In Depth - Pilot Mental Illness Screening

     Under Germanwings flight 9525, an Airbus A320 was deliberately flown by the first officer into the ground from an altitude of 38,000 feet in a matter of 11 minutes. This was the result of placing the life of over 150 people in the hands of a mentally ill pilot, who was not caught by the current system of mental health screening. The system practiced by the Federal Aviation Administration and airline companies to screen pilots for mental illnesses is similar to the one used by the German authorities. Therefore, the catastrophic and unfortunate accident of Germanwings flight 9525 marked the beginning of doubts in the methods used here in the United States to screen pilots. It was clear then that the process being utilized by the regulatory and employer side of the industry may be corrupt and could potentially be a concern to the safety of millions of passengers flying daily. There was and still is a need to further address, assess, and eliminate all risk in any way possible without introducing regulations that will complicate the process, or make it less practical. The system of airline pilot mental health screening could fail, and likely will fail at some point, just like any other system. Although, there is evidence that does indeed prove the presences of mentally unstable pilots in the cockpit of airplanes that we all fly on. However, there isn’t enough data to suggest a crisis at hand nor a practical solution.  fact alone is unsettling to think about. According to a Journal of Environmental Health study, as many as 13 percent of airline pilots met the threshold of clinical depression (Wu et al., 2016). The study later stated that more than 4 percent of participants admitted having experienced suicidal thoughts in the two weeks prior to taking the survey (Wu et al.,2016). As a young aviator wanting to pursue a career as an airline pilot, I can think of the job as being very stressful at times, but depressive? Maybe to those who has a long history of depression, like Lubitz. There are many other factors (outside of the job environment) that are causing those individuals to show symptoms as the study and other sources suggest.
 
     There is no surprise here that the subject is of a huge interest to the mainstream media of the aviation industry. The regulatory system and the FAA itself, were put up for questions. There was a need to further clarify what airlines have in place to screen as well as keep track of pilot mental illnesses on their end. In aviation, where there is little room for error, we witness heavy regulations put in place in the aftermath of most accidents. The Germanwings accident was a huge eye opener to the issue, but actions in response should be carried out a bit differently so that the industry does not experience a detriment. I will argue that our regulatory body and airline companies are taking all proactive approaches needed to eliminate as much associated risk as possible with the mental wellness of pilots. Therefore, no further regulations, which are leading factors to the shortage of pilots and the resulting crisis endured, are needed. We must keep in mind that pilots are human beings, and no profession is bulletproof against every human weakness. So, we shall not try to make an airline pilot bulletproof to any of the psychological complications that an ordinary human may face throughout the course of life.

An Opposing Point of View

     Many people within our aviation industry can agree that FAA needs to implement a stricter method to screen pilots for mental illness. In the Germanwings accident, Andreas Lubitz showed a long history of depressive episodes in which he was treated with heavy antidepressants and was in fact put back on medications when symptoms began to appear while mistakenly being considered “fit” to fly passengers daily (Hammer, 2016). As to how on earth Lubitz was allowed near a cockpit, the answer remains within the investigations of the Germany authorities and the doctor who failed to disclose information to his employer, which we cannot blame as he was abiding by the medical information privacy law act. Such facts show that the strenuous screening and training procedures does not guarantee the cockpits of the planes we board daily are empty from mentally and emotionally troubled personnel. It suggests that as “thorough” as the mental screening process are, more could be done. 

     Another issue that seem troubling to many is the actual medical examinations for pilots. American airline pilots are required to undergo a medical examination that is administered by an FAA certified medical examiner annually or every six months, depending on their age. An argument can be made that “there is no formal psychological testing during the examinations”, which in that case the statement is a valid one. In response to the issue, an article published by Foxnews states that “most of the exam is devoted to the pilot’s physical conditions” and “examiners aren’t required to ask specific mental-health questions” (Foxnews, 2016). The exam also provides a medical history form and the FAA asks every pilot to self-disclose their mental history and warns that failure to do so will result in monetary fines (FAA, 2016). The current method of screening for pilot mental illnesses might be starting to look sketchy. A person that is mentally unstable and possibly on heavy medications or drugs of some sort could walk into an AME’s office check “No” on the form that asks if he/she has ever been diagnosed with a mental illness, and walk out several minutes later with a first-class medical certification in their position, right? And you could very well be a passenger, on flight whose pilot-in-command is not mentally stable. Rest assure, it is not as easy as it is or as I might be making it seem. In fact, there is rarely any accident records indicating pilot mental illness as one of the probable causes. The NTSB aviation accident data base could very well back my words up.  

A Proactive Approach 

     While realizing that the industry could not afford regulating the pilot’s mental illness screening methods, the FAA avoided regulations on the matter and acted upon a proactive approach. If the process was to get complicated, we will for sure witness a huge number of pilots grounded from flying and lining up in front of a clinical psychologist’s office. Not necessarily because they are mentally ill, but more likely due to the impracticality of the process. If the FAA or airline companies were to heavily focus on the psychological testing of pilots, it is assumed that it will be done through a questionnaire evaluations that are dependent response of those pilots. The impractically of this method lies within the actual psychological evaluation itself. Keep in mind that throughout the “testing” it is possible to “flag a lot of people who are normal but for some reason or other, on that day, give you a strange response”, says aviation psychologist Dr. Diane Damos (Davies, 2017). The so-called evaluation would then be very ineffective as it reveals the pilot’s mental state for only a certain period of time, with no further insight into problems that may occur later. The FAA or the airliner company would then need to monitor almost 50,000 thousand pilot. I am certain that this is way beyond their capabilities.

