NextGen

NextGen has four pillars: economic impact, sustainability, flexibility, and safety. Economic impact deals with how aviation has impacted the U.S. economy and creates millions of jobs. With NextGen it will help make the industry more efficient and possibly bring in more money. Sustainability is a pillar because it benefits the environment because NextGen will help to reduce the fuel burn and decrease carbon dioxide. There is also the possibility of having aircraft be quieter for the neighborhoods around the airport. Flexibility is that now routing is more direct which will help in fuel burn and can help with avoiding bad weather and other delays. Safety is always important in the aviation world. NextGen plans to have more accurate aircraft location information for ATC and for pilots flying. Weather information and information on airspace to help with communication between the controllers and those on the plane.

Out of these four pillars I would say that obviously Safety is the first priority next to flexibility because that also aids in a higher level of safety. Then economic impact to help bring in money followed by sustainability.

The next hurdle to jump with NextGen is how is it going to be funded? As said previously the aviation industry already brings in money and helps to grow the economy. I say why not say thanks for working so hard and actually trying to help the U.S. become better financially, unlike other programs. Plus if NextGen can prove it will have even more of an economic impact then why not invest? If not there is always the standard bake sale.

As for my future who would not be for safer and more modern way to travel. This article even goes into detail about how politicians are for this as well. The big problem right now to deal with is of course the funding, but once that is taken care of hopefully we can see an even bigger impact on the safety of air travel and the economy.

Retirement Age

Since the dawn of time the retiring age for pilots has been 60 years, until recently when a new bill was passed in 2007. Today the mandatory retiring age is 65, which could have happened for multiple reason. It could have been that people would feel safer with a well experienced pilot on board flying the aircraft, or that there could have been a shortage and in order to take care of the problem just increase retirement age by five years to buy us some more time. My personal favorite is that someone was paid off, but who really knows what happens behind closed doors.

How this effects everything five years from now is that at the age of 60 a pilot would have to retire. But now they have five more years to go, and it gives them five more years to share their stories and pass down their knowledge. For me personally I love that part, I enjoy listening to peoples stories and experiences. I learn so much from others, plus if I still have my medical at the age of 60 I will know that I have five more years of flying.

Who else wants to go to China?

Well, it's happened Hawker Beechcraft has been sold to Superior Aviation Beijing Co. Which begs the question as to who else has left to go to China...For a while China has had issues with their General Aviation, one blogger states that China is behind the curve and doesn't really know where to begin in order to bring General Aviation up to where the U.S. is. To me it makes perfect sense that China is purchasing U.S. manufacturers, how else are they going to learn the ways to have a successful world of aviation, and who is better to learn from then the leader? Today the Cessna Skycatcher is built in China and shipped on over to the U.S.. This saves the company $71,000 in production costs PER AIRCRAFT. Even though they save about 40% in cost on the down side over 650 jobs were lost in the plants of Wichita and Bend Oregon and that was just at the beginning of the sale over to China. By the end of it all over 8,000 jobs were lost in America so that the Skycatcher could be built in China...thank you China.

Now China is starting to learn our ways of how we are able to have a successful world of General Aviation they are starting to grow just like the U.S. When there's a company building faster and safer aircrafts people are going to be more willing to buy them, and that could be what China is going for. Having a safer GA there so they can make even more money off of us silly pilots.

One thing I've noticed with a few other companies that have ties with China is that they are just ties. China hasn't fully taken over. Just like the Cessna Skycatcher, China is only building that one type aircraft. They're not designing them and their not building all of the Cessna aircrafts. This seems to be the way with other companies like Cessna, China is only doing a part of it in order to reduce cost and in return making it more affordable for those looking to purchase.

If what I think is happening with China's GA actually happens this could potentially be bad news for the U.S. GA. More and more jobs will be moved and some might even go to China in order to purchase an aircraft completely Chinese made instead of keeping at least a portion of the money here in the States. But let's be honest here, what hasn't China partially taken over? It comes down to the person running the company if they're a gung-ho American lover or if they would rather keep some more green in their pocket.

Comair or Comsink?

Back in the 70s a couple of guys got together and purchased some Piper Navajo and flew out of Cincinnati. With their growth they purchased more and more aircrafts and became a public company in the early 80s. It wasn't until 1984 that they became a Delta Connection carrier and by 1999 Delta fully owned Comair and from then on Delta has owned Comair until it's resent closure. The story as to why they were shut down is because it wasn't financially smart to keep them running. The smaller regional airplanes cost more since they are not as fuel efficient, not to mention that as these planes age the cost to maintain them and keep them airworthy was almost not worthy (haha!). Another reason why Comair got the short stick in it all is that they weren't all that busy. From Detroit about 6% of the departing flights were from Comair and only 1% in Atlanta. The loss of jobs is devastating especially for the Cincinnati Kentucky area since they employed approximately 1,700 people.

