Tuesday, December 13, 2016
Flying Cheap: Professionalism
Professionalism is a very delicate term. Some people would argue that if you get paid to do something than you're a professional, while others would go above and beyond by having their personal expectations that they must achieve. In our current industry, I don't believe that increased pay translates into increased professionalism. Our industry is suffering from a pilot shortage. There are often many flights that are cancelled just because there aren't enough pilots to fill the positions. This shortage has lead to a major increase in hiring, which has also resulted in a decrease in prior experience. Yes, the minimums to fly for a regional airline are 1,500 hours and an ATP rating; however, the average experience of pilots being hired has significantly decreased. The decrease in average experience upon hire however has not had any affect on safety of the industry.
In fact, the aviation industry is actually the safest that it has ever been. To prove this, in 2015 there were less than 200 fatalities from aviation accidents. Previous to this, the lowest was 260 back in 2013 (ASN, 2016). But overall, the number of fatalities in the commercial aviation industry has continuously been on a downward trend since 1996. The fatalities counted toward the downward trend do not account for any deaths that were associated with hijacking or suicidal accidents.
In order to deal with the pilot shortage, institutions are trying to get the 1,500 hour rule reduced. Yes, this rule is already reduced to 1,000 hours if you graduate from a Part 141 school with the necessary course requirements but many people want it even lower (Udris, 2013). I don't agree with this argument. I believe that even though it is a pain to get to 1,500 hours, that this rule is one of the best ones that aviation has received in a long time. This rule has significantly affected the industry and is a major reason behind the pilot shortage. Since almost every company is short pilots, they are not able to hire very young, low time pilots. In order for the larger companies to hire more qualified pilots, they are having to increase their wages and benefits. The pilot market is definitely in favor of the pilots. Pilots are able to shop the market and look for the wages, schedule, and benefits that they prefer. Just a few years ago it was the complete opposite situation. Pilots were happy with any position that they could be offered and had no room to argue their wages. In the end, this pilot shortage has created a much better environment financially for the pilot community. Unfortunately this shortage has not affected all aspects of aviation in a positive way. The FAA has had a very difficult time over the past several years.
Overall, I don't believe there is a lack of professionalism in the aviation industry, including within the FAA. I believe that the biggest reason behind this assumption by others is because of their lack of staffing. The FAA has cut many positions in order to decrease their spendings. As a result of this, the employees are have more work on their plates and are not able to put enough focus into all of their projects. In 2013, the FAA planned to cut $600 million dollars. That is a substantial amount of money, and they plan to do that by decreasing the number of ATC facilities, furloughing a vast majority of their 47,000 employees, cutting the night shifts, etc. (FAA, 2013). With a decrease of $600 million dollars, you can only expect a decrease in the amount or quality of work. With this being said, I definitely do not blame the FAA employees. I am sure that they are doing whatever they can to try and accomplish their tasks to the best of their ability. So in my opinion there isn't a lack of professionalism within the FAA, rather there is just a lack of funding and resources allocated towards the FAA.
References:
ASN. 2016. Statistics. Aviation Safety Network: Flight Safety Foundation. Retrieved from https://aviation-safety.net/statistics/
FAA. 2013, February 22. FAA Planning for $600 Million in 2013 Spending Cuts. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=71078
Udris, A. 2013, October 1. The 1500 Hour Rule- Restricted ATP Requirements for First Officers. Bold Method. Retrieved fromhttps://www.boldmethod.com/blog/2013/08/1500-hour-rule-restricted-atp/
Thursday, December 8, 2016
Jobs Plans & Topic Review
My plans from the beginning of the semester have not changed at all. Part of this is due to the delay in my training, especially because of weather. For example, I have been trying to take my commercial check ride for three weeks now and keep having to reschedule it for weather. Even though I will earn an aviation management degree, my intent is to fly for a living. Within the next few months, I plan to be flying for a Part 91 company out of Pontiac airport. This will most likely include and aircraft fleet containing TBM's, Beechcraft King Airs, and Cessna Citations. From there, I hope be be hired by a larger corporate company such as Pentastar Aviation in order to accumulate enough hours to become a Captain. Once hitting the required number of hours and certificates to become a Captain, my ultimate goal is to either be hired on with Delta Air Lines or a Fortune 100 company.
