The Rise of Recreational UAVs

1) UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) technology has been regarded by some industry experts as the most dynamic growth sector of  the aerospace in this decade (Cavoukian 2012). Heck even my uncle and cousin that live across the street just got little drones for Christmas and are out using them. Over the past 5 years the UAV community has evolved from strictly a military technology to becoming a recreational hobby (think RC planes) and even being used commercially as well (Amazon's Prime Air). If you YouTube or Google UAV videos you can find a ton of civilians using their purchased drone taking it to new heights especially with either a GoPro attached or some drones even come with cameras attached. Just this past year there was a video that was a huge internet hit where a man flew his drone into a large firework display and it was magnificent (here's the link for those interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9KZ3jgbbmI). UAVs were being used for hunting at one point but there has recently been an uprising against drone-assisted hunting in multiple states leading to them being banned. In a FOX News report multiple men from hunting groups claim that "the use of drones to aid in hunting is inappropriate and would essentially undermine the concept of fair-chase hunting" (FoxNews 2014). UAVs have recently become a problem near airports as well. Apparently some recreational users have been interfering with the airspace close to Washington International airport that it led the FAA to construct an NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) about small UAVs. In this NPRM, it proposes that, "unmanned aircraft systems weighing less than 55 pounds and not for recreational or hobby use and with necessary equipment for safe and efficient operation can be used in the national air space." The small UAS (unmanned aircraft systems) that could be used in accordance with this NPRM are as follows: crop monitoring/inspection, research & development, educational/academic uses, power-line/pipeline inspection in hilly or mountainous terrain, antenna inspection, aiding certain rescue operations such as locating snow avalanche victims, bridge inspections, aerial photography, and wildlife nesting area evaluations. Non-recreational use of UAS is accommodated by the FAA through the use of special airworthiness certificates, exemptions, and certificates of waiver or certificates of authorization (Foxx 2015). So far the FAA has published a requirement stating that "all owners of small unmanned aircraft or drones weighing between 0.55 and 55lbs must have it registered before taking to the skies" (knowbeforeyoufly.org).

2) I do see UAVs integrating into the National Airspace and I think the way it will be done is through altitude limitations. Already UAVs aren't supposed to be out of sight of their operator and I think that rule will try to remain to be enforced if they integrate into the NAS. When a UAV enthusiast registers their aircraft, I think it will evolve to the point where they are required to have some sort of GPS tracking system on them if there already isn't one. Either that or they simply limit the altitude that UAVs can operate (maybe strictly Class G airspace)? I imagine that it would further clutter the air space in the US but as long as people follow the rules and keep them away from airports I don't see why it would be a problem.

3) UAVs have greatly aided in our decreased human involvement when it comes to aerial bombing. According to an article written by Andrew Callam, "by October 19th, 2009 had conducted 41 strikes under President Obama compared with the same number over 3 years under former President Bush. The agency has conducted 11 strikes in Pakistan in the first month of 2010." In the military the offensive capabilities of the UAV has 3 broad operational concepts. The first being to suppress enemy air defense. Second, UAVs are used in combat to support counterinsurgency operations. Third, UAVs are used to find and eliminate targets in the field of combat (Callam 2010). Now that last concept is where things can get a little gray. What exactly is a target, and is eliminating the target worth the additional casualties that could come with it? In the article previously mentioned by Callam he starts with an anecdote about a 2009 drone strike that took out the alleged leader of the Pakistan Taliban. Great news yes, but not when you consider that prior to this drone strike there were 16 drone strikes in the 14 months leading up to this assassination dealing somewhere between 201 & 321 additional casualties. The main issue with military UAVs is that although the images they can see are at most times clear; without complete intelligence on the ground drones can (and have) lead to civilian casualties.

4) http://uavcoach.com/uav-jobs/ this website has a plethora of UAV job openings that range from actual pilots and operators to field representatives and product marketing positions. Also, if no one is aware, Eastern offers an elective in UAV and the class is titled: CET 273 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles so if you're stuck looking for classes to fill your schedule this is one I recommend checking out!

