NextGen

control as we know it. This system will totally incorporate GPS navigation for much more accurate positioning, much closer separation, and more efficient, standardized approach and departure procedures for the nation’s airports. In an effort to better manage air traffic flows in and out of airports, allowing more flights in and out while maintaining the safest environment possible comes with a hefty price tag.

Older ground based radar systems will be replaced by the more modern satellite systems we are becoming more and more familiar with. These GPS positions for all aircraft will be available to ATC and the pilots in the aircraft themselves. They will display a real time continuous image of all traffic in the sky. However, since this is obviously not currently available and never has been in the past, major changes will need to take place to implement this technology in every aircraft, and in a timely manner.

Since every airport and aircraft will be required to have these capabilities, new systems and components will need to be installed in every single aircraft in operation. The funding for these changes are a very hot topic and obviously the government will be paying to implement the system, but the required equipment that companies, airlines, and general aviation will need to purchase could be an issue.

Looking at the big picture, it will cost more money to operate a more advanced system; therefore prices are going to go up across the board. Whether it be an added tax or a user fee, somehow this $20 billion project needs to be paid for. As far as paying for the equipment, I believe that the government should pay to install all required ground equipment at airports or terminal areas to get the system up and running. As far as the equipment that will be added to the aircraft, I believe it should be treated as another required for flight system and integrated with the overall price of building the aircraft. Therefore, the price of the aircraft will go up. These changes in general aviation on the other hand, I feel should also be funded by the government for all aircraft currently in operation. If it is a requirement to have this equipment, then some type of credit should be given to GA aircraft owners to install the equipment. After this, any repairs or component replacements should be that of the aircraft owner. Obviously these systems will start coming on all newly manufactured aircraft in the near future. Companies will have to pay for that themselves and add the value of these systems to the sales price of the aircraft.

As far as the systems and the operations that will be utilizing them, a higher percentage of the bill should be the responsibility of the more demanding operations. Obviously, 121 carriers will have a higher demand and utilization of this system then the guy flying off the grass strip in the Upper Peninsula. Once again, if the cost of operating increases, prices will rise. On top of this, there is risk in charging companies or private aircraft owners to install certain equipment, which is not yet proven. I’m not incredibly familiar with the system, but it seems there would have to be some type of testing/analysis period before total implementation. The following article provides significant detail to the previously stated financial issues; the FAA budget, the coming ATC problems that will require this new system, as well as the technology constraints and political constraints involved.   

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/transportation/airports-atc

Airport Security Since 2001

The events of September 11^th 2001, most definitely changed the security of the aviation as well as national security in general.  Many measures have been put into place at airports and around the industry aimed at preventing any similar event from happening again. From the public perception, everything seems to be much safer, but also more complicated at the airport. That raises the question, is it actually helping or hurting the industry

In my eyes aviation security is much better then it was at that point in time, but designing a security system and process for an industry that is evolving faster and faster everyday seems very difficult.  Security plans and processes are designed and implemented based on the industry and the way it operates, but when that changes, so must the security in some cases.

Despite the advances and improvements in airport security, holes in the system still exist. According to a report by reuters (link included below), airport security needs to come from every angle possible, and they are still concerned with smaller airports that lack funding for proper security. This should definitely be a concern at all airports that need security such as passenger screening, bag checks and airport perimeter security as well. The economy is in a rough spot and the airline industry is one of the hardest hit. During this time where every company is looking for ways to cut costs, security needs to be very careful to not remove measures that will jeopardize safety.

I believe these operations can be performed more efficiently. A lot of time is put into coming up with new ideas and systems for airport security. The ones that prove successful are then implemented for use until the next best advance comes along. Fact of the matter is, is that constant change is the most important reason for success in airport security.  These systems and procedures need to be constantly changed and unpredictable. If not, the observance of these procedures and the “routine” could be studied and memorized, in which case leaves the risk of someone being able to see the holes and know how to get through them. I believe more change more frequently in these processes may actually be beneficial.

