop technologies that are more environmentally friendly.  This sounds great, on paper.  They have introduced legislation that adds onto that the emissions given off by aircraft, and thus the airlines in the EU also now have to abide by that program.  This legislation is supposed to go into effect as of 2012.  

There's one little problem with the legislation as it stands, however:  They are forcing US based carriers to pay for the entirety of a flight that goes into their sovereignty as a destination.  Essentially, if a flight starts in Los Angeles, and flies to Frankfurt, the carrier would have to pay for the entire flight to Frankfurt, including the portion over foreign airspace and US airspace, in essence paying a 'tax' to the EU over US property.  That doesn't make any sense. If this were to stand as is, US carriers would have to pay billions in revenue on a yearly basis to the EU Emissions Trading System.  This is money out of the airlines pockets, directly into the EU pockets.  It would make more sense if the system was designed to reinvest directly into aviation for technologies that burn fuel more efficiently, but that is not the case.  This is basically the EU forcing their policies and beliefs on a different sovereignty.  

Honestly, it's a little scary.  I'm not going to argue that their intentions aren't good.   A simple read through the aviation portion of the EU ETS site tells me they are doing this with the intention of doing the right thing, building it as a model for other countries.  Their method, however, is wrong.  What gives them the right to impose their will on the US?  Nothing.

The overall cost to the airlines will be huge.  The Airlines will likely find workarounds to game the system anyway, which would most likely cause more emissions than before.  A good example is the fact that the US carrier may just land somewhere in Turkey, and then take the flight into their EU destination, avoiding a heft cost.  It was found that about 9% of an overseas trips would actually be within EU airspace, which means that the carrier should only have to pay for 9% of that flight.  Instead, the EU is forcing payment for the entire flight.

As it is, the US Congress has created a bill, HR 2594, that prohibits any US based carrier to pay any fees to the EU in their cap and trade scheme.  The bill essentially tell the EU to bugger off.  I agree with this bill.  The only problem is where does that leave the US carrier?  Will they have to cancel overseas business to the EU? Will they have to find longer routes to avoid EU airspace?  Only time will tell what's going to happen, but rest assured, it's going to happen soon.  We only have 2.5 months left in this year.  I, for one, will be keeping a very close eye on this situation.

Who new to follow?

Runway Girl.  Here blog can be found at http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/runway-girl/.

Her blog appears to be geared more toward technology, and what it has to offer the world of aviation. She covers everything from the use of tablets to seats in business class for across seas trips.  Her coverage of topics is very detailed, and her commentary is bright and refreshing.  On top of that, not only does she talk about the new technologies afforded customers and employees, but she also tests a lot of the technologies out herself.

Check her out, you won't be sorry!

Look at the size of that thing!

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is finally here.  After almost four years of delays, the first Dreamliner was delivered in September of this year.  Several delays ranging from manufacturing defects to assembly issues plagued the release of the 787, costing billions more in R&D than initially anticipated, but with the delivery of the first one, it would appear the payoff may have been worth it.

The aircraft itself is impressive.   Through the use of composite materials and newer technology for the engines, the aircraft has received an efficiency boost equal to that of the large jumbo-jets, but at the size variation of a medium sized jet.  This link from the Boeing website gives some good specifications for the aircrafts -8 model variant, with the most notable specification being:

Range:
7,650 to 8,200 nautical miles (14,200 to 15,200 kilometers)

The range of the aircraft is quite impressive, and with an overall fuel savings from the aircraft, flights overseas could become cheaper in the longrun, giving a large incentive for companies ranging from airlines to cargo to invest in the aircraft for their overseas operations.

The introduction of the Dreamliner is going to pave the way of the future for the airlines, giving an overall lower cost and high efficiency to their operations.  As a pilot, I look forward to hopefully flying this aircraft one day.  There are several variants that are being looked at, and they range from regional sizes to cargo variants, showing that the aircraft is very versatile, and may eventually replace the simple 727's and 757's we see now in domestic use.

NextGen, who's paying for this stuff.

