Hi Readers: Having been in and out of the hospital these past few weeks, I've fallen a little behind in the 2008 Accident/Incident reporting and accounting. Since the month of May has passed and June is well on it's way, I've decided to account for the two months together, making the important comparisons and discussing the safety of flight trends.
Meanwhile, I hope you are aware of the current changes taking place in the Aviation Industry in an effort to keep our economics balanced and stable. The Airlines, in addition to the mergers and agreements within themselves, are cutting back on flights and routes, pilots, flight attendants, mechanics, etc. to reduce operational costs, such as the high cost of fuel; and the sting of passing the fuel costs to the ticket-buyer is having a reverse effect on travel demand. And the airline services are getting worse and worse. Travelers are looking toward train and bus transportation - (actually we need both in addition, not as an alternate).
The GA User Fee is rearing its ugly head again, after having been reported as settled; the demand for production of new jets and other airplanes is apparently beginning to "sag" in the middle; and all the employee cutbacks are beginning to add to the other problems - all economics. The FAA Controller problems, shortages and training, are still with us - in spite of much study and review (by whom?).
It appears to me that the present Administration does not understand, or is not willing to understand, or study the current problems taking place in the Aviation Industry. And Congress keeps itself busy with it's political nitpicking, most of the time preventing a reasonable vote on the issues it considers, and the aviation problems seem to be at the bottom of the list. What's more, the aviation problems seemto be divided between so many committees - the aviation Industry, knit from pilot to airplanes to airspace to airports, etc., must be considered within itself, en total, to get the fair picture.
Who is actually oversiteing the aviation problems - the problems that go together, the solution of which provides our prime mode of transportation. Yes, you and I, and I've said many times that we must start looking at the total aviation picture, with the long-term view in mind.
Enough for this time. Keep reading, and thanks! Robert Shaw.
Showing posts with label FAA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FAA. Show all posts
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Where Is Aviation Heading?
Hi Readers - I'm getting more than concerned about Aviation - where we are, so many problems, and where are we going with total aviation. I look at aviation as an industry, a way of life, our primary mode of travel, a huge conglomeration of businesses - airplanes, scheduled and nonscheduled Airlines, General Aviation (GA), cargo and Part 135 flights, airports, associations, schools, and other elements.
In almost all aspects we now have problems of regulation, de-regulation, high taxes, and most irritating, the high fuel prices. The grand regulator of our flying, the FAA - tells us what we can do, how we do it and when - is underfunded, supposedly understaffed, and constantly under pressure to perform, to encourage aviation while regulating it, and charged with a never-ending problem of safety of flight. Have we given FAA a total workload that cannot be handled effectively and efficiently?
The development of aircraft and technical equipment is equally important - the problems created faster than the development and use of the advanced equipment to handle an ever-increasing number of aircraft in flight at any one time and the separation and safety of these aircraft in flight. An can certain elements of aviation, such as GA, afford the cost of the advanced equipment now available, in the interest of inflight collision and terrain avoidance?
Our Air Lines are crowding the same traffic hubs, terminals, and airports in the interest of their own economies, and are using surcharges as a method of recovering sky-rocketing fuel and other costs which normally would be their own costs of doing business. Travelling passengers are forced to swallow numerous delays and odd routing of flights to get to their destinations, and are totally frustrated by lack of pertinent information, delays, and misplaced and lost baggage.
Adding to this mess of confluence, our Congress, democratic or republican, which is aware of many of these problems, is sitting on it's "duff" ( not to say they all are not working at something) awaiting the political outcome of the next 4 years of presidency.
Who am I to critisize - well, I'm one of those taxpayers who believe I'm paying my share, or more than my share, of the total tax burden, and; in the interest of overseeing aviation, which I point out that Congress is charged with doing, I can see some of the glaring areas of fault. At present, I do not like what I see and I want changes made for the better in the future for my and your aviation. And I'm here to do my part. Keep checking my Website.
The April NTSB accouting of Accidents/Incidents will be coming up shortly.
Thanks for listening. Robert Shaw.
