Jetwhine

Flight Training’s Future Needs Unified Plan

Scott Spangler — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 14:31:53 +0000

When it comes to the future of flight training in America, I have some good news, and some not so good news. The good news is that given the attendance at the panel discussion of this subject, held the Saturday of EAA AirVenture, flight instructors care. Of the roughly 80 folks in the audience, a show of hands revealed that all but a few were CFIs.

The not so good news is that while the five-member panel (including yours truly) accurately itemized the challenges flight training now faces, the solutions were but ideas scattered like seeds. But perhaps the panel’s indirect agreement on those challenges will create an environment in which those idea seeds can grow.

With me on the panel were Russ Still of Online Ground School; Kent Lovelace, who leads the John D. Odegard School of Aeronautics at the University of North Dakota; Eric Radtke, president of Sporty’s Academy; and NAFI Executive Director Jason Blair. In our own words, we all agreed that becoming a pilot is no longer a popular option today, which calls for a business model optimized for a niche rather than a mass market. As Still said, the old model of “getting a building, putting out a sign, and waiting for people to walk through the door clearly doesn’t work any more.”

The moderator, NAFI Mentor Editor Greg Laslo, asked what can be done to reduce training costs. Seating order put me up first, and my answer was a simple and honest “nothing.” Everything costs more today—insurance, gas and oil, maintenance, and personnel costs—and you can’t roll back the clock. Indirectly, the others agreed. The said components like ground school options and simulator use can mitigate the cost, but nothing will substantially reduce it. Financing is needed, especially for those pursuing aviation as a career.

None of us had any ideas how to secure this financing, however. And even if that was available, it still wouldn’t bring students through the doors. After a short tangent on the possibility that flight training might evolve into a system were students train for their desired flying mission—recreation, personal transportation, or a career—Radtke watered the garden of ideas: Creating personalized learning experiences tailored to a student’s particular needs is only of half of the solution. “The challenge is that flight training still has to fulfill a number of antiquated requirements.”

Digesting all of this later, herein, I realized is the key: training innovations are held hostage by the current time-equals-experience certification requirements. The future of flight training must be built on a foundation of new FAA requirements that have been tailored to the 21st century. If the industry waits for the FAA to do this, it’ll never happen because FAA reacts to stuff. Being proactive is not in its charter, and realistically, that’s the way it should be.

So, if flight training wants to have a future, it must put aside its individual desires for a larger piece of a shrinking pie, close ranks from top to bottom, and develop certification requirements and a training model that work as a unified system that meet today’s needs of pilots who fly for fun or profit. Certainly this would be no easy undertaking, but nothing worthwhile ever is. And once the unified group has its plan in place, with all the details hammered out and most of the problems solved, it needs to beat on the FAA’s door, and keep beating until it achieves a successful reaction.

A hint of what that system might look like revealed itself in the disconnected comments of the panel. Flight training in the future would be proficiency based and mission oriented. It would be modular, so pilots would take the training that would give them more quickly achieved goals, not to mention the pilot privileges they desire, from solo, to carrying passengers in controlled airspace, to night and instrument flight, to cross-country, and all the rest.

Perhaps the most difficult obstacle to overcome is the prospect of change. No one likes change, but the future of flight training, not to mention aviation itself, depends on it. Without a wise, measured, comprehensive, and unanimous plan for what flight training should become, oblivion is unavoidable. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Flight Training,Flight Schools,University Avaition Programs,Airline Careers,Recreational Aviation,Learning to Fly,NAFI,Sporty’s Academy,Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences,Gold Seal Online Ground School

Cessna’s New Fighting Machine

Robert Mark — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 19:31:44 +0000

For those skeptics who just a few years ago tore into Cessna Aircraft as the development of the Skycatcher began to move ahead, comes this photo of the mighty Cessna 162 going nose to nose with one of America’s finest F-18s in the ultimate stare down contest on the Yingling Aviation ramp in Wichita recently.

I swear I saw the F-18 blink.

Rob Mark, editor

Technorati Tags: Cessna 162 Skycatcher,F-18,Wichita,Yingling Aviation

NextGen Success Hinges on Showing Big Picture Integration

Scott Spangler — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:20:05 +0000

Like many pilots, I still haven’t gotten my head around all the details related to the Next Generation National Airspace System. EAA AirVenture Oshkosh, I figured, would be the perfect place to learn more about its components, like ADS-B, the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast system, and have the people who really know paint me a big picture of how they all work together.

Imagine my surprise when a line-by-line reading of the forum schedule revealed just four NextGen presentations, none of them delivered by the people building the new system, and one of them, “Next Generations Homebuilts: Just Build Them,” while extremely interesting, had nothing to do with the NextGen system.

On Monday, Jamie Luster of FreeFlight Systems, which makes ADS-B equipment for store-bought and amateur-built airplanes discussed “ADS-B Ruling and Equipage.” He explained the differences between the two systems, Out, which will one day replace less precise ground radar stations, and In, which will bring weather and traffic info to the cockpit (one day in the now seemingly distant future). On Friday, David Zwegers, director of aviation safety at Embry-Riddle’s Daytona Beach campus discussed “ADS-B: What’s in it for me?” He showed how the GPS-based system will help accident investigation and prevention.

The most interesting of the four was Steve Fulton’s Tuesday showcase of serpentine instrument approaches through valleys to extreme mountain airports in China and New Zealand clearly demonstrated what performance-based navigation brings to NextGen. A Technical Fellow for GE Aviation Systems, he is co-founder of Naverus Inc., which created the PBN approaches to these extreme airports. Afterwards, on my way to the FAA hangar, out of curiosity I passed through the Federal Pavilion. There I stumbled on NOAA’s Role in the NextGen system, which equaled the PBN forum because weather is often a daily challenge.

Captivated, I joined a handful of people paying attention to the NOAA staffer. Weather causes 70 percent of aviation delays, and to overcome this, NextGen will better integrate the weather offices with ATC so that route selection will be proactive, not reactive. He expertly and patiently answered all questions, except one: he didn’t know why his presentation was not listed anywhere that I could find. He answered my last question, about the inefficiency of bureaucratic silos with a diplomatic shrug of his shoulders.

Only one exhibitor in the NextGen compound that filled the center of the FAA hangar knew that NOAA played a crucial role in the system’s future, and it came from an FAA office I’d never heard of before: System Wide Information Management, or SWIM. This program’s goal is to develop the system that increases the sharing of information crucial to efficient air traffic management. That information includes flight data, airport status, what’s going on in special use airspace—and weather. Even better, they are developing the system using commercial off-the-shelf hardware and software, so we taxpayers won’t get stuck paying for a custom designed system that, like most custom government programs, costs more and does less than planned.

I have no doubt that they will get the job done. But if the Feds want us, the flying community and public, to get on board, they must take a lesson from SWIM and mount a unified information and education program, online and face-to-face at gatherings like EAA AirVenture Oshkosh, AOPA Summit, and NBAA regional and national events. Imagine the efficiency, the time and money saved, if all the players from the diverse government offices united in a single, concerted effort to both build—and explain—NextGen. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: NextGen National Airspace System,ADS-B,Performance-Based Navigation,Naverus,Freeflight Systems,NOAA,FAA System Wide Information Management

Playing Jeopardy with Aviation’s Future

Robert Mark — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:37:11 +0000

That Future of Flight Training session at AirVenture a few weeks ago left me feeling pretty cranky … whiny even. Not because of the session itself. All the folks on the panel, including moderator Greg Laslo, couldn’t have been nicer.

But we all walked away from the discussion with the same thought … now what? Considering the lousy turnout, as Scott Spangler mentioned last week, I left wondering how anything we spoke about could in any way affect how the management types view flight training or its foundational position within the industry?

So here’s an idea, let’s not make the argument for flight training any longer.

