Southwest is the place for me.

For me this assignment was one of the more difficult assignments. I have been asking myself for quite sometime now what I want to do when I graduate. I have recently considered switching majors to management as well as a few others. My job with National Airlines helped me to realize some things about myself and my plans for the future. First of all I learned that I am not a fan of international travel. Especially with on-demand carriers. I would like to start a family in the not so distant future and the thought of being stuck on the road in foreign countries for extended periods of time with little more then a few hours notice does not mesh well with my plans for the future. Discovering this really helped narrow down where I would like to go. I would prefer not to be on-demand and also would like to only travel domestically. This cut out most cargo companies and also most major airlines.
What I have found is that Southwest airlines seems to fit exactly what I have been looking for. Not only do they fit my plans for the future In December 2010, Southwest Airlines topped the list of the 50 best U.S. places to work by Glassdoor.com. This is only one of many awards received by Southwest Airlines. More can be seen at this site: http://www.southwest.com/html/about-southwest/history/fact-sheet.html This was supported by what I experienced when providing contract maintenance to Southwest airlines at Detroit Metro. Their pilots and staff were consistently the happiest people I dealt with. This went all the way up through management. When dealing with maintenance control there focus was always how they could help you perform your job better. They weren't there to tell you how to do it. Through this experience I began considering Southwest as my career goal.
So now as I sit and type this assignment I have sorted out my goal once again. To work towards the minimums required to apply with Southwest. ATP, 1,500 hours turbine total time, and 1,000 hours Pilot in command turbine time.

Aviation's best kept secret wears blue vests

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) serves customers and members more than 208 million times per week at more than 8,600 retail units under 59 different banners in 15 countries. With fiscal year 2010 sales of $405 billion, Wal-Mart employs more than 2 million associates worldwide. Roughly 76 of these employees are pilots for their corporate flight department and another 40 are mechanics. There flight department currently consists of 20 aircraft. 14 Lear 31's, 4 Lear 45's, a Lear 40, and a Global Express BD-700. They fly mostly regional and divisional vice presidents to and from there stores and the head quarters in Arkansas. They also fly purchasers to insudstry shows and companies Wal-Mart buys their merchandise from.
Pilot's fly mostly weekdays and most are round trips. They have 11 days off a month and at least one four day weekend a month. It averages to 15 flight days a month. Pilots are only expected to do two overnights a month. All flights are scheduled pilots do not carry pagers and are not "On Call"  Salary starts at $50,000 a year with 10% bonus and company stock for a First Officer with a guaranteed 3 year upgrade. First year captains salary is $74,000 a year with 10% bonus and company stock. 
Wal-Mart does not post minimums for flight positions. They say they hire people not log books. However it is generally accepted you must have 3000 hours with some turbine experience to be competitive with other applicants. The interview process is an all expense paid interview and once hired you will be recuurrent trained at flight safety twice a year.
As of now there are no job listings for pilots at Wal-Mart Aviation. The last hiring was 3 pilots in April. I could not find any management positions either although it seems the hired a flight planner in July of this year. You can keep an eye on their website for future job openings it also offers minimal information about the department http://walmartstores.com/Careers/7687.aspx Many furloughed pilots have gotten jobs at Wal-Mart and decided not to leave when called back to the majors. As one employee stated Wal-Mart is Aviation's best kept secret.

To infinity and beyond........ or maybe just to Mars.

A recent airline publication's cover reads "The New Space Economy is Getting Real." Without any research I think this has something to do with Richard Branson opening his spaceport just days ago in New Mexico. This has been the next step since Burt Rutan made the first private space flight in 2004.