In almost all aspects we now have problems of regulation, de-regulation, high taxes, and most irritating, the high fuel prices. The grand regulator of our flying, the FAA - tells us what we can do, how we do it and when - is underfunded, supposedly understaffed, and constantly under pressure to perform, to encourage aviation while regulating it, and charged with a never-ending problem of safety of flight. Have we given FAA a total workload that cannot be handled effectively and efficiently?
The development of aircraft and technical equipment is equally important - the problems created faster than the development and use of the advanced equipment to handle an ever-increasing number of aircraft in flight at any one time and the separation and safety of these aircraft in flight. An can certain elements of aviation, such as GA, afford the cost of the advanced equipment now available, in the interest of inflight collision and terrain avoidance?
Our Air Lines are crowding the same traffic hubs, terminals, and airports in the interest of their own economies, and are using surcharges as a method of recovering sky-rocketing fuel and other costs which normally would be their own costs of doing business. Travelling passengers are forced to swallow numerous delays and odd routing of flights to get to their destinations, and are totally frustrated by lack of pertinent information, delays, and misplaced and lost baggage.
Adding to this mess of confluence, our Congress, democratic or republican, which is aware of many of these problems, is sitting on it's "duff" ( not to say they all are not working at something) awaiting the political outcome of the next 4 years of presidency.
Who am I to critisize - well, I'm one of those taxpayers who believe I'm paying my share, or more than my share, of the total tax burden, and; in the interest of overseeing aviation, which I point out that Congress is charged with doing, I can see some of the glaring areas of fault. At present, I do not like what I see and I want changes made for the better in the future for my and your aviation. And I'm here to do my part. Keep checking my Website.
The April NTSB accouting of Accidents/Incidents will be coming up shortly.
Thanks for listening. Robert Shaw.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
What Is Marginal Weather?
Hi Readers: Marginal weather is a subject which has bugged pilots for years, and has been the cause of many aircraft accidents - many fatal. Airline pilots, if given marginal weather conditions, automatically expect IFR conditions to follow, and of course they file IFR flight plans anyway. To the GA pilot, marginal weather, depending on the pilot's ratings, experience, and proficiency, is a matter to be dealt with on an individual basis. Too often the GA pilot fools himself by deciding the weather, deteriorating, will get better ahead.
Unless we have divine powers or a degree in meteorology or Aerology, we should not attempt to outguess the weather. Let's let the weather man - briefer, forecaster, or whatever name he goes by, handle the weather for us, X-C or local flight. We should listen closely to his words and ask the routine and difficult questions. As pilots, however, that still does not absolve us of not knowing what VFR, marginal weather, and IFR are and their differences. And the flight, local or X-C, is ours to plan and execute safely.
So marginal weather conditions are somewhere between VFR and IFR - let's get specific.
The FAA defines the term as ceiling 1,000' to 3,000' (AGL), and visibility 3 to 5 miles - interpreted as flight visibility (How expert are we in estimating visibility?). So marginal weather is just beyond VFR and that's usually where the problems start. Unless we are IFR qualified, we should immediately question our ability to continue with our flight plan (if we have one) or alter our course and revise our flight plan. Let's ask ourselves, do we honestly believe, knowing our capabilities, that we should continue the flight.
The National Weather Service, and other weather facilities, stand ready to assist us in our preflight preparations and flight planning, but do not define marginal weather or make decisions with respect to marginal weather. There can be a briefing for the flight, a forecast for the route of flight, or weather advisories. Readily available is METAR, FA (Area forecasts which give MVFR (Marginal VFR) reports for areas of 3,000 Sq miles at any one time, SIGMETS (4 hour period), and AIRMETS (6 hour period). TIBS ( area and route briefings) can be used, but is not considered a substitute for briefings by a weather Specialist (Call 1-800-WX BRIEF). Then there is also AWOS (Automatic Weather Observing System) at most airports, transmitted on a discrete VHF radio frequency - these airports listed in the FAA Airport Facility Directory.
There is a fine line between VFR, MVFR, and IFR conditions due to weather phenomenon such as low-level, layered clouds (associated or not associated with weather fronts) changing ceilings and visibilities with the advent of fog, dust, or haze conditions, even to the point of sky obscuration.