      Surprisingly enough, this time Michael Huerta (former head administrator of the FAA) had it figured out just right. On a documented interview, he aimed to “do more to remove the stigma surrounding mental illness in the aviation industry so pilots are more likely to self-report, get treated and return to work” (Foxnews, 2016). In the previous days, a pilot could be denied a medical certificate and lose their professional flying career if reported any mental health issues. For obvious reasons, hiding mental illness symptoms was a very reasonable thing for airline pilots to do. The veil on pilot mental illness and on depression for the most part has finally been removed among the airline communities. The old days are way gone and things are heading in the right direction. Non-punitive actions are currently taken towards airlines pilots who self-report information regarding their mental health. On the other hand, the FAA has been allowing the issuance of a medical certificate for those who are suffering mild to moderate depression and therefore prescribed medication such as antidepressants (FAA, 2010). It is safe to assume in this case that the regulatory body of our industry is taking the necessarily precautions to ensure pilots are up to job mentally as they are physically.  The Airline companies’ role towards their pilot’s mental illness screening is an important one. The Pilot Fitness Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) recently published its voluntary recommendations to further guide airline companies in assigning duties to pilots that are mentally fit. In its recommendation, the ARC asks air carriers “to implement mental health education programs for pilots and supervisors that improve awareness and recognition of mental health issues, reduce stigmas, and promote available resources to assist with resolving mental health problems” (FAA, 2015). Many American airlines are making positive changes and adopting to the recommendations made by the ARC. They have become way more supportive to pilots who experience mental difficulties then anyone might have expected before. 

     Many, if not all, major airlines provide their own personality evaluations during the pre-employment process. While those evaluations are designed to examine how well a pilot’s personality fit the operating environment of the company, they do somewhat focus on the mental state of the personnel. Much of the pilot’s mental illness screening methods at the airliner level is done through surveillance. To aid surveillance of those who could be mentally unstable, airline companies are now provide reporting system such as Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). The idea behind the reporting systems is to allow the pilot and their colleagues to self-report themselves or each other when mental wellness red flags are raised, but of course with full confidentiality. Help is being provided to those whose name come up in the reports. The actions by the airlines are also non-punitive so that a pilot who is at risk for depression does not fear negative career consequences. Many airlines are even offering paid medical leaves, increasing the pilot’s willingness to self-report and seek help when truly needed. While no amount of surveillance can fully eliminate the risk of placing plots with histories of depression or reliance on medication, the idea of making this matter something a pilot can be open about is a big step towards a “mentally fit” cockpit.  

In Conclusion 

     The mental wellness of airline pilots is crucial to the safe operation of the aircraft. It is unsettling to think that a person flying you from point A to point B could be mentally challenged. Although with all certainty, that is rarely the case. We can forever discuss whether there is a need for additional psychological teasing but in the end, were all forced to rely on a set of presumptions. In other words, we must trust what the industry is doing is regards to the matter. As stated above, no profession is bulletproof against human weakness. Our industry will suffer greatly and experience a crisis of pilot shortage if we were to ever think of way to make airliner pilots bulletproof to any mental complication an average person may endure. The FAA and aviation community are taking the correct proactive approach to help eliminate all risks associated within the scope of the issue at hand. The safety of flight and passengers are, with no doubt, the priority of every party involved in the aviation world. Removing the stigma around pilot’s mental state by allowing them to be open about without fearing negative career implications is the way to go. So, rest assure, sit down, relax, fasten your seatbelt and enjoy the ride. The people flying your plane are exactly what you expect them to be: a nothing short of excellent professionals whom safety is their number one priority. 

References 

Davies A. (2017, June 03). We have no way to screen every pilot for mental illness. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2015/03/no-way-screen-every-pilot-mental-illness/ 

FAA. (2016, June 09). Fact Sheet – Pilot Mental Fitness. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20455

FAA. (2010, April 02). Press Release: FAA Proposes New Policy on Antidepressants for pilots. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=11293 

FAA. (2015, November 18). Pilot Fitness Aviation Rulemaking Committee Report: November 18, 2015. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/ documents/index.cfm/document/information/documentID/2762

Foxnews. (2016, June 10). FAA: No psychological testing needed of airline pilots. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/health/2016/06/10/faa-no-psychological-testing-needed-airline-pilots.html

Hammer, J. (2016, February 22). The real story of Germanwings Flight 9525. Retrieved February 27, 2018. From https://www.gq.com/story/germanwings-flight-9525-final-moments 

Wu, A. C., Donnelly-Mclay, D., Weisskof, M. G., McNeely, E., Betancourt, T.S., & Allen, J. G. (2016, December 15). Airplane pilot mental health and suicidal thoughts: A cross-sectional descriptive study via anonymous web-based survey. Journal of Environmental Health. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-016-0200-6