Works Cited

 Cavourkian, A. (2012, August). Publicsafety.gc.ca (Canada, Information and Privacy Commissioner). Retrieved February, 2016, from http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cnmcs-plcng/cn29822-eng.pdf

Fireworks filmed with a drone [Vid]. (2014, May 13). Drone Hub.

 Eyes in the air: States move to ban drone-assisted hunting | Fox News. (2014, March 25). Retrieved February 13, 2016, from http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/03/25/eyes-in-air-states-move-to-ban-drone-assisted-hunting.html

 Foxx, A. (2015). Operation and certification of small unmanned air systems (Vol. 80, Ser. 35, pp. 3-6) (United States, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration). Washington, DC: Federal Register. Retrieved February, 2016, from https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-02-23/pdf/2015-03544.pdf. 

 

Callam, A. (2010). Drone Wars: Armed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. International Affairs Review, XVIII, 3rd ser. Retrieved February, 2016, from http://www.iar-gwu.org/node/144 

 

Flight and Duty Regulations in the Cargo World

1) The old saying goes, "aviation rules are written in blood" meaning that necessary changes get made in this industry whenever a significant loss of life has occurred. Colgan 3407 is no different. Now although it is blatantly clear thanks to the NTSB investigation that the pilots in this situation were severely inexperienced (or at least not the most ideal pilots to fly); some of the immediate changes made to operate in as a 121 airline pilot may be a more kneejerk reaction due to the incident. After Colgan the NTSB recommended that a few new rules get put in place in order to operate as a 121 pilot. The first being a recommendation to establish an electronic database for pilot records to improve pilot monitoring and the hiring process (Schaal 2013). The transition from paper to electronic can be a long process however so this could be a rule that isn't implemented until the database can be used nationwide by 121 air carriers. Another rule that was pushed for change after the Colgan incident was the requirement of remedial crewmen training for those who have demonstrated deficiencies or have failed a section of their training and training specifically for proper stall procedures, stall stick pusher readings as well as training to recognize flying into potential weather events like icing conditions. These rules are all directly related to the events and lack of recognition that led up to the Colgan incident. Another issue that was considered a factor was pilot fatigue and sure enough, in the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010; duty time was addressed as follows, "the Administrator of the FAA shall issue regulations based on the best available scientific information to specify limitations on the hours of flight and duty time allowed for pilots to address problems relating to pilot fatigue." In the Act, it goes further in depth on what they would look for in regards to pilot fatigue like the time of day a "duty" begins, the number of takeoffs and landings conducted in a duty period, the effects of commuting and length of commute, and rest environments among many other factors (Airline Safety & FAA Extension Act 2010). Now the biggest and most influential rule that changed due to the Colgan incident was the flight hours required in order to receive an ATP (airline transport pilot) certificate for a 121 carrier. Prior to the incident, a First Officer only needed 250 flight hours to work for a 121, but after the incident that hours requirement sky-rocketed to 1,500 flight hours just to become a First Officer in a 121 airline operation. This has had the largest effect on student pilots because on average, a pilot obtains around 200-350 hours in their pursuit of a commercial and CFI(I) certificate , so they are left with coming up with another 1,000 hours of flight give or take before they can even become a first officer for a regional air carrier.

2) According to CFR 117.11 section A subsections 1,2, & 3 states that "no certificate holder may schedule and no flightcrew may member may accept an assignment or continue an assigned flight duty period if the total time: exceeds the total time in Table A of this part if the operation is conducted with minimum required flight crew,  or will exceed 13 hours conducted with a 3-pilot flightcrew, or will exceed 17 hours with a 4-pilot flightcrew." Table A lays out a maximum flight time in reference to the time of the report which is as follows: from 0000-0459 the maximum flight time is 8 hours, from 0500-1959 the maximum flight time is 9 hours, and from 2000-2359 the maximum flight time is 8 hours. The key difference here from a cargo operator over an airline is the 9 hours that can be the max flight time rather than the concrete 8 hours of flight duty in a 121 airline operation. Also, the more pilots included in a cargo operation the longer the flight can be conducted before rest is required (refer to table C in part 117) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/part-117/appendix-TableC).