Most aircraft accidents relating to low ceilings and visibilities (flying into marginal weather) are the result of somewhat inactive pilots who are not qualified for IFR flight and, more often than not, attempt flight by visual reference into deteriorating weather conditions. Losing the visual horizon, they are immediately at risk to experience vertigo. If flying by reference to instruments is not accomplished immediately, control of the aircraft may be lost. Continued flight into adverse weather (marginal conditions) is the single cause of the greatest number of fatal accidents.
The best advice is to be aware of, and on the alert for, weather phenomena that may produce marginal VFR and IFR conditions. Above all, pilots should be honest with respect to their capabilities. Can I handle this weather? If not, do a 180 degree turn or change course or altitude immediately - don't wait. Get back to VFR conditions. There will always be another time - perhaps additional proficiency time.
Thanks for listening. R.S.
Unless we have divine powers or a degree in meteorology or Aerology, we should not attempt to outguess the weather. Let's let the weather man - briefer, forecaster, or whatever name he goes by, handle the weather for us, X-C or local flight. We should listen closely to his words and ask the routine and difficult questions. As pilots, however, that still does not absolve us of not knowing what VFR, marginal weather, and IFR are and their differences. And the flight, local or X-C, is ours to plan and execute safely.
So marginal weather conditions are somewhere between VFR and IFR - let's get specific.
The FAA defines the term as ceiling 1,000' to 3,000' (AGL), and visibility 3 to 5 miles - interpreted as flight visibility (How expert are we in estimating visibility?). So marginal weather is just beyond VFR and that's usually where the problems start. Unless we are IFR qualified, we should immediately question our ability to continue with our flight plan (if we have one) or alter our course and revise our flight plan. Let's ask ourselves, do we honestly believe, knowing our capabilities, that we should continue the flight.
The National Weather Service, and other weather facilities, stand ready to assist us in our preflight preparations and flight planning, but do not define marginal weather or make decisions with respect to marginal weather. There can be a briefing for the flight, a forecast for the route of flight, or weather advisories. Readily available is METAR, FA (Area forecasts which give MVFR (Marginal VFR) reports for areas of 3,000 Sq miles at any one time, SIGMETS (4 hour period), and AIRMETS (6 hour period). TIBS ( area and route briefings) can be used, but is not considered a substitute for briefings by a weather Specialist (Call 1-800-WX BRIEF). Then there is also AWOS (Automatic Weather Observing System) at most airports, transmitted on a discrete VHF radio frequency - these airports listed in the FAA Airport Facility Directory.
There is a fine line between VFR, MVFR, and IFR conditions due to weather phenomenon such as low-level, layered clouds (associated or not associated with weather fronts) changing ceilings and visibilities with the advent of fog, dust, or haze conditions, even to the point of sky obscuration.
Most aircraft accidents relating to low ceilings and visibilities (flying into marginal weather) are the result of somewhat inactive pilots who are not qualified for IFR flight and, more often than not, attempt flight by visual reference into deteriorating weather conditions. Losing the visual horizon, they are immediately at risk to experience vertigo. If flying by reference to instruments is not accomplished immediately, control of the aircraft may be lost. Continued flight into adverse weather (marginal conditions) is the single cause of the greatest number of fatal accidents.
The best advice is to be aware of, and on the alert for, weather phenomena that may produce marginal VFR and IFR conditions. Above all, pilots should be honest with respect to their capabilities. Can I handle this weather? If not, do a 180 degree turn or change course or altitude immediately - don't wait. Get back to VFR conditions. There will always be another time - perhaps additional proficiency time.
Thanks for listening. R.S.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Did You Know - Random Facts
Did you know that:
AOPA (Aircraft Owners Pilot Association) now has 412,000 members.
GA (General Aviation) makes up less than 4% of FAA's Tower Operations - but is expected to increase in the future.
International passenger flights are taking a bigger slice of the flying pie each year, by fuel consumption accounts, gradually increasing from 10% of the total in 1977 to 30% in 2006. Domestic passenger flights dropped from 90% to 74% for the same time periods, while the total of International and Domestic flying increased by 53%. By all accounts, these figures will only increase year by year in the future.
In a more recent accounting by the Department of Transportation (DOT) research, U.S. Airlines carried 64.9 million scheduled Domestic and International passengers in April 2007, 2.7% more than in April 2006 - 7.5 million of those were schedled International passengers, a 2% increase.