NextGen & Air Traffic Control Privitization

There has been multiple attempts in the recent years to change, or upgrade, our Air Traffic Control system and the way it works. Many would agree that while the traffic system used now is doing the job safely, it is somewhat outdated. Our current system is divided into 21 areas, which further divided into smaller sections (all governed by the FAA). To monitor those sectors, the ATC system does much of its operation from five different divisions that are designated for the multiple phases of flight, named the Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC), Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC), Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON), Air Traffic Control Tower, and Flight Service Station (FSS) (Freudenrich, 2018). The system currently used in our nation's airspace is radar based. Aircrafts are equipped with transponders that are activated by the pilot at the departure point and modified during flight by the request of the ATC. The purpose of the transponder is to detect incoming radar signals from one of the five previously mentioned centers and broadcast an amplified signal/response to the ground stations. This amplified response signal is then received by a controller working in one of the five centers (depending on the phase of flight the aircraft is in), appearing as blip on their radar detection screens (Freudenrich, 2018). The signal emitted help provide information in regards to the aircraft and flight to the controller, and that's pretty much how our current ATC system operates. While these centers are located on the ground, the signal emitted from the aircraft's transponder must travel long distances to reach the stations and convey traffic information needed. The time delay is indeed a weakness of our current system since sometimes and in case of heavy traffic, there isn't much time to play with. The Next Gen system is aiming to make things more efficient.

Instead of relying on the above technology, that we have been using since the early 60's, the FAA has spent billions of dollars trying to come up with a new system we now call "NextGen". With the NextGen, the goal is to make the National Airspace System more efficient through safety and accommodation to the increasing number of aircrafts. This goal is based on the replacing a radar-based system to a satellite-based system called Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-). The ADS-B technology will be coupled with a new Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedural system that will also utilize the satellite-based (GPS) technology to create a more precise route for aircraft to fly, which in turn saves money, time, fuel, and the environment because of decreased fuel consumption while increasing the volume of air traffic (FAA, 2017). The components of the NextGen, with the advanced GPS technology, will allow ATC and aircrafts to transmit real time flight and traffic information to each other in a matter of seconds. Aircrafts flying will also have real time traffic displayed in their cockpit, therefore reducing the work load of controllers and increasing situational awareness for pilots. So in a nutshell, NextGen will make operations much faster, cheaper, and more efficient. Since GPS is used, there will be more direct flights than ever before.

The privatization of Air Traffic Control is a very debated subject among the industry. People who are involved in general aviation activities are speaking against it for one main reason; money. If ATC was to be privatized, it would require the general aviation to somewhat pay up (in access fees). Part of the privatization has to do with the movement towards the NextGen technology, which would required updated avionics and so forth. The general aviation aircraft that are flying around, some worth as low as $16,000 would have to comply with the required installment of an ADS-B out, for the least. The ADS-B out installment alone is costly, ranging from $4,000 to $6,000, based on my educational knowledge. On the flip side, the airliner companies matters are completely the opposite. The primary reason as to why airlines such as, Southwest Airlines and American Airlines, are pro privatization is because they believe the FAA’s structure and funding are not capable of completing the new satellite-based project or even any modernization project. Therefore, airlines feel as if the privatization option would provide a much more efficient and financially stable operating system that will work in their favor (Bachman & Sasso, 2016). The airline's stand on privatization originates from the fact that it will potentially allow them to increase their profit by increase air traffic volume, provide them with more airspace for operations, and save money on unnecessary costs wasted on things like fuel and longer routes. I think the pro and cons differ between the GA and airline operations and that is to why we forever will witness an on-going debate about the topic. Many aviation organizations have taken their own stand on this matter. The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) is one association that opposes ATC privatization and it believes that this will create a government-approved monopoly. Where the National Air Traffic Controllers Association is supporting the ATC privatization. NATCA strongly agrees that the FAA will not be successful is allocating the right resources to move towards the NextGen system (Wood, 2016). Therefore, allowing an outside company to take over can led to successful endeavor in this period of transition.

Throughout my research, it was very interesting to try to discover information about how the system is privatized in other countries and what the pros and cons are. In an article posted by NewYork Times, it is stated that only Canada and Britain have their system privatized, but it is a much smaller system then the one we have in the United States (NewYork Times, 2016). While this assignments asks to get into detail about the operations and funding of the ATC system of out neighboring companies, I feel as if such information is irrelevant. As stated above, the United State has a much larger and busier system. One that can not be compared to any other, as it significantly differs. Although I will state the following, before such change is made there is a need for a heavy analysis of both the positives and negatives on all sectors of the aviation industry. We must take an approach that will benefit everyone. I think the privatization of ATC has more to do with how it will effect the industry and in what way rather than whether it can or can not be done.

According to NewYork Times, the process of privatizing ATC is very bureaucratic. A bill must be introduced and approved by the House of Representatives and the Senate (as will as the approval of our president of course), before it is official (New York Times, 2016). The process is not as easy as many would think it is, the FAA does not have the ultimate decision in privatizing ATC. Recently, a bill was introduced by two reps. (Bill Shuster and Frank Lobiondo). My limited research indicated that the bill was vetoed out. Overall, the process seems to be lengthy and must take all the legal constitutional process.