3) I believe that cargo operators are exempt from the new rules because due to the high demand of their operation they need pilots operating at all times. I also think it has something to do with what is carried on the aircraft. In the view of most, cargo or things that are inanimate are not seen as more important than an aircraft loaded with 200+ people or even anything over the 4-8 crewmembers that may be aboard a cargo plane should the situation get disastrous. I also believe that this is partially why a majority of cargo pilots are former military because they are used to working ridiculous hours and handling heavy workloads. I feel the cargo industry has a form of masculinity and machoness to it that isn't in place in the airline industry due to the demand and value of life on board the aircraft.

4) I think cargo carriers should be included in the new flight duty and limitation rules because if it is something that is being implemented in the airline industry I don't see why cargo carriers wouldn't be included or embrace it either. Especially with the measurement of fatigue. I think pilot fatigue affects every pilot equally regardless of the type of operation they run, so for a cargo carrier to allow an extra hour (even if it's "just an hour") during the peak times of the day (0500-1959) that their pilots can fly before requiring rest seems like pushing the envelope. I think this could be a reason why cargo carriers aren't seen as an illustrious career choice and often receive the nickname "cargo dog" because they deal with heavier workloads and worse conditions than an airline pilot goes through.

5) If cargo carriers were included in the new duty limitations then I think it would make a manager's job a bit tougher. They need for more pilots would continue to increase to a demand greater than it is already at. Also, managers of cargo carriers would have to be very careful in planning the routes and destinations that they choose their pilots to fly. Either shortening the routes or bringing more pilots on the trip would be ways that a manager could work with the new limitation rules, but that would in turn lead to paying more wages (more pilots on board) or losing revenue for the company (shortening or possibly ending further routes). I think the limitation would put a lot more stress on a manager and you could possibly see the separation of a company over a few hubs across their intended region so that way they could maintain their routes but depart from areas a few hours closer in order to make it within that concrete 8 hour flight duty limitation.

Works Cited

Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 retrieved from: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ216/html/PLAW-111publ216.htm

Schaal, D. (2013, November 05). FAA Issues New Pilot Training Rule to Fix Colgan Air Deficiencies. 

14 CFR 117 Table A & C retrieved from: http://www3.alpa.org/portals/alpa/committees/ftdt/Part-117-Flight-Time-Limitations-and-Rest-Requirements.pdf

General Aviation Medical Reform

1)  Currently, the GA push for medical reform is looking to remove the requirement needed to go in and renew a 3rd class medical certificate every 24 months (2 years) if a pilot is over 40 years old and every 60 months (5 years) if the pilot is under 40 years old. In the proposed reform, a pilot who has held a 3rd class medical certificate (including special issuance) over the past 10 years would not be required to go through the FAA medical certification process again (Tennyson 2015). This rule rule comes with some stipulations which are: the aircraft to be flown must be 6,000lbs or less, the pilot can only carry up to 5 passengers, the altitude flying must remain below 18,000ft, and the speed of the aircraft cannot exceed 250kts (Tennyson 2015). The need to apply and test for a 3rd class medical would only be required to those who are initially applying like a new student pilot, or those requiring a special issuance certificate or those who haven't held a current medical certificate for over 10 years since the legislation. Also, the proposed bill would require private pilots to undertake a free online "aeromedical factors" course once every two years as well as a visit to their physician once every four years (Bergqvist 2015). Although this trip to the physician seems like a similar concept to applying for a 3rd class medical the difference is that you don't have to report the outcome to the FAA, just simply make a note of the visit in your logbook and have the form that is required to be filled out in your logbook as well (Tennyson 2015a).

2) Currently the medical reform has been included in a "Pilot's Bill of Rights 2" which was introduced by Senator Jim Inhofe last February (Tennyson 2015). I'm guessing this makes the medical reform a "bill" so to say and it has been approved by the Senate and is currently in the process of getting through the House before it can be signed by the president.