Let’s focus the light where it really needs to be, on the Big Picture, where everyone claims they’re looking anyway.

Without pilots, there is no aviation industry, period. No Part 135 charter, no corporate flight departments, no sightseeing flights and most of all, no airlines … nothing.

We need to stop pussy footing around trying to grab a few new students here and there to fly our shiny new Cessnas, and Cirrus SR-22s and Piper Warriors. Let’s be serious, none of the previous incarnations of any Learn-to-Fly programs have ever come even close to returning us to the old days when 17,000 new airplanes were delivered in a year and a commensurate number of pilot starts kept the Government Printing Office in business producing student pilot certificates. We’re all so focused on Learn-to-Fly though as the solution as if the only audience we need to succeed with are those potential customers for flight schools.

Another Perfect Storm?

We all hate listening to the fact that 75 percent of new student starts last year quit before they ever earned their Private Pilot certificate. But for the moment, how we deal with that one issue is irrelevant.

The Big Picture question really is why only a few of us appear to see the writing on the wall … that very soon, we’re again going to be short of qualified pilots not simply to teach people to fly, but with the commensurate skills to compete for professional pilot cockpit jobs coming down the road?

Making matters worse is that fewer and fewer young people see flying as a career … starting pay is almost food-stamp level and the amount of debt to pay for the training is beyond most. The military long ago dried up as a viable source of pilots and the passing of HR 5900 – the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act – that could force airlines to require an ATP from all candidates (with a few exceptions) will only make the situation worse. We haven’t even spoken yet about the rash of “Fly-til-their-65” airline pilots who will very soon be grounded.

It’s time we stopped looking at each individual business as separate from what make aviation fly … airplanes. No pilots, no FBOs … no pilots, no need for many training airplanes … no pilots, no need for airlines, no pilots, no need to see John and Martha much down the road. But we all seem to look at the shortage of people learning to fly as if it really has nothing to do with these individual segments … but it does, all of them.

A Bright Spot

At AirVenture this year, I met a really bright young Singapore Airlines pilot who was just crazy in love with aviation. One reason he was so enthused was not simply because he had a job, but because he’d always wanted to fly but was successful even though he lacked the funds to pay for the training. Originally from Mumbai, he mentioned it was a tad more expensive there to learn to fly.

So how did he reach the skill level of licenses and hours necessary to get hired by Singapore? Easy. He didn’t. He was hired through Singapore’s cadet program, better known to us here in the states as an ab initio training system.

Singapore paid for all his flight training from his private right up through his turbine time via a Lear 45 type rating. His total time is somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 hours and he’s soon off to school on the Boeing 777 all at the expense of Singapore Airlines. His commitment to Singapore for their commitment to him … seven years of his life after he completes training.

In the U.S. of course, no such programs exist. Our airlines – in fact every organization that uses pilots in this country – assumes the pilots should bare the costs of learning the ropes because that’s the way we’ve always done it. This strategy of course makes pilots rather expendable when it suits the company. That strategy is going to begin biting us all in the butt pretty soon though.

Our Future

“This whole pilot shortage thing doesn’t seem that bad to me,” a fellow told me at AirVenture over a cold drink one afternoon. I asked this young man to consider that the only item that has kept this pilot shortage chaos from running rampant right now is that our economy tanked which forced many companies to lay off crews. But that life preserver is going to sink once we’re all back in business again.

Think back though, to just a few short years ago when anyone with a pilot’s license was being hired and upgrade times were shoving questionable captains into a command role, a topic that forced some of the recent regulatory chaos in the aftermath of the Colgan crash in Buffalo.

The question again is why we aren’t working as a group on this. Wait you say? What about DOT Secretary Ray LaHood’s Future of Aviation Advisory Committee (FAAC) seminars coming soon to a town near you?

With only Cessna’s Jack Pelton representing general aviation vs.. a slew of airline and airline union people, I doubt LaHood’s future will have much to do with people learning to fly. Of course, I could be wrong. Let’s take a look at the agenda for this week’s meeting in Chicago. There’s NextGen, and Financing, Safety, Competition, the Environment and Work Force Issues. Nope, nothing about the foundation of the industry there.

If these sessions are really about the future of our industry, it’s time someone thumped Mr. LaHood on the back of the head and told him that without a steady supply of men and women to drive these ever-evolving aerial machines, there won’t be much of an industry for aircraft manufacturers like Cessna, Boeing, Airbus, Embraer … the list goes on. That also mean the parts and service suppliers are going to get a whack as well. Flight training is simply the foundation upon which our industry is built … and trust me, the low-fuel light is on and no one seems to notice, or if they have, they seem clueless to solve the problem.

Now if, as some industry insiders have told me, the LaHood shows are simply PR fluff to make it look like someone is taking action, then I say shame on Mr. LaHood – as well as our President – for wasting a precious opportunity to actually use the experts gathered together for these little pow- wows to try and solve some of the problems we’re desperately struggling with in the industry.

If these FAACs aren’t fluff, and if you really believe that a steady supply of pilots is critical for success, why is Cessna CEO Jack Pelton the only man in the room representing the general aviation side of the world … the foundation of our industry?

What’s it going to be? Are we going to build yet another general aviation Learn-to-Fly program to encourage more people to take to the air or are we finally going to gather the industry’s best and brightest together – the Cessnas, the Boeings, the John and Martha Kings, the Garmins, the airlines, the FBOs, the charter industry and people from every other segment of the industry to solve the problem?

If we don’t, there’s no need for a Flying magazine, no need for Aviation International News, no need for Avweek, and certainly no need for @flightblogger, or @avweekbenet, no @getintheair, no Airplane Geeks podcasts and of course, no @jetwhine. Without a way to encourage people to choose aviation as a career, we won’t need any of this.

Whatever we do, we’d better get moving pretty quickly. Pilots are turning away from the industry much faster than they’re signing up. If we’re going to gather all these experts together, lets put them to work on a problem that needs solving … building a foundation for every other element of the aviation industry. That’s a Big Picture idea.

Visit the FAAC page here and tell them you’re mad as hell and you’re not going to watch our industry crumble while the politicians play pretend. The next FAAC meeting is in Chicago on Wednesday, but here’s a thought. When the invites go out for that next Big Picture meeting, let’s not invite the people who put that guest list together for our Transportation Secretary because it’s pretty clear they don’t have a clue.

Rob Mark, editor

Technorati Tags: Cessna aircraft,Jack Pelton,Ray LaHood,DOT,Future of Aviation Advisory Committee,FAAC,@flightblogger,@avweekbenet,John and Martha King,Flying Magazine,Boeing,Embraer,Aviation International News,HR 5900,Garmin,Singapore Airlines

Electric Aircraft & Air Show Possibilities

Scott Spangler — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:26:27 +0000

On many levels the 2010 Electric Aircraft World Symposium was a surprise. Sponsored by GE Aviation and held at the EAA museum on AirVenture Friday, I expected a geek fest with a small audience of a hundred or less, because that’s the space available in the Founder’s Wing, the symposium’s original location. But when I hoofed my way to the museum, I saw Kermit Week’s Mosquito parked outside. Being an old all-wood airplane, I’ve never seen EAA do that before. The reason, I soon discovered, is that three or four times as many people had signed up, so they moved all the airplanes out of the Eagle Hangar (except for the XP-51), to make room for everyone.

The symposium delivered on my geek-fest expectations. Sitting at one of the round tables up front, three engineers networked and shared highlights of their careers and their most challenging projects. The agenda for the day-long event essentially followed the same path, with speakers from GE Aviation, Sikorsky Innovations, Tesla Motors, NASA, and electric aircraft builders including John Monnett and Pete Buck, the driving force behind Sonex e-Flight Initiative. Batteries were the primary topic of discussion, and Bertrand Piccard and Solar Impulse pilot Andre Borschberg talked about their project and the historic overnight flight of its photovoltaic flying machine that has a circumnavigation dream.