Upon graduation, my plan is to already be working for a Part 91 company. If this does not work out for some reason then I will focus on finishing up my CFI certificate. Once receiving that and I am still not flying for a company then I will plan to flight instruct out of a FBO such as Solo Aviation, DCT Aviation, or Crosswinds Aviation.
I believe that the most useful topic that we covered this semester was the Regional Carriers and Flying Cheap blog. This post made us think about the pilot shortage and how it is affecting the regional carriers. The majority of us will eventually be in the regionals, so thinking about the industry we are soon to be in was very helpful. Defining professionalism was difficult at first; however, it was good to hear what everyone else thought that it meant and showed different characteristics that could be considered when talking about being professional.
One of the least useful topics this semester for me was the emissions post mainly because I don't think that it will really directly affect us like the other topics. Yes, prices might go up for airline tickets due to the probability of companies having to buy the emissions cards; however, as pilots we can't really change this. To decrease emissions, the routes or airlines need to be changed, meaning that airspace will most likely need to change, and the design process will need to change. Aircraft are already becoming very efficient compared to older planes and even other types of transportation. Approximately 96% percent of a flight is flown by the autopilot, which follows the magenta line very well and ultimately saves the company on fuel costs.
Upon graduation, my plan is to already be working for a Part 91 company. If this does not work out for some reason then I will focus on finishing up my CFI certificate. Once receiving that and I am still not flying for a company then I will plan to flight instruct out of a FBO such as Solo Aviation, DCT Aviation, or Crosswinds Aviation.
I believe that the most useful topic that we covered this semester was the Regional Carriers and Flying Cheap blog. This post made us think about the pilot shortage and how it is affecting the regional carriers. The majority of us will eventually be in the regionals, so thinking about the industry we are soon to be in was very helpful. Defining professionalism was difficult at first; however, it was good to hear what everyone else thought that it meant and showed different characteristics that could be considered when talking about being professional.
One of the least useful topics this semester for me was the emissions post mainly because I don't think that it will really directly affect us like the other topics. Yes, prices might go up for airline tickets due to the probability of companies having to buy the emissions cards; however, as pilots we can't really change this. To decrease emissions, the routes or airlines need to be changed, meaning that airspace will most likely need to change, and the design process will need to change. Aircraft are already becoming very efficient compared to older planes and even other types of transportation. Approximately 96% percent of a flight is flown by the autopilot, which follows the magenta line very well and ultimately saves the company on fuel costs.
Monday, November 28, 2016
Aviation Organizations
The two most important organizations to be associated with for my career path are AOPA (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association) and ALPA (Air Line Pilots Association, International).
The mission for AOPA is to ultimately protect our freedom to fly. They strive towards this goal by advocating on behalf of their members, educating pilots and policy makers, supporting activities than ensure long-term health of general aviation, fighting to keep GA accessible to all, and ensuring sufficient resources to ensure their success (AOPA, 2016). AOPA has 5 key values: initiative, teamwork, service, integrity, and excellence. They don't only support general aviation like most people would assume, they have a large part in the entire aviation industry. AOPA is associated with increasing safety standards through the industry and implying ethical behaviors and techniques for both pilots and non-pilots. A large portion of their work is associated with the government and improving the aviation laws that ultimately affect both GA and commercial operations.
ALPA's mission is to promote and champion all aspects of aviation safety throughout all segments of the aviation community; to represent the collective interests of all pilots in commercial aviation; to assist in collective bargaining activities on behalf of all pilots represented by the Association; to promote the health and welfare before all governmental agencies; to be a strong, forceful advocate of the airline piloting profession; and to be the ultimate guardian and defender of the rights and privileges of the professional pilots (ALPA, 2015). Yes, this association is heavily geared toward air line pilots and the commercial industry; however, they still have their ties with general aviation. For example, ALPA works to promote safety for the entire industry. The safety is required for the entire industry because the young pilots need to learn the safety techniques not only for the safety of our country but also to know those techniques well so they can continue to use them in a commercial pilot setting. The commercial setting is the largest source of revenue for the aviation industry, so air lines have a huge say in subject matters. The choices that air lines choose to fight for ultimately affect the industry because the majority of the regulations are consistent no matter what or where you are flying. For example, most of the airlines were for the NextGen technology to cut their operating costs while still improving safety. This ADS-B requirement starting in 2020 will of course help the air lines but it will also GA aircraft and the air traffic controllers as well.