The future for Regional Airlines is rather dark. Even though they account for almost half of the Nations schedules flights the costs are outweighing the profit forcing airlines to shut their regional down and closing the small routes. Because of all of the extreme prices the airlines are having to prioritize where their money goes. The major airports have more of a demand for the not only the airlines money but their attention as well causing the Regional Carriers to go on the back burner.

Coming from a Pilot who might have to take a job at the Regionals in order to build hours and reach higher jobs I hope that the major airlines will find a more suitable purpose in order to keep them alive. Comair may no longer operate however most Regional Carriers are merging together such as Pinnacle and Mesaba or SkyWest and ExpressJet. Hopefully this will aid in keeping the Regional Carriers alive and moving.

From this point I decided to look into First Officer jobs at the Regional level. I finally found a site that didn't require my money in order to look at the job posts and found out that CommutAir is hiring. The starting pay is low but somewhat normal for the first year at a Regional Carrier as a First Officer. Starting at $23-$25 an hour which may require me to live with my parents for a bit but I'm sure they won't mind and would enjoy my company. Plus who doesn't enjoy mama's cooking?

Is Flying Really Affordable?

Growing up and still today I have been very fortunate to have a family that goes on vacations about every other year to different places, typically to a beach though. Out of these several vacations I have been on a commercial airline only twice in my life, one to Disney World in Florida and the other to Denver Colorado where we departed from Chicago so we still had to drive. All the other places we've been to we've all piled in a car, sucked it up and started our adventure to wherever we were going. I must say that because of these car rides our family has become a lot closer, has many inside jokes, and stories. Not to mention all the experience we had from driving in different locations and in different situations. Typically my family travels in packs so my moms brother his wife and their three kids come along as well which just adds to the fun. This past summer the five of them the four of us (My dad, mom, sister and  myself) and my cousins fiance all traveled to Dauphin Island, AL which isn't your typical vacation spot and I understand that so this isn't my only example. We took a total of 3 cars to carry all of us and our luggage, plus another key factor to this is that all of us have drivers license even though the youngest just earned his a few months prior. This helps a lot because if we had to we could drive all through out the night but we didn't because we had travel points that we used to sleep in a hotel. Now to get into the nitty gritty of costs.

The closest airport to our destination that has airlines is Mobile, AL (MOB), there are four different airlines that fly into MOB. Not to mention that we would then have an hour car ride from the airport to our house on the beach and no car... Without the cost of the car a ticket for one person cheapest was about $455 per person from United and U.S. Airways round trip. I chose tickets from a Saturday to the following Saturday which is when we were traveling and made sure it wasn't on a holiday to get the best price option. The cost of gas for us to get down in my mothers 2008 Cadillac STS which gets about 22 mpg on the highway wast about a total of $650 to travel there and back. With 4 people in the car that totals to about $163 per person to travel down and back. Need I say more?

But like I said tickets to get into Mobile are probably higher because it's not the hot spot to be at. So earlier in the year once again my mother, sister, myself and my mom's brother, his wife, and their three kids went on a cruise. We chose to drive down to Miami, FL because once again driving made more financial sense then to fly. Even though the time of travel more than triples the savings meant that we could spend more on ourselves during the cruise. The cruise started on a Thursday and we returned on Sunday so I chose tickets on Travelocity this time because there were way too many options to search them all. I chose morning flights on Thursday so that we would make it in time for departure of the cruise and afternoon on Sunday which would give us time to load up and arrive at the airport in time for our flight home. The cheapest ticket was $321 per person from DTW to MIA. For this trip down we took my sisters 2011 Hyundai Elantra (which is a lot more comfortable than the Cadillac in the back seat) which gets about 38 mpg highway. We spent a total of about $700 in gas to make it to Miami and back, plus an $80 parking fee (which we would have had to pay at the airport anyways). But to make this seem more fair I'll leave the parking fee in. Three people (My sister, my mom, and myself) in my sisters car this came to be about $260 per person. The margin is closer for sure however it still would cost more to fly than to drive. And when you're saving $60 per person it comes to saving a total of $180.

I understand that a lot of pilots in training fly because they have a family member who is a pilot or is in the aviation industry with some flight perks. If that's the case more power to you why not travel by plane in arrive at your destination faster than if you were to drive. However my family doesn't have that luxury so we utilize our resources in order to find the cheaper option and to go where we want to go. All my life my mom says that she works so she can go on vacations, yes why not wait another year and save up the money for a plane ticket but if that were the case why not go somewhere nicer and still drive?

Is flying a luxury? That depends on who you're talking to. To my family it's an option for travel that we have taken a few times not necessarily a luxury. But why spend the extra money on flying when you can spend the extra time with your family and drive. If you were able to snag a great deal on airline tickets to go somewhere, more power to you. Or if you notice that flying is actually cheaper than driving once again don't be silly take the cheaper option. But some people are willing to spend the extra money to save time, and once again like I said it depends on who you're talking to.