While the technical information was interesting, a good primer on a field that grows ever more important with time, the keynote speaker, Burt Rutan, started with what we might see in Electric Flight: The Next 10 Years. Yes, he said, electric flight is now impractical, “but you have to start someplace.” To see where it first might deliver a commercial application, he suggested a YouTube search for 3D flight, what pilots flying electric RC models call fixed-wing hovering and stationary rolls made possible when an airplane has more power than weight.

Noting that he’d been coming to Oshkosh forever, Rutan said he stopped watching the daily air shows decades ago because they are loud, boring, and repetitive, with all the performers doing the same maneuvers in different combinations. (I’m right there with you, Burt.) Just imagine, he said, spinning the dream, of aerobats flying silent 3D performances in scaled-up electric powered airplanes, like those seen on YouTube. “That is,” Burt said, nodding toward FAA Administrator Randy Babbit, who welcomed the symposium participants and said the FAA was a willing partner in the e-flight effort, “if Randy will let us do it.”

It’s my guess that 3D airplane flight will fly with the FAA long before 3D helicopter demos, another YouTube look at the future. Sustained inverted flight and other maneuvers must make the Red Bull aerobatic helo jealous, and it gives the team at Sikorsky Innovations something to shoot for, and I can’t wait! –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Electric Aircraft Symposium,GE Aviation,Sikorsky Innovations,Sonex e-Flight Initiative,Burt Rutan,FAA Administrator Randy Babbit,Solar Impulse,EAA AirVenture Oshkosh

Does the Aviation Industry Really Care About Pilot Population Growth?

Scott Spangler — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:38:39 +0000

Given the underwhelming participation at an 1130 panel discussion about the subject the Saturday of AirVenture Oshkosh, the general answer must be a big, boldfaced NO.

For the discussion of How to Grow the Pilot Population, just seven of the nearly 100 seats in the Learn to Fly Discovery Center’s presentation area were occupied, by 2.5 reporters and 3.5 independent flight instructors (JetWhine Editor Rob Mark was, as usual, the multitasker). The National Association of Flight Instructors organized the panel, and its chairman, Ken Hoffman, completed the audience.

Some industry members proved that they truly care about pilot population growth by participating in the panel. The moderator, NAFI Mentor Editor Greg Laslo, introduced them from the audience’s left to right:

Julie Filucci, a long-time CFI, manages the Cessna Pilot Center program, and she handed out a friendly, informative learn-to-fly booklet, You Were Never Destined to be a Passenger. With more than three decades in the flight training industry, Bob Anderson manages the Remos Aircraft Sport Pilot Center program. Jennifer Storm is AOPA’s director of public relations—and a flight instructor. Eric Radtke is president (and chief flight instructor) of Sporty’s Academy. And Jason Blair, NAFI’s executive director, is a CFI, designated pilot examiner, and flight school owner.

The panel started the discussion by itemizing the challenges facing pilot population growth, starting with cost and the lack of role models, the modern-day equivalents of Lindbergh and Earhart, and finishing with an abysmal dropout rate, an anecdotal figure that ranges between 70 and 80 percent. Then it transitioned to what each member was doing to meet these challenges.

Citing the FAA’s prediction of fewer than 60,000 student pilots next year, Radtke said “learning to fly is no longer cool, so we have to get creative.” Sporty’s has been overcoming the intimidating amount of time and effort needed to become a pilot by focusing on achieving goals, like solo and cross-country flight, that are building blocks to certification as a sport or recreational pilot.

The panel agreed that light-sport aircraft, with their lower operating costs and modern systems, play a key role in attracting and retaining new students. Blair added that retaining current pilots, and returning lapsed aviators to the fold, would also slow the declining pilot numbers. (What affect the sharp decline of international students training in the US after 9/11 has on the pilot population didn’t occur to anyone in the audience or on the panel until after the forum.)

Noting that flight schools are not good at sales, overcoming that challenge might be the most difficult because it requires a cultural shift, said Anderson. The airport is an intimidating place, he said, which is why the Remos centers have had success by offering “Free Pilot Aptitude Tests” at shopping malls with a VFR simulator, which leads to a 5-hour “try before you buy” flight training package.

No matter how good they are, there are some aspects of learning to fly that no school or instructor can control, like the weather, Filucci said. Still, schools need to keep students coming to the airport for regular lessons. Giving an example of a student scheduled for three lessons a week, she said only two of them might be in an airplane, with the third in a flight training device or classroom.

Flight training as a one-size-fits-all effort no longer works, Radtke says, the learning experience must be customized to the student’s personal goals and schedules. Undertaking and enforcing this takes dedication and time, and to increase the pilot population it must be the norm at flight schools, not the exception.

If there was a consensus, it was that in the second century of powered flight—every customer counts. Whether they be a prospective pilot, active aviator, or lapsed aeronaut, every member of the pilot community counts because they sustain the aviation industry. And to keep their business, the industry must show pilots that it cares about them and is doing something to reduce the challenges they must overcome. If not, those potential and past pilots will find something more productive to do with their time and money. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Flight Training,Pilot Populatino,learn to Fly,Cessna Pilot Center,Remos Sport Pilot Center,Light-sport aircraft,flight schools,flight instructors

Exhibiting Aviation’s State of the Industry

Scott Spangler — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:24:53 +0000

An EAA AirVenture Oshkosh participant every year since 1978, I started spending the week there in 1989, when I began a decade-long tenure as Flight Training magazine’s booth boy. I spent roughly half that time in the old exhibit buildings, now the Federal Pavilion and GE Aviation Learning Center, and the remainder in one of the current exhibit hangars.

To pass the time when not talking to readers, and when roaming the aisles on my breaks, I began to take note of the changes from year to year. In the early years, when aviation was growing and stuffing another exhibitor into the old sheds seemed impossible, EAA built the new exhibit hangars and redesigned the outside spaces. And they quickly filled up.

Over the past three years the signs of an eroding aviation industry have been slight, but this year they were shockingly apparent, especially when I walked into Hangar C. Vast pools of open floor spilled from each of the large doorways. The aisles between exhibitors were maybe a third wider than last year, and for the first time in my memory some aisles were formed by the backside of the other aisle’s booths.

The migration of exhibitors with tenuous ties to aviation from the Flymart to the exhibit hangars has been gradual—and constant. Given the economy and the decline of the pilot population, this trend will surely continue. Some of the products displayed, demonstrated, and for sale were pretty cool, however. My favorite was this electric powered RC model that reminded me of the flying machines in Avatar.

Perhaps the loneliest exhibitors at AirVenture 2010 were the flight schools and companies that sell flight training courses and supplies. Apparently, learning to fly for recreation or a career seemed to interest few at AirVenture. During the week I spent upwards of an hour or more circulating past them to see if traffic had picked up. Nope. Two schools did attract some interest however. Kansas State at Salina, with its Citation parked beside its tent, did some traffic by giving away a $2,000 scholarship every day. And inside, people lined up at the University of Dubuque’s booth to fly its Redbird flight simulator. The booth boys, however, spent most of their time talking to each other.

While people didn’t seem interested in flying lessons, they were interested in the idea of flight because they mobbed many of the exhibit aircraft. Light-sport aircraft were the primary draws, and one and two on the list of people magnets were the Icon A5, who had people waiting for its exhibit to open every day, and the Cessna Skycatcher, which attracted the curious after hours, with only the info board to answer their questions. Other aircraft, especially prototypes like the futuristic Cobalt, were, for the most part, as lonely as the flight schools.