Personally, being a member of AOPA will be important for two major reasons. Firstly, if I were to pay the small yearly fee for legal help then I would be protected in the case of a lawsuit. In order to retain good lawyers it is very expensive. The small fee through AOPA will be much less over the years when comparing the cost of a one-time lawsuit. It is always better safe than sorry, so even though you might not ever need legal help, it is better to prepare for the worst. Secondly, AOPA is a tremendous resource for general aviation flying. I fly a lot through my family planes and I am always looking information up through AOPA. They have resources in any aviation category that you might need; whether it is from actual flight planning all the way to accident analysis or even Caribbean flying.
ALPA will not only benefit me, but it will also help out younger pilots. ALPA has a great website that has many different blogs about aviation questions such as interview gouges, updated pay scales, minimum pilot requirements, etc. It is also the world's largest pilot union, thus it will protect my job industry and the details surrounding our careers.
References:
ALPA. (2015). What We DO. Air Line Pilots Association, International. Retrieved from
http://www.alpa.org/about-alpa/what-we-do
AOPA. (2016). AOPA's Mission, Vision, and Values. Aircraft Owner's and Pilot's Association.
Retrieved from https://www.aopa.org/about/mission-vision-and-values
The mission for AOPA is to ultimately protect our freedom to fly. They strive towards this goal by advocating on behalf of their members, educating pilots and policy makers, supporting activities than ensure long-term health of general aviation, fighting to keep GA accessible to all, and ensuring sufficient resources to ensure their success (AOPA, 2016). AOPA has 5 key values: initiative, teamwork, service, integrity, and excellence. They don't only support general aviation like most people would assume, they have a large part in the entire aviation industry. AOPA is associated with increasing safety standards through the industry and implying ethical behaviors and techniques for both pilots and non-pilots. A large portion of their work is associated with the government and improving the aviation laws that ultimately affect both GA and commercial operations.
ALPA's mission is to promote and champion all aspects of aviation safety throughout all segments of the aviation community; to represent the collective interests of all pilots in commercial aviation; to assist in collective bargaining activities on behalf of all pilots represented by the Association; to promote the health and welfare before all governmental agencies; to be a strong, forceful advocate of the airline piloting profession; and to be the ultimate guardian and defender of the rights and privileges of the professional pilots (ALPA, 2015). Yes, this association is heavily geared toward air line pilots and the commercial industry; however, they still have their ties with general aviation. For example, ALPA works to promote safety for the entire industry. The safety is required for the entire industry because the young pilots need to learn the safety techniques not only for the safety of our country but also to know those techniques well so they can continue to use them in a commercial pilot setting. The commercial setting is the largest source of revenue for the aviation industry, so air lines have a huge say in subject matters. The choices that air lines choose to fight for ultimately affect the industry because the majority of the regulations are consistent no matter what or where you are flying. For example, most of the airlines were for the NextGen technology to cut their operating costs while still improving safety. This ADS-B requirement starting in 2020 will of course help the air lines but it will also GA aircraft and the air traffic controllers as well.
Personally, being a member of AOPA will be important for two major reasons. Firstly, if I were to pay the small yearly fee for legal help then I would be protected in the case of a lawsuit. In order to retain good lawyers it is very expensive. The small fee through AOPA will be much less over the years when comparing the cost of a one-time lawsuit. It is always better safe than sorry, so even though you might not ever need legal help, it is better to prepare for the worst. Secondly, AOPA is a tremendous resource for general aviation flying. I fly a lot through my family planes and I am always looking information up through AOPA. They have resources in any aviation category that you might need; whether it is from actual flight planning all the way to accident analysis or even Caribbean flying.
ALPA will not only benefit me, but it will also help out younger pilots. ALPA has a great website that has many different blogs about aviation questions such as interview gouges, updated pay scales, minimum pilot requirements, etc. It is also the world's largest pilot union, thus it will protect my job industry and the details surrounding our careers.
