Final Exam Blog

I'd like to revisit the commercialization of the space industry for my final blog.  I spent most of the first time around talking about how the idea for commercialization circled around the X Prize competition from 1996.  While this was the biggest deal of the recent past to attempt to send civilians into space, it was not the first.  The first major idea came from Pan American World Airways in their "First Moon Flight" vouchers that began in 1968 and ran until 1971 issuing over 93,000 vouchers to customers who were promised trips to the moon once it became possible.  "Between 1968 and 1971, Pan Am issued over 93,000 "First Moon Flights" club cards to space enthusiasts eager to make a reservation for the first commercial flight to the moon."(Haupt, 2015) The vouchers were issued at no price and were issued using priority numbers.  Initially, Pan Am had thought that the first flight was going to depart in 2000, unfortunately, the company went out of business in 1991.  The club was thought to have originated in 1964 as a waitlist of people who were interested in commercial space flights.

Even though to just over 93,000 very excited people flying to the moon seemed out of the question and it was not big news for most of the world, commercializing space flight was not completely forgotten.  X Prize was born and like mentioned in my earlier blog, was won by a team from Mojave Aerospace Ventures when their "Space Ship One" reached space twice in a one week period.  This really opened the door for commercial space flight as it proved that it is possible.  Virgin Atlantic created the successor to Space Ship One and called it Space Ship Two, a 6 seat aircraft that was capable of space flight just like the predecessor and seats go for $250,000 a ticket.  According to space.com "Other companies are getting into the mix, too.  For instance, XCOR Aerospace is developing a one-passenger suborbital rocket plane called Lynx that may get up and running around the same time that Space Ship Two does."(Wall, 2014)  As of now, the Lynx is still not finished and has been halted for the time being.

Space travel is not new, nor is the concept of commercial space travel.  Companies are always getting closer to making it a practical option to travel to space.  Some people have made the trip already at extremely large prices.  The goal is to reduce the prices of travel so it can be more practical to the public, however, it seems like these companies are having more roadblock problems than successes.  Space X has been successful in taking over the space industry in a commercial role not as a passenger outfit, but as essentially a cargo operation supplying and performing maintenance on the space stations.

As stated in my previous blog, I do think that commercial space travel will be more feasible one day but it is not going to be anytime soon.  However, when that day comes, I would love to be able to see it for myself because I think it is a great concept and could open a lot of doors for future exploration.

References:

Haupt, T. (2015, July 31). Were You a Member of the. Retrieved December 11, 2016, from https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/were-you-member-“first-moon-flights”-club

Pan Am and the waiting list for the moon…. (n.d.). Retrieved December 11, 2016, from http://backstoryradio.org/2013/08/19/pan-am-and-the-waiting-list-for-the-moon/

Wall, M. (2014, October 3). Private Spaceflight Era Launched with SpaceShipOne 10 Years Ago. Retrieved December 11, 2016, from http://www.space.com/27339-spaceshipone-xprize-launched-commercial-spaceflight.html

XCOR Lynx. (n.d.). Retrieved December 11, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XCOR_Lynx

Job Plans and Topic Review

Before the class started my plans were to land a job as a professional pilot, either in the cargo or passenger industry, I had no preference really as to which.  My goals have not changed due to the fact that this is why I wanted to become a pilot, to get paid to fly someone's airplane for them.

My action plan for when I graduate is to fly for USA Jet since I just got hired by them last month.  I will continue to fly for them for the foreseeable future until I can either upgrade or move on to the airlines.

I think the most useful topic that we covered this semester was the duty time regulations.  I feel this way mainly because this is something that will be impacting me immediately and it will be a part of my everyday life as a professional pilot.

The least important topic for me was kind of a toss up between the commercial space industry or the Chinese competitor to Boeing and Airbus.  The commercial space industry is still a novelty, in my opinion, therefore it does not really hold much weight as a conversation piece.  Comac's aircraft was also a weak conversation topic for me as well since even if it does become a relevant aircraft in the United States it will most likely not affect me personally.

Aviation Organizations

Belonging to aviation organizations is important because not only will belonging to an organization keep you up to date on what is happening in the aviation world but it offers many benefits to members that you would not have otherwise.  A couple important organizations to belong to as a professional pilot are Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) and Airline Pilots Association (ALPA).