Without a doubt the attendance this year was down, thanks to the weather, but those who showed up were interested in all that AirVenture had to offer. After talking to a number of exhibitors whom I’ve known for years and are not apt to BS me, it was a good year for business, and they all hoped the trend would continue. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: EAA AirVenture Oshkosh,Flight Training,Collegiate Aviation Degree Programs,Light-sport aircraft,Icon A5,Cessna Skycatcher

Oshkosh, the Verb

Robert Mark — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:23:25 +0000

Sometimes we bloggers simply talk too much trying to express how we feel about something like AirVenture when simply letting the story tell itself works much better.

With that clever insight in mind, may I present for your review, a few photos that made me realize what a special place – what a special experience – traveling to this town is each and every year. Hint: It’s the people!

Rob Mark, editor

Airspeed Editor Steve Tupper prepares a special brew at the Sennheiser, Jetwhine, MyTransponder party Thursday night

The week started out a tad wet. Forget tad, it was a watery mess and will surely affect overall attendance figures

Father and son management team – John (l), Jeremy (r) at Sonex Aircraft that won a portion of the Lindberg prize for their electric aircraft initiative

Cessna’s skunk works never would acknowledge this as their next generation project, code name Groundcatcher

Ohhh, da food!

Not surprisingly, Jetwhine’s editor did battle on Flight Sim with opponents he had a chance of defeating (he didn’t win BTW)

See previous shot for details!

FAA’s infamous Pink Shirt controllers at Fisk Approach Control, or as they call it, the “RayCon”

My old airplane … sniff

Women in Aviation breakfast with EAA’s Elissa Lines (l) and WAI president Peggy Chabrian

North American F-100 cockpit just the way I remember it from my early Air Force days in the 60s

And oh, the Tweet Ups

More crazies at the Sennheiser, Jetwhine, MyTransponder Tweet Up

FlyAbout Director Monika Petrillo

Bob Richards, former ORD air traffic controller, author of Secrets from the Tower and current media lunatic. He also reportedly never recovered from having Jetwhine’s editor as a trainer in the FAA.

Retiring EAA President Tom Poberezny’s infamous scout car, “Red Three”

What would AirVenture be without the kids?

And finally, Jetwhine’s editor shows off his new Cessna straw hat. Thank you Bob Stangarone!

AirVenture 2011 begins in 368 days. See you next year.

Technorati Tags: Cessna Aircraft Company,Bob Stangarone,Jetwhine,Airplane Geeks,EAA,FlyAbout,Monika Petrillo,Secrets form the Tower,Bob Richards,Sennheiser,MyTransponder,women in Aviation,Elissa Lines,Peggy Chabrian,Red Three,Tom Poberezny,Steve Tuppper,Airspeed podcast,air traffic controllers,Wittman Regional Airport,NATCA,John and Jeremy Monet,Sonex Aircraft

Checking Out EAA AirVenture—Day 0

Scott Spangler — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:09:09 +0000

For the decade I’ve lived just outside of Oshkosh, my favorite excursion of EAA AirVenture Oshkosh always takes place on Day 0. Otherwise known as setup up day, this year was little different, all because of the weather.

To say we’ve had a little rain is an understatement. In just July more than 10 inches has fallen, breaking a record set in 1912. Water has always been a problem during the 30-plus years I’ve been tramping around the grounds, but the subterranean system EAA installed in and around the exhibit areas worked great!

That doesn’t help the outlying areas where 10,000 airplanes park and campers numbering into five figures live for the week. The mass arrivals of Cessna, Bonanzas, Mooneys, and Cherokees didn’t happen, and the North 40 was barren on Day 0, aside from a few campers on the high ground at the west end.

But the sun was out all day, and EAA was doing its best to dry things out, so why don’t you take a (silent) walk with me…and end up at the Sonex Aircraft open house for a look at the Hornet’s Nest updates on the SubSonex jet, now a three-wheeler, and the single-seat Sonex, the Onex. If you’d like to take a photographic stroll with me, click more…

In deference to what once was, I start at the Brown Arch, the primary portal to the magical creations on the flight line on my first trip to Oshkosh in 1978.

From the main gate I took off down the walkway to forums. Passing the Cessna outdoor exhibit, it was dry, meaning the subterranean drainage system EAA installed works.

With their higher weight and narrow tires, the warbirds were right to wait before moving into Fightertown.

Here’s a group hoping for dry weather. Set up since Thursday, they were just about dried out. The CAP helps set up general purpose tents in the background.

This Bell 47 spent the better part of an hour at 12 to 18 inches as it tried to dry the turf ramp where the EAA Ford Tri-Motor loads and unloads its paying passengers.

The homebuilt parking and camping area was almost empty, with a lone RV and some campers back on higher ground.

Beware of the Canada Geese! With few neighbors in vintage camping, all should be safe for a while.

Seeking the source of what sounded like a turbojet getting ready to launch, I found not and airplane but this puddle sucker,

Despite the soggy conditions, camper spirits are strong and happy. After skipping his way across this muddy access to Camp Scholler, this guy celebrated not slipping with a happy yee-haw!

Out of the frame, the small pickup is stuck in the mud. On flipped-up back window of its shell is "OSH or Bust!" Neighbors from the next campsite helped the couple wrestle their popup camper into position.

The AirVenture flight lines and aircraft camping areas were mostly empty. I found the flying machines and their campers set up in every nook, cranny, and open space around Wittman Regional Airport’s two FBOs, Basler and Orion.

Attending my inaugural Sonex Aircraft Open House, I had no reference for a good turnout. But there were a number of well-built airplanes and a bunch of happy people there!

A new three-wheeler, the SubSonex jet will soon be ready to resume its flight test program.

The prototype Onex, a single-seat Sonex, is approaching its first flight. Peeking in the cockpit, it seems that I might fit, which is something designer John Monnett promised. After AirVenture, I’ll have to stop by for a fitting.

PS: Technology is sometimes grand, sometimes it’s like wallowing in the mug. This post was supposed to be up Monday morning, with a nice slide show. That didn’t work, nor did the video conversion of the slideshow. After our inability to solve the problem, we punted. But not trying something new was something we never considered. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: EAA AirVenture Oshkosh,Sonex Aircraft Aircraft,Cessna Aircraft,Warbirds,SubSonex Jet,Onex

Let’s Discuss the Future of Flight Training

Scott Spangler — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:40:16 +0000

As I write this, the start of EAA AirVenture Oshkosh is five days away. Between the daily rain showers and afternoon thunderstorms (yes, it’s pretty soggy here) the air is growing increasingly alive with the sound of engines I seldom hear during the rest of the year.

If you plan to be a member of this airborne symphony, or in the automotive conga line snaking its way into Wittman Regional Airport, and you’re free at 1130 on Wednesday, July 28, I urge you to visit the Learn-To-Fly Discovery Center for a panel discussion on the Future of Flight Training.

The LTF Discovery Center is on Main St., which connects the main gain to AeroShell Square, where all the big, cool airplanes are. And the discussion should be lively, which is one reason why (I think) NAFI Executive Director Jason Blair invited me to participate.

When he called to seek my participation, Jason, a loyal JetWhine reader, specifically mentioned some of my previous posts and said something about my not seeing the world with ordinary eyes. I’m not so sure of that, so you be the judge—here are my some of my recent training related posts:

Rote is the Route to Prosaic Mediocrity; Does Parochialism Hinder Aviation’s Future?; Becoming a Pilot: Is it a Relevant Choice?; Pay Attention to California School Regs; NIFA Challenges Pilots Past Bare Minimums; California Requires Pro Training Standards that Have Nothing to do with a Pilot’s Education; Pro Pilot Training Evolving to Industry Needs. Well, you get the point, so I won’t go on.

If you’re around the EAA AirVenture Learn to Fly Discovery Center at 1130 on Wednesday, July 28, I hope you’ll stop in. Jason says he’s still confirming the rest of the panel members, but it should be interesting.