"NextGen, the latest innovative technology in aviation designed to make our airways safer and more efficient than ever before."  This is one of those taglines you would see at the beginning of a presentation, with the typical response from the crowd something along the lines of 'ooooh' or 'ahhhhh'.  So, the question remains, what is NextGen?  See, I got your attention.  Well, simply put, NextGen is the Next Generation of Air Traffic Control, replacing our current radar tracking system with a more precise, more reliable GPS based system.  That's about as plainly as I can put it.  For a more detailed writeup on what it involves, you can click this link, and be given a pretty good rundown of what is it.  Now, granted, it's a wikipedia article, put it takes it's information from this FAA website, so it's rather reliable.  It involves 5 different elements to make it work, those being:

1. Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B). ADS-B will use the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite signals to provide air traffic controllers and pilots with much more accurate information that will help to keep aircraft safely separated in the sky and on runways. Aircraft transponders receive GPS signals and use them to determine the aircraft's precise position in the sky. These and other data are then broadcast to other aircraft and air traffic control. Once fully established, both pilots and air traffic controllers will, for the first time, see the same real-time display of air traffic, substantially improving safety. The FAA will mandate the avionics necessary for implementing ADS-B.
2. System Wide Information Management (SWIM). SWIM will provide a single infrastructure and information management system to deliver high quality, timely data to many users and applications. By reducing the number and types of interfaces and systems, SWIM will reduce data redundancy and better facilitate multi-user information sharing. SWIM will also enable new modes of decision making as information is more easily accessed.
3. Next Generation Data Communications. Current communications between aircrew and air traffic control, and between air traffic controllers, are largely realised through voice communications. Initially, the introduction of data communications will provide an additional means of two-way communication for air traffic control clearances, instructions, advisories, flight crew requests and reports. With the majority of aircraft data link equipped, the exchange of routine controller-pilot messages and clearances via data link will enable controllers to handle more traffic. This will improve air traffic controller productivity, enhancing capacity and safety.
4. Next Generation Network Enabled Weather (NNEW). Seventy percent of NAS delays are attributed to weather every year. The goal of NNEW is to cut weather-related delays at least in half. Tens of thousands of global weather observations and sensor reports from ground-, airborne- and space-based sources will fuse into a single national weather information system, updated in real time. NNEW will provide a common weather picture across the national airspace system, and enable better air transportation decision making.
5. NAS voice switch (NVS). There are currently seventeen different voice switching systems in the NAS, some in use for more than twenty years. NVS will replace these systems with a single air/ground and ground/ground voice communications system.  

Sounds amazing, doesn't it.  It sure does to me.  Some of the benefits include route efficiency, lower fuel costs, and tighter separation of aircraft.  Everyone wants this, especially the airlines.  There's one little problem with it all.  Who's paying for all of this?

First, lets give a very fast, quick rundown of the costs.  The Cato Institute wrote an article on what the costs of this systems implementation would be.  Initial estimates put the implementation around $40 billion (with a B), but new estimates are now placing it around $160 billion (yes, another B).  I don't know about you, but I don't have a billion dollars in my back pocket.  The article goes into a little more depth than I have, but the point has been made.  This is going to cost a lot.  So, again, the question is, who is going to pay for all of this?

The quick answer would be, "Well, Uncle Sam should pay for it. The .gov is implementing the program, which is something we can't control, so why should any of us pay for anything regarding that system?"  Well, times have changed.  We can't just get the government to pay for it.  I know I can't outright afford to put ADS-B equipment into my aircraft, some estimates are saying as low as $10,000 and as high as $50,000 for GA type aircraft, and the cost to put something like that into an airliner are even higher.  At the same time, aircraft would essentially be required to have this equipment to operate into controlled airspace (I like flying in class G airspace as much as the next guy, but sometimes, you just have to hit a class C or B airspace to get to your destination).  For the third time, we ask, "Who is paying for all of this?"

Well, there is really no answer for this.  Everyone has an opinion, including me.  So, here's my idea.  Have the .gov pay for all the implementation on their side.  Then, they are going  to have to help subsidize the GA field in some way, an example being 50% cost covered by the FAA, and then a different type of subsidized cost for the airlines (after all, this really is for them).  GA pilots end up paying out of their own pocket, and most of the time, don't have an aviation based income (based around that plane) to cover the rest of the costs.  The airlines, on the other hand, do have that ability.  The airlines can turn around and pass that cost off onto the consumer, and pay it off over a period of time.  Now, the good thing is that NextGen is supposed to have 100% functionality by 2025, which means we still have a good 13 years to get there.  Not every aircraft in the fleet has to be upgraded immediately.  If the airlines raise their ticket prices by $10 - $15 one way trip, per person, to simply cover the cost of this implementation, they could make that figure.  On that same account, an agreement should be made with the government to allow that additional per ticket charge to not be taxed, and held into some sort of trust fund, with the stipulation that those funds are only used to pay out for upgrading the fleet to NextGen capability. No tax would ever be paid out on those funds after they are used either, protecting the airlines.  Simple math would show that over just a few years, given the number of people that fly every day, and the number of flights, the cost would make up for itself.  

