NEXTGEN

NextGen is a complete overhaul of our air traffic system. it will pave the way for point to point flying without way points. It will also help to allow much more tragic in the skies without the congestion. The major difference is that it moves out ATC from a radar based system to a satellite based system.

There are several aspect to the NextGen system that will work together to make it the further of aviation. these include, ADS-B: Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, CATMT: Collaborative Air Traffic Management Technologies, Data Comm: Data Communications, NNEW: Network Enabled Weather, NVS: The National Airspace System Voice System, SWIM: System Wide Information Management, AIRE: The Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions.

The issue that is on mind for just about every one in aviation in the coast and who will pay for it. according to an article in the Davinport post  by Ann Schrader, about $20 billion on the part of the government and about equal in part of airlines. impementing it would reduce delays by 35% and $23 billion in benefits. With that put there in no reason in my mind that airlines should get subsidized for this. they get a great return without it. that is different for General Aviation pilots.

In an article in the General Aviation News,the coast for a general aviation aircraft between $7,000 and $30,000.  There is a great return in information and safety, but not much in financial return. It will be more than the average aircraft owner can not afford this. it would make a major blow to GA. i feel the only way is to subsidize. this way GA pilots can still fly. otherwise i feel that it would take years for the average GA pilots to catch up.

I will say that I am not in favor of user fees. If every one pays for it the burden is much lower. In my opinion every one benefits from aviation in one way or another. With the just in time delivery, aviation has played a hug role. Without it there would be a much longer wait on most good that are produced across the nation and world, thus driving up prices. This is why I feel that the funding should come from taxpayers. if that is not enough then user fees are still acceptable. I feel that user fees should be dependent one the amount used. This would make the majority supporter by airlines and high traffic cargo operations.

Aviation Security Problems

Ever since September 11th, 2001, airport security has secured its place in the news. we had a dramatic change in the way that our government handles security. this was mostly by  adding more personnel and the invention of the TSA. the has also been in huge increase on regulation of carry on items. for most people, this all has been nothing but a hug inconvenience. But is it worth it? the government would like us to believe so, but were are the studies to show it. An article  "Airport Security Not Backed By Solid Evidence," says otherwise.

Eleni Linos and colleagues reviewed evidence for the effectiveness of airport security screening measures and comparing it to the evidence required by the UK National Screening Committee criteria to justify medical screening programmes.
Despite worldwide airport protection costing an estimated $5.6 billion every year, they found no comprehensive studies evaluating the effectiveness of passenger or hand luggage x-ray screening, metal detectors or explosive detection devices. There was also no clear evidence of testing accuracy. For example we know there are countless technologies that can be used to blow up plane. the Current major detection system is metal detectors. Biological explosives do not show up. there are a few other detection methods, but still nothing really show how effective and accurate they really are.

The article goes on to say that the TSA stop 13 million prohibited items. There is no real way of knowing what the harm really was. For all we know it could have been things like a nail clipper or shampoo that was in to big of a bottle.

So in reality our current security is nothing more than show. It may intimidate a few people out of doing anything stupid, but if someone really wanted to there are way to many inconsistencies. For the rest of us, it is just a major hassle. The first real step to to truly evaluate and open it up to academically debate the issue.

Automation Debate

Automation in the cockpit is a big topic of debate lately. Are pilots losing skills? Becoming to complacent to recognize failures? Theses are some of the major questions that need answers.

Mica R. Endsley wrote Automation and Situation Awareness. He goes really in depth on the problems and that benefits of automation. He feels there are several factors that are causing problems.A couple major ones are complacency, and feedback.

Complacency causes on of the biggest problem today, many will argue. pilot tend to trust the system to much. It never seems to fail, so pilots will focus their attention on other tasks and become situationaly unaware. this is and effective coping strategy for a person's  limited attention in  a high attention environment.

Feedback can also lead to problems. It has been known that operators ignore alarms and warning that have a high tendancety to produce failures readings. the way the system provide feedback can cause problems. In some cases, information is replaced with automation that does not provide the same level of information to the pilots. Information can be hidden all together as well.

As of right now there is not standard for automation and the way it presents information to pilots. A pilot may have to learn several differn systems for several different aircraft. If and indecent ever occurs, pilots always revert to training. That may lead to a wrong reasons/action to a cue provided by the automation.

With that said, pilot can very easily be seen as computer operators rather that conventional pilots. This can refined pilot's skills in many ways. One major one is that skill based training will be more focused on computer interpretation than actual flying skills. in a since out take the pilots out of the equation of flying and put in a computer technician.

I am currently a private pilots with my instrument rating. I am also currently working on getting my commercial. all of out Cessna 172's have the G1000. It is a glass cockpit with only a few Standby instruments that are note operated by a computer. at the beginning, most of out time is concentrated on flying without the display map, weather and flight view(follow the magenta line). Now further in we use everything. Once in a while we do have to shut it down and simulate a failure. This is where you only fly by standbys. It really does take a second to get oriented. it makes you appreciate the automation.

When it is all said, I feel there are a few ways the stop complacency and keep pilots skills to conventional pilots standards. the first is training and more training. make sure that they know how to fly without automation before putting them in automation.the second is to make it mandatory that they fly by hand more often. this will keep those skills present.

How Aviation

    I have been interested in flying as long as I can remember. I would always go to the air show and be in

amazement. I wanted to explore the skies and see the world from above. It wasn't later that I realized that is what I wanted to do for a living.

    It was when i was in high school that I realized that being a pilot that I realized that i could do this for a living. I had to to a class project to search for career opportunities. This lead me to search for things in aviation. I quickly realized that becoming a pilot would be a hard road. 

    I looked around and found several colleges that would help me on that road. That solidified my determination to go to school to become a pilot.