Air Traffic Control privatization is a very hot topic right now in modern day aviation. Many people say yes it should be privatized, while others say no it should not be privatized. There are many benefits to either side. Personally however, I feel that is should be privatized. Privatizing ATC would mean a fast forward in technology and would introduce new technology into aviation. NextGen is the future of air traffic control and would be a perfect time to be introduced when/if ATC were to be privatized. NextGen is a great piece of technology that adds many benefits to the Air Traffic Control world. According to an online article, "In 2003, Congress created NextGen, a $40 billion program slated to be completed by 2025, to transition the nation's airspace from 1950s ground radar to satellite technology that would allow aircraft to fly more direct routes and navigate around inclement weather, reducing delays. As envisioned, the technology would allow every controller to see the exact position of every plane, no matter where the controller worked." Not to say that what we have now as far as ATC goes is bad, its just that we need to keep up with the times and modern day technology, and the new system would really bring us up to speed on that.
On top of the modern day technology benefit, privatizing ATC has already proven that it works in other countries. "In countries such as Australia, Canada, Germany and the U.K., Mr. Engler said, privatized air traffic control systems effectively provide “a high-tech service that can be funded directly” by users. Privatization plans typically require operators of commercial, business and private aircraft to pay for services." So privatizing ATC has been proven that it works in other countries so why not try it in the USA? It makes sense to switch to the private sector as it is and there's nothing saying that it doesn't work anywhere else.
Now of course there are negatives with anything and this is no different with ATC being privatized. With all of this new technology, someone is going to have to pay for it. This is where it is going to hurt a lot of the GA population. " The proposal to privatize ATC will likely lead to user fees for general aviation, a measure that EAA continues to vigorously oppose." All of the fees that the General Aviation population already pays, to add another one for ATC doesn't really make sense. But in all honesty, if it is going to make the skies safer for everyone than maybe people will consider it. Yes the skies are safe now, but there's no such thing as being too safe, especially when it comes to aviation.
All in all, I believe that ATC should be privatized. There are too many factors that play into the decision that show that it works and it is beneficial for it not to be considered. It will introduce new technologies that bring Air traffic into the modern day society. And it has proven to work in other countries which shows that this system does in fact work. It will be interesting to see what happens and if ATC privatization does in fact happen.
References
1. Should air traffic controllers be privatized? (2015, September 28). Retrieved December 17, 2015, from http://articles.philly.com/2015-09-28/business/66932623_1_air-traffic-organization-national-airspace-system-the-faa
2. Keeping a Close Eye on ATC Privatization | AviationPros.com. (n.d.). Retrieved December 17, 2015, from http://www.aviationpros.com/press_release/12085497/keeping-a-close-eye-on-atc-privatization
3. House Panel Considers Privatizing FAA's Air Traffic Control System. (n.d.). Retrieved December 17, 2015, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/house-panel-signals-air-traffic-control-privatization-firmly-on-agenda-1416331332
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Sunday, December 6, 2015
ATC Privatization
Air traffic control being privatized is a controversial topic in today's aviation world. Some people are for it while others are not. GA flyers have traditionally spoken against the privatization of air traffic control. An online article said that, "In addition, a privatized air traffic control system would be funded by user fees, which would require the establishment of a whole new bureaucracy to administer these fees, and decimate small businesses that depend on these aircraft and airports for their livelihood." Air traffic controllers are not cheap, and knowing that these GA users would have to pay for it is a big factor in their decision.
Airlines have also spoken out against the privatization of air traffic control. One article spoke out against the privatization of air traffic for the airlines saying that, "Airlines need to pad extra minutes into published schedules to accommodate potential delays caused by the obsolete ATC system’s limitations." Having more direct routes provided by a better ATC system would account for that and make things better. There are some countries around the world that have privatized Air Traffic Control systems. Germany, Canada and United Kingdom are a few countries that have privatized air traffic systems that are doing well and prospering. An article said that, "About 50 countries have privatized air-traffic control during the last 20 years, and there has been no loss in safety." NextGen air traffic control would be a big part of this process of privatization. The FAA would have a big part of this privatization process as well as most of it would go through them. Personally, I believe that privatized air traffic control would be better and more efficient than what it is now. We have already seen other countries doing it and we see that it works. And as I stated earlier it would also involve the initiation of NextGen which is supposed to revolutionize Air Traffic as we know it. All in all, it would be interesting to see the changes that privatization brings if it were ever to happen.