During the first 4 months of 2007 the Domestic and International flights of the major carriers enjoyed average load factors exceeding 77.8%.
The DOT also reported that American Airlines carried more total system passengers in the first 4 months of 2007 than any other airline, while SouthWest Airlines carried more Domestic passengers. American Airlines also carried more International passengers.
Closer to home, the Domestic revenue passenger miles market share from May 2006 to April 2007 was: American 15.3%, United 12.1%, Southwest 11.9%, Delta 11.1%, Continental 7.7%, Northwest 7.0%, U.S. Airways 4.7%, Jet Blue 4.0%, America West 3.8%, Alaska Airline 2.6%, and Other 19.8%.
The top Domestic Routes for the same period were: (passengers in millions) New York to Chicago 3.24, Los Angeles to Chicago 2.78, Washington D.C. to Chicago 2.69, Ft. Lauderdale to New York 2.65, Atlanta to New York 2.63, Atlanta to Orlando 2.62, Denver to Chicago 2.53, Atlanta to Washington D.C. 2.51, Las Vegas to Chicago 2.4, and Dallas/Ft. Worth to Chicago 2.36. (Chicago appears to be the central Hub, - no doubt, but probably with more delays).
The top airports - More total System and Domestic passengers boarded flights in the first 4 months of 2007 at the Atlanta - Hartsfield Johnson International airport, while more International passengers boarded flights at Miami International. (I'm sure that the Air Traffic Controllers are mindful of these increases since they report that there are too few of them to handle it all).
And, hey, did you know that Live Rock 105 radio is owned by CBS and (for Robin and Leta) have pretty good music, too. I wonder if those "rock-jocks" can come up with a "flying dreamliner" song. RS.
AOPA (Aircraft Owners Pilot Association) now has 412,000 members.
GA (General Aviation) makes up less than 4% of FAA's Tower Operations - but is expected to increase in the future.
International passenger flights are taking a bigger slice of the flying pie each year, by fuel consumption accounts, gradually increasing from 10% of the total in 1977 to 30% in 2006. Domestic passenger flights dropped from 90% to 74% for the same time periods, while the total of International and Domestic flying increased by 53%. By all accounts, these figures will only increase year by year in the future.
In a more recent accounting by the Department of Transportation (DOT) research, U.S. Airlines carried 64.9 million scheduled Domestic and International passengers in April 2007, 2.7% more than in April 2006 - 7.5 million of those were schedled International passengers, a 2% increase.
During the first 4 months of 2007 the Domestic and International flights of the major carriers enjoyed average load factors exceeding 77.8%.
The DOT also reported that American Airlines carried more total system passengers in the first 4 months of 2007 than any other airline, while SouthWest Airlines carried more Domestic passengers. American Airlines also carried more International passengers.
Closer to home, the Domestic revenue passenger miles market share from May 2006 to April 2007 was: American 15.3%, United 12.1%, Southwest 11.9%, Delta 11.1%, Continental 7.7%, Northwest 7.0%, U.S. Airways 4.7%, Jet Blue 4.0%, America West 3.8%, Alaska Airline 2.6%, and Other 19.8%.
The top Domestic Routes for the same period were: (passengers in millions) New York to Chicago 3.24, Los Angeles to Chicago 2.78, Washington D.C. to Chicago 2.69, Ft. Lauderdale to New York 2.65, Atlanta to New York 2.63, Atlanta to Orlando 2.62, Denver to Chicago 2.53, Atlanta to Washington D.C. 2.51, Las Vegas to Chicago 2.4, and Dallas/Ft. Worth to Chicago 2.36. (Chicago appears to be the central Hub, - no doubt, but probably with more delays).
The top airports - More total System and Domestic passengers boarded flights in the first 4 months of 2007 at the Atlanta - Hartsfield Johnson International airport, while more International passengers boarded flights at Miami International. (I'm sure that the Air Traffic Controllers are mindful of these increases since they report that there are too few of them to handle it all).
And, hey, did you know that Live Rock 105 radio is owned by CBS and (for Robin and Leta) have pretty good music, too. I wonder if those "rock-jocks" can come up with a "flying dreamliner" song. RS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