So you ask, if we raise the time requirement if that will ultimately effect the price of an airline ticket? If a pilot wants to be an airline pilot I think they'll take the same measly pay and work their way up to a better salary even with the extra hour requirement in the beginning. That's just from talking to people in the area who fly, they are determined to make it in the airlines and that is what they've wanted ever since they were a little kid. "To be successful, you must decide exactly what you want to accomplish, then resolve to pay the price to get it." - Bunker Hunt. If a person wants it bad enough they'll do whatever it takes to get it. If you think there isn't enough people to go the extra mile I must say that I laugh at you. Look at the sports industry, all those athletes went the extra mile to climb to the top and they did whatever it took to get there. That is just the sports industry there are so many other fields where there are people who paid the price to accomplish what they wanted to accomplish, the airlines is a great example of that too.

Airline Safety and FAA Act

After the Colgan crash in 2009 the families of those who lost a loved one lobbied the lawmakers in order to increase the safety standards of the airlines. Because of the crash of flight 3407 (colgan crash of 2009) it showed many gaps in the airline system that could have prevented the crash and in return save lives. Since there was a problem Obama signed the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010. This act changed many safety standards, some of the highlights being a change in pilot duty periods in order to reduce fatigue, all airline pilots must hold an ATP (Airline Transport Pilot certificate) which increases the hours needed to be a pilot for an airline, and requiring that pilots are trained to recover from stalls and other unusual attitudes. These are just a few changes from the act that are now in place.

Although my dream job is not to be an airline pilot, that doesn't mean that the door is completely closed. However many of my friends are longing for the day that they work for their airline of choice, and this rule postpones that date for them because of the new ATP requirements going from only 250 flight hours to 1,500 flight hours minimum. This also effects not only Eastern Michigan's Eagle Flight Centers training but any flight school as well. Students will work their way up to Certified Flight Instructor and start applying to schools to be a CFI, but there's no room for them because the CFI's that are currently working there are stuck until they reach the minimum hours to eventually find that airline job they have been dreaming about. After discussing this topic before with my fellow aviation friends it seems silly to hire someone that has about 1,500 hours of flying to the practice area and back. Yes, they may have gone on a few cross countries with students, and back when they were working on their commercial rating experienced a few cross countries on their own but the majority is to the same area and back over and over again. Although the intention is good, does this specific rule actually increase the safety of the airlines?

One could say that in the extra hours required the pilot has a chance to experience problems while flying when there are fewer people at risk. An example of this could be if a pilot experiences an engine failure, through the experience they realized that staying calm and utilizing their checklist saved not only their life but the airplanes as well. However this is taught to a pilot in flight training on multiple occasions, but to live the experience and make believe the experience is two different things. However when you're flying as an airline pilot just starting out you don't have 1,500 hours in that aircraft and will be flying in areas that you may have never experienced. If you have an engine failure then it's going to be different then an engine failure in a training aircraft at the practice area that you know better than the back of your hand.

Do I agree with changing the flight hours in order to obtain the ATP? Yes I do, but I think 1,500 hours is too much. Maybe in increase from 250 hours to 500-700 hours makes a bit more sense. Being a pilot with just over 300 hours I can tell you that I am not ready to take on the responsibility of flying for airlines, but in about another hundred hours or two I might be. I think a lot of the changes that were created in this act were because of the Colgan crash in 2009. The crash is absolutely horrible and my heart goes out to those who have lost a loved one. However, I think some of these rules are just strangling pilots more with the rules and restrictions that are being put in place. The intentions are good, but I think it's a bit much.

Safety Standards

Safety standards are different in every country, even in the aviation world each country has a different approach. Today there is a bare minimum standard that many countries use, however some argue as to if these standards are too low. The United States (of course) has led the world in aviation safety, therefore we take the standards and became extreme over achievers. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) have set these standards, now there's talk about raising them causing these other countries to meet them. Today ICAO has rules on what language is used, mandated rest requirements, accident investigations, and ways to help with runway safety which are just a few of the many rules they have put into place. ICAO has published an 80 page document that goes into wonderful detail of all they do.
The question is if the safety standard bar should be higher for those who meet the bare minimum. In the document it shows the accident rate compared to by regions. It shows the traffic amount in the region compared to the accident rate. Africa had the highest accident rate compared to their traffic rate, which begs the question as to if these standards are high enough. With africa having the worst score they had just over 1 million planes for traffic with 17 accidents. I think everybody would like to see this number being zero but if there were only 17 accidents (3 being fatal) with over a million flights the numbers aren't that bad. In order to make these numbers closer to zero there could be more rules on rest periods and maybe more standards on maintenance requirements. But honestly I think they should be left alone, if the country wants their numbers to be better, like the United States, then they would increase safety on their own.
It would be nice if other countries tried to better the safety of the aviation world especially in their own home, it could create more jobs by having more mechanics or hiring people to create a new procedures and implement them. But once again I think that it's the duty of the country to do that on their own.