And if you are around AirVenture the previous afternoon, let me reiterate Rob’s invitation to Become an Airplane Geek for a Day. I’ll be with the geeks at Forum # 6 on Tuesday, July 27, starting at 1600. I hope to see you there, and at the Future of Flight Training panel discussion. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Flight Training,Pilot Population,NAFI,EAA AirVenture Oshkosh

Beyond Social Media 101 – Answers to Real Aviation Problems at #OSH10

Robert Mark — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:17:50 +0000

AirVenture 2010 will soon be home to thousands of airplanes, hundreds of thousands of people and dozens and dozens of great programs all designed to stimulate just about anyone’s curiosity about all things aviation. For the social-media curious, there’s something new this year … collaboration … with an attitude!

Jetwhine is teaming up with the Airplane Geeks, Flightblogger and MyTransponder to build an interactive session that answers the social-media question to which everyone wants an answer; how can we stop wasting time and money noodling with Facebook, Twitter and blogs and solve some of the real customer-engagement problems facing our industry.

The panel begins at 4 PM on Tuesday July 27^th in Pavilion 6 just north of the control tower and runs until 5:15 PM. That means we’ll run concurrently with the airshow so arrive early to get a seat up front.

Our panelists include Rob Mark and Scott Spangler from Jetwhine, Rod Rakic from MyTransponder, Dan Webb from the Airplane Geeks and Jon Ostrower from Flight Global. All are experienced social media practitioners who will tell us where social media’s headed and what your company needs to know to stay one-step ahead of your competitor.

If you’re “just” a social media aficionado hoping to follow the action or meet the experts, you’re most welcome to join us and listen in. But we also hope you’ll add your two cents to the discussion.

Whether you plan to join us or not, do send along a real-life aviation problem that social media has solved for you, or an area the industry needs to focus on where engaging huge groups of people might just be the answer for you or your company.

And just for fun, we’ll be auditioning a guest host for a future Airplane Geeks show, so plan to rehearse your best elevator pitch before next Tuesday about why YOU should be our choice. We’ll also have some Airplane Geeks T-Shirts to give away and of course, some of those incredible Jetwhine buttons to impress your friends at the show.

All our panelists should be on Twitter during the show by the way. Rob Mark’s @jetwhine, Dan Webb’s @danwebbage, Jon Ostrower’s @flightblogger and Rod Rakic is @mytransponder.

See you next week. And we’ll even tell you the meaning of #OSH10 in today’s title.

Rob Mark, editor

Technorati Tags: Airplane Geeks,Jetwhine,flightblogger,MyTransponder,AirVenture 2010,Rob Mark,Dan Webb,Rod Rakic,Jon Ostrower

UAV Next Step: Autonomous Aerial Refueling

Scott Spangler — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 13:49:17 +0000

It seems that the capabilities of unmanned aerial vehicles will soon be complete. On July 1, DARPA announced a $33 million dollar contract for Northrop Grumman to demonstrate autonomous aerial refueling using two NASA Global Hawks.

The company will retrofit the UAVs with a probe-and-drogue system, with one being the tanker and the other being thirsty. The company didn’t give a lot of information on what it meant by autonomous, so let’s assume that the two UAVs will be programmed to meet at a specific location and time and the onboard systems will take it from there.

Just to make the accomplishment special, to quote the release, the refueling will “take place at a much higher altitude than has been previously demonstrated with manned aircraft. It will also be the first time that [high altitude, long endurance] UAVs have flown in formation.”

One wonder’s how high? Given manned tanker performance, most midair refueling takes place between 20,000 and 35,000 feet? (What say you experts in JetWhine land with first-hand experience?) The Global Hawk’s service ceiling is 65,000 feet, and unrefueled it has a published endurance of 36 hours.

The notice said the technology that makes this autonomous feat possible will benefit manned flight as well because it will reduce pilot workload. Yeah, automation does that.

As previously discussed (See UAV Pilot Shortage & Military Intelligence, UND Plants Seed of No-Pilot Airliners, and No-Pilot Aircraft Go Vertical & Hover) it may eventually affect the military and civilian job market, or at least change a pilot’s job description. And let’s not forget another Global Hawk First: FAA clearance for operation in US national airspace. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Aerial Refueling,UAV,Global Hawk,Autonomous Flight,DARPA,Northrop Grumman

Become an Airplane Geek for a Day

Robert Mark — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 21:14:30 +0000

Each year since 2006 as AirVenture approaches, I take a minute to look back on the new friends I’ve made through our social media contacts on Twitter as well as here at Jetwhine. The blog is almost four years old, while my “Jetwhine” Twitter account was opened just before AirVenture 2008.

If I look back on any of the new relationships with a bit of extra fondness though, it would be the meet up I’ve had with the Airplane Geeks. I’ve been a closet radio guy all my life, so connecting with people all over the globe each week means something pretty special to me. My thanks to my other Geek buddies, Max, David, Dan here in the states and those two loonies Grant and Steve in the outback down under.

One thing we’ve noticed at the Geeks recently is a real rise in the amount of listener mail, as well as the downloads which of course tells us we must be on the right track. People approaching us to be see if they can be a guest on the show also means a tip of the hat to my comrades for their hard work.

AirVenture 2010 – Your Big Chance

With this year’s big show approaching yet again in beautiful downtown Oshkosh, Jetwhine and the Airplane Geeks are joining forces for the first time. On July 27th at 4 PM, I’ll be at Pavilion #6 just north of the control tower for a session on the practical aspects of social media in aviation.

I’ll be joined by my co-conspirator at Jetwhine Scott Spangler, as well as my fellow Airplane Geek Dan Webb. Our able co-presenter will be Jon Ostrower known to the rest of the world as the Flight Blogger, the first guy I every watched shoot video, edit and post to stories to his blog right from an iPhone. I’m still learning video editing myself.

Sure we’re going to talk about social media 201 – how to use social media to solve real-world aviation problems – but we’re also going to be offering some lucky visitor a chance to turn all geeky on us … at least for a day.

Everyone who joins us at our AirVenture session on the 27th at 4 PM will have an opportunity to tell us in their own words why THEY should be a guest on the Airplane Geeks. We’ll have a recorder on hand to record every single word, so the Geeks who can’t make it to Oshkosh will have the chance to weigh in before we select a winner.

Dan Webb says we might even have time for a little bit of Airplane Geeks “Jetpardy,” so be prepared.

Only one Airplane Geek guest entry per person so practice your sales pitch before you arrive. If you’d rather read your pitch from your own cue card or cheat sheet, that will be perfectly acceptable.

So mark your calendar for July 27th – two weeks from tomorrow – and join the Jetwhine/Airplane Geeks/Flight Blogger pack at pavilion #6 at 4 PM and you just might be our next guest on the Airplane Geeks.

PS – Even if you don’t want to enter to be a Geek Guest, stop by and say hi. We’ll be giving away those valuable Jetwhine buttons, and some Airplane Geeks T-shirts.

Rob Mark, editor

Technorati Tags: Jetwhine,The Airplane Geeks,FlightBlogger,Things in the Sky,Rob Mark,Dan Webb,Jon Ostrower,David Vanderhoof,Max Flight,Steve Visscher,Grant McHerron,AirVenture,Oshkosh

Independence Day & Fireworks From Above

Scott Spangler — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 20:07:28 +0000

One joy of small town living is our ability to watch the annual Independence Day fireworks from our deck when we don’t feel like joining the crowd counted in the thousands. Staged at a riverside park just a bit more than a quarter-mile away, as the Canada geese fly, most of the show blossoms above the trees in multicolored galaxies of color and sound.

