Sharing the Airspace

Great letter to the editor on AvWeb
concerning personal jets by
George Davis, USAF (Ret):

"We should remember that airline pilots are still the new kids on the
block.
I can remember the day when the Boeing 707 invaded my airspace for the
first time.
My F-86 and I -- until that point -- had been the only users of that
rarified air.
I learned to tolerate their invasion; they will just have to get used to
the
invasion of private jets."

Amen! Although I fly as a passenger on airliners frequently,
it doesn't seem fair that the corporations who own the airlines are
able to influence the radius of class bravo regions. As the population
increases, eventually more class bravo regions will be carved out
around the country, and GA planes will be dodging each other
in narrow little alleyways between all these restricted areas.
The airlines will say that the common man should not be
allowed to fly jets in "their" airspace. Don't the people own
the airspace? The airlines will insist on special background
checks on the pilots of these personal jets as well as rigorous
training, maintenance standards, and Class I medical fitness.

Bigger is not always better with aircraft; even though the
Canadair regional jet is much smaller than the 757, it feels much less
claustrophobic. And 9/11 proved that jetliners have a lot of momentum.
Furthermore, while small planes routinely make safe off-airport
landings,
most off-airport landings in jetliners result in fatalities.
The rest of aviation shouldn't necessarily
have to kowtow to the needs of the "heavy" jetliners.
At the same time however, it would not be viable for every passenger
to travel in small aircraft because the current ATC system
would be overloaded. Perhaps there is a more scalable way of
coordinating air traffic. Maybe we need a more imaginative
approach to dealing with the problem.

The Nova program this week about recreating the Wright flyer
demonstrated what an amazing achievement that Orville and Wilbur
accomplished. It is impressive that they were able to overcome
all of the technical obstacles with what they had available.
It is remarkable that these first pilots did not get killed by their
invention.
Their ability to make a profit building aircraft, which remains a
problem
to this day, is commendable. It is highly appropriate
that the FAA is honoring them. The vertical dimension adds
a lot of complexity and is a very hard problem!
Even 747 captains find it a little tricky, like the one who
turned onto the wrong taxiway in Taipei in 2000.
All those statistics about flying being safer than driving
don't take into account that the average driver is a
complete schmo -- just take a field trip to the DMV.

The people tinkering around with rocket engines in order to
win the X-prize share the spirit of the Wright Brothers.
The inventors of these space planes are inspiring.
I wish I possessed one tenth of their imagination.
Buzz Aldrin said that we would never have made
it to the moon with today's risk-averse zero-tolerance
attitude. It is refreshing to know that there are still
visionary people who are willing to take risks.

Ted

--
__
/ \___/ |
/ / |
/ _ |
/ / \ _|
__ / --- / |
\__/ \__ \/\

"Ted Huffmire" wrote in message
...
|
| Amen! Although I fly as a passenger on airliners frequently,
| it doesn't seem fair that the corporations who own the airlines are
| able to influence the radius of class bravo regions. As the population
| increases, eventually more class bravo regions will be carved out
| around the country, and GA planes will be dodging each other
| in narrow little alleyways between all these restricted areas.

I fly GA in class B all the time. Class B is not a restricted area.

As for private jets flying in class A, they already do. While it is true
that as the number of private jets increases that there will be more planes
in class A, it is also true that new technology is allowing better
utilization of that airspace.

The airlines have been trying to get rid of GA for years. Thus far they have
not been successful, and their arguments now are just as bogus as they were
twenty years ago.

On 2003-11-13 20:14:56 -0800, Ted Huffmire said

The airlines will insist on special background
checks on the pilots of these personal jets as well as rigorou
training, maintenance standards, and Class I medical fitness

That's a bit much to assume.

These so-called "personal jets" aren't any different than an owner-flown biz jet like an old Citation or 20-series Learjet that can be had for the same price that they're hoping get for an Eclipse 500. Anyone with a private pilot certificate and a third class medical who can pass the type rating checkride for a jet can fly one - single pilot, in some cases

In article , C J Campbell
wrote:

As for private jets flying in class A, they already do. While it is true
that as the number of private jets increases that there will be more planes
in class A, it is also true that new technology is allowing better
utilization of that airspace.

Isn't that what domestic reduced vertical separation is all about?

"C J Campbell" wrote

The airlines have been trying to get rid of GA for years. Thus
far they have not been successful, and their arguments now are
just as bogus as they were twenty years ago.

C J, I have worked for several airlines over a 25 year period
ranging in size from one of the world's largest (PanAm) to a
one airplane airline (Dominicana). At a couple of them, I served
as Director of Operations and at a couple of others, Chief Pilot.
At NO time did "General Aviation" ever cross our minds. I don't
know what my argument against them would have been. In the Miami
area, I operated out of Miami International and GA pretty much
stuck to Opa Locka and Tamiami. A much bigger problem to the jet
carriers were all of those commuters flying turboprop bugsmashers.

Bob Moore

Robert Moore wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote

The airlines have been trying to get rid of GA for years. Thus
far they have not been successful, and their arguments now are
just as bogus as they were twenty years ago.

C J, I have worked for several airlines over a 25 year period
ranging in size from one of the world's largest (PanAm) to a
one airplane airline (Dominicana). At a couple of them, I served
as Director of Operations and at a couple of others, Chief Pilot.
At NO time did "General Aviation" ever cross our minds.

But C.J. is right. As far as the lower levels are concerned, the airlines call
the area below about 8,000' "Indian Country" and they would be very happy if
every airport served by commercial aircraft had a class-B type airspace (the
upside-down wedding cake) and all GA aircraft were prohibited from entry. As
far as managemnet is concerned, GA is competition on a small scale, and they
would really like it if all those corporations were forced to buy airline
tickets instead of flying officers on leased or owned Citations.

It's true that me and my Maule are beneath their notice (except as possible
deviation sources in "Indian Country"), but I won't own it very long if I can't
land or fly through the places the big boys go.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...


But C.J. is right. As far as the lower levels are concerned, the airlines call
the area below about 8,000' "Indian Country" and they would be very happy if
every airport served by commercial aircraft had a class-B type airspace (the
upside-down wedding cake) and all GA aircraft were prohibited from entry.

Actually, the usual Airline interference in GA is to make sure that GA pays
more taxes so they can pay less and to decrease their impact on the terminal
ground facilities. They don't seem to find us as a threat in the air.