3) An aspect of the medical reform that I would like to analyze is the form needed and the 4 year checkup required by pilots. One "for" on this topic is that it ensures the pilot is still medically sound to fly and with the exam being conducted with a personal physician there should be a relaxed comfort level so they pilot won't be afraid to reveal information. In the same aspect though, the personal physician could bypass certain tests they don't see necessary from their "medical judgement" and ok the pilot since they know them personally which could lead to a potential medical condition overlooked. Also, the fact that the medical conditions aren't required to be reported to the FAA unless specifically requested seems very discerning. This makes me believe that a pilot could potentially be unfit to fly due to some medical condition, but as long as they have the form signed and made a note in their logbook of the doctor visit, they technically are still able to fly without FAA intervention.

4) Personally I don't see the medical reform as being necessary. I think the requirement the FAA had in place where a pilot over 40 had to go for renewal every 2 years and every 5 years for a pilot under 40 was fine. I think this reform was instituted more for those older pilots so they can continue to fly as they age without having to go in for a medical certificate renewal. I also think the reform was put in place to aid in the growth of General Aviation by not requiring a renewal of the 3rd class medical unless you require a special issuance or are a new plot. The "10 years prior legislation" rule imposed in the medical reform seems excessive; for example, I would still be able to fly under this rule because I applied and received my first class medical certificate in 2011 so I would still be eligible to fly after this year (the 5 year mark) if I wanted to without needing ANY medical examination whatsoever. I understand from the GA's perspective how big of a reform this is for their aging members, but I just feel it could potentially lead to some medically unqualified pilots flying when they shouldn't be flying for the safety of other pilots in the air.

Works Cited

Tennyson, E. (2015, December 15). Full senate passes medical reform. In aopa.org.

Tennyson, E. (2015, December 9a). Third class medical reform FAQs. In aopa.org. Retrieved January 30, 2016.

Bergqvist, P. (2015, December 17). Senate passes third-class medical reform. In flyingmag.com.

Pilots and Depression

1) I'll never forget March 24, 2015. I was going for my (at the time) daily run on the treadmill at my local rec center and all of a sudden the TV news channel simultaneously project a large heading, "Commercial airliner crashes in French Alps". I knew right then there would be no survivors but I as I continued my run I observed the news as little details began to unfold about the recent tragedy. Germanwings flight 9525 was scheduled to depart Barcelona, Spain and land in Dusselfdorf, Germany on March 24, 2015. Unfortunately this flight did not make it to its final destination as the A320 was reported to be downed somewhere in the French Alps 30 minutes after takeoff. Although the official report is not available, the details that have been released in the Preliminary Report by the BEA and those that are found on publicly accessed websites indicate that the co-pilot of flight 9525 intentionally programmed the aircraft into a controlled descent into the mountains. In the BEA report, at 9h 30min 08s the pilot notified the co-pilot that he would be leaving the cockpit and asked the co-pilot to take over the controls (assumed the pilot left to use the lavatory) (BEA 2015). 45 seconds after the captain left the selected altitude of the A320 on the FCU (flight control unit) was changed from 38,000ft to 100ft and the autothrust setting was changed to "THR IDLE" mode (BEA 2015). Both of these setting changes along with a change to a "selected" speed management of 308kts further indicate that the crash was deliberate. Over the course of the next/ remaining 11 minutes of the flight there were multiple contacts to the cockpit from various centers/towers/other aircraft/ and military to declare the A320's altitude with no response to any of them (BEA 2015). At about 9h 34min until 9h 39min there were periodical knocks/yelling/and "violent blows" to the cockpit door because it was locked from the inside (captain was locked out after he left for the lavatory at 9h 30min) (BEA 2015). Andreas Lubitz was refused renewal of his 1st class medical on April 9, 2009 by the Lufthansa aeromedical centre due to depression and the taking of medication along with that diagnosis (BEA 2015). Considering he voluntarily suspended his flight training on November 5, 2008  due to medical reasons and the fact that his yearly renewal of his first class was suspended for 2009 due to depression, it is clear to see that his mental illness was documented. Lubitz was able to get his 1st class medical reinstated on July 28, 2009 but there was an endorsement on it stating, "note special conditions/restrictions of the waiver" and a limitation on his pilot license that included "specific regular medical examinations - contact the licensing issue authority" which required the AME to contact the license issuing authority before the medical evaluation to extend or renew his medical certificate (BEA 2015). Upon reading the Preliminary Report from the BEA it appears that Andreas Lubitz was screened and documented for his condition and had to undergo yearly medical evaluations when renewing his 1st class medical certificate. Now how the AME's conducted their evaluations is unknown but in a TIME article it is discussed how mental evaluations are tough to judge because they are more difficult to quantify and are based off of yes and no responses to questions (Park 2015).

