Final Blog Post: Medical Reform

I decided to talk about the FAA general aviation medical reform because it will definitely affect the aviation community and it is a hot topic right now in the news. Myself as well as others have heard a lot of talk from aviation enthusiasts and Washington about the reform that will be coming to FAA airmen medical certificate regulations but not much work has been done to get the bill into motion other than AOPA trying to push the legislation on law makers. I am skeptical of the repercussions that have the potential to ensue if the bill does go into effect and there are pilots out there flying with nothing more than a drivers license, provided they fly smaller general aviation aircraft. There is much debate on the topic, people like myself who strongly oppose the idea and others that are very pro the idea. For the most part the community of people who strongly support the legislation are older aviators who have lost their medical and can no longer fly or aviators who have not lost their medical yet but fear they will lose it in the future. There is also the community of people who just dislike the necessity that requires them to go and receive a medical examination every year or so depending on their age (Tennyson, E).

Currently the medical reform only applies to smaller aircraft with certain stipulations that they must meet to be exempt from the legislation that the Bill of Rights 2 calls for under a third class medical certificate.  The medical requirement will not apply to anyone who is engaging any any of the following operations

• Aircraft that have a max gross weight of 6000 lbs or more
• Aircraft carrying more than 5 passengers
• Aircraft climbing through 14,000' or higher 
• Aircraft traveling in excess of 250 KIAS
• Aircraft operating for compensation or hire

Aviation enthusiasts for the most part will not be engaging in any of the criteria above so many will be exempt from holding a medical certificate at all. From my experience I have encountered people on the road driving that scare me and should have their drivers license taken away, with this bill it will allow those same people to operate aircraft at their leisure as long as they do not engage in any of aforementioned criteria. My opinion on the subject matter is not bias because it will do me no good whether the bill goes into effect or not I will have to maintain a first class medical. I disagree with allowing pilots without medicals to fly for the safety of not only pilots in the air but also innocent homeowners and pedestrians on the ground. If a unfit to fly pilot, but still legal due to him having a drivers license decides to go up and soar after recent chest pains and has a heart attack and kills innocent people on the ground that is what will most likely have to happen first for the government to think twice about authorizing this bill.

Just recently, and since my original post the Senate passed by a unanimous decision the Pilots Bill of Rights 2 which is now on its way to the House for consideration. Most likely what will happen is the bill will go to the House and the House will add or edit some part of the legislation in their favor and send it back to the Senate a number of times before both parties can agree. Eventually after they have came to an agreement it will be sent to the white house to be signed by the president as law (Tennyson, E).

Although the House and Senate are talking about the proposed law the FAA will not implement the regulation into the FAR's until it goes through a Notice of Proposed Rule making period and has allowed the public to comment on potential changes to the legislation. What I believe will most likely happen once it has reached the FAA's hands is a great majority of people will support the legislation and only a small majority of people like myself will be against it. By the time it is in the NPRM stage unfortunately the public will not be able to convince the FAA to not allow it, by that time it would have been placed upon the FAA by congress and given a time period during which it must be complied with. 

Similar to what I had to say in my original blog post the pros and cons of the implementation of the regulation allowing recreational flying without a medical is an easy one, with many points in favor of both parties. The older generation of aviators who have lost their medical and have been unable to fly for sometime have the greatest incentive for this bill to go into effect. On the flip side, aviators such as professional airline pilots want to operate in airspace not plagued by pilots who may or may not be physically unfit to fly. I also suspect that the majority of the U.S population has no idea that these regulations are even in the process of being talked about, and if they were to get more attention by the media I suspect that many would not be okay with this. There really is only one way to make this fair for everyone, pilots who cannot pass their medical and physically fit pilots alike and that is the implementation of a regulation that requires a less stringent examination but more frequent medical examinations. I personally cannot tell you how often the Secretary of State checks vision for drivers or how else they determine if a applicant is physically fit to perform duties as a driver and or pilot but I suspect them to be very easy to pass. I personally am not okay with allowing this lax of a requirement for aviators (Text - S.571)

I do believe that the Pilots Bill of Rights 2 will go through both the House and the Senate but the only way to keep our skies safe is to come to a compromise requiring more frequent medicals. I am very passionate about this bill going into effect and believe that more people need to stand up for what is right so that the airspace overlying our land is safe and not compromised.