References
1. (n.d.). Retrieved December 7, 2015, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeboyd/2015/10/06/time-to-privatize-air-traffic-control-the-right-way/
2. Stop the movement to privatize Air Traffic Control. (n.d.). Retrieved December 7, 2015, from http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/stop-the-movement-to-privatize-air-traffic-control/article_0e6c72ca-1c18-5826-902e-f9f06d46fb0a.html
3. Jansen, B. (2015, June 15). House transportation chairman: Privatize air-traffic control. Retrieved December 7, 2015, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/06/15/faa-air-traffic-control-rep-shuster-privatization-aero-club/71244404/
Airlines have also spoken out against the privatization of air traffic control. One article spoke out against the privatization of air traffic for the airlines saying that, "Airlines need to pad extra minutes into published schedules to accommodate potential delays caused by the obsolete ATC system’s limitations." Having more direct routes provided by a better ATC system would account for that and make things better. There are some countries around the world that have privatized Air Traffic Control systems. Germany, Canada and United Kingdom are a few countries that have privatized air traffic systems that are doing well and prospering. An article said that, "About 50 countries have privatized air-traffic control during the last 20 years, and there has been no loss in safety." NextGen air traffic control would be a big part of this process of privatization. The FAA would have a big part of this privatization process as well as most of it would go through them. Personally, I believe that privatized air traffic control would be better and more efficient than what it is now. We have already seen other countries doing it and we see that it works. And as I stated earlier it would also involve the initiation of NextGen which is supposed to revolutionize Air Traffic as we know it. All in all, it would be interesting to see the changes that privatization brings if it were ever to happen.
References
1. (n.d.). Retrieved December 7, 2015, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeboyd/2015/10/06/time-to-privatize-air-traffic-control-the-right-way/
2. Stop the movement to privatize Air Traffic Control. (n.d.). Retrieved December 7, 2015, from http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/stop-the-movement-to-privatize-air-traffic-control/article_0e6c72ca-1c18-5826-902e-f9f06d46fb0a.html
3. Jansen, B. (2015, June 15). House transportation chairman: Privatize air-traffic control. Retrieved December 7, 2015, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/06/15/faa-air-traffic-control-rep-shuster-privatization-aero-club/71244404/
Sunday, November 29, 2015
Medical Reform
Medical Reform is changing right before our eyes. On November 18th of this year, this new reform (The Pilots Bill of Rights 2) was introduced to the Senate commerce. This new reform has amendments on it that could change general aviation as we know it. In an online article, it stated that this Bill had a few changes in it, one of those changes being, "If you’ve held a regular or special issuance medical within the past 10 years, you may never need to get another medical certificate. Although this is just a bill that has not been passed yet, it has been getting good reviews.
Another topic of discussion in this proposed Bill is that, "Among other things, the law requires the FAA to give written notice to these individuals of their rights when the FAA is investigating them." As far as being "for" this proposed idea, it informs pilots being investigated of their rights which would help a lot of pilots who don't necessarily know the law. And personally that makes sense because every pilot should be informed when being investigated. Now if someone were to be against this idea, one could say that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Which although ignorance is no excuse, being informed of one's rights can and probably will save many people when being investigated.
Personally, I believe that medical reform isn't really necessary. The way it is now where pilots need to keep renewing their medical is a huge positive considering people's medical status can change. And if this were to change, if someone were to pass their medical once than their medical status could change without anyone knowing, which could potentially have mazy hazards. It will be interesting to see what comes about this.
References:
1. Closer than ever. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2015, from http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/November/18/Closer-than-ever
2. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2015, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2015/03/11/why-proposed-pilots-bill-of-rights-could-affect-air-safety/
Another topic of discussion in this proposed Bill is that, "Among other things, the law requires the FAA to give written notice to these individuals of their rights when the FAA is investigating them." As far as being "for" this proposed idea, it informs pilots being investigated of their rights which would help a lot of pilots who don't necessarily know the law. And personally that makes sense because every pilot should be informed when being investigated. Now if someone were to be against this idea, one could say that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Which although ignorance is no excuse, being informed of one's rights can and probably will save many people when being investigated.