References:
ALPA. (2015). What We DO. Air Line Pilots Association, International. Retrieved from
http://www.alpa.org/about-alpa/what-we-do
AOPA. (2016). AOPA's Mission, Vision, and Values. Aircraft Owner's and Pilot's Association.
Retrieved from https://www.aopa.org/about/mission-vision-and-values
Friday, November 18, 2016
Aviation Emissions
When talking about emissions, aviation has an unfair biased associated with it. The large aircraft are assumed to horrible on fuel efficiency and produced horrendous emissions to the environment but that isn't the case at all. In fact, the large jets such as the Airbus A380 and Boeing 737 actually are efficient as most modern compact cars. According to the Air Transport Action Group, aviation is responsible for 12% of the C02 emissions from all transportation, which is much lower than road transport at 74%. Most of the emissions from aviation are from the long distance flights and at this time there are no other practical means of transport for those trips. Approximately 80% of aviation emissions are produced from flights of longer than 1,500 km, or 931 miles (ATAG, 2016). Due to the Paris Agreement and the high fuel prices, aviation has a very strong incentive to increase efficiency even more in order to save costs.
The specifics to the proposed reduction plan are actually pretty simple. The overall idea of the plan is starting in 2027, emissions will be enforced to the 2020 level. These enforced regulation will be standard for the 191 countries associated with ICAO (Green, 2016). Any emissions over the 2020 level must be offset by the airlines. The offsetting of emissions will be done through the market based measure, MBM. The MBM will require each carrier to purchase carbon offsets, which they will then be able to sell off to other carriers if they are more efficient than they are expected to be.
Under the newly elected administration, I don't think that the Paris Agreement will work out. Trump seems to be against most of the agreements. For example, it has even been said that he is against the NATO and wants to repel that agreement. If he wants to reply NATO, which has been an agreement for several years between many countries, why would he want to agree to the Paris Agreement. The reduction laws within the agreement are unnecessary and will be very expensive to the United States. In fact, several countries have already tried to create a emission reduction law and it was shut down to due to the expensive costs to U.S. air carries.
I personally think that the reduction laws are an overreaction. Not only has the aviation industry been working on efficiency, but so is every other industry. Currently, fuel is approximately 33% of the operating costs. In order for airlines to make more money, the easiest way will be to increase efficiency to decrease fuel costs. Aircraft are already very efficient compared to our past history. Jets in today's industry are 80% more efficient per seat kilometer than the early jets in 1960 (ATAG, 2016). This being said, airlines are working on efficiency and I think that the reduction laws will actually make it harder for the aviation industry because there will be fines associated with the efficiency of aircraft.
References:
Air Transport Action Group. (2016, May). Facts and Figures. ATAG. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html
Green, J. (2016, October 14). The World is About to get Tough on Aviation Emissions, Here's What
you Need to Know. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/
news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/10/14/the-world-is-about-to-get-tough-on-aviation-emissions-
heres-what-you-need-to-know/
The specifics to the proposed reduction plan are actually pretty simple. The overall idea of the plan is starting in 2027, emissions will be enforced to the 2020 level. These enforced regulation will be standard for the 191 countries associated with ICAO (Green, 2016). Any emissions over the 2020 level must be offset by the airlines. The offsetting of emissions will be done through the market based measure, MBM. The MBM will require each carrier to purchase carbon offsets, which they will then be able to sell off to other carriers if they are more efficient than they are expected to be.
Under the newly elected administration, I don't think that the Paris Agreement will work out. Trump seems to be against most of the agreements. For example, it has even been said that he is against the NATO and wants to repel that agreement. If he wants to reply NATO, which has been an agreement for several years between many countries, why would he want to agree to the Paris Agreement. The reduction laws within the agreement are unnecessary and will be very expensive to the United States. In fact, several countries have already tried to create a emission reduction law and it was shut down to due to the expensive costs to U.S. air carries.