I personally do not know where I stand on the ATC privatization issue. I feel like each side has its benefits and harms. While it would somehow be a detriment to general aviation, the system would benefit the US carriers in the longer run. Both are important sectors of the industry and therefore a middle ground should be reached before making any changes. I refuse to look at the issue from a point of view as to how much it will benefit the passengers, because it is invalid. Research indicates that there even if the system reduce costs to airlines, there is no guarantee that those savings would be passed to passengers. I feel like it a very tricky and confusing topic. Maybe the FAA needs to allocate some of its assets to outside companies to help them carry out the process rather than just privatizing it? I personally would not know. As of right now and while being a student pilot, I would hate to see the system place restrictions on where I can and can not fly. Also, I would to have to pay more then I already have to.

References

Freudenrich, P. C. (2018, March 08). How Air Traffic Control Works. Retrieved April 06, 2018, from https://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/air-traffic-control.htm

FAA. (2017, December 04). How NextGen Works. Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/how_nextgen_works/

Bachman, J., & Sasso, M. (2016, November 09). Airlines to trump: block rivals and privatize air traffic control. Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-09/airlines-to-trump-block-rivals-and-privatize-air-traffic-control

Wood, J. (2016). GA raises concerns over proposal to privatize atc. General Aviation News. Retrieved from http://generalaviationnews.com/2016/02/17/ga-raises-concerns-over-proposal-to-privatize-atc/

New York Times. (2016, February 15). Don't Privatize Air Traffic Control. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/15/opinion/dont-privatize-air-traffic-control.html

Aviation Organization

Throughout ones aviation career, it is strongly recommended to join an association that is well-known in the industry. Upon research, two very beneficial associations were found. Founded in 1947 and based in Washington, D.C., the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) is the leading organization for companies that rely on general aviation aircraft to help make their business a more productive, and successful one. On the other hand, the General Aviation Manufacture Association (GAMA), founded and formed in 1970 in Washington, D.C., foster the aviation industry through promoting a better understanding on maintenance, repairs, and overhaul for general aviation aircrafts their users.

According to their website, the NBAA "foster an environment that allows business aviation to thrive in the United States and around the world" (About NBAA, n.d.). The way the association does that is through adhering and unfailingly representing and protecting the interest of their aviation members by presenting a united business aircraft front in all matters of the operation where such organization is necessary. In its journey to better the general aviation operating environment, NBAA was successful in making the following changes:

• Improvements Airways and Airports.
• Better weather reporting services.
• Expanded communication and air navigation facilities.
• Improved general aviation aircraft parts distribution.
• Help companies by providing qualified pilots meet the professional requirements for business flying. 

So with that being said, the association was successful in representing more than eleven thousand companies and provided well over hundreds of goods and services (NBAA History, n.d.).

On the other hand, the contributions of GAMA is beyond important to the general aviation industry. The association focuses mainly on the maintenance side of operations, which is indeed a crucial factor to the safety of flight. Their vision is to be "recognized as the most effective trade association in business and general aviation, aerospace manufacturing, and in the maintenance, repair and overhaul domain (About Gama, n.d.). To include some of the GAMA functions within the industry, it is important to keep in mind that following are some of the accomplishments:

• Enhanced safety through innovation and the promotion of quality training.
• Facilitated improvements in certification, audit and regulatory processes.
• Fostered a sustainable general and business aviation growth.
• Promoted the economic impact and societal benefits of general and business aviation.

Such association has been very successful in working closely with general aviation aircraft manufacturers to standardize mechanical procedures (About Gama, n.d.). Through such standardization, of parts or repairs, it is safe to assume the basis of general knowledge of the GA operations is somewhat strong to those who participate in it.     

For me personally, and for almost all of my aviation peers, it is very important to consider joining some of those associations. I am just currently trying to get my foot in the doors of the aviation industry. Being a member of GAMA, NBAA, or any other association for that matter will display my heavy personal desire to be an important part of the community. Being a member will also grant me the opportunity to get as heavily involved in aviation as my future employer would hope I am. In addition, the amount of networking opportunities that exists within those associations is invaluable.

The employment opportunities within those organizations is huge. While maneuvering around the NBAA website and their career paths, I came across something stating that they offer help to those who have the desire to becoming GA pilots. So you apply, and if you meet the requirements (commercial certification and etc), they help connect you companies and you could possibly be flying a business man from one airport to another. So while the airline route is hard to predict at where I am at in terms of flying at the point, it is nice to know what other options or hopes I have of becoming a pilot. For further possible employment opportunities, I recommend visiting the organization's website.       

References 

About GAMA. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://gama.aero/about-gama/

About NBAA. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.nbaa.org/about/

NBAA History. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2018, from https://www.nbaa.org/about/history/

Global Airlines: Is It a Fair Playing Field?

