1) What civilian purpose, if any, are UAVs currently being used for in United States? How are these civilian UAVs currently regulated (if they are regulated)? What are some of the details of the regulations that apply to the commercial use of UAVs?
According to Wingfield at the New York Times drones or UAV's are used just for leisure for civilians. A lot of civilians also use drones for aerial photography. The FAA released regulations for drones last summer in which businesses or the civilians have to abide by; the drones must be under 55 pounds and to operate the drone the pilot must pass a written test and be at least 16 years old. The drones can only be flown below 400 feet and be at least 5 miles away from any airports.
2) Do you foresee UAVs integrating into the NAS? If so, how? Also, what problems do you foresee resulting from this? Be sure to include not only logistical problems, but also potential perception problems.
According to Hughes at CNSnews.com that if the FAA integrates drones in the NAS that it would be an $82.1 Billion economic benefit to the United States. If that is true I believe it could be a real benefit just for that reason. I think the problem that could occur from it is an over population of drones in the NAS. I also feel that the sectional charts would have to be completely rewritten and redrawn for adding those "airspace's". However, the economic impact could outweigh the other issues.
3) As for the military application of UAVs, how have they transformed military strategy? Has their integration been efficient (consider all aspects - from financial to ethical)?
According to Bowden at The Smithsonian the predator drone has made an incredible impact in how it has been used to track down enemies. I would say that it has been ethical to an extent, because it has been used for the safety of the United States but I think it could be abused if not done properly. There is a lot of issues in the United States with privacy and the NSA and if the military started abusing that, I think it could be an issue but for the safety of American's it can be very useful.
4) Finally, do some research and find out if their are UAV jobs that are advertised for civilians (both flight and management students). If so, include this as your link. If you are unable to locate a job posting, reference your above answers to brainstorm the potential for types of UAV jobs in the future.
I went to glassdoor.com which is a very useful job search site and looked up civilian UAV jobs and came up with nearly 924 openings throughout the United States. I believe that if the UAV's integrate with the NAS that there would be many more opening and positions available. I attached the link as well: https://www.glassdoor.com/Job/uav-operator-jobs-SRCH_KO0,12.htm
Works Cited
Bowden, M. (2013, November). How the Predator Drone Changed the Character of War. Retrieved February 09, 2017
Hughes, B. M. (2015, August 19). FAA Aims to 'Seamlessly Integrate' Drones Into National Airspace; Industry Report: $82.1B Economic Benefit to U.S. Retrieved February 09, 2017.
Wingfield, N. (2016, August 29). A Field Guide to Civilian Drones. Retrieved February 9, 2017.
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Friday, February 3, 2017
Cargo Carriers Are Exempt from Revised Flight/Duty Rules…Should They Be?
1) As a result of the Colgan Air accident, the FAA institute new flight and duty regulations. Summarize these new regulations and describe how they are different from the old flight and duty regulations.
The biggest change as a result of the Colgan Air accident is that there is a new provision in which you must feel "fit for duty", which means that if you do not feel physically fit to fly the aircraft then you are able to opt out of the trip without any penalty. The other provision that is current is that the flight crew must be given a 10 hour rest period of 10 hours instead of 8-9 hours depending on the necessity.
2) Cargo carriers are exempt from the Part 117 rules. What are the current flight and duty limitations for cargo carriers?
The difference between cargo carriers and other part 117 carriers is that each pilot must be able to work a 16 hour day and must be given an 8 hour rest period. Most of these 16 hour work days are night based as well.
3) Why do you feel that cargo carriers have been excluded from the new changes? Value of life? Public perception? Too much money for the carrier? Other reasons? All the above? You may find that reading the preamble of the final rule is helpful in answering this question.
I believe that cargo carriers are excluded from the new changes because it is not as much of a life and death situation as carriers under the part 117 regulations. Less people are technically at risk when it comes to cargo carriers. Also cargo is delivery of products and goods, if these cargo carriers are not delivering on time then they will lose business, in turn the flight crews suffer because of these hours.
4) Do you believe cargo carriers should be included in the new rules? Why or why not?
I obviously value life more than delivery of goods and products on time but it is not realistic because these carriers will not be able to continue as a business unless they operate this way. I also think that flight crews going in to this position know what they are getting themselves into so I don't believe it should be changed when it comes to looking at it from that perspective.
5) Finally, what would be the impact to your career if cargo carriers were to be included in these new rules - Pilots, address this from a pilot perspective, management address from a management perspective.
I have considered a career as a cargo pilot before I go to the airlines because it is a good way to build hours but I believe if cargo carriers operated under part 117 regulations that it would take me longer to get to the minimum hours needed so it would negatively impact me. Management would have safer flights going in and out but they would ultimately lose business and money because of companies and people not wanting to ships products and goods via flying because of it being a slower process.
The biggest change as a result of the Colgan Air accident is that there is a new provision in which you must feel "fit for duty", which means that if you do not feel physically fit to fly the aircraft then you are able to opt out of the trip without any penalty. The other provision that is current is that the flight crew must be given a 10 hour rest period of 10 hours instead of 8-9 hours depending on the necessity.
2) Cargo carriers are exempt from the Part 117 rules. What are the current flight and duty limitations for cargo carriers?
The difference between cargo carriers and other part 117 carriers is that each pilot must be able to work a 16 hour day and must be given an 8 hour rest period. Most of these 16 hour work days are night based as well.
3) Why do you feel that cargo carriers have been excluded from the new changes? Value of life? Public perception? Too much money for the carrier? Other reasons? All the above? You may find that reading the preamble of the final rule is helpful in answering this question.
I believe that cargo carriers are excluded from the new changes because it is not as much of a life and death situation as carriers under the part 117 regulations. Less people are technically at risk when it comes to cargo carriers. Also cargo is delivery of products and goods, if these cargo carriers are not delivering on time then they will lose business, in turn the flight crews suffer because of these hours.
4) Do you believe cargo carriers should be included in the new rules? Why or why not?
I obviously value life more than delivery of goods and products on time but it is not realistic because these carriers will not be able to continue as a business unless they operate this way. I also think that flight crews going in to this position know what they are getting themselves into so I don't believe it should be changed when it comes to looking at it from that perspective.
5) Finally, what would be the impact to your career if cargo carriers were to be included in these new rules - Pilots, address this from a pilot perspective, management address from a management perspective.
I have considered a career as a cargo pilot before I go to the airlines because it is a good way to build hours but I believe if cargo carriers operated under part 117 regulations that it would take me longer to get to the minimum hours needed so it would negatively impact me. Management would have safer flights going in and out but they would ultimately lose business and money because of companies and people not wanting to ships products and goods via flying because of it being a slower process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)