I personally think that the reduction laws are an overreaction. Not only has the aviation industry been working on efficiency, but so is every other industry. Currently, fuel is approximately 33% of the operating costs. In order for airlines to make more money, the easiest way will be to increase efficiency to decrease fuel costs. Aircraft are already very efficient compared to our past history. Jets in today's industry are 80% more efficient per seat kilometer than the early jets in 1960 (ATAG, 2016). This being said, airlines are working on efficiency and I think that the reduction laws will actually make it harder for the aviation industry because there will be fines associated with the efficiency of aircraft.
References:
Air Transport Action Group. (2016, May). Facts and Figures. ATAG. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html
Green, J. (2016, October 14). The World is About to get Tough on Aviation Emissions, Here's What
you Need to Know. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/
news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/10/14/the-world-is-about-to-get-tough-on-aviation-emissions-
heres-what-you-need-to-know/
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Global Airlines
Prior to International agreements, airlines would have to receive specific clearance in order to operate a flight into a different country. They would have to get authorization to land at each airport they planned to stop at, which was way more work than it should have been. The Open Skies Agreement was created to make this process more efficient. It grouped together several different countries and allowed air carriers to travel to and from any airport within those countries without having to get authorization for every flight. A few of the many countries involved in the agreement are the United Stats, France, Germany, Canada, and The United Arab Emirates (Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, 2016). One of the important terms to this international agreement includes that the carriers must not be subsidized. There is currently an argument between the United States and The United Arab Emirates about their carries being heavily subsidized. The major carriers being questioned are Emirates, Etihad Airlines, and Qatar Airways (Mouawad, 2015).
Yes, all U.S. carriers used to receive subsidies; however, it was before the Open Skies Agreement was formed. Between 1918 and 1998, the federal government spent $150 billion to support aviation. This money went to building and improving new airports, helping out airlines during rough times, and sharing the costs of airlines when traveling into economically declined areas (McGee, 2015). Air carriers are also subsidized through the Essential Air Service, which allows small communities to still be served by certificated air carriers.
Foreign carriers are able to purchase aircraft below market value because of the export/import bank. This bank is an incentive program to generate more revenue for the U.S. manufacturer. Foreign carriers don't actually receive a discount on the aircraft itself; however, they are offered lower interest rates for the aircraft loan. It also allows for the export/import bank to finance to a U.S. exporter if they are defined as an SBA small business (EXIM, 2012).
Personally, I don't believe that the global playing field of air carriers is fair. The Open Skies Agreement clearly states that to be a participant you must not receive subsidizes. Although different carries have different definitions of being subsidized, they need to create one definition for all participants. The carriers that receive money when their fuel hedging estimates aren't correct have a major advantage over the carriers that don't receive money for that. Another disadvantage for U.S. carriers is the export/import bank. Foreign carriers are able to purchase aircraft at a cheaper rate due to the lower interest on loans. U.S. carriers do no get this discount, and thus are at a huge disadvantage financially because they not only pay more for their aircraft but they also don't get reimbursed for their loses in fuel hedging margins.
References:
Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs. (2016, October 18). Open Skies Partners. U.S.
Department of State. Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ata/114805.htm
EXIM. (2012, May 25). The Aviation Exports Policy. Export-Import Bank of The United States.
Retrieved from http://www.exim.gov/policies/aviation-exports
McGee, B. (2015, September 2). How much do Taxpayers Support Airlines. USA Today. Retrieved
from http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2015/09/02/how-much-do-
taxpayers-support-airlines/71568226/
Mouawad, J. (2015, February 6). Open-Skies Agreement Challenged. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/business/us-airlines-challenge-open-skies-
agreements.html?_r=0
Yes, all U.S. carriers used to receive subsidies; however, it was before the Open Skies Agreement was formed. Between 1918 and 1998, the federal government spent $150 billion to support aviation. This money went to building and improving new airports, helping out airlines during rough times, and sharing the costs of airlines when traveling into economically declined areas (McGee, 2015). Air carriers are also subsidized through the Essential Air Service, which allows small communities to still be served by certificated air carriers.
Foreign carriers are able to purchase aircraft below market value because of the export/import bank. This bank is an incentive program to generate more revenue for the U.S. manufacturer. Foreign carriers don't actually receive a discount on the aircraft itself; however, they are offered lower interest rates for the aircraft loan. It also allows for the export/import bank to finance to a U.S. exporter if they are defined as an SBA small business (EXIM, 2012).