The Department of State, working closely with the departments of Transportation and Commerce, constantly negotiates civil air service agreements with foreign aviation industries. The United States' "open-skies" policy was designed to eliminate government involvement in the commercial airlines' decision making in regards to routes, capacity, and pricing in the international market. Such agreement has successfully expanded throughout multiple nations, promoting increased air travel to and from the United States. The United States, as of today, has "open-skies" agreements with over 120 nations.

The United States and United Arab Emirates, has both agreed on an international treaty allowing "open-skies" for both operators. The agreement highlights that commercial carriers can operator within the air space of both nations as long as there is little to no government interference what so ever. In other words, the government can not regulate the operation and may not offer huge amounts of subsidies to its commercial carriers. Those subsides, if given in huge amount, may allow those international carriers like Fly Emirates to offer cheaper tickets and therefore competing with our own big long-haul carriers. According to the United States Department of State, the following are some of the highlights of the right and duties of parties under the agreement.

• The right to fly across its territory without landing.
• the right to make stops in its territory for non-traffic purposes. 
• Each Party shall have the right to designate as many airlines as it wishes to conduct international air transportation in accordance with this Agreement and to withdraw or alter such designations.
• On receipt of such a designation, and of applications from the designated airline, in the form and manner prescribed for operating authorizations and technical permissions, the other Party shall grant appropriate authorizations and permissions with minimum procedural delay.
• While entering, within, or leaving the territory of one Party, its laws and regulations relating to the operation and navigation of aircraft shall be complied with by the other Party's airlines. 
• Either Party may request consultations concerning the safety standards maintained by the other Party relating to aeronautical facilities, aircrews, aircraft, and operation of the designated airlines.
• The airlines of each Party shall have the right to establish offices in the territory of the other Party for the promotion and sale of air transportation.
• The airlines of each Party shall be permitted to pay for local expenses, including purchases of fuel, in the territory of the other Party in local currency. 

The purpose of the "open-skies" agreement, as mentioned above, is to provide fair competition among those international carriers (US Department of State, 2002). To sum everything up, flights operated by Fly Emirates into our airspace can not be funded by their government. If those flights were to be funded by the UAE government, then they must be conducted and flagged as a U.S. carrier. The Middle Eastern airlines are huge when it comes to government funds, specially Fly Emirate and Qatar Airways. Based on my knowledge, I can say that Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways are listed under this agreement too. They operate similar to Fly Emirates, in terms of government subsides and all of that good stuff. 

Our own long-haul carriers receive no where near those subsidies given to Middle Eastern operators by their wealthy governments. Although research does indicate that there have been subsidies paid out to american long-haul carriers. For example, recent research show that American Airlines received subsidized loans by the federal government on their first big aircraft orders (Leff, 2017). Our government is no where near being able to pay anything for our carriers. Our country is just not as rich as those Middle Eastern ones, and we must accept that. 

The Export-Import bank provides many opportunities to foreign companies to increase United States exports. They offer many financing programs, such as loans, at below-market interest rates in order to keep make foreigners contribute to our economic growth. So basically, when a foreign long-haul carrier purchases an aircraft from the United States, they get a much much lower export rate (EXIM, n.d.). With this being said, the amount those long-haul carriers pay when purchasing a american aircraft are is lower than the amount and american carrier would pay. This option is unavailable to United States carriers due to the fact that most of those companies pay huge amount of taxes when making aircraft purchases. 

There are currently many issues going on with the international air travels and the "open-skies" agreements between the United States and other nations. In regards to Norwegian Air, Posaner states the Following: "Norwegian Air has been waiting two years for approval for its Ireland-registered offshoot, Norwegian Air International (NAI), to start direct flights from Cork and Shannon to Boston, and later New York. Approval for such a move is supposed to be fairly straightforward thanks to the ‘open skies’ agreement, which allows any EU or U.S. airline to fly between any point in each other’s jurisdiction. But U.S. regulators are stalling, under pressure from some in Congress" (Posaner, 2016). If the stalling continues, the trade between Europe and our nation could get affected in a very bad way. On the other hands, our system is also facing a huge problem with international airliners, such as Emirate and Qatar, as they seem to be a very big threat to american airliners. Emirate and Qatar, are still to this day, receiving huge amounts of government subsidies. If this was to be true, it could raise madness within our carriers and it would mean that Emirates and Qatar are not complying with the "open-skies" treaty.  

Now, and in all honesty, I do not know where I stand regarding whether the global airline playing field is fair or not. One thing for sure, the United States government have every right in the world to go after and against those international airliners if they were to jeopardize business growth. Emirates and Qatar are supported by the world's richest governments. We all know that is not the case for airlines like Delta and Spirit, for example. I totally agree that flights operated by those long-haul international carrier must have no government interference if they want to conduct business on U.S. airspaces. Emirates and Qatar airways are where I want to end up but that does not mean they get to put our domestics airlines out of business, because that will hurt our aviation industry economically.    