We do not need to implement GA user fees to do this either.  There's no need to.  As a  big proponent of the GA community, user fees would do nothing but harm the GA community as a whole.  Flight training, at this point, is so incredibly expensive.  Implementing GA user fees would finally put flight training out of reach for a lot of people.  It's already too much for some people.  Would be pilots simply balk at the idea of paying 40-50 thousand dollars to get the ratings they need to get a job, which has left us with an overall pilot shortage, but this conversation is for another time.  

So, there it is.  This is my idea to implement NextGen into our airspace system.  For the record, I think NextGen is an absolutely brilliant idea.  The ease of use and efficiency it brings is what this country has needed for its airspace system for a very long time.  But, like everything else, it comes down to cost. This is my idea.  What's yours? 

To TSA, or not to TSA. That is the question...

September 11, 2001 was a day that will forever be seared into my head.  I was awoken by a close friend telling me we were under attack and to turn the news on.  I put on CNN just in time to watch the second plane hit the World Trade Center.  I remained glued to the T.V. for the next four days.  I had no work to go to, as I had just started my vacation that fateful Tuesday, and was planning to fly to New Hampshire for a wedding.  Our lives were forever changed after that day.  The world of aviation was altered entirely.

There was, without a doubt, a severe lack of security needs at our nations airports.  No proper screening was in place, we could come and go to a terminal at our leisure, we could even take a blade on board an aircraft if it were no longer than 3 inches long.  This is how the terrorists were able to get by, hijack our aircraft, and do their bidding.  After 9/11, there was no doubt that we needed more stringent security at our nations airports.  Thus, the Department of Homeland Security was born, and the Transportation Security Administration was created.  The TSA is responsible for the passenger safety of all modes of public mass transportation in the United States.  They are tasked at averting the daunting reality that terrorists will do what they can to create havoc upon the American people.  I have no qualms about their intentions being noble, but when it comes down to it, their methods are less than subtle.

As time has gone on, the powers that be at the TSA have continued to up the ante in their quest to create a more secure way of travelling.  Little by little,  they continue to find ways to make it more difficult for terrorists to use our methods of mass transportation against us, but at what cost to the average law abiding citizen?  Last year, the TSA introduced a new full body scanner that is designed to detect the slightest of substances on a persons body (mind you, this is any substance, it doesn't matter).  So, if you take out everything except a receipt that you forgot in your pants pocket, it will see that.  The TSA agent is then notified that there is a foreign object, and a pat down ensues.  The body scanner uses 'radiation' to scan ones body.   RADIATION.  Now, we receive radiation every day from the sun, electronics, and whatever else gives off the slightest radiation, but it's radiation nonetheless.  The TSA states the amount of radiation given off by the scanner is no more than we would receive on a standard flight to our destination.  What they don't tell you is radiation doesn't dissipate from your body.  It accumulates over time.  Now, for the infrequent flyer, someone that flies maybe once every year or two, it's not so much of an issue.  The frequent flyers, however, that would be a long term problem.  I fly back and forth to Florida 4 to 5 times a year.  That's a lot of radiation over an extended period of time.  I'll get back to this in a moment.

If you opt out of the body scanner (which you can), you have to go through a thorough and invasive pat-down.  I have told myself many times if I ever go that route, one of two things are going to happen:  I will either request a woman to do it, or act in a manner that will make the male TSA agent VERY uncomfortable. Yes, I know it's not their fault they are told to do this, but at the same time, I believe I have the right to have a little fun at the governments expense.  Back on topic now.  The pat-down is a very invasive, and very intense pat down.  They literally run their hands along a persons entire body, head to toe, between legs, touching genitalia, you name it, they touch it.  It's a very uncomfortable situation.  At the pure essence of it, it is a search and seizure.