Personally, I don't believe that the global playing field of air carriers is fair. The Open Skies Agreement clearly states that to be a participant you must not receive subsidizes. Although different carries have different definitions of being subsidized, they need to create one definition for all participants. The carriers that receive money when their fuel hedging estimates aren't correct have a major advantage over the carriers that don't receive money for that. Another disadvantage for U.S. carriers is the export/import bank. Foreign carriers are able to purchase aircraft at a cheaper rate due to the lower interest on loans. U.S. carriers do no get this discount, and thus are at a huge disadvantage financially because they not only pay more for their aircraft but they also don't get reimbursed for their loses in fuel hedging margins.
References:
Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs. (2016, October 18). Open Skies Partners. U.S.
Department of State. Retrieved from http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ata/114805.htm
EXIM. (2012, May 25). The Aviation Exports Policy. Export-Import Bank of The United States.
Retrieved from http://www.exim.gov/policies/aviation-exports
McGee, B. (2015, September 2). How much do Taxpayers Support Airlines. USA Today. Retrieved
from http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/mcgee/2015/09/02/how-much-do-
taxpayers-support-airlines/71568226/
Mouawad, J. (2015, February 6). Open-Skies Agreement Challenged. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/business/us-airlines-challenge-open-skies-
agreements.html?_r=0
Thursday, October 27, 2016
A Chinese Competitor to Aviation
COMAC, or commercial aircraft corporation of China, is an aircraft manufacture that is trying to compete with Boeing and Airbus. On November 2, 2015, they produced their first large airliner called the C919 that holds approximately 168 passengers. It is very difficult to say that the C919 will never receive FAA certification; however, I don't think that it will happen anytime soon. First, the FAA is never quick about anything not involving emergencies. There is always extensive paperwork and research with all of their procedures and the fact that it is coming from a country that has no previous FAA aircraft makes it even more work. Secondly, China has a very poor reputation with the quality of their manufacturing products. Not only will the FAA keep that in mind, but I believe that there will be many different individuals that are watching over the FAA's shoulders and trying to influence them not to grant COMAC with certification. This being said, I believe that the public perception will have a large influence.
The public perception of Chinese manufacturing is not good. If the C919 were to get FAA certification, I don't believe that it would affect the U.S. carriers at all for the first 10 years or so. Yes, the COMAC aircraft will probably be cheaper than Boeing and Airbus; however, I think the carriers will wait about 10 years to see their safety and maintenance records before switching manufactures to cut costs. On the passengers side, I believe that the general public will be against the Chinese aircraft in the media and in their daily conversations. Most flying passengers don't actually know much about aircraft and are too focused with just getting on the plane and taking their seats, so when it comes time to actually flying I don't think they will really even notice what type of plane they are on.
Not only will COMAC have issues in the future trying to market to other countries, they are currently having their own personal issues. The C919 is behind production schedule and it is also heavier than expected. With the increased weight, the efficiency has gone down, which means that it will cost more to fly per hour than its competitors (Cendrowski, 2016). Luckily their delayed production is not affecting many companies because COMAC is owned by the Chinese government. Since China owns COMAC, the C919 will be flown by all Chinese carriers. The C919 is not the only COMAC plane that is delayed with production. COMAC is also working on producing a smaller jet, smilier to a CRJ, that is called the ARJ-21. The ARJ-21 is a 90 passenger jet that made its' first flight commercial flight on June 28, 2016 (Riva, 2016).
Even if the C919 were to receive FAA certification, I don't think that other companies would try to enter the market. Mainly due to the huge financial costs behind aircraft manufacturing. Both Boeing and Airbus are over budget on almost every airplane that they produce, so most companies will not be able to afford that. Another reason that other companies won't try to compete is the strict regulations and certifications that are necessary. The FAA is very strict and not only will complying with certifications cost new companies a lot financially, it will also cost them more time then they will be able to handle. In my opinion, I don't think that the C919 will end up receiving FAA certification and that will show other potential companies how difficult it is to join the market and will prevent them from trying to do so.