References 

Export-Import Bank of the United States. (n.d.). Export Finance Solutions to Increase Sales for U.S. Businesses [PDF file]. Retrieved march 13, 2018, from https://www.exim.gov/learning-resources/publications

Leff, G. (2017, October 29). More Hypocrisy By US Airlines on Subsidies: Where's the Outrage Over the Latest Bailout? Retrieved March 13, 2018, from https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2017/10/30/hypocrisy-us-airlines-subsidies-wheres-outrage-latest-bailout/

Posaner, J. (2016, September 02). Norwegian airline clouds open skies. Retrieved March 13, 2018, from https://www.politico.eu/article/norwegian-airline-nai-ireland-us-open-skies/

US Department of State. (2002, March 11). Air transport agreement: U.S. UAE air transport agreement of March 11, 2002. Retrieved March 13, 2018, from https://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ata/u/ 

The Next FAA Administrator

The Federal Aviation Administration administrator position has been empty since the early start of this year, when Michael Huerta decided to step down. With that being said, this marks the beginning of the question on who should be the next FAA head administrator. Well, it looks like our president, Donald Trump, already has someone in mind: his personal pilot, John Dunkin. Mr. Trump is recently speaking very high of his personal pilot, stating that he is very well qualified for the position. About the "very qualified", we shall see my friends.

John Dunkin, is no doubt, a very competent pilot. In his journey in aviation, Mr. Dunkin has managed airline and corporate flight departments, certified airlines from the startup under the regulations of the FAA, and had oversaw Trump's fleet throughout the presidential campaign (Naylor, 2018). There is no reason to believe why Mr. Dunkin isn't capable of being the head administrator of the FAA what so ever. Although, the fact that this marks the second time in which president Trump seems like he is pushing his personal pilot into such position raises many concerns to me personally. The FAA does not only regulate the aviation industry in the united states, it is also oversees foreign carriers that fly into into our domestic airspace. We currently have one of the safety industries and the FAA is who we should thank. I don't want to further explain how important the department is to every aspect of our current aviation system, as many of you would alread know. I just want to simply state that it is insane to even think of the how qualified a person must be to be place in such position.

I am one of the people that don't think very badly of Trump, like many others of course. I agree and disagree with some of the changes he had made ever since he got into office. There is a reason behind every move of our "precious" president as he is evilly smart. President Trump, thinking like the business man he is, has been trying to modernize our air traffic control system by privatizing it. So my aviation friends, as soon as you hear that Mr. Dunkin is elected the head administrator of the FAA, be certain that you will see such change. While there is no doubt that Mr. Dunkin has all the experience in the world to captain the FAA, it is to believe that he may lack the judgement qualification factor to carry out the role (Negroni, 2018).

Dan Elwell, acting FAA Administrator after Hureta's departure back in January, is also a candidate to take on the job full-time (Lanktree, 2018). Elwell is a former pilot, served various roles in the FAA, and worked as an executive representing the airline industry's trade association. On the other hand, Republican Representative Sam Groves, who is a member of the aviation subcommittee of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is also a candidate for the position (Lanktree, 2018). I personally think that all candidates qualify for the job but I lean more towards Elwell and Groves. The reason being that both of the names mentioned above have had experience in a governmental structure and therefore would know how to guide the FAA properly. The position requires a person with very strong leadership qualifications.

Thus far, the FAA have been captained by very qualified personnel who were labeled great leaders after the impact they had on the system. The past candidates are whom we should thank for the success in terms of safety as well as other economical and regulatory factors in our current industry. Former FAA Administrator, Michael Huerta, was a very qualified man. "Prior to his appointment he ran his own consulting firm, advising clients on transportation policy, technology, and financing. He also served as a member of President Obama's transition team for the Department of Transportation" (FAA, 2018). J. Randolph Babbitt, who was in office before Huerta, was also a competent administrator. He was the head representative of all Airline Pilot Contract Negotiating Committee and later elected as the president before being appointed (FAA, 2018). As I have perviously mentioned, the administrator of the FAA is the back bone of our aviation industry and therefore he/she must obtain all the qualities needed to handle all responsibilities associated with the job.

My research on what is the actual job responsibility of an FAA Administrator came empty. I was unable to find what he/she are exactly responsible for. Do they just sign papers or are they involved in day to day operations of the field? Would love to find more information out. Although, I can make some assumptions. Besides the numerous tasks associated with such leader ship position, the FAA Administrator is responsible for promoting safety in the industry as well as work with the budget given to the administration by our government. I would hope that those head management people do not only sign papers as we will all be screwed one day. It is very important to choose the right person for this position. Their vision and leadership will phase the future of many aviators, multi-billion dollar companies, and the United States' aviation industry as a whole. In my opinion, the FAA has been very successful in creating the world's best and safety aviation industry.