It appears that AOPA has more than one mission, if you look at the about us page it states that AOPA's mission is "To ensure that the sky remains within reach of everyone who dreams of becoming a pilot."  AOPA also claims that their mission to be: "We protect your freedom to fly by...

• advocating on behalf of our members, 

•  educating pilots, non-pilots, and policy makers alike, 

•  supporting activities that ensure the long-term health of General Aviation, 

•  fighting to keep General Aviation accesible to all, and 

•  securing sufficient resources to ensure our success.

AOPA offers all sorts of benefits to its members such as discounts, insurance, legal support, and they even do a giveaway drawing every year where someone wins a Cessna 172.  ALPA's mission is "To promote and champion all aspects of aviation safety throughout all segments of the aviation community;" it goes on for a while so instead of typing the whole mission out, I will attach the link at the bottom.  ALPA is better known as the largest airline unions in the world.  Advocating for airline pilots to ensure fair treatment as well as contract negotiations.

It is important to me to belong to these two organizations for all of the benefits that they provide, if nothing else the advocacy that these organizations offer will be an important aspect in the career of an airline pilot, staying current in the industry with the latest information that they provide as well as the legal information as well as insurance if I ever decide to purchase my own airplane.

References:
https://www.aopa.org/about/mission-vision-and-values

http://www.alpa.org/en/about-alpa/what-we-do

Aviation Emissions

Global warming has been a growing concern over the years as emissions continue to grow as well.  What does the world do?  Blame the aviation industry, why not right?  The aviation industry is a pretty easy target to put the blame on, large jets fly the skies every day burning massive amounts of jet fuel into the atmosphere.  However, the aviation industry's carbon footprint is not nearly as high as some other industries.  According to the Air Transportation Action Group, "The global aviation industry produces around 2% of all human-induced carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions" (Air Transportation Action Group, 2016).   Doesn't seem too bad right?  They also stated that "Aviation is responsible for 12% of CO2 emissions from all transport sources, compared to 74% from road transport" (Air Transportation Action Group, 2016).  So while the aviation industry is not the worst when it comes to CO2 emissions, there are still some actions that can be taken to lower the footprint that we have on the global warming problem.

The basis of the Paris Agreement for aviation is a good idea.  The idea is that the airlines' carbon emissions in the year 2020 will be set as the upper limit of what carriers are going to be allowed to discharge.  If an airline exceeds this limit in future years (which they are expected to do) "they will be required to offset their emissions growth by buying credits from other industries and projects that limit greenhouse gas emissions" (Lowy, 2016).  The first phase of this agreement, which will take place from 2021 until 2027 will be voluntary and becomes mandatory from 2028 until 2035.  This deal will apply only to international flights, which is responsible for 60 percent of all aviation activity.

President-Elect Donald Trump has stated in the past that he intends to cancel the Paris Agreement because he feels that it would be bad for business.  Whether or not his administration goes through with the cancellation of the agreement, I do not know, but I do know that Trump somehow thinks that global warming was created by the Chinese for the Chinese as a business tactic in a tweet that he posted in 2012.

I feel that to some extent the new regulations are a necessity.  The level at which this plan needs to be carried out, I am not sure.  It seems a little overkill that they are so focused on the aviation industry when in fact the road transportation industry is far worse with the CO2 emissions.  I suppose the deal that they have come up with is better than what I have come up with so I guess I can't look down on their idea too much.

References

Facts & FIGURES - Air Transport Action Group (ATAG). (2016, May). Retrieved November 18, 2016, from http://www.atag.org/facts-and-figures.html

Low, J. (2016, October 06). UN agreement reached on aircraft climate-change emissions ... Retrieved November 18, 2016, from http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2016-10-06/un-agreement-reached-on-aircraft-climate-change-emissions

News, B. (2016, May 27). Donald Trump would 'cancel' Paris climate deal. Retrieved November 18, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36401174

Global Airlines, Is It A Fair Playing Ground?