     For years space travel has been limited to government agencies such as NASA and equivalents from other countries. However Burt Rutan opened the doors when he designed and built Spaceship One. With NASA's aging shuttle fleet, recent accident of shuttle Columbia as well as the current economy they were forced to cancel all future shuttle missions. For the time being they will rely on Russia's space program for all future trips to the international space station. When NASA cancelled there shuttle program they invested that money in private companies to develop their own shuttles. The hope is to use private shuttles for trips to and from the international space station in 5-7 years. For more on this and the reaction of Rick Mastracchio visit this Link: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2011-04-28-shuttle-future_n.htm

     So what will space travel look like for the next 25 years. It appears it will be the new “IT” tourist destination according to the hopes of billionaire Richard Branson. He recently opened his new spaceport in the New Mexico desert. For more on the space port you can check out the website http://www.virgingalactic.com/ Branson is hoping people will be willing to cough up $200,000 for a 5 hour trip into space and experiencing 5 minutes of weightlessness. Though he is the first it seems he is not the only one with these plans. It seems there are a few others working on building their own gateway to space.

     With all of this privatized space flight you might be asking yourself where does this leave NASA? Well NASA seems to feel they have conquered low orbit space flight. They are looking beyond Earth’s orbit. There are plans in the works for a deep space flight to an asteroid and eventually Mars. NASA’s website http://www.nasa.gov/about/whats_next.html is quite informative with some of their plans as well as the rocket they plan to use in getting there.

     It seems the purpose of space exploration is still the same as when it started not so long ago. Exploration and seeking a better understanding of the universe we live in. I feel it’s good that we as a human race have such a thirst for knowledge and understanding. It has led to so many great discoveries and inventions in the past. Is this not how man learned to fly?

     So what does all this mean to us aviation graduates, Pilots and managers alike? It could mean more job opportunities. Pilots may eventually be able to get another rating maybe it will be labeled “low orbital space flight”. I think this will open up many new door ways for aviation managers. I think many aspects of the industries will be very similar and those that know aviation will be able to move seamlessly into space flight management. No matter what happens it's a very exciting time to be alive and experience all of this technological growth.

Europe calls ICAO lazy and tries to earn money in the name of global warming.

In a shocking move the European Union has attempted to stretch its power globally. In there latest proposal they have stated airline carriers will be required to pay for emission credits for flights originating or terminating in the the E.U. This doesn't sound too bad however they want carriers to pay for the entire duration of the flight, Not just those portions within E.U. airspace. For example: a U.S. carrier flying from New York to a Destination in the E.U. would pay for carbon credits for portions of the flight flown in U.S. and international airspace. Now this is obviously stretching the power of the E.U. far beyond their borders.
My first problem with this is obviously the fact they are stretching there governing power beyond their borders. There claim is emissions effect the entire world and this gives them the power to make such a regulation. They have also stated this is in response to ICAO's lack of emissions regulations. While the U.S. government and carriers fight this ruling the E.U.'s Issac Valero-Ladron has stated the ruling is already set in stone. My second issue is they are doing this over a widely unproven and in many cases considered dis proven issue. for more on that, this link can get you started. http://www.falconium.org/node/337.
So why is this E.U. doing this? My personal feeling is that it has much to do with their continued financial crisis.http://www.ira.com/debt-crisis-continues-eu-finance-ministers-have-no-answers This would bring in more money from many foreign countries. Thus increasing money being brought into there economy. The E.U. has also been grey on how the money brought in from this regulation will be spent. Saying It will be given over to European and third world countries for research into environmental aviation technologies. These countries will report to the E.U. and it is the E.U.'s "intention" to make these reports public. Their intention makes me nervous. So they intend to release the reports but are not sure even after they have gone on record saying the regulation is set in stone. This brings me to a few questions. Shouldn't you know where the money is going and how it will be handled before you take someone's money? Secondly what third world countries have the money to spend on researching Aviation Emissions? Not many third world countries have a basis of aviation travel to do research on nor the technology or facilities to perform such research. My feelings are that this must not be allowed to stand. If this passes what is next? Where does this stop? Does this make it ok for countries to enact regulations beyond their borders? The U.S. clearly feels this is unjust as they have released legislation banning U.S. carriers participating in these taxes. http://transportation.house.gov/news/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1357.
We will all have to wait and see how this works out. It will be interesting and could open many doors for more legislation beyond borders if this stands.