2) Hauntingly enough there was a similar suspected suicide 2 years prior to this GermanWings incident on a LAM Mozambique flight near Bwabwata National Park in Namibia. Almost the same setup as well, except that the roles were changed (instead of the captain leaving to use the lav it was the co-pilot). In this incident, the captain locked the cockpit door after the co-pilot leaves and changed the altitude preselector from 38,000ft to 4,288ft then to 1,888ft, and finally down to 592ft (ASN 2013). He (the captain) then reengaged the autothrottle and set the throttle level to idle as he began to manually select the airspeed to increasing numbers over the course of the recording until it remained close to the Vmo speed (ASN 2013). The mental health of the pilot was in question due to the fact that his son had died about a year prior to the accident and over the course of several months prior to this flight he was experiencing marital problems (ASN 2013).

3) Currently the mental evaluation of commercial pilots is conducted once every 6 months for those over 40 years old and once every year for those under 40 (Park 2015). According to Alpo Vuorio, the examiner "tries to see if the pilot is well, and it's not the easiest thing" due to the response from the pilot being either "yes" or "no" and the fact that it is up to the pilot to delve further (Park 2015). Most pilots are afraid to admit or claim that they are depressed or have even had thoughts of suicide because any mental health  problem will likely take them out of the sky. I think the current screening could be handled better or at least have the psychological evaluation handled by a more appropriately trained individual. In the TIME article, Park talks about how medical examiners aren't always trained in mental health, which could lead to them not being able to properly recognize the subtle signs of mental deterioration like depression or alcoholism (Park 2015). I think some reform may be needed in the questions asked (make them more open ended) and the way the situation is handled once a pilot is deemed or self-reports that they suffer from psychological conditions. Make it less of a punishment and more of an encouragement to improve and have experts who can help talk it out and through rather than instantly prescribing an anti-depressant.

4) Having a more liberal approach to the idea of mental health treatment for pilots could prove to be disadvantageous though. I can imagine the reporting system being abused in the airline world if a pilot just doesn't want to fly that day or take that leg that they go and claim mental illness. Now I know this seems extreme but if the airline would continue pay (why wouldn't they) as the pilot undergoes treatment, what pilot wouldn't take the option to "fake" depression just to have a few paid weeks off? I see it being used like fatigue was being used when it initially became a condition that could exempt you from flying that day.

Works Cited

Rep. No. BEA-D-AIPX - 24 mars 2015 at 29 (2015).

Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité de l’aviation civile. Retrieved from: http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2015/d-px150324.en/pdf/d-px150324.en.pdf 

ASN Aircraft Accident Embraer ERJ 190-100 IGW (ERJ-190AR) c9-EMC Bwabata National Park. (2013, November 29). Retrieved January 22, 2016, from http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20131129-0 

Park, A., & Oaklander, M. (2015, March 26). How Pilots Are Screened for Depression and Suicide. Retrieved January 22, 2016, from http://time.com/3760132/germanwings-plane-crash-pilot-suicide-andreas-lubitz/