COMAC is not a threat to Boeing or Airbus. Neither of the companies have really responded to the new manufacturer because they have been the manufacturers for the last few decades. They already have enough clients and are FAA certified. They don't have time to worry about potential competitors because they are already behind their schedules. Both Boeing and Airbus are working on new airliners and when asked about COMAC, they basically turned the question into an opportunity to advertise their new products.
References:
Cendrowski, S. (2016, February 16). China's Answer to Boeing Loses Shine. Fortune. Retrieved
fromhttp://fortune.com/2016/02/16/china-comac-c919-delay-delivery/
Riva, A. (2016, June 28). China Just Flew its First Passenger Jet: and its a Clunker. Vine News.
Retrieved from https://news.vice.com/article/china-just-flew-its-first-passenger-jetand-its-a-
clunker
The public perception of Chinese manufacturing is not good. If the C919 were to get FAA certification, I don't believe that it would affect the U.S. carriers at all for the first 10 years or so. Yes, the COMAC aircraft will probably be cheaper than Boeing and Airbus; however, I think the carriers will wait about 10 years to see their safety and maintenance records before switching manufactures to cut costs. On the passengers side, I believe that the general public will be against the Chinese aircraft in the media and in their daily conversations. Most flying passengers don't actually know much about aircraft and are too focused with just getting on the plane and taking their seats, so when it comes time to actually flying I don't think they will really even notice what type of plane they are on.
Not only will COMAC have issues in the future trying to market to other countries, they are currently having their own personal issues. The C919 is behind production schedule and it is also heavier than expected. With the increased weight, the efficiency has gone down, which means that it will cost more to fly per hour than its competitors (Cendrowski, 2016). Luckily their delayed production is not affecting many companies because COMAC is owned by the Chinese government. Since China owns COMAC, the C919 will be flown by all Chinese carriers. The C919 is not the only COMAC plane that is delayed with production. COMAC is also working on producing a smaller jet, smilier to a CRJ, that is called the ARJ-21. The ARJ-21 is a 90 passenger jet that made its' first flight commercial flight on June 28, 2016 (Riva, 2016).
Even if the C919 were to receive FAA certification, I don't think that other companies would try to enter the market. Mainly due to the huge financial costs behind aircraft manufacturing. Both Boeing and Airbus are over budget on almost every airplane that they produce, so most companies will not be able to afford that. Another reason that other companies won't try to compete is the strict regulations and certifications that are necessary. The FAA is very strict and not only will complying with certifications cost new companies a lot financially, it will also cost them more time then they will be able to handle. In my opinion, I don't think that the C919 will end up receiving FAA certification and that will show other potential companies how difficult it is to join the market and will prevent them from trying to do so.
COMAC is not a threat to Boeing or Airbus. Neither of the companies have really responded to the new manufacturer because they have been the manufacturers for the last few decades. They already have enough clients and are FAA certified. They don't have time to worry about potential competitors because they are already behind their schedules. Both Boeing and Airbus are working on new airliners and when asked about COMAC, they basically turned the question into an opportunity to advertise their new products.
References:
Cendrowski, S. (2016, February 16). China's Answer to Boeing Loses Shine. Fortune. Retrieved
fromhttp://fortune.com/2016/02/16/china-comac-c919-delay-delivery/
Riva, A. (2016, June 28). China Just Flew its First Passenger Jet: and its a Clunker. Vine News.
Retrieved from https://news.vice.com/article/china-just-flew-its-first-passenger-jetand-its-a-
clunker
Thursday, October 20, 2016
The Commercial Space Industry
The idea of space tourism basically began in 1998 with the founding of Space Adventures. It has developed from being just a concept about self-funded people being able to travel into space into an actual experience, assuming you can afford it. So far, self-funded individuals have traveled over 36 million miles and have spent approximately three cumulative months in space (Lawrence, 2016). One of the biggest hurdles of this industry is financially. Most people are not able to spend 20 million dollars to take a 10 day vacation into space. Another big hurdle has been the regulations of space travel. There are not many regulations about the individuals traveling themselves, but most of the concerns are about protecting the general public. Even through these struggles, the industry has successfully sent individuals to space and is currently working on developing a space frontier for more individuals to travel to.