Existing security now affects certain personnel in the industry as well as customers. Sure it is different now than 10 years ago, but we have all adapted to it and will continue to do so. As for the future, changes to the system could affect ones aviation career in certain aspects, such as background or background checks. If a certain measure is added that wasn’t present in the past, it could change ones eligibility or status. Clearances may become stricter and in that case would cost companies more to complete these background checks, which would make already having a clearance more beneficial. Added requirements for crewmembers may be implemented such as the carrying of a firearm, which will require more training for some. It could also affect simple aspects such as ones daily schedule. Passengers have to show up much earlier for flights than in the past to complete security measures, in some cases employees do as well.  The known crewmember access point article highlights this issue and some experiments being conducted to make it more efficient for employees.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/16/us-airport-security-idUSTRE78F6G720110916

Automation Pros & Cons

Much can be said about the automation used in aircraft around the world today.  The instrumentation and display of essential flight information continues to evolve in the cockpit and therefore training and operating procedures must do so as well, in order for pilots to maximize the available benefits that this new technology has to offer.  However, at the same time these systems that are designed to increase safety and effectiveness are being implemented, if they are not utilized to their full capacity or solely for the purpose they are designed, they may hinder the ability of the pilots operating them.

The biggest problem I see with automation in modern day aviation, without a doubt starts in the initial stages of training.  I am a firm believer new pilots or student pilots need a significant amount of experience flying before any exposure to these new systems, but then again what really counts as significant experience?  Pilots and students are not all the same, but it is just as important early as it is late, that pilots refrain from developing any type of dependency on this equipment.

     

Even though it is evident that automation has greatly contributed to safety in aviation and reduced the workload in the cockpit, it is the rare situations where pilots are faced with unfamiliar situations that one begins to question the possibility of automation being a problem.  I am not too familiar with the training pipelines of current airline pilots in the majors or regionals, but would bet that the majority of their training for emergency procedures, stalls, unfamiliar attitudes and system malfunctions are done in simulators more then in the actual aircraft model they fly.

Having been on aircrews in the Navy, I can say that in the military it is the exact opposite.  Every flight regardless of the mission includes emergency drills and procedures either in transit to and from operating areas and/or being the sole purpose of the flight.  Most training is done in the aircraft and a more minimal amount is done in the simulator.  I feel that this relaxes the situation much more when it actually occurs in flight; the crew is used to it, and has seen it before in the actual aircraft as opposed to just in a simulator.

As a management major and a future military pilot, I try to look at the issue from both perspectives.  The automation is there for a reason and is highly effective, and in my opinion the benefits outweigh the possible problems by a landslide.  However, I can easily see how reliability on this equipment can affect general flying abilities.  I believe the understanding of the aircraft itself and its systems is key in mastering their operation, but repetition is just as important, especially in emergency situations, and with the use of modern automation, that repetition and use of basic instruments and procedures has decreased.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3651/is_200101/ai_n8952663/

           

The Basics: How I got into aviation

My interest in aviation sparked when I was about five years old and watched the Blue Angels for the first time at Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda, Michigan.  I was fascinated by all military aircraft and aircraft in general. I knew at a young age that I wanted to pursue a career as a pilot.  My family has an extensive history of military service, my uncles, grandfathers, and father have all served and I knew this was the route I wanted to take.

My initial plan was to attend college after high school, earn a degree and apply for OCS, instead, I enlisted in the Navy immediately after high school in 2002, and was probably the best decision I've ever made.  At that time, financially, college did not seem possible.  I went to boot camp three months after graduation, completed aircrew candidate school, rescue swimmer school, A-school, and SERE school all in my first year.  I have been stationed in Pt. Mugu, CA, Jacksonville, FL, Brunswick, ME, and Newport, RI.  I have done two Western Pacific deployments and multiple DOD and counter narcotics detachments, prior to being selected for a commissioning scholarship.

I was selected for pilot and will attend flight school in Pensacola, FL upon earning my degree in Aviation Management from EMU.  I plan to finish out a minimum 20 year career in the military and hopefully move to the airlines after.  I would like to continue flying but also work towards an MBA and eventually hold a management position with an airline or aviation organization in the future.