Personally, I believe that medical reform isn't really necessary. The way it is now where pilots need to keep renewing their medical is a huge positive considering people's medical status can change. And if this were to change, if someone were to pass their medical once than their medical status could change without anyone knowing, which could potentially have mazy hazards. It will be interesting to see what comes about this.
References:
1. Closer than ever. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2015, from http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/November/18/Closer-than-ever
2. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2015, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2015/03/11/why-proposed-pilots-bill-of-rights-could-affect-air-safety/
Sunday, November 8, 2015
COMAC
The Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) has released their own mid size airliner the C919. I do not believe that this aircraft will receive FAA certification on the basis of this companies previous airliners. This corporation has also released a different type of aircraft called the COMAC ARJ21, which has also not been certified by the FAA. According to an online website, "It’s always a great thing to see a new entrant into the market, but this one feels like it is designed not to fill the global niche of mid-size, narrow-body aircraft. Instead, it seems to be designed to fill the need of urgent lift for the Chinese market." Which makes sense considering the Chinese market was in need of an aircraft of this nature.
If it were to be FAA certified, I don't see any challenge for US carriers. If anything its another aircraft for them to choose from. American carriers would still be considerate and faithful to Boeing and Airbus, but if another cheaper aircraft was certified I could see them exploring that option. But public perception wouldn't go over so well. Many people are afraid to fly and I feel like adding a new aircraft to the mix would only make this fear worse. People have learned to somewhat trust the aircraft that American carriers choose to fly and adding a foreign aircraft with hurt the public perception of flying. COMAC is a Chinese government owned company. The Chinese government also owns the Chinese airlines making it perfect for the airlines to purchase their own aircraft. COMAC has the ARJ21 which was also released but has not been FAA certified.
If the C91 were to get FAA certified, I do believe that other companies would enter as competitors. They would see one successful company and all try to do the same thing. Lastly, I do not believe Boeing or Airbus has responded to this new rollout. I do not believe they need to respond as they have already proven themselves and have a huge share of the market. They both have respectable aircraft that can compete with the C919.
References
1. A Closer Look at the Comac C919 - Why Does it Exist? - AirlineReporter. (2015, March 18). Retrieved November 9, 2015, from http://www.airlinereporter.com/2015/03/closer-look-comac-c919-exist/
If it were to be FAA certified, I don't see any challenge for US carriers. If anything its another aircraft for them to choose from. American carriers would still be considerate and faithful to Boeing and Airbus, but if another cheaper aircraft was certified I could see them exploring that option. But public perception wouldn't go over so well. Many people are afraid to fly and I feel like adding a new aircraft to the mix would only make this fear worse. People have learned to somewhat trust the aircraft that American carriers choose to fly and adding a foreign aircraft with hurt the public perception of flying. COMAC is a Chinese government owned company. The Chinese government also owns the Chinese airlines making it perfect for the airlines to purchase their own aircraft. COMAC has the ARJ21 which was also released but has not been FAA certified.
If the C91 were to get FAA certified, I do believe that other companies would enter as competitors. They would see one successful company and all try to do the same thing. Lastly, I do not believe Boeing or Airbus has responded to this new rollout. I do not believe they need to respond as they have already proven themselves and have a huge share of the market. They both have respectable aircraft that can compete with the C919.
References
1. A Closer Look at the Comac C919 - Why Does it Exist? - AirlineReporter. (2015, March 18). Retrieved November 9, 2015, from http://www.airlinereporter.com/2015/03/closer-look-comac-c919-exist/
Sunday, November 1, 2015
Aviation Organizations
In modern day aviation, there are many organizations that people can become apart of. Having already received my private pilot certificate, I became a member of AOPA (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.) According to AOPA's website, "AOPA protects the rights of general aviation pilots and aircraft owners to fly while keeping general aviation safe, fun, and affordable." AOPA deals mostly with general aviation and offers numerous benefits for its members. They offer flight planning services on their website which is always a helpful tool. Another major benefit they offer is many different types of insurance. Everything from aircraft owners insurance to hangars insurance and even CFI insurance plus many more. Being a member of AOPA even offers car rental discounts and even pilot protection services. And we all know being in aviation can be very expensive, but being a member of AOPA offers financial services and help for people pursuing a career in aviation or even just buying and owning an aircraft. Being a member in AOPA is very important for any aviator not just for these reasons already mentioned, but the fact of being a member in such an established organization is very helpful knowing that they can help you with pretty much anything you need help with in your aviation career.