References 

FAA. (2018, January 03). History. Retrieved March 01, 2018, from https://www.faa.gov/about/history/

Lanktree, G. (2018, February 26). Who is John Dunkin? Trump wants his personal pilot to head america's aviation regulator. Retrieved March 01, 2018, from https://www.newsweek.com/who-join-dunkin-trump-wants-his-personal-pilot-head-faa-819300

Naylor, B. (2018, February 26). Trump reportedly considering his personal pilot to captain FAA. Retrieved March 01, 2018, from https://www.npr.org/2018/02/26/588957046/trump-reportedly-considering-his-personal-pilot-to-captain-faa

Negroni, C. (2018, February 27). In pushing his personal pilot for FAA, Trump shows disregard for air safety. Retrieved March 01, 2018, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinenegroni/2018/02/27//in-pushing-his-personal-pilot-for-faa-trump-shows-disregard-for-air-safety/2/#beafe6b11db7 

The Commercial Space Industry

Space-Tourism is used to describe the idea of people buying a ticket in means of traveling and exploring the space. For many people, this idea sound very futuristic. In the recent years, there have been many resources and developments allocated towards the Commercial Space Industry. The idea of space-tourism is becoming a reality day by day, at least to those who can afford it. The Commercial space industry started back in the 1960s, when many attempts were conducted in means of flying higher distances and therefore reaching the space. On August 23, 1963, the USAF X-15 space plane successfully reached an altitude of 354,200ft, setting a world record up until 39 years later when SpaceShipOne broke it by reaching 367,442ft (www.spacefuture.com). Later in the 1980s, attempts to designed ships to carry out passengers to space were made and indeed projects were carried out. Lastly, in the 1990s, the Commercial Space Industry experienced a heavy research and development period. Today, fewer than 600 people had traveled to space and companies are trying their best to expand the number.

Regulating the Commercial Space Industry started back in the 1980s, when president Ronald Reagan signed the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 (www.faa.gov). This act helped create opportunities for private space flights. In the later add ons of this rule, private companies were given the legal authority to operate vehicles into space and carry passengers, at their own risk of course. The Federal Aviation Administration Commercial Space Industry regulations are located in Chapter III, parts 400 to 460, of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Much of those regulations were put in place to have rules in place for the operations of space vehicles. They highlight important aspects for those companies in such way to mostly ensure financial responsibility. For more about the regulations, I would advise to visit the NASA website as well. I think that the space industry is just like any other aviation industry and therefore must be somewhat regulated. I personally agree with all the regulations, even though I am sure that there will be many changes due to the fact the industry will only be expanding in the next years to come.

The Space-Tourism industry is currently expanding. The idea itself does not interest me personally but I am sure it interests others. I personally do not see this idea being opened up to the general public and for one reason only, the cost per person per flight. Estimates show that a ticket will cost a person nearly $250,000 to millions of dollars (Mann, 2017). How many people would be able to afford such ticket price? not me not you I am sure. Opportunities to tour the space are opened up for those wealthy individuals who do not know what else to do with their money. Research indicate that there are many attempts being made to lower that price but tickets, at least in my opinion, will remain outside of the general public's reach. Also, if those private space companies were to lower prices, I am so sure that they will minimize spendings on safety, indirectly, and operations will no longer be safe.

Throughout my research, I have came to conclusion that the Commercial Space Industry has many opportunities for you, my fellow aviation peers. With opportunities comes many qualifications that a person must have to land a job in such industry. Other than some preferred qualifications, the FAA does a great job setting the minimum requirements for pilots of human spaceflights. Below are some of those requirements.

• A person must possess an FAA pilot certificate with an instrument rating.
• A person must have a Class 1 medical certificate.
• A person must train in operating aircraft, wearing assigned pressure suits.
• A person must a have a strong knowledge in the following fields:
• Aerodynamics 
• High-Altitude Operations 
• Rocket Machineries 
• Aerospace Physiology
• Ballistic Flights
• Re-Entry Flights 
• A person must be training on several emergency procedures.
• A person must have experience in jet fighting, as he or she will be familiar with traveling at higher speeds than normal.

With that being said, most jobs in the industry are given to fighter pilots, test pilots, and commercial airlines pilots who have flying hours in excess of at least 3000 hours. 

References 

Mann, A. (2017, July 21). So you want to be a space tourist? Here are you options. Retrieved February 22, 2018, from https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/so-you-want-be-space-tourist-here-are-your-options-ncna784166

Www.faa.gov. (2017, September 27). Office of Commercial Space Transportation. Retrieved February 22, 2018, from https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/regulations/ 

(Www.spacefuture.com), P. W. (n.d.). Space Tourism - The Story So Far. Retrieved February 22, 2018, from http://www.spacefuture.com/tourism/timeline.shtml 

The Current Status of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)

I am sure that we, some what, have an idea of the current status of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in the United States. The use of such concept is increasing drastically in the military as well as the civilian sectors of the operation. The advanced modern technology has played a key role in the evolvement of UAVs. Drones, also known as UAVs, are machines that are flown without a pilot on board and controlled/operated from a ground station ("pilot less"). Believe it when I tell you, that you are going to see more of them hovering above you in the coming months/years. The civilian use of UAVs extends from those hobbyists who buy drone for the sheer of joy and challenge of flying an object in the sky to the ability of some to capture a high-quality photos/videos from an aerial vantage point. The regulations imposed on the civilian use of drone, and according to New York Times, is that any vehicle weighting more than 250 grams must be registered with the Federal Aviation Administration, comply with the public laws (suggests to fly under 400 feet, clear of emergency response efforts, etc), and to notify a control tower when operating 5 miles within the radius of the airspace of the airport (Wingfield, 2015). On the other hand, the regulations for the commercial use of drone is a whole different game.

The commercial use of drones refers to the use of such machine by a person or a company as a service to generate profits. Some examples of commercial use of drones are as follows: Real Estate aerial imagery, precision crop monitoring, aerial photography/videography, storm tracking, construction projects surveillance, package delivery (coming in the future believe it or not), and the list could go on and on. The FAA has recently put in place a new set of regulations that commercial users of drones must abide by. According to the Verge.com, the regulations are as follows:

• Drones have to remain in Visual Line of Sight of the Pilot.
• Pilots must at least be 16 years old.
• Operation is only allowed during daylight hours or twilight with appropriate lighting.
• Maximum groundspeed of 100 mph.
• Maximum altitude of 400 feet. 
• Pilots must hold a "Remote Pilot Airman Certificate" Issued from the FAA.
• Remain clear of controlled airspace and manned aircrafts.

The above rules do not apply to traditional model airplanes and drone delivery operations (said to be put in place by google and amazon) due to the fact that such machines would have to use autonomous technology to guide the drones rather than human pilots (Vincent, 2016). In my personal opinion, the regulations by the FAA are fair enough. At least they are not requiring drone operators to be certified pilots. Rather, by such regulation, the FAA is trying to educate drone operators on the environment in which aircrafts operate in. The UAVs had to be regulated as they can easily interfere with the traffic as well as the safety of manned aircrafts operations. 

The use of UAVs expands internationally. Without doing much research, I can personally assume that United States is not the only country associating itself with the use of such machines. Drones are being used all over the world for recreational as well as commercial purposes. According to a traveler named Anil Polat, "Commercial drone use requires a permit in practically any country you can think of" (Polat, 2016). Perhaps the requirement of having a permit to fly a drone any where in the word is not a "regulation" from a federal agency like the FAA in the United States but I would not know for sure anyways. I personally can not provide information regarding how hard/easy the process of getting your drones permitted in other countries. I can tell you this though, If you are a traveler who makes use of a drone to capture imageries, make sure you familiarize yourself with the the country's laws regarding UAVs before you launch. You never want to get in trouble while on a vacation, I tell you that from an unfortunate and unrelated experience.

Now, let's get down to some real business. I, personally, do see the integration of drones into our National Air Space (NAS) but for commercial use only. After researching the topic, I came across sources that stated future plans of companies for the use of UAVs. You got Google and Amazon trying to deliver packages via drones on one hand and Uber attempting to provide a service of unmanned transportation (a drone picks you up and drops you at your destinations) on the other hand. My point here is, we are going to see the use of drones commercially increase as technology is advancing and businesses would take advantage of such developments. With this being said, we are going to come to a time where those drones will need to be operated at higher altitudes, for longer periods of time, for longer distances (forcing the operation to be completely autonomous), and thus creating a risk to the traffic system in the airspaces. The potential logistical problem of the integrating of drones into out NAS is that it might give the system more than it can handle. When workload increases, risks increase as well, and catastrophic events are more likely to happen. In terms of perception problems, I can think of two. How would pilots feel knowing that the are operating in an airspace where unmanned flying machines are flying all over it? I would feel paranoid. How would the public/passengers feel knowing that, small and harmful object that are controlled by a person that is no where near the airspace but rather some hundreds of miles away, could interfere with and probably reduce the safety of their flights. Technology and computers may malfunction at any time as they lack the decision making process human acquire. We are going to see interesting things happening in the near future my friends. I will leave it at that. 

As in regards to the military use of UAVs, I am two hundred percent in support of the idea. The use of drones in the military sector has mainly been for the purpose of reconnaissance, to spy on the enemy in other terms. I think this has been very efficient as we are no longer in need of sending actual lives in danger. Reconnaissance provide military with all the real time intel they need to carry out missions, and drones have played a magnificent rule in the aide of that. Economically speaking, drones are cheaper than an actual aircraft. In case of a drone being shut down, no problem ... launch another one. Ethically speaking, well, wait, there are no ethics in the military. We go to war for a reason, to defeat the enemy. Our military units have every right to use any technological development to reduce spendings and casualties to as little as possible. In war applications, a nation uses all of its sources to gain an advantage over the enemy. For example, the drone played a key role in the capturing of Usama Bin Laden. It was a key in providing the american seal team with his location as well as s proof of his actual presence in his secret hideout. 

If you, my fellow classmate, interested in a drone job ... please google "Drone Jobs in My area" and I am sure you will be able to find something that fits what you are looking for. I tried it, You should too. "They can't say yes if you don't ask." 

References

Polat, A. (2017, July 25). This Map Shows You The Drone Laws For Every Country In The World (Updated Regularly). Retrieved February 06, 2018, from https://foxnomad.com/2017/07/25/map-shows-drone-laws-every-country-world-updated-regularly/

Vincent, J. (2016, August 30). FAA regulations for commercial drones are now in effect. Retrieved February 06, 2018 from https://theverge.com/2016/8/30/12707502/drone-regulations-legality-us-faa

Wingfield, N. (2015, November 23). A Field Guide to Civilian Drones. Retrieved February 06, 2018 from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/technology/guide-to-civilian-drones.html