ATC Privatization

1) Currently the ATC system used in America and in our airspace is one that relies heavily on radar equipment placed in the aircraft as well as around the airports and control towers through the land. This radar technology emits a radio wave that "pings" back to the original emitter once it is received by an aircraft or object. That "ping" has all kinds of information on it that the controller uses to interpret the aircraft's location, size and speed in the area. With that information, a controller guides the aircraft into the airport while avoiding other traffic or obstructions that could be hazardous to the aircraft using vectors for the aircraft to follow. Now in comparison to the proposed idea of NextGen, there are many differences. The first key difference would be that the NextGen technology uses global positioning systems (GPS) to track and guide aircraft. GPS can be thought of as a more accurate and quicker upgrade from the radar system ATC uses today. It starts with the satellites orbiting the Earth that continually broadcast their signal to identify their location; then once a GPS equipped device receives that satellite's signal it transmits it's (the device's) signal back to the satellite for a constant up-to-date positioning on it's location in reference to the satellite. With that constant up-to-date position, NextGen is able to (hypothetically) direct flights equipped with the proper broadcasting and GPS devices to destinations on a more direct route rather than the vectors and jet airways that get used currently under the radar technology.

2) The largest issue general aviation (GA) has with the privatization of ATC is the implementation of user fees. Since ATC would be privatized they would no longer receive funding or be part/considered in the government budget as they are now. The funding then would have to come from users of the ATC system which is anybody and everybody who flies. This kind of user fee puts those in GA at a disadvantage to airlines because airlines have that kind of revenue to pay for continual user fees where a GA pilot or operation may not. Since GA is so broad not all operations in GA generate revenue especially not to the extent of the airlines and these type of user fees could see a reduction in numbers for those who participant in general aviation. This leads to another issue that the GA fears may happen if privatization of ATC becomes a reality and that is that priority may occur with certain air traffic in the airspace, namely the airlines. Under federal ownership the ATC system guarantees equal access for all of its users (Wood 2015).  The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) believes that ATC privatization and the implementation of per-use fees for services could, "penalize the prudent practice of using ATC services like filing for IFR in marginal conditions or receiving VFR advisories" (Wood 2015). Groups like EAA and AOPA (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association) are against privatization because they believe that the "current method of collecting revenues through a tax on aviation fuel is not broken" and that "any air traffic system must preserve GA access to airports and airspace on a first-come first-serve basis like we do today." (Wood 2015). Another organization called Airlines for America (A4A) has a different belief on the privatization of ATC. A4A believes that the transition is long overdue and that the radar system we use currently is severely outdated. On a conference call with fellow members and CEOs of major airlines, A4A found that, "separating air traffic control from the FAA would lead to a much more efficient and effective airline operation because and independent ATC organization would operate with long-term funding and governance certainty. The leader of the organization would be incentivized to pursue efficiencies without constraints imposed on government agencies that hamper their ability to operate nimbly and effectively." (Parker 2015).

3) Two countries I was able to find that have nonprofit, privatized ATC are Canada and the United Kingdom. In Canada the organization that controls the air traffic is called Nav Canada and they coordinate the air traffic from 7 area control centres (ACCs) throughout the country (http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/about-us/Pages/what-we-do-atc.aspx). From those 7 control centres, the Canadian airspace is broken up into sections between them and then get broken down further to sections where controllers can monitor the flow of air traffic. As for the way they are governed, NAV Canada has four groups that come to a consensus on the board of directors nominees: commercial air carriers, Government of Canada, business/general aviation, and employees. 4 directors are elected by commercial carriers, 1 by GA/business aviation, 3 from the Government of Canada, and 2 by the employee unions  (http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/about-us/Pages/governance.aspx). In regards to funding, NAV Canada receives its funding from charging airlines and other operators for air traffic control services (user fees). They receive their financing through publicly traded debt like bonds and notes. (http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/about-us/Pages/investor-relations.aspx). The company in the UK that operates the ATC is called NATS and only have two control centres unlike the 7 that are in place in Canada. NATS provide similar services with regards to air traffic control and guidance to aircraft operating within their airspace. The one difference I see from NATS to NAV Canada is that NATS has military air traffic controllers that work alongside them in the Swanwick centre and that they cover an area of the Northern Atlantic from 45 degrees to 61 degrees North latitude (http://www.nats.aero/about-us/what-we-do/our-control-centres/). An issue that NATS has experienced since taking over the air traffic in the UK area is the increase in delay times (5.5 sec in 2014 to 1.4 sec in 2013). There was also a large unexplained system failure in December of 2014 which lead to hundreds of delays and some 300 flight cancellations (http://www.nats.aero/about-us/operational-performance/). A failure of this caliber hasn't occurred since, but it leaves NATS with a questionable reputation and showed how things just don't operate when a system with that much oversight and no outside help goes down.