Being an aviation management major, there is another organization in which it its beneficial to be apart of. American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) is "the world's largest professional organization for airport executives, representing thousands of airport management personnel at public-use commercial and general aviation airports." Being an airport manager or in management, this organization is the one for you. Once you become a member, you get an accreditation next to your name saying you are a member. Working in the aviation industry it is a nice honor to have the accreditation next to your name. Other benefits that come with this membership, is a automatic subscription to Airport Magazine as well as all of the latest information in the aviation society. They also offer 80 different types of seminars and workshops that members get discounted rates to attend. All in all being a member of either organization only offers benefits which can only help someone pursuing an aviation career.
References
1. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2015, from http://www.aopa.org/
2. Home. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2015, from http://www.aaae.org/
Being an aviation management major, there is another organization in which it its beneficial to be apart of. American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) is "the world's largest professional organization for airport executives, representing thousands of airport management personnel at public-use commercial and general aviation airports." Being an airport manager or in management, this organization is the one for you. Once you become a member, you get an accreditation next to your name saying you are a member. Working in the aviation industry it is a nice honor to have the accreditation next to your name. Other benefits that come with this membership, is a automatic subscription to Airport Magazine as well as all of the latest information in the aviation society. They also offer 80 different types of seminars and workshops that members get discounted rates to attend. All in all being a member of either organization only offers benefits which can only help someone pursuing an aviation career.
References
1. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2015, from http://www.aopa.org/
2. Home. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2015, from http://www.aaae.org/
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Global Airlines
In aviation today, long haul carriers are a big part of traveling. And there is a big dispute from the American Airlines saying international airlines are receiving subsidies. The big 3 international airlines competing for government subsidies Emirates, Qatar as well as Eithad airlines. American Airlines, Delta Airlines as well as United Airlines all had their executives meet with the Obama Administration to talk about how the big three international airlines are receiving these subsidies. According to an online article, "They allege that since 2004, Emirates, Qatar Airways and Etihad Airways have received $40 billion in hidden subsidies from their governments." 40 billion dollars is no small number especially when you think about how many passengers fly these airlines every year.
Airlines based in the united states are no strangers to receiving subsidies either. Boarding Area.com says that, "Between 1918 and 1998 the federal government spend $150 billion in support of aviation." $150 billion spread over 100 years is not on the same scale as $40 billion spread over the last few years but its still money to consider. Another topic of discussion in this debate is when aircraft are purchased under market interest rates. Selling aircraft through the Export-Import Bank is something both American as well as international airlines do. "Boeing, which has sold hundreds of large jets to Emirates and other Middle Eastern airlines, strongly defends the Ex-Im Bank." So it is possible for American airlines to sell through the bank, but purchasing aircraft via this option is not as available. All in all, I don't believe that the global playing field is fair. I do feel like the field is tipped in the international favor as they are more susceptible to receiving larger amount of government subsidies. This is a very controversial subject that has been an ongoing issue for years and will probably continue to be an issue for years to come.
References
1. LINDENBERGER, M. (n.d.). American Airlines leading fight against three foreign rivals. Retrieved October 26, 2015, from http://www.dallasnews.com/business/airline-industry/20150304-american-airlines-leading-fight-against-three-foreign-rivals.ece
2. US Airlines Have Received More Subsidies than Middle East Ones - View from the Wing. (2015, April 8). Retrieved October 26, 2015, from http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2015/04/08/us-airlines-have-received-more-subsidies-than-middle-east-ones/
Airlines based in the united states are no strangers to receiving subsidies either. Boarding Area.com says that, "Between 1918 and 1998 the federal government spend $150 billion in support of aviation." $150 billion spread over 100 years is not on the same scale as $40 billion spread over the last few years but its still money to consider. Another topic of discussion in this debate is when aircraft are purchased under market interest rates. Selling aircraft through the Export-Import Bank is something both American as well as international airlines do. "Boeing, which has sold hundreds of large jets to Emirates and other Middle Eastern airlines, strongly defends the Ex-Im Bank." So it is possible for American airlines to sell through the bank, but purchasing aircraft via this option is not as available. All in all, I don't believe that the global playing field is fair. I do feel like the field is tipped in the international favor as they are more susceptible to receiving larger amount of government subsidies. This is a very controversial subject that has been an ongoing issue for years and will probably continue to be an issue for years to come.
