1500

At the beginning of the year we discussed how the 1500-hour rule could be affecting the pilot and what should be done. I stated my position in opposition to the 1500-hour rule, stating there has been no evidence that the increased ATP minimums have increased the safety for 121 carriers. The 1500-hour rule was a rush job by the FAA to show the public that more ‘experienced,’ pilots were at the controls. Also included was that pay increases would help with the pilot shortage. This is what I also believe is not the case. But for the purpose of this different view, I will make the argument that the 1500-hour rule has helped improve safety at the 121 carriers that the pay increase has brought back pilots.

On February 12, 2009 a Colgan DHC8-400 crashed in Buffalo, New York, killing all on board and one person in a house. After this crash the media started to dig deeper into aviation regulations. One thing they found was that in order to fly for a regional airline, all you needed was 250 hours TT and a commercial multi engine rating (FAA, 2013). Once this was broadcasted, outrage ensued stating that was insufficient time, to be able to fly for the airlines. This intern began a movement to increase safety at the airlines. One of these changes included an increase in the number of hours required for first officers at the airlines. This change would become the 1500-hour rule. And since this rule became public regulation, no one has died as a result (on a US carrier) to an airline accident (Yanofsky, 2018).

This is very difficult to type because there is 0 evidence that the 1500-hour rule helped. Now I will argue against it again. Along with the 1500-hour rule came a string of changes to the 121 world, including new flight duty and rest regulations introduced in 2011 and new training requirements in 2012. Again the 1500-hour rule took effect in 2013, four years after the Colgan crash. In that time span, not one death was recorded due to an airline crash.  In fact, both of the pilots in the Colgan crash had more than 1500 hours. The captain had over 3,000 hours and the first officer had over 2,200 hours. This negates the 1500-hour rule people are talking about. It now takes about an extra 1,200 hours, from graduation of a part 61 school to make it to the airlines. That’s almost over two years of flying somewhere else, before going to the airlines.

The pilot shortage talk wouldn’t be complete without talking about money. Money does talk, and the regional airlines have been under paying their pilots for years and years. In 2012 the average pilot salary per year was $22,500 (Zillman, 2014). That’s how much I made as a Line Tech while still living at home. These regional pilots were still trying to pay off their student loans and trying to afford rent and other life costs. Now pilots are earning around $60,000 in their first year. This is a false narrative though. In reality, pilots are still making more then they were six years ago but not by much. The $60,000 first year pay includes the hourly scale and bonuses. After the first year, those bonuses go away, and the pilot reverts back to making $35,000 - $40,000 per year. Until about the third year when most are eligible to upgrade to captain. This trend does not look like its slowing down. The regionals are making it look more appealing to work for them with the high first year pay only in turn to decrease your pay in the second year. And not every pilot can receive the maximum number of bonuses.

The pilot shortage is a real deal that is and will affect the aviation industry in the future. But there is hope. Just recently, the amount of pilots has grown over the past year tremendously. Since 2010 the number of pilots has decreased from 627,588 to 584,362. Over a 40,000 decrease in pilots. But in 2017 the US saw its first growth in eight years. In 2017, the amount of pilots increased by about 25,000. Almost all of that came from the student pilot sector with an increase of over 21,000. This could mean many things, but I see it as a huge positive in the US aviation market.

References

E. (2018, April 19). Pilot Career Compensation. Retrieved April 20, 2018, from https://www.envoyair.com/pilot-career-compensation/

F. (2014, September 19). Press Release – FAA Boosts Aviation Safety with New Pilot Qualification Standards. Retrieved April 17, 2018, from https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14838

Yanofsky, D. (2018, April 18). The first US passenger airline with an accidental death since 2009 is Southwest Airlines. Retrieved April 20, 2018, from https://qz.com/1254971/southwest-flight-wn1380-is-the-first-fatal-us-passenger-airline-accident-since-2009/

ATC

1) Describe the fundamentals of our current ATC system vs. the proposed NextGen system. Include details. i.e. "Next Gen is satellite-based." is not enough detail.

The current ATC system was made in the 1970s known as Host (pretty creepy). The system is outdated but is very reliable. Hence why not much has changed in over 40 years. The system is however very inefficient. Using outdated radar services instead of GPS. The world is connected by GPS, planes even use GPS for routing, but the controllers that tell the plane where to go don't have that luxury. We all know the government takes AWHILE change anything. Well the FAA was tasked with updating the ATC sector of aviation. The new updated system is called NEXT GEN (kinda cliche). But in 2007 the first concept was published. In it were the major goals, and completion dates of these goals. Next Gen works in three parts. First is See, this part helps controllers see exactly where planes are at all times and lets controllers see weather patterns. Next is Navigate, this part works with See, as controllers are now able to give aircraft more direct routes. Next is Communicate, here controllers are able to send clearances and other information to aircraft digitally by means of the new digital communications (FAA, 2017). On paper Next Gen looks great, looks exactly what the United States airspace system needs. But with set back after set back, it is looking more like a hassle then a good thing.