Between our ohhs and ahhs, my wife and I somehow started reminiscing about memorable birthday displays on previous July 4ths. The mental movie of July 4, 1974 instantly started playing in my Cranial Cineplex. What made the show—shows, actually—is that I watched them from above.

A photographer on flying status at NAS Alameda, I remember the day was warm and boring. Seeking relief from both, I called air ops and learned that a reserve antisubmarine helicopter squadron had scheduled a night training mission. Another phone call got me on the yellow sheet.

Strapped into the sling seat in the back of the SH-3 Sea King, we took off just after dusk, two pilots, the crew chief, and I. The horizon reminded me of light seeping from under a closed door, and just as it went dark the pilots started calling out the fireworks below as we circled San Francisco Bay.

Contorting my body to see out the small window in the H-3s starboard-side sliding barn door, I finally asked the pilot if I could open it. With a view not much better than mine from his station at the sonar console, the crew chief joined me. A camera hung from my neck, ignored in the darkness.

Restrained by our gunner’s belts, we sat cross-legged in the open door. It was clear and cool and the earth looked like a starry sky. Everywhere we turned pyrotechnics climbed toward us on fiery tails and exploded below in slow-motion super novas of color and light. The only sound was the helicopter’s hum and the pilot’s occasional calls to ATC.

As it did that night, reliving that flight filled me with an ineffable sense of peaceful appreciation for the privilege of being witness to such a sight. And for the first time it struck me that six months after that flight, give or take, I was sitting in the open door of another helicopter, a UH-1N, keeping an anxious eye out for another form of pyrotechnics, red and green tracers, and the snaking molten red dot of a heat seeking missile.

Reporting to the command ship, the USS Blue Ridge (LCC-19), the pilots, crew chief, and I were collecting photos in preparation for the evacuation of Saigon. My part of the mission complete, the camera hung from my neck ignored, as I anxiously searched for telling bits of light rising from the mostly green ground below. Fortunately, on this flight, it never materialized in sharp contrast to the dusky light.

The sudden connection of these two flights moved me, and I struggled to define why as I watched the fireworks burst to life over the trees. That I didn’t make the connection at the time wasn’t the issue: the significance of any event never registers when living the moment. Perspective and relevance comes with time and contemplation. Perhaps this is doubly true when considering the celebration and responsibility of independence. – Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: NAS Alameda,SH-3,UH-1N,USS Blue Ridge,Evacuation of Saigon,Indepenced Day

Rote is the Route to Prosaic Mediocrity

Scott Spangler — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 03:27:25 +0000

Flight instructors who can remember the answers that returned a passing score on the Fundamentals of Instruction test they had to take should be able to tell you that Rote is the first of four levels of learning. If they possess a good memory (or they took the test a few days ago), they might actually be able to parrot its FAA-approved definition: “The ability to repeat something which one has been taught, without understanding or being able to apply what has been learned.”

In simpler, more concise terms: Monkey See, Monkey Do.

Correlation is the highest level of learning. It means you employ all previous learning and make relevant connections to aspects of a new situation and derive the proper response to what one might call a learning experience. In between the first and last steps are Understanding, which is the ability to comprehend or grasp the nature or meaning of something, and Application, the act of using something learned and understood.

Despite claims to the contrary, most aspects of aviation rarely step beyond rote. By not correlating the lessons learned from past experiences to new challenges, we’re bound to repeat our past actions, with the outcome a predictable route to prosaic mediocrity. If you doubt that rote is a contributing factor to more than a century of aviation tradition unimpeded by progress (another name for learning through correlation), permit me a few examples.

Let’s start with accidents. Most agree that roughly 80 percent of them are the result of pilots making poor decisions. And as the AOPA Air Safety Foundations annual Nall Report shows, running out of gas, flying into bad weather, and maneuvering, usually close to the ground, are the most common procedures for airplane bending, folding, and mutilation.

Why? Rote.

Pilots are not devising new and unusual ways of running out of gas, flying into bad weather, or maneuvering close to the ground. They are repeating the same rote actions they’ve read about in thousands of accident reports. If we truly have reached the level of correlation, we’d know that a timely go-around is the best “save” for a less than perfect approach, yet we still bend airplanes instead, and run out of gas, and fly into bad weather.

The government is our co-dependent, the pied piper of rote. Structure is necessary to any organization, and rote operation is SOP for most bureaucracies. We perpetuate this by “monkey doing” without first correlating our current behavior with all we’ve learned from previous situations.

The Next Generation National Airspace System is a perfect example. People in all corners of aviation are complaining that ADS-B is too expensive, not well thought out, or doesn’t provide enough reward to their particular segment of aviation for the investment. I imagine that people made the same complaints when navigation went from bonfires to beacons, and to A-N ranges, and to VORs, and to Loran, and to GPS. Oh, and remember the stink about transponders and the Mode-C veil?

At the rote level, people wonder why are you doing this to us? Operating at the level of correlation, experience has taught us that we cannot have progress without change, and that change is not free. Life is a series of transitions, and at the level of correlation we know this and plan accordingly. NextGen is just the next step, the eventual replacement for radar-based ATC, and goodness knows the FAA has been talking about it long enough, so it shouldn’t be a surprise that it would one day require some new equipment. Those working at a level of correlation started saving for it years ago, and they will reap the rewards in the future.

As most flight instructors will tell you, only those doing the learning can lift themselves from one level of learning to the next. from rote to understanding, to application, and finally to correlation. It is an individual effort, an individual decision. No one can do it for us.

Each of us has to decide that blindly following the route to prosaic mediocrity isn’t good enough any more. And each of us has to invest the time and effort to actually think about our decisions, to correlate them to all that we’ve learned, and then respond in a way that delivers the best outcome. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: CFI,Flight Instructors,Levels of Learning,Rote Behavior,Future of Aviation

Does Parochialism Hinder Aviation’s Future

Scott Spangler — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 05:37:02 +0000

Last weekend I had the honor of being a guest on Airplane Geeks, thanks to my JetWhine.com co-conspirator Rob Mark, who is one of the quartet of regulars. It was my inaugural podcast (Episode 101), and I greatly enjoyed the wide ranging aviation conversation, and I hope they invite me back.

In getting to know each other, Max Flight, the lead geek, asked about my other aviation activities. In the course of talking about the different aviation and non-aviation subjects I write about, I mentioned that writing for JetWhine was my favorite aviation gig.

The geek quartet seemed surprised at this. So I explained that this exquisite forum gives me the freedom to report and comment on the many facets of aviation I find interesting, unrestrained by the narrow editorial focus of most print and many online publications.

Pondering this self-inflicted epiphany during my celebratory post-podcast whiskey and cigar, publishing’s parochial focus makes sense in a media-rich environment. This outlook also seems to describe many who read them. If something doesn’t apply to their narrow aviation interest, they dismiss or ignore it. I wonder how this attitude has affected aviation to date. It certainly hasn’t done much for American politics.

For decades the slices have been fighting for a dominant share of the shrinking aviation pie. The conflicts are many: When it comes to paying for the national airspace system it’s the airlines versus general aviation. Airport access issues often pit business against recreational aviators. Military and civilians take sides on who can use what airspace. Things get more contentious when the mix involves helicopters, light-sport aircraft, amateur-built experimental aircraft, powered parachutes, and weight-shift trikes.

Has anyone really considered the consequences of this internecine squabbling and parochial view of the world? The “surprise” of AB-48 is, perhaps, the most recent example of what can happen when people don’t think about their connections to the outside world—and events taking place there that might affect them. (See Pay Attention to California School Regs.) The evitable introduction of UAVs into American airspace is surely the next donnybrook.