"Open skies agreements are bilateral agreements that the U.S. Government negotiates with other countries to provide rights for airlines to offer international passengers and cargo services." (state.gov, 2016)  Basically, Open Skies agreements are designed to expand passenger and cargo operations internationally by eliminating government interference in commercial airline operations, with respect to routes, capacity, and pricing.  The U.S. has brokered Open Skies agreements with 120 foreign partners since 1992.  The U.S. is now fighting for a reorganization of the U.S.-U.A.E. Open Skies agreement stating that due to the fact that they are receiving government subsidies, there is an unfair advantage over domestic air carriers.  Two of these companies that are receiving government subsidies is Emirates and Qatar Airways.  The chief complaint that is being made by Delta, American and United is that the Gulf carriers are at an unfair advantage due to the fact that they are supported by the government.  The U.A.E. companies disagree with this argument stating that there is no unfair advantage due to the fact that American companies receive government subsidies as well, while not in the form of direct compensation, the overseas companies see the bankruptcy laws and government bailouts as a form of support that levels the playing field.  In a New york Times article states, "Supporters of Open Skies point out that Unites States carriers have received government support in the past.  Delta, American and United, for example, have been granted far-reaching antitrust immunity to set up joint ventures with rival carriers on some specific routes to Europe and Asia." (Mouawad, 2015)

With the Export-Import bank, Delta is claiming that it's overseas long-haul rivals have received large price cuts that they are not entitled to as well.  While the rival companies are not actually getting a discount on these airplanes, they are receiving a lower interest rate through the Export-Import Bank.  Delta claims that the foreign companies are taking these savings that they are receiving and using it to lower ticket costs for the customers.  Even if that is the case, the judge that presided over the case stated in his 72-page ruling that the savings was only 12 million dollars over 12 years and that is not enough to make a noticeable difference.  Honestly, I do feel that the playing field is fair.  Fair enough at least.  I think that the domestic carriers are just complaining because the competition is getting too tight.  These companies were all about the Open Skies agreements when there really wasn't any competition, now that there is, they want to start complaining and lobbying the government to help them out.  They are trying to shut down the Ex-Im bank to make them pay more for airplanes as well as cut down their access to our country.  I understand that Delta, United, and American are corporations and they only want what's good for the growth of their company, and not to sound un-American but now who's not being fair, not only are they trying to cripple the competition but they are going to damage another American company in the process, Boeing will be on the losing end of the stick if the Ex-Im Bank is disbanded.

References:

Mouawad, J. (n.d.). Open-Skies Agreements Challenged - The New York Times. Retrieved November 4, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/business/us-airlines-challenge-open-skies-agreements.html

Open Skies Agreements. (n.d.). Retrieved November 04, 2016, from http://www.state.gov/e/eb/tra/ata/

Weisman, J., & Lipton, E. (n.d.). Boeing and Delta Spend Millions in Fight Over Export ... Retrieved November 4, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/07/business/boeing-delta-air-lines-export-import-bank.html

A Chinese Competitor to Boeing and Airbus question mark?

Due to the way everything has been going with the certification of the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China's (COMAC) other aircraft with the FAA I do not forsee the new C919 being FAA certified in the near future (if at all).  The idea that China had originally was potentially a good idea at the time, to them, but in reality, the C919 is going to be a cheaper made, heavier version of the Airbus A320 or the Boeing 737.  China is known for both military and corporate espionage stealing products like the F-35 and now what looks to be pretty much an exact replica of the A320.  The problem being, China does not know how to make a solid, reliable product.  This cheap designing flaw that China has lived by for so long is going to be a problem for them when it comes to the strict FAA certification standards.  The company's other project, the ARJ21 is being held up in FAA testing currently and is the problem that I forsee them having with the C919.  In an article by Bradley Perrett for aviation week, he states,

"The problem emerged in 2011 and is still unresolved.  Delays in Comac's earlier program, the ARJ21 regional jet, are holding up FAA recognition of the certification competence of the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC).  That casts doubt on the FAA's eventual acceptance of the CAAC's current work on C919 and therefore the Chinese type certificate.  Without Western airworthiness endorsement, the C919 cannot be sold in main commercial aircraft markets outside of China" (Perrett, 2013)

 As far as domestic companies are concerned, I do not think that there will be cause for concern by Boeing or Airbus due to the fact that they are a known entity and they have stood the test of time.  Major airlines or even regional airlines are not going to gamble and buy a cheaper made product out of China just to save a few dollars.  The only way I see our companies beginning to purchase these products will be after enough of them have been sold and flying in China and Singapore for a while and they see no issues, but I doubt it.  As far as the public's perception, I don't think the common person would be able to tell the difference between, just like I'm sure they can't tell the difference between aircraft now, except the size of the aircraft.