2) Why has GA traditional spoken against the privatization of ATC? What is the stance of US airlines on ATC privatization and why? Find two aviation organizations/lobby groups/think tanks (not individual companies) etc. and report their response to privatization.

GA has traditionaly spoken against the privatization of ATC because privatizing this function would greatly hurt the GA cause. Once ATC is transferred over to the private sector, the Airlines would step in and quickly have a huge interest in route planning. Making sure they each get priority into large hub airports. The GA world won't be able to compete. There will be no competitor, meaning there will be no way to reduce the costs of using the airspace system. A MAJOR lie being broadcasted by our President and the airlines is that the main reason you are delayed is because ATC can't keep up with traffic demand. This is true in some sense but it is NOT the overwhelming factor of why you can't get to your vacation in time. Out of 100% of flights between January 2017 and December 2017, 80.18% of flights were on time, 14% of flights were delayed or cancelled due to other factors including: Maintenance, weather, or late departures, and only 5.82% of flights were delayed in the Airspace system (DOT, 2017).

The US airlines are 100% for ATC privatization. This is due in part because the airlines want to see ATC modernized. The FAA has taken years and lots of money to try and modernize is only to be stricken by delays and the need for additional funding. The airlines believe a private organization will be able to speed up the process, thus leading to the airlines saving money on routes.

Many organizations (mainly GA) have opposed ATC privatization. One of the organizations is the AOPA. The AOPA states that the main interest in the Airlines wanting to privatize ATC is so they can all lobby for reduced pricing from more direct routes. Thus gaining a bigger profit. They will also charge more on their tickets because of a usage fee to use ATC and ticket prices will increase (Kildea, 2017).

A supporting and opposing view comes from the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. They will not support any for-profit model and a new private company must at minimum: 

• protect the rights and benefits of the workforce; 
• ensure that safety and efficiency remain the top priorities; 
• provide a stable, predictable funding stream that adequately supports air traffic control services, staffing, hiring and training, long-term modernization, preventative maintenance, and ongoing modernization of the physical infrastructure; and
• maintain service to all segments of our nation’s diverse aviation community. 

(Rinaldi, 2017)

3) Is ATC privatized in any other countries? If so, where? Write about the details of how this system works. How is it funded? Who are the private operators? Etc..Does the privatized ATC system run more or less efficiently than our current system?

ATC has been privatized in countries such as the UK and Canada. Lets focus on Canada because they are our neighbors. They are completely separate from the government and are funded by charging anyone who uses their services (NAV Canada, 2018). It is hard to compare Canada's system to ours as the United States has a very complex system and many many users. Canada's aviation industry is no where near the size of the United States. 

4) What would be the process for converting our current system into a privatized system? i.e. would it have to go through Congress, the FAA, etc..Where is the discussion at? i.e. is there a passed bill or law allowing ATC privatization? Does it have to be an act of Congress or can the FAA make this decision on its own. How do expect the current administration to impact ATC privatization if at all?

The process of privatizing ATC will have to pass congress and the President first. There must be a proposed bill, and that bill must go through all the legal hoops before coming a law. There has been a proposed bill but it never made it out of the committee debate. The current Republican administration was really pushing for the privatization over the summer and I believe support kind of fell through the cracks when other issues about our country arose. 

5) Finally, do you feel that the current ATC system would be more efficient if it were privatized. Why or why not?

I feel the current ATC system would be more efficient if it is modernized. I don't believe privatizing ATC will do anything beside increase operational costs for GA pilots and flight schools and put more money in the airline pockets.

References

D. (n.d.). Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://www.transtats.bts.gov/OT_Delay/ot_delaycause1.asp?type=21&pn=1

ATC Privatization Myths vs. Facts. (n.d.). Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aviation-advocacy-and-safety/aviation_advocacy/top-aviation-issues/atc-privatization-myths-vs-facts

Church, D. (2017, June 5). June 5, 2017 // Statement by NATCA President Paul Rinaldi about President's Announcement of Air Traffic Control Reform Initiative. Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://natca.org/index.php/media-center/news-archive/1887-june-5-2017-statement-by-natca-president-paul-rinaldi-about-president-s-announcement-of-air-traffic-control-reform-initiative-2

F. (2017, December 04). How NextGen Works. Retrieved April 6, 2018, from https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/how_nextgen_works/

Investor Relations. (n.d.). Retrieved April 6, 2018, from http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/about-us/Pages/investor-relations.aspx