Collectively, aviation is a minority in the economic and political tableau of American life. To survive the growing challenges we all face, it makes sense that the tiny slices of aviation unite as a whole pie of mutual support to prosper in an ever demanding world. But given the entrenched narrow interests of its participants, I wonder, is this possible? – Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Airplane Geeks Podcast,Aviation Industry,Airlines,General Aviation,Flight Training,Airport Access,Homebuilt Aircraft,LSA,Powered Parachutes,Weight-shift Trikes

Are FBO Freebies on the Way Out?

Robert Mark — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:08:52 +0000

In an era when airlines report $2.7 Billion in fresh baggage-fee revenue from work they used to handle for free, is anything sacred? Probably not.

In the U.S. though, Fixed Base Operators (FBO) still give away plenty for free and we all know it. But those days might just be coming to a end … and they probably should.

At last week’s Florida Aviation Trades Association Convention in St. Augustine, a discussion evolved not simply about how companies in a variety of other industries were learning from the airlines concept of fee for service, but that also like our friend Pogo mentioned here, we have probably to some degree wreaked this havoc as an industry on ourselves.

Imagine renting a car these days – no cheap item in Florida I might add – and telling them you’d like some cookies brought out when you arrive, along with some bottled water, ice for the first leg of your trip, newspapers to read during your next break 300 miles away and then too, perhaps a young intern to come out and vacuum the vehicle again because it’s not quite up to your standards.

They might laugh, but if they’re smart, they’ll give you everything you ask for … along with a nice little invoice for their efforts before you go.

The Way it Should Be?

I visited a swanky FBO outside London in March while I was there for a conference. Beautiful facility by almost any standards. In fact, the FBO at Farnborough is considered one of the best in the world. They’ll do anything for you. But they’ll charge you for almost every thing. Want to tanker fuel to save a buck, expect a ramp fee. Like to read the morning newspapers while waiting for the boss? Buy them. (I’ve actually watched pilots read an entire newspaper and then give it back to the girl at the desk because they were too cheap to buy it.So my point is what’s wrong with paying as you go? Absolutely nothing actually. My employees and I don’t work for free, nor do any of our customers expect that to happen. Sure we can offer some flex on what items make the invoice, but there are times when it’s just smart business to say, “It’s OK. Don’t worry about that one.” But that’s the operator’s call, not the customer’s.

But not FBOs. Except for fuel and maintenance, a world of extra are free … and crews expect it for free too, crew cars, snooze rooms, coffee … the list goes on. Of course the solution is not easy. How do FBOs begin weaning pilots off of free without losing them? The only way to make that work is for everyone – or at least almost everyone – to make the change at the same time, not just operationally, but philosophically.

And why would they all do that? So they can live to sell another day. FBOs are a great asset to our industry, but many are holding on by their fingernails and are too nice to admit it. My friend Jeff Kohlman from Aviation Management Consulting Group suggested a few well place signs around the FBO to remind pilots the price of the aircraft tug, or the fuel truck, or even the cost of cookies. A bit in your face, but I like the idea actually.

So the next time you stop your friendly FBO just to drop off passengers, remember who paid for that ramp you taxied in on as well as the restroom your customers can use after a long flight. And don’t forget that great glass of Florida OJ we often find waiting, not to mention a friendly smile.

Saying thanks to the FBO line and customer service folks is always nice, but try asking for 50 gallons a side the next time you stop to drop off for a quick turn. The boss will wait if you tell them it might just mean landing somewhere further away next time.

Rob Mark, editor

Technorati Tags: FBO,Fixed base Operator,business aviation,FATA.aero,Florida Aviation Trades Association,flight training

Becoming a Pilot: Is it a Relevant Choice?

Scott Spangler — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 03:58:54 +0000

Is it karma that led NPR to broadcast a story on the dwindling number of student pilots in June? It reported an FAA estimate that this year’s number of student pilot certificates would total less than 60,000, a “10 year low.” If you remember, June 1989 was the inauguration of the annual National Learn to Fly Month, and that year the FAA issued 142,554 student certificates.

The FAA only posts 10 years of airman numbers, but GAMA’s Statistical Databook archive provides FAA numbers back to 1964, and less than 60,000 student certificates is not just a decade low but an all-time low. Student certificates peaked at 209,406 in 1968 and reached an all-time high of 210,180 in 1979. They have been in decline since then, falling into five figures in 1994.

These numbers are student certificates issued. No one really knows how many students eventually earned a pilot certificate. And no one really knows how many quit before they got their student certificate, typically just before solo. (See General Aviation Won’t Find Future Pilots in Rear View Mirror.) An anecdotal presolo dropout guesstimation is 50 to 80 percent, so adding that to the number of certificates issued means somewhere between 315,270 and 378,324 people started flying lessons in 1979.

A question more pressing than the accurate number of those who dropped out or completed training or is why are increasingly fewer Americans signing up for training? Looking at the primary factors involved, from training to recreational and career possibilities, the answer seems clear: becoming a pilot is no longer relevant to people today, especially to those who will become the next generation of professional pilots.

A substitute teacher for the local middle and high school, my students, after learning I’m a pilot, express genuine interest by asking a lot of questions about possible aerial adventures, usually fueled by low-level video game yanking and banking and Red Bull Air Racing. Their interest quickly wanes upon learning how much time, money, and work it takes to become a pilot. This predictable because they, and their parents, grew up and live in a consumer-driven world based on immediate gratification.

Still, tens of thousands step up to the challenge, and a few actually become pilots. (See A Rare Breed: Students Who Finish Training.) But imagine the outcry if public schools had flight training’s dropout rate. The flight training industry’s typical response is little more than blaming the cost and lack of student determination. Certainly, both are factors, but a more important factor is one that also affects public schools: boredom.

Like public school curricula designed to meet the requirements of No Child Left Behind, flight training rarely goes beyond rote to teach the test. (See No Pilot Left Behind.) Exacerbating this problem is aviation’s perpetuation of a system of pilot training and experience building that has changed little since the end of World War II.

The CFI and aspiring professional pilot in the NPR report explained it perfectly: His loans total nearly $100,000, and to build the experience that will qualify him for a $20,000-a-year right seat in a regional airliner, he’s forced to “flight instruct, tow banners, and haul skydivers.” Think about the attitude bred by this decades-old system and the declining student and pilot population should surprise no one. Students expect a teacher, but what they often get is a disinterested safety pilot who regurgitates the rote education he memorized from a CFI just like him.

Following tradition, the NPR story reported that the low student numbers would lead to a shortage of professional pilots. Really? Has a flight ever been cancelled because there was no one to sit up front? It is true that airlines have lowered their entry-level flight-time requirements, and following tradition, NPR reported that this reduces safety.

Nonsense. Flight time is a lousy measure of a pilot’s capabilities. Training is what makes the difference. Just ask the US Navy. Its aviators enter the fleet with roughly the same flight time as new commercial pilots, 250 hours. The low-time aviators are landing F-18s on a pitching carrier deck at night, and new commercial pilots worry about how often they will have to fly a lazy eight during their careers.

Maybe, must maybe, a shortage of professional pilots will really happen this time. People are pretty smart, especially when their heroes are not the descendants of Lindbergh and Earhart but the wizards of technology and business who exemplify the benefits of smart decisions that bring a good return on the investment of their intelligence, time, and effort. (See Who Will Fly for America Tomorrow?)

Historically, aviation only makes changes when it is forced to; the federal aviation regulations are proof of that. So only a true shortage of professional pilots will force aviation to abandon its 60-year-old model of training and professional development. Maybe.

A good solution might be the military model, where candidates vie for a coveted seat, knowing they will receive top-notch proficiency-based training designed for the mission they will soon fulfill. Anyone can apply, but only the best will be chosen for the education program that fills a guaranteed professional pilot slot. Because the airlines would have more invested in their pilots, perhaps they wouldn’t treat them like Doritos: Hard financial times? Furlough them! There will always be new suckers who still believe in the happy airline pilot dream.