The regulations for commercial space were created in the mid 1980s, by the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984. These regulations were created to protect the general public, mainly during the launching and re-entry portions of travel. The majority of the regulations pertain to launching: what you can launch, how far people must be away from that site, launch registration, and etc (GPO, 2016). I believe that the regulations should be more strict; however, they are good for now to allow for the industry to continue growing without being constantly pressured. Once space travel becomes more affordable and popular then it should be more regulated.
With today's technology, I believe that self-funded individuals will be able to travel to the moon; however, I don't think that it will happen in the next decade. In the next 10 years, I think that more individuals will be able to travel into space for a much cheaper price than the 20 million dollars it costs now. Eventually, I believe that space travel will be accessible to the general public but it will probably take 10-15 years for the prices to come down to a reasonable amount. This means that it will be more of an expensive vacation rather than being a once in a lifetime, bucket list opportunity.
To work in the space industry as a pilot is very similar to the requirements for becoming a civilian or military pilot. You need to be able to pass a flight physical, which includes distant visual acuity of 20/100 or better uncorrected, or 20/20 corrected, blood pressure of maximum of 140/90 while sitting down, and between 62 and 75 inches tall (NASA, 2004). In addition to the physical test, it is also required that an applicant has at least 1,000 jet PIC time. It is also preferred that they have some flight test experience as well. Lastly, it is required that one needs a Bachelor's degree from an accredited university in one of the following areas: engineering, biological or physical science, or mathematics. Not only is the quality of the degree important, but it is also preferred that one has an advanced degree as well.
References:
GPO. (2016, October 18). Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: Title 14. U.S. Government
Publishing Office. Retrieved from http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?
gp=&SID=1f58495405665a030c05e44bca5a8591&mc=true&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14chapter
III.tpl
Lawrence, J. (2016, January 7). A Beautiful Planet. Space Adventures, Ltd. Retrieved from
http://www.spaceadventures.com
NASA. (2004, January 29). Astronaut Requirements: Commander and Pilot Astronaut Duties.
NASA. Retrieved from http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/postsecondary/features
/F_Astronaut_Requirements.html
The regulations for commercial space were created in the mid 1980s, by the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984. These regulations were created to protect the general public, mainly during the launching and re-entry portions of travel. The majority of the regulations pertain to launching: what you can launch, how far people must be away from that site, launch registration, and etc (GPO, 2016). I believe that the regulations should be more strict; however, they are good for now to allow for the industry to continue growing without being constantly pressured. Once space travel becomes more affordable and popular then it should be more regulated.
With today's technology, I believe that self-funded individuals will be able to travel to the moon; however, I don't think that it will happen in the next decade. In the next 10 years, I think that more individuals will be able to travel into space for a much cheaper price than the 20 million dollars it costs now. Eventually, I believe that space travel will be accessible to the general public but it will probably take 10-15 years for the prices to come down to a reasonable amount. This means that it will be more of an expensive vacation rather than being a once in a lifetime, bucket list opportunity.
To work in the space industry as a pilot is very similar to the requirements for becoming a civilian or military pilot. You need to be able to pass a flight physical, which includes distant visual acuity of 20/100 or better uncorrected, or 20/20 corrected, blood pressure of maximum of 140/90 while sitting down, and between 62 and 75 inches tall (NASA, 2004). In addition to the physical test, it is also required that an applicant has at least 1,000 jet PIC time. It is also preferred that they have some flight test experience as well. Lastly, it is required that one needs a Bachelor's degree from an accredited university in one of the following areas: engineering, biological or physical science, or mathematics. Not only is the quality of the degree important, but it is also preferred that one has an advanced degree as well.
References:
GPO. (2016, October 18). Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: Title 14. U.S. Government
Publishing Office. Retrieved from http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?
gp=&SID=1f58495405665a030c05e44bca5a8591&mc=true&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14chapter
III.tpl
Lawrence, J. (2016, January 7). A Beautiful Planet. Space Adventures, Ltd. Retrieved from
http://www.spaceadventures.com
NASA. (2004, January 29). Astronaut Requirements: Commander and Pilot Astronaut Duties.
NASA. Retrieved from http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/postsecondary/features
/F_Astronaut_Requirements.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)