Now, back to the radiation thing.  My last flight down to Florida, I saw the guy in the line next to me opt out of the body scanner and get pat down.  After I got through security (I was lucky enough to hit the metal detector line), I walked up to him and asked him why he did that.  He said he was a doctor.  It doesn't matter if it's a small amount of radiation, it's still radiation, and he wants none of it.  The body doesn't get rid of it.  If a doctor won't go through it, why should I?

All of this brings me to my point of the legality and health safety of the situation.  We have already established that even though it's a very small amount of radiation, it's still radiation.  Would you want a pregnant woman going through that thing?  I know I wouldn't want my pregnant wife going through it.  What about the pat-down, is it legal?  It's arguable at best.  The 5th and 14th Amendments of our constitution state that no person that be unlawfully seized and searched without due process.  That means probable cause and a search warrant.  In this article, you will see that Texas has passed a bill that states "A person who is a public servant [acting under color of his office or employment] commits an offense if the person: (2) while acting under color of the person's office or employment without probable cause to believe the other person committed an offense: (A) performs a search for the purpose of granting access to a publicly accessible building or form of transportation." Sadly, this shouldn't have even needed to be passed.  It's already in our constitution, but as we have seen over and over, our government has pushed the constitution aside to do their bidding.  Last I checked, this law is still under review in the Appellet court system, and not implemented yet, as I'm unable to find a news article that says otherwise.

Benjamin Franklin once said "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."  How many terrorists have the TSA actually caught? None. The TSA's motives are noble, don't get me wrong. It's their implementation that is piss poor at best. The last attempted terrorist attack using an airplane as means was Christmas, when the famed underwear bomber came in from OVER SEAS (yes, did not even pass through our TSA system). That wasn't a fault of the TSA, that was a fault of several pieces of intelligence falling through the cracks and letting that lunatic on a plane from a foreign country. Our security measures were doing their job. They are a deterrent. No security framework will ever be perfect. But it is enough to be a deterrent. No amount of security will ever stop anyone from doing something if they want it done bad enough. We do not need to give up our freedoms and constitutional rights. Once we give these up, the terrorists have won. They see things like the TSA's increasingly tightening security mandates as a victory, because it causes undue duress to the common, law-abiding citizen.

We should not have to give up our liberties at the expense of a little safety.  The lessons of 9/11 have taught us that we can stand up to terrorism, and that the common citizen has more power than any fanatic ever will.

The Great Automaton Pilot

"Automation is the wave of the future."  Wait, did I just say that?  No, I didn't, but I've heard it said many times before.  In the commercial airline industry, that statement is likely said at least 10 times a week.  Automation has offered safety, efficiency, and savings.  It all but takes the human element of error out of the equation.  But, what about the pilots skills in the event of an automation failure?  Common sense would dictate that pilots have the ability to compensate through training.  By the time a pilot gets a job with a commercial air carrier, they typically have several hundred, or not thousands, hours of flight, as well as consistent recurring training, all of which is FAA mandated, and then there is the constant recurrent training required of the air carriers themselves.  With everything the FAA and air carriers require, shouldn't that be enough?  In a perfect world, yes, but in reality, things are a little bit different.

As an instrument rated private pilot with over 190 hours and currently working toward a commercial certification, I can absolutely appreciate the convenience of automation.  The use of the autopilot, the G1000 glass cockpit, and everything it offers, makes flying the aircraft from point A to point B a lot easier.  Complacency is my biggest enemy.  I've caught myself many times becoming too 'relaxed' and forcing myself back into scanning mode in the cockpit.  I spend hours outside of the cockpit reading up on systems and regulations, trying to keep my senses sharp.  I also tend to keep very hands on in the cockpit, continuously scanning, only using the autopilot when I need to.  Unfortunately, there are those pilots that become so complacent, that they practically become reliant upon automation, and that's when accidents happen.

This AVWeb article gives an interesting look at what happens when a pilot becomes complacent.  Reliance on automation has become too high.  Most training on an airline commercial level appears to be based upon using automation in the cockpit to perform the flight.  Emergency training appears to me primarily hands on, but the time training on those procedures compared to the time spent on hands off automation training appears to be waning.  Airlines want efficiency, because that means more money in their pocket.  Who can blame them, they are there to make money by providing the fastest and most efficient service, and make as much money that is feasible in the process.  It comes down to a Risk vs. Safety margin, and what balance between both offers an acceptable amount of risk, while offering the largest gain in profits and buffer for safety.  It may sound like there is basically a dollar figure on safety because there is.  The business is there to make money.  If they didn't, they would not exist.