Collegiate aviation programs might be an excellent professional pilot training partner. Aside from having the necessary human and knowledge resources, equipment, and facilities, it would be easier to ensure consistent screening, curricula, and assessment of proficiency through the system of accreditation they all now comply with.

Such a model would take private flight schools and instructors out of the mix of professional pilot training, but such is the price of progress. This happens to all fields, just ask anyone in publishing what the Internet has done to the print side of the business. But progress forces us to change, adapt, and adopt new ways, and flight schools can do the same.

First, flight schools must accept that they are in the education business, not the aviation business. (See California Requires Pro Training Standards That Don’t Involve Stick & Rudder Education and Pay Attention to California School Regs.) To survive and prosper they should develop mission-based education programs for those who need personal all-weather transportation in technically-advanced airplanes or want to fly purely for sport—for the fun of it. And hire teachers, not safety pilots.

Then, flight schools and instructors must actively recruit students from their community, not sit around and wait for some national effort, like the long forgotten National Learn to Fly Month, to send prospects through their doors.

Finally, schools and instructors must address aviation’s horrendous dropout rate. Because becoming a pilot is no longer relevant to most Americans, each new student pilot is a rare resource that must be treated with respect. – Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: Student Pilots,Professional Pilot Training,Flight Training Loans,Pilot Dropout Rate,Flight Schools,CFIs,Collegiate Aviation Degree Programs,Military Flight Training,Future of Aviation

Pay Attention to California School Regs

Scott Spangler — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 03:40:43 +0000

Flight schools and instructors nationwide should be paying close attention to California Assembly Bill 48 (AB-48), which imposes new requirements (and fees that pay for their administration by the Bureau of Private Post-secondary Education) on those who educate pilots aspiring to an aviation career. (Schools and CFIs that teach people to fly for recreation are exempt.) This is legislation that could easily travel to other states. If they want to avoid the situation those in California now face, schools and instructors must break out of their aviation cocoons and get proactive.

Breaking out of the cocoon in critical. AB-48 makes clear that flight schools and instructors are not in the aviation business. They are in the education business, specifically post-secondary education, which AB-48 conventionally defines: “Postsecondary education” means a formal institutional educational program whose curriculum is designed primarily for students who have completed or terminated their secondary education or are beyond the compulsory age of secondary education, including programs whose purpose is academic, vocational, or continuing professional education.

In response to AB-48 many schools and CFIs say they are already regulated by the FAA. And when it comes to the subject they teach—aviation—that’s true. Nearly three dozen other fields, from acupuncture and auto repair to engineering and veterinary medicine, are in the same situation. There are an estimated 400,000 students paying more than $4.5 billion in tuition to private post-secondary schools in roughly three dozen career fields, and, like aviation, each of them must meet the minimum knowledge and skill standards for their chosen field. AB-48 is all about the business operations at these schools, not the curriculum. (See my previous post on the subject: California Requires Pro Training Standards That Don’t Involve Stick & Rudder Education.)

Aviation was exempt from the old post-secondary regs, and the Initial Statement of Reasons explains why AB-48 “Repeal[ed] section 73470 (FAA Certified Flight Schools) – “This section is obsolete because it is based on the former law.” The same rationale applies to truck drivers and others, so it’s not just about aviation. The tacit reiteration is that AB-48 is not about what a school teaches, but rather the sound operation of an educational institution, which includes protecting students.

Looking at it another way, no matter what their course of study, had private post-secondary schools followed accepted educational business practices, legislators wouldn’t have to impose the requirements on all of them to protect students from the unscrupulous few.

Some schools are exempt from AB-48, and their common denominator is that they have been accredited by an agency approved by the US Department of Education. Having participated in two reaccreditation exercises at the private college-prep military school I worked for, the standards, from reports to site visits, mirrored AB-48’s requirements.

The same is true for the accreditation standards of the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (ACCSC). Like AB-48, ACCSC serves a variety of educational disciplines. It has accredited 31 aviation schools, 16 for A&Ps, 10 for pilots, four technical colleges that train one, the other, or both, and one for dispatchers.

Initial ACCSC accreditation takes 18 to 24 months and costs $10,000 or more, and schools must renew their accreditation every three years. The primary benefit, aside from guaranteeing students that they will get the education they pay for (or a tuition refund if the school closes), is that accreditation qualifies a school for federal student aid funds.

Its requirements and fees aside, AB-48’s one-size-fits-all legislation is hits small schools harder than large ones, especially in aviation. Flight training institutions range from Part-141 behemoths with a faculty of a hundred or more to a single, freelance instructor preparing a student for a commercial or CFI checkride. Educating state legislators about this range before they write new requirements requires less traumatic effort than dealing with it after the fact, as California schools and CFIs are now doing.

The California case also makes it clear that schools and instructors cannot depend on aviation associations and journalists to be proactive for them. AB-48 became news well after California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the legislation into law on October 11, 2009. To avoid an AB-48 surprise that could put your state’s flight training future in jeopardy, start learning about the education business and its applicable requirements now. –Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: California Private Postseconary Education Act of 2009,AB-48,Flight Schools,Part-141 Pilot Training,Certificated Flight Instructors,Independent CFIs,ACCSC Accreditation

Steve Wood: Flying for a Record Purpose

Scott Spangler — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 03:27:38 +0000

Pilots earn their certificates for many reasons, but it’s been my experience that they only keep flying after the checkride if they have a goal, a purpose for being airborne more satisfying and fulfilling than the empty aeronautical nourishment of the hundred dollar burger.

For some it’s exploring the backcountry. For others it is aerobatics. And for Steve Wood, it is setting FAI world speed records over a recognized course in this homebuilt Glasair Aviation GlaStar, affectionately known as Goofy, for its N-number N600FY. I’ve mentioned Steve before, in Looking Up to Sustain a Future in Aviation, and noted that he’d set 90 world speed records.

Just before the three-day weekend I got an e-mail from Steve. He mentioned that he’d just run across the March 9 post, and “I thought you might like to know that on 16 April—yes, I took a day off from Sun ‘n Fun—I provisionally set a further 11 FAI World Records bringing my total to 101 records.”

In his usual manner, he planned the out and back flight to Nassau, Bahamas, with precision and attending to the multitude of details required for any record attempt. The success of any record attempt is determined by the planning, he says. To ensure the accuracy of the overhead times at each of the cities to and from the international destination (Nassau), he flies IFR and talks to each tower before the flight.

Five of Steve’s April 16 city pairs were Daytona, Orlando, Titusville, Vero Beach, and Fort Pierce to Nassau, a total one-way distance of roughly 350 nautical miles. On his way home to Spruce Creek, a fly-in community outside of Daytona Beach, he set another five world records from Nassau to the cities he passed over on the way down. Number 11 was a round-trip record between Daytona and Nassau. His top speed was 240.47 km/h (149.43 mph) between Nassau and Titusville.

“Why did I do this? Well, it’s OK having the most records of any British pilot and the most records set in a US registered homebuilt, etc., etc. But I thought I would be the very first to break the 100 world record barrier. Others may set more records than me in years to come, but now at least I will have been the first to break the 100 record barrier—a bit like breaking the sound barrier for the first time!”

And in the process, he brings attention to the causes for which he flies, Flying Scholarships for the Disabled, Able Flight, and EAA Young Eagles. Most who learn of Steve’s accomplishments are, like me, impressed, thankful…and jealous. Others feel threatened for some insecure reason, and they have whispered to me that Steve sets records for personal glory. My only response is a single-word question: So? And if the whispers get a bit uppity and self-important, I pose another question: What keeps you flying regularly and, more importantly, what have you contributed to the world of flight?” – Scott Spangler

Technorati Tags: FAI World Records,City-to-City Speed Records,Recreational Aviation,Steve Wood,GlaStar