As far as COMAC goes, and the relationship that it has with the Chinese government is that the Chinese government owns COMAC, which is how they have enough money to even entertain the idea about making transport category aircraft.  This relationship puts the airlines in a tight spot because the airlines are also owned by the government, this pressures the airlines to purchase the new aircraft regardless of the safety and quality of the aircraft.  COMAC also has the ARJ21 aircraft, which is supposed to rival the Boeing 717 jet.  This aircraft is also struggling to get FAA certification at this time.  Due to the fact that they can not get an aircraft certified (ARJ21) or one built (C919) they continue to show up at the Singapore Aviaiton Expo trying to avoid people because they cant produce a finished product, "COMAC is staying away from the cameras and crowds in Singapore, and competitors are talking less about it." (Cendrowski, 2016)

Whether or not CORMAC becomes a viable option for transport category airliners, I do not think thi is going to affect whether or not any other companies try to compete and build airliners.  The cost is way too high and it is not realy obtainable to think about trying to compete with the other major companies.  The only reason that COMAC can hang with Airbus and Boeing is because they are state owned and can afford to waste the money.

No where that I can find has Boeing or Airbus commented in any way about the new aircraft that COMAC is making.  Honestly if I were them I wouldn't either.  This airplane is not going to be any sort of competition due to the fact that by the time the aircraft is released the A320 and the 737 are going to be so far ahead of it that there will be no cause for concern.

References:

Cendrowski, S. (2016). China’s Answer To Boeing Loses Shine. Retrieved October 29, 2016, from http://fortune.com/2016/02/16/china-comac-c919-delay-delivery/

Perrett, B. (n.d.). C919 May Be Largely Limited To Chinese Market. Retrieved October 29, 2016, from http://aviationweek.com/awin/c919-may-be-largely-limited-chinese-market

The Commercial Space Industry

In 1961 the first manned space travel was accomplished by Yuri Gagarin in 1961 as a result of government program research.  For decades after this, few government superpowers have frequented space on pioneering missions.  Flight to space were few and far between due to the high cost, and intense planning that was involved.  Additionally, only a handful of people had been to space, mainly high trained government astronauts from a select few countries.  This trend began to change in 1996 when a group of philanthropists created the Ansari XPRIZE.  This competition attracted teams from all over the world.  The goal was to create a manned spacecraft that was able to carry at least 3 people  into space twice within 2 weeks.  1 team emerged from Mojave Aerospace Ventures, the team was funded by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen and was led by Burt Rutan and his company Scaled Composites.  "On October 4, 2004, SpaceShipOne completed all of the prize requirements and officially won the $10M Ansari XPRIZE.  In doing so, it became the first-ever private vehicle to carry a human being into space, making international headlines and stunning a world that had largely written off commercial human spaceflight as pure science fiction." (VirginGalactic)

The government does not regulate commercial space travel due to the fact that regulations would slow down the growth of commercial space travel and most likely ultimately bring it to an end.  The only actual "regulation" was laid out in a space.com article, it states "The regulations require launch vehicle operators to provide certain safety-related information and identify what an operator must do to conduct a licensed launch with a human on board." (David, 2006)

I do not think that commercial spaceflight will be an accessible option for the general public in my lifetime.  I think it will remain as it currently is, which is basically a one-time bucket list item for the extremely wealthy.  Commercial space operations such as Virgin Galactic and SpaceX have made it possible for the wealthy, but I don't think it will be available to the rest of the general public for a very long time.

In order to land a job at a commercial space company, there are a lot of qualifications that must be met.  For starters, you have to have a commercial multi-engine pilot certificate.  Additionally, you must have an advanced degree in a relevant technical field.  If that wasn't enough, the applicant must also be a graduate of an approved test pilot school with 2 years of test pilot experience under his belt in high-performance jets as well as large multi-engine transport category aircraft.  It is not required to be an astronaut but it is a preferred attribute.

References:

A Brief History of Human Spaceflight - Virgin Galactic. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2016, from http://www.virgingalactic.com/human-spaceflight/history-of-human-spaceflight/

David, L. (n.d.). FAA Sets Guidelines for Space Travel. Retrieved October 22, 2016, from http://www.space.com/3290-faa-sets-guidelines-space-travel.html