Follow the yellow brick.....blog?

I found this blog while poking around the internet. I found it interesting that whoever writes it has many pictures and reports of things that  are not released to mainstream media. Such as a pelican strike damage on an EMB 145 and a lightning strike that took out a windscreen. He even goes on to describe how a pilot for American Airlines declared an emergency simply so he could select a different runway. If you would like to follow this blog here is the link. http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/unusual-attitude/

When dreams become reality. Boeing 787 Dreamliner

Boeing began work on there 787 back in the mid 1990's. It was born from there scrapped Sonic Cruiser program and started with the idea of building 50% of it's structure out of composites (There previous best i believe was 15% on the 777) and having a 25% fuel savings. Targeted as a replacement for there aging 767's the aircraft was designed towards the point-to-point philosophy of travel rather than the traditional hub and spoke method.
On top of the radical concept of using such a high percentage of composites for weight savings they also came up with the idea to use wild AC electricity throughout the aircraft. Instead of using a constant speed drive on the engine driven generators they would be directly connected. This would change output frequency with engine rpm and would be rectified at the load. This system saves weight by doing away the the heavy constant speed drives as well as being able to use smaller wire in the power feeders. This may not seem like much but when you think of the miles and miles of wire used in an aircraft it can save a lot of weight by using smaller wiring.
The final new breakthrough is the no bleed system. this aircraft will use no bleed air in running aircraft systems. This makes the aircraft more efficient and also simplifies systems.  My experience in working on airplanes is that the bleed air systems are one of the most common systems to fail. For more on this you can read this link http://boeing.net/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_07/article_02_3.html
These breakthroughs have the potential to not only save fuel costs but also save on maintenance costs by doing away with some of the most expensive and troublesome systems. This revolutionary idea has the ability to change how aircraft are designed and built in the future. While airbus may have built something bigger they used standard construction material in methods, While Boeing went above and beyond to make a truly smarter system and aircraft.

NexGen the best is yet to come

Nex Gen is the new initiative by the FAA to streamline our air traffic control system while increasing safety. It includes switching from a radar based system to a GPS based system. Increasing accuracy as well as coverage area. It also includes changing from analog based voice transmission to digital voice transmission as well adding a way to send digital instructions that can be integrated with the aircraft systems. Finally they are developing a new network structure to properly handle all of this digital information for more information you can go direct to the source and read more here http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/.
     All of these are an excellent upgrade to our aging system. However this leads to the question who is going to pay for all of this. These upgrades were initially expected to cost $40 billion. However they are now quoted at costing upwards of $160 billion. Obviously this is no chump change. Many have said the airlines should pay while they retaliate that everyone should pay. So who in the end should pay?
     The FAA is government funded with our tax dollars and one of its tasks is to maintain and upgrade the ATC infrastructure. So they are one part that will help pay. The problem is with our current economic situation they cannot afford to pay for the whole thing. That leaves commercial carriers and general aviation. That leaves the rest of the bill to be picked up by the three parties left. Commercial aviation, users of commercial aviation, and general aviation.
     I persionally feel the cost should be distributed between the three parties. I would group users and Commercial aviation together as most likely any cost to commercial aviation will most likely be passed on to the users. So this ultimately leaves two groups left to pick up the tab. I think the split should be percentage based with commercial aviation paying most of the difference. Commercial aviation is the cause of most the of the congestion at major airports as well as on high altitude airways. They need the systems more then general aviation and also make a profit using aviation. Finally a portion should still be paid by general aviation as they will still be using the system. I would think somewhere between a 75 25 split would be sufficient although they could be tailored depending on the amount and also the method of payment either through user fee's or surcharges to passengers.