Tennyson, E. (2015, February 26). Medical reform legislation introduced in House, Senate. Retrieved November 30, 2015, from http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/February/26/Medical-reform-legislation-introduced-in-House-and-Senate

Tennyson, E. Full Senate passes medical reform. (2015, December 15). Retrieved December 15, 2015, from http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2015/December/15/Full-Senate-passes-medical-reform

Text - S.571 - 114th Congress (2015-2016): Pilot's Bill of Rights 2. (2015, February 25). Retrieved November 30, 2015, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/571/text  

ATC Privatization

If the bill governing the implementation of privatized air traffic control services goes into effect it will undoubtedly be a terrible mistake made by the our policy makers decisions. The general aviation community strongly opposes this shift to privatizing air traffic control for one reason specifically, and that is the addition of user fees on an per time basis.  Currently air traffic control is government subsidized by a tax through fuel fees, which has been a efficient way of providing services to pilots for decades. While the general aviation perspective on privatization is double-sided, the most common argument I have seen while researching the topic is the strong opposition for another fee being added to the cost of owning an airplane. The more important area of interest that law makers and pilots should be concerned about is repercussions that will follow by pilots opting to not use services they normally would such as; flight following, or filing an IFR flight plan in marginal VFR conditions due to the user fees associated with such services.

To my surprise major airlines are big supporters of the push to allow for privatized air traffic control facilities. Similar to all decisions made by the executives within fortune 500 companies there is always a motive when a push for a change within the industry exists. In the case of this regulation and almost all other reforms, it concerns potential savings or money! By air traffic control transitioning to a privatized system there are a number of benefits to air carriers such as a quicker implementation of NextGen into the NAS and a large reduction in the amount of money spent on fuel, which is an airlines single handedly largest cost. JetBlue Airlines is one of the U.S carriers to voice their opinion on the bill that will allow for the reduction in route times and fuel burn per hour which equals large savings even at small percentages (Jansen, B). Delta Airlines on the other hand is not a proponent of the idea of privatized ATC. I am not sure of this to be true or not but since Delta Airlines is the biggest airline in the United States their opinion on the matter may weigh more heavily in the eyes of the FAA when it comes time to make such a decision (Barton, E)

The privatization of air traffic control is not a new idea and other foreign countries have been on board with the idea for some time now. Canada is the home to the most well known subsidized ATC facilities out there today, even being used by the United States as a model to use when creating our own model plan for the future. There are associated risks and rewards for implementing a system to this degree as can be expected. The system runs more efficiently by allowing equipment and services to be updated at a faster rate than could be experienced by a government ran ATC (Call to action issued over ATC privatization).

Similar to all laws, if the lawmakers do decide it will be in the best interest of the people to hand over the responsibilities of the FAA over to civilian contractors, the idea will go through the same process that other pre laws go through before they actually become added to U.S Code. To my understanding since the FAA has the jurisdiction over air transportation it will not be debated across the house and senate but will be an internal matter resolved only within the FAA.

I cannot emphasize enough how against the privatization of of FAA control towers that I am. Not only do I think they will be inefficient but the dramatic effect on safety that they have will be paramount. It is possible that 50 or more years from now when our technology is so advanced that we hardly need human ATC intervention at all that the privatization of ATC could be efficient. Like I have already mentioned a number of times, the safety of the ATC system will be adversely affected by this shift to privatization. To make up for the lack of funding that normally comes through a fuel tax, the private ATC towers will generate their revenue by charging for services, similar to an a la carté style. What I mean by that is, pilots will no longer be provided all services equally for free . It so detrimental to safety that we do not go through with this method of ATC privatization because pilots will most likely stop using services that aid with safety like vfr flight following or filing an ifr flight plan in efforts to save money when able.

Barton, E. (2015, September 10). Transportation Watchdog Lauds Privatized Air Traffic Control. Retrieved December 5, 2015, from http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/10/transportation-watchdog-lauds-privatized-air-traffic-control/

Call to action issued over ATC privatization. (2015, July 8). Retrieved December 5, 2015, from http://generalaviationnews.com/2015/07/08/call-to-action-issued-over-atc-privatization/

Jansen, B. (2015, December 2). Airline executives urge privatization of air-traffic control. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/12/01/airline-executives-urge-privatization-air-traffic-control/76604766/