4) It appears that through the articles and links I have read that the process it would take to get our ATC system privatized comes from Congress. In multiple articles there is always a representative pushing for the pass of some privatization bill whether it be John Mica (R-Fla) or Bill Shuster (R-Pa). These representatives aim to get their legislation passed through the aviation subcommittee in the House and move it up from there (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/congress-considers-privatizing-the-air-traffic-control-system/2015/03/24/b63a38f4-d23d-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html). The final decision to allow ATC privatization lies on the decision of Congress not on the FAA.

5) I personally don't feel that the privatization of ATC is needed here in the US because we handle a lot more air traffic than the countries that are privatized. Could you imagine if a system failure occurred here like it did with NATS in the UK? Having the government regulate and fund our ATC system ensures that they receive funding and also that things are kept to the standard that the FAA institutes in all areas it oversees. The real issue here isn't the privatization but more so the way our government handles things like this matter that are needing change but never receive it. The bureaucracy that occurs in our government and the personal agendas that are being fulfilled behind closed doors or without public notice are the real issue here.

Works Cited

Call to action issued over ATC privatization. (2015, July 8). Retrieved January 16, 2016, from http://generalaviationnews.com/2015/07/08/call-to-action-issued-over-atc-privatization/

ICYMI: A4A National Media Call on the Need for Modernization and Reform of Nation's Air Traffic Control. (2015, Dec 8). Retrieved January 16, 2016, from http://airlines.org/news/icymi-a4a-national-media-call-on-the-need-for-modernization-and-reform-of-nations-air-traffic-control/

http://www.navcanada.ca/en/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.nats.aero/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/congress-considers-privatizing-the-air-traffic-control-system/2015/03/24/b63a38f4-d23d-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html

Personal Introduction

1. My interest in aviation started as a little kid when my mom would always take us on vacations due to her employment at Northwest Airlines. There's actually one memory from my childhood that I recall which sparked my interest in aviation and that was when my brother and I were allowed to go into the cockpit of an airplane (pre 9/11) and talk to the pilot's and wear their hat and sit in their seat. We were both super excited at the opportunity and my mom has a picture of us in her scrapbook. Junior year of high school was when I made the decision that I wanted to pursue aviation as a profession and began looking at colleges that offered flying. This lead me to Western Michigan University where I flew the Cirrus SR20 and logged 20+ hours of flight time. Upon transferring to Eastern I wanted to continue flying, but some complications arose with my medical and I didn't have the money or the time to wait out my medical so I switched my major to Aviation Management and began my current route pursuing an Aircraft Dispatcher certificate.

2. As mentioned, my major is Aviation Management Technology with a specialty in Aircraft Dispatch and a minor in General Business. My planned graduation is Fall 2016 so I'm right around the corner.

3. My future plans are to first pass my practical exam for aircraft dispatch then find a flight follower job or internship somwhere to practice aircraft dispatch. I've considered Kalitta Air or IFL Group since they are nearby but I am willing to go where I'm needed. The end game would be to work as a flight supervisor for Delta Air Lines and retire with them. Through adulthood and when my student loan debt isn't consuming my life, I would like to come back to flying and hopefully pursue my Private Pilot's certificate; so if any of my fellow pilots in this class end up becoming flight instructors let me know!