References
1. LINDENBERGER, M. (n.d.). American Airlines leading fight against three foreign rivals. Retrieved October 26, 2015, from http://www.dallasnews.com/business/airline-industry/20150304-american-airlines-leading-fight-against-three-foreign-rivals.ece
2. US Airlines Have Received More Subsidies than Middle East Ones - View from the Wing. (2015, April 8). Retrieved October 26, 2015, from http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2015/04/08/us-airlines-have-received-more-subsidies-than-middle-east-ones/
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Cargo Carriers
After the Colgan accident, a lot of regulations changed in the industry. Some of what changed is flight and duty requirements based on when the pilots day begins. According the FAA website, "The new rule incorporates the latest fatigue science to set different requirements for pilot flight time, duty period and rest based on the time of day pilots begin their first flight, the number of scheduled flight segments and the number of time zones they cross." This is different from the previous regulations because they did not take into account time zones and other factors involved in the new regulations. There is also a 10 hour minimum rest rule. Within this 10 hour minimum rest rule, pilots must be able to get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. This regulation has changed since the old rule was only 8 hours of minimum rest.
Cargo carriers have a different set of rules and regulations which has caused a bit of controversy. According to ALPA.org, "U.S. domestic pilots have a flight-time maximum of 30 hours in 7 days, while flag pilots are allowed up to 32 hours in 7 days. Supplemental pilots can fly 48 hours in a 6-day period, or 60 percent more than domestic pilots." This has caused a controversy because cargo pilots believe that isn't fair that they don't have the same rules as domestic carriers. I feel like cargo carriers were excluded from this rule for more then one reason. The main reason is that it would cost the carriers a lot more to hire more pilots to fill in the absence of the pilots they would have had if they were to switch to the new regulations. The other rule that I believe the cargo carriers have been excluded from the rule is because they do not carry passengers. Personally I don't agree with this rule because there are still lives on board the aircraft and all lives matter. With that being said, of course I believe they should be under the new rules. It isn't fair for them when they are doing the same job but they aren't carrying any passengers.
If cargo carriers were to change over to these new rules, from the management side you would have to hire more pilots immediately. All of the extra hours that would have been filled with pilots can no longer be filled because pilots get longer rest requirements. Also, needing more pilots affects your budget as a company which means you would have to increase your prices, or some aspect in order to make up for the new budgeting.
References
1. Press Release – FAA Issues Final Rule on Pilot Fatigue. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19, 2015, from https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=13272
2. Flight Time/Duty Time for Air Cargo. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19, 2015, from http://www2.alpa.org/alpa/DesktopModules/ViewAnnDocument.aspx?DocumentID=5524
Cargo carriers have a different set of rules and regulations which has caused a bit of controversy. According to ALPA.org, "U.S. domestic pilots have a flight-time maximum of 30 hours in 7 days, while flag pilots are allowed up to 32 hours in 7 days. Supplemental pilots can fly 48 hours in a 6-day period, or 60 percent more than domestic pilots." This has caused a controversy because cargo pilots believe that isn't fair that they don't have the same rules as domestic carriers. I feel like cargo carriers were excluded from this rule for more then one reason. The main reason is that it would cost the carriers a lot more to hire more pilots to fill in the absence of the pilots they would have had if they were to switch to the new regulations. The other rule that I believe the cargo carriers have been excluded from the rule is because they do not carry passengers. Personally I don't agree with this rule because there are still lives on board the aircraft and all lives matter. With that being said, of course I believe they should be under the new rules. It isn't fair for them when they are doing the same job but they aren't carrying any passengers.
If cargo carriers were to change over to these new rules, from the management side you would have to hire more pilots immediately. All of the extra hours that would have been filled with pilots can no longer be filled because pilots get longer rest requirements. Also, needing more pilots affects your budget as a company which means you would have to increase your prices, or some aspect in order to make up for the new budgeting.
References
1. Press Release – FAA Issues Final Rule on Pilot Fatigue. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19, 2015, from https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=13272
2. Flight Time/Duty Time for Air Cargo. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19, 2015, from http://www2.alpa.org/alpa/DesktopModules/ViewAnnDocument.aspx?DocumentID=5524
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)