So, what do we do about complacency with automation?  Simple really.  There needs to be more training on the use of the hands on technique at the airline level.  Recurrent training on the airline level, need to focus less on automation.  Once automation is learned, is easy to follow.  The human brain has a tendency to follow the path of least resistance, and easily retains the knowledge associated with that.  Automation is that path.  It's easy to follow.  Training, and recurrent training, needs to focus much more on the hands on approach.  the brain needs to be reminded constantly that 'you are the best option available', not the machine.  The AVWeb article puts it into a rather simple perspective: "...while we're ensuring those pilots maintain their flight-control skills, we should also be focusing on how to train airline pilots for the day when what they'll really need are better ways to manage complex systems and maximize cockpit resources."

The same can be said of GA pilots, only we have to motivate ourselves to do so.  We have to want to be the safest pilots we want to be.  Complacency is our biggest enemy.  The day we become complacent is likely to be a bad day.

Planes, Michigan, and Corsairs! Oh My!

Every once in a while, you come across a situation that is truly breathtaking, and totally surreal.  I could not believe this happened to me today.  Today, I decided to take a plane from KYIP to KJXN, pick a friend up, then fly us both to KHYX (Saginaw).  It was a nice IFR day, and I was in and out of the clouds for both legs of the flight.  I ended up picking up a visual approach at KHYX, and began my approach.  Not long after I entered the pattern, I heard "Corsair 179PT 8 miles North inbound landing 27 Saginaw County."  I really didn't give it much thought after that.  I continued to hear his calls in the pattern as I touched down.  After landing, I looked over and saw the airplane on the downwind.  I just stared for a few seconds.  I couldn't believe what I was seeing.  I could make out the long nose and unique rear stabilizer of what looked like an F4U Corsair.  I passed it off as visual illusion and went to taxi and tie down.  

Just after locking up my trusty 172, I looked up to see the aircraft I was looking at land, and was completely taken aback.  It was an F4U Corsair!  I couldn't believe my eyes!  What were the odds that I fly into a middle of nowhere airport, and right behind me, on that same day, someone flies in a World War II legendary warbird!?  I promptly walked up to the pilot as he hopped out of his aircraft and asked him if he wouldn't mind me looking over his aircraft.  He said he didn't mind at all, and then he left into a building.  I never did figure out why he was there.  Admittedly, I was curious, but I was too busy taking pictures, and just generally drooling over this magnificent piece of machinery.  

I touched her, ran my hands over her wings, and felt her from tail to nose.  She was amazing, and I felt like I could feel how alive she was.  

Every once in a while, something truly amazing happens, and you are there to witness it.  This was one of those days.  

Best laid plans...

Sometimes, it takes a while to realize your dream.  Other times, it's right in front of you, and you see it, but are too afraid to go for it.  Fear takes over and you walk another path, the safe path.  That's what happened to me.  I took that other path.  It took going full circle to come back and take the right path, and that is where I am.  I can remember being an adolescent fascinated with Top Gun, wishing I was Maverick flying that F-14 Tomcat through the sky, shooting down Migs (which, in the movie, were actually F-5's, because we couldn't get our hands on any Migs due to the fact that we were still in a Cold War with Russia), and dreaming of one day becoming a Naval Aviator.  Well, that dream never came to fruition, but the desire to fly still remained strong. Fast forward to 2007, and I finally got off my rear and signed up for flight lessons at the local FBO.  I knew nothing of the world of aviation other than the simulators I flew on my home computer and the sheer knowledge of military aircraft I learned throughout the years.

So, here I am, it's 2011, I'm on the verge of getting my Commercial Certificate, soon to move onto my CFI ticket, and I still have no idea what I really want to do in the long run.  Do I want to fly for the airlines?  How about a private charter company?  Is a corporate pilot job something I want?  Do I want to be a CFI for the rest of my career?  What about management?  These are all questions I hope to answer for not only myself, but possible help with those reading this.

So, as a wise man once said, "Sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride."