WASHINGTON, D.C. — General aviation now seems to be getting more attention in Congress and from the FAA. This observation comes from the appearance of a Congressman and a deputy administrator of the FAA at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Homecoming Fly-In earlier this month.
Michael Whitaker, FAA deputy administrator with the primary responsibility of developing the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), told a crowd of several hundred that he is getting his pilot’s license “to better understand my job and general aviation issues.”
He began taking flight lessons this past April and expects to take the test before the end of October. Whitaker stressed how important the FAA considers NextGen to be for the future of all aviation, including its importance to general aviation.
“And besides that, I’m enjoying it,” he happily told the crowd.
He noted that he started flying lessons early in his career, but quit after a few hours because of costs and other duties at the time.
Reauthorization of the FAA is due and Congressman Sam Graves (R-Mo.), a pilot and aircraft owner, said he is going out and listening to pilots everywhere so he and the committee “can hit the ground running” in January.
Air traffic control in other nations is being studied to adapt the best of all for continued improvement in the United States. Changes will be made. Maybe one of these, he commented, should be to get the government out of the way.
Reauthorization includes funding. Graves cautioned that fees are — and will be in the future — a subject to contend with as funding for government continues through the years. The current House still opposes user fees, but Graves cautioned pilots not to let up on their opposition. Contacting their members of Congress is something he urged all pilots to do to encourage their elected representatives to enact legislation to help general aviation.
Remotely Piloted Vehicles — usually known as Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), but RPVs at General Aviation News — is another important issue facing the committee. Graves said RPVs are going to be strong in the future and that he considers the manner the FAA is currently handling the integration of them into the airspace as proper.
The General Aviation Caucus in the House has now reached 253 members, Graves reported, adding the goal is to get to 300 members. The caucus lets non-pilot members better understand issues general aviation faces and to see ways to help them. Graves told the pilots at the AOPA Fly-In that they can help by asking their Congressional representatives if they are members of the caucus and, if not, to urge them to join. “Just ask them to contact me or my office and we will welcome them,” he said.
AOPA President Mark Baker spoke first at the session reporting on some of the association’s work and achievements of the year. A question and answer period brought numerous written questions from the crowd, the majority of which focused on the proposal to eliminate the third class medical certificate. The answer to all was the same as in the past: It is at the Department of Transportation going through the long process of review by various departments of government.
We don’t need no next gen or third class medical either and while you’re at it how about getting us a blanket approval for a no lead/no ethanol mogas for all airports. Thanks.
AMEN..!
Next Gen is great in concept, But Why ? It only helps a very few and at what cost ? When satellites break down which they all do. How do go out and send someone to fix it ? at what cost and how long does it take to fix ? Could it be the proverbial .10 cent part but costs $100 million to fix. I think the current ground based stuff is a hole lot better than space based platforms. Take for example the Chicago incident where someone destroyed the equipment. In two weeks it was up and running again. You can’t do that with a satellite. In my opinion, Next Gen has to be much better proven that it is cheaper and easier than good old fashion know how.
You comment like you have never heard about “that GPS thing”. There are 24 satellites plus few spare ones in orbit. Argument about 10 cent part is completely wrong here.
To Anonymous and All,
I stand by my comments. I have also posted my name to stand up and be counted. Something you are lacking.
Yes, I have heard of “That GPS Thing” and have owned 4 of them. One is currently in my aircraft Another is outdated and sitting on a shelf collecting dust. The other two just quit working. The manufacturer went out of business on one and the other one can’t be repaired by the manufacturer. Go figure.
Again, I disagree with your comment about the .10 cent part. I said it was the “Proverbial .10 cent part”. It could be a $10 part. for example. The bottom line, the stuff breaks down and then what ? Spend more money after bad, or just keep spending. The old ground stuff can usually be repaired a few times before it’s totally shot. Also, There aren’t anymore space shuttles flying to return a satellite from space.
GPS navigation is the future and sooner we mothball radio beacon navigation, sooner we eliminate redundant tax spending.
GPS system is used by all airplanes (commercial, military), ships, boats, ground transportation, smart phone users, survey, drones, precision bombs, missiles, etc. it is a universal system of all users that has been so successful that EU, Russia, India are putting up their own systems so as not to rely on the US system. It is an open infrastructure whose full potential is yet to be realized.
In comparison, legacy radio beacons (VOR, ADE, DME, etc) are special use systems that benefit small segment of population in specific geographic locations. As a taxpayer, I would like to see justification for maintaining this system with such limited benefit.
The question should be not ‘why should we switch to GPS?’, but rather ‘why should we keep radio-based navigation?’